| POPULATION
LIVING BELOW POVERTY LINE IN DRYLAND AREAS |
| Environmental |
Chapter 12 |
Driving Force |
1. Indicator
(a) Name: Population living below poverty
line in dryland areas.
(b) Brief Definition: A measure of the number of persons/households
classified as living below the nationally-defined poverty line, given as a
fraction of the total population in a country's dryland area.
(c) Unit of Measurement: %.
2. Placement in the Framework
(a) Agenda 21: Chapter 12: Managing Fragile
Ecosystems: Combating Desertification and Drought.
(b) Type of Indicator: Driving Force.
3. Significance (Policy Relevance)
(a) Purpose: The purpose of the indicator is
to show the extent to which poverty affects dryland economies, limiting
investment and increasing short-term resource management leading to
degradation. It indicates the need for the establishment of
alternative income-generating projects and food security systems in
drought-prone areas.
(b) Relevance to Sustainable/Unsustainable
Development: This indicator is relevant to policy decisions related to
education, health, land tenure, decentralization of resource management.
It can guide decision making towards preventive measures for lands that
are not yet degraded or are slightly degraded. In addition, it would
contribute to the identification of factors leading to desertification,
the development of practical measures to combat desertification and
mitigate the effects of drought, and the implementation and evaluation of
national action plans. The sustainable development of dryland ecosystems
depends on supporting a diversified economy and re-investing locally the
revenues of goods and services produced.
(c) Linkages to Other Indicators: The link
between poverty and environmental degradation was established by the
United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED). More
specifically, the indicator is better interpreted if paired with land use,
infrastructure availability, and other socioeconomic indicators, for
example, population density, education, food security, tenure, and
percentage of household income spent on food.
(d) Targets: No international targets exist
for poverty eradication or rural development.
(e) International Conventions and Agreements:
The United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification and the
International Conference on Population and Development (Cairo) are
relevant to this indicator.
4. Methodological Description and Underlying
Definitions
(a) Underlying Definitions and Concepts:
Poverty concepts are available at the national level or from the World
Bank World Development Report. However, this indicator is not operational
to any degree at this time, due to the severe limitations outlined under
4d below.
(b) Measurement Methods: A country-specific
poverty line. The headcount index as a percentage of the population is
established. The headcount index is the percentage of the population below
the poverty line. This needs to be computed at a regional or sub-regional
level to cover the dryland area, depending on the country.
(c) The Indicator in the DSR Framework:
Poverty in dryland areas can be considered a Driving Force inasmuch as it
may cause people to mismanage resources and contribute to desertification.
This will not hold true in all regions and at all times, given the
cyclical nature of droughts. On the other hand, poverty can be considered
a State indicator wherever desertification degrades the resource base and
contributes to the expansion of poverty.
(d) Limitations of the Indicator: The
concept of a poverty line can be misleading. Poverty is measured in terms
of income. However, populations in dryland areas may be income-poor given
lack of access to markets or monetized economies, but wealthy in terms of
livestock. Also, the poverty line measurement is insensitive to the
distribution of income below the poverty line. Security of tenure, a key
socioeconomic aspect of sustainable development in drylands, is not
reflected in poverty indicators. Therefore, while the issues of poverty
and population pressure are important in combating desertification,
further refinement of the indicator is necessary. Geo-referencing to
agro-ecological conditions and crops, and knowledge of carrying capacity
and its spatial/temporal variability is needed to properly capture the
role of poverty in the degradation of drylands. Disaggregation of poverty
data by dryland may not be readily available.
(e) Alternative Definitions: The focus of
this indicator is limited to dryland areas only. An alternative
socioeconomic indicator may be proposed as the "optimal land size for
the sustenance of a household basic needs." The sign and amplitude of
the difference between the average landholding and this optimal land size
could serve as an indicator of the resulting wealth or poverty of
households and of pressures for degradation. Determination of optimal land
size, however, is a complex multi-disciplinary exercise. Amounts of land
needed would depend on life style (that is., nomadic, sedentary), food
products consumed, variability of rain, etc. Data on optimal farm sizes
are available from many member nations. "Basic needs" would
generally be computed by countries to establish poverty indices. Issues of
land tenure are not captured by this alternative indicator either.
