DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 2 This is a draft for review. The data, material and messages contained in this draft may not be republished, 3 displayed, distributed, or transmitted in any manner, nor may the material, or portion thereof, be copied or 4 posted on any other website or network or otherwise distributed, quoted or cited.The report will be revised in 5 light of review comments, and also updated to take into account additional material from the sixth national 6 reports. The figures will be redrawn and simplified. 7 8 DRAFT 9 Fifth edition of the Global Biodiversity Outlook (GBO-5) 10 11 Table of contents

12 SUMMARY FOR POLICY MAKERS……………………………………………………………..…...…..3

13 1. INTRODUCTION………………………………………………………………………………..…...…..9 14 Overview ...... 10 15 Background and context ...... 10 16 Climate change and the Sustainable Development Goals ...... 13 17 IPBES and additional sources...... 15

18 2. BIODIVERSITY IN 2020 ...... 17 19 The Aichi Biodiversity Targets: a target by target summary of achievement for 2020 ...... 17 20 Target 1 ...... 19 21 Target 3 ...... 25 22 Target 4 ...... 28 23 Target 5 ...... 34 24 Target 6 ...... 42 25 Target 7 ...... 45 26 Target 8 ...... 49 27 Target 9 ...... 52 28 Target 10 ...... 56 29 Target 11 ...... 59 30 Target 12 ...... 65 31 Target 13 ...... 70 32 Target 14 ...... 73 33 Target 15 ...... 76 34 Target 16 ...... 78 35 Target 17 ...... 81 36 Target 18 ...... 83 37 Target 19 ...... 85 38 Target 20 ...... 90 39 Taking stock: overall trends from the indicators and other sources of information ...... 92

40 3. TRANSITIONS TO A BETTER FUTURE ...... 99 41 Interpreting the Vision – what does ‘living in harmony with Nature’ look like? ...... 99 42 Pathways to the Vision: it’s not too late to get there ...... 102 43 Key transitions ...... 107 44 The land and forests transition...... 109 45 The sustainable agriculture transition ...... 111 46 The sustainable food transition ...... 113

1 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 The sustainable fisheries transition ...... 114 2 The sustainable cities transition ...... 116 3 The sustainable fresh water transition ...... 118 4 The sustainable climate action transition ...... 121

5 4. CONCLUSION: FACING UP TO AN EMERGENCY ...... 122 6 7 8

2 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 1 Summary for policy makers 2 3 Overview 4 5 Humanity stands at a crossroads with regard to the legacy we wish to leave to future generations. 6 Biodiversity is declining at an unprecedented rate, and the pressures driving this decline are each 7 intensifying. None of the Aichi Biodiversity Targets will be fully met, in turn threatening the achievement of 8 the Sustainable Development Goals. 9 10 Nevertheless, reports provided by the world’s governments, as well as other sources of evidence, reveal 11 examples of progress which, if scaled up, can support the type of transformative changes necessary to 12 achieve the vision of living in harmony with nature by 2050. A number of transitions pointing the way to the 13 type of changes required are already in evidence, albeit in limited areas of activity. Examining how such 14 transitions can be replicated and built on, will be critical to using the short window available to make our 15 collective vision for living in harmony with nature a reality. 16 17 Options are available to the global community that simultaneously halt and ultimately reverse biodiversity 18 loss, limit climate change and improve our capacity to adapt to it, and meet other goals such as improved 19 food security. 20 21 These pathways to a sustainable future rely on recognizing that bold, interdependent actions are needed 22 across a number of fronts, each of which is necessary and none of which is sufficient on its own to achieve 23 these multiple goals. This mix of actions includes greatly stepping up efforts to conserve and restore 24 biodiversity; addressing climate change in ways that limit global temperature rise without imposing 25 unintended additional pressures on biodiversity; and transforming the way in which we produce, consume 26 and sustainably trade goods and services, most particularly food, that rely on and have an impact on 27 biodiversity. 28 29 Navigating the available pathways to the global vision involves consideration of all the multiple aspects of 30 our relationship with nature and the importance we attach to it. Solutions need to seek an integrated approach 31 that simultaneously addresses the conservation of the planet’s genetic diversity, species and habitats; the 32 capacity of nature to deliver material benefits to human societies; and the less tangible but highly-valued 33 connections with nature that help to define our identities, cultures and beliefs. 34 35 Finding solutions that address all the varying values we attach to nature is challenging, but the rewards are 36 great. Well-considered actions will produce multiple benefits, meeting societies’ needs and expectations 37 regarding the long-term balance required to return to a harmonious co-existence with nature. 38 39 Introduction 40 41 The strategy agreed in 2010 to guide global action during the UN Decade on Biodiversity 2011-2020 42 recognized the need to address the underlying drivers that influence the direct pressures on biodiversity. The 43 failure to tackle these underlying causes of biodiversity loss was spelled out in GBO-3 as one of the factors 44 resulting in the missing of the first global biodiversity target in 2010. Building on this analysis, the Strategic 45 Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020 structured the 20 Aichi Biodiversity Targets around five Strategic Goals, 46 setting benchmarks for improvements across drivers, pressures, the state of biodiversity, the benefits derived 47 from it and the implementation of relevant policies and conditions. 48

