المنتدى العالمي المعني بالأمن الغذائي والتغذية

Dear Mr. Kasareka,

There is a good case for merging indicators 2 (protected areas) and 4 (areas managed for soil and water protection) as in many cases the regimes are similar and there is a lot of overlap.  Most areas protected for biodiversity also protect against erosion.  Also in many countries, all forests are managed for protection of soil and water (see the latest study on State of Europe’s Forests, where several countries point out that all forests are meant to provide protection for soil and water).  The problem here is that such a merger leaves one of the seven thematic elements (on the protective functions of forests) without its own dedicated indicator.  Is that acceptable?  What do the contributors think?

Thanks again

Kit Prins

Moderator