5. Assessment of the Availability of Data from
International and National Sources
(a) Data Needed to Compile the Indicator:
Population and income statistics disaggregated by dryland region.
(b) Data Availability: Data disaggregated by
dryland area not readily available at the international level. Relevant
national data would be available from national statistical institutions.
(c) Data Sources: The United Nations and
World Bank data are the major international sources of data for this
indicator.
6. Agencies Involved in the Development of the
Indicator
(a) Lead Agency: The lead agency for the
development of this indicator is the United Nations Food and Agriculture
Organization (FAO). The contact point is the Assistant Director-General,
Sustainable Development Department, FAO; fax no. (39 6) 5225 3152.
(b) Other Organizations: Further development
of the indicator would be of interest to FAO, the United Nations
Statistical Office (UNSO), and the International Fund for Agricultural
Development (IFAD).
7. Further Information
The World Bank. World Development Report. 1990.
| NATIONAL
MONTHLY RAINFALL INDEX |
| Environmental |
Chapter 12 |
State |
1. Indicator
(a) Name: National monthly rainfall index (NMRI).
(b) Brief Definition: The national average of monthly station
rainfall, weighted by the long-term station rainfall average.
(c) Unit of Measurement: The preferred measure is the departure
from average in standard deviations. An alternate measure is the absolute
value or departure from the average in millimetres.
2. Placement in the Framework
(a) Agenda 21: Chapter 12: Managing Fragile
Ecosystems: Combating Desertification and Drought.
(b) Type of Indicator: State.
3. Significance (Policy Relevance)
(a) Purpose: The purpose of this indicator
is to measure rainfall water availability in countries subject to
desertification and drought.
(b) Relevance to Sustainable/Unsustainable
Development: Desertification in arid, semi-arid, and dry sub-humid
areas results from various factors, including climatic variations and
human activities. It affects about one sixth of the world's population,
70% of drylands, and about 25% of the total land area of the world.
Strengthening the access to the knowledge base on biophysical factors such
as rainfall availability will facilitate improved management of freshwater
and land resources. Rainfall data over the longer term is significant from
a climate change perspective, and, therefore, has significance in the
development of adaptive strategies. Rainfall information is critical to,
for example, habitat protection, and agricultural planning and risk
assessment.
(c) Linkages to Other Indicators: This
indicator is closely related to other social, economic, and environmental
measures important to dryland areas. These would include: population
growth rate, net migration rate, human and economic loss due to natural
disasters, Gross Domestic Product per capita, groundwater reserves, land
use change, land affected by desertification, and arable land per capita.
(d) Targets: Not available.
(e) International Conventions and Agreements:
Not available.
4. Methodological Description and Underlying
Definitions
(a) Underlying Definitions and Concepts: The
definitions and concepts associated with this indicator are well-known and
readily available. The NMRI gives greater weight to areas with a high
agricultural potential, assuming a roughly linear relation between total
monthly rainfall and agricultural potential.
(b) Measurement Methods: This indicator is
readily computed from monthly station rainfall data. The NMRI is easy to
interpret, and consistent across time and countries.
(c) The Indicator in the DSR Framework: This
indicator represents a climate condition. As such, it is a State measure
in the context of the DSR Framework.
(d) Limitations of the Indicator: Most
dryland ecosystems transcend national boundaries. Intra-seasonal patterns
(bimodal rainfall, etc.) are not taken into account. The quality of the
indicator depends on the number and geographic distribution of suitable
rainfall stations.
(e) Alternative Definitions: For large
countries or for countries only partially affected by dryland conditions,
regional reporting may be more appropriate.
5. Assessment of the Availability of Data from
International and National Sources
(a) Data Needed to Compile the Indicator:
The essential data are monthly rainfall statistics by meteorological
station.
