Key Messages...Overall Messages The Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011 – 2020 and the Aichi...

POSITION PAPER

INTERNATIONAL UNION FOR CONSERVATION OF NATURE

Key Messages Convention on Biological Diversity Seventeenth meeting of the Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical and Technological Advice (SBSTTA17) 14 - 18 October, 2013, Montreal, Canada

For more information, please contact : Dr. Jane Smart Global Director, Biodiversity Conservation Group Head, Species Programme IUCN Headquarters [email protected] Mrs. Sonia Peña Moreno Senior Policy Officer- Biodiversity Global Policy Unit IUCN Headquarters [email protected] Mr. Maximilian Mueller Junior Policy Officer Global Policy Unit IUCN Headquarters [email protected] IUCN World Headquarters Rue Mauverney 28 1196 Gland Switzerland Tel: +41 22 999 0000 Fax: +41 22 999 0002 [email protected] www.iucn.org

Overall Messages The Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011 – 2020 and the Aichi targets represent a positive response to ongoing and alarming biodiversity loss. Unfortunately, implementation measures and initiatives are currently unlikely to prove adequate to change this pattern, and most of the Aichi targets are unlikely to be met through current implementation efforts.

However, IUCN commends the Secretariat of and Parties to the Convention for the new approach to SBSTTA and for the analyses presented through the various background documents to this meeting (UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/17/2 and addenda) which address the precise constraints to implementation in terms of policy, science and technical issues. Existing deficiencies in policy tools, data and information do not constitute a reason for failing to advance in implementation of the Strategic Plan and the Aichi targets. IUCN urges those developing tools to consult with the potential users to ensure their effectiveness and to use exiting tools to develop national biodiversity indicators. Some highlights on specific Aichi targets include: Target 2: Increased coordination between ministries that follow the CBD processes with those dealing with issues linked to poverty reduction strategies in relation to appropriate accounting systems is urgently needed. Target 3: Reform will need to involve different parts of government who may have competing interests. Increased political will is essential. Target 5: Where habitat loss has been reduced or halted, concerted action has involved a combination of political commitment, strict enforcement of the law, monitoring as well as awareness raising schemes. Target 11: It is important to work to achieve the 17% terrestrial and 10% marine protected areas coverage, but Parties must remember that this must be achieved through ensuring the protection of ‘areas of particular importance for biodiversity’, as well as the other important elements in Target 11. It is essential to put in place a system of MPAs that persist over time in order to achieve conservation goals in the long term. Target 12: Conservation works but conservation effort needs to be scaled up given the fact that current efforts are insufficient to offset the main drivers of biodiversity loss. IUCN encourages Parties to join the efforts of Friends of Target 12, champion Target 12, share strategies and develop synergies to achieve it. Target 13: There is a need to ensure policies are in place to support enhanced plant genetic resource conservation and use. Target 15: It is important that pledges made to undertake restoration work convert into ‘on the ground’ restoration action.

mailto:[email protected]




http://www.iucn.org/

IUCN (International Union for Conservation of Nature): Position Paper Page 2

Introduction

This paper presents some general observations on the barriers to implementation of the Aichi targets; comments on the background papers under each Strategic Goal; and describes, very briefly, some of IUCN’s contributions to the achievement of the targets. Two Annexes to this paper, 1) The contribution of IUCN area based knowledge products to the achievement of the Aichi Targets; and 2) IUCN's Policy Tools and Methodologies that support the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020 and the Aichi Targets provide references to the wealth of knowledge and information available to support the implementation of the Aichi Targets. Also, a list of Useful Links and References is provided. The Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011 – 2020 and the Aichi targets represent a positive response to ongoing and alarming biodiversity loss and development patterns which are far from being sustainable in any region of the world. But implementation measures and initiatives are currently unlikely to prove adequate to change this pattern, and most of the Aichi targets are unlikely to be met through current implementation efforts.

However, IUCN commends the Secretariat of and Parties to the Convention for the new approach to SBSTTA and for the analyses presented through the various background documents to this meeting (UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/17/2 and addenda) which address the precise constraints to implementation in terms of policy, science and technical issues. As stated in UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/17/2 there are several gaps in policy tools and scientific and technical information which remain and hamper the full implementation of the Strategic Plan. Many of these gaps are, inter alia, related to incomplete information and datasets, lack of sufficient relevant knowledge at different levels, lack of awareness about biodiversity and insufficient follow-up. One issue common to many of the challenges highlighted relates to governance: in the national governance structures of most countries, the environmental ministries and government agencies and their policies, plans, tools and resources lose out in the battle for attention and resources with other sector structures (such as agriculture and infrastructure), and biodiversity and sustainability are not effectively mainstreamed. In addition, public, private and civil society organizations operating on the ground in developing countries lack governance frameworks for nature conservation and sustainable development. Effective and equitable governance is needed in all countries for conservation action to have sustainable impact. There is also a need for new, more

precise policies and effective governance structures. For example, integrated governance of landscapes, incorporating biodiversity, forestry, agriculture, land and water use, is still in its infancy. IUCN’s main message to this SBSTTA17 is that the existing deficiencies in policy tools, data and information do not constitute a reason for failing to advance in implementation of the Strategic Plan and the Aichi targets. Simply put, we already have enough policy guidance, knowledge and information to move forward. In addition to comments on the SBSTTA papers, IUCN presents concrete examples of the knowledge products, some activities and efforts through which the Union contributes to achieve the Strategic Plan and help bridge some of those gaps identified.

IUCN’s Messages and inputs by Strategic Goal UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/17/2

IUCN concurs with the fact that the Global Strategy for Plant Conservation (GSPC) provides an effective mechanism for the ‘plant subset’ of the Strategic Plan. Likewise, the POWPA has led to a range of useful supporting materials and guidance which are highly relevant to the implementation of the Strategic Plan. IUCN urges those developing tools to consult with the potential users to ensure their effectiveness. The gap analysis of policy support tools and methodologies presented is useful. IUCN would add the following: On Target 2, there is a need to enshrine biodiversity values (both monetary and non monetary) in policy mechanisms; On Target 10, a further gap is that of insufficient uptake of available knowledge; On Target 11, a further gap is the need for a consolidated approach to identify areas ‘of particular importance for biodiversity’ (see UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/17/2/Add.3, paragraph 12), which IUCN is addressing through the development of the Key Biodiversity Areas standard. Regarding “Data Management and Analysis”, the current text concentrates wholly on primary data management, as organized through GBIF. This does not go far enough. To be useful for monitoring the biodiversity attributes addressed in the Aichi targets, these data need analysis and synthesis. The kind of work undertaken in delivery of authoritative biodiversity conservation knowledge products, such as those mobilized through the Commissions, Members, Secretariat, and partners of IUCN, provides a good example.


Specific cases include existing knowledge products for measuring extinction risk (i.e., The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species) and area protection (i.e., Protected Planet, powered by the World Database on Protected Areas and jointly managed between IUCN and the UNEP-World Conservation Monitoring Centre) and knowledge products under development including for measurement of risk of ecosystem collapse (i.e., Red List of Ecosystems) and of sites of biodiversity significance (i.e., Key Biodiversity Areas). Knowledge is key for filling policy implementation gaps and some knowledge products, such as the Red List of Threatened Species and the World Database on Protected Areas have already had significant policy impact (see Annex 1).

Strategic Goal A UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/17/2/Add.1

Regarding Target 1, IUCN emphasizes the importance of ensuring that increasing ‘awareness of the values’ enshrines understanding of the importance of biodiversity to human survival and well being, as well as the magnitude of the crisis facing biodiversity. Indeed, raising public awareness about biodiversity, its value and ways to conserve and use it sustainably is at the heart of IUCN’s communication work. Our web and media work regularly result in comprehensive coverage of biodiversity issues in international media and increasing visibility on the website and social media channels. IUCN is running a Nature-based Solutions campaign including through a dedicated webpage. Through our partnership with Reuters, we have promoted the idea that conserving biodiversity makes nutritional, ecological and economic sense. Numerous events and meetings are being used as avenues to better relay the biodiversity message to other constituencies and target audiences. In the run up to the World Parks Congress in 2014, key simple messages are being developed to raise the visibility about the value of protected areas: Protected areas conserve nature and biodiversity while contributing to people’s livelihoods, particularly at the local level; protected areas are good business; and investing in protected areas is a cost effective way to reduce business risks linked to biodiversity loss, climate change, pollution and unsustainable practices. The IUCN Commission on Education and Communication (CEC) is also spearheading numerous activities, notably the Campaign How to Tell a Love Story, to inspire people to act.

On Target 2, IUCN strongly agrees with the need for further development of tools to help integrate biodiversity values into national accounts. Increased coordination between ministries that follow the CBD processes with those dealing with issues linked to poverty reduction strategies in relation to appropriate accounting systems is urgently needed. Good but modest efforts to achieve this target need to be scaled up by directly engaging government ministries dealing with development issues.

IUCN’s work supports Nature-based Solutions and makes the economic and business case for land- and seascape management of multiple-ecosystem service benefits, promoting investment in natural infrastructure and ecosystem restoration, and stimulating economic development. Biodiversity must enter development planning as an asset considering its values – both monetary and intrinsic. IUCN promotes the careful economic valuation of biodiversity and ecosystem services for integration into decision-making at all levels and across sectors. This is being done through research work such as on the economic assessment of desertification, sustainable land management and resilience of arid, semi-arid and dry and sub humid areas and through IUCN’s contribution to the World Bank WAVES (Wealth Accounting and Valuation of Ecosystem Services). Furthermore, IUCN works with businesses to test new methods such as a guide to Corporate Ecosystem Valuation. In 2013, IUCN has been involved in the preparation of the WBCSD Business Guide to Water Valuation, which features IUCN’s work with various water companies. Considering Target 3, IUCN notes with concern that there has been little progress on this target and incentives harmful to biodiversity continue to be a major underlying cause of biodiversity loss. IUCN notes and agrees strongly with the view that reform will need to involve different parts of government who may have competing interests, and that increased political will is essential.

IUCN supports the implementation of positive incentive measures, which promote the adoption of behaviors beneficial to biodiversity. Examples are schemes for the Payment for Ecosystem Services (PES), which compensate individuals and communities for the additional cost of specific land uses and management practices providing ecosystem services, the introduction of subsidies linked to the provision of conservation benefits, and other tax schemes.

http://www.iucnredlist.org/

http://www.iucnredlist.org/

http://www.protectedplanet.net/

http://www.iucnredlistofecosystems.org/

http://www.worldparkscongress.org/

http://www.iucn.org/about/union/commissions/cec/cec_how_we_work/love__not_loss_/



On Target 4, IUCN commends the engagement with the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) in relation to policy support tools.

