DOCSLIB.ORG

The Government's Environmental Policy and the State of The

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Government's Environmental Policy and the State of The Summary in English: Report No. 21 (2004–2005) to the Storting The Government’s Environmental Policy and the State of the Environment in Norway Translation from the Norwegian. For information only. Table of Contents 1 Environmental status 2005 . 5 7 Hazardous substances. 26 1.1 A shared global responsibility . 5 7.1 Goals . 26 1.2 The state of the environment in 7.2 Policy instruments and measures . 26 Norway . 5 1.3 The path forward . 10 8 Waste management and recovery . 27 2 Key priorities of Norwegian 8.1 Goals . 27 environmental policy . 12 8.2 Policy instruments and measures . 27 2.1 Halting the loss of biodiversity . 12 2.2 Developing a more ambitious 9 Climate change, air pollution and climate policy . 13 noise . 28 2.3 Reducing NOx emissions in 9.1 Climate . 28 accordance with the Gothenburg 9.2 Depletion of the ozone layer. 29 Protocol . 13 9.3 Long-range air pollution . 29 2.4 Halting emissions of 9.4 Local air quality . 30 environmentally hazardous 9.5 Noise . 31 substances. 14 2.5 Improving waste management 10 International environmental and increasing waste recovery . 15 cooperation, environmental 2.6 Developing environmental assistance, and environmental policy at local level . 15 protection in the polar regions . 32 2.7 Moving to sustainable production 10.1 EU/EEA environmental legislation 32 and consumption . 16 10.2 International environmental 2.8 Focusing on environmental bodies . 32 technologies . 17 10.3 International agreements with 2.9 Greening public procurement. 18 implications for the environment . 33 2.10 Developing a knowledge-based 10.4 Bilateral and regional environmental policy . 19 environmental cooperation . 33 10.5 Environmental protection in 3 Conservation and sustainable the polar regions . 34 use of biological diversity . 21 3.1 Goals . 21 11 Regional planning and land-use 3.2 Policy instruments and measures . 21 policy . 36 11.1 Goals . 36 4 Outdoor recreation . 23 11.2 Land-use management in areas 4.1 Goals . 23 designated as agricultural areas, 4.2 Policy instruments and measures . 23 areas of natural environment and outdoor recreation areas . 36 5 The cultural heritage . 24 11.3 A proactive policy for the 5.1 Goals . 24 shoreline . 37 5.2 Policy instruments and measures . 24 11.4 A proactive land-use and natural resource policy for river basins . 37 6 Eutrophication and oil pollution 25 11.5 Adapting holiday housing 6.1 Goals . 25 developments to the 6.2 Policy instruments and measures . 25 environment . 37 11.6 Land use and the environment in towns and urban settlements . 37 Utenriksdepartementet Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs The Government’s Environmental Policy and the State of the Environment in Norway Summary in English: Report No. 21 (2004–2005) to the Storting Recommendation from the Ministry of Environment of 18 March 2005, approved in the Council of State on the same date. (White paper from the Bondevik II Government) 1 Environmental status 2005 1.1 A shared global responsibility 1.2 The state of the environment in Norway Norway is a wealthy country, and has the capacity and resources both to safeguard its own environ- The previous white paper on the Government’s ment for future generations and to help other coun- environmental policy and the state of the environ- tries. We therefore have a special responsibility to ment in Norway was published in 2003. Since then, play an active part in efforts to reduce global envi- there has been relatively little change in the state of ronmental problems and combat poverty. The rich the environment in Norway. Nature is a large and part of the world cannot continue to base its pros- complex system and changes slowly. The impacts perity on unsustainable resource exploitation. Fur- of pressure on the environment often only become ther improvements in welfare and the quality of life apparent after a considerable delay. We must also must be based on non-material and human values. remember that although nature has a considerable We must respect nature’s tolerance limits and capacity for repair and to withstand human pres- apply the precautionary principle in cases where sure, this capacity is not unlimited. All life on earth there is a risk of serious environmental damage. is vulnerable to pressures such as pollution of air, And we must follow the polluter-pays principle, so soil and water. At present, many environmental that environmental costs are not transferred to trends are negative, both in Norway and globally. neighbours, the community or future generations. New and