(b) Data Availability: The data required are
readily available.
(c) Data Sources: The data are available
from national climatological services and international databases.
6. Agencies Involved in the Development of the
Indicator
The lead agency for the development of this
indicator is the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO).
The contact point is the Assistant Director General, Sustainable
Development Department, FAO; fax no. (39-6) 5225 3152.
7. Further Information
Gommes, R. and F. Petrassi. Rainfall Variability
and Drought in Sub-Sahara Africa since 1960. FAO Agrometeorology Series
Working Paper No. 9. FAO Rome. November 1994.
| SATELLITE
DERIVED VEGETATION INDEX |
| Environmental |
Chapter 12 |
State |
1. Indicator
(a) Name: Satellite derived vegetation
index.
(b) Brief Definition: A Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI)
of green leaf biomass derived from National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration's (NOAA) Advanced Very High Resolution Radiance (AVHRR)
satellites.
(c) Unit of Measurement: Grid cells of 50 km2.
2. Placement in the Framework
(a) Agenda 21: Chapter 12: Managing Fragile
Ecosystems: Combating Desertification and Drought.
(b) Type of Indicator: State.
3. Significance (Policy Relevance)
(a) Purpose: This indicator measures the
evolution of vegetation activity as a result of the combined effect of
meteorological and ecological conditions, and human activity in dryland
areas.
(b) Relevance to Sustainable/Unsustainable
Development: Desertification and drought affect about one sixth of the
world's population, 70% of drylands, and about 25% of the total land area
of the world. Strengthening the knowledge base on biophysical factors such
as vegetation biomass will facilitate improved risk assessment and
resource management. Areas under recurrent low biomass NDVI values
represent regions where the risk of unsustainable development is high,
especially if associated with high population pressure.
(c) Linkages to Other Indicators: The
interpretation of this indicator is strengthened if it is linked with the
other measures proposed for this Agenda 21 chapter. It is also linked to
other social, economic, and environmental indicators, such as population
growth rate, net migration rate, Gross Domestic Product per capita, land
use change, and land condition change.
(d) Targets: Not available.
(e) International Conventions and Agreements:
The following United Nations conventions are relevant to this indicator:
Convention to Combat Desertification; Framework Convention on Climate
Change; and Convention on Biological Biodiversity.
4. Methodological Description and Underlying
Definitions
(a) Underlying Definitions and Concepts: The
NDVI is a well known indicator measuring the amount and vigour of surface
vegetation. Its magnitude is related to the level of photosynthetic
activity in the monitored vegetation. In general, higher values of NDVI
indicate greater vigour and amounts of vegetation. The indicator is
usually presented in map form from a geographic information system
database. Its interpretation is enhanced if it is georeferenced with such
factors as rainfall and population pressure.
(b) Measurement Methods: The NDVI is
calculated using a ratio of the radiometric value obtained respectively
from the near infra red (NIR) and visible red (R) channels of low
resolution satellite data. It is represented by the formula:
NDVI =
NIR-R
NIR+R
It is computed every ten days from a series of
daily NDVI values at a resolution of 7.6 km at the global level, and at 1
km for some subregions or countries.
(c) The Indicator in the DSR Framework: This
indicator is a measure of the State of vegetation.
(d) Limitations of the Indicator: The
following limitations are associated with this indicator: (i) calibration
is needed to connect atmospheric disturbance and variation of sensor
sensitivity; (ii) correlation between NDVI and biomass remains coarse if
not correlated with vegetation maps and/or ground measurements; (iii)
problems exist in distinguishing very low vegetative cover from soil
background.
(e) Alternative Definitions: Not available.
5. Assessment of the Availability of Data from
International and National Sources
(a) Data Needed to Compile the Indicator:
Satellite data such as those from NOAA's AVHRR.
(b) Data Availability: Data are available
daily from the AVHRR satellites. Data from the Système Probatoire
d'Observation de la Terre (SPOT) 4 satellite (vegetation passenger data)
will be available in 1997.
