Case study details
The administration's plan would double by the fisheries that are privatized where access is limited to those who own allocated shares, that can be bought and sold, of the annual catch. Despite an increased awareness of overfishing, the majority of people still know very little about the scale of the destruction being wrought on the oceans. The miombo woodland is an important vegetation type covering the southern two thirds of Tanzania. But resources become more expensive to obtain as they are used up. Since becoming an EU member in , various strategic reference documents have been developed and implemented in response to national or EU policy, integrating biodiversity to a greater or lesser extent, and ensuring the financing of related projects. Sub-Saharan Africa1 contains a total population of million people of whom million i. There are signs of serious fertility decline and increasing soil acidity in some instances where there has been prolonged use of inorganic fertilisers.
Adopted in , the first NBSAP was implemented from to and produced, among other outcomes, three thematic instruments, namely, the National Policy for the Protection of Threatened Species, National Strategy for the Conservation and Rational Use of Wetlands, and the National Policy on Protected Areas all three instruments were updated in At present, Chile's terrestrial and marine protected areas cover In , work began on the development of the new Strategy with consideration given to aligning it with the global biodiversity framework and on updating regional biodiversity strategies and action plans for 16 regional administrations.
The country's energy sector is evolving dynamically. The National Energy Policy was adopted in , with important advances having been made in the field of non-conventional renewable energy. It has been approved by the Secretary of State for the Territory and agreed upon by all the major stakeholders in the country. The Biodiversity Strategy is to be considered a dynamic reference document to guide economic and social development.
In response, the country intends to mainstream biodiversity considerations at all levels, which will necessitate the provision of economic, legislative and organizational support from government institutions and the involvement of the largest possible number of stakeholders in implementing actions.
Cultural traditions have persisted in the country over seven centuries. Biodiversity conservation will guarantee the preservation of these cultural services and the various benefits that are derived from them e. Specific priority areas of action have been identified under each primary objective in the action plan, as have responsible implementing bodies, and implementing timeframes to primarily only two actions on the development of a new plan to manage fauna and hunting and a website for San Marino Naturalistic Centre CNS are be implemented by In the last decade, the public administration has carried out work in various sectors to boost environmental protection, landscape conservation and the sustainable use of resources, in accordance with the European Directives.
Activities have also been carried out to raise awareness of the economic values of biodiversity and promote a transition to a Green Economy.
Law reform was carried out in on the Law on the Promotion and Enhancement of Energy Efficiency in Buildings and of Renewable Energy Use in the Civil and Industrial Sectors ; and San Marino's Environmental Code incorporating the latest European environmental standards was adopted by decree in San Marino has yet to establish a central authority to collect information on implementation and prepare national reports.
Priority areas under Primary Objective 4 promote a broad and easily accessible knowledge of biodiversity , include actions to: In this light, integration of the objectives of the Strategy in planning and socioeconomic development policies is implicit. The lessons learned from this process were instrumental in defining five national biodiversity priorities: There are in addition 15 strategic objectives mapped to the achievement of the global biodiversity strategic goals and targets , 40 targeted objectives and 48 actions to be implemented by The costs of implementation are estimated at , MDT.
Funding is to be mobilized through the integration or alignment of NBSAP objectives with sectoral strategies and programmes, including those related to research, and through the implementation of a resource mobilization plan developed for this purpose.
Recognition is given to the fact that women in rural communities worldwide constitute the principle users and guardians of biodiversity. In Tunisia, women perform a particularly important role with respect to the governance of potable water. Gender considerations have been mainstreamed in both the Strategy and Action Plan. The following seven strategic objectives contained in the second National Biodiversity Action Plan have been retained in the third Plan and are now mapped to achieving relevant Aichi Biodiversity Targets: The Department of Culture, Heritage and the Gaeltacht is the official body responsible for oversight of the implementation of this Plan and for coordinating the other Public Authorities, NGOs and private-sector organizations involved in the process.
The Biodiversity Forum represents various economic sectors, NGOs, academics and other relevant stakeholders and will monitor the implementation of the Plan and advise the Minister accordingly. Different institutions are currently tracking biodiversity-related expenditure for Ireland which is the first step in understanding and developing a sustainable funding mechanism for biodiversity conservation. Further to this, the National Parks and Wildlife Service will develop a financial plan to address biodiversity finance challenges in a comprehensive manner and build a sound business case for increased investment in biodiversity management.
As part of this, research novel finance mechanisms will also be reviewed, including payment for ecosystem services and biodiversity offsets. Cross-sectoral strategies and cross-cutting issues include: Adequate funding as well as effective law enforcement are important factors to achieving the strategic objectives.
Activities will cost nearly 50 million dollars over the ten-year period to implement. Fortunately, there have been strong commitments from international partners and multilateral donors to provide full or matching funds for the conservation of the biodiversity in the country. Priority legislative actions which need to be implemented include, among others: With the lack of a proper coordinating mechanism partly to blame for lapses in the implementation of the first NBSAP , adopted in , the establishment of the following is vital for administering the current NBSAP: Monitoring rests on the shoulders of all key stakeholders, but the process must be led by the EPA and the NPAA and aligned with other national development strategies, national policies and international biodiversity programmes and agreements.
Consideration is being given to establishing a national Clearing-House Mechanism and developing a communication strategy as an auxiliary document to the NBSAP Read document National Targets Country profile Honduras The new National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan represents a paradigm shift in the strategic orientation of conservation policies — one which seeks to establish a balance between conservation and development activities to ultimately enhance quality of life for the people of Honduras.
It was developed through a highly participatory and inclusive process, including a broad range of ministries, e. The NBSAP provides general guidance to all stakeholders who are also expected to contribute to the implementation of the action plan. Eleven national targets have been set and mapped to achieving the Aichi Biodiversity Targets and the Sustainable Development Goals, and are complemented by respective activities and tasks, as well as performance and impact indicators.
Deforestation is among the most serious threats to biodiversity in the country Honduras has moreover one of the highest rates of deforestation in the world. The Forest Law was adopted in which has significantly advanced conservation efforts. Other legislations recently adopted include: The inclusion of the gender approach in all sectors and at all levels, in accordance with the CBD framework, is also being promoted.
Shorter-term action plans will be formulated up to to support the five strategic goals. The action plan for the period focuses on halting overall biodiversity loss and maintaining healthy, productive and functional ecosystems, based on establishing coherent and resilient ecological networks, supported by restructured policies and adequately mandated and empowered local communities and institutions.
Unfortunately, most of the values of ecosystem products are ignored in economic decision-making and thus not accounted for when estimating GDP and developing national income accounts. In this light, National Target 16 aims to increase awareness of the values of biodiversity and ecosystem services among decision-makers and integrate these values into key environmental sectors by which contributes to Aichi Biodiversity Target 2.
The issuance of a Cabinet decree declaring members on the Board of Directors of the coordination body for biodiversity issues, among which will include the NWC, is also envisaged. This Board of Directors will support a mechanism for monitoring and reviewing the status of NBSAP2 implementation the establishment of this mechanism will be coordinated by the Environment Protection Authority.
Actions in support of decentralized management for biodiversity empowering local communities will also be carried out in this implementation period. The current IBSAP comprises the principal guidelines to be taken into account by policy-makers in the biodiversity sector, and is also intended to serve as a key reference document for implementing programmes and activities in other development sectors, be they government, private, or civil-society sectors, at either national or sub-national level.
The IBSAP also calls for the need to ensure consistency with actions carried out to implement other international treaties to which Indonesia is a Party.
Four specific action plans have been formulated on the following themes: For each action plan, activities have been defined which include indicators, responsible institutions, implementation periods, budget indications, and which are linked to achieving relevant national and global biodiversity targets. The IBSAP also examines the relationship between biodiversity and climate change, with activities on climate change adaptation and mitigation to be carried out at decentralized levels over the implementation timeframe.
Activities related to the implementation of the Nagoya Protocol on ABS and its derivative instruments will also be carried out at both national and local levels during this timeframe Indonesia became a Party to the Nagoya Protocol in The NBIN also provides a connection to the global biodiversity information network, facilitates the flow of biodiversity information and responds to the needs of users involved in the biodiversity sector.
