Deliverable 3(b)(i): Thematic assessment on land degradation and restoration

The assessment of land degradation and restoration is to cover the global status of and trends in land degradation, by region and land cover type; the effect of degradation on biodiversity values, ecosystem services and human well-being; and the state of knowledge, by region and land cover type, of ecosystem restoration extent and options. The assessment would enhance the knowledge base for policies for addressing land degradation, desertification and the restoration of degraded land.

A workshop was held to develop the scope of the land degradation and restoration assessment in September 2015, in Beijing, China. Experts of this scoping workshop further developed the scope of the land degradation and restoration assessments. In January 2015 the third session of the Plenary approved the launch of the land degradation and restoration assessment together with an agreed scope.

Land degradation, which is primarily a direct or indirect result of human activities, is a major problem on every continent except Antarctica. The total human cost of land degradation is not known, but the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) estimates the economic impact at more than $40 billion annually. Building on the work of the Rio conventions (the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification in Those Countries Experiencing Serious Drought and/or Desertification, Particularly in Africa, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Convention on Biological Diversity), and the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development (Rio+20), the goals of halting and reversing land degradation and decoupling economic growth from environmental degradation have been proposed as part of the sustainable development goals. These goals include Convention on Biological Diversity Aichi Biodiversity Targets 5, 7, 14 and 15 and the ongoing process for developing a post-2015 development agenda. In 2011, in recognition of the benefits to people of restoring degraded land, world leaders endorsed the “Bonn Challenge”, a global effort to restore 150 million hectares of deforested and degraded land by 2020. As a first step towards meeting that goal, there is a clear need to assess the extent, causes and processes of land degradation and the consequences for biodiversity and people, as well as evaluating responses to the restoration and rehabilitation of degraded land and the avoidance of future degradation and the benefits that this will deliver to people. 

At the second session of the Plenary of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, held in Antalya, Turkey, from 9 to 14 December 2013, member States approved the initiation of scoping for a thematic assessment of land degradation and restoration. Accordingly, a scoping document was developed by an expert group in accordance with the procedures for the preparation of the Platform’s deliverables (IPBES-2/3, annex). The expert group met in Beijing from 9 to 11 September 2014, thanks to generous in-kind support received from China. The present note constitutes the scoping document developed by the expert group. Additional information on the work of the expert group is available in Annex VIII of IPBES/3/18.

Scope

For the purposes of this thematic assessment, “degraded land” is defined as land in a state that results from persistent decline or loss of biodiversity and ecosystem functions and services that cannot fully recover unaided within decadal time scales. “Land degradation”, in turn, refers to the many processes that drive the decline or loss of biodiversity, ecosystem functions or services and includes the degradation of all terrestrial ecosystems. The assessment will include associated aquatic ecosystems that are impacted by land degradation. “Restoration” is defined as any intentional activity that initiates or accelerates the recovery of an ecosystem from a degraded state. The term “rehabilitation” is used to refer to restoration activities that may fall short of fully restoring a biotic community to its pre-degradation state, including natural regeneration and emergent ecosystems. This assessment will include eight chapters, the first four of which will report on the benefits of avoiding degradation and restoring degraded land for human well-being and quality of life (chapter 1); concepts and perceptions of land degradation and restoration, according to different worldviews, including those of indigenous and local people (chapter 2); indirect and direct drivers of degradation processes (chapter 3); the nature and extent of land degradation processes and the resultant loss or decline in biodiversity and ecosystem structure and functioning (chapter 4); and the impact of changes in land degradation and restoration on the delivery of nature’s benefits to people and the impact of such changes on the quality of life (chapter 5). The following two chapters will explore the wide range of responses to land degradation by developing and applying a broad framework to assess the effectiveness of interventions intended to prevent, halt, reduce and mitigate processes of land degradation and to rehabilitate or restore degraded land (chapter 6) and a range of development scenarios, including the consideration of different response options and their implications for land degradation regionally and globally (chapter 7). The final chapter (chapter 8) will focus on providing decision support and policy relevant guidance to decision makers at all levels who are responsible for addressing land degradation problems and implementing restoration strategies. The assessment will seek to involve all relevant stakeholders from its inception. The structure of the assessment is based on the conceptual framework adopted by the Plenary of the Platform in its decision IPBES-2/4.

