1. COASTAL WATERS AS CARBON SINKS- MATCHING SCIENCE AND POLICY
9th IUCN ACADEMY OF ENVIRONMENTAL LAW COLLOQUIUM, Mpekweni Beach, Eastern Cape, South Africa 3-7 July 2011  
COASTAL WATERS AS CARBON SINKS- MATCHING SCIENCE AND POLICY
Adjunct Professor Rob Fowler, Law School,
University of South Australia

2. INTRODUCTION
“Maintaining or improving the ability of forests and oceans to absorb and bury CO2 is a crucial aspect of climate change mitigation. The contribution of forests in sequestering carbon is well known and is supported by relevant financial mechanisms. In contrast, the critical role of oceans has been overlooked.”
UNEP, Blue Carbon, 2009, Executive Summary.

3. RECENT INTERNATIONAL REPORTS ON “BLUE” CARBON:
Blue Carbon (UNEP, FAO & UNESCO, 2009)
The Management of Natural Coastal Carbon Sinks (Laffoley and Grimsditch, eds., IUCN, 2010)
Natural Solutions (IUCN WCPA, 2010)
International Working Group on Coastal Carbon, Recommendations (March 2011)
Climate Focus, Blue Carbon Policy Options Assessment , 2011.

4. THE ROLE OF MARINE AND COASTAL ECOSYSTEMS AS CARBON SINKS: CAPTURE AND STORAGE (PER UNEP REPORT, 2009)
Out of all the carbon captured by ecosystems, 55% is captured by marine living organisms (“blue carbon”);
Oceans constitute the largest long-term sink for carbon – some 93% of the Earth’s stored CO2 (40Tt) is stored and cycled through the oceans.;
Vegetated marine habitats – comprising mangroves, sea-grasses, kelp forests and salt marshes – account for 50-70% of all carbon storage in ocean sediments;
Over 20 years, by preventing further loss and degradation of coastal ecosystems, could offset 3-7% of current fossil fuel emissions ;
Would have the effect of contributing equivalent to at least 10% of the emissions reductions needed to keep CO2 concentrations below 450ppm.

5. COMPARISON OF CARBON SINK CAPACITIES OF COASTAL ECOSYSTEMS TO THOSE OF TERRESTRIAL ECOSYSTEMS (PER IUCN REPORT, 2010)
The carbon sequestration potential of coastal marine ecosystems compares favourably with, and in some respects, may exceed the potential of carbon sinks on land;
The absolute comparative value of the carbon sequestered per unit area may well outweigh the importance of similar processes on land, due to the lower potential for the emission of other powerful GHG’s such as methane;
Salt marshes (and possibly mangroves also) probably have a greater value than any other natural ecosystem per molecule of CO2 sequestered (cf., also for mangroves)

6. COMPARISON OF CARBON SINK CAPACITIES OF COASTAL ECOSYSTEMS TO THOSE OF TERRESTRIAL ECOSYSTEMS
The rate of carbon storage in the sediment by salt marshes, mangroves and seagrasses is approximately 10 times the rate observed in temperate forests and 50 times the rate observed in tropical forests;
Thus, the long term sequestration of carbon by 1 Km² of mangrove area is equivalent to that occurring in 50 km² of tropical forest;
The total annual loss of mangroves and seagrasses has a long term impact in terms of lost carbon sequestration capacity similar to the annual deforestation rate in the Amazon ;
The total carbon sequestration capacity lost through mangrove and seagrass clearing is equivalent to the sediment sequestration capacity of a tropical forest area greater than the Amazon forest.
IUCN Report at p. 49 (per Pidgeon, Conservation International).

7. ESTABLISHING THE SCIENCE TO JUSTIFY POLICY INTITIATIVES RE BLUE CARBON
UNEP Report 2009 criticized for providing incorrect data re carbon sequestration capacity of marine ecosystems ;
There is an urgent need for additional scientific research in this context to fill significant gaps in relation to the actual levels of capture and storage of carbon in these sinks;
Attempts by marine scientists to promote the relative benefits of coastal marine ecosystems as carbon sinks, compared to tropical and temperate forests, obfuscate their ultimate capacity and risk future criticism on the same lines as some elements of the IPCC’s 4AR
More recent admissions of uncertainty by IUCN: “While highly efficient in sequestering carbon, the actual amount of carbon stored in seagrass meadows is not known. Thus neither the ongoing nor the potential GHG emissions that may arise from further damage to these systems can be quantified reliably”

8. RECENT SCIENTIFIC INITIATIVE RE BLUE CARBON - THE INTERNATIONAL WORKING GROUP ON COASTAL (“BLUE”) CARBON
Established in 2011 by IUCN, UNESCO and Conservation International ;
First workshop held in Paris, February 2011
Sought to identify coastal carbon “hotspots” and to estimate possible emissions from degradation of coastal ecosystems ;
Second workshop to be held in Bali, Indonesia in July 2011

9. INTERNATIONAL WORKING GROUP ON COASTAL (“BLUE”) CARBON
3 broad areas of recommendations from initial meeting:
More research re the capacity for carbon storage in coastal systems and the emissions resulting from degradation;
Existing knowledge of carbon benefits is sufficient to warrant enhanced local regional measures to protect coastal ecosystems;
Greater international recognition by engaging the UNFCC to account for the management of coastal ecosystems, in particular:
Inclusion in IPCC technical guidance on GHG emissions reporting;
Long-term reporting of coastal-related GHG emissions in relation to sources and sinks;
Develop financial incentives for compensation for actions leading to reductions in emissions from coastal ecosystems;
Include mangrove conservation and restoration activities in national REDD+ strategies, policies and measures.