Strategic Goal B UNEP/ CBD/SBSTTA/17/2/Add.2

Regarding Target 5, it is important to note that although the net loss of forests has slowed substantially, globally most habitats are in a state of decline, and that degraded and fragmented habitats are less likely to be able to support their full complement of species or provide the same level of ecosystem services as intact habitats. IUCN would like to reinforce the point that where habitat loss has been reduced or halted, concerted action has involved a combination of political commitment, strict enforcement of the law; monitoring as well as awareness raising schemes. On Target 6, IUCN supports the summary conclusion, noting in particular that current policies and tools are in theory sufficient for this target to be met. This suggests that concerted action through an increase in political will is needed with involving collaboration between biodiversity and fishing communities. To move forward the implementation of Target 6, IUCN recently concluded a GEF project on defining an ecosystem approach on seamounts in the South West Indian Ocean which also outlined a road map towards sustainable use of biodiversity. This project proposed an innovative approach for the governance of the high seas and the management of the deep sea in this region. In the area of small-scale fisheries, IUCN is highlighting the need for better understanding on how to achieve sustainable use, and to integrate local with scientific knowledge in coastal ecosystem management. Activities include work with FAO to support implementation of their forthcoming "Guidelines on Securing Sustainable Small-Scale Fisheries" and increased communication and cooperation with the fisheries sector. With respect to Target 7, IUCN notes that there are no universally agreed sustainability criteria for forestry, agriculture and aquaculture and agrees with the view that this is limiting the development of a consensus on the ideal balance of approaches to agriculture (based on further intensification vs. small scale production systems), which itself is limiting progress. Two projects that contribute to Target 7 are being currently implemented: Aquaculture development

and Marine Protected Areas and The sustainability of aquaculture fish feeds from diverse perspectives aim to provide specific guidelines on ways in which areas under aquaculture can be managed sustainably. Both projects are conducted in close collaboration with the aquaculture sector. On Target 9, the development of strategies to prevent potential alien invasive species from becoming invasive is a priority. There is also a need for capacity building in the area of biological control (training on its principles, intentions, actions and results). At the national level, additional coordination amongst relevant ministries is urgently needed. To support implementation of Target 9, the IUCN Invasive Species Initiative (ISI) is available to developing countries to assist with updates of NBSAPs (in relation to prevention and management of biological invasions) and to develop or revise National Invasive Species Strategies and Action Plans (NISSAPS) – at national level generally or as species-specific strategies (e.g. Prosopis in Botswana). NBSAPs and NISSAPs are a convenient way to support implementing global standards. At the same time, the Initiative is encouraging Parties to work together to develop sub-regional and regional NBSAPs and NISSAPs. The IUCN Species Survival Commission’s (SSC) Invasive Species Specialist Group manages the Global Invasive Species Database (GISD), and is supporting the Island Biodiversity and Invasive Species Database (IBIS) and the newly developed Invasive Alien Species Pathway Management Toolbox, the Database of Island Invasive Species Eradications and the Threatened Island Biodiversity database. ISSG and the ISI are currently developing a significant report on Invasive Species Pathways based on field experience and needs and ways to address invasion pathways. ISSG is the lead agency developing the Invasive Alien Species Pathway Management toolkit/resource. As part of the Biodiversity Indicators Partnership, ISSG is leading the development of Invasive Species Indicators. A number of additional ISSG efforts such as the development of voluntary codes of conduct aimed at preventing the introduction of invasive species through some well-known pathways can be found on issg.org. On Target 10, IUCN notes with particular concern the gap in policy support tools for the identification of priority ecosystems which are vulnerable to climate change or ocean acidification. IUCN

http://www.iucn.org/about/work/programmes/marine/marine_our_work/marine_governance/seamounts/publications/

http://www.issg.org/database/welcome/

http://eradicationsdb.fos.auckland.ac.nz/


http://tib.islandconservation.org/


http://www.bipindicators.net/

http://www.issg.org/


agrees that accelerated progress could be achieved through the development of effective landscape approaches to manage multiple drivers of ecosystem loss and degradation, but questions whether the necessary governance mechanisms are in place to achieve this. Efforts by IUCN and the World Commission on Protected Areas (WCPA) are being carried out to advance on Target 10. These include the involvement in the International Reference User Group (RUG) on ocean acidification and the dissemination of the latest scientific findings on ocean acidification to a broad policy and decision-making audience.

Strategic Goal C UNEP/ CBD/SBSTTA/17/2/Add.3 IUCN notes that consistency in the definition of “protected areas” is an important precondition for implementation and monitoring of Target 11; a consensus definition was published by Dudley (2009) in Guidelines for Applying Protected Area Management Categories. IUCN reiterates that it is important to work to achieve the 17% terrestrial and 10% marine protected areas coverage, but reminds Parties that this must be achieved through ensuring the protection of ‘areas of particular importance for biodiversity’, as well as the other important elements in Target 11. The IUCN Joint Task Force in Biodiversity and Protected Areas of the IUCN SSC and the World Commission on Protected Areas (WCPA) has convened a process to bring together existing international approaches for identifying areas of importance for biodiversity. Progress towards developing this new global standard - which will be essential to consistently monitor implementation of one of the key elements of Aichi Target 11 - is well advanced. The findings of the Joint Taskforce will be launched at the 2014 World Parks Congress. Other efforts by IUCN to address gaps mentioned and strengthen the understanding of Target 11 include encouraging Parties to consider further supporting the development and reporting of private protected areas (e.g. NGO, private individual and company protected areas) and ensure recognition of these areas internationally by inclusion in the World Database on Protected Areas managed by UNEP World Conservation Monitoring Centre and IUCN. In addition, the development of guidelines for the Social Assessment of Protected Areas is currently in process. This includes the refinement of decision-making support for identifying and using

approaches that are most relevant to the context of a specific area. These approaches will be assessed through field-testing in sites in Australia and East and West Africa. This work will also contribute to Targets 14 and 18 with regard to equitable management of protected areas, benefits of ecosystem services, and integration of traditional knowledge and innovations of indigenous and local communities (ILCs). The Indigenous Peoples and Community Conserved Areas’ toolkit (ICCA toolkit), which is intended to support and empower the governance of protected areas and management of natural resources by ILCs, is now available on the homepage of the ICCA Registry website. A web-based version of the toolkit is planned. Also, the mentioned Joint Task Force has produced a number of articles and products which aim at furthering the understanding of Target 11 to enable its implementation. In Meeting Aichi Target 11: What does success look like for protected area systems? the authors argue for a holistic interpretation of Target 11 as a way for the global community to use protected areas to change the current unacceptable trends in global biodiversity loss. Two literature reviews from 2013 provide also valuable information on Target 11. Effectiveness of terrestrial protected areas in reducing biodiver-sity and habitat loss, concluded that in terrestrial protected areas there is a need to make species protection data from monitoring and management programs available, more transparent, and standardized, while regarding habitat protection the need to understand why protected areas are effective is reaffirmed. In Effectiveness of terrestrial protected areas in reducing habitat loss and population declines the authors demonstrated that there is good evidence that protected areas have conserved forest habitat but evidence remains inconclusive with respect to their effectiveness at maintaining species populations. Overall, available evidence suggests that protected areas deliver positive outcomes, but there remains a limited evidence base, and weak understanding of the conditions under which they succeed or fail to deliver conservation outcomes. Other efforts on Target 11 are being carried forward on the legal aspects of the target and include contributing to the IDLO- CBD “Legal Preparedness for Achieving the Aichi Biodiversity Targets Program” which promotes new thinking on practical ways that law can help to save biodiversity while fostering stronger economies, livelihoods and cultures.

http://epoca-project.eu/index.php/what-do-we-do/outreach/rug.html


http://cmsdata.iucn.org/downloads/guidelines_for_applying_protected_area_management_categories.pdf


http://www.iccaregistry.org/


IUCN and WCPA High Seas Marine Protected Areas Specialist Group have in turn been working on the application of Target 11 in marine areas beyond national jurisdiction (ABNJ), by considering existing regimes, experiences and best practices for area-based management in ABNJ. IUCN has addressed issues related to the existing policy and legal framework for MPAs in ABNJ and concluded that as currently practiced, the site-specific approach to establishment of protected areas in ABNJ may not address protection of regional and global biodiversity and ecosystem structure and function. IUCN also highlights the important role played by the CBD–facilitated regional workshops to describe marine areas of ecological or biological significance (EBSAs) in compiling and facilitating access to important scientific information and technological tools and building capacity at the national and regional level. As official observers to the Antarctic Treaty System, IUCN has engaged with the members of the Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR) in the development of a network of MPAs in the Southern Ocean, Antarctica. In 2012 however, the notion of time-limits, or sunset clauses, was introduced into the CCAMLR MPA discussion. This is of extreme concern to IUCN: The notion of arbitrary time-limits is a regressive step and will have impacts to protected areas globally. Permanence and persistence is particularly important in areas with fragile, slow growing, vulnerable species, such as in the Southern Ocean, or where ecosystem health and marine resources will be highly impacted by climate change and ocean acidification. IUCN emphasizes that it is essential to put in place a system of MPAs that persist over time in order to achieve conservation goals in the long term. It is worth mentioning that Stream 1 of the World Parks Congress, Reaching Conservation Goals: a Future of Hope, will focus entirely on Target 11. This stream will demonstrate that a well-planned, managed and connected system of protected areas is an essential component to achieve conservation goals. In support of Target 12, IUCN and its partners produce The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species™ ,widely recognized as the most comprehensive, robust and objective global approach for evaluating the risk of extinction of plant and animal species. The IUCN Red List is also used to produce the IUCN Red List Index (RLI) which is one of the key indicators used by the Biodiversity Indicators Partnership to measure progress towards Aichi Target 12 but also many

others. The Red List and its associated indicators are fundamental to measure progress towards achieving Target 12. IUCN reminds Parties that conservation works but that conservation effort needs to be scaled up given the fact that current efforts are insufficient to offset the main drivers of biodiversity loss. IUCN agrees that a key challenge is to assess the conservation status of plants, fungi, and invertebrates, and has identified these as a strategic priority for the Red List. However, IUCN disagrees that there is a “need to develop assessment methodologies for those species that are not currently reflected in red-lists such as fungi and invertebrates”, particularly as IUCN has recently simplified the Red List assessment process. The need is for application of existing, proven methods, not duplication of efforts through development of new ones. IUCN agrees that national indicators towards Target 12 can usefully be developed where national Red Lists have been compiled using consistent methods (e.g., following the 2003 Guidelines for Application of IUCN Red List Criteria at Regional Levels). Where this is not the case, the global Red List Index can be disaggregated to provide an efficient and effective indicator of progress towards this target. IUCN has led the establishment on a new partnership called Friends of Target 12, which brings together 25 environmental organizations, conventions, funding organizations and governmental agencies whose main aim is to support countries to achieve Target 12. IUCN encourages Parties to join this effort, champion Target 12, share strategies and develop synergies to achieve Target 12. On Target13, IUCN emphasizes that the implications of the decline in genetic diversity of cultivated plants, farmed or domesticated wild animals and of wild relatives (for food and nutrition security) is little appreciated by society. IUCN is highly concerned about the lack of conservation measures for wild relatives (and their habitats) in the wild.

