Women and wetlands: closing the gender gap

Women play a central role in the use, conservation and management of wetlands. For centuries, women have developed symbiotic relationships with wetlands, using them to provide water, food, medicine and income for their families, yet at the same time managing them in a wise and sustainable way so that they can benefit future generations.

However, we are not fully benefiting from this knowledge. Women have much to contribute as stewards, managers and decision-makers to the numerous initiatives globally and nationally that are underway to address the drivers of wetland loss and reverse the negative trends.

64% of the world’s wetlands have been lost since the 1900’s and degradation continues at alarming rates world-wide, putting at risk the livelihoods of women and men who depend on wetlands as well as local and national economies.

Women and girls are responsible for water collection in 80% of households without direct access to water. In the agriculture sector of most developing countries, women make up 43% of the labour force and in some countries this rises to 70%.

Today on 8 March, International Women’s Day, we are reminded that whilst there has been some progress to achieve gender equality, notably through a specific Sustainable Development Goal focused on the empowerment of women and girls, gender inequality still persists worldwide and this makes women vulnerable. Women are 14 times more likely to die from climate change related disasters such as drought or flooding.

Therefore, we need to press for progress within all the sustainable development goals and accelerate actions to recognize the role of women and wetlands. To close this gender gap, it is important to actively empower and facilitate the full participation of women in matters of wetland governance, remove barriers that deny them equitable access, as well as gather data on the impact of policies and decisions specifically on women.

The Ramsar Convention on Wetlands, to which 170 countries are parties, provides a global legal framework for the conservation and sustainable use of all wetlands. The Parties already recognize the importance of considering gender and social issues when managing wetlands. The Convention is therefore a fundamental platform from which to augment action from local to global levels to empower women and achieve gender equality.

A gender approach to wetland conservation is essential to reverse the worrying trends of wetland degradation and indispensable to achieve sustainable and equitable development for all.

Photo Credits: Justin Kernoghan

Arctic peatlands, glacier forelands, rivers, lakes, wet tundras, seashores and shallow bays make up the largest part of the Arctic (at least 60% of the surface) and constitute a significant part of the world’s wetlands and freshwater resources. Arctic wetlands store enormous amounts of carbon in frozen peat and soil, as long as the insulation by an undisturbed peat layer is preventing the underlying permafrost from melting.
 
Accelerated climate change in the Arctic provokes rapid environmental change, easier access to oil and gas, minerals and fisheries, This threatens ecosystems through the retreat of sea ice, permafrost thawing, atmospheric warming, habitat fragmentation, de-synchronisation of predator-prey life cycles, overharvesting of wildlife and of globally migratory bird and mammal populations, and ocean acidification (factors highlighted in UNEP’s “view from the top” in 2013).
 
The best available scientific and traditional ecological knowledge on Arctic ecosystems was recently compiled by over 260 experts in the Arctic Biodiversity Assessment (ABA) and published by the working group on the Conservation of Arctic Flora and Fauna (CAFF) of the Arctic Council (the high-level intergovernmental forum of eight Arctic countries and six indigenous peoples’ organisations). On 2-4 December 2014, CAFF and the Norwegian Environment Agency hosted the Arctic Biodiversity Congress in Trondheim as an important follow-up to the Arctic Biodiversity Assessment. More than 400 scientists, civil servants, administrators, business partners, and environmentalists gathered to discuss and advise how best to implement the ABA recommendations at national and international levels, as part of the CAFF implementation plan 2013-2021. An illustrated report on the congress was published by the IISD reporting services.
 
The link between changes in the Arctic and the rest of our planet is easily illustrated by birds that depend on the Arctic tundra to breed, but spend the rest of the year on migration across the globe. CAFF has started a project, the Arctic Migratory Birds Initiative (AMBI), to address urgent conservation needs of declining migratory bird populations in the Arctic, and beyond along their migration routes, e.g. by conserving the tidal flats of the Yellow Sea, important refuelling sites for the critically endangered spoon-billed sandpiper and other Arctic migrating shorebirds. With the help of the Arctic Council’s diplomacy, CAFF aims to provide an international forum to convince the countries at lower latitudes to find sustainable solutions to these problems.
 
For Ramsar Parties, the Arctic Biodiversity Congress was a timely opportunity to promote a draft resolution for COP12 taking place in June 2015 in Uruguay. Finland is submitting the draft, with support from Wetlands International, WWF International and other Arctic countries, on “undertaking an inventory of polar and subpolar wetlands”. The resolution highlights the global importance of the biodiversity and freshwater resources supported by these wetlands and calls for Ramsar Parties, together with CAFF, biodiversity-related conventions, IPBES and other organisations, to undertake an inventory and assessment of polar and subpolar wetlands, some of them already designated as Ramsar Sites in the Arctic and Sub-Antarctic regions.