Geographic coverage of the assessment

The assessment will encompass all the terrestrial regions and biomes of the world, recognizing that land degradation drivers and processes can vary in severity within regions and countries as much as between them. The assessment will encompass the full range of human-altered systems, including but not limited to drylands, agricultural and agroforestry systems, savannahs and forests and aquatic systems associated with these areas.

Utility

This expert-led assessment will provide the information and guidance necessary to support stakeholders working at all levels to reduce the negative environmental, social and economic consequences of land degradation and to rehabilitate and restore degraded land to aid the recovery of nature’s benefits to people. It will draw on information from scientific, indigenous and local knowledge systems to increase awareness and identify areas of concern. It will help to identify potential solutions to the challenges posed by land degradation, informing decision makers in public, private and civil society sectors. It will provide a framework for understanding, monitoring and taking action to halt and reverse land degradation in order to support decision-making at all levels and it will identify critical knowledge gaps and priority areas for new research and investment to enhance capacity in the sustainable management of land and biodiversity and their benefits to people.

Assumptions

The assessment will be based on both science and other knowledge systems, including indigenous and local knowledge systems. Land degradation is recognized as predominantly anthropogenically driven and as such is ultimately a consequence of the activities of institutions, governance and other indirect drivers (sociopolitical, economic, technological and cultural factors). The restoration of degraded land will be evaluated in its broadest sense, from partial rehabilitation to full restoration of the system to its pre-degradation state. Addressing direct and indirect drivers of degradation, promoting restoration and designing and implementing sustainable land management systems require a participatory process involving the co‑production of knowledge with relevant and diverse stakeholders. The assessment will take account of both the negative impact of land degradation and the benefits to people of preventing, halting, reducing and mitigating degradation and restoring degraded land.

Chapter outline

The assessment will be presented in a summary for policymakers and an eight-chapter report, as set out below. An introduction will briefly review the rationale, utility and assumptions of the assessment, as well as the approach adopted and the rationale for the chapter sequence. An executive summary will present key findings and policy-relevant conclusions. 

Chapter 1. Benefits to people from avoidance of land degradation and restoration of degraded land. This chapter will present a brief summary of the benefits to human well-being and quality of life that can be achieved by the halting, reduction and mitigation of degradation processes as well as the restoration of degraded land. The chapter will draw on information and insights from all other chapters, highlighting examples of success stories of how land conservation and restoration measures have helped to deliver improvements in livelihoods, reduce poverty and strengthen the long-term sustainability of land use and the extraction of natural resources.

Chapter 2. Concepts and perceptions of land degradation and restoration. This chapter will focus on assessing and comparing differing concepts and perceptions of land degradation and restoration, stemming from both science and other knowledge systems, including indigenous and local knowledge. The chapter will also review concepts and approaches used to assess the diversity of land degradation processes, the status of ecosystems and the impact thereon, as well as concepts and approaches used to describe different responses, including rehabilitation and restoration.