(c) Data Sources: Data at the global scale
is available from NASA/NOAA or SPOT (from 1997). Data at higher resolution
are available for several countries and regions from various national or
regional remote sensing centres. The United Nations Food and Agriculture
Organization (FAO), in the framework of the Application Research and Test
for Emergency Management Intelligent Systems (ARTEMIS) project and several
remote sensing projects has data for Africa and the Near East.
6. Agencies Involved in the Development of the
Indicator
(a) Lead Agency: The lead agency for the
development of this indicator is the United Nations Food and Agriculture
Organization (FAO). The contact point is the Assistant Director General,
Sustainable Development Department, FAO; fax no. (39-6) 5225 3152.
(b) Other Organizations: The Agrhymet Centre
of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), and the Regional
Centre for Services in Surveying, Mapping and Remote Sensing (RCSSMRS) in
Kenya have been involved in the development of this indicator.
7. Further Information
Not available.
| LAND AFFECTED
BY DESERTIFICATION |
| Environmental |
Chapter 12 |
State |
1. Indicator
(a) Name: Land affected by desertification
(b) Brief Definition: This is a measure of the amount of land
affected by desertification and its proportion of national territory.
(c) Unit of Measurement: Area (Km2) and % of land area affected.
2. Placement in the Framework
(a) Agenda 21: Chapter 12: Managing Fragile
Ecosystems: Combating Desertification and Drought.
(b) Type of Indicator: State.
3. Significance (Policy Relevance)
(a) Purpose: The indicator describes the
extent and severity of desertification at the national level. It should
be: (i) a measure of the state of the problem at any one time; (ii) an
indication of the trend in the severity of the problem over time and
success of response mechanisms; and (iii) a means of comparing the
severity of the problem from one country to another.
(b) Relevance to Sustainable/Unsustainable
Development: The indicator should be a mechanism for determining the
importance of this issue at the national level. Trend data over time can
indicate success of response mechanisms. For dryland areas,
desertification is a central problem in sustainable development. While
many dryland ecosystems have generally low levels of absolute
productivity, maintenance of that productivity is critical to the present
and future livelihood of many hundreds of millions of people. Combating
desertification is the core of sustainable development for large areas of
the world. Severe degradation is a major impedent to sustainable
development; moderate or slight degradation is also a significant barrier.
(c) Linkages to Other Indicators: This state
and trends indicator needs to be considered in conjunction with related
driving force and response indicators, integrating physical and
socio-economic processes, for meaningful interpretation and policy
relevance at the national level. It is closely linked with indicators
concerning land use, such as area affected by soil erosion, deforestation,
use of marginal land, area affected by waterlogging and salinization,
protected area as a percent of total land area, area of land reclaimed,
and population living below the poverty line in dryland areas.
(d) Targets: No specific targets have been
defined, however, the goal should be to reduce the area and percentage of
land affected by desertification, and/or reduce the severity of
desertification.
(e) International Conventions and Agreements: The
two most significant agreements are: Agenda 21 of the 1992 UN Conference
on Environment and Development; and the UN Convention to Combat
Desertification, 1994.
4. Methodological Description and Underlying
Definitions
(a) Underlying Definitions and Concepts: For
the purposes of this indicator, desertification is defined as "land
degradation in arid, semi-arid, and dry sub-humid areas resulting from
various factors, including climatic variations and human activities"
(UN Convention to Combat Desertification, 1994). Land degradation means
reduction or loss, in arid, semi-arid and dry sub-humid areas of the
biological or economic productivity and complexity of rainfed cropland,
irrigated cropland, or range, pasture, forest and woodlands resulting from
land uses or from a process or combination of processes, including
processes arising from human activities and habitation patterns, such as:
(i) soil erosion caused by wind and/or water; (ii) deterioration of the
physical, chemical and biological or economic properties of soil; and,
(iii) long-term loss of natural vegetation. Land degradation, therefore,
includes processes which lead to surface salt accumulation and
waterlogging associated with salt-affected areas.
