Enhancing implementation of the Convention on Biological Diversity: A novel peer-review mechanism aims to promote accountability and mutual learning

This Article 26 of the Nagoya Protocol discusses the basic rules for the functioning of the Conference of the Parties (COP)/Meeting of the Parties (MOP), and its relationship with the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) COP. The Protocol's governing body comprises representatives of all States that are Party to the Nagoya Protocol. It meets on a periodic basis. Article 26 thus details, in a self-explanatory manner, who is entitled to participate in the COP/MOP meetings, its bureau, the COP/MOP functions, the rules of procedure, and meetings arrangements. Article 26, similarly to the Biosafety Protocol, clarifies the relationship between the Protocol's governing body and the CBD COP. Since the Nagoya Protocol is a separate legal instrument, the functions of the COP/MOP differ to some extent from those of the CBD COP, and the membership of the two bodies is not necessarily the same.Keywords: Conference of the Parties (COP); Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD); Meeting of the Parties (MOP); Nagoya Protocol; Protocol's governing body

The ecosystem approach—as endorsed by the Convention on Biological Diversity (CDB) in 2000—is a strategy for holistic, sustainable, and equitable natural resource management, to be implemented via the 12 Malawi Principles. These principles describe the need to manage nature in terms of dynamic ecosystems, while fully engaging with local peoples. It is an ambitious concept. Today, the term is common throughout the research and policy literature on environmental management. However, multiple meanings have been attached to the term, resulting in confusion. We reviewed references to the ecosystem approach from 1957 to 2012 and identified 3 primary uses: as an alternative to ecosystem management or ecosystem-based management; in reference to an integrated and equitable approach to resource management as per the CBD; and as a term signifying a focus on understanding and valuing ecosystem services. Although uses of this term and its variants may overlap in meaning, typically, they do not entirely reflect the ethos of the ecosystem approach as defined by the CBD. For example, there is presently an increasing emphasis on ecosystem services, but focusing on these alone does not promote decentralization of management or use of all forms of knowledge, both of which are integral to the CBD’s concept. We highlight that the Malawi Principles are at risk of being forgotten. To better understand these principles, more effort to implement them is required. Such efforts should be evaluated, ideally with comparative approaches, before allowing the CBD’s concept of holistic and socially engaged management to be abandoned or superseded. It is possible that attempts to implement all 12 principles together will face many challenges, but they may also offer a unique way to promote holistic and equitable governance of natural resources. Therefore, we believe that the CBD’s concept of the ecosystem approach demands more attention.La Necesidad de Desenredar Conceptos Clave del Argot Ambiente-EstrategiaResumenLa estrategia ambiental – como es promocionada por la Convención Biológica sobre Diversidad en 2000 – es una estrategia para un manejo holístico, sustentable y equitativo de recursos naturales, que habrá de implementarse por vía de los 12 Principios de Malawi. Estos principios describen la necesidad de manejar la naturaleza en términos de ecosistemas dinámicos, mientras se compromete totalmente con las personas locales. Es un concepto ambicioso. Hoy en día, el término es común en la investigación y la literatura de políticas sobre el manejo ambiente. Sin embargo, se han relacionado múltiples significados con el término, lo que resulta en confusión. Revisamos referencias a la estrategia ambiental de 1957 a 2012 e identificamos tres usos principales: como una alternativa para manejo ambiental o basado en ecosistemas; en referencia a una estrategia integrada y equitativa para el manejo de recursos según la CBD; y como un término que indica un enfoque en el entendimiento y la valuación de los servicios ambientales. Aunque los usos de este término y sus variantes pueden traslaparse en su significado, típicamente no reflejan en su totalidad los valores de la estrategia ambiental como fue definida por la CBD. Por ejemplo, actualmente hay un énfasis creciente en los servicios ambientales, pero enfocarse solamente en estos no promueve la descentralización del manejo o el uso de todas las formas de conocimiento, siendo ambas integrales para el concepto de la CBD. Resaltamos que los Principios de Malawi están en riesgo de ser olvidados. Para entender mejor estos principios, se requiere de más esfuerzo para implementarlos. Dichos esfuerzos deben ser evaluados, idóneamente con estrategias comparativas, antes de permitir que el concepto de la CBD de manejo holístico y comprometido socialmente sea abandonado o reemplazado. Es posible que los intentos por implementar los 12 principios juntos enfrentarán muchos obstáculos, pero también pueden ofrecer una forma única de promover el gobierno holístico y equitativo de los recursos naturales. Así, creemos que el concepto de estrategia ambiental de la CBD exige mayor atención.

