Box 5.1. Key Factors of Successful Responses to Biodiversity Loss

• Mobilize knowledge. Ensure that the available knowledge is presented in ways that can be used by decision-makers.
• Recognize complexity. Responses must serve multiple objectives and sectors; they must be integrated.
• Acknowledge uncertainty. In choosing responses, understand the limits to current knowledge, and expect the unexpected.
• Enable natural feedbacks. Avoid creating artificial feedbacks that are detrimental to system resilience.
• Use an inclusive process. Make information available and understandable to a wide range of affected stakeholders.
• Enhance adaptive capacity. Resilience is increased if institutional frameworks are put in place that allow and promote the capacity to learn from past responses and adapt accordingly.
• Establish supporting instrumental freedoms. Responses do not work in a vacuum, and it is therefore critical to build necessary supporting instrumental freedoms—enabling conditions like transparency, markets, education—needed in order for the responses to work efficiently and equitably.
• Establish legal frameworks. A legally binding agreement is generally likely to have a much stronger effect than a soft law agreement.
• Have clear definitions. Agreements with clear definitions and unambiguous language will be easier to implement.
• Establish principles. Clear principles can help guide the parties to reach future agreement and guide the implementation of an agreement.
• Elaborate obligations and appropriate rights. An agreement with a clear elaboration of obligations and rights is more likely to be implemented.
• Provide financial resources. Availability of financial resources increases the opportunities for implementation.
• Provide mechanisms for implementation. Where financial resources are not sufficient, market mechanisms may increase the potential for implementation.
• Establish implementing and monitoring agencies. The establishment of subsidiary bodies with authority and resources to undertake specific activities to enhance the implementation of the agreements is vital to ensure continuity, preparation, and follow-up to complex issues.
• Establish good links with scientific bodies. As ecological issues become more complex, it becomes increasingly important to establish good institutional links between the legal process and the scientific community.
• Integrate traditional and scientific knowledge. Identify opportunities for incorporating traditional and local knowledge in designing responses.

Source: Millennium Ecosystem Assessment
 Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Biodiversity Synthesis (2005),
p.74

Biodiversity & Human Well-being

Direct cross-links to the Global Assessment Reports of the Millennium Assessment

Box 1. Biodiversity and Its Loss— Avoiding Conceptual Pitfalls

Box 1.1. Linkages among Biodiversity, Ecosystem Services, and Human Well-being

Box 1.2. Measuring and Estimating Biodiversity: More than Species Richness

Box 1.3. Ecological Indicators and Biodiversity

Box 1.4. Criteria for Effective Ecological Indicators

Box 2. MA Scenarios

Box 2.1. Social Consequences of Biodiversity Degradation (SG-SAfMA)

Box 2.2. Economic Costs and Benefits of Ecosystem Conversion

Box 2.3. Concepts and Measures of Poverty

Box 2.4. Conflicts Between the Mining Sector and Local Communities in Chile

Box 3.1. Direct Drivers: Example from Southern African Sub-global Assessment

Box 4.1. An Outline of the Four MA Scenarios

Box 5.1. Key Factors of Successful Responses to Biodiversity Loss

Figure 3.3. Species Extinction Rates

Figure 1.1. Estimates of Proportions and Numbers of Named Species in Groups of Eukaryote Species and Estimates of Proportions of the Total Number of Species in Groups of Eukaryotes

Figure 1.2. Comparisons for the 14 Terrestrial Biomes of the World in Terms of Species Richness, Family Richness, and Endemic Species

Figure 1.3. The 8 Biogeographical Realms and 14 Biomes Used in the MA

Figure 1.4. Biodiversity, Ecosystem Functioning, and Ecosystem Services

Figure 2. How Much Biodiversity Will Remain a Century from Now under Different Value Frameworks?

