The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA) has not yet triggered the responses it deserves, according to the House of Commons Environmental Audit Committee.

The MA is a ground-breaking, global research exercise that involved 1300 scientists in a four-year process of gathering, analysing and presenting international biodiversity and ecosystem data. It reported its findings in March 2005.

MA as economic indicator

The committee’s report notes that the MA showed how human activity is leading to species extinction, climate change and worsening poverty, and explores how the UK might contribute towards resolving these issues.

The report concludes that the government has started to ‘talk the language of the MA’ but needs to do more to ensure that MA findings become integral to its policies and practices. Committee member Colin Challen MP said: ‘It is with some urgency that the government should act to ensure that the environment is not damaged by policies in areas as diverse as planning, transport, taxation, development and trade.’

The report urges the government to ‘introduce an economic indicator that measures growth in a way that recognises environmental limits and more accurately describes human well-being.’ It recommends a full, MA-type assessment for the UK.

UK best placed

The committee found that many governments have been slow to grasp the importance of the MA. It called for the UK to ‘galvanise international action’ by setting up a Millennium Ecosystem Fund to support studies in developing countries that will help them develop without damaging the environment.

As SPA went to press, Defra had not yet prepared its formal response and declined to comment. Janet Ranganathan, Director of the People and Ecosystems Program at the World Resources Institute in Washington DC – a partner in the MA – observed that the UK has done more than many other countries. However, she has not seen any significant take-up of what she perceives to be the groundbreaking conceptual framework of the MA report; which is that it ‘looks at everything through the lens of ecosystem services’. This brings a different perspective to ecosystems so that they are valued for the services they provide (and on which life depends), rather than for their resources (in order to exploit or preserve them).

Dr Terry Parr, from the UK’s Centre for Ecology and Hydrology (CEH), confirmed Ranganathan’s view of UK efforts: ‘In terms of being able to provide data for broad-scale assessments of the state of UK biodiversity and ecosystems, the UK is one of the best placed in the world,’ he said, referring to several national observation programmes such as the National Biodiversity Network, the Environmental Change Network and the Countryside Survey.

The committee also found that development non-government organisations have failed to engage sufficiently with the MA findings, a view shared by Janet Ranganathan. Oxfam UK declined to comment, saying it did not have a specific policy position on the issue.

Vanessa Spedding is the Shorts Editor.