Unep/Cbd/Sbstta/19/Inf/18

UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/19/INF/18

Page 15

/ / CBD
/ Distr.
GENERAL
UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/19/INF/18
26 October 2015
ENGLISH ONLY

SUBSIDIARY BODY ON SCIENTIFIC, TECHNICAL AND TECHNOLOGICAL ADVICE

Nineteenth meeting

Montreal, Canada, 2–5 November 2015

Item 3.1 of the provisional agenda[*]

SPECIES CONSERVATION ASSESSMENT AS AN ESSENTIAL ELEMENT OF ACHIEVING AICHI BIODIVERSITY TARGET 12

Note by the Executive Secretary

INTRODUCTION

1.  The Executive Secretary is circulating herewith, for the information of participants in the nineteenth meeting of the Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical and Technological Advice, a note received from the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), members of the Species Survival Commission, and members of The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species Partners Committee on the above-mentioned subject.

2.  The information is provided in the form and language in which it was received by the Secretariat.

UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/19/INF/18

Page 15

I.  Introduction

1.  Aichi Biodiversity 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.” is a flexible framework to assist the establishment of national or regional targets. For effective implementation of this global target at the national level, Parties are invited to set their own nationally-relevant targets, taking into account national needs and priorities while also bearing in mind national contributions to assist the achievement of the global targets[1].

2. This document provides information about species conservation assessments as well as some draft elements of modalities and milestones for the operationalization of Aichi Biodiversity Target 12 for possible consideration by the Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical and Technological Advice to the Convention at its nineteenth meeting. It is not meant to be a comprehensive guide for the achievement of Target 12. The information presented here is meant to inform the development of a flexible framework for national target establishment and associated policy measures related to Aichi Target 12, and for their effective implementation, taking into account national circumstances and priorities[2].

3. This document has been developed by IUCN – the International Union for Conservation of Nature. The document has received significant input from IUCN members, including members of the Species Survival Commission (SSC), and The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species Partners Committee (Birdlife International, Botanic Gardens Conservation International (BGCI), Conservation International, Microsoft, NatureServe, The Royal Botanic Gardens Kew, Sapienza Università di Roma, Texas A & M University, Wildscreen and the Zoological Society of London).

4. This document is intended to address Parties’ needs, as identified through previous meetings and workshops (as described in Section II) and outlines some steps required to assist Parties’ in the implementation of some aspects of Target 12. Section III describes some steps required in order to achieve Aichi Target 12, including: identifying threats to species; conservation action-planning; implementation of conservation action; approaches to monitor progress towards the target, including species reassessment and the development and effective use of use of indicators; capacity-building and finally, reporting. Section IV indicates links and the synergies between activities required for the achievement of Aichi Target 12 with the activities required for reaching other biodiversity targets. Section V identifies options and advises on policy planning, while Section VI lists some capacity-building initiatives to enhance progress. Section VII suggests activities to be implemented by Parties and conservation organizations (IUCN and its partners) to accelerate progress towards Target 12, including optional milestones for Parties. Finally, section VIII, and provides a suggestion for moving forward.

5. The annexes to this document include: a guide to the steps necessary to undertake national assessments of the threat status of species (Annex 1); a breakdown of the number of species known to be threatened according to the Global IUCN Red List of Threatened Species (correct as of June 2015), to add context to the task in hand (Annex 2); and a table of some of the available tools and resources that may assist Parties and aid implementation (Annex 3).

6. Past decisions of the Conference of the Parties[3] already contain significant elements of guidance for Parties on how to implement the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity (2011 – 2020). The modalities below seek to bring together and consolidate the available guidance, as appropriate, for Target 12. Detailed references are provided below[4], but it should be noted that this document is not intended to exhaustive and recognizes that there are other initiatives and methods that could be included. This elaboration of the draft elements of modalities and milestones is based on:

a)  Earlier decisions adopted by the Conference of the Parties; and

b)  Information documents provided to Parties at the Fifth Meeting of the Ad Hoc Open-Ended Working Group on the Review of Implementation of the Convention, in Montreal, 16 – 20 June 2014, and the Eighteenth Meeting of the Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical and Technological Advice, in Montreal, 23 – 28 June 2014 (UNEP/CBD/WGRI/5/INF/26).