Chapter 3. Direct and indirect drivers of land degradation and restoration. This chapter will assess how land degradation and restoration are the result of multiple drivers, involving both direct anthropogenic and natural factors and interactions between them, as well as underlying indirect drivers. Direct drivers of degradation (e.g., unsustainable levels of biomass extraction and extractive industries) can result directly in degraded land, including reduction in the productivity of land, or in processes such as soil erosion due to unsustainable land management techniques, and natural drivers, such as floods, wind and drought, that result in land degradation. Direct drivers of restoration, encompassing both passive and active approaches, can result in either halting or reducing degradation and in the recovery of biodiversity and ecosystem functions. Indirect drivers of land degradation and restoration are related to institutions and governance systems, as well as social, cultural, technological and economic factors, including poverty, which underpin direct drivers, at the local to global levels. The chapter will assess the extent and severity of different drivers and how they vary within and between different biomes, regions and land-use systems around the world. The assessment of direct drivers will include anthropogenic drivers at global, national, regional and local scales, including human-driven climate change, as well as natural drivers and interactions between anthropogenic and natural drivers. Particular attention will be paid to climate change and its interaction with other anthropogenic drivers of land degradation, including interactions between processes of land degradation and extreme weather events. 

Chapter 4. Status and trends of land degradation and restoration and associated changes in biodiversity and ecosystem functions. This chapter will focus on the status and trends of land degradation and restoration in terms of changes in biodiversity and ecosystem functioning, as well as the degradation and restoration processes that result in those changes. Degradation processes include soil erosion, contamination, compaction, sealing, sedimentation, loss of organic matter, soil and water salinization, degradation of freshwater systems, invasion of alien species, changes in natural fire regimes and pollution. Degradation can also include landscape-scale processes such as changes in ecological connectivity, land cover and land use and changes in land management practices. Restoration processes include the avoiding, halting and reversing of degradation processes as well as the recovery of biodiversity and ecosystem functions. The chapter will assess levels of land degradation and restoration with regard to the type, extent and severity of changes in both biodiversity and ecosystem structure and functioning in different biomes and under different land-use and management systems. Changes in biodiversity include changes to both wild biodiversity and agrobiodiversity, including both above-ground and below-ground biodiversity. Changes in ecosystem structure and functioning include aspects such as primary productivity, nutrient cycling and the provision of habitat for species. Particular attention will be given to understanding system resilience (capacity to recover systems structure and functions following a perturbation), including the potential for thresholds and sudden changes in key attributes of biodiversity and critical ecosystem functions.

Chapter 5. Land degradation and restoration associated with changes in ecosystem services and functions and human well-being and good quality of life. This chapter will focus on the impact of land degradation and restoration on changes to the delivery of nature’s benefits to people and the resultant impact on quality of life. The chapter will assess land degradation associated with the loss of benefits to people including provisioning services, such as food production, quality and quantity of water resources, and availability of raw materials, as well as regulating, cultural services and other aspects of nature, recognizing a diverse conceptualization of the values of nature. The chapter will analyse changes in benefits to people in terms of the relative contribution of biodiversity and ecosystem structure and functioning and that of anthropogenic assets (e.g., technologies, knowledge) applied by people in the co‑production of benefits. The impact on the diverse dimensions of a good quality of life will include the impact on health, poverty, income-generating opportunities, meaningful livelihoods, the equitable distribution of natural resources and rights and values considered important in different cultures. The chapter will consider the diverse costs of land degradation and benefits of restoration for people, including the overall economic and non‑economic costs and benefits, encompassing those that are associated with the area of degraded or restored land itself, as well as costs or benefits borne by people in other areas who are affected by degraded or restored sites. For both land degradation and restoration the chapter will examine the type, extent and severity of these changes in different social-ecological systems in different land cover and land management systems, including their implications for social and ecological stability and resilience and cultural integrity.

Chapter 6. Responses to avoid land degradation and restore degraded land. This chapter will develop a framework for assessing the effectiveness of existing interventions to prevent, halt, reduce and mitigate the processes of land degradation and to rehabilitate and restore degraded land through the recovery of biodiversity and ecosystem structure and functioning and their benefits to people. The chapter will assess how past and current responses to degradation problems and restoration approaches vary according to context, including the type and severity of land degradation and underlying direct and indirect drivers, as well as the consequences of land degradation and the restoration for nature’s benefits to people and quality of life. The chapter will analyse the effectiveness of addressing the indirect causes of land degradation and restoration (institutions, governance systems and other indirect drivers), as compared to efforts to address direct drivers or anthropogenic assets (better techniques, access to training). The chapter will assess the relative success or failure, as well as the potential risks, of different institutional, governance and management response options against a range of social, cultural, economic, technological and political criteria. It will explore how responses to prevent land degradation through sustainable use compare with efforts to deal with its effects through adaptation and restoration. The chapter will also assess different institutional, policy and governance responses based on the type of policy instrument used, as well as support given to research and technology development, institutional reform and capacity‑building.

