Stakeholder Visions for Biodiversity Conservation in Developing Countries
2. Progress in Global Governance for Biodiversity
Challenges for Biodiversity Governance
3.1. Expert Viewpoint Elicitation
3.2. Stakeholder Selection
|China||(1) Director||Ministry of Environmental Protection|
|(2) National Focal Point|
|Brazil||(3) Minister and Head of the delegation||Ministry of Environment|
|(4) National Secretary of Biodiversity|
|(5) Senior Advisor and Director|
|Kenya||(6) Director General||Ministry of Environment, Water and Natural Resources|
|(7) Deputy Director|
|Bolivia||(8) Senior Advisor and Head of Delegation||Ministry of Foreign Affair and Ministry of Environment and Water|
|(9) National Focal Point|
|Ghana||(10) Professor (National Biodiversity Committee)||Ministry of Environment, Science and Technology|
|Japan||(13) Director||Ministry of Environment|
|South Africa||(14) Deputy Minister||Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs|
|India||(16) Director||Ministry of Environment and Forest|
|European Commission (EC)||(18) Biodiversity Policy Officer||Environment|
|International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN)||(19) Director||Global Policy|
|Nature Conservancy||(20) President and CEO||Management and Environmental Strategy|
|Conservation International||(21) President||Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services Policy|
3.3. Data Organization and Analysis
4.1. Beyond Target 11
4.2. Improved Biodiversity Action
4.3. Mobilizing Financial Resources for Biodiversity
5.1. Reframing the Biodiversity Problem
5.2. Guidance for NBSAPs
5.3. Assistance on Mainstreaming/Governing Nexus
5.4. Strengthening Financial System
6. Conclusions and Policy Implication
- Attention on the 2015 targets which may be lagging. The coming into effect of the Nagoya Protocol and a robust system of NBSAPs are necessary to enable progress after COP12. In addition, focus on other foundational targets could be pivotal in establishing the conditions for success. Target 1 (increasing awareness) and Target 20 (financial mechanism) would be important goals for significant new emphasis. As noted by respondents above, increasing awareness may mean approaching biodiversity in a different way and while not forgetting about “loss” emphasizing the role of ecosystem services in development.
- A comprehensive financial arrangement needs to be prioritized. While the 2011–2020 period was able to see an increase in aid, as noted above, this was largely a result of combining biodiversity funding with other projects. This is neither a good not a bad thing for biodiversity, it is an issue which requires a more comprehensive approach. Developing a funding approach that creates local markets for ecosystem services (building on the Nagoya Protocol), increases international funding, and clarifies best practices for funding biodiversity and other processes (such as climate change, development, water, etc.) is key. This includes developing funding not simply for protected areas but for protected area systems that include both land and marine areas.
- Capacity buildings for NBSAPs are crucial. First generation NBSAPs did not create the model that they could have because the processes were often developed too narrowly and political will to implement its initiatives was lacking. Developing countries can be helped significantly by providing guidance and incentives for CBD focal points to engage with other stakeholders and help build political will. In addition, the science community (including the developing IPBES) needs to provide clearer ways for states to translate the global to national level conditions in the most effective way possible.
- Create a more rigorous clearinghouse mechanism for examining biodiversity policy experimentation. As one respondent commented “Right now what we need is to mobilize resources so that the developing countries can scope out their programs that work to meet the Aichi Targets, and they need money for that”. A more rigorous process for collecting information and evaluating it based on unambiguous evidence could be very helpful as developing countries create their NBSAPs and implement biodiversity policies. Funding south-south cooperation could facilitate this effort or perhaps this is a role for the developing IPBES. Although the approach IPBES will take towards facilitating science is still being determined, there may be some important opportunities on issues such as indigenous knowledge. Regardless, this should fit into the funding conditions discussed above.
- Developing a plan for technology transfer. While UNEP has made technology transfer a key contribution of its efforts since the development of the Bali Strategic Plan [62,63], there is not yet clear effort in this regard under the CBD. Respondents were clear that appropriate technology transfer should be decided on a case-by-case basis; depending on the issue. Unfortunately, this once again is a problem of infrastructure which is often lacking in developing countries. Developing a plan and strategy for assessing technology, implementing it in effective and equitable ways, and finally fostering the transfer remains desiderata.
Appendix—Set of Interview Questions
- What is the national framework for biodiversity conservation in (Country)?
- How is biodiversity financed in (Country)?
- In terms of financial resources, how do you generate funds to support the project of biodiversity conservation?
- Are you getting resources from outside, from external donors towards developing the biodiversity framework and achieving the Aichi targets? How do you secure these resources?
- Do you think (Country) would be able to achieve the Aichi targets by 2020?
- What are the hindrances that may affect the conservation of biodiversity and achieving the Aichi targets by 2020?