improved knowledge shows that the These are global responsibilities that must be environmental impacts of some types of pollution translated into local action. are more serious than previously anticipated. Cli- mate change has proved to be a more acute prob- lem than we had believed, and the first impacts are probably already becoming apparent. Hazardous 6 Summary in English: Report No. 21 to the Storting 2004– 2005 The Government’s Environmental Policy and the State of the Environment in Norway substances are becoming more widely dispersed in heritage, the overall trend is clearly negative, the environment and are found in more and more despite the results that have been achieved. Local species, and also pose a greater threat than previ- eutrophication problems are also becoming more ously believed. Biodiversity is under pressure in severe in a number of water bodies. One of the Norway as well as other parts of the world. Wild main reasons for these trends is that environmen- salmon stocks in rivers and fjords have been threat- tal policy instruments have not been effective ened for many years. More recently, we have found enough either at national or at international level. that kelp forests are disappearing from parts of Another important factor is that there are still gaps Norway’s coastline. The area of mountain habitat in our knowledge about various environmental available for wild reindeer is being reduced with problems, for example hazardous substances. increasing traffic and infrastructure development. At global level, the rate of loss of biodiversity is Even though the usual indicators of the state of comparable to what has previously been observed the environment show little change over the past in connection with global natural disasters and two years, the overall level of threat is rising. We rapid climate change. Biodiversity is under threat are facing greater and more complex challenges. in Norway too, and the most serious threats are Environmental policy targets in several areas are considered to be the conversion of agricultural becoming more difficult to achieve. The formula- land for other purposes and other changes in land tion of environmental policy must reflect these use. A series of apparently insignificant develop- developments. This means that environmental pol- ments may have cumulative effects that make it dif- icy for some of Norway’s priority areas must be ficult for species and populations to survive and tightened up. In other areas, it will be sufficient to seriously impair the productivity of ecosystems. continue to apply the policy instruments in use Development also results in habitat fragmentation, today. As we work towards new policy instruments which makes conditions difficult for species that and approaches, we should also maintain the suc- are dependent on large continuous areas for their cessful elements of current environmental policy. survival. The state of the environment and environmen- The negative effects of the spread of invasive tal trends vary from one area of environmental pol- alien species to Norway are also becoming clearer. icy to another. There are positive trends for waste This problem may be intensified by climate management, depletion of the ozone layer, radioac- change. tive pollution and to some extent outdoor recre- About 12 per cent of mainland Norway is pro- ation. In these areas, a number of the national tar- tected under the Nature Conservation Act. Once gets are within reach. Consistent application of pol- the national park plan and the remaining county icy instruments over a period of some years has protection plans have been fully implemented in proved successful, and current policy will generally 2010, 13 -14 per cent of the total area of the main- be continued. land will be protected. We should maintain a high There is a more mixed picture for acidification, tempo in these efforts in order to safeguard habi- local air quality and noise, and to some extent for tats that are endangered and vulnerable or impor- biodiversity, eutrophication and the cultural heri- tant for endangered and vulnerable species, and to tage. Efforts to reduce acidification have yielded avoid damage to areas of high conservation value. results, and conditions in lakes and rivers in the Norway’s objective is to halt the loss of biologi- most sensitive areas have improved in the last 20– cal diversity by 2010. To achieve such an ambitious 30 years. Nevertheless, emissions of acidifying objective, it will be necessary to make use of effec- substances are still too high. Action has also been tive policy instruments and ensure close coopera- taken to reduce inputs of nitrogen and phosphorus tion between all sectors. Ensuring sustainable use to areas where there are signs of eutrophication, of resources is of critical importance for the main- but conditions do not appear to have improved suf- tenance of biodiversity. ficiently. Air pollution and noise are still serious Many Norwegians take part in a variety of out- problems, especially in urban areas and along main door activities and consider outdoor recreation to roads. The overall level of noise annoyance has be an important aspect of their lives. Natural condi- remained more or less unchanged since 1999, tions mean that Norway offers opportunities for despite improvements in vehicle technology and many types of outdoor recreation.