Speaking points on the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment

Ladies and Gentlemen, It is a pleasure for me be here on the occasion of the presentation of the millennium report from the World Resources Institute. I am also glad that this report is presented in this forum at Storebrand, a company in the forefront when implementing environmental criteria into their portfolios.

The official presentation of the report will be at the Conference of Ministers tomorrow in Bergen.

General

• The challenge of good biodiversity and resource management, as complex as life itself, is central to the vision of sustainable development as set out by the Brundtland Commission in 1987. Fulfilling this commitment is an exceedingly difficult undertaking, not least because our knowledge and understanding of the ways in which the ecosystems functions are so patchy and limited.

• Adverse effects of human impacts on nature have increased rapidly in the last 50 years, and in many countries and ecosystems this threatens the very foundation for sustainable development. Countering this global trend is one of the fundamental challenges of our time.

Lack of knowledge/ Over-exploitation

• We do not know the condition of the ecosystems sufficiently to predict the long-term effects of human impact. Our need to know will grow along with growing human populations and consumption and will have impact on long term planning and decision making.
• World wide, we are all familiar with serious problems caused by unsustainable use of nature. Over-fishing and degradation of forests are just two examples. Our ability -- and tendency -- to exploit our natural resources is expanding, as of course are population and consumption. At the same time all of our consumption patterns are increasingly westernised.
• Even in a small, rich, and fairly straightforward society like Norway, we see some of this trend. We do not realise all the values we loose when establishing new areas for industry, building new roads or simply removing the last trees when expanding agricultural land.
• So far 103 species of plants and animals have gone extinct in the last 150 years in Norway. Almost 300 more are now threatened, and may well disappear over the next five to ten years. Her I am talking about the large and "visible" species. We have not countered all micro-organisms yet.

• This inadequacy of our current understanding of the key roles and functions of biodiversity and ecosystems is a serious shortcoming and must be considered to be an underlying cause of biodiversity loss. Clearly, learning more about how biodiversity works and how it interacts with the human species is therefore one of our highest priorities.

Sufficient knowledge already exists

• However, at the same time we must resist the temptation to use this state of relative ignorance as a "sleeping pillow", as we say in Norwegian – an excuse for postponing action. We certainly know more than enough already to improve the ways in which we manage the biological resources of the planet. I am confident that the next presentation from Dr. Lash will show that this is the case.

Sustainable use

• To achieve sustainability in both direct and indirect use of resources is a crucial goal for all of us. In this regard it is necessary to bear in mind the three objectives of the Convention on Biodiversity and its multidimensional nature; conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity and fair and equitable sharing of benefits. The convention is a principal global instrument for promoting sustainable interaction between human society and the biosphere. All relevant political and economic sectors must be involved in the implementation of the convention.
• To arrive at well-founded and acceptable compromises between conservation and consumption, while maintaining biodiversity, is never easy. Sound knowledge is required of cultural no less than natural systems. Mankind depends on biodiversity for food, fuel, building materials, medicines and so much else. We cannot entirely stop exploiting the resources and riches of nature.

• The various economic sectors have their own legitimate objectives and responsibilities in the provision of goods and services to society. They must, however, take the interest of biodiversity into consideration when meeting society's needs. We have to face the challenge of safeguarding different and sometimes conflicting needs regarding biodiversity management.
• The values of biodiversity are often difficult to identify or explain, particularly as they may be perceived differently from culture to culture or even within cultures. All too often we tend to overlook the importance of biodiversity in the functioning of ecosystems. We take many of natures ecosystem services for granted, forgetting -- if we ever knew -- that these services may be dependent on key biodiversity elements and well functioning ecosystems. These are all issues and questions which I am confident will be part of the Millennium Ecosystem Assesment

• But, - identifying and defining the structures, functions and values is not enough. We also need to know how to protect them, and how to strike an acceptable balance. We need to know how to put in place management regimes and practices that can ensure sustainability for diversity.
• I would like to emphasise one of the basic ideas in the Biodiversity Convention; that each sector of society should take full responsibility for biodiversity in accordance with the measures at its disposal. Although this obligation is felt mainly at the national level, the same way of thinking should be applied internationally, for example in trade policies. This is certainly a fundamental principle for my government. Agriculture, forestry and fisheries are, as you know, key sectors in determining whether sustainable use of biological resources will be achievable. The impact on the environment of the goods and services provided by these primary industries must not be negative. Productivity and nutrient cycles, and our opportunities to benefit from the passive values associated with biological diversity, must be secured.

