Agenda 21 and the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands, file 3 of 3

Submission to the UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs (DESA) for the review and assessment of the implementation of Agenda 21 and the Programme for the Further Implementation of Agenda 21

177. Chapter 15 of Agenda 21 addresses the issues relating to the conservation of biological diversity, noting that "Our planet’s essential goods and services depend on the variety and variability of genes, species, populations and ecosystems" (Paragraph 15.2).

178. Not surprisingly the stated objectives under Chapter 15 in large part form today’s agendas of the Convention on Biological Diversity. Significantly, from the perspective of the Ramsar Convention, Chapter 15 makes some key references to wetland ecosystems.

179. Under "Activities, (a) Management-related activities", paragraph (b) urges countries to "integrate strategies for the conservation of biological diversity and the sustainable use of biological and genetic resources into relevant sectoral or cross-sectoral plans, programmes and policies, with particular reference to the special importance of terrestrial and aquatic biological and genetic resources for food and agriculture."

180. In the same section, paragraph (g) states "In situ measures should include the reinforcement of terrestrial, marine and aquatic protected area systems and embrace inter alia, vulnerable freshwater and other wetlands and coastal ecosystems, such as estuaries, coral reefs and mangroves."

181. Further, paragraph (h) in this section advises governments and others to "promote the rehabilitation and restoration of damaged ecosystems and the recovery of threatened and endangered species."

182. Finally, (c) describes a range of actions under "International and regional cooperation and coordination", and paragraphs (e), (f) and (g) are of direct relevance as follows:

181. Without specifically referring to the Convention on Wetlands, the above quotations from Chapter 15 of Agenda 21 have set the scene for the ever-strengthening partnership which now exists between the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and the Ramsar Convention. CBD’s 3^rd Conference of Parties in 1996 endorsed the Ramsar Convention as the "lead partner" (Decision III/21) for actions relating to wetland ecosystems, and this relationship has now evolved into a model of partnership and collaboration between conventions.

182. As outlined in more detail in section 8.3, the working partnership between the Ramsar Convention and the Convention on Biological Diversity was initiated through the Memorandum of Cooperation signed in January 1996. In 1998 the first Joint Work Plan between the Conventions was adopted and a second is now in place, covering the period up until the end of 2001.

183. The full scope of the working partnership between CBD and Ramsar is further described in section 8.3; however, in the context of reviewing work to pursuant to Chapter 15 of Agenda 21, several aspects of the CBD-Ramsar partnership are significant. Ramsar’s broad definition of ‘wetlands’ means that it has a direct interest in CBD’s work on ecosystem themes ranging from inland waters and coastal systems to forests (flooded peat swamps forests, for example – see Information box below), agricultural lands, drylands and mountain ecosystems.

184. Both CBD and Ramsar are pursuing similar agendas in terms of the so-called cross-cutting issues such as alien species, incentives, indicators, sustainable tourism and sustainable use of natural resources. The efficiencies being gained through their now coordinated efforts in these fields are a lesson for the broader implementation of Agenda 21 and the UNCED conventions especially. And, finally, the JWP recognizes most importantly the need to ensure strong institutional-level links between subsidiary scientific bodies of the conventions, their national focal points and in national reporting. All of these are now being addressed by CBD and Ramsar through the vehicle of their landmark Joint Work Plan.

185. One aspect of the Ramsar Convention’s three pillars of operation, its List of Wetlands of International Importance, deserves special mention in this context, and by the Rio+10 deliberations. As it stands today there are 1050 Wetlands of International Importance spread across the 123 Contracting Parties. These have a combined area of nearly 80 million hectares and include the full range of wetland types recognized under the Ramsar Convention (see Table 3 in Section 5).

186. Ramsar considers that these are the genetic, species and ecosystem reservoirs of the planet, and areas within which the principles of wise use are exercised and demonstrated. Of these, 857 contain freshwater wetlands types, and 498 coastal wetland ecosystems, and 299 include human-made or purpose wetlands which have special ecological attributes and values. (Note, the addition of these exceeds 1050, the total number of sites, as some sites contain several wetland types).

187. This global network, which continues to expand and diversify each week, must now be recognized as the global natural asset it represents.

188. At its COP7 in 1999, the Ramsar Convention Parties recognized the need to ensure that the ever-expanding List of Wetlands of International Importance included THE most important wetland sites; important from the perspective of biodiversity conservation, but also in terms of ecological and hydrological functioning. It adopted the Strategic Framework and guidelines for the future development of the List of Wetlands of International Importance (Resolution VII.11, Handbook 7 of the Ramsar Wise Use ‘toolkit’) and set the ambitious target of achieving a List of 2000 Ramsar sites by the time of Ramsar COP9 in 2005. Parties are urged to take a systematic approach to future designations to ensure the Convention is able "to develop and maintain an international network of wetlands which are important for the conservation of global biological diversity and for sustaining human life through the ecological and hydrological functions they perform" – this is the Vision for the Ramsar List of Wetlands of International Importance.

189. It is also significant that the Vision for the Ramsar List urges Parties to "develop and maintain" the network of sites. In order to assist Parties and local people with this important endeavour, the Ramsar Convention has produced as Handbook 8 of its Wise Use ‘toolkit’ an assembly of previously adopted guidance relating to site management – the Handbook goes by the title of "Frameworks for managing Wetlands of International Importance and other wetlands". The reference to "other wetlands" in the title of this Handbook is also noteworthy, as the assembled guidance on management planning, monitoring, risk assessment and impact assessment is applicable to all wetlands.

190. Of the eight Ramsar criteria for the identification of Wetlands of International Importance, seven form Group B, "Sites of international importance for conserving biological diversity" (see Information box 29 at the end of this section), and among these are specific criteria dealing with sites important for vulnerable, endangered, or critically endangered species or threatened ecological communities (Criterion 2), sites important for supporting populations of plant and/or animal species important for maintaining the biological diversity of a particular biogeographic region (Criterion 3) and sites important for supporting plant and/or animal species at a critical stage in their life cycles, or that provide refuge during adverse conditions (Criterion 4). In terms of broad biodiversity conservation it is notable that of the 1045 sites at present, there are 656 of these that meet criterion 2, 520 that meet criterion 3 and 498 that meet criterion 4.

