GOAL 15 : LIFE ON LAND
GOAL 15 : LIFE ON LAND
People with more education are more likely to engage in actions in relation to protecting the environment. In Germany, while 12% of people with less than secondary education took a stance on the environment and engaged in political action, the share rose to 26% of those with secondary education and 46% of those with tertiary education.41 Around the world, smallholder farmers can increase efficient food production and harvest by making better use of available arable lands. Increasing smallholder food production through education and training programs can make low-income rural communities self-sufficient and reduce hunger. Teaching people to participate in more sustainable and resilient agriculture practices aligned to ecosystems’ management can reinforce protection, restoration and sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems. Better educated citizens are more likely to participate in sustainable forestry and help stop deforestation, while also contributing to the restoration of degraded land and soils as well as combating desertification.
Forests cover 30.7 per cent of the Earth’s surface and, in addition to providing food security and shelter, they are key to combating climate change, protecting biodiversity and the homes of the indigenous population. By protecting forests, we will also be able to strengthen natural resource management and increase land productivity. At the current time, thirteen million hectares of forests are being lost every year while the persistent degradation of drylands has led to the desertification of 3.6 billion hectares. Even though up to 15% of land is currently under protection, biodiversity is still at risk. Deforestation and desertification – caused by human activities and climate change – pose major challenges to sustainable development and have affected the lives and livelihoods of millions of people in the fight against poverty. Efforts are being made to manage forests and combat desertification. There are two international agreements being implemented currently that promote the use of resources in an equitable way. Financial investments in support of biodiversity are also being provided.’
Forests Deforestation and Biodiversity
Forests harbour the world’s most concentrated variety of plant and animal life
Forests cover nearly one-third of Earth’s land area, and house more than 80% of terrestrial biodiversity. Tropical forests are home to the highest number of species per unit of land area, with particularly high rates of biodiversity in the Amazon basin of South America, the Congo basin of Central Africa, and the tropical rainforests of Southeast Asia. In addition, forests with unique compositions, such as those on isolated islands, or with varied topography, host high numbers of endemic species that are found nowhere else in the world. Any change to these habitats can lead to the extinction of the species that depend on them. Regions rich in both biodiversity and endemic species include Madagascar, the Hindu Kush-Himalayan region stretching from Afghanistan to Myanmar, and the highlands of Borneo. According to Enough is Enough, a report published by Eyes on the Forest in 2018, forest blocks in Indonesian Borneo and Sumatra, which were some of the last remaining habitats of critically endangered species like tigers, elephants, and orangutan, continue to be converted to palm oil plantations.
Detailed information about the location of areas with rich biodiversity, as well as highly threatened areas, can be used to better prioritize conservation and protection efforts. Biodiversity may be best conserved by minimizing human intrusion into intact and relatively un-fragmented habitats, and by restoring biodiverse areas that have been highly altered. If areas like this can be identified, continuous monitoring of them could measure progress towards greater biodiversity conservation. Many efforts are already underway to protect biodiversity and mitigate the destruction of forested habitats. International mechanisms designed to help conserve species include the Convention on Biological Diversity’s Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020, the Aichi Biodiversity Targets designed to be met by 2020, and the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals adopted in 2015. Others, such as The Consumer Goods Forum, Tropical Forest Alliance 2020, and the New York Declaration on Forests, are focused on achieving zero net deforestation by 2020, and focus on the production of commodities (such as beef and palm oil) that is driving deforestation within tropical forest regions rich in biodiversity.
Nature Based Solutions
Better protecting nature can help us adapt to climate change and prevent disasters
While conventional development often depletes natural resources and uses up vast amounts of energy-intensive materials, nature-based solutions can be applied to related problems in a sustainable way that benefits both people and biodiversity. For example, protecting and restoring forest ecosystems in upper river catchments (where rainfall collects) can reduce the risk of floods and landslides, prevent soil erosion, and improve water quality. This type of natural flood management can also be combined with engineered infrastructure in order to deal with severe rainfall events. Other nature-based solutions include “biomimicry,” or using nature as the inspiration or blueprint for products like medicines and advanced materials; self-cleaning paints inspired by the natural ability of the lotus leaf to remain pristine, for example, now generate hundreds of millions of dollars in annual revenue. This harvesting of knowledge from nature is a key element of the Fourth Industrial Revolution. In a distinct but related way, nature-based solutions can also play a vital role in mitigating climate change – by locking up stores of carbon in the biomass making up forests, wetlands and other ecosystems.