10. THREATS TO COASTAL ECOSYSTEMS AND RATES OF LOSS
Threats include:
unsustainable natural resources use practices- leading to nutrient and sediment runoff from land (with impacts on sea-grasses) – e.g., deforestation, agricultural runoff;
poor watershed management;
inappropriate/unsustainable coastal development – e.g.,
displacement of mangrove forests by urban development and aquaculture;
dredging, filling or drainage that causes sediment-loading, eutrophication and loss of biodiversity
poor waste management (e.g., ocean sewerage outfalls, industrial runoff)
oil spills
over-fishing. (UNEP/IUCN)

11. THREATS TO COASTAL ECOSYSTEMS AND RATES OF LOSS
Rates of loss of coastal marine ecosystems are much higher than any other ecosystem on the planet, in some instances up to four times that of rainforests;
measured currently at 2-7% per annum, a seven-fold increase to only 50 years ago. UNEP
pressures have reduced global range of mangrove forests to less than 50% of the original total cover – originally occupied 75% of the tropical coats worldwide. IUCN 17. Current rate of loss is 118 km² per year.
Two-thirds of the world’s seagrass meadows within inhabited areas have been lost through human activities that lead to eutrophication and siltation. IUCN 23. Reduced by 50% over a period of 15 years (to 2005), Current rate of loss is 110 km² per year.

12. IMPACT OF CLIMATE CHANGE – AN ADDITIONAL THREAT
Climate driven changes in the frequency and intensity of storms are likely to have one of the largest impacts on the production and storage of kelp carbon as disturbance from waves is one of the main factors affecting the standing crops of kelps. IUCN 34-5.
According to the Status of Coral Reefs of the World: 2008, we have lost 19% of the original area of coral reefs since 1950, 15% of coral reefs are in a critical state with loss possible in the next 10 to 20 years, and a further 20% are seriously threatened with loss predicted within years. IUCN 39

13. POLICY/LEGAL MEASURES - INTERNATIONAL
Carbon accounting measures (under UNFCCC and Kyoto Protocol)
GHG emissions that occur as a result of the [inadequate] management of coastal and marine habitats are not being accounted for in international climate change mechanisms (ie, UNFCCC, Kyoto, CDM, etc.).
Thus, countries are underestimating their anthropogenic emissions ;
Also any carbon savings from measures to protect and restore coastal marine habitats do not count towards meeting international and national climate change commitments (IUCN ES).
Bonn Climate Talks(May 2011) acknowledged coastal marine ecosystems for the first time

14. POLICY/LEGAL MEASURES - INTERNATIONAL
I REDD + : extension to coastal ecosystems 
Carbon revenue schemes could take the marine equivalent of the REDD scheme on land to safeguard these critical coastal carbon sinks. Don’t just think REDD, think coastal too! (IUCN ES).
II Carbon credits : including for coastal ecosystem rehabilitation under the flexible mechanisms (JI, CDM and carbon markets) or NAMA’s
a precursor to inclusion of coastal marine sinks in mechanisms such as the CDM is the recognition of such sinks in the accounting and reporting measures developed under the UNFCC and KP, therefore these are not options at present

15. CLIMATE FOCUS REPORT ON POLICY OPTIONS (2011)
Develop and improve IPCC reporting guidelines, particulalrly re sea-grasses ;
Ensure NAMa’s include actions that address blue carbon
Utilize REDD+, which could possibly include mangroves within definition of forests;
Increase recognition within voluntary carbon market;
Increase support under adaptation funding.

16. POLICY/LEGAL MEASURES - NATIONAL
Protected areas: MPA’s and spatial marine planning
Integrated coastal management (ICM) – buffer zones and better regulation of coastal development
Other – ecosystem rehabilitation etc.
“Restoration of tidal salt marshes is an excellent way to increase the world’s natural carbon sinks. Returning the tides to drained agricultural marsh can make a significant increase in the salt marsh carbon sink” e.g., UK “managed realignment program” to shift embankments inland and restore flooding of agricultural marshes. IUCN, 10.

17. CONCLUSIONS – LAW AND POLICY (INTERNATIONAL)
At the international level, climate mitigation strategies at present do not take into account coastal marine sinks; these are the “overlooked” element of LULUCF-related measures, which have a focus exclusively on the terrestrial environment (forests and soils, in particular) ;
A fundamental problem is that current accounting and reporting rules under the UNFCCC and KP do not allow for the inclusion of coastal marine ecosystems, so that emissions from these sources are not included in national inventories or reports;
A further consequence is that mitigation schemes such as the CDM and REDD are not able to extend to activities such as the protection or rehabilitation of coastal marine ecosystems;
It may be necessary to improve scientific understanding of the carbon sequestration capacity of these coastal marine sinks before they can be included in carbon accounts and hence be considered for inclusion within relevant mitigation strategies

18. CONCLUSIONS – LAW AND POLICY (NATIONAL)
In the absence of relevant, climate-related measures at the international level, there is currently no requirement or market-based incentive to develop appropriate protective measures for coastal marine ecosystems at the national level;
However, the other ecosystem services provided by coastal marine ecosystems, coupled with their likely carbon sequestration capacities, provide strong grounds for precautionary action by national governments anyway;
Such precautionary action should include marine spatial planning; development of marine protected areas: area-based fisheries management: integrated coastal management that includes better control of coastal development and the provision of buffer zones where possible; and the promotion of the rehabilitation of degraded or destroyed coastal marine ecosystems.

19. IN SHORT...
It is now a matter of great urgency to take action to conserve, protect and restore the Earth’s extremely valuable coastal marine ecosystems, and in particular to avoid devoting disproportionate efforts to terrestrial ecosystems at the expense of their coastal marine counterparts. (Fowler, 2011!)