191. These figures show how the Ramsar site network is making a major contribution to global biodiversity conservation. When the broad scope of Ramsar’s wetland definition is considered, these criteria offer enormous potential to see designated under the Ramsar Convention a major proportion of the world’s most vital ecosystems and habitats for conserving biodiversity. This avenue deserves serious exploration by the respective subsidiary scientific bodies of the two Conventions and should be encouraged by Rio+10.

192. An important element of the Ramsar List of Wetlands of International Importance is that the Convention’s ‘wise use’ concept (sustainable development) is totally compatible with the act of designating a site. The Parties at Ramsar’s 7^th Conference of Parties endorsed the following:

193. This statement is highly significant in the context of Agenda 21, as it can be taken to indicate that at least in principle, the global network of Ramsar sites is in fact designed to be ‘demonstration’ sites for sustainable development. Accordingly, they should be recognized as such by Rio+10, and the full weight and support of the United Nations should be directed to seeing this site network developed and maintained as "an international network of wetlands which are important for the conservation of global biological diversity and for sustaining human life through the ecological and hydrological functions they perform" – as prescribed by the Vision of the Ramsar List.

194. Also among the Ramsar criteria are two that deal specifically with waterbird habitats (Criteria 5 and 6). To many people this was the trademark of the Ramsar Convention for many years. Today, this continues to be an important part of the Conventions’ work, especially as wetland habitats continue to be placed under threat.

195. The global efforts to protect migratory waterbirds in particular are now becoming very well organized (see Information box 30 below), although the threats remain and some populations continue to decline. Ramsar’s major contribution to this global biodiversity conservation effort has been to see a large number of sites designated as Wetlands of International Importance; thus serving to support the creation of site networks critical as refuges, stopover and breeding habitats for these more than 400 species. In fact, of the 1050 Ramsar sites at present, 418 have been designated due to fulfilling criterion 4 and 475 have satisfied criterion 6.

196. Ramsar’s contribution to this area of Agenda 21 can be summarized as follows:

198. The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) has a far-reaching and ambitious agenda. By comparison, the Ramsar Convention is somewhat narrower in scope than CBD, although (as shown in this section) through its very broad definition of ‘wetland’ Ramsar has a direct interest in several of CBD’s ecosystem themes. Like CBD, the Ramsar Convention is also addressing a range of cross-cutting themes. It is therefore very encouraging that these two conventions are now working so closely together and that CBD can rely on a more specialized convention to advance key aspects of its work programme. Conversely, through CBD’s taking the lead on some cross-cutting issues, the Ramsar Convention can benefit from the products of CBD’s deliberation and deliver these in turn to its focal points. Rio+10 should recognize and commend this working partnership for all that it represents.

199. In the biodiversity conservation and sustainable use realm Rio+10 has a number of considerable challenges. As environments degrade and habitats fragment, conserving genes, species, populations and ecosystems becomes even more challenging. In the preceding section, Rio+10 was urged to adopt ecosystem restoration as a priority and this same challenge applies here in terms of conserving biological diversity.

200. Close examination of the CBD and the Ramsar Convention texts reveals parallels with respect to in-situ conservation which Ramsar believes offer an opportunity for the two Conventions to support one another even more strongly than at present, and through so doing, to advance significantly the implementation of Agenda 21.

201. CBD’s Article 7 (Identification and Monitoring) and its associated Annex I, Article 8 (In-situ conservation) and Article 10 (Sustainable use of components of biological diversity) have direct parallels in the Ramsar Convention through the various articles which consider the identification and designation of Wetlands of International Importance (Articles 2.1 and 2.2), the monitoring of these sites (Article 3.2), and the application of the Wise Use principle (Article 3.1). CBD’s Article 8 relating to in-situ conservation refers to the establishment of protected areas "where special measures need to be taken to conserve biological diversity".

202. To date 123 Parties to the Ramsar Convention have identified and designated 1050 Wetlands of International Importance which can be found spread across CBD’s so-called ecosystem themes (inland water, marine and coastal, drylands, mountains, etc.). In so doing these Parties have made a major contribution to their national obligations under CBD as well. This incidental synergy comes about because of the eight Ramsar site criteria, seven form Group B, which determine "Sites of international importance for conserving biological diversity" (see Information box 29), and among these are specific criteria dealing with:

203. Of the 1050 Ramsar sites at present, 656 of these are included on the basis of Criteria 2, 520 because of Criteria 3 and 498 because of Criteria 4. Many sites satisfy more than one criterion.

204. These figures show how the Ramsar site network is making a major contribution to global biodiversity conservation, and if promoted by Rio+10 as a mechanism for furthering Agenda 21 in this area, the global network of Wetlands of International Importance would instantly become a major plank in the efforts to conserve biological diversity. Ramsar’s Wise Use principle means that Wetlands of International Importance are ‘demonstration’ sites for sustainable development and also ‘demonstration’ sites for sustainable use of biological diversity.

Information box 27 - Peatlands at Risk

Covering some 400 million hectares in total, peatlands represent approximately 50% of the world’s terrestrial and freshwater wetlands. Despite being the most extensive single wetland type in the world, less than 10% of the global peatland area is represented on the Ramsar List. As of October 1999, only 93 (or 9%) of the 1005 sites on the Ramsar list contain forested peatlands, while 238 (or 24%) contain non-forested peatlands.

Peatlands are made up of mainly semi-decayed plant material accumulated over some five to eight thousand years. They are major contributors to the biological diversity of regions in many parts of the world but particularly in the tropics. Peatlands provide a variety of goods and services, both directly and indirectly, in the form of forestry and fishery products, energy, flood mitigation, water supply and groundwater recharge. They also have a functional significance far beyond their actual geographical extent – the carbon stored in peat represents 25% of the world soil carbon pool which would contribute to global warming and climate disruption if released.

The world’s peatlands are under increasing pressure from development such as agricultural conversion, forestry and mining, for both energy and horticultural supplies. The recent forest fires in Southeast Asia drew international attention to the adverse economic, social and cultural impacts of the ongoing degradation and destruction of tropical peatlands. In its response entitled Wetlands on Fire (October 1997), the Standing Committee of the Ramsar Convention called upon Parties to recognize that it can only be through strategic policy decisions and actions that we can hope to see peatland resources managed for long-term sustainability.

