PAPER N.

1 CLIMATE CHANGE AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT: GENERAL CONCEPTS

De Oliveira, T. (United Nations Environment Program, UNEP) Ikiara, M.M. (Kenya Institute for Public Policy Research and Analysis, KIPPRA)

1. INTRODUCTION
Climate change and associated threats have become some of the main global challenges to humanity. The difficult problems climate change raises involve science and economics, decision-making under uncertainty, and the balancing of the interests of the current and future generations. The third assessment report (TAR) of the IPCC released in 2001 confirmed the inevitability of climate change. It estimated that the global mean temperature will rise by 1.5-6.0 degrees Celsius. Climate change is expected to result into considerable water and other resource shortages, emergence or exacerbation of a large number of public health problems and disease outbreaks, loss of species biodiversity, deteriorating soil conditions, losses in agricultural productivity, changes in weather patterns (with increased damage from storms), sea level rise, drought and desertification, crop and livestock pest outbreaks, and escalation of infrastructure costs. In addition, climate change could trigger potentially catastrophic changes in certain earth systems. Already, many of these adverse impacts have been experienced around the world with immense suffering, especially of the poor who are the most vulnerable, for climate change and poverty are linked by the issue of vulnerability (Rayner and Malone, 2001). Both economic theory and common sense point to the desirability of taking measures to reduce the risks, and to avoid damages caused by climate change in spite of the small probability of such disasters. Uncertainty about the magnitude and risk of the risk posed by climate change provides a strong rationale for action rather than inaction hence the need for mainstreaming climate change issues into sustainable development planning. It is increasingly being realized that climate change issues cannot be dissociated from human activities and therefore poverty, hunger, illness, malnutrition and economic growth (IPCC, 2001;Munasinghe, 2003; Robinson and Herbert, 2001). As human activities have increased, they have impacted negatively on the carrying capacity of the earth ecosystems, which has in turn reduced the ecosystems resilience and increased the frequency, magnitude and risks of climate variability and climate change. The latter then worsens poverty, illness, and human pressure on the ecosystems thereby further driving the cycle. Not surprisingly, the IPCC (in both the Third Assessment Report and Fourth Assessment Report), the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), and the Millennium Declarations have recognized the importance of integrating policies and response strategies aimed at protecting the climate

system into national development programmes, including the poverty reduction strategy papers (PRSPs). Similarly, the Plan of Implementation that came out of the World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) in 2002 acknowledged the management of natural resources and ecosystems, an integral part of which is climate, as an essential base for economic and social development. Besides the recognition of the importance of integrating climate change mitigation into development planning, that of integrating vulnerability and adaptation to climate change has also been recognized. Thus, Articles 4.1 (e) and (f) of the UNFCCC recognize the importance of mainstreaming or integrating climate change, and adaptation to climate change specifically, into sustainable development plans and planning practices. It is, in fact, this latter issue that is the subject of this paper and the project upon which it is based. This paper is the first in a series of five papers prepared as resource material for a workshop aimed at launching a UNEP project on Mainstreaming Vulnerability and Adaptation to Climate Change into Sustainable Development Planning in the Eastern and Southern African Region. The project will promote the implementation of the UNFCC Article 4.1 (e) and (f) in Eastern and Southern Africa by launching pilot adaptation projects in selected countries of the region, which have been facing increasing impacts of climate change. To set the ground for the other papers, this paper outlines the general concepts and indicators of climate change adaptation and sustainable development; their interactions and associated synergies and trade-offs; and explores opportunities for their integration in policy development. The paper does not attempt to delve into the myriad of issues involved in the climate change sustainable development debate. Instead, it focuses on the poverty-environment nexus, as a framework to illustrate the interrelationships and tradeoffs between the environment and development. Without such an understanding it is difficult to identify win-win or double-dividend interventions that can reduce vulnerability and enhance adaptation to climate change while simultaneously yielding sustainable development in general and alleviating poverty in particular. The central question the paper attempts to answer is how climate change impacts on sustainable development, with a regional (eastern and southern Africa) perspective highlighted wherever possible. The three main sectors from which examples are drawn are water, land and health.

1.1. Approach
The paper starts from the premise that the poor are highly vulnerable and depend greatly on the good functioning and maintenance of ecosystems for their wellbeing. Poverty itself is a major threat to sustainability as desperation forces people to adopt inappropriate survivalist strategies to meet current and urgent needs while also putting future survival at risk by depleting ecosystem resources. Given the above, it can be argued that the development of response options aimed at reducing vulnerabilities and enhancing adaptation to climate change requires, first, an understanding of the linkages between ecosystem services and poverty reduction, and second, the integration of the services provided by the ecosystems into national development plans, including the PRSPs. It should be noted, nevertheless, that the policy priority accorded to anti-poverty programs (including improvement of food security, health care, and livelihood options, and reduction of poverty in general) in the Eastern and Southern African region already provides entry points through which vulnerability and adaptation to climate change could be integrated into sustainable development planning. The project upon which this paper is based considers not only the ecosystem services framework but all other approaches and tools through which vulnerability and adaptation to climate change could be effectively mainstreamed into sustainable development planning. The paper is written from a development economics perspective with a special focus on policies and socio-economic frameworks, including the poverty reduction strategies (PRSPs).

2. SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT: CONCEPT AND EVOLUTION

Although there is still no formal definition of sustainable development, the 1987 Brundtland Commission Report proposed a brief, widely quoted definition of sustainable development, as development that meets the needs of the present generation without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. The Commission elaborated further that sustainable development is not a fixed state of harmony, but rather a process of change in which the exploitation of resources, the direction of investments, the orientation of technological development, and institutional change are made consistent with future as well as present needs. As more elaborate definitions of sustainable development were developed, three main dimensions of sustainable development have been identified. The WSSD, for instance, recognizes economic development, social development and environmental protection as the three interdependent and mutually reinforcing pillars of sustainable development that should be advanced and strengthened at the local, national, regional and global levels. In the 1970s, the international community emphasized the importance of responding to environmental deterioration as evidenced by the Report of the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment (Stockholm, 5-16 June 1972). Twenty years later, at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, held in Rio de Janeiro, the international community reached the conclusion that the protection of the environment and social and economic development are fundamental to sustainable development, and adopted Agenda 21, a global programme to achieve sustainable development. There is now wide consensus that poverty eradication, changing consumption and production patterns and protecting and managing the natural resource base for economic and social development are overarching objectives of and essential requirements for sustainable development (WSSD, 2002: 2). In spite of this evolution, there are still considerable challenges to the achievement of sustainable development globally. Environmental problems in such forms as loss of biodiversity, depletion of fish stocks and other natural resources, desertification, adverse effects of climate change and natural disasters persist. Developing countries are more vulnerable to these problems. Inequalities between the rich and the poor and between developed and developing countries are also a major challenge, as is increasing globalisation whose benefits and costs are tilted against developing countries (Srivasta and Srinkath, 2001; Parikh, 2003; Best, 2003; Linden, 2003; Parry, 2003; Harrison, 2003).