Nature can also help absorb the impacts of climate change via urban parks, street trees, and green walls and roofs that can cool cities, reduce flooding, and filter out pollution – with less environmental impact than traditional solutions like air conditioning and concrete flood defences. While engineered solutions can be costly and require long-term maintenance, the costs of nature-based solutions are offset by multiple benefits. Coral reefs protect hundreds of millions of people from coastal flooding, for example, so their restoration is ultimately significantly cheaper than building and maintaining artificial breakwaters. In the US alone, coral reefs provide $1.8 billion-worth of free flood risk reduction every year, according to a report published by the US Geological Survey in 2019, while also serving as fish nurseries, tourist attractions, and carbon stores. Still, the potential for nature-based solutions to enhance natural habitats and restore and regenerate ecosystems is not always fully realized; carbon storage strategies often involve monoculture planting of non-native tree species, for example, which have little-to-no benefit for biodiversity. Only through evidence-based project design, sound governance, and greater awareness can we use nature to cost-effectively tackle both climate change and the biodiversity crisis.
Forest Landscape and Restoration
An area equal to more than twice the size of China is considered suitable for restoration
Most countries have an untapped resource: forest landscapes that could be restored and revitalized. Forest landscape restoration can revive “ecosystem services” (like air purification and climate regulation) and enhance human well-being in areas that have been cleared or degraded. In Ethiopia, for example, a government initiative resulted in more than 350 million trees being planted in a single day in 2019. Efforts like this can result in the establishment of dense forests, or high-yield agroforestry systems, as well as so-called mosaic systems – where wooded areas are interspersed among fields used for farming. Forest landscape restoration should not increase tree cover beyond what would be ecologically appropriate for a particular location – and should not introduce damaging, non-native species. More than two billion hectares of land have been identified as suitable for restoration around the world, which is an area equivalent to more than twice the size of China. Forest landscape restoration can diversify economies, reduce the damage caused by natural disasters, generate marketable forest and agricultural products, and support recreation and tourism.
Restoration is therefore a growing investment opportunity; in Latin America and the Caribbean alone, related investments could yield roughly $23 billion in profit over a 50-year period, according to a report published in 2016 by the World Resources Institute. An additional $300 billion per year in global financing is needed for adequate forest restoration and conservation, which can in turn create jobs, help alleviate local poverty, and increase food security. Restoration can meanwhile improve soil and water quality, conserve biodiversity, and help mitigate climate change. For example, reforestation bids such as Ethiopia’s concerted effort can bolster carbon capture and storage – and reduce the impact of emissions. Forest landscape restoration can also help governments meet the requirements of international agreements, such as the UN Convention on Biological Diversity and the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals. Thanks to the New York Declaration on Forests, and the Bonn Challenge, there is now a global effort underway to bring 350 million hectares of degraded and deforested land into restoration by 2030. These efforts are supported by commitments that have been made as part of regional restoration initiatives, including AFR100 in Africa, and Initiative 20×20 in Latin America and the Caribbean.
Conservation , Restoration and Regeneration
Ambitious collective action is required in order to preserve natural habitats
About 82% of all mammal biomass has been lost since prehistory, while the average abundance of native species in most major land-based habitats has fallen by at least one-fifth (mostly since 1900). In addition, more than one-third of all marine mammals are now threatened, according to the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. The IPBES now estimates that in total, roughly one million animal and plant species are threatened with extinction – the most in human history. While nature is under severe threat, conservation, restoration, and regeneration present potential solutions. The restoration of degraded landscapes can improve ecological integrity and human well-being. In Switzerland, for example, restoration has increased the capacity of that country’s forests, rivers, and lakes to provide water purification services; other examples include Ethiopia’s effort to plant more than 350 million trees in a single day in 2019, and the $1 billion invested in areas of the Catskills Mountains that provide water for New York City. Unlike restoration, regeneration allows landscapes to recover their richness and functionality without active intervention.
Regardless of their differences, both restoration and regeneration require comprehensive planning in order to be effective; non-native species should not be introduced via planting, and isolated areas of protected habitat cannot maintain viable populations unless surrounding areas are also made hospitable to wildlife that might cross over to find food or mates. This type of responsible planning can be achieved by establishing networks of wildlife corridors within areas dedicated to different land uses – like crops or livestock. Restoration efforts often require costly initial investments, but are cost-effective when considering the long-term benefits to society; studies show that the natural regeneration of tropical lowland pastures can help store large additional amounts of carbon, for example. In addition, costs can often be reduced by allowing landscapes to regenerate naturally. While the cost-benefit ratio of restoring ecosystems is usually positive, in order to maximize related benefits both restoration and regeneration need to have well-defined goals. While some projects aim to return landscapes to pre-disturbance conditions – by establishing a baseline before a system was degraded, damaged, or destroyed – this is not always possible.