Recommendation 7.1, A global action plan for the wise use and management of peatlands (see Appendix I), and its Annex, a Draft global action plan for the wise use and management of peatlands, define Ramsar’s response to the need for urgent action for the conservation and wise use of this threatened global resource. Among others, it calls for a global inventory and evaluation of peatlands, protection for sites at particular risk (such as tropical and boreal peatlands), the designation of additional peatland sites to the Ramsar List and increasing understanding and awareness of the functions and values of peatlands. The Global Action Plan is expected to be finalised early in the year 2000.

Information box 28 – Valuing wetland services – Ecotourism

Many wetlands are prime locations for tourism; some of the finest are protected as National Parks, World Heritage Sites, Ramsar sites, or Biosphere Reserves. Many wetland sites generate considerable income locally and nationally.
Recreational activities such as fishing, hunting and boating, etc., involve millions of people who spend billions of dollars annually on these activities.
Wetlands offer ideal locations for involving the general public and schoolchildren in hands-on learning experiences, in an essentially recreational atmosphere, to raise awareness of environmental issues.
In Australia, the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park recorded 1.6 million visitor-days with a value of more than US$ 540 million in 1997 while the more remote Kakadu National Park collects US$ 800,000 annually.
The Cayman Islands attract 168,000 divers per year, who spend US$ 53 million.
Collectively, Caribbean countries rely on their beaches and reefs to attract million of visitors each year; their tourist industry was valued at US$ 8.9 billion in 1990, one half of their GNP.
Recreational fishing involves more than 45 million people in the USA, who spend US$ 24 billion annually on their hobby.
In Canada, Mexico and the USA, more than 60 million people watch migratory birds as a hobby and 3.2 million hunt ducks, geese and other game birds; collectively they generate more than US$ 20 billion annually in economic activity.

Information box 29 - Ramsar’s network of Wetlands of International Importance

A global biodiversity asset worth nurturing

Today there 1050 Ramsar sites spread across 123 countries. With a total area of nearly 80 million hectares, they aremaking a major contribution to Agenda 21.

The Vision for the List of Wetlands of International Importance is "To develop and maintain an international network of wetlands which are important for the conservation of global biological diversity and for sustaining human life through the ecological and hydrological functions they perform".

The Ramsar criteria for designation of Wetlands of International Importance:

Group A of the Criteria. Sites containing representative, rare or unique wetland types

Criterion 1: A wetland should be considered internationally important if it contains a representative, rare, or unique example of a natural or near-natural wetland type found within the appropriate biogeographic region.

Group B of the Criteria. Sites of international importance for conserving biological diversity

Criteria based on species and ecological communities

Criterion 2: A wetland should be considered internationally important if it supports vulnerable, endangered, or critically endangered species or threatened ecological communities.

Criterion 3: A wetland should be considered internationally important if it supports populations of plant and/or animal species important for maintaining the biological diversity of a particular biogeographic region.

Criterion 4: A wetland should be considered internationally important if it supports plant and/or animal species at a critical stage in their life cycles, or provides refuge during adverse conditions.

Specific criteria based on waterbirds

Criterion 5: A wetland should be considered internationally important if it regularly supports 20,000 or more waterbirds.

Criterion 6: A wetland should be considered internationally important if it regularly supports 1% of the individuals in a population of one species or subspecies of waterbird.

Specific criteria based on fish

Criterion 7: A wetland should be considered internationally important if it supports a significant proportion of indigenous fish subspecies, species or families, life-history stages, species interactions and/or populations that are representative of wetland benefits and/or values and thereby contributes to global biological diversity.

Criterion 8: A wetland should be considered internationally important if it is an important source of food for fishes, spawning ground, nursery and/or migration path on which fish stocks, either within the wetland or elsewhere, depend.

Information box 30 - International cooperation and the conservation of migratory waterbirds

With amazing precision, migratory birds fly hundreds, sometimes thousands, of kilometres each year, leaving their breeding sites in the northern hemisphere in autumn and spending the winter months in the southern hemisphere. Between the two areas, the migrants rely on suitable ‘stopover’ sites where they can feed and rest before continuing their journey. This complex lifestyle presents a special challenge to those concerned with their survival since one break in the link could spell disaster for whole populations of migrants. Collaborative efforts have to be made at an international level to ensure the conservation of all critical sites, which may be located in several different countries, hundreds of kilometres apart.

In the past 15 years, contrasting innovative solutions have been found to safeguard critical sites for shorebirds and other species which utilize wetland habitats at some stage during their migration. Some solutions have involved formal intergovernmental agreements such as the North American Waterfowl Management Plan and the African-Eurasian Migratory Waterbird Agreement (AEWA), while others have involved the development of informal site networks such as the Western Hemisphere or the East Asian-Australasian Shorebird Reserve Networks. Both approaches have produced effective international mechanisms for safeguarding sites along flyways (the routes used by migratory shorebirds).

For the Asian region, the Asia-Pacific Migratory Waterbirds Conservation Strategy for the period 1996-2000 provided a framework for important waterbird conservation initiatives to be undertaken over the five-year period. The Strategy was developed through the collaborative efforts of many governmental and non-governmental organizations at a number of international conservation fora in 1994 and 1995. Contracting Parties to the Ramsar Convention were strongly encouraged at COP6 (through the Brisbane Initiative, Recommendation 6.3), to give their support to the implementation of the Strategy, which is coordinated by Wetlands International. In Okinawa in Japan in late 2000 the new Asia-Pacific Migratory Waterbirds Conservation Strategy for the period 2001 – 2005 was adopted.

A priority of the Strategy has been the establishment of three highly successful migratory bird networks, the East Asian-Australasian Shorebird Reserve Network, the North East Asian Crane Site Network and the East Asian Anatidae Site Network. Collectively, these international networks include 78 key wetland sites along the Asia-Pacific flyway where efforts are made to safeguard critical stopover sites and to collect and exchange data on their migratory visitors.

