First published on the Euforic Blog

Based on two studies addressing world development for the coming 50-100 years – the UN Millennium Assessment (MEA) and an analysis by the International Energy Agency (IEA) supporting the G8 Gleneagles plans (see the presentation) – a new DIE Discussion Paper provides a critical appraisal of the scenario studies and singles out factors which are important for future development policy.

The MEA study suggests four scenarios, described by their position in a 2×2 matrix with the characteristics pro-active / reactive policy and globalized / regionalized policy at the x-y axes. The scenarios explain the possible developments determined by the policy choices made until the year 2050 and beyond that until 2100. They identify different drivers which directly or indirectly influence future development. They speak about the climate, plant nutrient use, land conversion, diseases and invasive species as having a direct effect on the scenarios. Further the demographic, economic and socio-political development as well as the scientific and technological progress is described as indirect factors.

The MEA study makes it very clear that climate change is going to be the primary factor:

“given that climate change – which is primarily driven by energy-related Green House Gas emissions – is very likely to be the predominant force adversely affecting ecosystems over the course of the 21st century, discrete policy efforts to preserve ecosystems in the absence of decisive global climate change mitigation action would seem to be as useful as re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.”

All but one scenarios will bring considerable improvements for world climate with different effects on human welfare. However compared to the reference year 2000 they all expect continued loss of biodiversity and degradation of ecosystems. To name just a few figures dependent on the policy choices:

  • demand for food crops is projected to grow by 75-85%
  • water withdrawals increase by 20-85%

Continued conversions of ecosystems are consequently caused by the pressure to meet agricultural and/or infrastructural demands. Mostly affected will be developing countries, in particular tropical and sub-tropical regions, the study predicts.

“The combination of exposure to an already fragile environment, dominance of climate-sensitive sectors in economic activity and low autonomous adaptive capacity in these regions entail a high vulnerability to the harmful effects of global warming on agriculture production and food security, water resources, human health, physical infrastructure and ecosystems.”

According to the author this requires the full integration of environmental concerns into the formulation of future development strategies. Nonetheless a recent WWF review of integrated water resource management in EC development programming showed that this is done on the level of policy formulation but is inadequately implemented in policy action. The message of the scenarios for policymakers is that although upcoming challenges are serious, policy options still exists.

“If decisive and proactive action is taken, the challenges are manageable without dramatic implications for growth aspirations of developing and developed countries. The task ahead for development policy is to assist in translating this message into concrete action.”

 See the Euforic bookmarks on climate change and environment and development cooperation

See also our newsfeeds on water and sanition, energy and food security

First published on the Euforic Blog

The EU Consensus on Development recognizes that the environment is a cross-cutting issue within EC development cooperation together with human rights and gender, and needs to be mainstreamed in all national and regional development programs. Now a report published by BirdLife, FERN and WWF assesses environmental tools in EC development cooperation.

According to the authors the programming phase is crucial because main decisions are made which are difficult to adjust later on in the project circle. The EC requires an Environmental Country Profile Report in this phase to ensure that the environmental situation, existing policies and programs and capacities of the specific region or country are taken into consideration.

One of the criticisms expressed in the report is that knowledge of climate change is hardly ever included in these reports although climate change is clearly linked to biodiversity and poverty reduction. The report demands to take climate science reports on board in current EC programming. Other criticized aspects are:

  • insufficient statistical information and the lack of human capacity to provide this
  • inadequate analysis of underlining problems regarding governance and corruption
  • inadequate consideration of land tenure and its legal ramifications
  • inadequate consultations of civil society, local authorities and minority groups
  • failure to adequately address EC policies in areas such as fishing which can have a detrimental impact on ecosystems

by Martin Behrens

See the Euforic newsfeeds on environment and climate

First published on the Euforic Blog

Environmental protection is one of the cross-cutting issues in EU development policy. According to the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, biodiversity loss contributes directly or indirectly to health and food security.

While the European Commission praises its efforts in the fight to stop the loss of biodiversity, a new report by the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) strongly criticizes the lack of progress by the EU to halt the decline of biodiversity by 2010.

The analysis looks at the progress made within the EU’s development cooperation with ACP, Asian and Latin American countries.

“Half way to the Millennium Development Goals, eight years since EU Member states and the European Commission made the commitment to halt biodiversity loss by 2010, biodiversity conservation and natural resources have still not been brought into the mainstream of EU development and funding.”

The WWF calls on the EU Commission to:

  • increase funding for biodiversity along with other parts of EU aid
  • work with partner countries on sectoral budgets for the environment
  • develop sustainable beyond project sources of funding
  • participate environmental actors on the preparation process of country strategies

The paper concludes that

“[t]he weak and limited progress […] in the mainstreaming of biodiversity […] calls for a renewed high level political commitment to put the 2010 biodiversity target prominently on the EU external development agenda.”

Experts on biodiversity recently discuss the issue at an international conference in Bonn that aims to achieve new commitments in the light of the 2002 UN convention on biodiversity.

Subscribe to Euforic’s newsfeed on environmental aspects of European development policy.

Please also visit the EU sites for more on sustainable development and biodiversity.

by Martin Behrens