- Are there any problems in (Country) in planning for the Aichi targets?
- So in terms of new technology, what sort of technology would be appropriate to assist biodiversity efforts?
- How can various stakeholders (business, other ministries, etc.) be included in biodiversity efforts?
Conflicts of Interest
- Gari, J.A. Biodiversity Conservation and Use: Local and global considerations. In Science, Technology and Development Discussion Paper No. 7, Center for International Development and Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs; Harvard University: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1999. [Google Scholar]
- Flores, M. Protected Areas. In The Importance of Biodiversity and Ecosystem in Economic Growth and Equity in Latin America and the Caribbean: An Economic Valuation of Ecosystem; Bovarnick, A., Alpizar, F., Schnell, C., Eds.; United Nations Development Programme (UNDP): New York, NY, USA, 2010; pp. 203–237. [Google Scholar]
- Report of the Sixth Meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity. Available online: https://www.cbd.int/doc/meetings/cop/cop-06/official/cop-06-20-en.pdf (accessed on 20 December 2014).
- Adenle, A.A. Failure to achieve 2010 biodiversity’s target in developing countries: How can conservation help? Biodivers. Conserv. 2012, 21, 2435–2442. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Butchart, S.H.; Walpole, M.; Collen, B.; van Strien, A.; Scharlemann, J.P.; Almond, R.E.; Baillie, J.E.; Bomhard, B.; Brown, C.; Bruno, J.; et al. Global biodiversity: Indicators of recent declines. Science 2010, 328, 1164–1168. [Google Scholar]
- United Nations. Millennium Development Goals Report 2012; UN Publications: New York, NY, USA, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Fisher, M. 2010 and all that—Looking Forward to Biodiversity Conservation in 2011 and beyond. Oryx 2009, 43, 449–450. [Google Scholar]
- The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB). In The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity: An Interim Report; European Communities: Cambridge, UK, 2008.
- Leone, F. Earth Negotiations Bulletin. A Reporting Service for Environment and Development Negotiations. Proceedings of the Summary of the Tenth Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity, Nagoya, Japan, 18–29 October 2010; p. 9. Available online: http://www.iisd.ca/download/pdf/enb09544e.pdf (accessed on 20 December 2014).
- McCarthy, D.P.; Donald, P.F.; Scharlemann, J.P.; Buchanan, G.M.; Balmford, A.; Green, J.M.; Bennun, L.A.; Burgess, N.D.; Fishpool, L.D.; Garnett, S.T.; et al. Financial costs of meeting global biodiversity conservation targets: Current spending and unmet needs. Science 2012, 338, 946–949. [Google Scholar]
- Miller, D.C.; Agrawal, A.; Roberts, J.T. Biodiversity Governance, and the Allocation of International Aid for Conservation. Conserv. Lett. 2013, 6, 12–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wood, A.; Stedman-Edward, P.; Mang, J. Root Causes of Biodiversity Loss; Earthscan Publications: London, UK, 2000. [Google Scholar]
- Nijman, V. An overview of international wildlife trade from Southeast Asia. Biodivers. Conserv. 2010, 19, 1101–1114. [Google Scholar]
- Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. In Ecosystems and Human Well-Being: Biodiversity Synthesis; World Resources Institute: Washington, DC, USA, 2005.
- Lenzen, M.; Moran, D.; Kanemoto, K.; Foran, B.; Lobefaro, L.; Geschke, A. International trade drives biodiversity threats in developing nations. Nature 2012, 486, 109–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lenzen, M.; Moran, D.; Bhaduri, A.; Kanemoto, K.; Bekchanov, M.; Geschke, A.; Foran, B. International trade of scarce water. Ecol. Econ. 2013, 94, 78–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- UNEP-CBD. United Nations Environment Programme—Convention on Biological Diversity. Strategic Plan. Available online: http://www.cbd.int/decision/cop/default.shtml?id=7200 (accessed on 20 December 2014).