Efforts are also being carried out to enhance the national Biodiversity Clearing-House CHM which serves as a medium for disseminating information, including monitoring and evaluation results and implementation reports, regarding the IBSAP Read document National Targets Country profile Croatia Following an intense and inclusive development process, involving central, regional and local administrations, experts and scientists, civil society organizations and private-sector stakeholders, the Croatian Parliament adopted the Nature Protection Strategy and Action Plan on 7 July , in accordance with terms outlined in the Constitution and Nature Protection Act Five strategic goals aim to: Increase the effectiveness of key nature protection mechanisms; 2.
Reduce the direct pressures on nature and promote sustainable use of natural resources; 3. Strengthen the capacities of nature protection system; 4. Increase the knowledge and availability of data on nature; and 5.
Raise the level of knowledge, understanding, and support for nature protection among the general public. Under each strategic goal, specific objectives and activities are defined and mapped to achieving relevant Aichi Biodiversity Targets and targets contained in the EU Biodiversity Strategy to Detailed descriptions of the methods to achieve the strategic goals will be developed for the Action Plan.
Notably, Croatia has included geodiversity as a constituent part of the Strategy given that it represents an important segment of landscapes, conditioning biodiversity and serving as a foundation for ecosystems.
Priorities in the forthcoming period will continue to be strongly connected with commitments stemming from Croatia's membership in the EU. Significant mechanisms in environmental protection legislation include EIA and SEA, whose procedures are being increasingly harmonized with obligations stemming from international agreements and, in particular, those stemming from the EU acquis.
This Plan also includes indicators developed for the purposes of monitoring the implementation of activities performance indicators and the achievement of specific objectives impact indicators. As for resource mobilization, activities will address, among other matters, the lack of systematic records in this area, the introduction of positive biodiversity incentives e.
Croatia has had a positive experience implementing the system of fees payable by environmental polluters and users in the private and public sector, on the basis of the Polluter Pays Principle, where the Environmental Protection and Energy Efficiency Fund provides one part of the collected funds to projects contributing to biodiversity conservation.
In addition, and particularly important for the regional management level, is that all European territorial cooperation programmes foresee funds for projects contributing to: These opportunities represent a significant rise in support compared to cross-border programmes during the pre-accession period.
Croatia adopted its first Strategy in and its second Strategy in The country has retained the five strategic goals of the global Strategic Plan for Biodiversity and adapted all corresponding Aichi Biodiversity Targets to the national context, values and interests with the exception of Aichi Biodiversity Target 18 which stakeholders consider to not be applicable to the country in view of the fact that the people of the ROM are descendants of successive waves of immigrants from various countries.
Two action plans for the RoM are presented. Because Rodrigues gained autonomous status in and is governed by the Rodrigues Regional Assembly, a separate action plan was developed for the island and its associated islets.
These action plans specify the key programmes and activities with key indicators where available , Lead Agency and Partners, priorities, timeframes, and provisional budgets, for implementing each national target. Addressing knowledge gaps in biodiversity mainstreaming into national policies, strategies and plans and into sectoral policies, strategies and plans, across government, the private sector and civil society are made a priority in each Action Plan. Notably, the development and implementation of a Resource Mobilization Strategy has been made a priority activity for in both Mauritius and Rodrigues.
It was developed taking into account the current global biodiversity agenda, the Sustainable Development Agenda as well as the objectives of the Rio Conventions and biodiversity-related conventions. The ENBPA thus represents a cross-cutting component of the public agenda as well as an essential tool for achieving inclusive sustainable development, calling for the involvement of all ministries, levels of government, institutions, academics and scientists, indigenous peoples, the private sector and civil society organizations in implementation.
It is made up of the following 9 strategic objectives with strategic objectives 1 to 5 also containing thematic sub-objectives , each complemented by a rationale and general and specific objectives, and 21 priority national targets set within this framework: Actions will be implemented by different State entities possessing the required human resources and competencies in biodiversity matters. Environmental protection efforts are increasingly being assumed by national and provincial entities.
In , national spending on biodiversity conservation represented 0. It is the result of an extensive process national dialogue which began in , based on the concepts of co-construction and appropriation and on the three NBSAP principles of bottom-up logic, broad participation, and coherence and, if possible, synergies for achieving more sustainable results.
The participation of approximately persons was enabled through the organization of field visits, five regional workshops and two national-level workshops, focused on the scope of biodiversity and its vital importance for the achievement of sustainable development within the context of adaptation to climate change.
Its five strategic objectives focus on: A total of 20 national targets and 38 main activities are distributed among the five strategic objectives, each of which is further complemented by a keyword list non-exhaustive , a rationale, scene-setting, sub-targets, specific activities, linkages to other strategic objectives and sub-objectives as well as to national policy instruments and tools, expected results, among other elements. In this regard, the dissemination of best practices, and the pursuit and generation of sustainable financial and human resources, have been identified as cross-cutting issues to be addressed under each strategic objective in the revised NBSAP.
Significantly, ENB2 promotes a new form of environmental management underpinned by the principles of co-responsibility, interculturality, intersectoral collaboration, decentralization, the Ecosystem Approach, the Results-Based Approach and the Gender and Human Rights Approach.
The document also addresses management approaches for addressing the relationship between biodiversity and climate change. ENB2 components are mapped to the achievement of the four strategic objectives of the National Biodiversity Policy which are to: ENB2 addresses 7 strategic themes: Distributed among these strategic themes are 23 global medium-term goals , 98 national targets , along with associated indicators, baselines and responsible institutions.
It is incumbent upon the ENB2 Management and Monitoring Committee to follow up on activities at various levels and frequencies over the ten-year implementation period to ensure that targets and expected impacts are achieved. The results of a country study carried out on the political and socioeconomic contexts influencing biodiversity management also significantly contributed to the preparation of the revised document.
An Implementation Plan defines systemic, institutional, human and technological resource needs and comprises four components: Liberia intends to enhance institutional arrangements through the establishment of a platform of specialized biodiversity management committees, including the National Biodiversity Secretariat, the National Biodiversity Steering Committee and the Rio Conventions Steering Committee.
Activities at the subnational level will focus on the coordination of sectoral activities with the National Biodiversity Secretariat. The national CHM will be used to report and disseminate information coming from the subnational local and community level, as well as to facilitate focus group discussions, surveys, among other activities, at this level. The document comprises a monitoring plan developed by the Biodiversity Project Team and the Thematic Expert Group responsible for drafting the revised NBSAP this plan was subjected to stakeholder scrutiny in the four regions of the country and later taken to national validation workshops before its adoption.
The NBSAP is also guided by twelve principles, among which include the requirement that biodiversity status and trends be continually monitored and evaluated, and that development initiatives with potential adverse effects on biodiversity be subjected to strategic environmental assessment. Five strategic goals are closely aligned with the global strategic goals and supported by strategies which stress the following elements: The Action Plan comprises actions linked respectively to the objective and relevant national targets, responsible implementing institutions, a timeframe, and indicators for monitoring and periodically evaluating implementation.
It has also been proposed that a national institution, such as the Centre of Excellence on Biodiversity Conservation and Natural Resources Management, be strengthened to contribute to implementation. Human resources capacity-building for entities involved in biodiversity conservation, agro-biodiversity, biotechnology and biosafety will be undertaken at various training institutions, and promote gender as a cross-cutting issue in biodiversity planning.
A communication and outreach strategy has also been proposed which suggests development of a stronger and more effective Clearing House Mechanism, among other communication media. The proposed financing strategy focuses on initiating innovative financial mechanisms in order to increase public and private budget contributions as well as support from development partners.
It is recognized that the private sector has a critical role to play in conserving biodiversity and contributing to the achievement of sustainable development. In this regard, the Rwanda Private Sector Federation PSF exists as a professional organization, dedicated to promoting and representing the interests of the Rwandan business community while, at the same time, providing timely and relevant business development services that lead to sustainable private-sector-led economic growth and development.
Rwanda has also prepared a technology needs assessment. As a Party to the Nagoya Protocol on ABS, Rwanda anticipates that, by , the Protocol will be integrated in national legislation and administrative practices and enforced National Target By , Rwanda anticipates having integrated the values of biodiversity and ecosystems services in planning processes, the poverty reduction strategy and the national economy National Target 2.
Rwanda is one of the countries whose tourism is one of the fastest growing sectors, offering many popular attractions e.
Volcanoes National Park, Akagera National Park, Nyungwe Forest, birding facilities, Nile trails and accounting for a significant portion of foreign revenue. Rwanda adopted a Biodiversity Policy in and a Biodiversity Law in Notably, the first section of PNPN2 contains the National Biodiversity Strategy which was developed with consideration given to, inter alia , the current global biodiversity agenda, the EU Biodiversity Strategy to , and the national status and trends of biodiversity.