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Climate Change Impacts on Hydrology, Water Resources Management and the People of the Great Lakes - St
    CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS ON HYDROLOGY, WATER RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AND THE PEOPLE OF THE GREAT LAKES - ST. LAWRENCE SYSTEM: A TECHNICAL SURVEY A report prepared for the International Joint Commission Reference on Consumption, Diversions and Removals of Great Lakes Water Compiled by Linda Mortsch Environment Canada with support from Murray Lister, Brent Lofgren, Frank Quinn and Lisa Wenger This report has relied extensively on Canada Country Study -Water resources Chapter with contributions from: N. Hoffman, L. Mortsch, S. Donner, K. Duncan, R. Kreutzwiser, S. Kulshreshtha, A. Piggott, S. Schellenberg, B. Schertzer, M. Slivitzky 8L Climate Change Impacts: an Ontario Perspective prepared for the Ontario Round Table on Environment and Economy with contributions from: 1. Burton, S. Cohen, H. Hengeveld, G. Koshida, N. Mayer, B. Mills, L. Mortsch, J. Smith, P. Stokoe July, 1999 1 DISCLAIMER The information contained herein was assembled as part of a basic fact-finding effort in support of the International Joint Commission Reference on Consumption, Diversion and Removal of Great Lakes Water. The views expressed are those of the author(s), and do not necessarily represent the opinions of either the Commission or its Study Team. 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. CURRENT KNOWLEDGE OF CLIMATE CHANGE 6 ENHANCING THE ‘GREENHOUSE EFFECT’ 6 CLIMATE RESPONSE TO A CHANGING ATMOSPHERE 7 2. CLIMATE VARIABILITY AND CHANGE 8 TEMPERATURE 8 TEMPERATURE TRENDS 8 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS ON TEMPERATURE 11 PRECIPITATION 14 PRECIPITATION TRENDS 14 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS ON PRECIPITATION 16 EVAPORATION I EVAPOTRANSPIRATION 17 EVAPORATION TRENDS 19 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS ON EVAPORATION 19 SURFACE FLOWS 20 VARIABILITY AND EXTREME EVENTS 20 RIVER DISCHARGEISTREAMFLOW TRENDS 20 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACT ON STREAMFLOW AND RUNOFF 21 The St.
    [Show full text]
  • Kent State of the Environment Report: Evidence Base
    Kent state of the ENVIRONMENT 2015 A review of current and potential indicators within the Kent Environment Strategy Contents Executive summary 3 6.0 Biodiversity 35 Introduction 5 6.1 Introduction 35 1.0 Overview of Kent 6 6.2 Vision for Kent 36 1.1 Land and habitat types 6 6.3 Indicators 36 1.2 Kent Demographics 7 6.4 Current state of play in Kent 38 1.3 Employment and business demographics (any trends or projections) 10 7.0 Water resources 39 1.4 Climate (trends in rainfall, temperature, and sea level) 12 7.1 Introduction 39 2.0 Climate Change 13 7.2 Vision for Kent 39 2.1 Introduction 13 7.3 Indicators 39 2.2 Vision for Kent 15 7.4 Current state of play in Kent 40 2.3 Indicators 15 8.0 Resources 44 2.4 Current state of play in Kent 15 8.1 Energy generation and consumption 44 2.5 Severe weather events 17 8.2 Waste 46 3.0 Air quality 19 9.0 Infrastructure – transport, housing and land 51 3.1 Introduction 20 9.1 Introduction 51 3.2 Vision for Kent 21 9.2 Vision for Kent 52 3.3 Indicators 22 9.3 Indicators 53 3.4 Current state of play in Kent 22 9.4 Current state of play 54 4.0 Water quality 26 10.0 Economy 57 4.1 Introduction 26 10.1 Introduction 58 4.2 Vision for Kent 26 10.2 Vision 58 4.3 Indicators 28 10.3 Indicators 58 4.4 Current state of play in Kent 28 10.4 Current state of play in Kent 58 5.0 Flood Risk 30 11.0 Health and Wellbeing 60 5.1 Introduction 30 11.1 Introduction 60 5.2 Vision for Kent 31 11.2 Vision for Kent 60 5.3 Indicators 31 11.3 Indicators 61 5.4 Current state of play in Kent 31 11.4 Current state of play in Kent 63 12.0 References 64 Kent State of the Environment 2 Executive summary In 2011 the Kent Environment Strategy set out a series of priorities that changes needed to address the environmental challenges that lie ahead.