2.1. Pillars of Sustainable Development Environmental Pillar

The important economic processes of production and consumption draw to a great extent on goods and services provided by the natural-physical environment. The environmental dimension of sustainable development recognizes that if man (i) exploits these goods and services beyond the carrying capacity of the environment (for instance, by harvesting fish stocks at a rate faster than their regeneration) or (ii) releases more pollutants into the environment than its absorptive capacity can handle, then the capability of the physical environment to continue supplying those goods and services, which are essential to human well-being, will be impaired. In such circumstances mans activities are not sustainable.

Economic Pillar
The growth of economies and their structural transformation are the most important preconditions for the fulfilment of human needs, lasting improvements in living conditions, and therefore sustainable development. The economic dimension of sustainable development recognizes that strong economic performance and stewardship is essential for generating the resources required for sustainable

development. In simple terms, the benefits from a vibrant and expanding economy should be reinvested for the benefit of present and future generations.

Social Pillar
Development encompasses the strengthening of the material income base as well as the enhancement of human capabilities and the enlargement of choices available to them, a view that clearly transcends the narrow concept of development-as-economic-growth and emphasises the importance of social development in the context of sustainable development. Another argument for including social issues under the concept of sustainable development is underpinned by the idea of equity considerations, which are vital to the notion of sustainable development. More precisely, inter-generational or inter-temporal equity forms one of the cornerstones of the concept. Since in their desperation poor people exert more pressure on natural and other resources, thereby compromising sustainable development, it is now widely recognized that meeting the needs of the poor in this generation is essential for sustainably meeting the needs of subsequent generations. It should be noted, however, that inter-generationational and distributive equity go beyond the social pillar and are also key dimensions in the other two pillars of sustainable development. It follows that quality of life, integrated decision making and inter-generational and current equity are the key elements of sustainable development. The quality of life element recognizes that people value many different aspects of their life in society, including economic and social development and the preservation and improvement of environmental quality. Clearly, citizens want an economy that performs well. A healthy economy meets demands for job creation, economic security and improved living standards. It also allows nations to pursue the social objectives that are key elements of the quality of life for the present and future generations. Reconciling development and environmental quality objectives and addressing any conflicts among them, moreover, means paying particular attention to integrated decisionmaking. Equity, on its part, involves the fair distribution of the costs and benefits of development between the rich and the poor, between generations, and among nations.

2.2. Indicators of Sustainable Development

A core set of indicators was developed, improved and tested as part of the implementation of the Work Programme on Indicators of Sustainable Development (ISDs) adopted by the Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD) at its Third Session in April 1995. The indicators cover all three pillars of sustainable development and range from such social indicators as population living below the poverty line and life expectancy at birth, to such economic indicators as GDP per capita and intensity of material use, and to such environmental indicators as emissions of greenhouse gases and land affected by desertification (Appendix Table 1). These indicators provide a tool for countries to use in monitoring their performance with respect to sustainable development and can be a useful tool for considering how future climate change can impact on these indicators for this project.

3. SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT: REALITY

Considering the considerable international interest and focus on sustainable development, an important question to ask is how much progress has been made in actual pursuance and achievement of sustainable development. This section looks at some evidence.

Social Pillar
Evidence available (World Bank 2004, African Development Bank 2004; UNDP 2003 and 2004, UNIDO 2004) shows some progress has been made on some social indicators of sustainable development but that enormous challenges hinder progress on others in eastern and southern Africa:

1. On equity, many countries in the eastern and southern Africa region have ratified various international conventions and summits on human rights, the rights of children and women, and on social development in general but the majority of them are failing to achieve equitable societies. Slow growth in the region has increased the number of the poor in the 1990s with half of the population living below $1 a day. Although a per capita growth average of 1.5% is anticipated for the 2005-15 period, the number of poor is expected to rise from 315 million in 1999 to 404 million by the year 2015. This rise is likely to exert tremendous pressure on the environment and thereby contribute to climate change. 2. Since the Rio Earth Summit, some progress albeit inadequate to meet many of the goals established by the international community has been made in improving human health, with most countries having experienced declining infant mortality rates and an increase in life expectancy. A big proportion of the population in the region still lacks access to clean water and adequate sanitation. HIV/AIDS is the leading cause of death in the region but malaria and tuberculosis continue to be a major problem. 3. On education, progress has been made in most countries in the region in improving access and reducing illiteracy. However, adequate levels have yet to be attained in many countries. Only about one in four poor rural girls attends primary school. 4. On housing, many countries have made improvements in the formulation of housing policies and strategies aimed at accelerating construction, providing housing for low income groups, improving land and market conditions, and facilitating access to credit. Yet, the conditions of shelter and human settlements have continued to deteriorate in most countries during the 1990s. Infrastructure is not well developed, only 13% of the roads are paved and less than 3% of the population have access to telephone. 5. On security, crime appears to be on the increase and represents a challenge for sustainable development in the region, with civil strife and political instability bedevilling some of the countries in the region. Globalisation has contributed to new and expanded forms of criminality including smuggling of migrants, drug trafficking, corruption, computer crime, and illegal firearms trade. 6. Fertility rates and population growth rates are declining in most countries in the region. Nevertheless, absolute population numbers are still increasing in all countries. The proportion of people living in urban areas is expected to increase as the trend of rapid rural-urban migration continues. Life expectancy declined from 50 to 46 years since 1999 as a result of high infant mortality rates and the effect of HIV/AIDS.

