Alessandro Galli

Global Biodiversity: Indicators of Recent Declines

Global Biodiversity Target Missed In 2002, the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) committed to a significant reduction in the rate of biodiversity loss by 2010. There has been widespread conjecture that this target has not been met. Butchart et al. (p. 1164, published online 29 April) analyzed over 30 indicators developed within the CBDs framework. These indicators include the condition or state of biodiversity (e.g., species numbers, population sizes), the pressures on biodiversity (e.g., deforestation), and the responses to maintain biodiversity (e.g., protected areas) and were assessed between about 1970 and 2005. Taken together, the results confirm that we have indeed failed to meet the 2010 targets. An analysis of 30 indicators shows that the Convention on Biological Diversity’s 2010 targets have not been met. In 2002, world leaders committed, through the Convention on Biological Diversity, to achieve a significant reduction in the rate of biodiversity loss by 2010. We compiled 31 indicators to report on progress toward this target. Most indicators of the state of biodiversity (covering species’ population trends, extinction risk, habitat extent and condition, and community composition) showed declines, with no significant recent reductions in rate, whereas indicators of pressures on biodiversity (including resource consumption, invasive alien species, nitrogen pollution, overexploitation, and climate change impacts) showed increases. Despite some local successes and increasing responses (including extent and biodiversity coverage of protected areas, sustainable forest management, policy responses to invasive alien species, and biodiversity-related aid), the rate of biodiversity loss does not appear to be slowing.

A mid-term analysis of progress toward international biodiversity targets

In 2010, the international community, under the auspices of the Convention on Biological Diversity, agreed on 20 biodiversity-related “Aichi Targets” to be achieved within a decade. We provide a comprehensive mid-term assessment of progress toward these global targets using 55 indicator data sets. We projected indicator trends to 2020 using an adaptive statistical framework that incorporated the specific properties of individual time series. On current trajectories, results suggest that despite accelerating policy and management responses to the biodiversity crisis, the impacts of these efforts are unlikely to be reflected in improved trends in the state of biodiversity by 2020. We highlight areas of societal endeavor requiring additional efforts to achieve the Aichi Targets, and provide a baseline against which to assess future progress. Although conservation efforts are accelerating, their impact is unlikely to improve the global state of biodiversity by 2020. Indicators of progress and decline The targets set by the Convention on Biological Diversity in 2010 focused international efforts to alleviate global biodiversity decline. However, many of the consequences of these efforts will not be evident by the 2020 deadline agreed to by governments of 150 countries. Tittensor et al. analyzed data on 55 different biodiversity indicators to predict progress toward the 2020 targets—indicators such as protected area coverage, land-use trends, and endangered species status. The analysis pinpoints the problems and areas that will need the most attention in the next few years. Science, this issue p. 241

An exploration of the mathematics behind the ecological footprint

Introduced in the early 1990s, the ecological footprint has become a well-known and widespread environmental accounting tool. It measures human demand on nature and compares this to the availability of regenerative capacity on the planet. The method expresses human demand in terms of global hectares – i.e. biologically productive hectares with world-average productivity necessary for resource production and waste assimilation. Almost 15 years of research application and methodological advancements have made the ecological footprint an increasingly robust theoretical framework, and it continues to be refi ned. This article documents the most updated footprint methodology and focuses on the mathematics that supports footprint and biocapacity accounts, as well as its underlying factors such as equivalence and yield factors. To clarify the meaning and the usefulness of footprint and biocapacity reported in terms of global hectares, an in-depth description of the units of measure is presented. Finally, the different research questions that emerge when reporting data in nation-specifi c hectares as opposed to global hectares are investigated.