This statement from the Scientific Task Force on Avian Influenza and Wild Birds released 3 December 2014, is in response to the recent H5N8 HPAI developments (November 2014) to inform stakeholders in governments, poultry sector, disease control, wildlife management, site management and conservation sectors about the potential interaction between wild birds and H5N8 HPAI virus and appropriate ways of taking action.

Key messages

1. Highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) outbreaks are most frequently associated with intensive domestic poultry production and associated trade and marketing systems.
2. In 2014 multiple outbreaks of H5N8 HPAI occurred in domestic poultry in the Republic of Korea with subsequent outbreaks in Japan, China, Germany, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom. Most detections have been at relatively biosecure poultry production facilities but with some detections in wild bird species – with wild birds possibly being infected by poultry and vice versa.
3. Typically, spread of HPAI virus is via contaminated poultry, poultry products and inanimate objects although wild birds may also play a role.
4. The Scientific Task Force on Avian Influenza and Wild Birds, co-convened by the United Nations Environment Programme/Convention on Migratory Species (UNEP/CMS) and the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), urges agencies and organisations to:

• conduct thorough epidemiological evaluation to determine the true source of the virus including possible transmission through national and international poultry trade, and mechanisms of transmission among domestic and wild birds;
• regardless of the source of infection, focus disease control actions on affected farms, with the aim of minimising the risk of disease spread to other poultry farms and/or wildlife, ensuring that affected and nearby farms are biosecure to prevent wildlife-poultry contact;
• ensure there is no consideration of killing of wild birds or negatively affecting wetland habitats  as disease control measures; and
• recognise that focussing attention on wild birds, to the exclusion of other potential viral vectors, can misdirect critical resources away from effective disease control and result in continued spread among poultry populations and economic losses to farmers and national income, as well as negative conservation outcomes and loss of biodiversity.

Current situation

Publications report the detection of H5N8 HPAI virus in domestic poultry in China in 2010 . In mid-January 2014, the Republic of Korea reported the first of a large number of poultry outbreaks of H5N8 HPAI in chickens, domestic ducks and domestic geese. The virus was then responsible for outbreaks in poultry in Japan (April 2014), in China (September 2014), and more recently (November 2014) in closed and semi-closed poultry productions systems in Germany, then the Netherlands and United Kingdom.

During the numerous Republic of Korea outbreaks, in early 2014, a number of wild birds were reported as having died from H5N8 HPAI including Baikal Teal (Anas formosa) and Bean Geese (Anser fabalis) with isolations subsequently from a range of waterbird species including Common Coot (Fulica atra), Tundra Swan (Cygnus columbianus), Greater White-fronted Goose (Anser albifrons), Mallard (Anas platyrhynchos), Common Teal (Anas crecca) and Chinese Spot-billed Duck (Anas zonorhyncha).

 In November 2014, the virus was isolated from faecal samples from two Tundra Swans in Japan. The first wild bird detection in Europe was from a Common Teal shot on 16th November approximately 50km from the German poultry outbreak reported on 6th November, with the Netherlands reporting the virus in faecal samples from two Eurasian Wigeon (Anas penelope) on 1st December.

What is the role of wild birds in H5N8 HPAI?

 Prior to the Chinese report of the virus in poultry in 2010, global wild bird surveillance efforts have not detected this particular strain of avian influenza virus in wild birds. It seems likely that the virus originated in poultry and has probably been able to spill into wild birds and back into poultry, with more typical anthropogenic transmission routes involved too. Although this remains speculative, such a pattern was also seen with H5N1 HPAI virus.

With respect to the western European H5N8 HPAI poultry outbreaks, investigations are underway to try to determine the source of the virus. There is speculation that the virus has been spread from eastern Asia via wild birds. Firstly, it should be noted that direct migration by wild birds from eastern Asia (e.g. China or Korea) to western Europe would be highly unusual. Flyways are characteristically ‘north – south’ (with some areas of ‘overlap’ of contiguous flyways at higher latitudes), and water birds breeding in northeast Asia tend to migrate southwards into east and southeast Asia, and not into Europe. Movement of the virus from eastern Asia into western Europe via wild birds within an apparently short timeframe would be extraordinary, particularly in the absence of extreme weather conditions during this time.  

Over longer time frames and breeding seasons there would be a possibility of westward movement of circulating AI viruses moving between contiguous populations and flyways. In this scenario, even in regions where wild bird surveillance data are lacking, it might be expected that poultry outbreaks of the virus would have occurred across Eurasia if this virus was circulating widely in wild birds. To date, this has not happened, and the potential remains for anthropogenic introduction of the virus, to any part of the world, including Europe, with subsequent spread to wild birds.

H5N8 and human health

Unlike H5N1 HPAI, H5N8 has not been shown to infect humans and, on the basis of current knowledge, it is considered a low public health risk although appropriate hygiene measures should be taken.

What actions should be taken?