Chapter 7. Scenarios of land degradation and restoration. This chapter will explore the implications of a range of plausible development scenarios, including the adoption of different response options across multiple scales, and their implications for land degradation and restoration globally, including impacts on human well-being and quality of life and possible trade-offs between social, economic and environmental objectives. Scenarios will be developed using information derived from the assessment and work from across the Intergovernmental Science‑Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, motivated by a systematic review of other scenario exercises of this type, including the Platform’s ongoing methodological assessment of scenario analysis and modelling of biodiversity and ecosystem services, to be released at the end of 2015. The chapter will reveal the variation in plausible land degradation and restoration futures that depend on choices (with associated social and economic implications) made at the landscape, national, subregional, regional and international scales to address indirect and direct drivers and introduce new mechanisms for avoiding land degradation, mitigating its impacts and rehabilitating and restoring degraded sites.

Chapter 8. Decision support to address land degradation and support restoration of degraded land. This chapter will consolidate and rationalize information necessary to support
evidence-based decision-making and institution-building for policymakers and practitioners responsible for selecting and implementing strategies for addressing land degradation problems and restoring degraded land. The chapter will assess actions necessary to develop institutional competencies in the detection and analysis of land degradation problems and the design, implementation, management and monitoring of response strategies, including data, methods, decision support tools and stakeholder engagement. The chapter will place land degradation problems and potential restoration solutions in the wider policy, socioeconomic and environmental context, emphasizing the importance of institutions, governance and other indirect drivers that are the root drivers of both degradation and restoration. It will consider interactions between land degradation and restoration and other major policy areas such as farming and food, flood risk and water resource management, climate change adaptation and mitigation, invasive species and disease management, biocultural diversity conservation, public health and rural, urban and industrial development. 

 