A footprint family extended MRIO model to support Europe's transition to a One Planet Economy

Currently, the European economy is using nearly three times the ecological assets that are locally available. This situation cannot be sustained indefinitely. Tools are needed that can help reverse the unsustainable trend. In 2010, an EC funded One Planet Economy Network: Europe (OPEN:EU) project was launched to develop the evidence and innovative practical tools that will allow policy-makers and civil society to identify policy interventions to transform Europe into a One Planet Economy, by 2050. Building on the premise that no indicator alone is able to comprehensively monitor (progress towards) sustainability, the project has drawn on the Ecological, Carbon and Water Footprints to define a Footprint Family suite of indicators, to track human pressure on the planet. An environmentally-extended multi-regional input-output (MRIO) model has then been developed to group the Footprint Family under a common framework and combine the indicators in the family with national economic accounts and trade statistics. Although unable to monitor the full spectrum of human pressures, once grouped within the MRIO model, the Footprint Family is able to assess the appropriation of ecological assets, GHG emissions as well as freshwater consumption and pollution associated with consumption of specific products and services within a specified country. Using MRIO models within the context of Footprint analyses also enables the Footprint Family to take into account full production chains with technologies specific to country of origin.

Environmental and Economic Evaluation of Natural Capital Appropriation through Building Construction: Practical Case Study in the Italian Context

Abstract This paper focuses on appropriation of natural capital through construction of buildings. The ecological footprint and the Costanza natural capital concepts are applied. The environmental consequences of human settlement are currently of great concern, and a need is felt to reduce the impact of building on the environment. The embodied energy of building materials and the “land area” required to sustain their production are considered to evaluate the demand on nature of this activity. The ecological footprints of 2 typical Italian buildings are compared. The paper also focuses on how to reduce the natural capital appropriation of building construction by means of environmentally inexpensive materials, renewable energy resources, and optimization of the use of bioproductive land by construction of multistoried buildings. Finally, to allocate an environmental load of buildings, an economic evaluation of natural capital appropriation through building construction is proposed.

The Ecological Footprint of Building Construction

This paper evaluates the environmental pressure that is generated by the construction of two types of building, through the application of ecological footprint analysis. The appraisal of the impact of human settlement on the environment is of great concern and environmentally-friendly buildings are actually required. By considering the embodied energy of building materials and the “land area” required to sustain their assembly line, a comparison between the ecological footprint of two typical buildings in the context of Italy is presented. Finally, it is shown that the ecological footprint of building construction can be reduced by using environmentally-inexpensive materials, renewable energy resources and by optimizing bio-productive land use through the construction of multi-story buildings.

The Emergy Synthesis for the Province of Pescara (Italy) and Strategic Choices for a Sustainable Development

This paper shows an appraisal of local sustainability through an environmental accounting method that is applied to a region with reference to its population, human activities, natural cycles, infrastructures and other settings. Environmental resources locally used, whether directly or indirectly, from both renewable energy flows and storages of material are investigated. In this paper the Emergy Synthesis is applied to the Province of Pescara (Italy) and its districts, in order to evaluate the main flows of energy and materials that locally supply the territorial system, including human systems, with reference to their actual environmental cost. Once expressed in units of the same form of energy through the emergy evaluation, categories of resource consumptions and systems of varying scales and organization are compared. Furthermore, indexes of environmental performance based on emergy are calculated.

Deriving environmental management practices with the Ecological Footprint Analysis: a case study for the Abruzzo Region.

In order to implement a sustainability-based land management, a preliminary diagnosis of the health of a system is necessary. The Ecological Footprint Analysis (EFA) introduced by Wackernagel and Rees in the early 1990s, is a convenient way to appraise all energy and material flows, in a common basis. The EFA is used to show the environmental consequences of human use of resources therefore enabling to understand where and how human pressure can be reduced. The paper applies the EFA to a sub-national case study: the Abruzzo Region, one of the twenty Italian regions, centre-east located on the Adriatic Sea. Following the Footprint Standards promoted by Global Footprint Network a Process-Based approach was chosen and applied to the Region. Results show that the Ecological Footprint of an average resident is 3.95 gha, with more than 50% due to carbon Footprint. The Biocapacity, 1.80 gha per resident, is not enough to support local human demand. These results can be interpreted to derive environmental management practices for the Abruzzo Region.