Knowledge of migration patterns (when the species move and where) and of the key sites (breeding, non-breeding and stopover) is critical baseline information for effective conservation, yet this information is often scattered or unpublished. In support of the Strategy and the AEWA, Wetlands International has begun compiling the available information into flyway atlases which cover taxonomic groups of waterbirds in geographic regions. Four atlases are available or in progress and more are planned.

For the Americas, the Western Hemisphere Shorebird Reserve Network (WHSRN) and The North American Waterfowl Management Plan work collaboratively in the USA and Canada to strengthen shorebird and wetland conservation. The WHSRN, which also extends into Mexico and South America, is jointly implemented by Wetlands International-Americas and the Manomet Observatory. Membership in this network, which includes public and private lands, is completely voluntary and there are network reserves in Argentina, Brazil, Canada, Mexico, Peru, Suriname and in 12 States in the USA.

The North American Waterfowl Management Plan, signed in 1986 by Canada and the United States of America, and by Mexico in 1994, is a collaborative conservation effort from thousands of partners representing a wide range of interests in the three countries. The challenge for the Plan was to coordinate and focus conservation activities in the three countries to measurably increase the populations of a highly mobile, shared migratory resource - waterbirds. While the Management Plan has been signed by the three governments, its success lies in the diverse and effective public-private partnerships which have evolved. These partnerships recognized that effective conservation efforts in the 1990s would have to go beyond the traditional focus on public natural resource lands to encompass whole landscapes, including private and common lands. This landscape approach to managing waterbird habitat seeks to balance conservation and socioeconomic objectives within a region, and long-term success depends on the commitment of local communities to the concept of stewardship, including planning, implementation and caretaking.

Collectively, the partners have worked to conserve 5 million acres (over 2 million hectares) of wetland ecosystems, investing over US$1.5 billion between 1986 and 1997 in restoring, protecting, improving and managing wetland habitats for migratory birds, benefiting at the same time many other groups of animals and plants. This has been accomplished through a range of projects and joint ventures coordinated by an 18-member Plan Committee.

The most recent formal agreement on migratory birds is the African-Eurasian Migratory Waterbird Agreement (AEWA), which came into force in November 1999. Coming under the Bonn Convention (the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals), this agreement was spearheaded by the Dutch Ministry of Agriculture, Nature Management and Fisheries. It covers a large part of Eurasia, Northern America and the whole of Africa (around 120 countries) and includes 170 species of waterbird. The Agreement has two parts both of which are legally binding. The Agreement text outlines the philosophy, legal framework and provisions, while the Action Plan describes the conservation actions to be undertaken. The key points of the comprehensive Action Plan include:

Regulation of hunting according to the conservation status of each population, recognizing that hunting can play a positive role in certain circumstances;
Preparation and implementation of action plans for single species considered to be most at risk;
Development of emergency measures;
Re-introduction programmes;
Measures to address problems associated with invasive species;
Habitat inventories, conservation and management measures (linked to the Ramsar Convention);
Management of human activities (such as tourism), crop damage conflicts, etc; and
Development and coordination of research, monitoring, awareness and training programmes.

205. UNCED saw the birth of two international instruments designed specifically to address cornerstone issues of Agenda 21: the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). Later, as a result of the UNCED process, the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (CCD) came into being.

206. The evolution of the Ramsar Convention pre-dated these three conventions by over 20 years, yet because of the foresight of its architects, and the breadth of its mandate, the Convention on Wetlands was, and remains today, a natural partner of all three of the UNCED-related Conventions.

207. Over the past five years the Ramsar Convention has proactively sought to articulate and demonstrate the areas of common and complementary interest with the three UNCED Conventions, and as the following sections reveal, is today recognized as an increasingly important partner in assisting them to deliver on their respective, yet inter-related, mandates.

208. It is clear that the emergence of the three UNCED-related Conventions has stimulated much debate, focused political minds, and mobilized actions and funds to address the issues of desertification, biodiversity conservation, and climate change. However, there do remain fundamental challenges in seeing these conventions delivered on-the-ground in more integrated ways.

209. As Agenda 21 states many times, the key to sustainable development lies in seeing institutional and programmatic barriers broken down so that environmental, social and economic aspirations can be balanced. As the foregoing sections in this submission reveal, the modern Ramsar Convention is playing a significant role in assisting this process through its efforts to work with, and in partnership with, the three UNCED Conventions.

210. Apart from its emerging partnership with UNFCCC, and established collaboration with CBD and CCD, the Ramsar Convention also has in place Memoranda of Cooperation or Understanding with the Convention on Migratory Species, UNESCO’s World Heritage Centre, the Convention for the Protection and Development of the Marine Environment of the Wider Caribbean Region (the Cartagena Convention), and the Convention for the protection of the Mediterranean Sea Against Pollution (the Barcelona Convention).

211. The Convention also has a range of other agreements with NGO and scientific organizations (see Sections 3). Other, similar partnerships are also anticipated including with UNESCO’s Programme on Man and the Biosphere, the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES), The Convention on the Protection of the Marine Environment of the Baltic Sea, the European Commission, the South Pacific Regional Environment Programme (SPREP), the International Coral Reef Initiative, and the World Water Council. Further details of Ramsar’s ‘targets’ in this regard can be found in the "The Convention Work Plan 2000-2002" as approved by Ramsar COP7 (1999).

212. The Programme for the Further Implementation of Agenda 21 suggested a range of ‘tools’ to assist greater collaboration between conventions. Paragraph 118 suggests various ways to bring about such collaboration, including improved scheduling of meetings, integrated national reporting, improved balance between the sessions of the conferences of the parties and their subsidiary scientific bodies, and facilitating the participation of governments in these same sessions. Further, in paragraph 119; "At the international and national levels there is a need for, inter alia, better scientific assessment of ecological linkage between the conventions; identification of programmes that have multiple benefits; and enhanced public awareness-raising with respect to the conventions."

213. While there has been progress made in terms of some of these proposed actions, it cannot be said that this has yet yielded the fruit which was sought by the 19^th Special Session of the UN General Assembly when adopting the ‘Programme for the Further Implementation of Agenda 21’. Specifically, there has been work done to move toward more harmonized information management and national reporting (see Information box 31), although this has to date been restricted to the so-called ‘biodiversity-related’ conventions – a major limitation in terms of sustainable development and Agenda 21 aspirations.