Members of the Land Degradation and Restoration Assessment Expert Group

3bi Chairs
Role Name Affiliation Nominating Government/Organisation
Chair Robert Scholes University of the Witwatersrand South Africa
Chair Luca Montanarella European Commission Food and Agriculture Organisation
3bi Chapter 1
Role Name Affiliation Nominating Government/Organisation
Coordinating Lead Author Judith Fisher Fisher Research Pty Ltd Australia
Review editor Pascal Podwojewski Institute for Research and Development (IRD) France
3bi Chapter 2
Role Name Affiliation Nominating Government/Organisation
Coordinating Lead Author Florent Kohler Université de Tours France
Coordinating Lead Author Janne Kotiaho University of Jyväskylä Finland
Lead Author Robin Reid Colorado State University United States of America
Lead Author Shonil Bhagwat The Open University United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Lead Author Josef Sejak J.E.Purkyne University in Usti nad Labem Czech Republic
Lead Author Carlton Roberts Forestry Division Trinidad and Tobago
Lead Author Laetitia Navarro German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv) Halle-Jena-Leipzig Group on Earth Observations Biodiversity Observation Network – GEO BON
Review editor Katalin Toeroek Centre for Ecological Research Hungary
Review editor Alejandro Leon Stewart Universidad de Chile Chile
Fellow Maylis Desrousseaux Lyon 3 University Environmental law institute - Lyon 3 University
3bi Chapter 3
Role Name Affiliation Nominating Government/Organisation
Coordinating Lead Author Mahesh Sankaran National Centre for Biological Sciences India
Coordinating Lead Author Toby Gardner Stockholm Environment Institute Sweden
Coordinating Lead Author Nichole Barger University of Colorado United States of America
Lead Author Patrick Meyfroidt Le Fonds de la Recherche Scientifique (FNRS) & Université catholique de Louvain Belgium
Lead Author Tiina Maileena Nieminen Natural Resources Institute Finland, Luke Finland
Lead Author Vivek Saxena Government of Haryana India
Lead Author Francisco Moreira Institute of Agronomy Portugal
Lead Author Toshiya Okuro University of Tokyo Japan
Liaison expert Danielson Ramoz Kisanga University of Dar es Salaam United Republic of Tanzania
Liaison expert Forest Isbell University of Minnesota United States of America
Liaison expert Ricardo Ribeiro Rodrigues Agriculture School-ESALQ - University of Sao Paulo Brazil
Liaison expert Violaine Brochier Electricité de France, Research and Development France
Liaison expert Linda Broadhurst Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization (CSIRO) Australia
Liaison expert P. C. Abhilash Banaras Hindu University India
Liaison expert Alou Adamou Didier Tidjani Université Abdou Moumouni
Review editor James F. Reynolds Duke University United States of America
Review editor Neil Mckenzie The Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), Australia Australia
Review editor Valerie Kapos UNEP World Conservation Monitoring Centre (WCMC) United States of America
Fellow Matthew Ross
Fellow Marina Monteiro Universidade Federal de Goiás Universidade Federal de Goiás
3bi Chapter 4
Role Name Affiliation Nominating Government/Organisation
Coordinating Lead Author Graham Von Maltitz Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) UNCCD
Coordinating Lead Author Fengchun Zhang Chinese Rearch Academy of Environmental Sciences China
Coordinating Lead Author Stephen Prince University of Maryland UNCCD
Lead Author Gil Eshel Soil Erosion Research Station, Ministry Of Agriculture & Rural Development Israel
Liaison expert San Thwin University of Forestry Myanmar
Liaison expert Jean Paul Metzger University of São Paulo Brazil
Liaison expert Cristina Martinez Garza University of the State of Morelos Mexico
Liaison expert Mongi Sghaier Institut des Régions Arides
Liaison expert Kenneth Byrne University of Limerick Ireland
Liaison expert German Kust Moscow Lomonosov State University, Soil Science Faculty Russian Federation
Review editor Chencho Norbu Department of Forests and Park Services Bhutan
Fellow Bernard Nuoleyeng Baatuuwie University for Development Studies
3bi Chapter 5
Role Name Affiliation Nominating Government/Organisation
Coordinating Lead Author Matthew Potts Univeristy of California, Berkeley University of California, Berkeley
Coordinating Lead Author Barend Erasmus University of the Witwatersrand South Africa
Lead Author Sebastian Arnhold Ecological Services, University of Bayreuth Germany