7. Existing policy support tools and methodologies for implementation of Aichi Target 12 were outlined in the relevant section of the note of the Executive Secretary on the identification of the scientific and technical needs for the attainment of targets under Strategic Goal C of the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020[5], for consideration by the Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical and Technological Advice at its seventeenth meeting (UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/REC/XVII/1). This document notes that there are many useful and technically sound tools for achieving Targets under Strategic Goal C. The Executive Secretary suggests that the main focus for enhancing progress towards Targets under this Goal should be through the use and implementation of these existing tools, rather than development of new tools.

II.  Scientific and Technical Needs of Parties related to Achieve Target 12

8. In order to enhance progress towards Target 12, it is important to address any identified as barriers to implementation. Such barrier were identified in the “Report of the Global Workshop on National Experiences in implementing the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020” (12 - 14 March 2012 - Brasilia, Brazil).

9. Further needs of Parties to progress Target 12 identified (by Parties) include: a better understanding of the drivers of the decline of species, including illegal trade in wildlife; the impacts of invasive alien species; the long-term implications of climate change; and the role of multi-species and ecosystem approaches in recovery planning.

10. The Subsidiary Body Scientific, Technical and Technological Advice Recommendation XVII/1 found that efforts are required to enhance implementation toward Target 12 in a number of areas. To this information, IUCN and its members suggest other actions. These needs, identified by SBSTTA and IUCN include, inter alia:

(a)  Conducting IUCN Red List assessments, or comparable assessments, particularly for species of plants, fungi, invertebrates and marine and freshwater realms, in order to provide baseline information from which to prioritise actions to achieve Aichi Target 12;

(b)  Particular efforts are required to build baseline datasets on the status of threatened and endemic flora and fauna species, in particular for forest tree species, food crops and medicinal plants[6].

(c)  Enhancing the capacity to interpret The IUCN Red List for Threatened Species™ for setting and achieving targets;

(d)  Preparing, implementing and disseminating species recovery plans.

(e)  Improving regional cooperation, particularly to conserve migratory and transboundary species;

(f)  Devising measures for addressing control or eradication of invasive alien species, including action for threatened species and their recovery;

(g)  Designing cost-effective conservation methods;

(h)  Monitoring of conservation actions, to enhance good progress with species recovery, including adaptive management efforts;

(i)  Identify, protect and effectively manage sites that are identified as important for biodiversity, such as Key Biodiversity Areas (KBAs); and

(j)  Tackling broad-scale issues through policy responses addressing unsustainable agriculture, forestry, illegal and unsustainable trade of elements of biodiversity, managing bycatch, fisheries and the impacts of other industries on biological resources.

III.  General considerations

11. Although there is no formal CBD programme of work on species conservation (excluding the in situ and ex situ conservation targets developed by some Parties towards the Global Strategy for Plant Conservation), Aichi Biodiversity Target 12 is the framework to address the need to address species loss. In order to achieve this target, parties need to give special attention and emphasis to determining species conservation status and development and implementation of species action plans.

12. Studies have shown that conservation action has prevented extinction[7] and recovered populations[8]. Across mammals, birds and amphibians, a conservative estimate suggests that observed trends in extinction risk would be at least 20% worse without conservation[9]; a more realistic estimate for a much smaller set of species suggests trends could be eight times worse[10]. These studies suggest that conservation does work, but that the scale of implementation needs to be increased considerably. The financial costs of meeting the targets, for example for bird species, are estimated to be US $0.0875 to $1.23 billion annually, of which just 12% is currently funded[11].

13. Target 12 effectively breaks down into two components:

·  Finding out which species are threatened (conservation assessments); and

·  Implementation of targeted and coordinated conservation action to improve the status of those species found to be threatened.

