Introducing
Your new presentation assistant.
Refine, enhance, and tailor your content, source relevant images, and edit visuals quicker than ever before.
Trending searches
to cause biodiversity to be included in discussions, decisions, or simply accepted by most people....
mainstream only became popular in English usage since 1960s, since when popularity rocketed.
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.
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.
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 biodiversity are developed and applied, consistent and in harmony with the Convention and other relevant international obligations, taking into account national socio-economic conditions.
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.
The Faustian pact...
At a 2010 retreat in Switzerland representatives of the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands, CITES, CMS, the World Heritage Convention and the CBD agreed that the Strategic Plan for the period 2011-2020 to be adopted at the tenth meeting of the Conference of the Parties of the CBD, should serve as a common framework for action and financing over the next ten years.
so what does all this mean, then?
What is really needed is to match the information and tools that scientists, as part of society, can provide for the needs and capacities of stakeholders (the rest of society) to help in reducing biodiversity loss, or, better, managing biodiversity change
Stakeholder dialogues:
important they are not monologues!!
simple: be in on the ground floor....
is it a partnership?
or is it a symbiosis?
or parasitism?
information sharing:
key to good stakeholder dialogues
But how to share?
Do the stakeholders actually care?
and, do you??
Some well-known success factors for
community-based initiatives include :
•individuals committed to the project;
•individuals able to generate enthusiasm, and
enabling social structures;
•a problem that brings community together in
support of a shared cause;
•sufficient resources to support collective efforts
to change;
•agreement and consensus between people
to take things forward.
WATSON: assessments must be: demand-driven and co-designed with users and stakeholders; evidence-based and relevant to policy and decision making, but not prescriptive, in view of current ideological debates
Misses the point:
what is needed is:
policy responsive
Policy Support
POLICY IMPACT!
policy briefing papers >stakeholder networks>policymakers > impact.
A word on targets.
2000 EU adopts target to “halt biodiversity loss by 2010"
2002: WSSD creates 2010 biodiversity target to
“Reduce the rate of loss of biodiversity by 2010”
2002 – CBD adopts 2010 target
2006 – MDG 7 amended to include 2010 target
2010 – Failure!
now 2020 targets in play, CBD and EU
2015 - SDGs
Bad Policy:
Anticipating failure…
the G8 group of nations in 2007 added biodiversity
to the agenda. Reference is made to the 2010 target:
Notwithstanding the efforts and commitments to achieve
the 2010 target, direct and indirect drivers of biodiversity
loss, aggravated by climate change, still continue.
Furthermore, the world has been changing rapidly since
the adoption of the 2010 target. All of these drivers of
biodiversity loss, causing mid and long-term threats to
biodiversity and identified on the basis of scientific
research, should be considered in the development
of the post-2010 framework.
Good Policy ideas: NBS
what legacy will the project leave?
Stakeholders, satisfied and consulted,
are the best security for legacy
consulting groups of stakeholders early in a project
will ensure impact is maximised for the project findings,
and legacy is ensured.
and we can all swim in the mainstream...
Working through the buzz-words:
mainstreaming, stakeholders, science and policy.
Peter Bridgewater
Lack of defined indicators established at the same
time as the targets contributes further to the systematic
failure of the target setting system.
Good targets need to be capable of being measured to test the extent to which the outcome has been achieved, and
what there is left to do.
Despite this the 10th Meeting of the CBD COP in October 2010 established new targets, but left indicators to be settled later.
SMART? No.. CUTE certainly not!
Although targets should indeed be SMART, perhaps it is better if they are described as ‘CUTE’, i.e.
• Comprehensive: Does this target cover all defined
areas of concern? Is it related to the overall issue?
Does it bring together all aspects of the issue that
the target seeks to address (an integrating aspect)?
• Understandable: Can this target be understood
by all?
• Time-bound: How long should the target last?
• Enabling Does this target help decide appropriate
actions, including do-nothing options?
SMART makes sense for industry-focused applications, but is not easily transferable to systems looking at environmental management and outcomes, especially in intergovernmental organisations.
it is preferable to seek names for policy target elements which reflect the kind of indicators that could be used, and have something to say about
the destination of the target.
Good targets need several elements within them.
Targets for business are typically focused on being ‘SMART’, i.e. seeking an outcome but being:
• Specific: What is the task to be done?
• Measurable: What evidence could be used to show if and how well the task has been done?
• Achievable: Is the task possible?
• Relevant: Why is this target important?
• Time-bound: By when should the task be completed?
Anticipating failure…
From its 2007 meeting, the G8 group of nations added biodiversity issues to the agenda. In the ‘Carta di Siracusa’ on biodiversity (G8, 2007), issued by the G8 Ministers of the Environment, reference is made to the 2010 target:
Notwithstanding the efforts and commitments to achieve the 2010 target, direct and indirect drivers of biodiversity loss, aggravated by climate change, still continue. Furthermore, the world has been changing rapidly since the adoption of the 2010 target. All of these drivers of biodiversity loss, causing mid and long-term threats to biodiversity and identified on the basis of scientific research, should be considered in the development of the post-2010 framework.
A word on targets.
2000 EU adopts target to “halt biodiversity loss by 2010”
2002: WSSD creates 2010 biodiversity target to
“Reduce the rate of loss of biodiversity by 2010”
2002 – CBD adopts 2010 target
2006 – MDG 7 amended to include 2010 target
2010 – Failure!