DOCSLIB.ORG

Environment and Natural Resource Management POLICY

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Environment and natural resource management POLICY Resilient livelihoods through the sustainable use of natural assets Enabling poor rural people to overcome poverty IFAD ENRM core principles 10 Reduce Productive and IFAD’s environmental resilient livelihoods footprint Increase and ecosystems smallholder access to Promote role 9 green finance 8 of women and indigenous peoples Promote livelihood 7 diversification Improve 6 governance of natural assets Engage in value chains 5 that drive green growth Build 4 smallholder resilience to risk Promote climate-smart 3 rural Recognize development 2 values of natural assets Scaled-up 1 investment in sustainable agriculture Scaled-up investment in Improved governance of natural assets multiple-benefit approaches for for poor rural people by strengthening land tenure sustainable agricultural intensification and community-led empowerment Recognition and greater awareness Livelihood diversification to reduce vulnerability of the economic, social and cultural and build resilience for sustainable value of natural assets natural resource management ‘Climate-smart’ approaches Equality and empowerment for women to rural development and indigenous peoples in managing natural resources Greater attention to risk and resilience Increased access in order to manage environment- and by poor rural communities natural-resource-related shocks to environment and climate finance Engagement in value chains Environmental commitment through to drive green growth changing its own behaviour A full description of the core principles begins on page 28. Environment and natural resource management Policy Resilient livelihoods through the sustainable use of natural assets Enabling poor rural people to overcome poverty Minor amendments have been included in this document to reflect comments received during Board deliberations and to incorporate the latest data available. IFAD does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work. The designations employed and the presentation of material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of IFAD concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The designations ‘developed’ and ‘developing’ countries are intended for statistical convenience and do not necessarily express a judgement about the stage reached by a particular country or area in the development process. All rights reserved. ISBN 978-92-9072-267-0 Cover photo: © IFAD/Susan Beccio © 2012 by the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) August 2012 Contents Abbreviations and acronyms 4 Acknowledgements 5 Executive summary 7 Background 12 I. The context: accelerating environmental degradation is eroding the natural asset base of poor rural people 13 Poor rural people and natural resources 13 What needs to change? 21 Assessing IFAD’s experience 23 II. The ENRM policy: 10 core principles 28 IFAD ENRM core guiding principles 28 III. ENRM policy implementation: scaling up through systematic integration 33 Operations 33 Promoting knowledge, advocacy and partnerships 35 Resource mobilization 38 Internal organization 39 Measuring success 41 Annexes I. ENRM best-practice statements 42 II. ENRM policy results and implementation framework (2011-2016) 44 Case Studies Student farmers triple yields with integrated pest management in Rwanda cover flap Participatory rangeland management in the Syrian Arab Republic 11 Sustainable forest management in Mexico 16 Rewards for environmental services in Asia and Africa 20 Green growth through value chains in West Africa 27 Energy from waste in China 32 Abbreviations and acronyms ARRI Annual Report on Results and Impact of IFAD Operations CCAFS Climate Change Agriculture and Food Security (CGIAR) CBD Convention on Biological Diversity CGIAR Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research COP Conference of the Parties (UNCCD) ECD Environment and Climate Division ENRM environment and natural resource management ESAP Environmental and Social Assessment Procedures FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations GEF Global Environment Facility GHG greenhouse gas IBRD International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (World Bank Group) ICRAF World Agroforestry Centre IFAD International Fund for Agricultural Development IFI international financial institution IFPRI International Food Policy Research Institute ILC International Land Coalition IPM integrated pest management LDCF Least Developed Countries Fund LEED Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design NRM natural resource management PES payment for environmental services QE quality enhancement RB-COSOP results-based country strategic opportunities programme REDD+ Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation in Developing Countries RES reward for environmental services RIMS Results and Impact Management System SCCF Special Climate Change Fund TEEB The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity UNCCD United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification UNCSD United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development UNDP United Nations Development Programme UNEP United Nations Environment Programme UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change WFP World Food Programme 4 Acknowledgements The development of this policy was led by Matthias Meyerhans, Director (Administrative Elwyn Grainger-Jones, Director, Environment Services Division [ADM]); Tamara Nicodeme, and Climate Division (ECD), with support Marketing and Value Chain Development from a core ECD team comprised of: Sheila Specialist (PTA); Sabine Pallas, Programme Mwanundu, Senior Technical Advisor; Officer (International Land Coalition [ILC]); Kit Vaughan, Lead Consultant; Jeffrey A. Jesús Quintana, Regional Climate and Brez, Knowledge and Advocacy Manager; Environment Specialist, (ECD/Latin America Ilaria Firmian, Technical Advisor; Wietse and the Caribbean Division [LAC]); Francesco Michiels, Environment Quality Enhancement Ranalletta, Loans and Grants Officer (CFS); Support Junior Consultant; Aisha Nazario, Vineet Raswant, Senior Technical Advisor Administrative Assistant; Roland Sundström, (PTA); Antonio Rota, Senior Technical Advisor Intern; and Waltteri Katajamäki, Intern. (PTA); Naoufel Telahigue, Programme Manager (ECD); Ganesh Thapa, Regional Major contributions from IFAD staff were Economist (APR); Gelsomina Vigliotti, provided by members of the Policy Reference Resource Mobilization Officer (Resource Group (PRG) and others, including: Rami Abu Mobilization and Partnership Unit [RMP]); Salman, Regional Climate and Environment Douglas Wholey, Senior Technical Advisor Specialist (ECD/Near East and North Africa (PTA); and the PMD management team under [NEN]); Rima Alcadi, Grants Portfolio Advisor the leadership of Kevin Cleaver, Associate (Policy and Technical Advisory Division [PTA]); Vice-President (PMD). Tom Anyonge, Senior Technical Advisor (PTA); Tim Balint, Junior Strategic Planning Further inputs were received from Jean- Officer (Strategic Planning Unit [SPB]); Marian Philippe Audinet, Senior Technical Advisor Bradley, Country Programme Manager (East (PTA); Thierry Benoit, Country Programme and Southern Africa Division [ESA]); Rudolph Manager (ESA); Hubert Boirard, Country Cleveringa, Technical Advisor (PTA); Roshan Programme Manager (WCA); Nigel Brett, Cooke, Regional Climate and Environment Country Programme Manager (APR); Frank Specialist (ECD/Asia and the Pacific Division Butcher, Senior Technical Advisor (PTA); [APR]); Antonella Cordone, Coordinator for Federica Cerulli, Supplementary Funds Indigenous and Tribal Issues (PTA); Constanza Officer (RMP); Jeanette Cooke, Water, Di Nucci, Portfolio Management Officer (ECD); Sanitation and Hygiene Consultant (PTA); Silvia Donato, Climate Change Officer (ECD); Michael Hamp, Senior Technical Advisor, Tawfiq El-Zabri, Results-Based Management Rural Finance (PTA); Maria Hartl, Technical Officer (APR); Elizabeth Farmosi-Maga, Advisor, Gender and Social Equity (PTA); Operations Advisor (Programme Management Edward Heinemann, Senior Research Department [PMD]); Charles Forrest, Counsel Coordinator (Office of Strategy and (Office of the General Counsel [LEG]); Knowledge Management [SKM]; Gary Howe, Bernardino Fortuna, Loans and Grants Director, (SPB); Sean Kennedy, Technical Officer (Controller’s and Financial Services Advisor, Food Security, Health & Nutrition; Division [CFS]); Vincenzo Galastro, Country Monitoring & Evaluation (PTA); Matteo Programme Manager (West and Central Marchisio, Country Programme Manager Africa Division [WCA]); Shyam Khadka, (APR); Siv Oystese, Financial Strategy and Senior Portfolio Manager (PMD); Annina Private Sector Officer (Global Mechanism Lubbock, Senior Technical Advisor (PTA); [UGM-GM]); Bettina Prato, Research 5 Coordinator, (SKM); Claus Reiner, Country meeting in Vienna, Austria; at the Food and Programme Manager (ESA); Theresa Rice, Agriculture Organization of the United Nations Operational Systems Advisor (PMD); Ladislao and World Food Programme, in Rome; at the Rubio, Country Programme Manager (LAC); World Bank and a meeting of the Multilateral Rutsel Martha, General Counsel (LEG); Financial Institutions Working Group on Steven Schonberger, Regional Economist Environment, in Washington, DC; and at (WCA); Cristiana Sparacino, Country a workshop establishing an Indigenous Programme Manager (WCA); Michael John Peoples Forum at IFAD. The team wishes Taylor, Programme Manager (ILC);
Recommended publications
  • Land-Use, Land-Cover Changes and Biodiversity Loss - Helena Freitas