Commodities and Supply Chain
Zero-deforestation commitments and certification can address the social and environmental risk in supply chains
The Consumer Goods Forum, an industry association, estimates that four agricultural commodities – beef, palm oil, paper and pulp, and soy – account for about half of all tropical deforestation. Demand for these commodities is only expected to increase, particularly in emerging markets. Public-private partnerships like the New York Declaration on Forests, which aims to halve the rate of deforestation by 2020, the 2010 Consumer Goods Forum, which pledges to achieve zero net deforestation by 2020, and the Tropical Forest Alliance 2020 have set ambitious goals; however, a more precise understanding of related social and environmental risks presented by supply chains is required. More clarity is needed on links between agricultural expansion and forest impacts, for example. Monitoring systems can facilitate the implementation of protection efforts, while increased transparency can encourage accountability. Improved land tenure data, related to concessions, farm boundaries, and sourcing information can make environmental impacts clearer to everyone interacting with a supply chain. Meanwhile more frequently-updated data on forest changes (now available annually, or as often as weekly across the tropics), could provide a powerful tool to identify supply chain risk, and monitor compliance with deforestation commitments.
Companies must actively monitor the areas where they are sourcing, and make related disclosures; where information proactively disclosed is unavailable, civil society groups and research organizations have filled in the blanks through their own investigations. Non-governmental organizations have been working with companies and governments to develop environmental assessment tools, while certification systems for anti-deforestation requirements have advanced the sustainability agenda. Moratoria on purchasing commodities grown on deforested land have been successful under some conditions, notably in the case of Brazil’s Soy Moratorium in the Amazon, though they have been difficult to extend sector-wide. Approaches that take into account the needs of producers, and are adapted to different geographies and supply chains, are necessary to foster agricultural production that minimizes forest impacts. Regional processes, such as those tied to Tropical Forest Alliance 2020, have showcased the power of collaborative efforts; a regional pledge signed by seven African governments to shift to sustainable palm oil production, called the Marrakesh Declaration, is one such example. Hastening the implementation of jurisdictional programs that have a state or regional focus could further bolster progress towards achieving sustainable development goals. A Tropical Forest Alliance 2020-commissioned study published in early 2017 identified 34 different jurisdictional programmes that were being planned or implemented.
Forestry and Forest Products
Companies can be incentivized to pay closer attention to sustainability and supply-chain quality
The global forestry industry generates more than $60 trillion in annual revenue, according to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Demand for forest products is only increasing, due to population growth and improved living standards – which places added pressure on forest resources. While sustainable forestry efforts (including Ethiopia’s government-led initiative to plant more than 350 million trees in a single day in 2019) can help bolster and conserve resources, unsustainable practices persist. Illegal logging contributes to deforestation, biodiversity loss, and greenhouse gas emissions, while depriving governments of essential revenue. Logging in primary (old growth) forests and in intact forest landscapes typically leads to a cascade of human activity in remote regions, and eventual deforestation. Merely complying with existing laws could save almost 200 million hectares of natural forest in Brazil and Indonesia alone, according to a report published by the Tropical Forest Alliance 2020. Timber smuggling is not only an economic and environmental problem – it often involves criminal organizations and is tied to wildlife and drug trafficking, money laundering, corruption, conflict, and human rights violations.
An increasing number of countries have put measures in place to reduce imports of illegally-harvested wood. These have increased incentives for private businesses to pay closer attention to their supply chains. However, truly effective measures to reduce illegal logging require broad cooperation among governments, the private sector, and civil society; efforts such as the World Resources Institute’s Forest Legality Initiative, WWF’s Global Forest and Trade Network, and The Nature Conservancy’s Responsible Asia Forestry and Trade Network are successfully combating illegal logging by supporting government bids to implement related policies, and by working with the private sector to both exclude illegal wood and implement independent monitoring. Some of the tools for sustainable forest management that have been employed include forest certification and tree plantations; while these plantations can supply some, but not all of the “ecosystem services” (such as air purification) that natural forests provide, they will have to play an increasingly prominent role in providing forest products in the future. Ultimately, though, it is essential that plantations do not completely supplant natural forests.