A recently concluded project which did a Red Listing threat assessment of 572 European species from 25 economically important crop gene pools showed that at least 11.5% (66) of crop wild relative species are threatened. The main cause of threat was found to be unsustainable livestock farming and ranching, growing tourism and recreation use of rural areas and urbanization. Therefore there is a need to ensure policies are in place to support enhanced plant genetic resource conservation and use.

http://www.iucnredlist.org/documents/Required_and_Recommended_Supporting_Information_for_IUCN_Red_List_Assessments.pdf


http://www.iucnredlist.org/documents/reg_guidelines_en.pdf

http://www.iucnredlist.org/documents/reg_guidelines_en.pdf

http://www.iucn.org/friendsoftarget12


Work by the SSC Crop Wild Relative Specialist Group points to the need for a global network of in situ genetic reserves for crop wild relatives and on-farm conservation sites for landraces as a way of overcoming some recognized problems. A more coordinated Genebank Integrated System would provide crop breeders with improved access to conserved resources and help enhance use. Greater actual or predictive characterization and evaluation of conserved plant genetic resources, and more available online information linked with better mutual cooperation between conservation agencies is important. Governments could also stimulate the use of plant genetic resources and the marketing of a greater variety of crops by systematically analyzing positive and negative implications of the regulatory regime upon use of a diversity of crops and plant genetic resources.

Strategic Goal D UNEP/ CBD/SBSTTA/17/2/Add.4

Regarding Target 14, IUCN agrees that an important gap is guidance for assisting Parties in managing ecosystems for the delivery of multiple ecosystems services. The current inability to monitor regulatory, cultural and supporting services is also a concern. The newly-released Toolkit for Ecosystem Service Site-based Assessment provides an important contribution to implementing and measuring progress on Target 14 and should be considered. The work ongoing with the International Trade Centre to develop an analytical framework to better understand how and under what circumstances international trade in wild resources contributes to species and ecosystem conservation and meets local livelihood needs could be an important source of information. IUCN is also supporting and providing technical input to FAO on a project in the Southern Africa Development Community (SADC) that is examining the contribution of wild meat use (legal and illegal) to local food security. Recommen-dations for developing legal forms of wild meat management that safeguard ecosystems and species while meeting food security needs are being developed. On Target 15, good work is underway which could reap multiple benefits; nevertheless, it is important that pledges made to undertake restoration work convert into ‘on the ground’ restoration action. IUCN contributes to mitigating climate change through the conservation and restoration of coastal and marine ecosystems that provide essential services like sequestering and storing “blue” carbon from the atmosphere and oceans. Part of this work is conducted in the framework of the

Blue Carbon Initiative, which is co-hosted by IUCN and Conservation International. In addition, IUCN is supporting different countries in the process of developing or scoping out their blue carbon potential. IUCN is conducting important work on identifying potential areas of restoration in Rwanda, Brazil, Uganda, Guatemala and Mexico. This work is built on the methodology developed by IUCN and the World Resources Institute for the Global Partnership on Forest and Landscape Restoration (GPFLR). IUCN’s assessments include consultation with government officials and others to define the scope; identification and analysis of economic, institutional/policy, geo-spatial and biophysical data; stakeholder consultations to garner inputs into the assessment, and examination and testing the robustness of the analysis; socio-economic appraisal of the costs/benefits of different restoration strategies; and valuing carbon mitigation potential. IUCN is also actively collaborating with the CBD Secretariat to support the further advancement of the Bonn Challenge to restore 150 million hectares by 2020 – an implementation platform for Target 15 and the UNFCCC REDD+ goal. On Target 16, IUCN has published an Explanatory Guide to the Nagoya Protocol to support the better understanding of the Nagoya Protocol on Access and Benefit-sharing and the implementation of this target. The Guide is being used as an adaptable tool for ABS capacity-building and awareness raising initiatives, as well as an important reference for countries in their efforts to ratify and implement the Nagoya Protocol and operationalize ABS in practice.

Strategic Goal E

IUCN is prepared to assist governments in revising and/or updating their NBSAPs through knowledge products and tools and the wealth of experience vested in the Union, some of which have already been mentioned here. An IUCN Strategy for engagement on the process of revision and update of the NBSAPs has been developed and is now being implemented. A roster of IUCN “key experts” on core areas of IUCN’s expertise has been developed and will be constantly updated. Support modules and training materials on issues related to protected areas, species inventories, integrated water resource management, invasive alien species, access and benefit-sharing and others can be proposed to accompany countries’ efforts. In addition, IUCN has now signed up to the NBSAP Forum, a coordination mechanism led by the CBD Secretariat, UNEP (through its World Conservation Monitoring Centre) and UNDP.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212041613000417

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212041613000417

http://thebluecarboninitiative.org/

http://iucn.org/news_homepage/events/cbd/work/the_nagoya_protocol/


http://www.iucn.org/nbsaps/

http://www.nbsapforum.net/


One issue which is usually sidelined in the development of NBSAPs is the issue of gender mainstreaming. IUCN has been working together with other experts on the development of the Environment-Gender Index (EGI), an innovative new tool to monitor progress toward gender equality and women’s empowerment in the context of global environmental agreements. The EGI will provide information and quantitative data on governments’ performance translating the gender and environment mandates in the three Rio Conventions, and the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) into national policy and planning. Indicators used in the EGI will measure, e.g., the inclusion of gender in national plans or Convention reports, the inclusion of environment in gender-related plans, and participation of women in environmental decision-making. Concerning Target 18, local, traditional or indigenous knowledge in landscape and seascape management, governance and conservation constitutes an invaluable source of information. Local mapping often reveals land use systems that are not visible from other types of mapping (such as satellite imagery). It invariably surfaces systems of governance regimes over natural resource management which may not be known by Governments. Most of these systems actually pre-date the modern State. There is a whole body of literature about the participatory mapping and GIS which needs to be considered. For instance, the EU-ACP Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Development worked with the International Fund for Agricultural Development to release a whole online training course on participatory mapping and GIS. Several resources online provide useful information available to Parties. IUCN is contributing in many ways to Target 19. The Union is a central contributor to the Biodiversity Indicators Partnership and leads on several knowledge sources. Some of them have been recognized as being very important for progressing in the Aichi Targets’ implementation: The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species, IUCN / UNEP-WCMC World Database on Protected Areas, the IUCN Key Biodiversity Area Standard, the IUCN Red List of Ecosystems and the Global Invasive Species Database. A comprehensive analysis of the contribution of these knowledge sources to the Targets is available in Annex 1. Access to these sources of information has increased: to the World Database on Protected Areas access increased considerably between 2011 and 2012; and access to The IUCN Red List has also developed, both through the general

website, freely accessible on the internet for non-commercial use, and through the Integrated Biodiversity Assessment Tool, the gateway to these data for commercial use. The IUCN Red List is being constantly strengthened and is expanding its taxonomic and geographic coverage. The Red List of Ecosystems has advanced in the publication of a second version of the criteria and thresholds. The partners of this initiative continue to gather data and are starting to deliver pilot assessments at several levels: countries, river basins, sub-national administrative districts. At the global scale, the coverage of all terrestrial ecosystems at the continental level of the Americas is on its way (delivery in 2015). The standards for determining areas of importance for the global persistence of biodiversity (KBAs) have further developed. The criteria are now stabilized, although the thresholds are still under consideration. The institutional arrangements for supporting the delivering of this data are currently under discussion. IUCN has also undertaken work on the integration of these knowledge sources to streamline access and provide a simple access to data that will allow for informing relevant international and national processes, biodiversity positive decisions, standards and safeguards and land and seascape planning. This is done to increase the uptake of this knowledge by policy mechanisms. It is important to note that IUCN has been leading on the development of the Stakeholder Engagement Strategy of IPBES, responding to an invitation by the IPBES Plenary. This strategic guidance will play an important role in the implementation of IPBES. To contribute to Target 20, IUCN supported the CBD “Dialogue Seminar on Scaling up Biodiversity Finance” carried out in March 2012 in Quito, Ecuador, which looked into promoting a better understanding of this Target and other finance-related matters linked to the Strategy for Resource Mobilization like the concept and application of innovative financial mechanisms. As a follow-up, IUCN in conjunction with the CBD Secretariat carried out a “Regional Workshop on Financial Tools for Conservation” for the South American region in La Paz, Bolivia (August 2012). The findings and recommendations of both meetings are important sources of information on Target 20.


Annex 1: The contribution of IUCN area based knowledge products to the achievement of the Aichi Targets Purpose: To demonstrate the value of IUCN’s knowledge products for the achievement of the Aichi targets.

Building capacity to implement the targets

Information to support implementation

Monitoring progress towards achievement (indicators)

The IUCN Red List contribution includes content from UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/REC/XV/1, Annex I, for The Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020; Indicators which are ready for use at the global level are denoted by the letter (A) both in this paper and the table below. ***denotes Targets for which the knowledge product is of special importance.

IUCN Knowledge Product

Goal/ Targets IUCN Red List of Threatened Species www.iucnredlist.org

IUCN / UNEP-WCMC World Database on Protected Areas and ProtectedPlanet.net (its web interface)

IUCN Key Biodiversity Area Standard

IUCN Red List of Ecosystems

Global Invasive Species Database

Strategic goal A. Address the underlying causes of biodiversity loss by mainstreaming biodiversity across government and society

Target 1: By 2020, at the latest, people are aware of the values of biodiversity and the steps they can take to conserve and use it sustainably

Type and number of users of the IUCN Red List portal and map interface provides an indication of awareness levels. Global and national Red Lists can increase

WDPA and Protected Planet raise awareness of values of PAs and biodiversity; e type and number of PP / WDPA users could provide an indication of awareness levels

KBAs could conceivably provide an environmental education tool and indicator in making the connection in people’s minds between places and species/ecosystems

When used in tandem with the species red list, these two products would provide a comprehensive picture of the status of biodiversity worldwide, the

Focuses on the threat of Invasive Alien Species (IAS) on native biodiversity. Increases awareness about IAS to facilitate effective prevention and management








capacity and awareness in national institutions and with the general public

The Protected Planet Report drawn from the WDPA will communicate success and involve people in the conservation of biodiversity using PAs

primary threats and the conservation actions required or being implemented.

activities. Detailed information on actions that can be taken to prevent the introduction of IAS and control their spread.

Target 2: By 2020, at the latest, biodiversity values have been integrated into national and local development and poverty reduction strategies and planning processes and are being incorporated into national accounting, as appropriate, and reporting systems.

Indicator: degree to which PAs are incorporated into development plans and planning / reporting systems.

The WDPA provides a layer of information essential for land-use planning

***Indicator: %s of KBAs incorporated into national development/land use plans.

*** Important instrument to guide investments for several MDGs, as poverty reduction and improvements in health are dependent on properly-functioning ecosystems that provide goods and services

Target 3: By 2020, at the latest, incentives, including subsidies, harmful to biodiversity are eliminated, phased out or reformed in order to minimize or avoid negative impacts, and positive incentives for the conservation and sustainable use of

Indicator: socio-economic assessments of conditions for communities living in and around protected areas.

Indicator: % otherwise unprotected KBAs safeguarded through incentives for no net low/net positive impact on biodiversity.

“Good management” of ecosystems can be tracked to highlight 1) preventative actions that keep Least Concern ecosystems in that category, and 2) proactive actions that bring ecosystems








biodiversity are developed and applied, consistent and in harmony with the Convention and other relevant international obligations, taking into account national socio-economic conditions

from higher to lower categories of threat.

Target 4: By 2020, at the latest, Governments, business and stakeholders at all levels have taken steps to achieve or have implemented plans for sustainable production and consumption and have kept the impacts of use of natural resources well within safe ecological limits.