PNPN1 was adopted in The Biodiversity Strategy contains 7 objectives which aim to: Efforts will focus on five particular sectors: Among the 28 measures contained in the PNPN2 Action Plan, implementation of 12 measures addressing the following themes are assigned high priority: An integrated process has been initiated to elaborate a long-term strategy on issues related to sustainable development and climate.
To date, as a result of this process, objectives and measures for a National Strategy on Climate Change Adaptation have been defined for the biodiversity, water, forestry and agriculture sectors. In addition, twenty national targets modeled on the Aichi Biodiversity Targets have been set. Furthermore, the key priority areas of the new document were identified based on the lessons learnt, such as the importance of NBSAP mainstreaming in national development and economic planning processes, from the limited and challenged implementation of NBSAP 1 adopted in NBSAP 2 was prepared in a highly participatory and consultative manner, involving multiple national stakeholders.
The development process was led and coordinated by the Swaziland Environment Authority SEA , working with and through the Biodiversity Project Implementation Committee BPIC which served as the project steering committee, comprised of representatives from key government ministries and departments as well as strategic stakeholder institutions. Other participants included a national think-tank of local experts. Special stakeholder groups, such as Chiefs, were consulted at special regional workshops.
The action plan contains strategic initiatives to help guide the achievement of each target. Each strategic initiative has a number of indicative activities proposed by the strategy in fulfilment of the strategic initiative. For each of the strategic initiatives, a lead agency -ies and partners have been designated and baselines, indicators, timelines and cost estimates established. The implementation plan for the strategy comprises strategies for mainstreaming biodiversity into other sectors, human and technical capacity development, communication and outreach as well as resource mobilization.
A process for monitoring and evaluating implementation, on a biannual basis, has also been worked out. In this light, Montenegro has set the following 7 strategic targets to be achieved by Significantly, the Biodiversity Strategy adopts a new conceptual approach based on the need to improve biodiversity education, communication and awareness-raising CEPA and achieve more efficient sectoral mainstreaming of biodiversity considerations.
As such, emphasis is placed on preparing information, on the importance of biodiversity and the services it provides for sustainable economic development and human wellbeing, that is easily understood and accepted by the widest range of stakeholders, with special attention also given to the application of adequate economic incentives for achieving biodiversity targets. The above 7 strategic targets are complemented by 21 operational targets, each associated to a time period, deadline, achievement indicators and institutions responsible for implementation, including local self-government units LSGUs.
Local self-governments are moreover obligated by law to adopt local biodiversity actions plans aligned with the NBSAP. The development of a new National Strategy for Sustainable Development until is ongoing and, once finalized, will include long-term sustainable development goals aligned with the SDGs, as well as constitute an important development framework to which all other sectoral strategies and plans should be aligned.
The participation of municipalities in the implementation of the measures referred to in the Action Plan is recommended in the ministerial order itself.
The Plan aims to create conditions to enable the implementation of a long-term landscape and biodiversity policy, based on national tradition and in accordance with EU legislation such as that associated with the European Landscape Convention , international conventions, resolutions, agreements and programmes.
The document presents strategic and other objectives and tasks for conserving landscape and biological diversity, and objectives and tasks for protected areas. Tasks are respectively assigned evaluation criteria and target values and authority ies responsible for implementing the criteria. Measures are respectively linked to an implementation period which in some instances extends to due to EU support provided for the period , cost estimates and responsible actors. The strategic objective for landscape conservation is to conserve landscape areas at various territorial levels, as well as their ecological potential, by ensuring their adequate planning, management, use and sustainable development.
A priority measure to be carried out in this regard is the preparation of a draft law amending the Law of Environmental Protection, and integrating key landscape policy provisions. Among other measures, Lithuania seeks to prepare and implement management projects for eight parks of national importance, and prepare and implement projects for the creation of ten reference landscapes in transfrontier territories.
The development and implementation of green infrastructure projects will also be undertaken, as will measures to develop research on biological diversity and ecosystems and to use the research data to integrate these aspects in public policy sectors. Lithuania will also carry out measures to ensure the safe use of GMOs and prevent their dispersal in the environment and damage to ecosystems.
Lithuania is a signatory to the Nagoya Protocol on ABS and is taking steps towards its ratification and implementation, including the preparation of relevant legislation, with consideration also given to the EU Regulation adopted in on compliance measures for users from the Nagoya Protocol. The measures contained in the Action Plan will contribute to the implementation of various strategic plans, such as the National Progress Programme , the National Sustainable Development Strategy and the National Strategy for Climate Change Management Policy The three pillars of sustainable development social, environmental, environmental were taken into account during the development of the NBSAP, whose outputs are expected to contribute significantly to the Kiribati Integrated Environment Policy.
Nine priority areas will be focused on until The Action Plan identifies biodiversity threats and presents associated national targets mapped to achieving relevant Aichi Biodiversity Targets , national actions, indicators, outputs, responsible agencies and costs. Local communities will be heavily involved in implementation. Church groups, youth and women will also support implementation activities.
Kiribati is currently exploring ways and means to establish an Environment Fund. In , Kiribati became the world leader in marine conservation after declaring the Phoenix Islands sq km a marine protected area PIPA. Also included among its achievements over the last decade are the production of the Key Biodiversity Area Report, the directory of RAMSAR potential sites, community-based management plans fisheries and mangrove management plans , and environment educational materials.
The first National Biodiversity Strategy was prepared in however an associated Action Plan was not prepared. The new document particularly seeks to put in place systems, technologies and legislative instruments to mainstream biodiversity into the national development agenda.
Four strategic objectives components aim to: The four strategic objectives and respective priority national strategies are to be achieved over 25 years, within a three-phase programme , , A short-term programme comprising 20 separate action plans to be implemented between now and contains activities that fit into the ongoing national development agenda.
Funding for activities is provided from the national annual budget and development partners the total cost of implementing the short-term programme is GHS MESTI will maintain a strong leadership role and report regularly on the status of biodiversity and, in most cases, lead in the coordination of sectoral activities. The NBSAP has been designed to be implemented by ministries, departments and agencies outside of MESTI; emphasis is placed on concerted action at all levels of governance, including the traditional authorities, the private sector, civil society organizations and the Government of Ghana as a whole.
Local institutions will be highly instrumental in implementing actions and should also benefit from enhanced capacity and capability as a result of NBSAP implementation.
In order to ensure effective monitoring and reporting on the NBSAP, an overall results framework has been developed which provides clear guidance on indicators, which can be used to monitor implementation and review the action plan. By June , Ghana intends to have developed and implemented a communication and public awareness strategy on biodiversity conservation. The National Decentralized System for Participatory Planning constitutes a set of processes, entities and instruments that enables the interaction of various social and institutional actors to organize and coordinate development planning at all levels of government.
Ecuador's Strategy contains four objectives: National biodiversity targets are set and distributed under the four strategic objectives, and linked to nineteen results to be achieved by as well as to relevant Aichi Biodiversity Targets. An action plan provides a description of actions and entities responsible for implementation during this period. Specific studies were carried out regarding the integration of aspects on gender, interculturality and climate change during the preparation of the Strategy.
The National Institute for Biodiversity was established by decree in It represents the national response to implementing the commitments made by Parties in Nagoya. The Ministry of Ecology and Natural Resources is responsible for coordinating implementation of the Strategy and must advise the President on progress at least once a year.
Ten priority objectives aim to: For each priority objective, activities are elaborated and linked to outcomes, implementing organizations and implementation periods specific targets have been set under certain priority objectives.
Among other activities to be carried out to , Azerbaijan endeavours to: Funding for proposed activities will be met by funds allocated in the central state budget and from the State fund for environmental protection, micro-credit schemes, and grants from international donors and financial institutions. It is a five-year plan set within a fifteen-year framework, aligned with the Horizon national development framework and its third-phase strategy entitled the Growth and Sustainable Development Strategy GSDS endorsed in The Action Plan is notably structured for mainstreaming and multi-sectoral implementation across government, the private sector and civil society.
Five strategic goals address the following themes: Twenty measurable national targets are distributed among these strategic goals, each linked to achieving both relevant Aichi Biodiversity Targets and Sustainable Development Goals. The national targets are also linked to prioritized strategic actions broken down into activities associated to relevant indicators, lead implementing agencies and supporting agencies.