Governance of Nature
Adequate governance of global biodiversity is beyond the scope of any single entity
Policy decisions can have a deadly impact on biodiversity. So it is worth carefully considering who, exactly, is in a position to govern the use of land, the oceans, and biodiversity – all of which we rely upon for survival. While the governance of nature was traditionally the domain of governments, a diverse mix of corporate and grassroots groups, along with both supranational and municipal governments, now play prominent roles. This multi-stakeholder governance arose in response to a recognition that complex global issues like biodiversity loss, species extinction, climate change, and the melting of polar permafrost cannot be tackled by national policy alone. In light of increased populism in many parts of the world, it is particularly important that these governing stakeholders now complement rather than compete with each other, in the interest of preserving biodiversity. A single piece of land with a river running through it might represent different things to different stakeholders, for example, based on potentially valuable natural resources like fresh water; while those interests must be accounted for, it must be done in a way that protects and preserves resources.
The globalization of natural resources often results in a “tragedy of the commons,” whereby resources are exhausted and accountability for their use does not firmly lie with any single governing group or individual. One example of this is overfishing in the oceans; in regions with lax monitoring and ineffective regulation, fish stocks have been depleted. Off the coast of West Africa, several fish species risk becoming extinct – which in turn threatens entire marine ecosystems and fish-based economies. According to the World Bank, the proportion of fisheries that are fully fished, overfished, depleted, or recovering from overfishing increased to nearly 90% of the total by 2013, from about 60% in the mid-1970s. Additionally, the New Economics Foundation, a think tank, estimates that overfishing is resulting in a loss of more than 100,000 jobs and $4.3 billion annually (the World Bank estimates that exploitative fishing in general costs the global economy at least $80 billion every year). Better public-private cooperation is urgently needed to address related issues, because the way that nature is governed today will determine how much is available tomorrow.
Forest Communities
Improving land rights for local communities and Indigenous Peoples can help preserve forests
The well-being of forest communities and Indigenous Peoples is closely tied to their environment; places where communities have strong land rights also have lower rates of deforestation and forest degradation. Few governments have established the legal protections needed to secure community land rights, however. As a consequence, Indigenous Peoples are losing their land to governments and corporations. Indigenous Peoples and local communities have the legal right to less than one third of the forests in low- and middle-income countries, according to Commodities and Forests Agenda 2020, published in 2017 by Tropical Forest Alliance 2020 and the World Economic Forum. Overall, Indigenous Peoples and local communities have legal rights to at least 513 million hectares of the world’s forests, or about one eighth of the total, according to the World Resources Institute’s 2014 report Securing Rights, Combating Climate Change. Much larger areas of forest are held by communities under customary rights, which are not legally recognized by governments. Most community-held forests are in low- and middle-income countries, where deforestation pressure is strong.
When Indigenous Peoples and local communities have weak or no legal rights, their forests tend to be vulnerable to deforestation. According to the World Resources Institute’s 2014 report, in Indonesia, high levels of carbon dioxide emissions resulting from deforestation are due in part to weak or absent legal rights for forest communities. Another study of 80 forest areas in 10 different countries in South Asia, East Africa, and Latin America showed that community-owned and managed forests produce greater community benefits and improve carbon storage (the storage of carbon after it is emitted into the atmosphere). We will therefore forfeit an important opportunity to combat climate change, if we do not strengthen land rights for Indigenous Peoples and local communities. The Commodities and Forests Agenda 2020 report noted that a global consensus is emerging on the need for greater security of land tenure. The United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals commit member states to ensure that everyone has equal rights to ownership and control over land by 2030. In addition, nearly every country has endorsed the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, which guarantees land and territory rights. In some countries, communities have successfully lobbied for legal changes to recognize their land rights, while others are taking to the streets to voice their demands.
Latest Updates –
We must tackle global risks in an integrated way – here’s how
Investing in trees: global companies are restoring forests
The Data Driven Forest Carbon Exchange – Measuring every acre to make a market place for change
Target 15 of the Global Biodiversity Framework: Key Takeaways for the Private Sector
Saving biodiversity, securing earth’s future
LAND SUITABILITY ASSESSMENT FOR DISTRIBUTED SOLAR ENERGY
Room Action Agenda 2022 Room 15: Life on Land
Landmark UN Biodiversity Agreement 2030
Beyond the UN Water Conference: How to transform promises into progress?
Global Forest Status report 2022