Figure 2.1. Efficiency Frontier Analysis of Species Persistence and Economic Returns

Figure 3. Main Direct Drivers

Figure 3.1. Percentage Change 1950–90 in Land Area of Biogeographic Realms Remaining in Natural Condition or under Cultivation and Pasture

Figure 3.2. Relationship between Native Habitat Loss by 1950 and Additional Losses between 1950 and 1990

Figure 3.3. Species Extinction Rates

Figure 3.4. Red List Indices for Birds, 1988–2004, in Different Biogeographic Realms

Figure 3.5. Density Distribution Map of Globally Threatened Bird Species Mapped at a Resolution of Quarter-degree Grid Cell

Figure 3.6. Threatened Vertebrates in the 14 Biomes, Ranked by the Amount of Their Habitat Converted by 1950

Figure 3.7. The Living Planet Index, 1970–2000

Figure 3.8. Illustration of Feedbacks and Interaction between Drivers in Portugal Sub-global Assessment

Figure 3.9. Summary of Interactions among Drivers Associated with the Overexploitation of Natural Resources

Figure 3.10. Main Direct Drivers

Figure 3.11. Effect of Increasing Land Use Intensity on the Fraction of Inferred Population 300 Years Ago of Different Taxa that Remain

Figure 3.12. Extent of Cultivated Systems, 2000

Figure 3.13. Decline in Trophic Level of Fisheries Catch since 1950

Figure 3.14. Estimated Global Marine Fish Catch, 1950–2001

Figure 3.15. Estimates of Forest Fragmentation due to Anthropogenic Causes

Figure 3.15. Estimates of Forest Fragmentation due to Anthropogenic Causes

Figure 3.15. Estimates of Forest Fragmentation due to Anthropogenic Causes

Figure 3.15. Estimates of Forest Fragmentation due to Anthropogenic Causes

Figure 3.15. Estimates of Forest Fragmentation due to Anthropogenic Causes

Figure 3.15. Estimates of Forest Fragmentation due to Anthropogenic Causes

Figure 3.16. Fragmentation and Flow in Major Rivers

Figure 3.17 Trends in Global Use of Nitrogen Fertilizer, 1961–2001 (million tons)

Figure 3.18 Trends in Global Use of Phosphate Fertilizer, 1961–2001 (million tons)

Figure 3.19. Estimated Total Reactive Nitrogen Deposition from the Atmosphere (Wet and Dry) in 1860, Early 1990s, and Projected for 2050

Figure 3.20. Historical and Projected Variations in Earth’s Surface Temperature

Figure 4. Trade-offs between Biodiversity and Human Well-being under the Four MA Scenarios

Figure 4.1. Losses of Habitat as a Result of Land Use Change between 1970 and 2050 and Reduction in the Equilibrium Number of Vascular Plant Species under the MA Scenarios

Figure 4.2. Relative Loss of Biodiversity of Vascular Plants between 1970 and 2050 as a Result of Land Use Change for Different Biomes and Realms in the Order from Strength Scenario

Figure 4.3. Land-cover Map for the Year 2000

Figure 4.4. Conversion of Terrestrial Biomes

Figure 4.5. Forest and Cropland/Pasture in Industrial and Developing Regions under the MA Scenarios

Figure 4.6. Changes in Annual Water Availability in Global Orchestration Scenario by 2100

Figure 4.7. Changes in Human Well-being and Socioecological Indicators by 2050 under the MA Scenarios

Figure 6.1. How Much Biodiversity Will Remain a Century from Now under Different Value Frameworks?

Figure 6.2. Trade-offs between Biodiversity and Human Well-being under the Four MA Scenarios

Table 1.1. Ecological Surprises Caused by Complex Interactions

Table 2.1. Percentage of Households Dependent on Indigenous Plant-based Coping Mechanisms at Kenyan and Tanzanian Site

Table 2.2. Trends in the Human Use of Ecosystem Services and Enhancement or Degradation of the Service Around the Year 2000 - Provisioning services

Table 2.2. Trends in the Human Use of Ecosystem Services and Enhancement or Degradation of the Service Around the Year 2000 - Regulating services

Table 2.2. Trends in the Human Use of Ecosystem Services and Enhancement or Degradation of the Service Around the Year 2000 - Cultural services

Table 2.2. Trends in the Human Use of Ecosystem Services and Enhancement or Degradation of the Service Around the Year 2000 - Supporting services

Table 6.1. Prospects for Attaining the 2010 Sub-targets Agreed to under the Convention on Biological Diversity