A new international initiative for plant conservation was first called for as a resolution of the International Botanical Congress in 1999. The natural home for such an initiative was considered to be the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), and the Conference of the Parties (COP) to the CBD agreed to consider a Global Strategy for Plant Conservation (GSPC) at its 5th meeting in 2000. It was proposed that the GSPC could provide an innovative model approach for target setting within the CBD and, prior to COP5, a series of inter-sessional papers on proposed targets and their justification were developed by plant conservation experts. Key factors that ensured the adoption of the GSPC by the CBD in 2002 included: (1) ensuring that prior to and during COP5, key Parties in each region were supportive of the Strategy; (2) setting targets at the global level and not attempting to impose these nationally; and (3) the offer by Botanic Gardens Conservation International (BGCI) to support a GSPC position in the CBD Secretariat for 3 years, which provided a clear indication of the support for the GSPC from non-governmental organizations (NGO).

Article 27 of the Nagoya Protocol establishes the institutional and procedural linkages between the Protocol and the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). The article 27 addresses: the performance of functions by subsidiary bodies of the CBD in relation to the Protocol; which States are entitled to participate in the proceedings of subsidiary bodies; and who is entitled to act as an officer of a subsidiary body. Notably, the Nagoya Protocol foresees the possibility that CBD subsidiary bodies will support the work of the Nagoya Protocol Conference of the Parties (COP) serving as the Meeting of the Parties (MOP) to the Nagoya Protocol, without the need for a decision to this end to be taken by the COP/MOP. The CBD subsidiary bodies, such as the Working Group on Review of Implementation or the Working Group on Article 8(j) on traditional knowledge, could address issues related to the implementation of the Protocol.Keywords: Conference of the Parties (COP); Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD); Meeting of the Parties (MOP); Nagoya Protocol; subsidiary bodies

Article 28 of the Nagoya Protocol, which mirrors the corresponding provision of the Biosafety Protocol, makes provision for the Secretariat of the Protocol, which is responsible to administer the treaty and to act as day-to-day contact point for its Parties, international organizations and others. The Secretariat also prepares documentation for meetings of the governing and subsidiary bodies of the Protocol. The Secretariat's tasks also include the preparation of reports on the execution of its functions under the Protocol for consideration by the Conference of the Parties (COP) serving as the Meeting of the Parties (MOP) to the Nagoya Protocol. The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) Secretariat will also perform the functions of the Secretariat for the Protocol, as is customary in multilateral environmental agreements for cost-efficiency reasons. The Article 28 also addresses the separation of costs incurred by the Secretariat for its services for the Protocol rather than for the CBD.Keywords: Conference of the Parties (COP); Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD); Meeting of the Parties (MOP); Nagoya Protocol; Secretariat

Health in global biodiversity governance: what is next?

Post-2020 aspirations for biodiversity

Societal Impact StatementThe international conservation of biological diversity is addressed under the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and goals for the next decade will be discussed at the next Conference of the Parties. One issue under negotiation in the CBD is Digital Sequence Information (DSI), which has created tension between parties calling for preserving open access to DSI who also note its importance in addressing biodiversity and the UN Sustainable Development Goals and those parties calling for fair and equitable benefit sharing from DSI. This article introduces scientists to the current debate and political process on DSI within the CBD.SummaryMost biologists take open access to sequence data for granted. This open system, while a hallmark of innovation and collaboration for the scientific community, is being called into question as some parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) assert that this access undermines their sovereign rights over their genetic resources and corresponding benefit sharing. The governance of sequence data and potentially other types of biological data, known in international policy circles as “Digital Sequence Information” (DSI), a placeholder term invented by negotiators, could be dramatically altered and ultimately change the way scientific research and publishing on sequence data is conducted. Many sequence‐using scientists are unfamiliar with the international political processes around DSI even though it could lead to irreversible decisions that might have significant impacts on research. This paper bridges that gap by providing an overview of the ongoing political process with a focus on the most recent studies on DSI commissioned by the Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity (SCBD) and what these studies forecast about the political debate. With this information in hand, the scientific community can hopefully better engage with the political process and proactively promote evidence‐based decisions or even solutions that can bridge the demand for benefit sharing with the scientific need for open access to DSI.

