The MA report shows that its undeniable that the human impact on the world’s ecosystems is large. For example, agriculture covers roughly 1/4 of the Earth’s land surface.
The extent of cultivated ecosystems across the globe.
There are a whack of news articles on the MA (e.g. BBC, Christian Science Monitor, SciDev.Net & Guardian)However, most of the focus is on the eco doom and gloom side of the reports (which is real) but is neglecting the more positive side of the report, which talks about what people can do and are doing to make things better. In particular how changes in ecological management can improve the economic productivity of ecosystems as well as the human well being of people who live in them. Also, I think, is the discussion of the strengths & weakenss of different approaches – and where and in what way technological and institutional changes appear to be most likely to be successful or unsuccessful is novel and useful. This issue is discussed further in a post on WorldChanging
For example, the MA scenarios present four different stories about the future. In several of the supply of many ecosystem services are improved (See figure blow).
The relative pros and cons of different approaches to social-ecological problems will be covered more in the focussed synthesis reports – for health, business, etc as well as in the full reports: Scenarios, Response Options, and sub-global reports of the MA, which will be released in the summer. But there is still some interesting stuff summarized in the main synthesis document (it is after all 200+ pages).