Lead Author Eliska Krkoska Lorencova Global Change Research Centre, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic Global Change Research Centre, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic
Lead Author Andrew Lowe University of Adelaide Terrestrial Ecosystem Research Network
Lead Author Tim Holland University of California, Berkley Canada
Lead Author Simone Athayde Federal University of Tocantins Brazil
Liaison expert Chuluun Togtohyn National University of Mongolia Mongolia
Liaison expert Peter Elias Department of Geography, University of Lagos International Social Science Council (ISSC)
Liaison expert Maria Siobhan Fennessy Kenyon College Ramsar Convention Secretariat
Liaison expert Sandra Veronica Acebey Quiroga YPFB Petroandina S.A.M. Bolivia (Plurinational State of)
Review editor Ephraim Maduhu Nkonya International Food Policy research Institute (IFRPI) IFPRI
Review editor Edson Gandiwa Chinhoyi University of Technology, Zimbabwe Zimbabwe
3bi Chapter 6
Role Name Affiliation Nominating Government/Organisation
Coordinating Lead Author John Parrotta International Union of Forest Research Organizations United States of America
Coordinating Lead Author Ram Pandit University of Western Australia Nepal
Lead Author Emilie Coudel French agricultural research and international cooperation organization (CIRAD) France
Lead Author James Harris Cranfield University United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Lead Author Adam Kertesz Geographical Institute, Research Center for Astronomy and Earth Sciences, Hungarian Academy of Sciences Hungary
Lead Author Daniel Vieira Embrapa (Brazilian Agricultural Research Corporation) Brazil
Lead Author Juana L. Marino De Posada GUT Sas Colombia
Liaison expert Cristobal Felix Diaz Morejon Environmental Directorate, Ministry of Science, Technology and the Environment Cuba
Liaison expert Noraini Binti Mohd Tamin University of Malaysia Malaysia
Liaison expert Yaakov Anker Samaria and the Jordan Rift R&D center Samaria and the Jordan Rift R&D center
Liaison expert Phumza Ntshotsho Council for Scientific and Industrial Research Council for Scientific and Industrial Research
Review editor Susan Galatowitsch University of Minnesota Ramsar Convention Secretariat
Review editor Florencia Montagnini Yale Climate and Energy Institute United States of America
Fellow Ruishan Chen Guoqing Shi Hohai University
3bi Chapter 7
Role Name Affiliation Nominating Government/Organisation
Coordinating Lead Author Ben Ten Brink PBL-Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency Netherlands
Coordinating Lead Author Michael Obersteiner International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis Austria
Coordinating Lead Author Matthew Cantele International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis Italy
Lead Author Aletta Bonn Helmholtz Center for Environmental Research (UFZ) Germany
Lead Author Joe Morris Cranfield University United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Lead Author Jonathan Davies International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) IUCN (International Union for Conservation of Nature)
Lead Author Miguel Fernandez Trigoso German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv) Halle-Jena-Leipzig Group on Earth Observations Biodiversity Observation Network – GEO BON
Lead Author Nathanial Matthews
Liaison expert Klaus Kellner North West University South Africa
Liaison expert Wilson Ramirez Hernandez Alexander von Humboldt Institute Instituto Alexander von Humboldt
Review editor Yoshiki Yamagata National Institute for Environmental Studies (NIES) Japan
Review editor Petr Havlik International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA) Czech Republic
Fellow Vanessa Marie Adams University of Queensland, School of Biological Sciences University of Queensland, Centre for Biodiversity and Conservation Science
3bi Chapter 8
Role Name Affiliation Nominating Government/Organisation
Coordinating Lead Author Louise Willemen ITC University of Twente, Netherlands Netherlands
Coordinating Lead Author Grace Nangendo Wildlife Conservation Society Uganda
Lead Author David Douterlungne CONACyT and IPICyT Mexico
Lead Author Nana Bolashvili Ivane Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University Georgia
Lead Author Ana Mendes University of Évora Portugal
Lead Author Prasanta Kumar Mishra Indian Council for Agricultural Research (ICAR) India
Lead Author Afshin Akhtar Khavari Griffith University Australia
Lead Author Lindsay Stringer University of Leeds UNCCD