- Prip, C.; Gross, T.; Johnston, S.; Vierros, M. Biodiversity Planning. In An Assessment of National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans; United Nations University Institute of Advanced Studies: Tokyo, Japan, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Swiderska, K. Mainstreaming Biodiversity in Development Policy and Planning: A Review of Country Experience; Biodiversity and Livelihoods Group International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED): London, UK, 2002. [Google Scholar]
- Agrawal, A.; Redford, K. Poverty, Development and Biodiversity Conservation: Shooting in the Dark? Wildlife Conservation: New York, NY, USA, 2006. [Google Scholar]
- Adams, W.M.; Aveling, R.; Brockington, D.; Dickson, B.; Elliott, J.; Hutton, J.; Roe, D.; Vira, B.; Wolmer, W. Biodiversity Conservation and the Eradication of Poverty. Science 2004, 306, 1146–1149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ostrom, E. Governing the Commons; University of Cambridge Press: Cambridge, UK, 1990. [Google Scholar]
- Hill, R.; Halamish, E.; Gordon, I.J.; Clark, M. The maturation of biodiversity as a global social-ecological issue and implications for future biodiversity science and policy. Futures 2013, 46, 41–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Krishna, V.V.; Drucker, A.G.; Pascual, U.; Raghu, P.T.; King, E.D.I.O. Estimating compensation payments for on-farm conservation of agricultural biodiversity in developing countries. Ecol. Econ. 2013, 87, 110–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schomers, S.; Matzdorf, B. Payments for ecosystem services: A review and comparison of developing and industrialized countries. Ecosyst. Serv. 2013, 6, 16–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Padmanabhan, M.; Jungcurt, S. Biocomplexity-conceptual challenges for institutional analysis in biodiversity governance. Ecol. Econ. 2012, 81, 70–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Farmar-Bowers, Q.; Lane, R. Understanding farmers’ strategic decision-making processes and the implications for biodiversity conservation policy. J. Environ. Manag. 2009, 90, 1135–1144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dobson, A. Monitoring global rates of biodiversity change: Challenges that arise in meeting Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) 2010 goals. Philosophical Transanctions of the Royal Society of London. Biol. Sci. 2005, 360, 229–241. [Google Scholar]
- Santamaria, L.; Mendez, P.B. Evolution in biodiversity policy-current gaps and future needs. Evol. Appl. 2012, 5, 202–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Halpern, B.S.; Pyke, C.R.; Fox, H.E.; Haney, J.C.; Schlaepfer, M.A.; Patricia Zaradic, P. Gaps and mismatches between global conservation priorities and spending. Conserv. Biol. 2006, 20, 50–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Waldron, A.; Mooers, A.O.; Miller, D.C.; Nibbelink, N.; Redding, D.; Kuhn, T.S.; Roberts, J.T.; Gittleman, J.L. Targeting global conservation funding to limit immediate biodiversity declines. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2013, 110, 12144–12148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Miller, D.C. Explaining Global Patterns of International Aid for Linked Biodiversity Conservation and Development. World Dev. 2014, 59, 341–359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Barber, P.H.; Ablan-Lagman, M.C.A.; Ambariyanto Berlinck, R.G.S.; Cahyani, D.; Crandall, E.D.; Ravago-Gotanco, R.; Cahyani, D.; Juinio-Meñez, M.A.; Mahardika, G.N.; Shanker, K.; et al. Advancing Biodiversity Research in Developing Countries: The Need for Changing Paradigms. Bull. Marine Sci. 2014, 90, 1–24. [Google Scholar]
- Yin, R.K. Case study research: Design and methods. In Applied Socialresearch Methods Series, 3rd ed.; Sage Publications: New York, NY, USA, 2003; Volume 5, p. 111. [Google Scholar]
- Clark, R.E.; Feldon, D.; van Merrienboer, J.J.G.; Yates, K.; Early, S. (Eds.) Cognitive task analysis. In Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology, 3rd ed.; Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: Mahwah, NJ, USA.
- Dalal, S.; Khodyakov, D.; Srinivasan, R.; Straus, S.; Adams, J. ExpertLens: A system for eliciting opinions from a large pool of non-collocated experts with diverse knowledge. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2011, 78, 1426–1444. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- International Union for Conservation of Nature, United Nations Environment Programme (IUCN, UNEP). The World Database on Protected Areas (WDPA); United Nations Environment Programme—World Conservation Monitoring Centre (UNEP-WCMC): Cambridge, UK, 2009. [Google Scholar]
- UNEP-CBD. United Nations Environment Programme—Convention on Biological Diversity. Quick Guide to Target 11 of the Aichi Biodiversity Targets. Available online: http://www.cbd.int/doc/strategic-plan/targets/T11-quick-guide-en.pdf (accessed on 20 December 2014).
- Mother Earth. Proposal for a Law of Mother Earth. Plurinational State of Bolivia. Available online: http://boliviadiary.files.wordpress.com/2011/06/ley-madre-tierra-en-ingles-version-final.pdf (accessed on 20 December 2011).
- United Nations Environment Programme. In Protected Planet Report 2012: Tracking Progress Towards Global Targets for Protected Areas; United Nations Environmnet Programme World Conservation Monitoring Center: Cambridge, UK, 2012.