    Land-Use, Land-Cover Changes and Biodiversity Loss - Helena Freitas

    LAND USE, LAND COVER AND SOIL SCIENCES – Vol. I - Land-Use, Land-Cover Changes and Biodiversity Loss - Helena Freitas LAND-USE, LAND-COVER CHANGES AND BIODIVERSITY LOSS Helena Freitas University of Coimbra, Portugal Keywords: land use; habitat fragmentation; biodiversity loss Contents 1. Introduction 2. Primary Causes of Biodiversity Loss 2.1. Habitat Degradation and Destruction 2.2. Habitat Fragmentation 2.3. Global Climate Change 3. Strategies for Biodiversity Conservation 3.1. General 3.2. The European Biodiversity Conservation Strategy 4. Conclusions Glossary Bibliography Biographical Sketch Summary During Earth's history, species extinction has probably been caused by modifications of the physical environment after impacts such as meteorites or volcanic activity. On the contrary, the actual extinction of species is mainly a result of human activities, namely any form of land use that causes the conversion of vast areas to settlement, agriculture, and forestry, resulting in habitat destruction, degradation, and fragmentation, which are among the most important causes of species decline and extinction. The loss of biodiversity is unique among the major anthropogenic changes because it is irreversible. The importance of preserving biodiversity has increased in recent times. The global recognition of the alarming loss of biodiversity and the acceptance of its value resultedUNESCO in the Convention on Biologi – calEOLSS Diversity. In addition, in Europe, the challenge is also the implementation of the European strategy for biodiversity conservation and agricultural policies, though it is increasingly recognized that the strategy is limitedSAMPLE by a lack of basic ecological CHAPTERS information and indicators available to decision makers and end users. We have reached a point where we can save biodiversity only by saving the biosphere.
  • Factors Influencing Land Management Practices on Conservation Easement Protected Landscapes

    Factors Influencing Land Management Practices on Conservation Easement Protected Landscapes

    Society & Natural Resources An International Journal ISSN: 0894-1920 (Print) 1521-0723 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/usnr20 Factors Influencing Land Management Practices on Conservation Easement Protected Landscapes Dianne Stroman & Urs P. Kreuter To cite this article: Dianne Stroman & Urs P. Kreuter (2015) Factors Influencing Land Management Practices on Conservation Easement Protected Landscapes, Society & Natural Resources, 28:8, 891-907, DOI: 10.1080/08941920.2015.1024365 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08941920.2015.1024365 Published online: 04 Jun 2015. Submit your article to this journal Article views: 337 View related articles View Crossmark data Citing articles: 2 View citing articles Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=usnr20 Download by: [Texas A&M University Libraries] Date: 07 September 2016, At: 09:22 Society & Natural Resources, 28:891–907 Copyright # 2015 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC ISSN: 0894-1920 print=1521-0723 online DOI: 10.1080/08941920.2015.1024365 Factors Influencing Land Management Practices on Conservation Easement Protected Landscapes DIANNE STROMAN AND URS P. KREUTER Department of Ecosystem Science and Management, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas, USA The goal of this article is to investigate factors influencing conservation-oriented land management practices on land holdings with conservation easements. We report the results of a mail survey that produced responses from 251 out of a total of 518 landowners with a permanent conservation easement on their property. We predicted that landowner satisfaction with their easement and good relationships between land- owners and easement holders would be positively correlated with the amount of conservation-oriented land management practices.
  • Integrating Ecological Risk Assessment and Economic Analysis in Watersheds: a Conceptual Approach and Three Case Studies