Trends in population and extinction risk of utilized species, including species in trade (A)

(UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/REC/XV/1, Annex I)

PAs could provide a focus for sustainability of site use, e.g., by wild harvest, tourism, extractive industry

KBAs could provide a focus for sustainability of site use, e.g., by wild harvest, tourism, extractive industry

Integration of the IUCN Red List of Ecosystems into the International Finance Corporation’s Performance Standards on Social & Environmental Sustainability








Strategic goal B. Reduce the direct pressures on biodiversity and promote sustainable use

Target 5: By 2020, the rate of loss of all natural habitats, including forests, is at least halved and where feasible brought close to zero, and degradation and fragmentation is significantly reduced

Extinction risk trends of habitat dependent species in each major habitat type (A) (UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/REC/XV/1, Annex I)

Population trends of habitat dependent species in each major habitat type (A) (UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/REC/XV/1, Annex I)

***Implementation: PAs as particular targets to cease habitat loss.

Indicator: % natural habitat in PAs. Status and trends of habitats protected with PA systems are a key measure of this target. In conjunction with other datasets, WDPA can also be used to measure fragmentation and connectivity.

***Implementation: KBAs as particular targets to cease habitat loss.

Indicator: % natural habitat in KBAs.

*** Indicator: RLI for ecosystems (under development).

National, regional, global assessments speak directly to this target.

IAS are recognised as the second biggest threat to biodiversity loss after habitat loss. Profiles of the worst IAS that threaten native biodiversity and natural areas include description of impacts.

Target 6: By 2020 all fish and invertebrate stocks and aquatic plants are managed and harvested sustainably, legally and applying ecosystem based approaches, so that

Trends in extinction risk of target and bycatch aquatic species (A) (UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/REC/XV/1, Annex I)

Freshwater and marine PAs could provide a focus for sustainability of site use, e.g., by wild harvest, tourism,

Key habitats and refugia for production fisheries

freshwater KBAs, and EBSAs/marine KBAs could provide a focus for sustainability of site use, e.g., by wild harvest, tourism, extractive industry

*** Indicator: RLI for marine and freshwater ecosystems (under development).








overfishing is avoided, recovery plans and measures are in place for all depleted species, fisheries have no significant adverse impacts on threatened species and vulnerable ecosystems and the impacts of fisheries on stocks, species and ecosystems are within safe ecological limits.

are included in systems of PAs and registered in the WDPA.

Target 7: By 2020 areas under agriculture, aquaculture and forestry are managed sustainably, ensuring conservation of biodiversity.

As Target 4 (although relatively few sites under agriculture/aquaculture/forestry are PAs)

As Target 4 (although relatively few sites under agriculture/aquaculture/forestry are KBAs)

Indicator: as target 5 but focused on ecosystems especially threatened by expansion of agriculture.

Target 8: By 2020, pollution, including from excess nutrients, has been brought to levels that are not detrimental to ecosystem function and biodiversity

Red List Index to show impacts of pollution could be developed

PAs could conceivably serve as a site network for monitoring pollution loads and impacts.

KBAs could conceivably serve as a site network for monitoring pollution loads and impacts.

Indicator: as target 5 but focused on ecosystems especially threatened by pollution.








Target 9: By 2020, invasive alien species and pathways are identified and prioritized, priority species are controlled or eradicated, and measures are in place to manage pathways to prevent their introduction and establishment.

Trends in the impact of invasive alien species on extinction risk trends (A) (UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/REC/XV/1, Annex I)

***Implementation: PAs as targets for control/eradication of harmful invasives Indicator: % of PAs with species/ecosystem threatened by invasives where these invasives have been controlled/ eradicated.

***Implementation: KBAs as targets for control/eradication of harmful invasives Indicator: % of KBAs with species/ecosystem threatened by invasives where these invasives have been controlled/ eradicated.

Indicator: as target 5 but focused on ecosystems especially threatened by invasives.

Detailed distribution records of known IAS at country and site level and information on pathways of spread of all featured species - to identify and prioritise management measures; aid pathway management and provide best practice information for management of threat. Plans to integrate decision support tool for early warning and rapid action as a Global Register of Introduced and Invasive Species (GRIIS) with enhanced information on pathways and management of such pathways.








Target 10: By 2015, the multiple anthropogenic pressures on coral reefs, and other vulnerable ecosystems impacted by climate change or ocean acidification are minimized, so as to maintain their integrity and functioning.

Extinction risk trends of coral and reef fish (A) (UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/REC/XV/1, Annex I)

***Implementation: marine PAs identify sites for action towards Target 10.

The WDPA measures the extent to which these ecosystems are included in systems of protected areas

***Implementation: EBSAs/marine KBAs identify sites for action towards Target 10.

Indicators: trends in ecosystems and species, and in MPA coverage, at such sites.

Indicator: as target 5 but focused on ecosystems especially threatened by climate change.

Strategic goal C: To improve the status of biodiversity by safeguarding ecosystems, species and genetic diversity

Target 11: By 2020, at least 17 per cent of terrestrial and inland water areas, and 10 per cent of coastal and marine areas, especially areas of particular importance for biodiversity and ecosystem services, are conserved through

***Information / Implementation: Trends in extent of marine/terrestrial protected areas, WDPA is the global reference dataset for Target 11. WDPA facilitate regional and global gap analyses etc.

***Implementation: KBAs identify “areas of particular importance for biodiversity”. Indicators: Protected Area coverage of key biodiversity areas; coverage of terrestrial, marine

Risk of collapse of ecosystems within protected areas can be assessed to provide a quantitative measure of effective management.








effectively and equitably managed, ecologically representative and well connected systems of protected areas and other effective area-based conservation measures, and integrated into the wider landscapes and seascapes.

(A) (UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/REC/XV/1, Annex I) Indicators: PA coverage, representativeness; management effectiveness; (overlays with KBAs); Indicators: Additional % of protection by other effective conservation means such as Indigenous and Community Conserved Areas; measures of ecological representativity and connectivity. management effectiveness attributes as well as governance quality attributes

and inland water systems;); trends in representative coverage of protected areas a % of KBAs safeguarded by PAs or other effective measures. (UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/REC/XV/1, Annex I)

Target 12: By 2020 the extinction of known threatened species has been prevented and their conservation status, particularly of those most in decline, has been improved and sustained.

Trends in extinction risk of species (A) (decision VII/30 and VIII/15) (MDG indicator 7.7) (also used by CMS) (UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/REC/XV/1, Annex I)

Trends in distribution of selected species (B)

***Implementation: effective PAs are one of the key tools to achieve this.

Indicators: PA coverage of KBAs (Alliance for Zero Extinction (AZE) sites, Important Bird Areas (IBAs) etc,

PA coverage of KBAs (Alliance for Zero Extinction (AZE) sites, Important Bird Areas (IBAs) etc,

There is a need to document connection between threatened species and threatened ecosystems, in order to identify priorities that are effective for both simultaneously.

Focused on raising awareness of IAS with an impact on native biodiversity especially those that are at a risk of extinction. Work underway to integrate information in the GISD species








(decision VII/30 and VIII/15) (also used by UNCCD) (UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/REC/XV/1, Annex I)

Enables an assessment of which threatened species are represented in systems of protected areas

sheet with The IUCN Red List so that users of either knowledge products will have access to increased information on IAS and threatened species respectively.

Target 13: By 2020, the genetic diversity of cultivated plants and farmed and domesticated animals and of wild relatives, including other socio-economically as well as culturally valuable species, is maintained, and strategies have been developed and implemented for minimizing genetic erosion and safeguarding their genetic diversity.

Indicator of genetic diversity of cultivated plants, and farmed and domesticated animals and their wild relatives could be developed

Possible indicators could include representation of CWR centres (e.g., Vavilov centres) in PAs;

Possible indicators could include % of KBAs key to survival of crop wild relatives and domesticated animals representation of CWR centres (e.g., Vavilov centres) in KBAs; and RLI for phylogenetic diversity in protected vs. unprotected KBAs.

Indicator: %of threatened ecosystems that are key to survival of wild relatives of cultivated plants and domesticated animals.

Strategic goal D: Enhance the benefits to all from biodiversity








and ecosystem services

Target 14: By 2020, ecosystems that provide essential services, including services related to water, and contribute to health, livelihoods and well-being, are restored and safeguarded, taking into account the needs of women, indigenous and local communities, and the poor and vulnerable.

Extinction risk trends of species that provide ecosystem services (A) (UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/REC/XV/1, Annex I)

***Implementation: PAs as targets for PES mechanism.

Indicators: trends in ES delivery (e.g., freshwater ES delivery to people downstream) from PAs.

Assessment of ecosystems represented in PA systems

***Implementation: KBAs as targets for PES mechanism.

Indicators: trends in ES delivery (e.g., freshwater ES delivery to people downstream) from KBAs

*** *** Important instrument to guide investments for several MDGs, as poverty reduction and improvements in health are dependent on properly-functioning ecosystems that provide goods and services

Target 15: By 2020, ecosystem resilience and the contribution of biodiversity to carbon stocks has been enhanced, through conservation and restoration, including restoration of at least 15 per cent of degraded ecosystems, thereby contributing to climate change mitigation and adaptation and to

***Implementation: PAs and connectivity areas as potential targets for REDD+ funding and/or ecosystem-based adaptation.

Indicators: % of the world’s carbon stocks in PAs.

The WDPA measures the extent to which PA systems incorporate carbon-rich ecosystems

***Implementation: KBAs as targets for REDD+, ecosystem-based adaptation.

Indicators: % of otherwise unprotected KBAs safeguarded through REDD+ mechanism; climate change vulnerability of species triggering KBAs.

*** “Good management” of ecosystems tracked to highlight 1) preventative actions that keep Least Concern ecosystems in that category, and 2) proactive actions that bring ecosystems from higher to lower categories of threat. (Focus on restoration








combating desertification.

and mitigation efforts)

Target 16: By 2015, the Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits Arising from their Utilization is in force and operational, consistent with national legislation.

Implementation: fair and equitable sharing of benefits from PAs.

Indicator: % of PAs where adherence to the Nagoya Protocol is demonstrated

Implementation: fair and equitable sharing of benefits from safeguarding KBAs. Indicator: % of safeguarded KBAs where adherence to the Nagoya Protocol is demonstrated.

Strategic goal E. Enhance implementation through participatory planning, knowledge management and capacity building

Target 17: By 2015 each Party has developed, adopted as a policy instrument, and has commenced implementing an effective, participatory and updated national biodiversity strategy and

% NBSAPs that adequately address threatened species conservation

Information / Implementation: WDPA national gap analyses

The listing of protected areas in the WDPA is an essential function/activity in any NBSAP

Indicator: % of KBAs incorporated into NBSAPs, or % NBSAPs that incorporate action to protect and adequately manage KBAs

Indicators: At the global level, number of countries that have assessed the risk of collapse of ecosystems. At the national level, number of threatened








action plan ecosystems, and use of ecosystem assessments in public policy.

Target 18: By 2020, the traditional knowledge, innovations and practices of indigenous and local communities relevant for the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity, and their customary use of biological resources, are respected, subject to national legislation and relevant international obligations, and fully integrated and reflected in the implementation of the Convention with the full and effective participation of indigenous and local communities, at all relevant levels.

Information on species, trade and use (RL livelihoods module)

Indicator: Number and extent of Indigenous and Community Conserved Areas in WDPA ICCA Registry. Forest canopy cover of ICCAs.