214. As follow-up to the recommendations of the WCMC report described in Information box 31 at the end of this section, a workshop in October 2000 in the United Kingdom explored ways of establishing a more harmonized approach to national reporting to international biodiversity-related agreements, and determined to develop pilot projects for testing options at national and international levels. The workshop, attended by eight convention secretariats, including Ramsar, and several other international organizations involved in exploring convention synergies, developed four pilot projects which will be tested during 2001 in up to eight countries with different convention commitments and capacities. The pilot projects address:

215. A fifth project is already under way, developing a Reporting Obligations Database, analysis of which will help countries identify areas of overlap and synergy and guide their national information management for convention reporting.

216. Assessment of the ecological linkages between conventions has also advanced and is demonstrated clearly in the following three sections. The Joint Work Plan between the Convention on Biological Diversity and the Ramsar Convention (see section 8.3) is a model of two conventions working to identify common programmes that have multiple benefits.

218. It is evident that a great deal more is needed in order to achieve the much needed synergy at the global level.

219. The emerging partnership between the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Ramsar Convention is based on two contrasting, yet equally important roles which wetlands play in terms of the climate change dynamic. One is the management of greenhouse gases (especially carbon dioxide) and the other is in physically buffering climate change impacts.

220. Ramsar submitted statements to both UNFCCC’s COP5 and its COP6. The Ramsar secretariat presented to COP5 a discussion paper on "Wetlands and Climate Change" prepared for Ramsar by IUCN – The World Conservation Union. COP5 requested the Climate Change Convention Secretariat to undertake discussions with Ramsar to determine how cooperation between the Conventions could be strengthened. Both secretariats are working on this matter, on the basis of three broad themes of common interest:

221. In addition, Ramsar’s Scientific and Technical Review Panel (STRP) is preparing for Ramsar COP8 (2002) a comprehensive review of the potential impacts of climate change on wetlands, and of the roles that wetlands can potentially play in mitigating the effects of climate change and sea level rise. To progress this review and guidance the Convention has established an Expert Working Group on wetlands and climate change, which has already provided expert comments on the IPCC’s Third Assessment Report.

222. The STRP is also preparing further guidance to Contracting Parties on wetland risk assessment, including the use of early warning indicators, for inclusion in the Ramsar "toolkit". This work is particularly relevant to the UNFCCC areas of work on technology transfer, adaptation and capacity building.

223. The working partnership between the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and the Ramsar Convention was initiated through the Memorandum of Cooperation signed in January 1996. In 1998 the first Joint Work Plan between the conventions was adopted and a second is now in place covering the period up until the end of 2001. These Joint Work Plans recognize that CBD has formally endorsed at its 3^rd Conference of Parties that the Ramsar Convention is its "lead partner" in matters relating to wetland biodiversity (Decision III/21). They also include a range of actions to be pursued jointly by the two conventions which are more cross-cutting in nature; such as action relating to incentive measures, impact assessment, and alien species.

224. The full scope of the working partnership between CBD and Ramsar is perhaps best illustrated by the table of contents of the second Joint Work Plan currently in place, as shown in Information box 33 below.

225. Several aspects of the CBD-Ramsar partnership are significant. One, that Ramsar’s broad definition of ‘wetlands’ means it has a direct interest in CBD’s work on ecosystem themes ranging from inland waters and coastal systems to forests (flooded peat swamps forests, for example), agricultural lands, drylands, and mountain ecosystems.

226. Both CBD and Ramsar are pursuing like agendas in terms of so-called cross-cutting issues such as alien species, incentives, indicators, sustainable tourism and sustainable use of natural resources.

227. The efficiencies being gained through their now coordinated efforts in these fields is a lesson for the broader implementation of Agenda 21 and the UNCED-related conventions especially. And, finally, the JWP recognizes most importantly the need to ensure strong institutional-level links between subsidiary scientific bodies of the conventions, their national focal points and in national reporting.

228. It not surprising that the CBD-Ramsar Joint Work Plan is now regularly held up as the model for progressing toward more integrated implementation of international environment conventions. However, while there are some signs that this global-level collaboration is beginning to flow through to closer cooperation and integrated approaches by national focal points of CBD and Ramsar, there remain a large number of Parties in which this is not evident. Rio+10 should look in detail at this issue and develop mechanisms to overcome these institutional impediments.

229. Within the CBD-Ramsar 2^nd Joint Work Plan, especially notable is Section 8 dealing with "important sites". With its now long-established List of Wetlands of International Importance, this is one major direct contribution the Ramsar Convention is making to the conservation of biodiversity, while at the same time promoting policies and approaches which see these resources used wisely.

230. A Memorandum of Cooperation (MoC) was signed between the secretariats of the Ramsar Convention and the Convention to Combat Desertification in December 1998. The reasons for this agreement are reflected in the first three of the preambular paragraphs of the MoC as follows:

231. Importantly, the MoC recognized that both Ramsar and CCD promote sustainable development (called "wise use" by the Ramsar Convention).

232. The MoC articulates a range of action to be undertaken including aspects on institutional cooperation, the exchange of information and experience, capacity building and training, science and technology and the coordination of work programmes. (See Information box 34 below.)

233. Intrinsically, CCD and the Ramsar Convention are both seeking to change behaviours that foster land degradation – CCD focuses its work within the arid and semi-arid regions, and Ramsar takes a more global perspective courtesy of its broad definition of ‘wetland’. The same unsustainable land uses and climate change impacts that are promoting desertification also threaten wetland ecosystems. Scientific and technical cooperation is therefore vital between the cnventions, and especially among national focal points. For this reason, at its 7^th Conference of Parties, the Ramsar Convention’s Parties invited the chair of CCD’ subsidiary scientific body to become a permanent observer on the Ramsar Scientific and Technical Review Panel.