Environmental Pillar
Minimal progress has been made in the eastern and southern Africa region on the environmental aspects of sustainable development. 1. On atmospheric change, fossil fuel consumption for energy production and transportation, land use change (including deforestation), industrial processes, intensive agriculture, and waste disposal are the principal human activity drivers. Global and local atmospheric change (principally climate change, stratospheric ozone depletion, acidification, urban air quality, and tropospheric ozone levels) has long-term, global and irreversible impacts on human health, biodiversity, ecosystem health, and economic activities. While some gains have been achieved through greater efficiency, fuel substitution, and the use of renewable energy, emission levels have continued to increase due to overall increases in energy use and transportation driven by rapid urbanization in the region. High mobility levels and congestion have led to substantial increases in emission levels of air pollutants such as suspended particulate matter, carbon dioxide, sulphur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, volatile organic compounds, and ozone, in the region.

2. On land, priority problems faced by many countries include land degradation, desertification, deforestation, urban growth, and agricultural and rural development. Increasing land degradation, desertification, and deforestation are caused by poverty, population pressure, unsuitable land allocation, inappropriate farming and grazing practices, and lack or misuse of appropriate technologies. Rapid urbanization has also brought land use adjustment pressures to both urban and rural areas. 3. On oceans, seas and coasts, while a measure of success is evident in the control of marine pollution, the unsustainable development of coastal and marine resources largely continues. The regions coastal ecosystems face moderate to high potential risk of degradation as a result of inappropriate development. The influence of climate change on sea level rise, and the frequency and intensity of floods and storms is particularly pertinent to small island states and densely populated delta areas. Coral reefs, an important component of the marine environment, are particularly susceptible to damage. Many fisheries have surpassed their optimum long-term sustainability. 4. Regarding freshwater, both water quantity and quality are becoming dominant issues in many countries. Problems relate to poor water allocation and pricing, inefficient use, and lack of adequate integrated management. Most of the water used by industries and municipalities is often returned to watercourses already polluted. Pollution from intensive agricultural use of fertilizers and pesticides is also of serious concern. Irrigation agriculture, responsible for nearly 40% of world food production, uses about 70% of total water withdrawals (90% in the dry tropics). Groundwater, which supplies one third of the world's population, is increasingly being used for irrigation. Water tables are being lowered in many areas making it more expensive to access. 5. Loss of biodiversity has occurred in parts of the region where policies and development activities have failed to properly value natural resources and the environment. Inequity in ownership and access to natural resources has also contributed to unsustainable use.

Economic Pillar With respect to the economic aspects of sustainable development, performance has been mixed. Thus: 1. A few countries have been able to take advantage of rising foreign direct investment flows and achieved substantial economic growth. However, many other countries, particularly the poorest ones, have shown slow or negative growth and continue to be marginalized. The level of external debt continues to impede the progress of most countries in the region towards sustainable development. 2. Since the Earth Summit, only limited progress has been made in the adjustment to more sustainable consumption and production patterns in the region. Overall, insufficient progress has been achieved in the more efficient use of materials, reduction of energy demand and waste, and the use of more sustainable transportation systems. 4. THE POVERTY-ENVIRONMENT NEXUS
This section of the paper will discuss the conceptual links between ecosystem services and poverty reduction using the ecosystem approach as adopted by the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment and applied by the UNEP1. The section will then briefly infer on the issue of policy responses and strategies and notably the concept of mainstreaming the ecosystem services into development plans and the PRSPs.
The section has borrowed heavily from the MA, UNEP Poverty-Ecosystem Conceptual Framework. See Duraiappah (2002) and De Oliveira et al. (2001, 2002 and 2003).
1

While this is the subject of the section, it does not mean that mainstreaming of ecosystem services into development plans and the PRSPs is the only way by which vulnerability and adaptation to climate change could be mainstreamed into development planning. It is done largely for illustrative purposes. If it is true that climate change is happening and will increasingly affect the poor and that adaptation is necessary and there is a need to integrate responses to climate change and adaptation measures into strategies for poverty reduction to ensure sustainable development as noted by a recent joint publication of several multilateral organizations on poverty and climate change2, then the climate change and sustainability debate needs to first ensure that there is a clear understanding of the linkages between the essential services provided by the ecosystems and poverty. Indeed climate change affects humans in general and the poor in particular in several ways including negative health impacts, reduced access to drinking water, and threat to humans basic freedoms such as the ability to have access to food and income through notably food and cash crops, that are tightly linked to drought and land degradation. The notion of sustainability is linked to temporal and inter-generational considerations (generally associated to long term effectiveness and distribution), trade-offs and drivers associated with human actions and creating negative effects felt through change in climate patterns and stressed ecosystems. The climate change and sustainability debate, especially adaptation, needs to therefore adopt a more integrated and multi-disciplinary approach in order to come up with effective response strategies. Such comprehensive integration measures include environmental-including climate change- mainstreaming into poverty reduction strategies. The ecosystem approach as adopted by the MA and the notion of increased capability for the poor put forth by 1998 Nobel Laureate of economics Professor Amartya Sen and applied by UNEP, could offer the opportunity to address the climate change and sustainable development debate through a comprehensive framework that recognizes the importance of maintaining the well functioning of ecosystem services as essential for development and a way to reduce the vulnerability of the poor while increasing their ability to function and actively participate in the lives of the community.

4.1. Ecosystems and Poverty: The Ecosystem and Capability Approach

Adaptation needs to be considered as part of an integrated framework combining ecosystems and socioeconomic concerns that have direct link to the poor. In the literature on poverty and environment the word environment is used to cover a range of issues related to the natural environment. However, the term environment is ambiguous. The Oxford dictionary defines environment as surroundings or conditions for life or growth. Used in this manner, the term adds more confusion instead of clarifying a problem governed by complexity. The primarily interest here is addressing how human well-being is influenced by the natural environment. The purpose is therefore better served by explicitly defining the natural environment as the ecosystem. Moreover, humans are part of an ecosystem. By actually addressing human well-being from an ecosystem approach we provide an integrated framework, which is a necessity if the links between natural systems and human well-being are to be understood. The term ecosystem will therefore be adopted in this section of the paper to avoid ambiguity. There are several ways of defining ecosystems and the services and goods they provide for human well-being. Here we draw on the ongoing work done by ecologists like Gretchen Daily (see Box 4), Hal Monney and, more recently, the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment to guide us. Ecosystems are defined as: A spatially explicit unit of the earth that includes all of the organisms, along with all components of the abiotic environment within its boundaries.
2

Poverty and Climate Change. P.IX. 2003

It is becoming increasingly clear that ecosystems provide more than just goods for humans (see Box 1). They also provide critical life-supporting services. Ecosystems also provide cultural and spiritual values for human societies. Daily (1997) categorizes the various services ecosystems provide into the following three components3: provisioning; regulating; and enriching/cultural.

