|
Monitoring DLDD from the Bottom-Up: Measuring What Matters
 |
 |
 |
 |
On Wednesday morning the panel discussed the benefits and challenges of local-level monitoring (LLM) in drylands, with a special focus on Namibia. The first speaker stressed the importance of LLM and ownership of monitoring processes for informed decision making and planning.
Two panelists discussed monitoring methods for community-based natural resource management (CBNRM). They explained that if community-tailored systems are user-friendly and repeatable, use few tools, and increase capacity and ownership of information, they can provide the foundation for rich national status reports and improve land management.
A farmer from central Namibia shared experiences from a LLM project, which collected data on livestock and grazing areas from 20 villages. He identified the challenges of data accuracy, continuity and funding.
A government representative discussed the added value of LLM in Namibia’s conservancies for national-level decision making. She noted that constraints remain in sustaining technical capacity and funding, and that integrated ecosystem management requires more data and new indicators. |
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
A Stronger UNCCD for a Land-Degradation-Neutral World Calls for a Target-Setting Approach
|
|
|
|
On Wednesday afternoon this UNCCD special event discussed means of engaging the UNCCD in achieving the UN Conference on Sustainable Development (UNCSD, or Rio+20) outcome “The Future We Want,” in particular the goal related to a land degradation neutral world. The panel also addressed UNCCD involvement in the ongoing post-2015 development agenda process. The panel also described the outcomes of the Consultative Meeting on a Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) on a Land Degradation Neutral World and on the Associated Target for Zero-Net Land Degradation, which took place on 26-27 June 2013, in Seoul, Republic of Korea.
The panelists called for building on the momentum of Rio+20 and ensuring DLDD is included in the post-2015 development agenda process outcomes. UNCCD Executive Secretary Luc Gnacadja noted that UNCCD COP 11 should build on progress made in defining and refining indicators by setting targets to address land-related challenges. The panel noted recommendations for establishing an Ad Hoc Working Group to continue intersessional work on these issues at UNCCD COP 11. |
|
|
|
|
|
Practical Tools for Monitoring and Assessment of DLDD: An Overview
|
|
|
|
A land assessment expert from the US presented a number of tools and applications for data collection and management of soil health, quality and potential. He noted that expectations regarding land and its actual quality can be better aligned once soil properties are understood. He underscored the importance of standardization of methodologies, and their simplicity and user-friendliness for comparative data and studies.
At the end of the panel, participants took part in a field demonstration of the stick method, a simple measurement methodology applied widely in many parts of the world for monitoring the condition of rangelands. |
|
|
|
|
|
Drylands Biodiversity: Bridging the Gap With Conventions and National Legislation
Best-Practices for Pursuing Land Degradation Neutrality at the National and Sub-National Level: Policy Options Learned From 75 Years of US Experience
|
|
|
|
On Wednesday evening this panel highlighted existing policies to address land degradation neutrality in the US. Panelists presented the history of land management in the US, examining successes and failures, including various legislative frameworks such as the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA), the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the Clean Water Act (CWA).
They presented a case study of solar energy development on federal public lands, noting that under NEPA, high ecosystem service value areas are excluded from development and that within low ecosystem service value areas projects are required to: avoid and minimize impacts; undertake off-site compensatory mitigation; and utilize monitoring and adaptive management. In conclusion, the speakers emphasized that neutrality is an aspirational target, requiring no explicit targets.
During the question and answer session, participants discussed, inter alia: whether or not US law includes explicit targets; the scaling of land neutrality objectives; how to achieve land degradation neutrality without ideal governance frameworks; and compensation for land degradation. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Daily web coverage (click on the following links to see our daily web pages)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Seventh Rio Conventions Pavilion (RCP)