234. One key area of cooperation between the conventions for the future is at the national level, where desertification and wetland policies or strategies should be harmonized, especially for those countries with extensive arid and semi-arid areas. The Ramsar Convention encourages these countries to identify, and designate as Wetlands of International Importance, their most vital wetlands (see section 7). For the arid and semi-arid environments these are especially precious resources, important to sustaining life through providing food and water security. Both CCD and Ramsar seek to promote the sustainable use of these resources. In the African context, where desertification is a major concern, the recent efforts to have Chad nominated as a Ramsar sites are a tangible example. (See Information box 35 at the end of this section.)

8.5 International cooperation, institutional arrangements, legal instruments and mechanisms

235. In Chapter 2 of Agenda 21 international cooperation for sustainable development is considered, although more from the financial perspective than in terms of aspects such as transboundary cooperation or the sharing and exchange of knowledge. These latter issues are considered throughout the chapters of Agenda 21, where specific international cooperation is urged in order to advance action on a specific theme. Chapters 38 and 39 consider International Institutions and International Legal Instruments and Mechanisms, respectively. This section of Ramsar’s Agenda 21 Report deals with each of these in turn, beginning with International Cooperation. (See also Information box 36 below.)

236. As indicated in the Introduction (Section 1), the Ramsar Convention is built round three main pillars – Wise use, the List of Wetlands of International Importance and International cooperation – and thus special consideration of this latter area is included here.

237. Historically the Ramsar Convention focused much of its energy on international cooperation for the protection of migratory waterbirds (see section 7.3). However, through Agenda 21, and with the mainstreaming of wetlands (in all their forms) into the center of natural resource management debates, the dimensions of international cooperation under the Convention have expanded to include the following areas:

238. At Ramsar COP7 (1999), the Parties adopted Guidelines for international cooperation under the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands through Resolution VII.19. These guidelines reflect the above themes and provide advice for Parties in meeting their obligations to work with other Parties in their implementation of the Convention.

239. Some notable achievements of the Ramsar Convention in these areas of international cooperation include the following:

240. Chapter 38 considers in some detail the international institutional arrangements in place to support implementation of Agenda 21, with a focus on the United Nations system.

241. The Ramsar Convention has UNESCO as its Depositary although it does not operate under the administrative umbrella of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) or the UN Secretariat. The Ramsar secretariat is hosted, with a large degree of autonomy, by the World Conservation Union (IUCN). This situation is a legacy of the roots of the Ramsar Convention when NGO movement was ngly involved in the formation of this international legal instrument.

242. Its rather unique administrative situation does not impede the Ramsar Convention in any way in contributing to the work of Agenda 21, or indeed other United Nations conventions and entities.

243. Similarly, the Ramsar Convention focal points and secretariat work very closely with UNEP and the UNDP, most notably in terms of projects gaining support from the Global Environment Facility.

244. Also, as demonstrated through the foregoing sections, the Ramsar Convention has excellent working relations with the UNCED-related Conventions, the Convention on Migratory Species, and UNESCO’s World Heritage Centre, and is forging stronger links with the Man and the Biosphere Programme.

245. Chapter 39 has as its stated objective (summarized) to ensure that international law and associated mechanisms are promoting the integration of environment and development policies. More specifically it speaks of addressing the difficulties that some States, particularly developing countries, may have in participating fully in international agreements and instruments, setting priorities for future law-making on sustainable development at the global and other levels, improving the effectiveness of agreements and instruments, and pre-empting disputes or conflicts between environmental and social/economic instruments.

246. From the Ramsar perspective there are a number of issues to be addressed here, such as the continuing difficulties, caused primarily by resource constraints, of developing countries in participating fully in the global-level policy development and priority setting of the conventions. This situation is further exacerbated by insufficient coordination and collaboration between the conventions – in all areas – policy, science and administration.

247. Also from the Ramsar perspective, there is a need for the Rio+10 process to fully recognize the international legal obligations imposed by the Convention on Wetlands. For example, Article 5 (see Information box 38) of the Ramsar Convention provides a most explicit obligation on Parties in relation to international cooperation over shared wetlands and water resources. This is being used to good effect by the Convention in several parts of the world today (see section 6.4), and offers Agenda 21 another mechanism which to date has not been strongly promoted by United Nations bodies.

248. Ramsar’s contribution to Agenda 21 in this area can be summarized as follows:

250. Among the tools which exist to assist Governments and local stakeholders in pursuing environmental protection, sustainable use of natural resources, and sustainable development is the range of multilateral conventions. These represent a suite of mechanisms, each with different scopes and scales, but nonetheless, they are linked by a common theme of sustainable use of our natural assets. Ideally, these conventions would together offer an integrated package for implementing Agenda 21; however, the common anecdotal feedback from Parties is that they fall short of offering that at present, and this is in itself is a major challenge for Rio+10. Some of the major weaknesses identified by Parties are as follows:

251. As Agenda 21 so strongly states, gaining the support and direct involvement of the major groups within civil society has to be a priority if we are to witness sustainable development happening on the ground. A key to gaining that support and involvement is in education and public awareness, so that stakeholders are better informed and made aware of unsustainable practices. One of the challenges which Rio+10 is urged to take up is that of documenting and demonstrating the fundamental science behind the global ecosystem, how it is being broken down, and why. Within this context, it is important to then articulate the specific role, or roles, of each convention, how they link – in an ecosystem sense – and how they link operationally.

252. Rio+10 should also support the advice of the Ramsar Convention in promoting the concept of ‘demonstration’ sites to show how these various international conventions can be implemented in an integrated way to deliver sustainable development. There remains a healthy skepticism among local communities that these high-level instruments can be manifested into tangible outcomes for them. ‘Demonstration’ sites that show how this can be done would provide an enormous boost for the aspirations of Agenda 21.

253. The general lack of coordination between the multilateral conventions in terms of policy development, science and technology, information management and administration is a major concern, though this has gained some attention over the past few years, and we are now seeing Memoranda of Cooperation and Understanding being put into place between conventions on a bilateral basis. As described in this section, Ramsar’s Joint Work Plan with CBD is considered the model for advancing inter-convention collaboration.

254. Despite these recent efforts, the process of creating a more integrated working ‘team’ of conventions requires acceleration, and Rio+10 could be the catalyst for this. Ramsar proposes the following as significant first steps to achieving these more efficient and effective working arrangements between conventions.