The representation of Indigenous and Community Conserved areas, as well as those in private ownership in the WDPA permits an assessment of the extent to which these communities are involved and are participating

Indicator: % of KBAs which are also considered sacred by indigenous or local communities (which will stay constant if Target 18 is being delivered).

Indicator: number of “green listed” ecosystems that are considered safe due to traditional uses and practices.








Target 19: By 2020, knowledge, the science base and technologies relating to biodiversity, its values, functioning, status and trends, and the consequences of its loss, are improved, widely shared and transferred, and applied.

Number of maintained species inventories being used to implement the Convention

Capacity for performing red list assessments (species and ecosystems) is decentralized and widely distributed around the world. Datasets and tools readily available in multiple languages and in the public domain.

The WDPA and Protected Planet Report is a global standard for measurement of the extent to which biodiversity in PAs in maintained, and the causal relationship of protection for conservation

Indicator: Number of KBAs identified over time (which will level off if Target 19 is being achieved).

Capacity for performing red list assessments (species and ecosystems) is decentralized and widely distributed around the world. Data sets and analytical tools are readily available in multiple languages and in the public domain.

Target 20: By 2020, at the latest, the mobilization of financial resources for effectively implementing the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020 from all sources, and in accordance with the consolidated and agreed process in the Strategy for Resource Mobilization should increase substantially from the current levels.

***Implementation: PAs, or subsets of PAs, can help guiding investment strategy for conservation donors,

Indicators: Funding flows to PAs (absolute, as % of all flows, and as % of funds needed).

The WDPA can include attributes of PAs including their funding and financial sustainability status.

***Implementation: KBAs as guiding investment strategy for conservation donors,

Indicators: Funding flows to KBAs (absolute, as % of all flows, and as % of funds needed).

*** Red List assessments (species and ecosystems) are recognized as a fundamental element of any biodiversity strategy or plan – nationally, regionally and globally.

Indicator: funding devoted to red list assessments.








This target will be subject to changes contingent to resource needs assessments to be developed and reported by Parties.


Annex 2: IUCN's Policy Tools and Methodologies that support the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020 and the Aichi Targets IUCN's Policy Tools and Methodologies that support the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020 and the Aichi Targets

Policy Tool/Methodology

Description

Most relevant

Aichi Target

Other Aichi

Targets URL IUCN Lead Unit Partners

Manual for the implementation of payment for ecosystem services (PES), based on experiences from IUCN Tacana Project

A simple and practical methodological and conceptual guide based on the main results from implementation of two pilot projects for local Payment for Ecosystem Services (PES) in the municipalities of San Pablo and Tacana, both in the department of San Marcos in Guatemala. This document can provide guidance for implementation of local mechanisms for PES in other areas of the country and in other countries. Only available in Spanish.

3

http://www.iucn.org/es/sobre/union/secretaria/oficinas/mesoamerica_y_caribe/?12590/Contribuyendo-a-las-Metas-de-Aichi

IUCN Mesoamerica

Forest Poverty Tool-Kit

The Poverty-Forests toolkit uses modified forest-focused PRA techniques to identify levels of forest dependence among richer and poorer local people and as they affect men and women. After a wealth-ranking exercise, the toolkit gathers data on trends over the past 30 year or so and helps villagers to identify what they think are the key forest problems in their area, and their potential solutions. The toolkit is being adapted for use in landscape management activities and with other tools.

5 7

http://www.iucn.org/about/work/programmes/forest/fp_our_work/fp_our_work_initiatives/fp_our_work_ll/fp_livelihoods_landscapes_our_work/fp_livelihoods_landscapes_our_work_added/fp_livelihoods_landscapes_our_work_toolkits.cfm

Global Forest Programme

PROFOR, IUCN, ODI, CIFOR and Winrock International

Fisheries Management, a/o with the Fisheries Experts Group (FEG)

To foster the sustainable use of fisheries and promote the conservation of related marine ecosystems, FEG organizes scientific debates and meetings on key issues at the interface between fisheries and conservation. It produces and contributes to publications, books, articles, policy briefs, supported by desk studies and syntheses of available knowledge. CEM links with IUCN Commissions such as the Species Survival Commission (SSC) (particularly with its Marine Conservation sub-Committee and the Fisheries Experts Group of the ESUSG), with the

6 7

http://www.ebcd.org/en/IUCN_CEM_FEG/ http://www.iucn.org/about/union/commissions/cem/cem_work/tg_feg/

Commission on Ecosystem

Management (CEM)

















Commission on Ecological, Economic and Social Policy (CEESP) and the World Commission for Protected Areas (WCPA). Some policy relevant outputs are: • Bycatch fisheries governance study performed under CEM: “Performance Assessment of Bycatch and Discards Governance by Regional Fisheries Management Organizations”; • Elaboration of a multidisciplinary report on the use on MPAs in fisheries for the Sub-regional Fisheries Commission (CSRP) Dakar, April-December 2011) • “Reconsidering the consequences of selective fisheries”. A Policy Forum article in Science (March 2012 issue) • “Governance for fisheries and marine conservation. Interactions and co-evolution” - A book by S.M. Garcia, J. Rice, and A.T. Charles (Co-editors)

IUCN - SSC / ISSG: Global Invasive Species Database

The Invasive Species Specialist Group (ISSG) of IUCN's Species Survival Commission (SSC) has committed to provide information and data on invasive species to support the CBD Parties to meet the provisions of Aichi Target 9 that calls on states to strengthen work on invasive species. ISSG offers considerable expertise to this role and hosts the Global Invasive Species Database (GISD) which is globally acknowledged as the most authoritative information source on invasive species. There GISD is being integrated with the Red List of Threantened species, an IUCN flagship Knowledge Product. The Global Invasive Alien Species Information Partnership: This is a Memorandum of Cooperation that formally acknowledges that ISSG will support the work of the CBD on invasive species.

9 11,12

http://www.issg.org http://www.cbd.int/doc/meetings/cop/cop-11/information/cop-11-inf-34-en.pdf

Species Survival Commission -

Invasive Species Specialist Group

A Guide to Designing Legal and Institutional Frameworks on Alien

This guide seeks to help by providing national law and policy makers with practical information and guidance for developing and strengthening legal and institutional frameworks on alien invasive species,

9

Strategic Goal A and E,

12

http://data.iucn.org/dbtw-wpd/edocs/EPLP-040-En.pdf


Invasive Species Specialist Group





Invasive Species consistent with Article 8(h) of the CBD, as well as pertinent obligations under other international instruments. It provides a structured framework for dealing with alien invasive species issues and contains illustrations and practical examples to assist in understanding their impact.

UNEP-WCMC / IUCN: Protected Planet and The World Database on Protected Areas

The World Database on Protected Areas (WDPA) is a joint project of UNEP and IUCN, produced by UNEP-WCMC and the IUCN World Commission on Protected Areas (WCPA). The overall goal for this Knowledge Product is to provide the most comprehensive and authoritative global dataset on national parks and protected areas that answers key questions about sustainable development informing decision makers and policy makers.The WDPA includes the “UN List of Protected Areas” mandated by the UN Economic and Social Council (res. 713 XXVII 1959) to be compiled from officially delegated national authorities on protected areas. The Protected Planet Report 2012 reviews progress towards the achievement of the protected area targets of the CBD. Building on the work of the CBD-mandated Biodiversity Indicators Partnership (BIP) and the infomation contained in the WDPA, the report includes a set of indicators of protected area coverage, representativeness, effectiveness, management and governance. The report had a considerable policy impact and will be in the future a key tool for tracking progress towards the achievement of Target 11.

11 1,2,5,12,14,15,1

7

http://www.unep-wcmc.org/world-database-on-protected-areas-wdpa_76.html

World Commission on

Protected Areas / Global Protected

Areas Programme

UNEP-WCMC

IUCN Green List of well-managed Protected Areas

The IUCN Green List of well-managed protected areas is a global initiative that celebrates the success of effective protected areas and encourages other protected area to reach high standards. More effectively managed protected areas means greater benefits for people and nature. The IUCN Green List will reward innovation,

11

http://www.iucn.org/about/work/programmes/gpap_home/gpap_quality/gpap_greenlist/

Global Protected Areas Programme










excellence and endeavour while measuring progress towards effective and equal management of protected areas. Benefits for protected area managers and agencies include international recognition, increased political and financial support, motivation to meet and maintain high management standards, acknowledgement of benefit-sharing for local communities, recognition from the tourism industry and more.

IUCN Guidelines for Protected Areas Legislation (Date of release: 2011 (English, Spanish and French)

The main purpose of the Guidelines is to identify new or strengthened elements that countries should take into account in their protected area legal framework. The Guidelines are mainly intended for legal drafters working closely with protected areas authorities and others involved in the legislative process. It is also a valuable resource for those in executive agencies that oversee and implement related policies and programmes, and for concerned or affected communities, organizations and individuals. So far the guidelines have been successfully used as a benchmark tool in the drafting process and legislative review tackling various issues such as protected areas governance, management categories, legal mechanisms for adaptation, marine protected area (e.g in North Africa, the Caribbean, Asia and the Adriatic region). It is envisioned that these guidelines may stimulate ongoing dialogue among government authorities and stakeholders toward the aim of continuing to modernize national policy and legal frameworks to be most responsive to and supportive of conservation priorities, international law commitments, adaptive needs, and community goals for sustainable development.

11

http://www.iucn.org/about/work/programmes/environmental_law/elp_resources/elp_res_publications/

Policy and Programme

Group

IUCN Protected Area Management Categories

Through its World Commission on Protected Areas (WCPA), IUCN has provided the international guidelines on the categorisation of protected areas for nearly a quarter of a century. These categories are

11 1,5,14,1

5,17

http://www.iucn.org/about/work/programmes/marine/marine_resources/?11131

World Commission on

Protected Areas / Global Protected





http://data.iucn.org/dbtw-wpd/edocs/paps-016.pdf





internationally recognised and facilitate a global system for defining, recording and classifying protected areas and the wide variety of specific aims they might embody. They are acknowledged on an international level and often incorporated into national legislation. Recenly, Guiddelines for the application of these categories to marine protected areas have been developed.

/Guidelines-for-Applying-the-IUCN-Protected-Area-Management-Categories-to-Marine-Protected-Areas

Areas Programme

Guidelines for Applying Protected Areas Management Categories

IUCN’s Protected Areas Management Categories, which classify protected areas according to their management objectives, are today accepted as the benchmark for defining, recording, and classifying protected areas. They are recognized by international bodies such as the United Nations as well as many national governments. As a result, they are increasingly being incorporated into government legislation. These guidelines provide as much clarity as possible regarding the meaning and application of the Categories. They describe the definition of the Categories and discuss application in particular biomes and management approaches.)

11 http://data.iucn.org/dbtw-wpd/edocs/paps-016.pdf


Meeting Aichi Target 11: What does success look like for protected area system?