Poultry farms and markets

 In accordance with FAO and OIE guidance, most H5N8 HPAI disease control measures should focus on poultry farms and bird markets including quarantine, stamping out, strict biosecurity, cleaning and disinfection, and trade and movement restrictions. If implemented properly, these steps will help control outbreaks and prevent the spread of the virus. Outreach and communication allied industries of the poultry sector would be indispensable for compliance and preventing economic losses.

Wild birds

To protect wild birds and prevent them from being involved in any onward spread of virus, all efforts should be taken at poultry farms and during disease control operations to reduce environmental contamination and risks to wild birds, particularly in wetland areas which can be particularly sensitive and contain susceptible bird species.

Measures should be taken to keep wild birds away from the infected farms e.g. by reducing any attractants such as food and open water, and, where appropriate, increasing deterrents such as scaring devices (e.g. flags) in the immediate vicinity of affected farms. Away from affected farms, disturbance to wild birds should be minimised, to allow them to remain in these lower risk areas.

Despite a recent publication on H5N8  suggesting otherwise, killing wild birds should not be considered as a control measure as this is diversionary, impractical, inefficient and contrary to the advice of all the major animal health agencies.  Similarly, negatively affecting wild bird habitat, by e.g. applying disinfectants to the natural environment including wetlands, is not advisable, as this is ineffective against the virus and can harm the environment, wildlife and fisheries. Such measures are also contrary to conservation commitments accepted by Contracting Parties to both the Convention on Migratory Species and the Ramsar Convention on wetlands.

Disproportionately blaming wild birds for the introduction and spread of HPAI viruses, to the exclusion of other possible routes of transmission (as has happened during previous outbreaks of H5N1 HPAI), can lead to less focused disease control activities, potential spread of virus and dismissal of accountability of responsibilities. The media, academics and human and animal health agencies are requested to act responsibly when considering the role of wild birds in avian influenza, and avoid implicating them as the source of the virus if the evidence does not support this. 

About The Scientific Task Force on Avian Influenza and Wild Birds

The United Nations Environment Programme/Convention on Migratory Species (UNEP/CMS) and Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) co-convened the Scientific Task Force on Avian Influenza and Wild Birds in 2005. It works as a communication and coordination network and continues to review the role of wild birds in the epidemiology of AI and the impact of the disease on wild birds, promoting a balanced opinion based on currently available evidence.

Task Force observers include the United Nations Environment Programme, World Health Organisation and World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE). Task Force members include FAO, CMS, and African Eurasian Waterbird Agreement, BirdLife International, Ecohealth Alliance, International Council for Game and Wildlife Conservation, Ramsar Convention, Royal Veterinary College, Wetlands International, and Wildfowl & Wetlands Trust. 

Further Information

OIE: H5N8 Q&A

http://www.oie.int/en/for-the-media/press-releases/detail/article/questions-and-answers-on-high-pathogenic-h5n8-avian-influenza-strain-update-27112014/

FAO:This FAO Manual provides practical guidance for wild bird surveillance techniques:

http://www.fao.org/docrep/010/a1521e/a1521e00.htm

Ramsar Convention: The Ramsar Wetland Disease Manual provides specific practical guidance on preventing and controlling avian influenza and a range of other wetland-related disease issues:

http://www.wwt.org.uk/rwdm

http://strp.ramsar.org/strp-publications/ramsar-technical-reports/rtr-no.7-ramsar-wetland-disease-manual-guidelines-for-assessment-monitoring-and-management-of-animal-disease-in-wetlands-2012

Ramsar’s Handbook on avian influenza and wetlands provides a major source of information, including a risk assessment for wetland managers and dealing with the media: http://www.ramsar.org/sites/default/files/documents/pdf/lib/hbk4-04.pdf

Multilateral Environmental Agreements on HPAI from Ramsar Convention, Convention on Migratory Species and the African Eurasian Waterbird Agreement:

http://www.ramsar.org/sites/default/files/documents/pdf/res/key_res_x_21_e.pdf

http://www.ramsar.org/sites/default/files/documents/pdf/res/key_res_ix_23_e.pdf

http://www.cms.int/sites/default/files/document/Res_9_08_Wildlife_Disease_En.pdf

http://www.cms.int/sites/default/files/document/CP8Res_8_27_Avian_Influenza_eng_0.pdf

http://www.unep-aewa.org/sites/default/files/document/res4_15_responding_threat_ai_final_0.doc

 Photo credits: ©Yvette Lee 2009

Recommendation 2.1 (1984) urged Parties to submit detailed National Reports (NRs) to the Secretariat at least six months before each ordinary meeting of the Conference, and this tradition has continued unbroken to this day.

National Reports provide:

• a valuable overview of national experiences,
• continuous monitoring of the implementation of the Convention, 
• a means of sharing information relating to wetland conservation measures that have been taken, any problems that may have arisen, and appropriate solutions to such problems.

The National Reports are submitted in one of the three official languages.

See the National Reports in the Ramsar Library.