Science of the MDGs and Global Sustainability: Identifying Future Goals, Targets, and Indicators

1. Dr. Heidi Wittmer UFZ, Department Environmental Politics UFZ Science Policy Expert group Science of the MDGs and Global Sustainability: Identifying Future Goals, Targets and Indicators

2. Questions • Are MDGs, SDGs + Global Sustainability Goals inter-changeable? Similar, different, complementary or conflicting?→ poverty focussed, should include poverty, global limits • Goals, targets and indicators to reflect inter-connections? Conceptual framework to reflect system dynamics + identify data required? • Need for collective action to achieve these targets? Resolve dichotomy between principles of universality and subsidiarity?

3. Questions cont. • Reconcile data on global environmental indicators with local, national and regional environmental indicators? Soc. econ.? • Information needs from natural and socio-economic systems to ensure comparable concrete, quantifiable and time bound goals, targets and indicators? • Steps for scientific community in post 2015 framework

4. Goals, targets and indicators to reflect inter-connections? Conceptual framework to reflect system dynamics + identify data required? • Interdependence: local-global, between different goals • Synergies and trade-offs depend on strategy chosen • Issues, analysis, solutions

5. 1. Science and policy – what are the challenges? • Scientific policyadvice– chiefscientisttothe UN • orinterfacescience-policy Policy/Society Science. Science. Policy/Society Science. Policy/Society

7. What we need? Framework + process .(results from a focus group with policy makers May 2012) • Joint formulation of policy relevant questions: • Comprehensive • Answerable by science • Solutions that can be implemented on the ground • Knowledge on impacts of policy, • knowledge on policy design • Consolidated version from science

8. Governance: where are decisions taken? • Ostrom (2005) rule framework: no way to derive ideal governance deductively: contextualized trial and error • Facilitate and speed up this „learning by doing“ • Providing a means for bringing information together, furthering exchange and analysis

9. A flexible methodological approach able to include • Answers to different (types) of questions • impact assessment • local demand (and its global impact) • Information on potential provision of ESS (jobs, health…) • Status of ecosystems, (economic, social, cultural system) • Local data, where available

10. Need for collective action to achieve these targets? Resolve dichotomy between principles of universality and subsidiarity? Two examples that can help bridge the gap: • Translation oflocalproblemfieldsto global sustainability → integrative sustainabilityconcept • Collectinginformation, furtheringexchange → eye on earth

11. Integrative sustainability concept from the Helmholtz Association (Kopfmüller et al., 2001)

12. Dr. Volker Stelzer ITAS, KIT Integrative Concept of Sustainable Development

13. Dr. Volker Stelzer Integrative Concept of Sustainable Development

14. Dr. Volker Stelzer ITAS KIT Integrative Concept of Sustainable Development

15. Connection An Integrative Concept of Sustainability(“Helmholtz-Konzept”: Kopfmüller et al., 2001 and Hartmuth et al., 2008) 1. Securing human existence 2. Maintaining society’s productive potential 3. Preserving society’s options for development and action 1.1 Protection of human health …. 2.2 Sustainable use of non-renewable resources … 3.4 Conservation of the cultural function of nature … Sustainability Goals • Criteria/Indicators: • Number of cars per day • Chemical groundwater quality • Unemployment rate • … • Lack of green spaces in former industrial areas • Contaminated groundwater • High unemployment • … Local Problem Areas

16. Dr. Volker Stelzer ITAS KIT Sustainability Problems ofMegacities (ex.) (I)

17. Dr. Volker Stelzer ITAS KIT Sustainability Problems ofMegacities (ex.) (II)

18. Dr. Volker Stelzer ITAS, KIT Sustainability Problems ofMegacities (ex.) (III)

19. European Environmental Agency:Eye on Earth • Allows open access to broad range of data, • Allows users to feed in data • Allows analysis and including model results

22. Questions cont. • Reconcile data on global environmental indicators with local, national and regional environmental indicators? Soc. econ.? • Information needs from natural and socio-economic systems to ensure comparable concrete, quantifiable and time bound goals, targets and indicators? → Set up systems able to capture relevant data, protocols, explanations, standardization, hierarchical systems (aggregate and differentiate)