    Integrating Ecological Risk Assessment and Economic Analysis in Watersheds: a Conceptual Approach and Three Case Studies

    EPA/600/R-03/140R September 2003 Integrating Ecological Risk Assessment and Economic Analysis in Watersheds: A Conceptual Approach and Three Case Studies National Center for Environmental Assessment Office of Research and Development U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Cincinnati, OH DISCLAIMER This document has been reviewed in accordance with U.S. Environmental Protection Agency policy and approved for publication. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use. ABSTRACT This document reports on a program of research to investigate the integration of ecological risk assessment (ERA) and economics, with an emphasis on the watershed as the scale for analysis. In 1993, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency initiated watershed ERA (W- ERA) in five watersheds to evaluate the feasibility and utility of this approach. In 1999, economic case studies were funded in conjunction with three of those W-ERAs: the Big Darby Creek watershed in central Ohio; the Clinch Valley (Clinch and Powell River watersheds) in southwestern Virginia and northeastern Tennessee; and the central Platte River floodplain in Nebraska. The ecological settings, and the analytical approaches used, differed among the three locations, but each study introduced economists to the ERA process and required the interpretation of ecological risks in economic terms. A workshop was held in Cincinnati, OH in 2001 to review progress on those studies, to discuss environmental problems involving other watershed settings, and to discuss the ideal characteristics of a generalized approach for conducting studies of this type. Based on the workshop results, a conceptual approach for the integration of ERA and economic analysis in watersheds was developed.
  • H-1703-4, Project Management

    H-1703-4, Project Management

    2 H-1703-4 PROJECT MANGEMENT HANDBOOK (Public) This page intentionally left blank. BLM Handbook Rel. 1-1711 04/09/2008 3 H-1703-4 PROJECT MANGEMENT HANDBOOK (Public) This Handbook does not create any right or benefit, or trust responsibility, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or equity by a party, person, or any entity against the United States, its agencies or instrumentalities, its officers, or employees, or any other person or entity. This Handbook does not alter or amend any requirement under statute, regulation, or Executive Order. At the time this Handbook was written, the various hyperlinks referenced in this document were active and accurate. Because of the frequent changes to Websites, it is possible that some of the hyperlinks might become inaccurate and not link to the indicated document or Website. BLM Handbook Rel. 1-1711 04/09/2008 4 H-1703-4 PROJECT MANGEMENT HANDBOOK (Public) TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION 6 2.0 PROJECT MANAGEMENT OVERVIEW 7 2.1. Project Management in General 7 2.2. Applicable BLM Projects 7 2.3. Purpose and Goals of BLM Project Management 8 2.4. Laws, Regulations, and Authorities 9 3.0 PROJECT LIFECYCLE 11 3.1. Initiation and Development 11 3.1.1. Project Goals and Objectives 15 3.1.2. Site Description, Background, History 15 3.1.3. Programmatic Framework 15 3.1.4. Regulatory Framework/Enforcement Actions 16 3.1.5. Organizational Structure 17 3.1.6. Statement of Work (SOW) 17 3.1.7. Project Team Identification and Responsibilities 18 3.1.7.1.
  • Study on the Organizational Structure of Rural Land Stock Cooperative System Based on Game Theory and Network Data

    Study on the Organizational Structure of Rural Land Stock Cooperative System Based on Game Theory and Network Data