In addition, synergies have been identified for mainstreaming implementation, through the identification of national legislations, policies and plans that contain similar objectives e. Timeframes per target are also suggested and, in some instances, extend beyond , however remain within the timeframe of the Horizon framework.
An Implementation Plan focused on capacity development, communication and outreach, and resource mobilization has been formulated. Capacity gaps at individual, institutional and systemic levels identified during the NBSAP revision process capacity gaps were also identified under the GSDS are addressed in this Plan. Recommendations for addressing gaps and limitations in biodiversity policies and legislation that can potentially affect NBSAP implementation have also been assembled.
The country plans to develop a Communication and Outreach Strategy Framework which will be supported by the re-establishment of the national Clearing House Mechanism CHM , among other activities. The National Protected Areas System is the primary mechanism used by Belize for biodiversity conservation and is supported through a variety of funding mechanisms, such as grants from the Protected Areas Conservation Trust PACT , Debt-for-Nature Agreement, and revenue generated directly by the protected areas themselves.
NBSAP II is based on results obtained from studies carried out in five thematic areas, subsequently adopted as strategic areas axes for intervention in the final version of the document. These strategic areas comprise: Sub-objectives have also been defined which correspond more particularly to achieving the three CBD objectives on conservation, sustainable use, and the fair and equitable sharing of the benefits arising from the use of genetic resources, and are distributed under each strategic area, as appropriate.
For each of the latter, compliance indicators, verification sources and action plans comprised of separate projects are also presented. Each project is associated to responsible bodies, partners national, international and financial , objectives, activities, estimated costs, among other elements.
It should be noted that activities are of a preliminary nature and will be continued beyond , as necessary. Also, under the Decentralization Policy, pursued by the central Government, the District Councils are officially responsible for environmental matters. Various restoration projects concerning tree species of high commercial value have been conducted, and work in this area is ongoing.
Work has also been carried out regarding the valuation of traditional medicines. CEPA activities are underway to raise awareness within society at large of the values of agricultural ecosystems and the traditional uses of and customs linked to biodiversity. Sao Tome and Principe also intends to develop a national legal framework on biosafety and promote scientific research within the scope of biotechnology.
The vision and guiding principles developed in have been retained in the updated version. The current NBSAP also pays special attention to themes not addressed in the earlier NBSAP, namely gender, as a cross-cutting issue, and biodiversity integration in climate change and disaster risk reduction plans.
Jamaica also seeks to enhance biodiversity mainstreaming in awareness-raising activities, particularly targeting youth development programmes and policies, and in land use planning.
While an outline for a resource mobilization strategy has been elaborated, there exist difficulties in mobilizing financial resources and in the application of natural resource valuation NRV methods. Actions focus on biodiversity conservation across all sectors. Local governments parish councils are designated among the entities responsible for implementing activities related to land use planning. The NBSAP also comprises a plan for monitoring and evaluating the achievement of the national targets.
The Agency will be responsible for following up with various ministries and agencies regarding the production of data to inform the targets and indicators. In this implementation period, among numerous other activities, Jamaica endeavors to: It contains five strategic objectives, mapped to achieving relevant Aichi Biodiversity Targets, focused on: An implementation timeframe has been set, however Andorra anticipates revising the strategic objectives in in accordance with biodiversity trends that exist at that time.
Initiatives are promoted in three sectors, in particular: Included among the activities to be undertaken are: NBSAP2 contains 24 national targets and 99 activities. Examples of activities to be implemented under the four strategic goals include: To implement the 17 SDGs, 16 sub-committees have been established under the guidance of the NCSD, each responsible for different goals and chaired and organized by a ministry or organization other than the Department of the Environment.
These sub-committees, in addition to addressing technical, legal and political aspects of the SDGs and related Conventions, should prepare national reports for the Conventions, and propose, approve and monitor implementation of relevant national and regional environmental projects. In addition, national steering committees have been put in place to coordinate, monitor and evaluate the implementation of such projects. In this context, the document represents the cornerstone strategic framework for achieving sustainable income generation and employment for inclusive green growth, for the benefit of present and future generations, through actions focused on conservation, sustainable use, restoration and biodiversity valuation.
An NBSAP summary has been prepared specifically for decision-makers to enhance their perception of biodiversity, and contains proposals to accomplish this through strengthening work related to the economics of ecosystems and biodiversity, among other actions. Information collected on the status and trends of Algerian ecosystems marine and coastal, forest and mountain, steppe, Saharan, oasis, wetland and from three specific studies on biodiversity and climate change, ecosystem goods and services and urban biodiversity, contributed to the elaboration of the NBSAP.
Its four strategic objectives focus on: What is the carrying capacity of our planet? The answers to these questions,after all, define a sustainable population. Not surprisingly, the answers are quite hard to tease out. Various numbers have been put forward, each with its set of stated and unstated assumptions -not the least of which is the assumed standard of living or consumption profile of the average person. In other words, the higher our standard of living climbs, the lower our population level must fall in order to be sustainable.
This is discussed further in an earlier article on Thermodynamic Footprints. To get some feel for the enormous range of uncertainty in sustainability estimates we'll look at six assessments, each of which leads to a very different outcome.
We'll start with the most optimistic one, and work our way down the scale. The ecological footprint is a measure of human demand on the Earth's ecosystems. It is a standardized measure of demand for natural capital that may be contrasted with the planet's ecological capacity to regenerate.
It represents the amount of biologically productive land and sea area necessary to supply the resources a human population consumes, and to assimilate associated waste. As it is usually published, the value is an estimate of how many planet Earths it would take to support humanity with everyone following their current lifestyle. It has a number of fairly glaring flaws that cause it to be hyper-optimistic.
The "ecological footprint" is basically for renewable resources only. It includes a theoretical but underestimated factor for non-renewable resources. It does not take into account the unfolding effects of climate change, ocean acidification or biodiversity loss i. Still, the estimate as of the end of is that our overall ecological footprint is about "1.
In other words, there is at least 1. As you will see, other assessments make this estimate seem like a happy fantasy. The Fossil Fuel Assessment The main accelerator of human activity over the last to years has been our exploitation of the planet's stocks of fossil fuel. Before there was very little fossil fuel in general use, with most energy being derived from the flows represented by wood, wind, water, animal and human power.
The following graph demonstrates the precipitous rise in fossil fuel use since then, and especially since Graphic by Gail Tverberg This information was the basis for my earlier Thermodynamic Footprint analysis. The following graph illustrates the multiplier at different points in history: Fossil fuels have powered the increase in all aspects of civilization, including population growth. This enormous increase in food production supported a swift rise in population numbers, in a classic ecological feedback loop: Over the core decades of the Green Revolution from to the world population almost doubled, from fewer than 2.
Compare that to 0. This analysis makes it tempting to conclude that a sustainable population might look similar to the situation in , before the Green Revolution, and before the global adoption of fossil fuels: It's tempting largely because it seems vaguely achievable , but unfortunately that number may still be too high.
Even in the signs of human overshoot were clear, if not well recognized: Unless the growth rate can be kept down very close to zero, such a situation is decidedly unsustainable. The Population Density Assessment There is another way to approach the question.
If we assume that the human species was sustainable at some point in the past, what point might we choose and what conditions contributed to our apparent sustainability at that time? I use a very strict definition of sustainability. It reads something like this: In order to find a population that I was fairly confident met my definition of sustainability, I had to look well back in history - in fact back into Paleolithic times.
The sustainability conditions I chose were: I also assumed the populace would each use about as much energy as a typical hunter-gatherer: There are about million square kilometers, or 60 million square miles of land on Planet Earth.
However, two thirds of that area is covered by snow, mountains or deserts, or has little or no topsoil. This leaves about 50 million square kilometers 20 million square miles that is habitable by humans without high levels of technology.
A typical population density for a non-energy-assisted society of hunter-forager-gardeners is between 1 person per square mile and 1 person per square kilometer. Because humans living this way had settled the entire planet by the time agriculture was invented 10, years ago, this number pegs a reasonable upper boundary for a sustainable world population in the range of 20 to 50 million people.
I settled on the average of these two numbers, 35 million people. That was because it matches known hunter-forager population densities, and because those densities were maintained with virtually zero population growth less than 0. If we were to spread our current population of 7 billion evenly over 50 million square kilometers, we would have an average density of per square kilometer.