Provisioning Services
Provisioning services cover natural resources that are primarily used for economic activities. The level of contribution towards well-being is normally determined by the magnitude and rate of goods harvested (the flow) from the natural ecosystems. Provisioning services include: food micro-organisms, plant and animal products; genetic material, biochemicals and pharmaceuticals; fuels/energy; fiber; non-living materials; and fresh water.

Box 1. Ecosystem services are the conditions and processes through which natural ecosystems, and the species that make them up, sustain and fulfil human life. They maintain biodiversity and the production of ecosystem goods, such as seafood, forage, timber, biomass fuels, natural fiber, and many pharmaceuticals, industrial products and their precursors. In addition to the production of goods, ecosystem services are the actual life-supporting functions, such as cleansing, recycling, and renewal, and they confer many intangible aesthetic and cultural benefits as well.
Source: Daily et al. (1997).

Regulating Services
Sometimes called supporting services, regulating services are the actual life-supporting functions ecosystems provide for the existence of humans. These are the services that are commonly forgotten or taken for granted by societies. The level of contribution towards well-being by these services is normally determined by the size and quality (the stock) of the natural ecosystem. But exhaustive conversion of natural ecosystems into human controlled ecosystems (high flow rates) has jeopardized the continued existence of these regulating services. The absence of markets and price signals in these services has meant that changes in their conditions have gone unnoticed. It is also becoming increasingly clear that the
3

Adapted from UNEP Poverty and Ecosystems Conceptual Framework 2004

public good nature of these services may make traditional markets redundant in addressing the issue and new methods of making sure that these services are not lost may be required. Regulating services that contribute to well-being include: purification of air and water; mitigation of floods and droughts; detoxification and decomposition of wastes; renewal of soil and soil fertility; pollination of crops and natural vegetation; control of a vast majority of potential agricultural pests; dispersal of seeds and translocation of nutrients; maintenance of biodiversity, from which humanity has derived key elements of its agricultural, medicinal and industrial enterprise; protection from the suns harmful ultraviolet rays; partial stabilization of climate; and moderation of temperature extremes and the force of winds and waves.

Cultural Services
Also called enriching services of ecosystems, cultural services are among the most overlooked services ecosystems provide, especially to many people in developing countries. Many of the religions and cultures in these countries believe that nature is a living entity and, in fact, their followers pray to various elements of nature. The beliefs and values surrounding natural forces have provided spiritual guidance for many societies for many generations. But these are destroyed at an alarming rate as the ecosystems get degraded or converted into human-dominated ecosystems. The breakdown of these spiritual and cultural norms has had a devastating effect on social relations among people and their values. Similar to regulation, the level of contribution this service provides for well-being is determined by the size and quality (the stock) of the natural ecosystem available. Cultural or enriching services provided by ecosystems include: spiritual components and the relationship of people to land and water; aesthetic values; social relations and values; and educational and scientific value.

Some of these ecosystem services (provisioning, regulating and cultural) are both very relevant to the kind of lives the poor lead or could lead but they are also at the heart of the climate change and sustainable debate which calls for the formulation of long-term response strategies based on the sound management of the ecosystems and sensitive to inter-generational issues including distribution and equity. Let us explore some of the linkages between ecosystems and human well-being. For instance, with the increase in frequencies of extreme events such as floods or droughts negative effects on the health of human beings, on access to water resources, and on food security will be certainly felt. Similarly change in rainfall and increased soil erosion would put enormous stress on land productivity and affect agriculture yields, which in turn will be detrimental to food security and the ability of the poor to have access to basic freedoms such as water, food and good health.

The need to better manage the ecosystems and ensure sustainability has to go through a balance approach and consideration of all the three main services provided by the ecosystems. It is for instance unwise to only worry about the productivity of the land (a provisioning service) if we do not ensure that there is no water stress or floods which are often prevented by the existence of trees and forests (a regulating service). In the same fashion ensuring that indigenous knowledge and the protection of sacred sites for example (a cultural service) are taken into account has a beneficial effect in so far as it encourages conservation. At this juncture it will be useful to briefly discuss the concept of capability alluded to earlier, as it does capture the notions of development, agency and choices for the poor and how these important notions are provided by different services delivered by the ecosystems. The concept of functionings and capabilities that Amartya Sen puts forth are essential for evaluating human well-being. The notion of being able to which is facilitated through the use of services provided by the ecosystems, allows for the incorporation of the fundamental properties of capabilitiesagency, value and choice. The capability or freedom to achieve the functionings (also called constituents and determinants) that individuals value helps in turn to introduce the concept of having the poor at the centre and hand them control over how they achieve their well-being In this sense they become active and part of the development process and not victims who are dependent on aid. This notion resonates well with the concept of sustainable development that focuses on long-term rather than short-term measures. Below is an illustration of some of the linkages between ecosystem services and the different poverty dimensions.