Arid, semi-arid, and dry sub-humid areas means
areas, other than polar and sub-polar regions, in which the ratio of
annual precipitation to potential evapotranspiration falls within the
range from 0.05 to 0.65 (UN Convention to Combat Desertification, 1994)
(b) Measurement Methods: Measurement for
this indicator initially requires an assessment of the extent of land
degradation throughout the arid, semi-arid, and dry sub-humid zones of the
nation. This is best done by a combination of previous assessments
represented in map form, carried out by the United Nations Environment
Programme (UNEP) with the United Nations Office to Combat Desertification
and Drought (UNSO), and the Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO); and
updates from a combination of remote sensing and local knowledge.
The creation of an index which combines degrees of
severity will require the following measures:
(i) Area subjected to severe land degradation xKm2
(severe here includes both the severe and very severe categories of
UNEP.
(ii) Area subjected to moderate land degradation yKm2.
(iii) Area subjected to slight land degradation = zKm2.
(iv) National area (excluding surface water bodies) nKm2.
(v) National area of drylands (vulnerable to desertification, assuming
that all drylands are potentially vulnerable to desertification.
Hyper-arid lands are excluded), consisting of arid, semi-arid, and dry
subhumid land = dKm2.
From the above measurements, the following sets of
numbers can be derived:
Indicator
computations:
a.
National area affected by desertification
=
x + y + zKm2
b.
Percent of national area affected by desertification
= x + y + z X 100
n
c.
Percentages of national area affected by severe, moderate and slight
desertification
respectively
can be calculated in the same way.
d.
Percent of national drylands affected by desertification
= x + y + z X 100
d
e.
National area not affected by desertification
= n - (x + y +z)Km2
f.
National dryland area not affected by desertification
= d - (x + y + z)Km2
Trends can be determined by comparing results
computed for a sequence of years (for example., every five years).
A useful extension of the indicator would be for
countries to report dryland areas (d) as a percentage of all
agriculturally productive areas (e=n-hyper arid land) to give an
indication of the overall vulnerability of the country to desertification.
While it is based on a combination of analytical
and subjective assessment, if these are done systematically on an annual
basis, a sound data base can be developed. Given the importance of
determining the extent and severity of desertification to the index, it
may be that a periodic special survey using remote sensing and ground
assessment may be important, though this may only be technically feasible
for some countries.
An important issue in the basis measurement of
degradation is the factors which are measured to assess the degree of
local degradation. As Bie (1990) clearly points out, the two factors of
productivity and resilience are the most important elements in assessing
the existence and the extent of dryland degradation. Accurate measurement
of land affected by desertification is a problem about which there is not
yet complete consensus and further work needs to be done to agree on a
comparable methodology for the various countries affected by
desertification (UNEP, Atlas of Desertification; UNEP/ISRIC/ISS/FAO,
Global Assessment of the Status of Human-induced Soil Degradation (GLASOD))
.
(c) The Indicator in the DSR Framework: This
is an indicator of State as it provides an assessment of the extent of
land degradation in desertification prone environments.
(d) Limitations of the Indicator: There are
a number of issues to be resolved before this indicator can be entirely
satisfactory. The ecosystems addressed in this definition undergo cyclic
episodes of more or less rainfall, as well as long-term degradation in
many cases. Separating short-term fluctuations from longer-term trends is
important, though scientists often find this difficult to determine,
except for longer time periods. Also, UNEP has generally defined
desertification (degradation) in categories (severe, moderate, slight),
and a national indicator needs to include an assessment of this kind. It
has been a practice to include problems of waterlogging and salinization
as part of desertification, if they occur within the ecosystems as defined
above. In this case the area affected by these problems should also be
included in the desertified area.
Because of these issues, the indicator may well
benefit from further refinement and definition. The concepts of land
degradation in arid, semi-arid, and dry sub-humid areas are well defined
and described in a number of UNSO, UNEP, and other UN publications, as
well as in the academic literature. The translation of these concepts into
agreed national level indicators has not been so well articulated. (Mabbutt,
J.A. 1986; Maimuet 1991).