    [Show full text]
  • Towards a Pollution-Free Planet
    Towards a Pollution-Free Planet Report of the Executive Director United Nations Environment Programme Advance Copy (long version) Copy Advance unep.org/environmentassembly This advance version of the report "Towards a Pollution-Free Planet" by the Executive Director of the UN Environment Programme is meant to support the preparations for the third session of the UN Environment Assembly. This is not for quotation or citation at this point. Comments to the secretariat are welcome by 14 July. A shorter version of this paper targeting policy makers will be prepared and provided in September. Towards a Pollution-Free Planet Report of the Executive Director, United Nations Environment Programme Advance Copy (long version) Towards a Pollution-Free Planet Table of Contents Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................................. I INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................1 1 EVIDENCE OF A POLLUTED PLANET: THE SCIENCE, IMPACTS AND ECONOMIC COSTS ..................................5 1.1 Air pollution ............................................................................................................................5 1.2 Land and soil pollution ...........................................................................................................9 1.3 Freshwater pollution .............................................................................................................11
    [Show full text]
  • JOURNAL of the AMERICAN WATER RESOURCES ASSOCIATION Distingillshing BETWEEN WATERSHEDS and Ecoregionsl James M. Omernik and Robe
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN WATER RESOURCES ASSOCIATION VOL. 33, NO.5 AMERICAN WATERRESOURCES ASSOCIATION OCTOBER 1997 DISTINGillSHING BETWEEN WATERSHEDS AND ECOREGIONSl JamesM. Omernik and Robert G. Bailey2 ABSTRACT: In an effort to adopt more holistic ecosystem To accomplishthis redirection, the need for a spa- approaches to resource assessment and management, many state and federal agencies have begun using watershed or ecoregion tial framework is obvious.The problem is which one. frameworks. Although few would question the need to make this Do we use existing frameworks, or do we need to move from dealing with problems and issues on a case by case or developone to fit this particular purpose?Many have point-type basis to broader regional contexts, misunderstanding of felt that watershedsprovide the spatial tool necessary each of the frameworks has resulted in inconsistency in their use for effective research, assessment,and management and ultimate effectiveness. The focus of this paper is on the clarifi- cation of both frameworks. We stress that the issue is not whether of ecosystems(Water Environment Federation, 1992; to use watersheds (or basins or hydrologic units) or ecoregions for Armitage, 1995; Montgomery et al., 1995; Parsons, needs such as developing ecosystem management and non-point 1985; USFWS, 1995; Cannon, 1994; Lotspeich, 1980; source pollution strategies or structuring water quality regulatory FEMAT, 1993; Maxwell et al., 1995; CoastalAmerica, programs, but how to correctly use the frameworks together. Defmi- 1994; USEPA, 1996a). However, publications recom- tions, uses, and misuses of each of the frameworks are discussed as well as ways watersheds and ecoregions can be and have been used mending use of the watershed framework do not all together effectively to meet resource management needs.