259. The burden imposed by the independent reporting requirements under each Convention is also a major issue, especially for developing countries, and warrants attention by Rio +10. The WCMC Report on harmonizing information management between the biodiversity-related conventions referred to above proposes measures to streamline national reporting, and these require urgent attention. There have been some recent innovations in this area which also deserve consideration, most notably the move by CBD, Ramsar and others to reduce reporting requirements to a minimum, and Ramsar’s conversion of its triennial national report format into a national planning and monitoring tool for ongoing use by Parties as an implementation tool. However, the bottom line is that if these conventions are to form an integrated matrix for implementing Agenda 21, then it must be possible to design a single national reporting format to meet the expectations of all conventions.

260. The problem of ensuring that all Parties can participate fully in the workings and deliberations of the international conventions is not a new issue. Regrettably no solution has yet been found to this problem, which continues to leave developing countries disadvantaged. Some of the actions recommended above, such as better coordination of meeting schedules, more integrated work programmes, simplified and streamlined national reporting, etc., would serve to reduce the burden on developing countries and for this reason deserve high priority. Experience has also shown that participation by developing countries in Conferences of the Parties and subsidiary scientific bodies is generally constrained by lack of resources. If equity is to be ensured in these important international discussions, this matter needs to be addressed.

262. Perhaps the greatest impediment to achieving sustainable development in most countries is the difficulty of breaking down the barriers between sectors – sectors within civil society, and sectors within government. The challenge for Agenda 21 was to find mechanisms to break those barriers down – and this challenge remains for Rio+10 to address. Without a strong move to achieve a more collaborative and integrated implementation of the UNCED-realted and other relevant conventions, it is difficult to foresee national administrations, and even local stakeholders, being encouraged to think more holistically about the management of natural resources.

263. Agenda 21 is about looking at natural resource management issues and challenges from the perspective of long-term sustainability – to have social, economic and environmental concerns taken fully into consideration. The proliferation of conventions and treaties, if not well coordinated, runs the serious risk of creating a whole new set of ‘sectors’ which decision-makers and other stakeholders must contend with.

264. If the conventions can reach a point where they are being implemented as a well coordinated and integrated whole, it will almost certainly flow down to the regional, national, and local levels. Addressing this weakness in the global mechanisms of sustainable development must be a priority of Rio+10. In conjunction with these actions at the international level, if Parties were to review, and reform as necessary, their national institutional and programmatic arrangements for implementing the UNCED-related and other conventions with sustainable development mandates, it would assist in advancing the cause of sustainable development that much sooner.

Information box 31 - Towards harmonized information management systems for the biodiversity-related conventions

In 1998, the secretariats of the so-called biodiversity-related conventions – the Convention on Biological Diversity, the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands, the Convention on International Trade in Endangered jointwebsite.jpg (22336 bytes) Species (CITES), the World Heritage Convention and the Convention on Migratory Species with the United Nations Environment Programme – engaged the World Conservation Monitoring Centre to undertake a study to identify options for more harmonized information management. The report of this project entitled "Feasibility study for the harmonized information management infrastructure for biodiversity-related treaties" was completed in 1999. The study found there exist several areas where opportunities exist for such harmonization to occur – these include areas such as the Web sites of each convention, in the glossaries of terms and taxonomic systematics used, in national reporting, and in the sharing of ‘lessons learned-type’ information. The WCMC report was considered by Ramsar’s 7^th Conference of Parties which gave it strong endorsement and urged the Ramsar Bureau (secretariat) to continue to support the follow-up actions proposed by WCMC (Resolution VII.4). The Ramsar Conference also urged that the secretariats of the Conventions on Desertification and Climate Change be invited to join the project, as well as the Bern Convenion on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats.

As the first steps in implementing the recommendations of the WCMC report, a joint entry point and common search engine have been established between the Convention Web sites. In late 2000 a workshop was held in the United Kingdom to consider ways of taking forward the proposed harmonized approach to national reporting.

Information box 32 – Wetlands – Reservoirs of biodiversity

Freshwater wetlands hold more than 40% of the world’s species and 12% of all animal species.
Wetlands support spectacular concentrations of wetland-dependent wildlife, such as the more than 2 million shorebirds visiting both the Banc d’Arguin National Park in Mauritania and the Wadden Sea in northern Europe, or the 30,000 black lechwe antelope that inhabit the Bengweulu Basin in Zambia. They also support charismatic species such as the hippopotamus, shoebill stork, and jaguar. Wetlands may be individually recogniz ed for their endemic species – such as Lake Tanganyika, with 1,470 animal species, 632 of which are found in that lake only, and the Amazon river which boasts 1,800 species of endemic fish.
Coral reefs rival tropical rainforests in terms of biological diversity; they may contain 25% of all marine species. Reefs hold an estimated 4,000 species of fish and 800 species of reef-building corals; total number of species associated with reefs may be over one million.
Wetland biodiversity is a significant reservoir of genes that has considerable economic potential in the pharmaceutical industry and in commercial crop plants such as rice, a common wetland plant and the staple diet for over half the world’s population. Wild rice continues to be an invaluable source of new genetic material for developing disease resistance, yet many different varieties of rice have disappeared in recent years – leaving us dependent on a shrinking genetic base.

Information box 33
2nd Joint Work Plan 2000-2001 of the Convention on Biological Diversity and the Convention on Wetlands

Table of Contents

A. Thematic areas:

1. Inland water ecosystems
2. Marine and coastal ecosystems
3. Other ecosystems that include Ramsar-defined wetlands

3.1. Forests
3.2. Agricultural lands
3.3. Dryland, Mediterranean, arid, semi-arid, grasslands and savannahs
3.4. Mountains

B. Cross-cutting areas:

4. Alien species
5. Incentive measures
6. Indicators for biological diversity, monitoring and early warning systems
7. Traditional knowledge of indigenous and local communities
8. Important sites, inventory and site management
9. Impact assessment and minimizing adverse impacts
10. National strategies, policies, laws and plans
11. Small island developing States
12. Sustainable tourism
13. Sustainable use of components of biological diversity

C. Institutional links:

14. Between subsidiary scientific bodies
15. National focal points and rosters of experts
16. National reporting

Information box 36 - Regional cooperation on transboundary basins: the challenge for Africa

Water and its prudent management is the key to reversing the downward spiral in human welfare in Africa which has been caused by a combination of rapid population growth, stagnating per capita food production,and accelerating environmental degradation across the continent. One of the major challenges in the management of water resources facing African countries is the need for regional cooperation on transboundary water basins:

Africa has over 50 significant water basins spanning nearly all the countries;
about 40% of the land area in Africa falls within transboundary basins;
approximately 75% of total water resources of the continent are concentrated in eight major river basins (the Congo, Niger, Ogoague (Gabon), Zambezi, Nile, Sanga, Chari-Logone and Volta);
for 14 countries, practically their entire national territories fall within shared river basins;
in Sub-Saharan Africa, international river basins constitute the principal source of water resources and 35 countries in the region share the 17 major river basins.