Based just on that number, and without even considering our modern energy-driven activities, our current population is at least times too big to be sustainable.
As I said above, we also need to take the population's standard of living into account. Our use of technological energy gives each of us the average planetary impact of about 20 hunter-foragers. What would the sustainable population be if each person kept their current lifestyle, which is given as an average current Thermodynamic Footprint TF of 20?
We decided above that the maximum hunter-forager population we could accept as sustainable would be 35 million people, each with a Thermodynamic Footprint of 1. First, we set I the allowable total impact for our sustainable population to 35, representing those 35 million hunter-foragers. Next, we set AT to be the TF representing the desired average lifestyle for our population. In this case that number is We can now solve the equation for P.
This number tells us that if we want to keep the average level of per-capita consumption we enjoy in in today's world, we would enter an overshoot situation above a global population of about 1. By this measure our current population of 7 billion is about 4, times too big and active for long-term sustainability.
For the sake of comparison, it is estimated that the historical world population just after the dawn of agriculture in 8, BC was about five million, and in Year 1 was about million. We crossed the upper threshold of planetary sustainability in about BC, and have been in deepening overshoot for the last 4, years.
The Ecological Assessments As a species, human beings share much in common with other large mammals. We breathe, eat, move around to find food and mates, socialize, reproduce and die like all other mammalian species. Our intellect and culture, those qualities that make us uniquely human, are recent additions to our essential primate nature, at least in evolutionary terms.
Consequently it makes sense to compare our species' performance to that of other, similar species - species that we know for sure are sustainable. I was fortunate to find the work of American marine biologist Dr. Fowler, who has a deep interest in sustainability and the ecological conundrum posed by human beings. The following three assessments are drawn from Dr.
First assessment In , Dr. Fowler and Larry Hobbs co-wrote a paper titled, "Is humanity sustainable? In it, they compared a variety of ecological measures across 31 species including humans. The measures included biomass consumption, energy consumption, CO2 production, geographical range size, and population size.
When it came to population size, Fowler and Hobbs found that there are over two orders of magnitude more humans than one would expect based on a comparison to other species - times more, in fact. Similarly, our CO2 emissions outdid other species by a factor of Based on this research, Dr.
Fowler concluded that there are about times too many humans on the planet. This brings up an estimate for a sustainable population of 35 million people. This is the same as the upper bound established above by examining hunter-gatherer population densities.
Second assessment In , five years after the publication cited above, Dr. Fowler wrote another paper entitled "Maximizing biodiversity, information and sustainability. In other words, what is the largest human population that would not reduce planetary biodiversity? This is, of course, a very stringent test, and one that we probably failed early in our history by extirpating mega-fauna in the wake of our migrations across a number of continents.
In this paper, Dr. Fowler compared 96 different species, and again analyzed them in terms of population, CO2 emissions and consumption patterns. This time, when the strict test of biodiversity retention was applied, the results were truly shocking, even to me.
According to this measure, humans have overpopulated the Earth by almost times. In order to preserve maximum biodiversity on Earth, the human population may be no more than 10 million people - each with the consumption of a Paleolithic hunter-forager. Third assessment After this article was initially written, Dr.
Fowler forwarded me a copy of an appendix to his book, "Systemic Management: In it he describes yet one more technique for comparing humans with other mammalian species, this time in terms of observed population densities, total population sizes and ranges.
After carefully comparing us to various species of both herbivores and carnivores of similar body size, he draws this devastating conclusion: It puts a sustainable human population at about 7 million. Conclusions As you can see, the estimates for a sustainable human population vary widely - by a factor of from the highest to the lowest. The Ecological Footprint doesn't really seem intended as a measure of sustainability. Its main value is to give people with no exposure to ecology some sense that we are indeed over-exploiting our planet.
It also has the psychological advantage of feeling achievable with just a little work. As a measure of sustainability, it is not helpful. As I said above, the number suggested by the Thermodynamic Footprint or Fossil Fuel analysis isn't very helpful either - even a population of one billion people without fossil fuels had already gone into overshoot.
That leaves us with four estimates: The central number of 35 million people is confirmed by two analyses using different data and assumptions. My conclusion is that this is probably the absolutely largest human population that could be considered sustainable.
The realistic but similarly unachievable number is probably more in line with the bottom two estimates, somewhere below 10 million. I think the lowest two estimates Fowler , and Fowler are as unrealistically high as all the others in this case, primarily because human intelligence and problem-solving ability makes our destructive impact on biodiversity a foregone conclusion. After all, we drove other species to extinction 40, years ago, when our total population was estimated to be under 1 million.
So, what can we do with this information? It's obvious that we will not and probably cannot voluntarily reduce our population by Even an involuntary reduction of this magnitude would involve enormous suffering and a very uncertain outcome. It's close enough to zero that if Mother Nature blinked, we'd be gone. In fact, the analysis suggests that Homo sapiens is an inherently unsustainable species.
This outcome seems virtually guaranteed by our neocortex, by the very intelligence that has enabled our rise to unprecedented dominance over our planet's biosphere.
Is intelligence an evolutionary blind alley? From the singular perspective of our own species, it quite probably is. If we are to find some greater meaning or deeper future for intelligence in the universe, we may be forced to look beyond ourselves and adopt a cosmic, rather than a human, perspective.
Discussion How do we get out of this jam? How might we get from where we are today to a sustainable world population of 35 million or so? We should probably discard the notion of "managing" such a population decline. People seem virtually incapable of taking these kinds of decisions in large social groups. We can decide to stop reproducing, but only as individuals or perhaps small groups. Without the essential broad social support, such personal choices will make precious little difference to the final outcome.
Politicians will by and large not even propose an idea like "managed population decline" - not if they want to gain or remain in power, at any rate. China's brave experiment with one-child families notwithstanding, any global population decline will be purely involuntary. A world population decline would will be triggered and fed by our civilization's encounter with limits.
These limits may show up in any area: In , shortly after I grasped the concept and implications of Peak Oil, I wrote my first web article on population decline: The Elephant in the Room. In it I sketched out the picture of a monolithic population collapse: As time has passed I've become less confident in this particular dystopian vision. It now seems to me that human beings may be just a bit tougher than that. We would fight like demons to stop the slide, though we would potentially do a lot more damage to the environment in the process.
We would try with all our might to cling to civilization and rebuild our former glory. Different physical, environmental and social situations around the world would result in a great diversity in regional outcomes. To put it plainly, a simple "slide to oblivion" is not in the cards for any species that could recover from the giant Toba volcanic eruption in just 75, years. Still, there are those physical limits I mentioned above.
They are looming ever closer, and it seems a foregone conclusion that we will begin to encounter them for real within the next decade or two. In order to draw a slightly more realistic picture of what might happen at that point, I created the following thought experiment on involuntary population decline. It's based on the idea that our population will not simply crash, but will oscillate tumble down a series of stair-steps: I started the scenario with a world population of 8 billion people in I assumed each full cycle of decline and partial recovery would take six generations, or years.
It would take three generations years to complete each decline and then three more in recovery, for a total cycle time of years. In ten full cycles - 2, years - we would be back to a sustainable population of about million. The biggest drop would be in the first years, from to when we would lose a net 53 million people per year. Even that is only a loss of 0. As a scenario it seems a lot more likely than a single monolithic crash from here to under a billion people.
Here's what it looks like: It's important to remember that this scenario is not a prediction. It's an attempt to portray a potential path down the population hill that seems a bit more probable than a simple, "Crash! With climate change getting ready to push humanity down the stairs, and the strong possibility that the overall global temperature will rise by 5 or 6 degrees Celsius even before the end of that first decline cycle, our prospects do not look even this "good" from where I stand.
Rest assured, I'm not trying to present 35 million people as some kind of "population target". It's just part of my attempt to frame what we're doing to the planet, in terms of what some of us see as the planetary ecosphere's level of tolerance for our abuse.
The other potential implicit in this analysis is that if we did drop from 8 to under 1 billion, we could then enter a population free-fall. As a result, we might keep falling until we hit the bottom of Olduvai Gorge again. My numbers are an attempt to define how many people might stagger away from such a crash landing. Some people seem to believe that such an event could be manageable.
I don't share that belief for a moment. These calculations are my way of getting that message out. I figure if I'm going to draw a line in the sand, I'm going to do it on behalf of all life, not just our way of life. What can we do? To be absolutely clear, after ten years of investigating what I affectionately call "The Global Clusterfuck", I do not think it can be prevented, mitigated or managed in any way.
