IMPROVING THE ENABLING ENVIRONMENT TO COMBAT LAND DEGRADATION: INSTITUTIONAL, FINANCIAL, LEGAL AND SCIENCE-POLICY CHALLENGES AND SOLUTIONS M. AKHTAR-SCHUSTER 1 * , R.J. THOMAS 2 , L.C. STRINGER 3 , P. CHASEK 4,5y AND M. SEELY 6 1 Secretariat DesertNet International (DNI), c/o Biocentre Klein Flottbek and Botanical Garden, University of Hamburg, Ohnhorststr.18, 22609 Hamburg, Germany 2 United Nations University Institute for Water, Environment and Health (UNU-INWEH), 175 Longwood Road South, Suite 204, Hamilton, ON L8P 0A1, Canada 3 Sustainability Research Institute, School of Earth and Environment, University of Leeds, Woodhouse Lane, Leeds LS2 9JT, UK 4 Earth Negotiations Bulletin, Reporting Services, International Institute for Sustainable Development 5 Manhattan College, 300 East 56th Street #11A, New York, NY, 10022, USA 6 Desert Research Foundation of Namibia, P O Box 20232, Windhoek, Namibia Received 2 February 2010; Revised 1 July 2010; Accepted 21 September 2010 ABSTRACT The need to mainstream land degradation issues into national policies and frameworks is encouraged by international mechanisms such as the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD) and the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs, 2000). However, main- streaming has faced a number of interrelated institutional, financial, legal, knowledge and policy barriers. As such, despite 15 years of existence of the UNCCD, successes in reversing and/or preventing land degradation arewidely perceived to be limited. This paper highlights the nature of these barriers to mainstreaming and identifies ways in which specific limitations that hamper mainstreaming of land degradation into national, regional and international activities and policies may be overcome. It also identifies institutional infrastructures through which scientific findings may more effectively enter policy, suggesting that scientific bodies are required to strategise, coordinate and stimulate the global scientific research community to support mainstreaming and the up-scaling of efforts to combat land degradation. Such a scientific body could also stimulate national cross-sectoral and multi-stakeholder knowledge exchange. The paper then moves to the national level to examine mainstreaming processes in Namibia, a country particularly advanced in taking a more integrated approach. Although the Namibia case study shows an impressive degree of integration, there are still many lessons to be learned in order to further strengthen mainstreaming processes. These lessons form the basis of our conclusion and recommendations, which outline a potential way forward. Copyright # 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. key words: mainstreaming; institutions; policy; land degradation; desertification; science-policy interface; UNCCD INTRODUCTION Advances in the scientific understanding and prevention of land degradation 1 in recent years (e.g. Geist and Lambin, 2004; Reynolds et al., 2007; Mortimer, 2009) have progressed significantly further than advances in under- standing the institutional, sectoral, financial, legal and knowledge barriers to combating land degradation and achieving Sustainable Land Management (SLM) (Bauer, 2006; UNCCD, 2009; Akhtar-Schuster et al., 2010). This is despite acknowledgement that land degradation is an important barrier to sustainable development that cuts across multiple sectors, disciplines, actors and interest groups (WCED, 1987; Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA), 2005). Given the continuing trends in increasing land degradation (MA, 2005) and its pronounced links with climate change, biodiversity loss, poverty, health, food, water and energy insecurity, as well as human displacement, there is an urgency to mainstream land issues into national cross-sectoral policies and international negotiations. It is also important to achieve synergetic outcomes offering multiple benefits for several multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs), including the United Nations Frame- work Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), Conven- land degradation & development Land Degrad. Develop. 22: 299–312 (2011) Published online 21 November 2010 in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com) DOI: 10.1002/ldr.1058 * Correspondence to: M. Akhtar-Schuster, Secretariat DesertNet Inter- national (DNI), c/o Biocentre Klein Flottbek and Botanical Garden, Uni- versity of Hamburg, Ohnhorststr.18, 22609 Hamburg, Germany. E-mail: makhtar-schuster@botanik.uni-hamburg.de y Executive Editor in Earth Negotiations Bulletin and Associate Professor in Manhattan College, New York, NY. 1 In this paper, the term ‘land degradation’ should be taken to include desertification i.e. ‘land degradation in drylands’ as defined by the UNCCD (1994). We use land degradation more broadly to include non-dryland areas too. Similarly the term ‘sustainable land management’ applies globally. This is consistent with recent statements from UNCCD that ‘a new under- standing of the convention has emerged over the past 10 years which combines the priority given to the drylands and Africa with recognition that the tools and policies promoted by the convention are relevant to SLM globally’. (http://www.unccd.int/publicinfo/announce/docs/lgGTZ.pdf, ac- cessed on 9 March 2010). It is also consistent with the fact that the UNCCD is an international convention. Copyright # 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.