Analysis of Target 11 published in the Journal Parks by members of the WCPA

11 https://cmsdata.iucn.org/downloads/parks_woodley_1.pdf

World Commission on Protected Areas

Protected Areas Management Effectiveness Information Module

This website has been developed to help the conservation community share experiences and ideas on management effectiveness, as well as provide ‘lessons learned’ from these assessments. This reseource includes a Global Study of protected area management effectiveness which conceived to address the lack of standardisation of approaches to measuring management effectiveness around the world, and the absence of a compiled set of completed assessments. The work developed from a call from practitioners for systems to be ‘harmonised’,

11 http://www.wdpa.org/ME/Default.aspx


UNEP-WCMC, WCPA



https://cmsdata.iucn.org/downloads/parks_woodley_1.pdf



http://www.wdpa.org/ME/Default.aspx

http://www.wdpa.org/ME/Default.aspx


and from the call from international organisations and conventions such as the CBD for global reporting on management effectiveness, rather than just protected area coverage.Several methodologies have been developed to evaluate the management effectiveness of protected areas. So far, the Global Study has assembled and analysed information from more than 40 different methodologies that have been applied in more than 100 countries.

Protected Planet Ocean

In this website, explore the world's Marine Protected Areas directly in Google Earth, learn about ocean issues and how you can help and/or work in conservation, as well as upload movies and photos from inside Marine Protected Areas to our global Google Earth Marine Protected Areas layer.

11 http://www.protectplanetocean.org/


IUCN and other partners (CI, TNC, WWF, UNEP, WCMC, WCPA, MPA, PISC, etc...)

IUCN World Heritage Gaps Studies

IUCN produced several World Heritage gaps studies on the following topics: Wolrd Heritage desert landscapes, Nature and World Heritage in the Arab States, The Bahrain Action Plan for Marine World Heritage, World Heritage volcanoes, etc. Please refer to the link for a complete list of studies.

11

http://www.iucn.org/about/work/programmes/wcpa_worldheritage/resources/publications/

World Heritage Programme

State of World Heritage Report

Natural World Heritage Sites are internationally recognized as the world’s most important natural areas. These unique places are increasingly faced with threats such as mining, major infrastructure projects, poaching, illegal logging, agricultural encroachment and climate change. Of the 217 natural World Heritage Sites, nearly 8 per cent are on the List of World Heritage in Danger, 25 per cent are affected by serious conservation issues, and the status of many of these sites is not known. IUCN is undertaking Conservation Outlook Assessments in order to fill the current knowledge-gap on natural World Heritage Sites and provide a global overview of their state of

11

http://www.iucn.org/about/work/programmes/wcpa_worldheritage/our_work/conservation_outlook/


http://www.protectplanetocean.org/

http://www.protectplanetocean.org/










conservation.

Evaluation methodology for candidates for World Heritage Listing

Countries that have signed the World Heritage Convention can submit nominations for sites for inclusion on UNESCO’s World Heritage List as long as the property was previously included on the State Party’s Tentative List. Each year IUCN receives all completed World Heritage nominations for natural and mixed properties from the UNESCO World Heritage Centre. Each nominated site is independently evaluated by two Advisory Bodies –IUCN for natural properties and ICOMOS for cultural properties. IUCN and ICOMOS work together for the evaluation of mixed (natural and cultural) properties.

11

http://www.iucn.org/about/work/programmes/wcpa_worldheritage/our_work/wcpa_nomination/


Key resource manuals on WH

Written in colaboration with different partners, the resource manuals on World Heritage address the following issues: Managing Natural World Heritage, Managing Disaster Risks for World Heritage and Preparing World Heritage Nominations.

11 http://whc.unesco.org/en/resourcemanuals


IUCN, ICOMOS, ICCROM, UNESCO

The "Enhancing Our Heritage"-Toolkit

"The Enhancing Our Heritage Toolkit contains twelve practical tools, each designed to help those responsible for World Heritage site conservation piece together the elements of a comprehensive management framework, including the construction of targeted monitoring strategies. Designed as separate exercises, each with tables and guidelines, the emphasis is on user-friendliness, flexibility, and adaptability to local realities." (WHC Website)

11 http://whc.unesco.org/en/series/23


IUCN, UNESCO and UN Foundation

IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria version 3.1 (In English, Spanish and French)

The IUCN Red List Criteria were designed to be applied at the scale of the entire range of the species (subspecies, variety or subpopulation) being assessed, but they can be applied at the national level if the recommended guidelines are followed. Assessed species are assigned to one of seven categories, based on a rigorous set of criteria. These categories range from “Extinct” (no individuals remaining) to “Least Concern” (lowest risk, may be widespread and abundant). It also classifies other

12 1,2,6,9,13,17

http://www.iucnredlist.org/technical-documents/categories-and-criteria

Global Species Programme





http://whc.unesco.org/en/resourcemanuals

http://whc.unesco.org/en/resourcemanuals

http://whc.unesco.org/en/series/23

http://whc.unesco.org/en/series/23






species as “Data Deficient” (lacking sufficient data to make an assessment of risk of extinction). The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species is one of IUCN's flagship Knowledge Product.

Guidelines for Using the IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria

This is a guide for using the IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria at a global level.

12 1,2,6,9,13,17



Guidelines for Application of IUCN Red List Criteria at Regional and National Levels: Version 4.0 (In English, Spanish and French)

This is a guide to apply the IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria below the global level. Any country, or other region, using the IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria for listing species must follow these guidelines without deviation or modification, if they wish to state that their assessment follows the IUCN system.

12 2,6,9,13

,17



IUCN Red List Index

The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species information is used to develop one of the key existing biodiversity indicators, the Red List Index. The Red List Index can be calculated for all species or for a particular groups of species (i.e. birds, mammals, corals, etc), and it can also be calculated at a global, regional, and/or national scale. RLIs have been widely adopted at the policy level, being used to report against the CBD 2010 Biodiversity Targets, the UN Millennium Development Goals, by CITES, CMS (and its agreements: AEWA, ACAP Raptor MOU), and for regional policy fora (e.g., SEBI in Europe). It has been well profiled in global assessments such as the Global Biodiversity Outlook-3 and Global Environment Outlook 5. The RLI index is now key and formally adopted for monitoring progress towards CBD's Aichi Biodiversity Target 12 and is also important for other targets such as targets 5,6,7,8 and 14.

12 2,5,6,7,9,13,14,

17

http://www.iucnredlist.org/about/publications-links#Red_List_Index http://www.iucnredlist.org/technical-documents/categories-and-criteria http://intranet.iucn.org/webfiles/doc/SpeciesProg/RLI_Guidelines_Final_4march09.pdf


Guidelines for Re-Introductions and other Conservation

These guidelines are intended to act as a guide for procedures useful to reintroduction programmes. The guidelines have been widley used by the conservation

12 http://www.issg.org/pdf/publications/Translocation-


Invasive Species










http://intranet.iucn.org/webfiles/doc/SpeciesProg/RLI_Guidelines_Final_4march09.pdf













http://intranet.iucn.org/webfiles/doc/SSC/SSCwebsite/Policy_statements/Reintroduction_guidelines.pdf




Translocations community and are in the process of an important update.

Guidelines-2012.pdf Specialist Group

Checklist to assist in making non-detriment findings for Appendix II exports

"The Checklist helps identify the factors that need to be taken into account when making an NDF and assists Scientific Authorities in understanding the strengths and weaknesses of the information at their disposal." (CITES-Website http://www.cites.org/eng/prog/ndf/index.shtml)

12

English: http://data.iucn.org/dbtw-wpd/edocs/SSC-OP-027.pdf French and Spanish annexes: http://data.iucn.org/dbtw-wpd/edocs/SSC-OP-027.pdf

Species Survival Commission

A Guide to Amending the Appendices to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora

The guide attempts to provide the Parties and others with a single document to guide them through the Convention's articles and subsequent resolutions governing the submission, presentation and adoption of proposals to amend the Appendices.

12

English (7th edition): http://data.iucn.org/dbtw-wpd/edocs/CITES-030.pdf French (7th edition): www.iucn.org/dbtw-wpd/edocs/CITES-030-Fr.pdf Spanish (7th edition): www.iucn.org/dbtw-wpd/edocs/CITES-030-Es.pdf

Global Species Programme /

Species Survival Commission

Explanatory Guide to the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture

The entry into force of the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture marks the commitment of the world community to a freestanding convention directed at addressing both global needs for food security and internationally agreed objectives regarding the concepts of ‘access and benefit-sharing’ found in the Convention on Biological Diversity. The sixth in a series of Guides to the implementation of particular international instruments and concepts, it seeks to promote greater understanding of the Treaty’s text, including some of the scientific, technical and legal issues upon which it is founded, and possible implications.

13 7 http://data.iucn.org/dbtw-wpd/edocs/EPLP-057.pdf


Group

Genetically Modified Organisms and

Biosafety and genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are amongst the most complex of biodiversity issues:

13 http://data.iucn.org/dbtw-wpd/edocs/PGC-001.pdf


http://data.iucn.org/dbtw-wpd/edocs/EPLP-057.pdf


http://data.iucn.org/dbtw-wpd/edocs/PGC-001.pdf

http://data.iucn.org/dbtw-wpd/edocs/PGC-001.pdf


Biosafety: A background paper for decision-makers and others to assist in consideration of GMO issues

from species conservation, to sustainable livelihoods, to socio-cultural policy. The greatest GMO-related need shared by all decision-makers – governmental, civil society, and industrial – is for unbiased background information and a framework for evaluating new evidence. This detailed, background analysis aims to enable IUCN and its Members determine how they should "advance leadership, research, analysis and dissemination of knowledge regarding the potential ecological impact of the release of genetically modified organisms into the environment, focusing especially on biodiversity, socio-economic impact and food security".

Group

WANI Tool Kits

For the implementation of Water Projects in SUR (including support to policy tools at local level and trans-boundary (The IUCN Water and Nature Initiative (WANI) has worked with 80+ partner organizations across the world to demonstrate water management that supports healthy rivers and communities. A toolkit series has been developed under WANI: to support learning on how to mainstream an ecosystems approach in water resource management; it is aimed at practitioners, policy-makers and students from NGOs, governments and academia; to build on practical case studies to show how key principles of sustainable water management are implemented in river basins; current toolkits cover the management of flows, governance, economics and incentives, and adaptation to climate change.

14 2,4,6 http://www.iucn.org/about/work/programmes/water/resources/toolkits/

Global Water Programme

Disaster Risk Reduction Guidelines

To promote the role of ecosystem management for reducing disaster risks due to disaster and climate change. This objective is an important and emerging subset of CEM’s overall goal. Especially in the aftermath of disasters, local communities depend on ecosystem services and products for their survival and

14 14, 15

http://www.iucn.org/about/union/commissions/cem/cem_work/tg_drr/ http://www.pedrr.net/


Management (CEM)

in partnership

http://www.iucn.org/about/work/programmes/water/resources/toolkits/



http://www.iucn.org/about/union/commissions/cem/cem_work/tg_drr/



http://www.pedrr.net/


recovery. DRR work offers an ecosystem based reduction of impacts of disasters, by respecting and strengthening ecosystem functioning. In addition, investing in sound ecosystem management, DRR can offer cost-effective solutions to reducing community vulnerability to future disasters. Some policy relevant outputs are: • “Environmental Guidance Note for DRR” published in 2009 • The United Nations University (UNU) Press book “The Role of Ecosystems for Disaster Risk Reduction” to be published at 2013 UNISDR Global Platform • Co-organized sessions and booth at UNISDR Global Platforms in 2009 and 2011, and International Disaster Risk Forum in 2010 and 2012; Workshops on the Mexican Gulf Oil Spill in Washington (USA) and Merida (Mexico); Knowledge Café at Jeju.