    International Journal of Security and Its Applications Vol. 10, No. 3 (2016), pp.333-344 http://dx.doi.org/10.14257/ijsia.2016.10.3.29 Study on the Organizational Structure of Rural Land Stock Cooperative System based on Game Theory and Network Data Liang Xiao School of economics and management, Suzhou University, Suzhou city, Anhui province, 234000, China Abstract With the development of economy and society, the agricultural land stock cooperation system is a typical system innovation, which has a significant effect on rural production efficiency. In this paper, we research on the organizational structure of rural land stock cooperative system based on game theory; the result shows that the economic performance of land circulation stock cooperative system is much higher than other land transfer mode. At the same time, the mode of joint-stock cooperative system also has high social performance. By using game theory, we find that farmers tend to passively accept unfair treatment in enterprises based on the consideration of individual benefit, so that governments should effectively implement the macro management functions, and make punishment for the behavior of the enterprise managers' untrue disclosure. In order to improve the agricultural land stock cooperation system, the government should make clear the property right of farmland; promote the scale management of agricultural land and enhance the industrialization of rural areas. Keywords: Rural land circulation; Stock Corporation; Scale operation; Empirical analysis 1. Introduction The rural land stock cooperative system is the reform and innovation of the rural land property rights system in China, and it is a kind of land circulation mode which is explored in practice.
  • Buying a Mining Claim from BLM Field Offices Bureau of Land Management the Internet

    Buying a Mining Claim from BLM Field Offices Bureau of Land Management the Internet

    U.S. Department of the Interior Investigate before buying a mining claim from BLM Field Offices Bureau of Land Management the internet. The BLM manages public lands to support many uses, FRONT RANGE DISTRICT including mining claims Royal Gorge Field Office 3028 E. Main St. and mineral Cañon City, CO 81212 extraction. You 719-269-8500 can file mining Buying A claims on any San Luis Valley Field Office 1313 E. Highway 160 public lands Monte Vista, CO 81144 that are open to 719-852-7074 Mining Claim mineral entry, and the law NORTHWEST DISTRICT Important Information You Should Know encourages you Colorado River Valley Field Office to explore and 2300 River Frontage Road develop minerals Silt, CO 81652 in those areas. 970-876-9000 However, before Grand Junction Field Office buying an 2815 H Road unpatented mining claim from a private seller, make sure Grand Junction, CO 81506 you understand what you are purchasing. 970-244-3000 Kremmling Field Office A Federal unpatented mining claim describes a parcel 2103 E. Park Ave. of federal land that may contain valuable minerals. Any Kremmling, CO 80459 prospective buyer should understand federal mining laws, 970-724-3000 including the rights and responsibilities of an unpatented mining claim. Little Snake Field Office 455 Emerson St. Craig, CO 81625 Keep in mind the phrase “buyer beware” when 970-826-5000 deciding to purchase a mining claim via an White River Field Office Sellers may provide incomplete or internet site. 220 E. Market St. incorrect information about the mining claim or what Meeker, CO 81641 type of operation is allowable on the claim.
  • Chapter 4: Land Degradation

    Chapter 4: Land Degradation

    Final Government Distribution Chapter 4: IPCC SRCCL 1 Chapter 4: Land Degradation 2 3 Coordinating Lead Authors: Lennart Olsson (Sweden), Humberto Barbosa (Brazil) 4 Lead Authors: Suruchi Bhadwal (India), Annette Cowie (Australia), Kenel Delusca (Haiti), Dulce 5 Flores-Renteria (Mexico), Kathleen Hermans (Germany), Esteban Jobbagy (Argentina), Werner Kurz 6 (Canada), Diqiang Li (China), Denis Jean Sonwa (Cameroon), Lindsay Stringer (United Kingdom) 7 Contributing Authors: Timothy Crews (The United States of America), Martin Dallimer (United 8 Kingdom), Joris Eekhout (The Netherlands), Karlheinz Erb (Italy), Eamon Haughey (Ireland), 9 Richard Houghton (The United States of America), Muhammad Mohsin Iqbal (Pakistan), Francis X. 10 Johnson (The United States of America), Woo-Kyun Lee (The Republic of Korea), John Morton 11 (United Kingdom), Felipe Garcia Oliva (Mexico), Jan Petzold (Germany), Mohammad Rahimi (Iran), 12 Florence Renou-Wilson (Ireland), Anna Tengberg (Sweden), Louis Verchot (Colombia/The United 13 States of America), Katharine Vincent (South Africa) 14 Review Editors: José Manuel Moreno Rodriguez (Spain), Carolina Vera (Argentina) 15 Chapter Scientist: Aliyu Salisu Barau (Nigeria) 16 Date of Draft: 07/08/2019 17 Subject to Copy-editing 4-1 Total pages: 186 Final Government Distribution Chapter 4: IPCC SRCCL 1 2 Table of Contents 3 Chapter 4: Land Degradation ......................................................................................................... 4-1 4 Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................
  • Perspectives from Hazards, Disaster, and Emergency Management