14. This document highlights tools and resources to help to facilitate these two components. These are discussed in relation to a) knowledge about what is threatened; b) planning and implementation of conservation action; c) monitoring progress; d) species reassessments; and e) capacity-building and suggestions for new resources and activities.

15. In what follows, the term “IUCN Red List of Threatened Species™” (also referred to as “The IUCN Red List”) is a global list of threatened species maintained by IUCN (www.iucnredlist.org) in which all species have been assessed against the IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria. Whereas “national red lists” provide countries with key information about the risk of extinction for species within their national boundaries – i.e. species are not assessed at the global level – and may or may not follow the IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria. In addition, the terms “red list” and “red listing” are colloquial terms used to define the process of conservation assessments. However, note that the use of the term “red-listed” is strongly discouraged owing to ambiguities that it introduces.

A.  Information about threatened species (establishing baseline information resources)

The Global Red List

16. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species™ (“The IUCN Red List”) is the most authoritative and widely accepted means of assessing species’ extinction risk. It provides information and analyses on the status, trends and threats to species that can be used to inform and catalyse conservation action. As of November 2014, The IUCN Red List contained global assessments for over 80,000 species, of which approx. 22,000 (over 27%) are threatened with extinction, see: www.iucnredlist.org and Annex 2 to this document. IUCN’s campaign, The Barometer of Life[12], aims to assess 160,000 species by 2020, an objective manifested through a Red List strategic plan[13]. This will make The IUCN Red List much more representative of currently under-represented taxa including plants, fungi and invertebrates, as well as provide an increased focus on marine and freshwater realms. National species assessments and assessments of particular taxonomic groups (such as plants) are required urgently to help identify their status to also greatly inform the global assessment.

17. The IUCN Red List assesses the risk of extinction of a particular species according to a standardized methodology with quantitative thresholds that assign species to one of eight Red List categories. Assessments are mainly undertaken by a wide, international network of experts and scientists in the taxonomic Specialist Groups and Red List Authorities, and IUCN Red List Partners, supported by the IUCN Red List Unit and the Biodiversity Assessment Unit, and other international partners. They compile the best available information to assess the extinction risk of a species – i.e. the data are robust, standardized and the entire process (as well as the underlying data) is independently reviewed by at least one person. Given that the robust, quality controlled dataset behind The IUCN Red List takes time to generate, other approaches, including national assessments, can supplement The IUCN Red List and assist the throughput of the assessment process.

18. The IUCN Red List codes countries of occurrence for all species assessed. This allows querying and reporting of data at the national level and as such, The IUCN Red List can also be helpful to countries developing National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs)[14]. It also enables geographic disaggregation to present Red List Indices (see paragraph 43 below) at national levels.

19. Although The IUCN Red List focuses on global assessments of the extinction risk for animal, plant and fungi species, the methodology can also be applied at regional or national level. This helps to identify species that may not be threatened at a global level but may be highly threatened at a national level, or to identify species for which Parties may have global responsibility (e.g. single country endemics, as in many tropical countries). It also provides information on the threats that each species faces and the priority actions required in order to address these, to improve the status of threatened species, and prevent extinctions.

National Red Lists

20. In addition to the global dataset (The IUCN Red List), national red lists are baseline datasets that provide countries with key information about the status and trends (when reassessments are made) of species threat status within their national boundaries. This baseline data can then be used directly to assist national conservation planning and policies, such as national protected area expansion strategies, the CBD Programme of Work on Protected Areas Action Plans and the development of NBSAPs. National red lists can also help countries understand impacts of development on species, which is a vital component of Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs).

21. It is a particularly high priority to focus national red listing efforts on species groups such as plants, fungi and invertebrates, among which there may be many national endemics. According to analyses conducted in 2010, plants are the most assessed of all taxonomic groups in national red lists, with vascular and nonvascular plants being assessed by 88% and 76% of countries with national red lists, respectively, although not always comprehensively[15],[16]. Such assessments, when completed following IUCN guidelines[17] and including appropriate documentation[18], also make the largest incremental contributions to towards the Barometer or Life[19].