    [Show full text]
  • Engineering the Environment: Regulatory Engineering at the U.S
    Engineering the Environment: Regulatory Engineering at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1970-1980 Jongmin Lee Dissertation submitted to the faculty of the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy In Science and Technology Studies Matthew H. Wisnioski, Chair Mark V. Barrow, Jr. Gary L. Downey Saul Halfon Ann Johnson August 2, 2013 Blacksburg, VA Keywords: air pollution, control technology, environmental regulation, regulatory engineering, catalytic converter, scrubber, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Copyright Jongmin Lee Engineering the Environment: Regulatory Engineering at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1970-1980 Jongmin Lee ABSTRACT My dissertation addresses how engineers, scientists, and bureaucrats generated knowledge about pollution, crafted an institution for environmental protection, and constructed a collective identity for themselves. I show an important shift in regulators’ priorities, from stringent health-based standards to flexible technology-based ones through the development of end-of-pipeline pollution control devices, which contributed to the emergence of economic incentives and voluntary management programs. Drawing on findings from archival documents, published sources, and oral history interviews, I examine the first decade of the EPA amid constant organizational changes that shaped the technological and managerial character of environmental policy in the United States. Exploring the EPA’s internal research and development processes and their relationship with scientific and engineering communities sheds light on how the new fields of environmental engineering and policy were co-produced in the 1970s. I argue that two competing approaches for environmental management, a community health approach and a control technology approach, developed from EPA’s responses to bureaucratic, geographical, and epistemic challenges.
    [Show full text]
  • State of the Environment Reporting
    ITALY STATE OF THE ENVIRONMENT REPORTING First Environmental Report published by National System for Environmental Protection National Environmental Agency launches its Environmental Yearbook website (https://annuario.ispram biente.it/) Environmental Data Yearbook is the source of the main Italian environmental reports. Italy publishes national and regional SoE reports First Italian Environmental Yearbook published by National Environmental Agency The first EEA SOER Report was used for the mid- term review of the 5th EAP (1993–2000) First SoE report published by Italian Ministry of the Environment Next SoE Report by MoE and Environmental Yearbook by ISPRA Scheduled for 2020 Environmental criminal offence law Milestones Italy State of the environment tools and building blocks TOPICS COVERED Themes Data Indicators Scoreboards Assessments from showing environmental giving insight in providing knowledge on • Biodiversity • Industrial pollution • Freshwater • Natural hazards • Environmental monitoring DPSIR EEA typology • Environmental trends • State and past trends • Land and soil • Contaminated sites • Key registers and databases • Driving forces • Descriptive • Policy progress • Trends and outlooks • Marine environment • Hydrological disasters Pressures • Performance • Environmental state • Systemic challenges and • Climate change mitigation and adaption • Environment and well being • Dedicated data sources and • • Efficiency responses • Air pollution • Environmental knowledge analysis • States • Waste and resources • Impacts • Policy effectiveness
    [Show full text]
  • State and Pressures of the Marine and Coastal Mediterranean Environment
    1 Environmental issues series No 5 State and pressures of the marine and coastal Mediterranean environment UNEP 2 State and pressures of the marine and coastal Mediterranean environment NOTE The contents of this report do not necessarily reflect the official opinion of the European Communities or other European Communities institutions. Neither the European Environ- ment Agency nor any person or company acting on the behalf of the Agency is responsible for the use that may be made of the information contained in this report. A great deal of additional information on the European Union is available on the Internet. It can be accessed through the Europa server (http://europa.eu.int). Cataloguing data can be found at the end of this publication. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, 1999 Cover: EEA Layout: Folkmann Design ISBN © European Communities, 1999 Printed in Printed on recycled chlorine-free paper European Environment Agency Kongens Nytorv 6 DK-1050 Copenhagen K Tel. (+45) 33 36 71 00 Fax (+45) 33 36 71 99 E-mail: [email protected] Home page: http://www.eea.eu.int 3 Contents List of contributors ........................................................................................................6 Foreword ......................................................................................................................7 Executive summary ........................................................................................................9 1. Introduction .........................................................................................................27