10

11

The fact that the poor have very little substitute when being deprived from having access to basic freedoms such as water or health (either due to natural and catastrophic events or institutional/governance set-ups) makes them that more sensitive to climate variations (e.g. floods or prolonged drought) than the non-poor. Some ecosystems are highly sensitive to climate variations and remain, for the majority of the poor, the main source of basic freedoms such as food, building materials, fuel and energy. With the alteration in the composition of the services provided by the ecosystems, comes a deprivation of basic capabilities and choices that the poor could enjoy. For instance, being able to be free from avoidable disease is linked explicitly to ecological conditions. A recent study by Lvovsky indicates that approximately 20 per cent of the burden of diseases in developing countries can be attributed to ecological factors (Lvovsky, 2001). For example, in 1995, 3.1 million people80 per cent of them childrendied from diarrhoea (Patz 2000). A direct causality has been established between malariaor man-made malaria as specialists call itand deteriorating ecosystems. The disease is known to flare up in ecological systems which have their regulation component altered by irrigation projects, dams, construction sites, standing water and poorly drained areas. For example, it is estimated that the deforestation and consequent immigration of people into the Brazilian interior increased malaria prevalence in the region by 500 per cent (Smith, 2002). The same trend had been observed between ecological damage and other vector-borne diseases across a range of developing countries (Platt, 1996). Being able to have adequate and clean drinking water is also linked to ecological quality. Let us begin with the issue of supply. One of the provisioning services ecosystems provide is water. However, destruction of watersheds and over-harvesting of water tables for human activities has caused serious disruptions in water supply. For example, the conversion of forest in the highlands of Narok district in Kenya for commercial agriculture had reduced the flow of water down to the plains causing water shortages for people living downstream, especially the poor (Duraiappah et al., 2000). Quality of water is also a major issue for the poor in many developing countries. Although the number of people having access to piped water has increased, as of 1995, 1.3 billion peoplemostly rural poorstill did not have access to clean water. Furthermore, it is projected that the number of people victims of water scarcity will increase from about 1.7 billion to around 5 billion people by 2025. Climate change will further increase water scarcity in the subtropics, for instance, where an increase in the frequency of droughts, evaporation, and change in rainfall patterns and run-off can be observed (poverty and climate change, 2003). Similarly, Being able to have clean air is also conditioned by ecological conditions. It is a well-known fact that ecosystems play an integral part in the cleansing of the atmosphere and regulating atmospheric content. Without going into detail on the various geochemical cycles within ecosystems that clean air, it is known for sure that the regulating component of an ecosystem can be degraded by unsustainable human activities (Daily 1997). Empirical evidence points to two main sources of human disruption that have caused a breakdown of the regulating component of ecosystems to provide clean air. The first source is the excessive release of pollutants into the atmosphere thereby overloading the ecosystem and eventually causing the cleansing property to break down. The release of pollutants comes primarily from industrial activities as well as domestic activities like cooking with highly polluting fuels. The second source is a disproportionate conversion of the natural ecosystem into a human-dominated system. One of the many regulating services ecosystems provide is the mitigation of floods, landslides and the impacts of storms. The removal of forest cover for commercial and/or subsistence activities leaves hillsides vulnerable to soil erosion and increases the probability of landslides as well as floods, thereby affecting Being able to cope with extreme natural events including floods, tropical storms and landslides. Many of the commercial as well as subsistence activities are subsidized by government policies in order to encourage economic activities in marginal areas that otherwise would not been feasible (Duraiappah, 1998).

12

A synopsis of the numerous linkages between ecosystems and poverty is presented in Appendix 2. Given these linkages, it is important to consider actual operationalisation of some of them into response strategies which ensure that the drivers (both direct and indirect) causing the stress felt by the poor as well as the carrying capacity of the earth ecosystems are addressed. Secondly, policy formulation taken within a sustainable development framework requires the integration of these linkages into existing development frameworks such as the PRSPs.

5. IMPLICATIONS OF CLIMATE CHANGE ON SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

Sustainable development and climate change are two important and interlinked challenges facing humankind in the 21st century. Climate change has impacts on prospects for sustainable development, and in turn, resultant development paths affect future climate change, hence a cyclical interaction between climate change and sustainable development. Each socio-economic development path (driven by the forces of population, economy, technology, and governance) gives rise to different levels of greenhouse gas emissions. These emissions accumulate in the atmosphere, increasing the greenhouse gas concentrations and disturbing the natural balance between incident solar radiation and energy re-radiated from the earth. Such changes give rise to the enhanced greenhouse effect and changes in the climate system, which tend to persist well into the future and impose stresses on the human and natural systems. Such impacts ultimately have effects on socio-economic development paths, thus completing the cycle. The development paths also have direct effects in the form of non-climate stresses such as changes in land use leading to deforestation and land degradation (Munasinghe, 2003). There is a wide range of potential impacts of climate change on sustainable development and vice versa (Munasinghe, 2003; Robinson and Herbert, 2001). In the last section several examples of these impacts have been cited. In the illustration presented in that section, climate change (and variability) could be viewed as impacting adversely on the various ecosystem services, thereby impairing their resilience and capability to provide well-being. In this section, broad impacts will be summarized. Munasinghe (2003) summarizes the implications of climate change on sustainable development. First, global warming threatens future economic development and well-being of large numbers of human beings. This is likely to happen so long as the atmospheric resource lacks property rights and is therefore exposed to excessive and unsustainable use. Second, climate change could also undermine social welfare and equity in an unprecedented manner. In particular, both intra- and inter-generational equity are likely to be worsened since poorer countries and the poorer segments of the population within countries are more vulnerable. Moreover, the costs of damage as well as of the required adaptation and mitigation efforts will be unevenly distributed both among and within countries. There is also risk of further erosion of social capital and increase in the vulnerability of social values and institutions, already weakened by technological changes. Inequity could undermine social cohesion and exacerbate conflicts over scarce resources. Third, increasing anthropogenic emissions and accumulations of GHGs might significantly perturb a critical global subsystem the atmosphere with major adverse effects, depending on climate change intensity (such as magnitude and frequency of shocks), system vulnerability (for example, the extent of impact damage), and system resilience (that is, ability to recover from impacts). Changes in the global climate (such as mean temperature and precipitation) could threaten the stability of a range of critical, interlinked physical, ecological and social systems and subsystems (IPCC 2001). Even though the focus of this paper, and the project upon which it is based, is mainstreaming of vulnerability and adaptation to climate change into development planning, this section has given considerable attention to the fact that unsustainable human activities harm the environment and thus contribute to climate change. This has been guided by the wisdom that ensuring that scale of the human

13

activities planned for is sustainable could be viewed as a mainstreaming intervention that is likely to yield results albeit in the long run.

6. MAINSTREAMING VULNERABILITY AND ADAPTATION TO CLIMATE CHANGE INTO DEVELOPMENT PLANNING: AN OVERVIEW
This section appreciates the recognition by the Third Assessment Report of the IPCC that the linkages among local, regional and global environmental issues, and their relationship to meeting human needs, offer opportunities to capture synergies in developing response options and reducing vulnerabilities to climate change, although trade-offs between issues may exist and the capacity of countries to adapt and mitigate can be enhanced when climate policies are integrated with national development policies including economic, social and other environmental dimensions. The Plan of Implementation that emerged from the World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) in 2002 also recognised the protection and management of the natural resource base as an essential element of economic and social development, and climate as an integral part of that natural resource base. It is in this spirit that the Fourth Assessment Report of the IPCC has identified sustainable development as a cross-cutting theme with the explicit objective of leveraging sustainable development towards climate change and vice versa.