- Woodley, S.; Bertzky, B.; Crawhill, N.; Dudley, N.; Londono, J.M.; MacKinnon, K.; Redford, K.; Sandwith, T. Meeting Aichi Target 11: What Does Success Look Like for Protected Area Systems? Parks 2012, 18, 21–34. [Google Scholar]
- United Nations Environment Programme-World Conservation Monitoring Centre (UNEP-WCMC). In National and Regional Networks of Marine Protected Areas; UNEP-WCMC: Cambridge, UK, 2008.
- Joppa, L.; Visconti, P.; Jenkins, C.; Pimm, S. Achieving the convention on biological diversity’s goals for plant conservation. Science 2013, 341, 1100–1103. [Google Scholar]
- Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity. In Mainstreaming Biodiversity into National Sectoral and Cross-Sectoral Strategies, Policies, Plans, and Programs, NBSAP Training Modules Version 2.1—Module 3; Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD): Montreal, QC, Canada, 2011.
- Chasek, P. Confronting Environmental Treaty Implementation Challenges in the Pacific Islands; East-West Center: Honolulu, HI, USA, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Union for Ethical BioTrade. Biodiversity Barometer 2013; UEBT: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Palmer, C.; di Falco, S. Biodiversity, poverty, and development. Oxf. Rev. Econ. Policy 2012, 28, 48–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gatzweiler, F.W. Organizing a public ecosystem service economy for sustaining biodiversity. Ecol. Econ. 2006, 59, 296–304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Parker, C.; Cranford, M.; Oakes, N.; Leggett, M. The Little Biodiversity Finance Book; Global Canopy Programme: Oxford, UK, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). OECD DAC Statistics: Biodiversity-Related Aid; OECD: Paris, France, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- The World Bank. Expanding Financing for Biodiversity Conservation: Experiences from Latin America and the Caribbean; The World Bank: Washington, DC, USA, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Chandra, A.; Idrisova, A. Convention on Biological Diversity: A review of national challenges and opportunities for implementation. Biodivers. Conserv. 2011, 20, 3295–3316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aichi Biodiversity Targets. Available online: https://www.cbd.int/sp/targets/ (accessed on 20 December 2013).
- CBD. Convention on Biological Diversity. Latest NBSAPs. Available online: http://www.cbd.int/nbsap/about/latest (accessed on 20 December 2014).
- Report of the Eleventh Meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity. Available online: http://www.cbd.int/doc/meetings/cop/cop-11/official/cop-11-35-en.pdf (accessed on 20 December 2014).
- Pisupati, B.; Rubian, R. MDG on Reducing Biodiversity Loss and the CBD’s 2010 Target; United Nations University-Institute of Advanced Studies (UNU-IAS): Yokohama, Japan, 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Mace, G.; Baillie, J.E. The 2010 Biodiversity Indicators: Challenges for Science and Policy Conservation Biology. Conserv. Biol. 2007, 6, 1406–1413. [Google Scholar]
- Harrop, S.R.; Pritchard, D.J. A hard instrument goes soft: The implications of the Convention on Biological Diversity’s current trajectory. Global Environ. Chang. 2011, 21, 474–480. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Johannsdottir, A.; Cressewell, I.; Bridgewater, P. The Current Framework for International Governance of Biodiversity: Is It Doing More Harm than Good? RECIEL 2010, 19, 139–149. [Google Scholar]
- Global Environment Facility-United Nations Environment Programme-Convention on Biological Diversity (GEF/UNEP/CBD). Mainstreaming Biodiversity into Sectoral and Cross-Sectoral Strategies, Plans and Programmes; Module B-3. Available online: https://www.cbd.int/doc/training/nbsap/b3-train-mainstream-en.pdf (accessed on 20 December 2007).
- BIP. Biodiversity Indicator Partnership. Indicator relationship to main Aichi Biodiversity target. Available online: http://www.bipindicators.net/oda (accessed on 20 December 2014).
- United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). In Bali Strategic Plan for Technology Support and Capacity-Building; UNEP: Nairobi, Kenya, 2005.
- United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). In Technology Transfer and Cooperation under the Convention on Biological Diversity: Towards More Effective Implementation; UNEP: Nairobi, Kenya, 2010.
© 2014 by the authors; licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Adenle, A.A.; Stevens, C.; Bridgewater, P. Stakeholder Visions for Biodiversity Conservation in Developing Countries. Sustainability 2015, 7, 271-293. https://doi.org/10.3390/su7010271
Adenle AA, Stevens C, Bridgewater P. Stakeholder Visions for Biodiversity Conservation in Developing Countries. Sustainability. 2015; 7(1):271-293. https://doi.org/10.3390/su7010271Chicago/Turabian Style
Adenle, Ademola A., Casey Stevens, and Peter Bridgewater. 2015. "Stakeholder Visions for Biodiversity Conservation in Developing Countries" Sustainability 7, no. 1: 271-293. https://doi.org/10.3390/su7010271