Table 2.2. Trends in the Human Use of Ecosystem Services and Enhancement or Degradation of the Service Around the Year 2000 - Provisioning services
Legend
|
= Increasing (for Human Use column) or
enhanced (for Enhanced or Degraded column)
|
|
= Decreasing (for Human Use column) or
degraded (for Enhanced or Degraded column)
|
|
= Mixed (trend increases and decreases
over past 50 years or some components/regions increase while
others decrease
|
Click on the links below for similar tables on:
Regulating services
Cultural services
Supporting services
Service |
Sub-category |
Human Use (a) |
Enhanced or Degraded (b) |
Notes |
Provisioning Services |
|
|
|
Food |
Crops |
|
|
Food provision has grown faster than overall population growth.
Primary source of growth from increase in production per unit
area but also significant expansion in cropland. Still persistent
areas of low productivity and more rapid area expansion, e.g.,
sub-Saharan Africa and parts of Latin America. |
Livestock |
|
|
Significant increase in area devoted to livestock in some
regions, but major source of growth has been more-intensive,
confined production of chicken, pigs, and cattle. |
Capture Fisheries |
|
|
Marine fish harvest increased until the late 1980s and has
been declining since then. Currently, one quarter of marine
fish stocks are overexploited or significantly depleted. Freshwater
capture fisheries have also declined. Human use of capture fisheries
has declined because of the reduced supply, not because of reduced
demand. |
Aquaculture |
|
|
Aquaculture has become a globally significant source of food in the last
50 years and, in 2000, contributed 27% of total fish production.
Use of fish feed for carnivorous aquaculture species places
an additional burden on capture fisheries. |
Wild plants and animal food products |
NA |
|
Provision of these food sources is generally declining as
natural habitats worldwide are under increasing pressure and
as wild populations are exploited for food, particularly by
the poor, at unsustainable
levels. |
Fiber |
Timber |
|
|
Global timber production has increased by 60% in the last
four decades. Plantations provide an increasing volume of harvested
roundwood, amounting to 35% of the global harvest in 2000. Roughly
40% of forest area has been lost during the industrial era,
and forests continue to be lost in many regions (thus the service
is degraded in those regions), although forest is now recovering
in some temperate countries and thus this service has been enhanced
(from this lower baseline) in these regions in recent decades.
|
Cotton, hemp, silk |
|
|
Cotton and silk production have doubled and tripled respectively
in the last four decades. Production of other agricultural fibers
has declined. |
Wood fuel |
|
|
Global consumption of fuelwood appears to have peaked in the
1990s and is now believed to be slowly declining but remains
the dominant source of domestic fuel in some regions. |
Genetic resources |
|
|
|
Traditional crop breeding has relied on a relatively narrow
range of germplasm for the major crop species, although molecular
genetics and biotechnology provide new tools to quantify and expand
genetic diversity in these crops. Use of genetic resources also
is growing in connection with new industries based on biotechnology.
Genetic resources have been lost through the loss of traditional
cultivars of crop species (due in part to the adoption of modern
farming practices and varieties) and through species extinctions. |
Biochemicals, natural medicines, and pharmaceuticals |
|
|
|
Demand for biochemicals and new pharmaceuticals is growing,
but new synthetic technologies compete with natural products
to meet the demand. For many other natural products (cosmetics,
personal care, bioremediation, biomonitoring, ecological restoration),
use is growing. Species extinction and overharvesting of medicinal
plants is diminishing the availability of these resources. |
Ornamental resources |
|
NA |
NA |
|
Freshwater |
|
|
|
Human modification to ecosystems (e.g., reservoir creation)
has stabilized a substantial fraction of continental river flow,
making more fresh water available to people but in dry regions
reducing river flows through open water evaporation and support
to irrigation that also loses substantial quantities of water.
Watershed management and vegetation changes have also had an
impact on seasonal river flows. From 5% to possibly 25% of global
freshwater use exceeds long-term accessible supplies and requires
supplies either through engineered water transfers or overdraft
of groundwater supplies. Between 15% and 35% of irrigation withdrawals
exceed supply rates. Freshwater flowing in rivers also provides
a service in the form of energy that is exploited through hydropower.
The construction of dams has not changed the amount of energy,
but it has made the energy more available to people. The installed
hydroelectric capacity doubled between 1960 and 2000. Pollution
and biodiversity
loss are defining features of modern inland water systems in
many populated parts of the world. |
* = Low to medium certainty. All other trends
are medium to high certainty.
NA = Not assessed within the MA. In some cases,
the service was not addressed at all in the MA (such as ornamental
resources), while in other cases the service was included but the
information and data available did not allow an assessment of the
pattern of human use of the service or the status of the service.
† = The categories of “Human Benefit” and “Enhanced
or Degraded” do not apply for supporting services since, by definition,
these services are not directly used by people. (Their costs or
benefits would be double-counted if the indirect effects were included).
Changes in supporting services influence the supply of provisioning,
cultural, or regulating services that are then used by people and
may be enhanced or degraded.
a For provisioning services, human use
increases if the human consumption of the service increases (e.g.,
greater food consumption); for regulating and cultural services,
human use increases if the number of people affected by the service
increases. The time frame is in general the past 50 years, although
if the trend has changed within that time frame the indicator shows
the most recent trend.
b For provisioning services, we define
enhancement to mean increased production of the service through
changes in area over which the service is provided (e.g., spread
of agriculture) or increased production per unit area. We judge
the production to be degraded if the current use exceeds sustainable
levels. For regulating and supporting services, enhancement refers
to a change in the service that leads to greater benefits for people
(e.g., the service of disease regulation could be improved by eradication
of a vector known to transmit a disease to people). Degradation
of a regulating and supporting services means a reduction in the
benefits obtained from the service, either through a change in the
service (e.g., mangroves loss reducing the storm protection benefits of an ecosystem) or
through human pressures on the service exceeding its limits (e.g.,
excessive pollution exceeding the capability of ecosystems to maintain
water quality). For cultural services, enhancement refers to a change in the ecosystem features that increase the cultural (recreational, aesthetic, spiritual, etc.) benefits provided by the ecosystem. The time frame is in general the past 50 years, although if the trend has changed within that time frame the indicator shows the most recent trend.
Source: MA
Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Biodiversity Synthesis
(2005), p.33-37
Related publication:
Other Figures & Tables on this publication:
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