زمینه و هدف: یکی از ساختارهای مهم بین المللی که نقش زیادی در توسعه نهادی حقوق بین الملل محیط زیست داشته است، اعضای معاهدات زیست محیطی به شمار می آید. با این همه، جایگاه و مشروعیت وضع مقررات زیست محیطی، توسعه و تضییق الزامات و تعهدات مندرج در معاهدات زیست محیطی توسط و اجرای تصمیمات و مصوبات آن، از مسائل حقوقی مهم می‌باشد که کمتر به آن پرداخته شده است. در این پژوهش تلاش شده است تا جایگاه حقوقی و نقش اعضای معاهدات زیست محیطی در توسعه حقوق بین الملل محیط زیست مورد بحث و بررسی های حقوقی قرار گیرد. روش بررسی : این تحقیق مبتنی بر روش تجزیه و تحلیل استقرایی حقوقی است. بر اساس این روش، برخی از معاهدات زیست محیطی از دهه 1970 تا به امروز که دربردارنده ساختار هستند، گردآوری، تجزیه ، تحلیل و مورد بررسی حقوقی قرار گرفته است. یافته ها و نتایج : این پژوهش، ضمن بررسی فرصتها و ظرفیتهای حقوقی کنفرانس اعضا در توسعه حقوق بین الملل محیط زیست، نتیجه گیری کرد که اعضای معاهدات زیست محیطی همچنان با ناکارآمدی‌ها و خلأهای حقوقی و اجرایی مواجه هستند و در نهایت، راهکارها و پیشنهاداتی در جهت جبران خلأهای فراروی ساختار ارائه گردید.

In contrast to the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD) and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) gives developing countries greater bargaining power owing to their abundant natural resources. CBD negotiations tend to be increasingly dominated by agendas related to the CBD’s third objective: benefit sharing. The first and core objective of CBD is biodiversity conservation, but it is often neglected in favor of benefit sharing. To verify this tendency, this study used topic modeling to analyze the recommendations of the subsidiary bodies and decisions made by the Conference of the Parties (COP) over the past 30 years. The study identified the ten most frequently discussed agenda, then determined the relative dominant agenda between the COP and subsidiary bodies. By categorizing the negotiation agendas into strategic decision agendas and operational conservation agendas based on the level of the meeting which the agenda dominated, this study offers a new framework that can be used to understand how strategic and operational factors interact in CBD negotiations. The findings show that biodiversity conservation, the first objective of CBD, is no longer dominant, at least during negotiations. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first comprehensive investigation of all documents generated during CBD negotiations since its inception.

At the 10th Conference of the Parties (CoP) of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) in 2010. the so-called Aichi Biodiversity Targets were adopted. In Target 11, states are to use protected areas and ‘other effective area-based conservation measures’ (OECMs) to achieve quantitative goals of biodiversity protection. However, only at CoP14 in 2018 a definition of OECMs was put in place. This paper presents how despite the absence of a definition countries and organisations have made use of OECMs in their endeavours to protect biodiversity. Focusing particularly on Arctic countries, it is shown that OECMs constitute an important tool for indigenous and local recognition and how the discourse within the CBD has made increasing reference to indigenous and local communities. It is furthermore discussed how OECMs, despite challenges of application, can contribute to a redefinition of ‘conservation’ and to the reaching of biodiversity targets 2020 and beyond.

Achieving global biodiversity goals by 2050 requires urgent and integrated actions

Biodiversity Conservation Targets: How to Allocate Resources

This chapter discusses the role of the financial mechanism under the Protocol, and the role of other forms of financial solidarity, in turn. The international governance of the financial mechanism under the Nagoya Protocol includes a key role not only for the Protocol's governing body, but also for the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) Conference of the Parties (COP). In voluntarily providing financial resources through other channels, developed countries are to take into account the needs of developing countries, as identified in their capacity need self-assessments, and may choose between bilateral, regional and multilateral channels. Intergovernmental discussions preparing for the entry into force of the Protocol have already identified the need to take a strategic approach to maximize opportunities for financial support as a complement to the Global Environment Facility (GEF). Governments, organizations, private sector and financial institutions are encouraged to provide financial resources for the implementation of the Protocol.Keywords: Conference of the Parties (COP); Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD); financial mechanism; financial resources; Global Environment Facility (GEF); Nagoya Protocol

Underprotected Marine Protected Areas in a Global Biodiversity Hotspot