    Perspectives from Hazards, Disaster, and Emergency Management

    CARRI Research Report 1 COMMUNITY AND REGIONAL RESILIENCE: PERSPECTIVES FROM HAZARDS, DISASTERS, AND EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT Susan L. Cutter,* Lindsey Barnes, Melissa Berry, Christopher Burton, Elijah Evans, Eric Tate, and Jennifer Webb Hazards and Vulnerability Research Institute Department of Geography University of South Carolina Columbia, South Carolina *Carolina Distinguished Professor and Director of the Hazards and Vulnerability Research Institute Date Published: September 2008 Community and Regional Resilience Initiative RESEARCH FINDINGS ABOUT COMMUNITY AND REGIONAL RESILIENCE One of the commitments of the Community and Regional Resilience Initiative (CARRI) is to understand what resilience is and how to get there, based on research evidence. As one resource for this effort, CARRI has commissioned a number of summaries of existing knowledge about resilience, arising from a number of different research traditions. This paper is one in a series of such summaries, which will be integrated with new resilience explorations in several CARRI partner cities and with further discussions with the research community and other stakeholders to serve as the knowledge base for the initiative. For further information about CARRI’s research component, contact Thomas J. Wilbanks, [email protected], or Sherry B. Wright, [email protected]. CARRI Research Report 1 iii Community and Regional Resilience Initiative COMMUNITY AND REGIONAL RESILIENCE INITIATIVE Oak Ridge National Laboratory’s (ORNL) Community and Regional Resilience Initiative (CARRI)
  • A Measure of Risk Tolerance Based on Economic Theory

    A Measure of Risk Tolerance Based on Economic Theory

    A Measure Of Risk Tolerance Based On Economic Theory Sherman D. Hanna1, Michael S. Gutter 2 and Jessie X. Fan3 Self-reported risk tolerance is a measurement of an individual's willingness to accept risk, making it a valuable tool for financial planners and researchers alike. Prior subjective risk tolerance measures have lacked a rigorous connection to economic theory. This study presents an improved measurement of subjective risk tolerance based on economic theory and discusses its link to relative risk aversion. Results from a web-based survey are presented and compared with results from previous studies using other risk tolerance measurements. The new measure allows for a wider possible range of risk tolerance to be obtained, with important implications for short-term investing. Key words: Risk tolerance, Risk aversion, Economic model Malkiel (1996, p. 401) suggested that the risk an to describe some preliminary patterns of risk tolerance investor should be willing to take or tolerate is related to based on the measure. The results suggest that there is the househ old situation, lifecycle stage, and subjective a wide variation of risk tolerance in people, but no factors. Risk tolerance is commonly used by financial systematic patterns related to gender or age have been planners, and is discussed in financial planning found. textbooks. For instance, Mittra (1995, p. 396) discussed the idea that risk tolerance measurement is usually not Literature Review precise. Most tests use a subjective measure of both There are at least four methods of measuring risk emotional and financial ability of an investor to tolerance: askin g about investment choices, asking a withstand losses.
  • ECOLOGICAL PRINCIPLES for MANAGING LAND USE the Ecological Society of America’S Committee on Land Use

    ECOLOGICAL PRINCIPLES for MANAGING LAND USE the Ecological Society of America’S Committee on Land Use