Liaison expert Jayne Belnap U.S. Geological Survey, National Climate Change and Wildlife Science Center United States of America
Liaison expert Mekuria Argaw Denboba Addis Ababa University Ethiopia
Liaison expert Ravishankar Thupalli Independent International Forest Biodiversity, ABS and Community Development Consultant India
Liaison expert Ulf Molau University of Gothenburg Sweden
Review editor Mary Kathryn Seely Desert Research Foundation of Namibia United States of America
Review editor Pedro Henrique Santin Brancalion Universidade de São Paulo Brazil
Fellow Sugeng Budiharta Indonesian Institute of Sciences Indonesian Institute Of Sciences
3bi Scoping
Role Name Affiliation Nominating Government/Organisation
Scoping expert Uriel Safriel Hebrew University of Jerusalem/Center for Environmental Conventions, Blaustein Institutes for Desert Research Israel
Scoping expert Archana Godbole Applied Environmental Research Foundation Applied Environmental Research Foundation
Scoping expert Gonzalo Chapela Universidad Autonoma Chapingo Mexico
Scoping expert Hamid Custovic UNCCD/University of Sarajevo, Faculty of Agricultural and Food Sciences
Scoping expert Bo Wu Institute of Desertification Studies (IDS), Chinese Academy of Forestry (CAF) China
Scoping expert Florent Kohler Université de Tours DIVERSITAS
Scoping expert Ricardo Ribeiro Rodrigues Agriculture School-ESALQ - University of Sao Paulo Brazil
Scoping expert Nana Bolashvili Ivane Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University Georgia
Scoping expert Alisher Mirzabaev Center for Development Research, University of Bonn Center for Development Research (ZEF), University of Bonn
Scoping expert Noraini Binti Mohd Tamin University of Malaysia Malaysia
Scoping expert Magdy El Bana University of Suez Canal & Port Said Egypt
Scoping expert Pablo Munoz United Nations University DIVERSITAS
Scoping expert Mourad Arabi Institut National de recherche forestière Algeria
Scoping expert Mikiko Ishikawa Cho University Japan
Scoping expert Ephraim Maduhu Nkonya International Food Policy research Institute (IFRPI) International Food Policy Research Institute
Scoping expert Mekuria Argaw Denboba Addis Ababa University Ethiopia
Scoping expert Frito Dolisca State University of Haiti Haiti
Scoping expert Graham Von Maltitz Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) UNCCD
Scoping expert Coen Ritsema Wageningen University Netherlands
Scoping expert Ana Mendes University of Évora Portugal
Scoping expert Jocelyn Davies CSIRO Australia
Scoping expert Roxana Aragon CONICET Argentina
Scoping expert San Thwin University of Forestry Myanmar
Scoping expert Edgar E. Gutierrrez Espeleta University of Costa Rica Costa Rica
Scoping expert Joe Morris Cranfield University United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Scoping expert Katalin Toeroek Centre for Ecological Research Hungary
Scoping expert Sevinc Madenoglu Ministry of Food Agriculture and Livestock Soil Fertilizer and Water Resources Research Institute Turkey
Scoping expert Wilson Ramirez Hernandez Alexander von Humboldt Institute Colombia
Scoping expert Fei Wang Northwest A&F University Institute of Soil and Water Conservation, CAS and MWR
Scoping expert Nichole Barger University of Colorado United States of America
Scoping expert Lala Razafy Fara WWF MWIOPO Madagascar
Scoping expert Md Saiful Karim Faculty of Law, Queensland University of Technology Australia
Scoping expert Pandi Zdruli CIHEAM Mediterranean Agronomic Institute of Bari UNCCD
Scoping expert Toby Gardner Stockholm Environment Institute Sweden
3bi Other
Role Name Affiliation Nominating Government/Organisation
Bureau expert group member Rashad Zabid Oglu Allahverdiyev Ministry of Ecology and Natural Resources Republic of Azerbaijan
Bureau expert group member Fundisile Goodman Mketeni South African National Parks
MEP expert group member Yi Huang Centre of Environmental Sciences, Peking University
MEP expert group member Marie Roue Laboratory of Eco-anthropology and Ethnobiology, National Museum of Natural History (MNHN)
MEP expert group member Saw Leng Guan Forest Biodiversity Division, Forest Research Institute of Malaysia
MEP expert group member Guenay Erpul Ankara University
IPBES Secretariat (TSU) Anastasia Brainich IPBES Secretariat

Second Order Draft

The Second Order Draft (SOD) of the 8 chapters and the First Order Draft of the Summary for Policy Makers (SPM) will be coming out for external expert and government review on 1 May 2017.

Please find the original notification here