If and when it happens, it will follow its own dynamic, and the force of events could easily make the Japanese and Andaman tsunamis seem like pleasant days at the beach. The most effective preparations that we can make will all be done by individuals and small groups.
It will be up to each of us to decide what our skills, resources and motivations call us to do. It will be different for each of us - even for people in the same neighborhood, let alone people on opposite sides of the world. I've been saying for a couple of years that each of us will each do whatever we think is appropriate to the circumstances, in whatever part of the world we can influence. The outcome of our actions is ultimately unforeseeable, because it depends on how the efforts of all 7 billion of us converge, co-operate and compete.
The end result will be quite different from place to place - climate change impacts will vary, resources vary, social structures vary, values and belief systems are different all over the world. The best we can do is to do our best.
Here is my advice: Stay awake to what's happening around us. Don't get hung up by other people's "shoulds and shouldn'ts". Occasionally re-examine our personal values. If they aren't in alignment with what we think the world needs, change them.
Others are as much victims of the times as we are - even the CEOs and politicians. Blame, anger and outrage is pointless. It wastes precious energy that we will need for more useful work. Laugh a lot, at everything - including ourselves. Hold all the world's various beliefs and "isms" lightly, including our own. Love everything just as deeply as you can. That's what I think might be helpful. If we get all that personal stuff right, then doing the physical stuff about food, water, housing,transportation, energy, politics and the rest of it will come easy - or at least a bit easier.
And we will have a lot more fun doing it. I wish you all the best of luck! Global population is as of now projected to reach 9. These staggering levels of growth in humans leads to the question of whether the resources of our ecosystems are enough.
British journalist Vivien Cummings analyzes how many people can live on Earth without depleting the planet. The first half of the article pushes for the notion that consumption levels are the key, not population by itself.
The Western World has for example a much higher emission of CO2 per capita than poorer nations. If countries with excessive population growth levels could be swayed to keep their "footprints" small, we could sustain a large number of people in the world. But experience and history shows that they will seek more material goods as they become more affluent. Especially people living in the cities will you see strong effects like pollution, emissions, smog and similar as they experience urban population growth.
Also wealthier countries have the greatest footprint per household. Will Steffen from the Australian National University suggests that, if fertility rates were further reduced, the world could be stabilized at a number around 9 billion and then slowly fall, but this is very hard to achieve. Corey Bradshaw of the University of Adelaide in Australia concluded in a study, that if two billion people died tomorrow - or if every government adopted controversial fertility policies such as China's one-child policy - there would still be as many if not more people on the planet by as there are today.
The UNFPA calculates that million women in the poorest countries did not want their last child, but did not have the means to prevent the pregnancy. If these women's needs were met, it would have a significant impact on global population trends.
Creating a sustainable population is as much about boosting women's rights as it is about reducing consumption of resources. Cummings points out the responsibility incurred on Western nations to change their consumption patterns; in face of growing population numbers we can't expect to keep on our way of life.
Unless we slow the destruction of Earth's declining supply of plant life, civilization like it is now may become completely unsustainable, according to John Schramski, lead author of a study published by researchers at the University of Georgia's College of Engineering in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Large animals -- including elephants, rhinoceroses, polar bears and others -- face the highest rate of decline.
After billions of years simple organisms evolved the ability to transform the sun's light into energy, eventually leading to an explosion of plant and animal life that bathed the planet with lush forests and extraordinarily diverse ecosystems.
This stored energy is needed to maintain Earth's complex food webs and biogeochemical balances. The study's calculations are grounded in the fundamental principles of thermodynamics, a branch of physics concerned with the relationship between heat and mechanical energy. Chemical energy is stored in plants, or biomass, which is used for food and fuel. If biomass drops below sustainable thresholds, the population will decline drastically, and people will be forced to return to life as hunter-gatherers or simple horticulturalists.
Thermodynamic laws are 'absolute and incontrovertible; we have a limited amount of biomass energy available on the planet, and once it's exhausted, there is absolutely nothing to replace it.
Virtually every country in the Mediterranean region consumes more ecological resources than local ecosystems can replenish. To cover the widening gap between supply and demand, the region is increasingly relying on global resources, which are also becoming increasingly limited.
Nations in the region now need to factor in the resource constraints of their trade partners and recognize the risk it poses to their own economic prosperity. The average Food Footprint of a Mediterranean resident is approximately 0. On a scale of zero to one, the U. Development Programme defines 0. Since , most of the Mediterranean countries have moved beyond that threshold.
This composition poses a specific challenge because food consumption can only be shifted increased or decreased to a small extent, given that food is one of the key basic human needs. The reasons for the Mediterranean region's relatively high food Footprint include water scarcity, low agricultural productivity, growing dependence on imported food, and a transition away from the traditional environmentally friendly and healthy Mediterranean diet.
Instead of consuming cereals, vegetables and oil typical of the Mediterranean diet-which have a low Footprint-countries are consuming more meat and dairy, which have higher Footprints. In this newly released interview, Rex Weyler shares his observations of "what can happen as a civilization grows out of control. Weyler does express some hope for the future, as well, and outlines changes needed to bring human civilization back to living within ecological limits.
This is the ninth in our series of podcasts and radio programs. We post a new podcast episode every Thursday. Click here to play this audio interview. Instead of problems in the subprime housing market, as economists claim, the Great Recession was a resource depletion problem masquerading as a financial crisis.
The depleted resource was oil: Many chose to put food on the table and gas in their tanks instead of paying their too-large mortgages. The world's economic and environmental fates have become forever interconnected. Natural resources are not unlimited, We can clear-cut only so many forests, pump only so much oil out of the ground and drain only so much water out of aquifers before our behavior becomes unsustainable.
GDP - or gross domestic product - measures a nation's flow of income, but it's a flawed yardstick and leads to some perverse accounting. For example, GDP grew when agricultural runoff caused toxic algal blooms in Lake Erie last year due to spending on bottled water and the goods and services needed to repair the damage.
This would suggest that polluting one of our Great Lakes benefits our economic health. When we become singularly focused on growing GDP, we're left with no incentive to sustainably manage our natural resources. We need to look to the future beyond short-term growth. What we use today is gone forever, making the problem worse and leaving it for our children to solve.
In the author's new book "Beyond GDP: National Accounting in the Age of Resource Depletion," we need to stop thinking of the economy as an "engine" that can stall, and start thinking of it as a metabolism or an organism that does not consume more energy than it acquires.
Using the metabolism metaphor, we ought to develop a new system of national accounting that includes raw materials flowing into the economy, burning of fossil fuels for energy and disposal of waste wherever possible.
In the early s, the U. Congress expressly forbade the collection of such data in Meanwhile, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development and even emerging economies have moved ahead without the United States. Economic-environment accounts are now common outside U. The Bureau of Economic Analysis ought to seek authorization to restart its program.
If we as a society can begin collecting relevant data, perhaps we can begin to use the analytical tools, metrics and knowledge to go beyond GDP and make wise choices for the future. Our deepest hope is to make a positive contribution in that direction. In Nigeria, the chairman of the National Population Commission, NPC, Eze Duruiheoma, warned that the country's economy was incapable of supporting the nation's population annual exponential growth rate of 3.
The current challenges such as militancy in the Niger Delta, Boko Haram, conflicts between farmers, and other security implications were manifestations of Nigeria's population, he said. He said the youth population poses security challenges of unemployment, social vices and the breakdown of family values. Additional challenges are rural-urban migration, declining availability of arable land, and decay in social infrastructure.
According to a report by the Global Footprint Network, the population of the United States is using twice the renewable natural resources and services that can be regenerated within its borders. Alaska, Texas, and Michigan are the most resource-abundant states based on biocapacity, a measure of bioproductive land.
California, Texas, and Florida have the highest ecological deficits -- when demand for resources exceeds what nature can regenerate biocapacity within the state borders. An ecological deficit is possible because states can import goods, overuse their resources for instance by overfishing and overharvesting forests , and emit more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere than can be absorbed by their own forests.
But doing so requires decision-makers to make strategic investments in infrastructure and our natural capital and set policies aimed at conserving our planet's resources. In the book Limits to Growth, commissioned by a think tank called the Club of Rome, predicted the collapse of our civilization some time this century. Research from the University of Melbourne has found the book's forecasts to be accurate, which, if things continue to follow the books track, we can expect the early stages of global collapse to start appearing soon.