    ECOLOGICAL PRINCIPLES FOR MANAGING LAND USE The Ecological Society of Americas Committee on Land Use Key ecological principles for land use and management deal with time, species, place, disturbance, and the landscape. The principles result in several guidelines that serve as practical rules of thumb for incorporating ecological principles into making decisions about the land. April 2000 INTRODUCTION DEFINITIONS Humans are the major force of change around the Land cover: the ecological state and physical appearance globe, transforming land to provide food, shelter, and of the land surface (e.g., closed forests, open forests, grasslands). products for use. Land transformation affects many of the planets physical, chemical, and biological systems and Land use: the purpose to which land is put by humans directly impacts the ability of the Earth to continue (e.g., protected areas, forestry for timber products, providing the goods and services upon which humans plantations, row-crop agriculture, pastures, or human settlements). depend. Unfortunately, potential ecological consequences are Ecosystem management: the process of land use not always considered in making decisions regarding land decision-making and land management practice that takes into account the best available understanding of the use. In this brochure, we identify ecological principles that ecosystems full suite of organisms and natural processes. are critical to sustaining ecosystems in the face of land- use change. We also offer guidelines for using these Land management: the way a given land use is principles in making decisions regarding land-use change. administered by humans. This brochure is the first of many activities under a Land Ecological sustainability: the tendency of a system or Use Initiative of the Ecological Society of America.
  • Exposure and Vulnerability

    Exposure and Vulnerability

    Determinants of Risk: 2 Exposure and Vulnerability Coordinating Lead Authors: Omar-Dario Cardona (Colombia), Maarten K. van Aalst (Netherlands) Lead Authors: Jörn Birkmann (Germany), Maureen Fordham (UK), Glenn McGregor (New Zealand), Rosa Perez (Philippines), Roger S. Pulwarty (USA), E. Lisa F. Schipper (Sweden), Bach Tan Sinh (Vietnam) Review Editors: Henri Décamps (France), Mark Keim (USA) Contributing Authors: Ian Davis (UK), Kristie L. Ebi (USA), Allan Lavell (Costa Rica), Reinhard Mechler (Germany), Virginia Murray (UK), Mark Pelling (UK), Jürgen Pohl (Germany), Anthony-Oliver Smith (USA), Frank Thomalla (Australia) This chapter should be cited as: Cardona, O.D., M.K. van Aalst, J. Birkmann, M. Fordham, G. McGregor, R. Perez, R.S. Pulwarty, E.L.F. Schipper, and B.T. Sinh, 2012: Determinants of risk: exposure and vulnerability. In: Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation [Field, C.B., V. Barros, T.F. Stocker, D. Qin, D.J. Dokken, K.L. Ebi, M.D. Mastrandrea, K.J. Mach, G.-K. Plattner, S.K. Allen, M. Tignor, and P.M. Midgley (eds.)]. A Special Report of Working Groups I and II of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, and New York, NY, USA, pp. 65-108. 65 Determinants of Risk: Exposure and Vulnerability Chapter 2 Table of Contents Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................................67 2.1. Introduction and Scope..............................................................................................................69
  • The Sustainable Land Management Mainstreaming Tool

    The Sustainable Land Management Mainstreaming Tool

    The Sustainable Land Management Mainstreaming Tool DECISION SUPPORT FOR MAINSTREAMING AND SCALING UP SUSTAINABLE LAND MANAGEMENT Decision Support for Mainstreaming and Scaling Up Sustainable Land Management The Sustainable Land Management Mainstreaming Tool By Soledad Bastidas Fegan FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS Rome, 2019 Required citation: Bastidas Fegan, S. 2019.The DS-SLM Sustainable Land Management Mainstreaming Tool - Decision Support for Mainstreaming and Scaling up Sustainable Land Management. Rome. FAO. 44 pp. Licence: CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO. The designations employed and the presentation of material in this information product do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) concerning the legal or development status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The mention of specific companies or products of manufacturers, whether or not these have been patented, does not imply that these have been endorsed or recommended by FAO in preference to others of a similar nature that are not mentioned. The views expressed in this information product are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of FAO. © FAO, 2019 Some rights reserved. This work is made available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 IGO licence (CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO; https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/igo/legalcode/legalcode). Under the terms of this licence, this work may be copied, redistributed and adapted for non-commercial purposes, provided that the work is appropriately cited.