While these statistics highlight the need for regional cooperation on transboundary basins, very few countries in the region have some kind of cooperative arrangements for development of common water resources. Even the existing basin institutions have been constrained by some or all of the following: (a) absence of a clearly designated and mandated agency to act on behalf of the riparian countries; (b) technical and managerial weaknesses at the level of the secretariat of the basin authorities; (c) inadequate funding by member States of the basin authorities; (d) inability to mobilise external funds for pre-investment studies and for investment; and (e) politiciztion of the selection of key personnel.

While these can be considered the underlying problems of existing institutions, the most serious problem is the total absence of common cooperative mechanisms which would permit countries to address the development of transboundary water resources for socio-economic development of riparian countries on an integrated and equitable basis. This problem pervades a large portion of the continent and remains a serious impediment to water resources development.

Full text of the case study ‘Some problems and constraints in integrated water resources management in Africa’ by S.M.K. Donkor and Yilma E. Wolde, United Nations Economic Commission for Africa, is available from the Ramsar Convention Bureau’s Web site: http://ramsar.org/wurc_index.htm.

Information box 37 - MedWet
An international initiative for Mediterranean wetlands

Wetlands of the Mediterranean Basin have always been characteristic elements of the landscape, providing a livelihood to many people in the form of fishing, water use, grazing lands, recreation and hunting, and playing a vital role in their cultural life. Yet extensive degradation of these wetlands has occurred throughout history through human activities, and continues today at an accelerated pace. While fewer people are directly dependent on the wetlands than in previous centuries, these ecosystems continue to play a significant social and economic role in the region and are valuable reservoirs of biological diversity.

During the 1970s and 1980s, the realiztion was steadily growing that the human pressures on Mediterranean wetlands were reaching critical levels, with almost 50% losses during the 20^th century. At the closing session of a symposium on Managing Mediterranean Wetlands and their Birds, in Grado, Italy, in 1991, Professor Edward T. Hollis and Dr Luc Hoffman challenged the participants to put their words into action, effectively precipitating the birth of the MedWet Initiative.

MedWet today represents a collaboration of all the governments of the region and the Palestinian Authority, as well as the European Commission, the Barcelona, Berne and Ramsar Conventions, and international NGOs and wetland centres. Their ambitious goal is to stop and reverse the loss and degradation of Mediterranean wetlands. Under the guidance of the Mediterranean Wetlands Committee (MedCom) of the Convention on Wetlands, and with funding from the European Commission, the MAVA Foundation, WWF and others (including recently GEF and FFEM), the Initiative has developed methods and tools for managing and conserving Mediterranean wetlands. These have made full use of the extensive technical and scientific knowledge and expertise available throughout this very diverse region.

Besides the Ramsar MedWet Coordinator, three institutions participate in the MedWet team, whose main purpose is the implementation of the Mediterranean Wetlands Strategy. Although they are involved in a range of other conservation activities, they are committed to achieving this long-term goal through technical work and ensuring effective communication and collaboration between the different members and partners of MedWet/Com. More specifically:

The Tour du Valat Biological Station in the Camargue, France, develops and manages projects for the Initiative, and is a focal point in the region for research results, wetland training and developing wetland management practices.
The Greek Biotope/Wetland Centre (EKBY) in Thessaloniki, Greece, provides secretariat services and disseminates information about the Initiative through the MedWet Web site (http://www.medwet.gr/) and through regular newsletters and technical reports. EKBY is the focal point for wetland mapping, restoration and rehabilitation.
Sede para el estudio de los humedales mediterráneos (SEHUMED), based at València University in Spain, develops and manages specific projects on the wise use of wetland resources and tourism. It is the focal point on water pollution, water quality and the sustainable use of wetland resources.

During 2001, a MedWet Coordination Unit will be established in Athens, Greece, financed by the Greek Government and co-located with the Coordinating Unit of the Mediterranean Action Plan of the Barcelona Convention.

Of particular importance to Contracting Parties is the extensive list of publications produced through the Initiative. While specifically written for Mediterranean wetlands, many have a broader relevance and are valuable resource materials for all wetland managers and decision-makers. The scope of MedWet publications ranges from Mediterranean wetlands at the dawn of the 21^st century (which presents an overview of the current issues, solutions and actions required), to reference manuals on inventory and monitoring, publications on training, information and public awareness, and a practical, seven-part series on the conservation of Mediterranean wetlands.

The work done on wetland inventories and especially the MedWet Database 2000 as raised the interest of a number of countries beyond the Mediterranean. In recognition of these and other MedWet tools, the MedWet Initiative has been endorsed as a model for regional collaboration within the Convention on Wetlands through COP7 Resolution VII.22: Collaborative structure for Mediterranean Wetlands.

For further information on MedWet contact:
Mr Thymio Papayannis, Senior Advisor on Mediterranean Wetlands
Voucourestiou Street 23, 10671 Athens, Greece
Tel: +30 1 36 00 711 4; E-mail: thymiop@hol.gr Web site: http://www.medwet.gr/

For further information about the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands, please contact the Ramsar Convention Bureau, Rue Mauverney 28, CH-1196 Gland, Switzerland (tel +41 22 999 0170, fax +41 22 999 0169, e-mail

). Posted 4 March 2001, Dwight Peck, Ramsar.