Researchers working out of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, including husband-and-wife team Donella and Dennis Meadows, built a computer model to track the world's economy and environment.
Called World3, this computer model was cutting edge. Industrialization, population, food, resource depletion, and pollution were tracked. If humanity followed the "business-as-usual" scenario, failing to take serious action on environmental and resource issues, the model predicted "overshoot and collapse" - in the economy, environment and population. Click on the headline above to see the graphs which show that, up to , the data is strikingly similar to the book's forecasts.
The graphs show that resources are being used up at a rapid rate, pollution is rising, industrial output and food per capita is rising. The population is rising quickly. To feed the continued growth in industrial output there must be ever-increasing use of resources. But resources become more expensive to obtain as they are used up. As more and more capital goes towards resource extraction, industrial output per capita starts to fall - in the book, from about As pollution mounts and industrial input into agriculture falls, food production per capita falls.
Health and education services are cut back, and that combines to bring about a rise in the death rate from about Global population begins to fall from about , by about half a billion people per decade. Living conditions fall to levels similar to the early s. The Global Financial Crisis of and ongoing economic malaise may be a harbinger of the fallout from resource constraints.
The pursuit of material wealth contributed to unsustainable levels of debt, with suddenly higher prices for food and oil contributing to defaults. Peak oil could be the catalyst for global collapse. Even the conservative International Energy Agency has warned about peak oil.
If these resources soak up too much capital to extract, the fallout would be widespread. The University of Melbourne research has not found proof of collapse as of But in Limits to Growth those effects only start to bite around Things could change the future: But it seems unlikely that the quest for ever-increasing growth can continue unchecked to without causing serious negative effects.
It may be too late to convince the world's politicians and wealthy elites to chart a different course. So to the rest of us, maybe it's time to think about how we protect ourselves as we head into an uncertain future. August 19th was Earth Overshoot Day. It is the approximate date that humanity's annual demand on nature exceeds what the Earth can renew this year. In less than 8 months, we have demanded an amount of ecological resources and services equivalent to what Earth can regenerate for all of Ecological deficit spending is made possible by depleting stocks of fish, trees and other resources, and accumulating waste such as carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and oceans.
It would take more than 1. It is possible to turn the tide. Global Footprint Network and its partners are supporting governments, financial institutions, and other organizations around the globe in making decisions aligned with ecological reality.
See how many Chinas it takes to support China. How many United States to support the United States, etc. California's, population grew by more than 4. The addition of 2,, immigrants between and represents The primary consumer of water in California is agriculture and industry.
Much agricultural water is wasted. Higher prices encourage investments in irrigation systems and a change in crop selection. Farmers use more water than they would if market forces were allowed to guide the use of water.
On a national level, we are using LESS water today than we did 20 years ago. While the population of the U. Even a slight increase in the price of water or energy results in pressure to conserve water. The primary consumers are irrigation and industry, both have curtailed their water usage. Increased consumption is evident in the public supply and livestock. Population growth across the nation needs to be brought under control. Arizona's population growth rate compares to Pakistan, Tanzania, and Honduras while Colorado's is similar to that of Ghana, El Salvador, and the Philippines.
Many of the scientists and speakers said Meadows was right about Limits to Growth in their presentations -- indeed, his model appeared to be ahead of schedule.
Meadows hates to give dates, but when pressed, did say that although he thought the most likely time-frame for collapse back in based on various model projections, the exponential use of resources and population growth appeared to have moved the time-frame forward to around At the "Limits to Growth" conference in he said the time-frame appears to be Dennis Meadows is a co-author of The Limits to Growth. In , the team of 66 scientists he assembled for the original Limits to Growth study concluded the most probable result will be a rather sudden and uncontrollable decline in both population and industrial capacity.
He has retired from Club of Rome discussions, and has found more cheerful uses for his time. But he seemed happy with the outcome, saying that this is the first time he faced an audience that did not need convincing. Instead, he took the time to add some details that I think are crucially important, among them the fact that his WORLD3 model is only accurate until the peaks are reached.
Once the peaks occur between and all bets are off: It's because people don't care about climate change. Despite myriad conferences and commissions on sustainable development since then, the world opted for overshoot.
The two-leggeds hairless apes did what they always have done. They dominated and subdued Earth. Faced with unequivocable evidence of an approaching existential threat, they equivocated and then attempted to muddle through. Global civilization will only be the first of many casualties of the climate the Mother Nature now has coming our way at a rate of change exceeding any comparable shift in the past 3 million years, save perhaps the meteors or supervolcanoes that scattered our ancestors into barely enough breeding pairs to be able to revive.
This change will be longer lived and more profound than many of those phenomena. We have fundamentally altered the nitrogen, carbon and potassium cycles of the planet. It may never go back to an ecosystem in which bipedal mammals with bicameral brains were possible.
Or, not for millions of years". Last, senior writer at The Weekly Standard, insists that America is heading over a demographic cliff because we're not making enough babies. We added more than million in the last 40 years, and in the next 40 to 50 years, according to the U. Census Bureau, we will add another million, most of it directly and indirectly from immigration.
Our current population of million runs a substantial ecological deficit that is pushing us ever deeper into ecological debt, according to the Global Footprint Network, which says: But we only have one planet at our disposal. Part of caring for our planet is having the collective wisdom to live within limits, including limiting the size of our families and population. We are busily sawing off the limb upon which the entire human enterprise rests-degrading and squandering the "natural capital" that makes sustainable economic prosperity possible.
Last quotes Julian Simon who said that " Human ingenuity, it turns out, is the most precious resource. Commodity prices did fall from to , but in the s prices for almost all raw materials have increased sharply.
Americans mistook temporary abundance of nonrenewable natural resources like the fossil fuels and metals as permanent sufficiency. It's a miscalculation with monumental consequences. We have fewer wetlands, fewer free-flowing rivers, less available surface and groundwater, less open space, fewer remaining fossil fuels and high grade metal and mineral ores, fewer arable soils, fewer healthy and more diseased forests, more wildfires and droughts, record temperatures, fewer fish, less de facto wilderness, more threatened and endangered species, more harmful invasive species, higher carbon dioxide emissions, and more crowded parks and beaches than ever before.
The climate is becoming more erratic; sea level is rising, and the oceans are becoming more polluted and acidic. Julian Simon once bragged: Physicist Al Bartlett calculated that after just 17, years only 0. However, more seniors living longer lives has also added to our population. Furthermore, Americans can do the world a big favor by consuming less.
Americans are the biggest consumers in the world. When millions of citizens from economically wealthy nations can still go to fully-stocked stores and have relatively high living standards, it is easy to justify business-as-usual policies.
However, with fish stocks collapsing and degradation of coral reefs due to overfishing and ocean warming; shortages and rapid price increases of commodities like wheat and corn due to water scarcity and extreme heat; deforestation; and literally drawing down our wells, overshoot's consequences are all-too-real.
Humanity has been living beyond its means like a community that draws down its well faster than it can recharge. The Persian Gulf may be one of the hardest-hit regions in terms of fisheries decline due to climate change and acidification. Awareness of our Ecological Footprint and the economic implications of resource constraints and climate-altering carbon emissions is being heightened. In the s Ecuador had four times as much biocapacity as it used. Now it is facing the onset of an ecological deficit.
In Ecuador became the first nation to incorporate the Ecological Footprint into its national plan. For traditional measures of economic wealth such as GDP or credit worthiness to be sufficient, they must take into account ecological wealth. The trend is increasing medium- and long-term national risk because of exposure to resource constraints.
Fortunately forward-looking governmental and financial leaders are investing in the stability of their own nations by adopting ecological accounting and moving towards its integration in decision-making-so we may keep our wells recharged.
How big a city would have to be to house the world's 7 billion people? That would depend on which real city it was modeled after. If we all lived like New Yorkers, for example, 7 billion people could fit into Texas.
If we lived like Houstonians, though, we'd occupy much of the conterminous United States. However, what's missing from this first infographic is the land that it takes to support such a city.
Cities' land requirements far outstrip their immediate physical footprints. They include everything from farmland to transportation networks to forests and open space that recharge fresh water sources like rivers and aquifers. Just looking at a city's geographic extents ignores its more important ecological footprint.