Guidance on assessments of ecosystems and the application of the ecosystem approach

Guidelines for assessments and principles of ecosystem management, understandable for and applicable by non-ecologists. Targeted to policy makers from the field to the international level; across sectors and disciplines. Some policy relevant outputs are: • Earlier products include the 12 principles of ecosystem management by the CBD and the 5-steps approach by Gill Sheperd • More recently an Ecosystem Management training has been delivered for park rangers in Latin America and four step assessment-methodology has been developed for the military • Presently we are developing resilience assessment for foresters; for watershed managers, and possibly an assessment tool for rural communities in relation to DRR.

14 11,15 http://www.cimic-coe.org/content/resources/download.php


Management (CEM)

in partnership

Principles of Ecosystem based adaptation to climate change

Promoting resilience of both ecosystems and human societies, beyond mere technological options that often are mainly focused on building hard infrastructure and other similar measures. EbA is the

15 http://www.iucn.org/about/union/commissions/cem/cem_work/tg_cca/


Management (CEM)

http://www.cimic-coe.org/content/resources/download.php



http://www.iucn.org/about/union/commissions/cem/cem_work/tg_cca/




use of biodiversity and ecosystem services as part of an overall adaptation strategy to help people to adapt to the adverse effects of climate change. As one of the possible elements of an overall adaptation strategy, ecosystem-based adaptation uses the sustainable management, conservation, and restoration of ecosystems to provide services that enable people to adapt to the impacts of climate change. It aims to maintain and increase the resilience and reduce the vulnerability of ecosystems and people in the face of the adverse effects of climate change. Some policy relevant outputs are: • Publication with case-studies available on IUCN web page/CBD “Building resilience to climate change” • Presentations in COP-10 (Nagoya), COP-11(Hyderabad) and for UNFCCC (Copenhagen, Cancun Durban) • Workshops in in St.Louis, Sénégal; Steppe conference Mongolia; SITE, Italy; WCC-Jeju.

Guide for Trainers; Climate Change and Forests

A methodological capacity building set on climate change and forests which includes a guide to the trainers, a portfolio of posters and a user manual. It has been used and validated through consultative and participatory capacity building activities with indigenous and local communities, peasants and civil society organizations. (In Spanish only)

15

https://cmsdata.iucn.org/downloads/guia_capacitador_cc_version_impresa.pdf

IUCN Mesoamerica

Guide for the construction of a geospatial model to identify and prioritize areas with potential for forest landscape restoration at regional level

Within the frame of the global initiative launched in 2011 to foster the restoration of 150 million hectares of forest and degraded lands at global level, called “The Bonn Challenge”, this initiative aims to map and identify opportunities for forest landscape restoration in Mexico, but could also be use and replicate methodologically at regional level.

15 IUCN

Mesoamerica

Series of IUCN Explanatory Guides to Biodiversity-related Multilateral

The series of Explanatory Guides developed by the IUCN ELC seeks to address a critical need within international law of conservation and sustainable development – to provide neutral expert analysis of

16 http://data.iucn.org/dbtw-wpd/edocs/EPLP-083.pdf


Group








Environmental Agreements: Latest product: IUCN Explanatory Guide to the Nagoya Protocol on Access and Benefit-sharing (Date of release: 2012 (English), 2013 (Spanish and French))

the text of critical international documents. The main goal of the latest Explanatory Guide is to facilitate the understanding of the legal obligations of the Parties under the Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits Arising from their Utilization (ABS) to the Convention on Biological Diversity. This guide is the product of collaboration with ABS experts from different regions and international institutions who engaged with IUCN in the writing and reviewing of this Guide. This publication serves as an adaptable tool for future ABS capacity-building and awareness raising initiatives, as well as an important reference for countries in their efforts to implement the Nagoya Protocol and operationalize ABS in practice.

Communication, Education and Public Awareness (CEPA): A toolkit for NBSAP coordinators

IUCN’s Commission on Education and Communication (CEC) developed a communication, education and public awareness toolkit for NBSAP coordinators per a request by the CBD Secretariat. The toolkit is meant to serve both as a resource for regional training workshops for NBSAP coordinators as well as a resource base for them when they were back in their work place. The toolkit provides guidance on where, when and how to use a wide range of education and communication interventions.

17 1, 2

http://www.cepatoolkit.org/html/resources/F3/F3656DCC-C288-4A7A-93E7-0BBAF62D8A31/Toolkit%20CEPA%20total%20_12%2004_.pdf

Commission on Education and

Communication

Financing NBSAPs: Options and Opportunities

This publication aims to provide biodiversity planners and decisions makers in Asia with a series of clear and practical methods, options and steps for developing financing strategies for their NBSAPs. It further outlines some opportunities for raising and allocating more innovative sources of finance for NBSAP implementation.

17 20

http://books.google.ch/books/about/Financing_NBSAPs.html?id=7HHFMAAACAAJ&redir_esc=y

Global Economics Programme

Protocolo Bio-cultural del Pueblo Indígena Miskitu; el derecho al consentimiento libre,

Herramienta metodológica para la defensa y el reconocimiento de los derechos ancestrales en el territorio de la Muskitia hondureña, elaborada mediante un proceso participativo de aprendizaje

18 16

http://www.iucn.org/es/sobre/union/secretaria/oficinas/mesoamerica_y_caribe/?12590/Contribuyendo-a-

IUCN Mesoamerica
















previo e informado en nuestro territorio de La Muskitia Hondureña

(“learning by doing), con el resultante empoderamiento de las organizaciones representativas del pueblo Miskitu.

las-Metas-de-Aichi

Payments for Ecosystem Services – Legal and Institutional Frameworks

Country-based analysts with experience in ecosystem services transactions have developed country and project assessments to define existing and recommend future regulatory and institutional frameworks that enable equitable and long-lasting ecosystem services transactions. The publication provides lessons and offers recommendations on the future development of PES schemes and supporting legal and institutional frameworks.

20 http://data.iucn.org/dbtw-wpd/edocs/EPLP-078.pdf


Group

Identifying and Mobilizing Resources for Biodiversity Conservation

This report provides a baseline assessment of global spending on biodiversity conversation and why biodiversity conservation fails to attract the resources necessary to halt the decline in biodiversity.

20

https://cmsdata.iucn.org/downloads/identifying_and_mobilizing_resources_for_biodiversity_conservation.pdf


ECOLEX

ECOLEX is an information service on environmental law, operated jointly by FAO, IUCN and UNEP. Its purpose is to build capacity worldwide by providing the most comprehensive possible global source of information on environmental law . This unique resource, which combines the environmental law information holdings of FAO, IUCN and UNEP, seeks to put this information at the disposal of users world-wide, in an easily accessible service, employing modern technology. The ECOLEX database includes information on treaties, international soft-law and other non-binding policy and technical guidance documents, national legislation, judicial decisions, and law and policy literature. Users have direct access to the abstracts and indexing information about each document, as well as to the full text of most of the information provided.

Strategic Goal A and E

multiple www.ecolex.org


Group

FAO, IUCN, UNEP

Drafting Legislation for Sustainable Soils:

This is a unique publication relating to legal frameworks of natural resources management.

Strategic Goal A

multiple http://data.iucn.org/dbtw-wpd/edocs/EPLP-052.pdf


IWMI








http://www.ecolex.org/




A Guide Following the “Legal and Institutional Frameworks for Sustainable Soils” (EPLP 45), this publication contributes to the revision of existing, and drafting of new, legislation relating to soils. It highlights the need for national soil policy, and sets out a soil management plan. It proposes legal and institutional elements that specifically address the needs of disadvantaged people, particularly women.

and E Group

An Explanatory Guide to the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety

This guide has been prepared by the IUCN Environmental Law Programme and the Foundation for International Environmental Law and Development (FIELD), in cooperation with the World Resources Institute (WRI). The main goal of the guide is to facilitate the understanding of the obligations of Parties to the Protocol, by providing an information base on the content and origin of the Protocol provisions, accessible to the non-specialist and useful for those who will be involved in the development and implementation of national safety frameworks.

Strategic Goal E



Group

Forthcoming Tools

Criteria and Categories for the IUCN Red List of Ecosystems

The IUCN Red List of Ecosystems, a new IUCN Knowledge Product, will be a global standard for how we assess the status of ecosystems, applicable at local, national, regional and global levels. We will be able to say whether an ecosystem is not facing imminent risk of collapse, or whether it is vulnerable, endangered, or critically endangered. This will be measured by assessing losses in area, degradation or other major changes such as conversion.

5 10,14,15,

17 http://www.iucnredlistofecosystems.org/


Management (CEM)

IUCN, CEM, Provita

The Legal Aspects of Connectivity Conservation - A Concept Paper: (Date of release: April 2013)

The purpose of the concept paper is to explore the legal aspects of connectivity conservation for achieving biodiversity conservation and supporting the goals of protected areas. In light of climate change, the analysis also considers the role of connectivity conservation for building natural resilience areas and for climate change adaptation and mitigation. The paper sets out basic concepts and principles related to connectivity

11 15 Policy and

Programme Group






conservation that are important to take into account for supportive legal instruments. It also presents legal aspects of connectivity conservation, including command and control techniques, as well as voluntary approaches and other economic instruments. Five case studies were developed to illustrate the concept (European Union, the Netherlands, Brazil, Australia and South Africa). The concept paper is aimed at a wide audience, from policy and law practitioners, protected areas managers and planners to a general readership. The intended audience may include international organizations working with connectivity (e.g., CBD and UNFCCC), government officials, conservation NGOs, local communities, indigenous peoples, and private sector interests with ownership or use rights.

Technical guide to Target 11 (Date of release: Fall 2013)

The Global Protected Areas program of the IUCN is working with the CBD secretariat to produce a technical guide to Target 11. This guide will examine all elements of the Target to assist parties with understanding and measuring these elements. This guide will be produced for Fall, 2013.

11 Global Protected

Areas Programme CBD Secretariat

IUCN standard to identify areas of global significance for biodiversity (Key Biodiversity Areas)

The WCPA-SSC Joint Task Force on Biodiversity and Protected Areas is working with partners to develop global standard for Key Biodiversity Areas which will become a new IUCN Knowledge Product. The Task force held a framing workshop to define the key issues around KBAs in June, 2012. This will be followed by other technical workshops. The first one on criteria and delineation was held in Washington DC in March 2013. This is a wide consultation process to develop a globally agreed framework to identify, as target 11 reads: “areas of particular importance for biodiversity”, applicable to all taxonomic groups and biomes (freshwater, marine and terrestrial). The process is building on and collaborating with organizations leading on existing approaches and aims to be compatible and in line with current exiting efforts such as Important Bird

11 4,5,10,11,12,14,15,

17

http://www.iucn.org/knowledge/focus/ipbes_focus/key_biodiversity_areas/







Areas, Alliance for Zero Extinction sites, Ecologically and Biologically Significant Areas (EBSAs), and others. Parties can learn about the progress in this project at the task force website: www.iucn.org/biodiversity_and_protected_areas_taskforce . The IUCN aims to launch this new Knowledge Product at the World Parks Congress in November 2014.