23. Conclusions • No one size fits all • Solutions at different levels but take into account interconnectedness (vertical and horizontal) • Awareness raising is not enoúgh – solution-oriented implementable knowledge is needed • Provide procedural assistance rather than concrete solutions for all situations • Science organisation: Network of networks

24. Thank you for your attention! Heidi.wittmer@ufz.de

25. Needs for a MAES framework • Needs todisentangle „decisions“ andwhatinfluencesthem • Regulation, incentives, institutions -> entrypoints • Howtoinfluencedecisionsbybetterinformation on ecosystemsandtheirservices • Needs toframeevaluationofservices, currentlywe „value“ onlycertainservicesexplicitly • Needs tomakebenefits (in termsof HWB) explicit • Whereiswhatinformationneededatwhatlevelofdetail? Guidance on thechoiceofinformation • Needs toincludebiodiversityexplicitly

26. Connection An Integrative Concept of Sustainability (“Helmholtz-Konzept”: Kopfmüller et al., 2001) Sustainability Rules Local Problem Areas

27. Goals, targets and indicators to reflect inter-connections? Conceptual framework to reflect system dynamics + identify data required? • No one size fits all • Solutions at different levels but take into account interconnectedness (vertical and horizontal) • Awareness raising is not enoúgh – solution-oriented implementable knowledge is needed • Provide procedural assistance rather than concrete solutions for all situations

28. Dr. Volker Stelzer ITAS, KIT Sustainability Problems ofMegacities (ex.) (IV)

29. Dr. Volker Stelzer ITAS KIT Sustainability Problems ofMegacities (ex.) (V)

30. TEEB framework: ecosystem processes – functions – services – benefits – values

31. E.g. Target 2 – Restoring at least 15% of degraded ecosystems Information needs on status BES List of current knowledge at all scales on target 2 Define Target (Baseline, trends, gaps, uncertainties…) EU EU EU EU MS MS MS MS Indicators Scenarios, models Local Local Local Local Information on management practices and how they affect BES Identify actors at all scales and their actions/roles on target 2 Identify actions Identify relevant policies and tradeoffs influencing target 2 Does the policy affect the actions Information on how policies affect actions and BES Identify policies Conditionality Information on how policies actually affect actins and how these affect BES Monitoring How do BES affect other management or policy goals? (can be illustrated at different points of the cascade, depending on policy and target).

32. Processes Functions Services Benefits Values

33. Processes Functions Processes Services Functions Benefits Services Values Benefits Values

34. Goals from Policy sectors Processes Management Policy sectors Functions Processes Awareness Services Functions Management Benefits Services Policy sectors Values Benefits Awareness t Values Policy sectors

35. Types of questions asked: • Science: what is the current state of biodiversity? how does biodiversity function? why is it important? How are biodiversity and ecosystem services linked? • Policy: how is biodiversity/are ecosystem services affected by current policy? What needs to be changed in the management on the ground, so that biodiversity suffers less harm? How can this be implemented via policy? How much biodiversity do we need? What does it cost to preserve (a certain amount of) biodiversity?

36. Challenges remain Understanding for political processes and societal needs still underdeveloped among scientists Understanding for scientific work flow still underdeveloped among knowledge ‚users‘ Involvement of other relevant players needed (e.g. economic sector) Bridging activities are needed and require resources and manpower

37. 2. Zur (Vor-)Geschichte: Wie kamen wir zum IPBES? 3. Vorbereitungskonferenz Busan Ende IMoSEB Konsultationen Start IMoSEB Konsultationen Fusion IMoSEB-MA follow-up 2. Vorbereitungskonferenz 1. Vorbereitungskonferenz 2. IPBES Plenum 1. IPBES Plenum 2005 2008 2008 2007 2009 2010 2011 2012 UNGA 9.COP-CBD Bonn Veröffentlichung MA-Reports