How much land would we really need if everyone lived like New Yorkers versus Houstonians? While some cities track resource use, most don't. Of those that do, methodologies vary city to city, making comparisons nearly impossible. Plus, cities in most developed nations still use a shocking amount of resources, regardless of whether they are as dense as New York or as sprawling as Houston.
But what we can do is compare different countries and how many resources their people-and their lifestyles-use. Their methodology is based on peer-reviewed research by Mathias Wackernagel, the organization's founder. It's consistent and comprehensive. While each country's footprint is assembled from sub-footprints, ranging from cropland to carbon to urbanization to fishing grounds, the second infographic only used terrestrial sub-footprints.
Click on the link in the headline and scroll down past the first infographic to see this amazing and educational graphic showing eight countries and the amount of land each country's footprint takes up. Colby Loucks of WWF, compared humanity to bad houseguests: Paul Ehrlich, billed as the world's most renowned population analyst, says that, without a massive reduction in the number of humans and redistribution of natural resources, we will be faced with a nuclear disaster, the plague, or other disaster.
While the Royal Society in London said that physical numbers are as important as the amount of natural resources consumed, Paul Ehrlich, Bing professor of population studies at Stanford University in California and author of the best-selling Population Bomb book in , says that the optimum population of Earth - enough to guarantee the minimal physical ingredients of a decent life to everyone - is 1.
If you want a world where everyone has minimum space and food and everyone is kept just above being alive you might be able to support about 4 or 5 billion people in the long term. But we already have 7 billion. If we go on at the pace we are there's going to be various forms of disaster: Ehrlich was described as alarmist in the s but claims most of his predictions have proved correct.
They are going to have to be fed on more marginal land, from water that is purified more or transported further, we're going to have disproportionate impacts on how we feed people from the population increase itself," he said.
He agreed with the Royal Society report that said human population and consumption should not be divided but multiplied together. You have to deal with them together. We have too much consumption among the rich and too little among the poor. That implies that terrible thing that we are going to have to do which is to somehow redistribute access to resources away the rich to the poor.
We need to freeze and cut both population and consumption. However, without lowering population, cutting back on the high consumption can't do the job. Looking at the Ecological Footprint we see that the production and consumption of goods and services depends entirely on arable soils, forests, croplands, pasture lands, fishing grounds, clean waters and air, the atmosphere, ozone layer, climate, fossil fuels, and minerals - to perform the ecological services and provide the materials and energy and waste sinks that sustain civilization.
Those who see Affluence or consumption as the key use the Ecological Footprint as a yardstick for lowering their Impact, such as: Americans can lower their footprints by trimming fat - but they aren't going to give up too much. They may be willing to go to the leaner Japanese and Western Europeans lifestyles, but cutting back to how Mexicans or Nigerians or Bangladeshis live, is not an option that Americans will consider.
We can bring our per person footprint down, but not nearly enough for generous sustainability, which includes creating societies that leave sufficient natural resources for future human generations to live good lives; and sharing the landscape generously with nonhuman beings. Environmentalists who think we can double or triple U. Research from Murtaugh and Schlax at Oregon State University shows that a hypothetical American woman who switches to a more fuel-efficient car, drives less, recycles, installs more efficient light bulbs, and replaces her refrigerator and windows with energy-saving models, would increase her carbon legacy by 40 times if she has two children.
We can't lower Impact only by lowering Affluence. And Americans have the biggest Affluence footprint per person of any people in the world. Any population growth in the United States, then, is growth of these big Affluence footprints, making U. The world cannot afford more Americans. The author has more on this in his book, Man Swarm. The Royal Society in Britain has launched a two-year study into global population, establishing a group of leading experts to draw up a comprehensive set of recommendations on human population.
Sir John Sulston, who took a leading role in decoding the human genome, will lead the study. A failure to be open about the problems caused by the global population explosion would set back human development, he warned. The announcement of the study comes on World Population Day, which will be marked by a meeting of science experts at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine.
They include Sir John Beddington, the Government's chief scientist, who has warned that population is one of several environmental issues that could produce a "perfect storm" of global events in the coming decades. Today the planet's population is 6. Although fertility rates in most countries are falling, the number of young people alive now who are destined to become parents in the future suggests that this figure could rise to 8.
In , there were only about a billion people. By the number had risen to 1. Due to advances in medicine and public health, cheap fossil fuels and a technical revolution in food production, world population mushroomed to six billion by Much of the coming increase in human numbers will be in the poorest developing countries.
Some of the poorest nations in Africa could see their populations triple. Many countries have already significantly exceeded their capacity to be self-sustainable in providing their people with food, water and land without having to import resources. Britain is 17th in the league table of overpopulated nations, which are dominated by the high-consuming countries of the Middle East and Europe.
Overpopulation is a much used and abuse word, but we believe the index helps to anchor it firmly in the realm of sustainability; of people living within the limits of the place they inhabit. The "footprint" is measured in global hectares, or average world productivity, allowing one area or population to be compared with another.
The Democrats' two most urgent policy priorities are - reducing CO2 emissions and immigration reform that includes amnesty for 12 million illegal immigrants. Enactment of the latter may prove to be the key obstacle to achieving the former. The economic and national security implications of open borders have been examined in depth. Less study, however, has been devoted to the possible environmental impact of immigration as millions of people from developing countries settle down in, or are encouraged to move to, the world's largest energy-consuming country.
This liberal conundrum is illustrated by the events in the Gulf of Mexico, since a demand for fuel sparked the recent chain of events. Population growth is the primary cause of heavier traffic, urban sprawl, further depletion of natural resources and increased CO2 emissions. Census Bureau estimates that the population, more than million Americans today, will grow to million as early as and million by Studies show that recent immigrants' consumption patterns, including energy use, quickly resemble those of native-born Americans.
On average, immigrants increase their emissions fourfold after coming to the United States. That's million tons more than they would have produced had they remained in their home countries. Everyone at the current U. Everyone at the same affluence level as in 1, but with few restrictions on commerce, pollution, land use, personal behavior within current law , etc. Basically a libertarian, laissez faire economy, with few or no environmental restrictions. This points out that there is a population price to pay for the current American way of Commerce.
Everyone at the same affluence as indicated in 1, but with many and onerous restrictions on freedoms relative to behaviors leading to environmental degradation.
Restrictions on the transport of food Prohibitions against cutting of trees on one's property. Limitations on the burning of fossil fuels. Only people in the U. Everyone else at the current prosperity level of Mexico. Increasing population density is inextricably linked to loss of freedom and losses of choice. In the worst of the above scenarios, we can forget the Bill of Rights.
Bruce Sundquist I once believed that energy was the key issue, but now I am totally convinced that soil resources are the crucial issue. The reasoning behind that conclusion is given below.
Those concerned about energy resources invariably point to the exponential growth in energy consumption, but they rarely ponder the reason why the growth is exponential, and therefore never foresee an end to exponential growth until energy supplies are totally depleted. The reason why energy consumption grows exponentially is because both population and technological advances are growing exponentially.
In recent years, the rate of discovery of energy resources has outpaced energy consumption, due largely to major technological advances in the science of finding new energy resources. Both the quality of new reserves and the amount of total reserves have thus not been falling. Thus energy prices have fluctuated but have shown no clear trend.
In an environment such as this, energy consumption is bound to grow exponentially. Such a process cannot continue, and eventually reserves and reserve-quality must decline. Then prices must rise. People with large cars will then buy small cars. People with small cars will ride the bus, bus riders will walk or bicycle, and countless other conservation measures will occur quite naturally--without any help from Audubon Society.
Growth will stop being exponential and later turn negative. Rising prices will make thin seams of coal profitable to mine and to convert to gas and liquid. Supply and demand will always remain in balance; the total system will probably always show a high degree of stability, though inequities in distribution will always be with us. Exponential growth of energy consumption will be relegated to the history books where it will join countless other phenomena that have defined the course of human history, and that have shown exponential growth in their early stages.
New processes such as information generation and flow will have their turn at exponential growth before they plateau and seek a steady state. If one examines the global data on various soil related issues croplands, forest lands, grazing lands, irrigated lands, fisheries one is struck by the huge number of positive feedback phenomena instabilities that have historically never allowed a steady state to be reached, but instead have produced an endless series of collapses of soil-based systems.
When irrigation production falls short of desire, people attempt to get along with less water per unit of output. The result is salination and less--not more--crop production. When timber production falls short of desire, people harvest trees at younger ages. The result is less productivity--not more. When livestock production falls short of desire, more grazing animals are put on the same pasture.