IUCN Index of Human Dependency on Nature

Under development: The main goal of the IUCN Index of Human Dependency on Nature, a forthcoming flagship Knowledge Product, is to provide policy makers from the development, environment and other sectors with an independent assessment of the degree to which natural ecosystems and wild resources contribute to the needs of rural and coastal communities as a proportion of total household income. The Index will aim to improve the sustainable management of natural resources to better meet local needs and help target national development and conservation policies.

14

11, 18, 19 Strategic Goals D and E

http://www.iucn.org/knowledge/focus/ipbes_focus/iucn_index_of_human_dependency_on_nature/


IUCN Natural Resource Governance Framework

Under development: The main aim of this forthcoming IUCN Knowledge Product is to provide an independent method to determine the strengths and weaknesses of natural resource decision-making and implementation. It will help decision-makers, whether citizens, economic institutions or political authorities to make better and fairer decisions that will underpin the sustainable management of natural resources and improve existing governance arrangements. IUCN will develop, test and apply the new framework that will provide the same coherency and consistency of approach to understanding and assessing natural resource governance as the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species does for the conservation status of threatened species.

multiple Strategic Goal A and E

http://www.iucn.org/knowledge/focus/ipbes_focus/iucn_natural_resource_governance_framework/


Group












Annex 3: Useful Links and References Target 1 Op-ed co-signed by IUCN Director General Julia Marton-Lefèvre on the idea that conserving biodiversity makes nutritional, ecological and economic sense: http://sustainability.thomsonreuters.com/2013/06/14/executive-perspective-linking-agriculture-and-biodiversity-can-help-feed-the-planet CEC Campaign “How to tell a love story”: http://www.iucn.org/about/union/commissions/cec/cec_how_we_work/love__not_loss_/ Target 2 IUCN work featured in WBCSD Business Guide to Water Valuation: http://www.wbcsd.org/Pages/EDocument/EDocumentDetails.aspx?ID=15801&NoSearchContextKey=true Target 5 Best Practice Guideline on Ecological Restoration for Protected Areas: http://www.iucn.org/about/work/programmes/gpap_home/gpap_capacity2/gpap_bpg/ Target 6 Multiple publications in relation to the GEF project on defining an ecosystem approach on seamounts in the South West Indian Ocean. All publications available online: http://www.iucn.org/about/work/programmes/marine/marine_our_work/marine_governance/seamounts/publications/ Target 9 Island Biodiversity and Invasive Species Database (IBIS): http://ibis.fos.auckland.ac.nz/ Invasive Alien Species Pathway Management Toolbox: http://www.pathway-toolbox.auckland.ac.nz/ Database of Island Invasive Species Eradications: http://eradicationsdb.fos.auckland.ac.nz/ Threatened Island Biodiversity database: http://tib.islandconservation.org/ Other ISSG efforts: www.issg.org Target 10 The International Reference User Group (RUG): http://epoca-project.eu/index.php/what-do-we-do/outreach/rug.html Target 11 Dudley, N. (Editor) (2008). Guidelines for Applying Protected Area Management Categories. Gland, Switzerland, IUCN. x + 86pp. Available online: http://cmsdata.iucn.org/downloads/guidelines_for_applying_protected_area_management_categories.pdf. The Indigenous Peoples and Community Conserved Areas’ toolkit (ICCA toolkit): http://www.iccaregistry.org/ Woodley, S., Bertzky, B., Crawhall, N., Londoño, J.M., MacKinnon, K.,Redford, K., Sandwith, T., “Meeting Aichi Target 11: What does success look like for protected area systems?”, in PARKS, 18.1 (2012), pp. 23-36. Geldmann, J. , Barnes, M. , Coad, L. , Craigie, I., Hockings, M. & Burgess, N. 2013. Effectiveness of terrestrial protected areas in reducing biodiversity and habitat loss. CEE 10-007. Collaboration for Environmental Evidence: www.environmentalevidence.org/SR10007.html .

http://sustainability.thomsonreuters.com/2013/06/14/executive-perspective-linking-agriculture-and-biodiversity-can-help-feed-the-planet

http://sustainability.thomsonreuters.com/2013/06/14/executive-perspective-linking-agriculture-and-biodiversity-can-help-feed-the-planet


http://www.wbcsd.org/Pages/EDocument/EDocumentDetails.aspx?ID=15801&NoSearchContextKey=true

http://www.wbcsd.org/Pages/EDocument/EDocumentDetails.aspx?ID=15801&NoSearchContextKey=true

http://www.iucn.org/about/work/programmes/gpap_home/gpap_capacity2/gpap_bpg/



http://ibis.fos.auckland.ac.nz/

http://www.pathway-toolbox.auckland.ac.nz/

http://www.pathway-toolbox.auckland.ac.nz/



http://www.issg.org/





http://www.iccaregistry.org/

http://www.environmentalevidence.org/SR10007.html


Geldmann, J. , Barnes, M. , Coad, L. , Craigie, I., Hockings, M. & Burgess, N. 2013. Effectiveness of terrestrial protected areas in reducing habitat loss and population declines, in BIOLOGICAL CONSERVATION, 161 (2013), pp. 230-238. Articles on technical and legal tools and approaches to improving the conservation and management of biodiversity in ABNJ including: Gjerde, K.M., Currie, D., Wowk, K., Sack, K., (in press) “Ocean in Peril: reforming the management of global ocean living resources in areas beyond national jurisdiction”, Marine Pollution Bulletin http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0025326X13004244 Warner, R., Gjerde, K.M, and Freestone, D. (in press). “Regional Governance for Fisheries and Biodiversity” in GOVERNANCE FOR FISHERIES AND CONSERVATION: INTERACTION AND CO-EVOLUTION, Garcia S., Rice, J. and Charles, A. (eds), Wiley-Blackwell Ban, N.C, Bax, N.J., Gjerde, K.M., Devillers, R., Dunn, D.C., Dunstan, P.K., Hobday, A.J., Maxwell, S.M., Kaplan, D.M., Pressey, R.L., Ardron, J.A., Game, E.T. & Halpin, P.N., 2013. Systematic conservation planning: A better recipe for managing the high seas for biodiversity conservation and sustainable use, Conservation Letters 00 (2013) 1–14 first published online: 22 FEB 2013 DOI: 10.1111/conl.12010 Borrini-Feyerabend, G., N. Dudley, T. Jaeger, B. Lassen, N. Pathak Broome, A. Phillips and T. Sandwith (2013). Governance of Protected Areas: From understanding to action. Best Practice Protected Area Guidelines Series No. 20, Gland, Switzerland: IUCN. xvi + 124pp.: www.iucn.org/pa_governance IUCN Green List of Protected Areas: http://www.iucn.org/about/work/programmes/gpap_home/gpap_quality/gpap_greenlist/ BIOPAMA (Capacity Building to Strengthen PA management): http://www.iucn.org/about/work/programmes/gpap_home/gpap_capacity2/gpap_biopama/ Lausche, Barbara, David Farrier, Jonathan Verschuuren, Antonio G. M. La Viña, Arie Trouwborst, Charles-Hubert Born, Lawrence Aug (2013). The Legal Aspects of Connectivity Conservation. A Concept Paper, IUCN, Gland, Switzerland. xxiv + 190 pp.: http://data.iucn.org/dbtw-wpd/edocs/EPLP-085-001.pdf Lausche, Barbara. (2011). Guidelines for Protected Areas Legislation. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland. xxvi + 370 pp, http://www.iucn.org/about/work/programmes/environmental_law/elp_work/elp_work_issues/elp_work_pa/pa2/ Target 12 Required and Recommended Supporting Information for IUCN Red List Assessments: http://www.iucnredlist.org/documents/Required_and_Recommended_Supporting_Information_for_IUCN_Red_List_Assessments.pdf Target 14 Kelvin S.-H. Peh, Andrew Balmford, Richard B. Bradbury, Claire Brown, Stuart H.M. Butchart, Francine M.R. Hughes, Alison Stattersfield, David H.L. Thomas, Matt Walpole, Julian Bayliss, David Gowing, Julia P.G. Jones, Simon L. Lewis, Mark Mulligan, Bhopal Pandeya, Charlie Stratford, Julian R. Thompson, Kerry Turner, Bhaskar Vira, Simon Willcock, Jennifer C. Birch, “TESSA: A toolkit for rapid assessment of ecosystem services at sites of biodiversity conservation importance”, in ECOSYSTEM SERVICES, Available online 9 July 2013, ISSN 2212-0416, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2013.06.003. Target 15 Blue Carbon Initiative: http://thebluecarboninitiative.org/

http://www.iucn.org/pa_governance


http://www.iucn.org/about/work/programmes/gpap_home/gpap_capacity2/gpap_biopama/

http://data.iucn.org/dbtw-wpd/edocs/EPLP-085-001.pdf

http://data.iucn.org/dbtw-wpd/edocs/EPLP-085-001.pdf

http://www.iucn.org/about/work/programmes/environmental_law/elp_work/elp_work_issues/elp_work_pa/pa2/

http://www.iucn.org/about/work/programmes/environmental_law/elp_work/elp_work_issues/elp_work_pa/pa2/



http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2013.06.003

http://thebluecarboninitiative.org/


Target 16 Thomas Greiber, Sonia Peña Moreno, Mattias Åhrén, Jimena Nieto Carrasco, Evanson Chege Kamau, Jorge Cabrera Medaglia, Maria Julia Oliva, Frederic Perron-Welch in cooperation with Natasha Ali and China Williams 2012. An Explanatory Guide to the Nagoya Protocol on Access and Benefit-sharing IUCN, Gland, Switzerland. xviii + 372 pp, http://iucn.org/news_homepage/events/cbd/work/the_nagoya_protocol/. Model Agreement on Access to Marine Microorganisms and Benefit Sharing: http://www.microb3.eu/sites/default/files/pdf/MicroB3_ABS_model_agreement_web_final.pdf Target 17 IUCN Strategy for engagement on the process of revision and update of the NBSAPs: http://www.iucn.org/nbsaps/ The NBSAP Forum: http://www.nbsapforum.net/ The Environment-Gender Index (EGI): http://environmentgenderindex.org/ Target 18 Training Kit on Participatory Spatial Information Management and Communication: http://pgis-tk-en.cta.int/ The IFAD adaptive approach to participatory mapping: http://www.ifad.org/pub/map/pm_ii.pdf Good practices in participatory mapping: http://www.ifad.org/pub/map/pm_web.pdf Target 19 Integrated Biodiversity Assessment Tool: https://www.ibat-alliance.org/ibat-conservation/login, https://www.ibatforbusiness.org/login


http://www.microb3.eu/sites/default/files/pdf/MicroB3_ABS_model_agreement_web_final.pdf

http://www.iucn.org/nbsaps/

http://www.nbsapforum.net/

http://environmentgenderindex.org/

http://pgis-tk-en.cta.int/

http://pgis-tk-en.cta.int/

http://www.ifad.org/pub/map/pm_ii.pdf

http://www.ifad.org/pub/map/pm_web.pdf

https://www.ibat-alliance.org/ibat-conservation/login

https://www.ibatforbusiness.org/login

Date post:	26-May-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	5 times
Download:	0 times

Key Messages...Overall Messages The Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011 – 2020 and the Aichi...

Documents