Industry

• The loss of ecosystem values is an interdisciplinary and cross-sectoral challenge like so many of todays challenges. These kind of challenges can only be met by a coherent and interministerial approach. National authorities need to establish co-ordinated policies and action. Such co-ordinated action must also be communicated to local authorities, industry and consumers.

• Parts of private sector have already developed tools, analytic techniques and inverstment funds that serve the cause of sustainable development. One example is Storebrand, Norways leading private sector life insurance and investment group. Storebrand has developed a methodology for environmentally sound portfolio investment practices which has been applied to several investment portfolios. In recent years, many new mutual funds have been launched by banks, insurers and fund managers in western countries, seeking to incorporate ethical or environmental criteria into portfolios.
• But we need more initiatives from private sector to further develop their own guidelines and standards for sustainable use of nature, like e.g. eco-labeling and certification. Some industries already offer monitoring programmes for safer production
• I also hope that the next lecture by Jonathan Lash will encourage private industry to become donors for national Millennium Ecosystem Assessments.
• I am ready to continue the dialogue on these issues with the industry

Importance of ecosystem approach

• Traditionally we have segregated the management regimes of nature protection and the needs for effective production systems. Here I would like to mention the new concept of the " Ecosystem Approach" which is a strategy for the integrated management of land, water and living resources that promotes conservation and sustainable use in an equitable way.
• When making the "ecosystem approach" more operative we have to link the two different ways of thinking mentioned above. Environmentalists have to accept production, and producers have to accept the limits for biological capacity of ecosystems. I hope Dr. Lash will introduce you to some of the ideas that the ecosystem approach represents.

• I would also like to stress the need for local understanding and participation. Unless the people most dependent for their living on the use of biodiversity are with us in our endeavour, we will fail. We must encourage a feeling of stewardship at the local level if we are to be successful in our national work. And if we can communicate the message that there is something in it for them, local communities and people will be crucial partners in the achievement of sustainability in the use of biodiversity.

• Norway have already taken an international initiative on "Ecosystem Appproach" In 1999 the Norwegian Government, the UNEP and several institutions arranged the 3rd Trondheim Conference on biodiversity. The topic was to make the principles more operative for sustainable use in marine ecosystems and in forestry.

Importance of Millennium Ecosystem Assessment

• We need to visualise the ecosystem values and what goods and services nature provides us with. These are values like of intact forests, agricultural landscapes, clean water, local insects controlling pests, of intact mires preventing flooding.
• And not to forget that ecosystems also serve as buffers to absorb pollution and mitigate the effects of climatic changes.
• Likewise we must visualise the consequenses for the society when ecosystem functions and values are eradicated or lost.
• The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment represents a new methodology and a new way of thinking. We need this initiative to improve our own management and to communicate the values of the ecosystems, of nature, to wider groups of the society including relevant stakeholders and sectors.

Government follow-up

• Norway will start a pilot study on the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment in 2001. This study will hopefully be a start of a complete assessment revealing goods and values that Norwegian ecosystems provide.
• The obligation under the Convention on Biodiversity to prepare national biodiversity action plans should reflect these imperatives. Norway is now in the midst of preparing a second-generation action plan on biodiversity incorporating proposals put forward by 14 different ministries and their constituencies in various sectors. Of course, we have all learned the hard way that it is one thing to put forward a plan-- and quite another thing to remember where you actually put it! But this is not what we expect from the current plan. We see it as a tool for co-ordinated policy-making, for identifying – and achieving --priorities at the turn of the Millennium. The plan will be presented as a report to the Storting/Parliament in 2001.

In conclusion

• I am confident that our understanding of biodiversity will progress as we have entered the new "century of biology". The need to know will become increasingly urgent, especially in the life sciences, such as gene-technology. Population pressure, consumer demand and the pace of technological development are driving forces here. And we may expect public awareness of our interdependence on well functioning life systems on earth to rise accordingly. The sustainability of the actions we take today will be judged by future generations in the light of this heightened environmental awareness.

• I therefore welcome the study from World Resources Institute (WRI) which reports on the condition of our ecosystems
• I hope this will be a new initiative to make sure that policymakers use the best and most up-to-date knowledge at hand, that scientists have a clear picture of the most pressing policy issues, and finally that it facilitates the dialogue between the politicians, policy-makers, scientists and the industry.