(e) Alternative Definitions: Not available.
5. Assessment of the Availability of Data from
International and National Sources
The data needed to complete the indicator are the
extent and severity of dryland degradation in the country concerned, the
dryland area, and national area (excluding surface water bodies). The
degree of accuracy and reliability of both spatial and statistical data
varies considerably and are often poorly documented and/or out of date.
For some countries the data do not yet exist. Dryland and national areas
can be obtained from national statistical institutions and publications,
and can also be found in standard World Resources Institute (WRI), UN and
World Bank publications. Some data on extent and degree of land
degradation are available at the country level in national institutions or
from non-government organizations, in donor countries, and in publications
of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP)/UNSO, UNEP, FAO and
other international institutions.
6. Agencies Involved in the Development of the
Indicator
(a) Lead Agency: The lead agency is the
Office to Combat Desertification and Drought (UNSO) of UNDP. The contact
point is the Director, UNSO; fax no. (1 212) 906 6345.
(b) Other Organizations: Other contributing
organizations include: UNEP, FAO, Consultative Group on International
Agricultural Research (CGIAR), International Fund for Agricultural
Development (FAD), ISRIC, the International Union for the Conservation of
Nature (ACNE), and selected national governments.
7. Further Information
(a) Further Readings:
Bie, Stein W. 1990. Dryland Degradation Measurement
Techniques, World Bank, Environment Work Paper No. 26, 42 p.
Dregre, H., Kassas M. and Rozanov, B. 1991 "A
new assessment of the world status of desertification."
Desertification Control Bulletin 20. p. 6-18.
Dumanski, J. And Pieri, C. 1994. "Comparison
of available frameworks for development of land quality indicators."
Agr. Tech. Div., World Bank. p. 14.
Mabbutt, J.A. 1986. "Desertification
Indicators." Climatic Change 9. P. 113-122.
Mainguet, M. 1991 Desertification: Natural
Background and Human Mismanagement. Springer-Verlag, Berlin. 306 p.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and
Development. 1991. Environmental Indicators: a Preliminary Set. OECD.
Paris. 77 p.
O'Connor, J. et al. 1995. Monitoring Environmental
Progress (Draft). World Bank. 72 p.
UNDP/UNSO and NRI. 1995. Development of
Desertification Indicators for Field Level Implementation. 53 p.
UNEP. 1992. World Atlas of Desertification. Edward
Arnold. London.
UNEP. 1994. United Nations Convention to Combat
Desertification in those countries experiencing drought and/or
desertification, particularly in Africa. Text with Annexes. 71 p.
UNEP/ISRIC. 1988. Guidelines for General Assessment
of the Status of Human-induced Soil Degradation (GLASOD).
UNEP/ISRIC. 1990. World Map of the Status of
Human-induced Soil Degradation: An Explanatory Note (GLASOD).
UNEP/ISRIC. 1991. World Map of the Status of
Human-induced Soil Degradation. (GLASOD).
UNEP/ISRIC/ISSS/FAO. 1995. Global and National
Soils and Terrain Digital Databases (SOTER), Procedures Manual (revised
edition). ISBN 90-6672-059-X.
UNEP/Netherlands National Institute of Public
Health and Environment (RIVM). 1994. An Overview of Environmental
Indicators: State of the art and perspective. UNEP/EATR.94-01:RIVM/402001001.
Environmental Assessment Sub-Programme, UNEP, Nairobi. ISBN 92-807-1427-9.
WB/FAO/UNDP/UNEP. In print. Land Quality
Indicators. World Bank Discussion Papers.
(b) Other References:
See section 7a above.
(c) Status of the Methodology: The
methodology for the compilation of the above statistics has not yet been
agreed upon by any inter-governmental fora, however negotiations are
underway. It has therefore the status of a recommendation for guidelines.
|