    [Show full text]
  • State of the Environment: Soil Quality Report
    State of the Environment Soil Quality Report 1 Foreword 2 Executive Summary 4 1. Introduction 6 1.1 The Soil Resource 6 1.2 Soil Quality 11 1.3 Soil Monitoring 12 1.4 Pressures on Soil Quality 13 1.5 Soil Protection Legislation 13 2. Impacts of Industry 16 2.1 Derelict and Vacant Land 16 2.2 Chemically Contaminated Land 18 2.3 Radioactively Contaminated Land 21 2.4 Deposition from the Atmosphere 23 2.4.1 Acidifying and Eutrophying Compounds 23 Contents 2.4.2 Heavy Metals 29 2.4.3 Persistent Organic Pollutants 31 2.5 Climate Change 32 3. Impacts of Agriculture and Forestry 34 3.1 Soil Loss 35 3.2 Fertiliser and Pesticide Use 38 3.2.1 Fertilisers 38 3.2.2 Pesticides 41 3.3 Gaseous Emissions 43 3.3.1 Nitrous oxide 43 3.3.2 Methane 44 3.3.3 Carbon dioxide 44 3.3.4 Ammonia 45 3.4 Forestry 45 4. Impacts of Waste Application to Land 49 4.1 Organic Wastes 49 4.1.1 Sewage Sludge 50 4.1.2 Industrial Wastes 52 4.1.3 Agricultural Wastes 53 4.1.4 Composted Waste 54 4.2 Landfill 55 5. Summary 57 5.1 Pressures from Industry 57 5.2 Pressures from Agriculture and Forestry 57 5.3 Pressures from Waste Application to Land 59 5.4 Regulatory Framework 59 6. Conclusions and Recommendations 62 References 64 Glossary 68 Units 68 Acronyms 69 Useful Web Addresses 69 Acknowledgements 69 Photographs and Figures 69 Foreword The effects of air and water pollution are visible and obviously threatening to human health but the importance of soil is often overlooked.
    [Show full text]
  • Urbanization, Economic Development and Environmental Change
    Sustainability 2014, 6, 5143-5161; doi:10.3390/su6085143 OPEN ACCESS sustainability ISSN 2071-1050 www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability Article Urbanization, Economic Development and Environmental Change Shushu Li 1 and Yong Ma 2,* 1 Institute of Policy and Management, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100190, China; E-Mail:[email protected] 2 China Financial Policy Research Center, School of Finance, Renmin University of China, Haidian District, 59 Zhong Guan Cun Street, Beijing 100872, China * Author to whom correspondence should be addressed; E-Mail: [email protected]; Tel.: +86-10-8250-9318. Received: 4 May 2014; in revised form: 28 July 2014 / Accepted: 31 July 2014 / Published: 11 August 2014 Abstract: This paper applies the pressure-state-response (PSR) model to establish environmental quality indices for 30 administrative regions in China from 2003 to 2011 and employs panel data analysis to study the relationships among the urbanization rate, economic development and environmental change. The results reveal a remarkable inverted-U-shaped relationship between the urbanization rate and changes in regional environmental quality; the “turning point” generally appears near an urbanization rate of 60%. In addition, the degree and mode of economic development have significant, but anisotropic effects on the regional environment. Generally, at a higher degree of economic development, the environment will tend to improve, but an extensive economic growth program that simply aims to increase GDP has a clear negative impact on the environment. Overall, the results of this paper not only further confirm the “environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis”, but also expand it in a manner. The analysis in this paper implies that the inverted-U-shaped evolving relationship between environmental quality and economic growth (urbanization) is universally applicable.
    [Show full text]
  • Land Degradation
    THEAUSTRALIANCOLLABORatION A Collaboration of National Community Organisations Land Degradation What is Land Degradation? Extent and Type of Degraded Land There are many definitions of land degradation but all Land degradation is a global issue for a number of reasons share the idea that detrimental changes to the condition but most significantly because productive land is one of of land have occurred because of the many ways land has several resources where a reducing supply threatens our been developed and used. The term ‘degradation’ is used to capacity to feed a growing world population estimated to describe changes that are additional to those occurring be over 9 billion by 2050. In his book ‘Coming Famine’, naturally and carries with it the notion of change that is Julian Cribb points out that of the 1.5 billion hectares of undesirable and brought about by humans. Land degrada- global farmland, a quarter is affected by serious degrada- tion then refers to chemical and biophysical changes in tion, up from 15% two decades ago. The seriousness of this land that reduce both its quantity and quality. Frequently, is clear when we are told that the world demand for food is these changes are linked to a reduction in the productive growing many times faster than the area of land being capacity of land and its economic value. farmed. The term ‘land’ generally includes rocks, soils and miner- In Australia, about two thirds of agricultural land is als and the vegetation and animal habitats it supports – degraded. The major types of land degradation are soil ero- the combination of all these elements form landscapes.