6.1. Tools and instruments to address the Drivers

In this section, we are interested in developing a response strategy towards the factors that drive ecosystem destruction and inhibit the poor from accessing and using ecosystem services. In order to provide a systematic framework, we have classified the drivers into the following four broad categories: 1] Economic Drivers; 2] Governance-related Drivers; 3] Social Drivers; and 4] Ecological Drivers. In order to correct or remove the drivers, there is a need to approach the problem in an integrated fashion. There are two components to a successful policy intervention strategy: The first component looks at the tools of intervention while the second focuses on the enabling conditions needed for the successful development as well as implementation of the tools. We classify instruments, institutions and organizations as tools. The difference between the approach taken here and other existing policy frameworks is the integration of instruments, institutions and organizations within a single frame of reference. Policy options have, in a majority of cases, been approached in a disjointed manner. Policy intervention strategies are either focused primarily on the development of an instrument or an institution to achieve an outcome. For example, a subsidy on kerosenean instrumentis usually used by many developing countries as an incentive for the poor to switch from firewood to kerosene. But in many cases, the subsidies did not work because the institutions and organizations needed to implement the instrument were not put in place or were inefficient and ineffective in the implementation of the policy. We believe that a response strategy should look at all of the following three components in an integrated manner: 1] Instruments market and non-market; 2] Institutions formal and informal; 3] Organizations public, private and civil. The second critical component is the use of an overarching framework to provide the enabling conditions for the successful development and implementation of the tools. For tools to be developed and implemented successfully, people need a variety of freedoms in order to make sound decisions on the type of instruments, institutions and organizations they want. It is important to note here that many of these freedoms have both an instrumental and constitutive value for well-being but for policy implementation purpose we will focus primarily on the instrumental perspective; in other words as a means to achieve a desired endwell-being. There are six classes of instrumental freedoms that we believe will address the four types of drivers: 1] Participative freedom; 2] Economic facilities; 3] Social opportunities; 4] Transparency guarantees; 5] Protective security; and 6] Ecological security. The first five freedoms have been put forward by

14

Nobel Laureate Amartya Sen. We have extended the list to include ecological security as an important freedom for well-being (Duraiappah, 2002).

Participative freedomstrategic interventions:

Establish democratic processes to allow individuals to decide on issues related to well-being and ecosystem management. Allow a process for value formation and the creation of an environmental ethic through public discussion. Provide the means by which the impoverished can organize and articulate their views and positions on ecosystem management. Establish clear ownership or rights and easy access to ecosystems and ecosystem services. Reduce transaction (processing, administrative, information) costs for converting ecosystem goods into economic products. Provide financial resources in the form of micro-credit. Provide information on prices, technology and market opportunities in a timely and consistent format. Promote womens agency by providing support for womens networks and the creation of informal institutions. Provide basic health facilities. Provide clean water. Provide safe and clean shelter. Provide basic education on ecosystems and their links with human well-being. Reduce corruption in public and private sector. Increase efficiency and effectiveness in the bureaucracy, polity and judiciary. Improve policy coherence among local, national and international environmental,

Economic facilitiesstrategic interventions:

Social opportunitiesstrategic interventions:

Transparency guaranteesstrategic interventions:

economic and social policy frameworks.

Protective securitystrategic interventions:

Create formal safety nets that automatically provide benefits during times of stress. Maintain existing informal safety nets and traditional coping (or adaptation) strategies used by communities. Recognize and formalize existing informal safety nets when private land tenure systems are being formulated. Create work (restoration of ecosystems) for food programs during times of extreme distress. Allow communities greater participative freedom to determine sustainable management of ecosystems and ecosystem services. Establish formal institutions to protect ecological safety nets established by local communities. Ensure coherence among multilateral environmental agreements with national and local environmental policies.

Ecological securitystrategic interventions:

15

Build capacity among local communities for establishing ecological security and ecological safety nets. Promote institutions to ensure fair distribution and the use of ecological safety nets by local communities.

With this framework containing all the strategic interventions/instruments designed to address all the drivers mentioned earlier, the next step is to actually mainstream the links into development framework, and especially the PRSPs, using the tools and instruments described in this subsection. 6.2. On Mainstreaming
Mainstreaming starts with asking the right questions about the links between health, ecosystems and poverty. Indeed, as emphasized severally in the paper, understanding the links is of great importance as it sets the stage for the process of integration. Asking the right questions has an impact on the whole process, as it will guide the assessment of the critical ecosystems-poverty issues that are pertinent to the country(ies) under scrutiny, where to find the relevant quantitative and qualitative data and indicators that will aid decision-making. It is also important to discuss the kind of tradeoffs that will need to be made in relationship to, for instance, the Medium Term Expenditure Framework (MTEF) of the PRSPs, as setting priorities will become critical. With regard to health issues as they are linked to climate change, for instance, the use of Disability-Adjusted Life Years (DALYs) as a measure of the burden of disease provides a pretty consistent basis to compare magnitude of health impacts and what kind of cost will be involved given a set of alternative interventions geared towards health improvement expressed in percentage points. For instance, a study carried in India found that environmental causes were responsible for 20% of the burden of disease, and that water and sanitation were responsible for 11% of the total burden of disease (Hughes, Dunleavy, and Lvovsky, 1999). The use of such quantities puts the interactions between health outcomes and ecosystems services (such as access to clean water supply) into the perspective of the kind of interventions (both policy and financial) that are needed. For example, improvement in water infrastructure will have to be factored in as part of health interventions. This in turn could have a greater appeal to planners as a great deal of funding within the MTEF is earmarked towards roads and infrastructures. Moreover, it presents an opportunity for double-dividends and therefore greater chance of support by planners and policy makers. Interventions take us in the realm of public action that comprises investments in projects as well as policy reform. Mainstreaming poverty-ecosystem linkages to the MTEF will entail the use of assessing expected costs and benefits of alternative priority programmes/projects. The objective behind poverty reduction strategy is the ranking of public policies and the kind of actions required according to their likely benefits and costs. Tradeoffs and selecting the points of entries in the PRSPs is of critical importance. Important points of entry include the planning and budgetary frameworks. The PRSPs go through various cycles of reviews and iterations in terms of realignment and readjustments of priorities due to budget constraints. Budgetary frameworks are at different levels (that is, national, district and sectoral levels). Whilst the overall vision and broad activities are set at the governmental level through participatory process, investments on activities dealing with specific sectors or geared towards responding to priorities at the district level, are discussed at lower administrative scales. The weakness of several environmental ministries in advocating for a more preponderant role of ecosystems and their impacts on human well-being and poverty reduction, and thus their better reflection in the planning and budgetary frameworks, is often due to their inability to make more rigorous statements (that is, use of qualitative and quantitative measures of magnitude about the impact of

