Languages:
Box 2. MA ScenariosThe MA developed four scenarios to explore plausible futures for ecosystems and human well-being based on different assumptions about driving forces of change and their possible interactions: Global Orchestration — This scenario depicts a globally connected society that focuses on global trade and economic liberalization and takes a reactive approach to ecosystem problems but that also takes strong steps to reduce poverty and inequality and to invest in public goods such as infrastructure and education. Economic growth in this scenario is the highest of the four scenarios, while it is assumed to have the lowest population in 2050. Order from Strength — This scenario represents a regionalized and fragmented world, concerned with security and protection, emphasizing primarily regional markets, paying little attention to public goods, and taking a reactive approach to ecosystem problems. Economic growth rates are the lowest of the scenarios (particularly low in developing countries) and decrease with time, while population growth is the highest. Adapting Mosaic — In this scenario, regional watershed-scale ecosystems are the focus of political and economic activity. Local institutions are strengthened and local ecosystem management strategies are common; societies develop a strongly proactive approach to the management of ecosystems. Economic growth rates are somewhat low initially but increase with time, and population in 2050 is nearly as high as in Order from Strength. TechnoGarden — This scenario depicts a globally connected world relying strongly on environmentally sound technology, using highly managed, often engineered, ecosystems to deliver ecosystem services, and taking a proactive approach to the management of ecosystems in an effort to avoid problems. Economic growth is relatively high and accelerates, while population in 2050 is in the mid-range of the scenarios. The scenarios are not predictions; instead they were developed to explore the unpredictable features of change in drivers and ecosystem services. No scenario represents business as usual, although all begin from current conditions and trends. Both quantitative models and qualitative analyses were used to develop the scenarios. For some drivers (such as land use change and carbon emissions) and ecosystem services (water withdrawals, food production), quantitative projections were calculated using established, peer-reviewed global models. Other drivers (such as rates of technological change and economic growth), ecosystem services (particularly supporting and cultural services, such as soil formation and recreational opportunities), and human well-being indicators (such as human health and social relations) were estimated qualitatively. In general, the quantitative models used for these scenarios addressed incremental changes but failed to address thresholds, risk of extreme events, or impacts of large, extremely costly, or irreversible changes in ecosystem services. These phenomena were addressed qualitatively by considering the risks and impacts of large but unpredictable ecosystem changes in each scenario. Three of the scenarios—Global Orchestration, Adapting Mosaic, and TechnoGarden—incorporate significant changes in policies aimed at addressing sustainable development challenges. In Global Orchestration trade barriers are eliminated, distorting subsidies are removed, and a major emphasis is placed on eliminating poverty and hunger. In Adapting Mosaic, by 2010, most countries are spending close to 13% of their GDP on education (as compared to an average of 3.5% in 2000), and institutional arrangements to promote transfer of skills and knowledge among regional groups proliferate. In TechnoGarden policies are put in place to provide payment to individuals and companies that provide or maintain the provision of ecosystem services. For example, in this scenario, by 2015, roughly 50% of European agriculture, and 10% of North American agriculture is aimed at balancing the production of food with the production of other ecosystem services. Under this scenario, significant advances occur in the development of environmental technologies to increase production of services, create substitutes, and reduce harmful trade-offs. Source: Millennium Ecosystem Assessment Related publication:
Other Figures & Tables on this publication: Direct cross-links to the Global Assessment Reports of the Millennium Assessment Box 1. Biodiversity and Its Loss— Avoiding Conceptual Pitfalls Box 1.1. Linkages among Biodiversity, Ecosystem Services, and Human Well-being Box 1.2. Measuring and Estimating Biodiversity: More than Species Richness Box 1.3. Ecological Indicators and Biodiversity Box 1.4. Criteria for Effective Ecological Indicators Box 2.1. Social Consequences of Biodiversity Degradation (SG-SAfMA) Box 2.2. Economic Costs and Benefits of Ecosystem Conversion Box 2.3. Concepts and Measures of Poverty Box 2.4. Conflicts Between the Mining Sector and Local Communities in Chile Box 3.1. Direct Drivers: Example from Southern African Sub-global Assessment Box 4.1. An Outline of the Four MA Scenarios Box 5.1. Key Factors of Successful Responses to Biodiversity Loss Figure 3.3. Species Extinction Rates Figure 1.3. The 8 Biogeographical Realms and 14 Biomes Used in the MA Figure 1.4. Biodiversity, Ecosystem Functioning, and Ecosystem Services Figure 2. How Much Biodiversity Will Remain a Century from Now under Different Value Frameworks? Figure 2.1. Efficiency Frontier Analysis of Species Persistence and Economic Returns Figure 3.3. Species Extinction Rates Figure 3.4. Red List Indices for Birds, 1988–2004, in Different Biogeographic Realms Figure 3.7. The Living Planet Index, 1970–2000 Figure 3.10. Main Direct Drivers Figure 3.12. Extent of Cultivated Systems, 2000 Figure 3.13. Decline in Trophic Level of Fisheries Catch since 1950 Figure 3.14. Estimated Global Marine Fish Catch, 1950–2001 Figure 3.15. Estimates of Forest Fragmentation due to Anthropogenic Causes Figure 3.15. Estimates of Forest Fragmentation due to Anthropogenic Causes Figure 3.15. Estimates of Forest Fragmentation due to Anthropogenic Causes Figure 3.15. Estimates of Forest Fragmentation due to Anthropogenic Causes Figure 3.15. Estimates of Forest Fragmentation due to Anthropogenic Causes Figure 3.15. Estimates of Forest Fragmentation due to Anthropogenic Causes Figure 3.16. Fragmentation and Flow in Major Rivers Figure 3.17 Trends in Global Use of Nitrogen Fertilizer, 1961–2001 (million tons) Figure 3.18 Trends in Global Use of Phosphate Fertilizer, 1961–2001 (million tons) Figure 3.20. Historical and Projected Variations in Earth’s Surface Temperature Figure 4. Trade-offs between Biodiversity and Human Well-being under the Four MA Scenarios Figure 4.3. Land-cover Map for the Year 2000 Figure 4.4. Conversion of Terrestrial Biomes Figure 4.5. Forest and Cropland/Pasture in Industrial and Developing Regions under the MA Scenarios Figure 4.6. Changes in Annual Water Availability in Global Orchestration Scenario by 2100 Figure 6.1. How Much Biodiversity Will Remain a Century from Now under Different Value Frameworks? Figure 6.2. Trade-offs between Biodiversity and Human Well-being under the Four MA Scenarios Table 1.1. Ecological Surprises Caused by Complex Interactions |