    [Show full text]
  • OECD Environmental Outlook to 2030 Summary in English
    OECD Environmental Outlook to 2030 Summary in English • How will economic and social developments drive environmental change to 2030? What policies are needed to address the main environmental challenges? How can OECD and non-OECD countries best work together to tackle these challenges? • The OECD Environmental Outlook to 2030 provides analyses of economic and environmental trends to 2030, and simulations of policy actions to address the key challenges. Without new policies, we risk irreversibly damaging the environment and the natural resource base needed to support economic growth and well-being. The costs of policy inaction are high. • But the Outlook shows that tackling the key environmental problems we face today -- including climate change, biodiversity loss, water scarcity and the health impacts of pollution -- is both achievable and affordable. It highlights a mix of policies that can address these challenges in a cost-effective way. The focus of this Outlook is expanded from the 2001 edition to reflect developments in both OECD countries and Brazil, Russia, India, Indonesia, China, South Africa (BRIICS), and how they might better co-operate on global and local environmental problem- solving. OECD ENVIRONMENTAL OUTLOOK TO 2030 ISBN 978-92-64-04048-9 © OECD 2008 – 1 KEY MESSAGES The OECD Environmental Outlook to 2030 is based on projections of economic and environmental trends to 2030. The key environmental challenges for the future are presented according to a “traffic light” system (see Table 1). The Outlook also presents simulations
    [Show full text]
  • The Global Integrated World Ocean Assessment: Linking Observations to Science and Policy Across Multiple Scales
    fmars-06-00298 June 6, 2019 Time: 16:34 # 1 REVIEW published: 06 June 2019 doi: 10.3389/fmars.2019.00298 The Global Integrated World Ocean Assessment: Linking Observations to Science and Policy Across Multiple Scales Karen Evans1*, Sanae Chiba2, Maria J. Bebianno3, Carlos Garcia-Soto4, Henn Ojaveer5, Chul Park6, Renison Ruwa7, Alan J. Simcock8, C. T. Vu9 and Tymon Zielinski10 1 CSIRO Oceans and Atmosphere, Hobart, TAS, Australia, 2 Japan Agency for Marine-Earth Science and Technology (JAMSTEC), Yokosuka, Japan, 3 Centre of Marine and Environmental Research, University of Algarve, Faro, Portugal, Edited by: 4 Spanish Institute of Oceanography, Santander, Spain, 5 Estonian Marine Institute, University of Tartu, Pärnu, Estonia, Eric Delory, 6 Department of Oceanography, Chungnam National University, Daejeon, South Korea, 7 Kenya Marine and Fisheries Oceanic Platform of the Canary Research Institute, Mombasa, Kenya, 8 Retired, Richmond, United Kingdom, 9 Hanoi University of Natural Resources Islands, Spain and Environment, Hanoi, Vietnam, 10 Institute of Oceanology, Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw, Poland Reviewed by: Mustafa Yucel, In 2004, the United Nations (UN) General Assembly approved a Regular Process to Middle East Technical University, Turkey report on the environmental, economic and social aspects of the world’s ocean. The Oscar Schofield, Regular Process for Global Reporting and Assessment of the State of the Marine Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, United States Environment, including Socioeconomic Aspects produced the first global integrated George Petihakis, assessment of the marine environment in December 2016 (known as the first World Hellenic Centre for Marine Research Ocean Assessment). The second assessment, to be delivered in December 2020, will (HCMR), Greece build on the baselines included in the first assessment, with a focus on establishing *Correspondence: Karen Evans trends in the marine environment with relevance to global reporting needs such [email protected] as those associated with the UN Sustainable Development Goals.
    [Show full text]