16

ecosystems in the lives of the poor) with regard to policy decisions/interventions when facing their planning and finance counterparts. The use of economic instruments while beset with uncertainty could bring some of the rigor mentioned above into political decisions/debates about priority actions. Furthermore and most importantly, economic tools and statistical inferences are among the surest ways to have ecosystems and poverty linkages reflected into budgetary frameworks. A good example is the one demonstrated by Bojo and Hamilton in their 2000 paper entitled Environment. In the example, it is stated that actions to reduce health damage can be valued by (1) gains in productivity among the affected population; (ii) savings in medical cost; or (iii) by measuring the willingness to pay (WTP) for the improvements among the affected population. Another important issue reflected by experts working in the poverty field is that distributional consequences of interventions have to be factored in the equation (who wins, who looses). The use of economic valuation techniques such as cost-benefit analysis (CBA) sometimes fails to give due consideration to this crucial issue. Finally and with regard to the PRSPs, the use of incidence analysis becomes key as it determines the (i) percent of the benefits that accrue to the poor, and (ii) the value of the benefits to the poor relative to household income or consumption (Bojo, Hamilton, 2000).

7. REFERENCES
Achary Arnab K., and Murray C.J.L., 2000.Rethinking Discounting of Health Benefits in Cost Effectiveness Analysis www.sussex.ac.uk/Units/economics/dp/arnab1.pdf African Development Bank (2004) African Development Report (www.afdb.org) Ambler, J., 1999:Attacking Poverty While Improving the Environment: TowardsWin-Win Policy Options. UNDP-EC Poverty & Environment Initiative EuropeanCommission viii.United Nations Development Programme,New York,NY. Amman,H.and A.K.Duraiappah, in press:Land Tenure and Conflict Resolution:A Game Theoretic approach in the Narok district in Kenya, Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. Best, G (2003). Food Security, climate change and sustainable development in M. Munasinghe et al. (eds.) Integrating sustainable development and climate change in the IPCC fourth assessment report, Munasinghe Institute for Development, Colombo, Sri Lanka Bojo Jan and Reddy Rama C., June 2002. Poverty Reduction Strategies and Environment: A Review of 40 Interim and Full Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers, Environment Department Paper No. 86, World Bank, Washington DC. Bojo Jan and Reddy Rama C., September 2003. Poverty Reduction Strategies and the Millennium Development Goal on Environmental Sustainability, Environment Department Paper No. 92, World Bank, Washington DC Bojo Jan, Bucknall J., Hamilton K., Kishor N., Klaus C., Pillai P., April 2001. Environment, World Bank website www.lnweb18.worldbank.org Daily,G.C., 1997:Natures Services. Island Press,Washington D.C, 1997. Duraiappah, A.K., 2002:Poverty and Ecosystems: A Conceptual Framework. UNEP Division of Policy and Law Paper, United Nations Environment Programme,Nairobi, 49 pp. Duraiappah,A.K., 1998:Poverty and Environmental Degradation:A Review and Analysis of the Nexus. World Development, 26(12), 2169-2179.

17

Duraiappah,A.K., G.Ikiara, M.Manundu,W.Nyangena and R.Sinange, 2000: Land Tenure, Land Use, Environmental Degradation and Conflict Resolution: A PASIR Analysis for the Narok District, Kenya. CREED Working Paper No.33, IIED, London, UK. Gayathri,V et al., 1999:Voices of the Poor: Poverty in Peoples Perceptions in India, Shastri IndoCanadian Institute, Calgary, Canada. Harrison, M. (2003) Biodiversity, ecosystem protection, climate change and sustainable development in M. Munasinghe et al. (eds.) Integrating sustainable development and climate change in the IPCC fourth assessment report, Munasinghe Institute for Development, Colombo, Sri Lanka IPCC (2001) Climate Change 2001, Third Assessment Report, Cambridge University Press, London, UK. Linden, Paul (2003) Water, climate change and sustainable development in M. Munasinghe et al. (eds.) Integrating sustainable development and climate change in the IPCC fourth assessment report, Munasinghe Institute for Development, Colombo, Sri Lanka Lvovsky, K., 2001: Health and Environment. Environment Strategy Papers,No.1. Environment Department,World Bank,Washington D.C.2001. Munasinghe, M. (2003) Climate change and sustainable development linkages: points of departure OECD, 2001:Poverty Reduction:The DAC Guidelines, OECD, Paris, France. Parikh, K. (2003) Climate change and sustainable development: View from the Developing World in M. Munasinghe et al. (eds.) Integrating sustainable development and climate change in the IPCC fourth assessment report, Munasinghe Institute for Development, Colombo, Sri Lanka Parry M. (2003) Human Health, climate change and sustainable development in M. Munasinghe et al. (eds.) Integrating sustainable development and climate change in the IPCC fourth assessment report, Munasinghe Institute for Development, Colombo, Sri Lanka Pierce,D.and K.Turner, 1990:Economics of natural resources and the environment. Harvester Wheatsheaf, New York,NY. Rayner S. and E. Malone (2001) Climate change, poverty and intra-generational equity, International Journal of Global Environmental Issues, Vol. 1, No. 2, 2001 Robinson J. and D. Herbert (2001) Integrating Climate Change and Sustainable Development, International Journal of Global Environmental Issues, Vol. 1, No. 2, 2001 Sen, A.K., 1987:The Standard of Living, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. Sen,A.K., 1993: Inequality Reexamined. Harvard University Press, Cambridge,MA. Sen,A.K., 1999:Development as Freedom. Anchor Books,New York,NY. Srivastava L. and S. Srikanth (2001) How development patterns in the South will affect climate change, International Journal of Global Environmental Issues, Vol. 1, No. 2, 2001 UNDP (2004) Human Development Report, UNDP (www.undp.org) UNIDO (2004) Industrial Development Report, UNIDO (www.unido.org) World Bank (2004) World Development Report, World Bank (www.worldbank.org)

18

APPENDIX 1 Table 1. CSD Theme Indicator Framework

Social Dimension of Sustainable Development Theme Sub-theme Poverty Equity Indicator Percent of Population Living below Poverty Line Gini Index of Income Inequality Unemployment Rate Gender Equality Nutritional Status Mortality Health Sanitation Drinking Water Healthcare Delivery Ratio of Average Female Wage to Male Wage Nutritional Status of Children Mortality Rate Under 5 Years Old Life Expectancy at Birth Percent of Population with Adequate Sewage Disposal Facilities Population with Access to Safe Drinking Water Percent of Population with Access to Primary Health Care Facilities Immunization Against Infectious Childhood Diseases Contraceptive Prevalence Rate Education Education Level Children Reaching Grade 5 of Primary Education Adult Secondary Education Achievement Level Literacy Housing Security Population Living Conditions Crime Population Change Adult Literacy Rate Floor Area per Person Number of Recorded Crimes per 100,000 Population Population Growth Rate Population of Urban Formal and Informal Settlements Environmental Dimension of Sustainable Development Theme Atmosphere Sub-theme Climate Change Indicator Emissions of Greenhouse Gases

19

Ozone Layer Depletion Air Quality Agriculture Land

Consumption of Ozone Depleting Substances Ambient Concentration of Air Pollutants in Urban Areas Arable and Permanent Crop Land Area Use of Fertilizers Use of Agricultural Pesticides

Forests

Forest Area as a Percent of Land Area Wood Harvesting Intensity

Desertification Urbanization Oceans, Seas and Coasts Coastal Zone

Land Affected by Desertification Area of Urban Formal and Informal Settlements Algae Concentration in Coastal Waters Percent of Total Population Living in Coastal Areas

Fisheries Fresh Water Water Quantity Water Quality

Annual Catch by Major Species Annual Withdrawal of Ground and Surface Water as a Percent of Total Available Water BOD in Water Bodies Concentration of Faecal Coliform in Freshwater

Biodiversity

Ecosystem

Area of Selected Key Ecosystems Protected Area as a % of Total Area

Species Economic Dimension of Sustainable Development Theme Sub-theme Economic Performance Economic Structure

Abundance of Selected Key Species

Indicator GDP per Capita Investment Share in GDP

Trade Financial Status

Balance of Trade in Goods and Services Debt to GNP Ratio Total ODA Given or Received as a Percent of GNP

Consumption and Production Patterns

Material Consumption Energy Use </span

Intensity of Material Use

20

APPENDIX 2. A Synopsis of linkages The following recurring themes were observed from the discussion on poverty ecosystem linkages presented above. They are: a close relationship between many of the constituents of well-being and the provisioning, regulating and enriching components of ecosystems; a close interdependency among the constituents of well-being with each other and the synergy we can reap for achieving the constituents by addressing one or more constituent; the provisioning service of ecosystems is highly influenced by the regulating services (see Figure 1).Over-harvesting, over-use, misuse or excessive conversion of ecosystems into human or artificial systems damages the regulation service which in turn reduces the flow of the provisioning service provided by ecosystems; exclusionary practicesintentional or unintentionalby the non poor prevented the poor from having access to the various services offered by ecosystems; the poor bear a disproportionately heavy burden of the impacts of ecosystem degradation that, in a majority of cases, were caused by the non-poor; the poor are excluded from participating in an equitable manner in the commercial activities that were introduced into converted ecosystems; and there are a variety of drivers influencing the links between wellbeing and ecosystems. Some of the main drivers observed are: ~ institutional failure; ~ lack of appropriate instruments; ~ inefficient government agencies; ~ lack of participation and involvement by the poor in decision-making; ~ lack of economic facilities; ~ lack of social opportunities like safety nets; ~ gender-based exclusion; ~ lack of ecological security in terms of protection from adverse events; and ~ distrust of bureaucracies and formal institutions due to lack of transparency surrounding common property resources and the equitable transfer of rights during privatization. 21

APPENDIX 3. Selected Sustainability Indicators for Participating Countries

Country Indicator Year South Africa Life expectancy at birth (years) Adult illiteracy rate (% ages 15 and above) Population without sustainable access to an improved water source (%) Population living below $1 a day (%) Total fertility rate (births per woman) Population with sustainable access to improved sanitation (%) Population with sustainable access to an improved water source (%) HIV prevalence (% ages 15-49) Tuberculosis cases (per 100,000people) Infant mortality rate (per 1,000live births) Net primary enrolment ratio (%) 2002 2002 2000 1990-2002 1970-75 2000-05 1990 2000 1990 2000 2003 2002 1970 2002 1990/91 2001/02 2002 48.8 14 14 7.1 5.4 2.6 86 87 86 86 Kenya 45.2 15.7 43 Madagascar 53.4 32.7 53 49.09 6.6 5.7 36 42 44 47 1.7 [0.8 - 2.7] 407 109 84 65 69 268 372.6 Rwanda 38.9 30.8 59 35.73 8.3 5.7 _ 8 .. 41 5.1 [3.4 7.6] 598 124 96 67 84 212 356.1 Tanzania 43.5 22.9 32 19.89 6.8 5.1 84 90 38 68 8.8 [6.4 11.9] 472 129 104 50 54 267 1,232.80 Malawi 37.8 38.2 43 41.66 7.4 6.1 73 76 49 57 14.2 [11.3 17.7] 462 189 114 50 81 177 377.1

GDP per capita (US$) Official development assistance 2002 (ODA) received (net disbursements) Total (US$ millions) Source: Compiled from UNDP 2004, Human Development Report

23.02 8.1 4 80 87 45 57 6.7 [4.7 21.5 [18.5 - 24.9] 9.6] 366 579 .. 96 52 78 88 74 90 70 2,299 393 656.8 393.1

22