1 This summary for policy makers was made available to the twenty third meeting of the Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical and Technological Advice as document CBD/SBSTTA/23/2/Add.3

3 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 The Strategic Plan for Biodiversity, while formally adopted by governments through the CBD and other 2 biodiversity-related conventions, was intended as a global framework for all sections of society – and its 3 success would depend on bringing about change among a wide range of sectors and stakeholders whose 4 decisions and actions have an impact on biodiversity. 5 6 The mid-term review of the Strategic Plan carried out for GBO-4 concluded that by 2014, while indicators 7 for the majority of the Aichi Biodiversity Targets were moving in the right direction, progress at that time 8 was not sufficient to bring about achievement of the targets by 2020. GBO4 outlined potential actions in 9 each of the target areas that, if stepped up, could still result in the achievement of the goals of the Strategic 10 Plan. 11 12 Biodiversity is critical to both the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the Paris Agreement under 13 the UN framework Convention on Climate Change, each finalized in 2015. For example, around 30% of the 14 net reductions in greenhouse gas emissions required to meet the Paris Agreement’s goals could come from 15 “nature-based solutions”. The Sustainable Development Goals on Life Below Water and Life on Land 16 (Goals 14 and 15) reflect most of the Aichi Biodiversity Targets. Biodiversity also underpins a much wider 17 set of SDGs: for example, it is a key factor for the achievement of food security and improved nutrition 18 (Goal 2). All food systems depend on biodiversity and a broad range of ecosystem services that support 19 agricultural productivity (through pollination, pest control and soil fertility), as well as water quality and 20 supply. 21 22 Progress made in implementing the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020 23 24 The global summary of progress towards the Aichi Biodiversity Targets is based on a range of indicators, 25 research studies and assessments (in particular the IPBES Global Assessment), as well as the national reports 26 on implementation of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), which parties are periodically obliged 27 to provide. The national reports provide additional rich information about the steps worldwide taken in 28 support of biodiversity conservation, sustainable use, and equitable sharing of benefit. This body of 29 information demonstrates the wealth of policies and actions developed in all parts of the world to address 30 biodiversity loss, even if cumulatively they have not been sufficient to meet the goals agreed by the global 31 community. 32 33 Summary of target achievement by strategic goal of the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020 34 35 Goal A: Address the underlying drivers: 36 37 - Progress has been made in public awareness and understanding of biodiversity and its values; there 38 is wide variation across countries and attention to biodiversity in the media remains at a much lower 39 level than coverage of climate change. Nevertheless, the heightened public alarm about the impacts 40 of climate change is frequently expressed alongside dismay at the state of biodiversity, in particular 41 the extinction crisis. (Target 1). 42 43 - Despite individual examples of biodiversity being integrated into national planning, development 44 and accounting, biodiversity is not yet being brought into the mainstream of decision making at a 45 global scale (Target 2) 46 47 - Progress has been made both in reducing agricultural subsidies that are potentially harmful to the 48 environment, and increasing the use of taxation to encourage conservation and sustainable use of 49 biodiversity; however, these changes are not on a sufficient scale to minimize or avoid negative 50 impacts on biodiversity (Target 3). 51

4 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 - Despite an increase in plans from governments and businesses for more sustainable production and 2 consumption, these are not being implemented on a scale that moderates the negative impact of 3 unsustainable human activities on biodiversity. While the ecological footprint of human societies 4 appears to have stabilized in recent years due to more efficient use of natural resources, it remains 5 well above safe ecological limits (Target 4). 6 7 Goal B: Reduce direct pressures: 8 9 - There has been a slowing in the rate of net deforestation worldwide, including for mangroves; 10 however, the loss and degradation of habitats remains worrying high especially in tropical regions, 11 including for primary forests, wilderness areas and global wetlands. Land degradation and 12 fragmentation of rivers represent critical threats to biodiversity (Target 5). 13 14 - A growing proportion of the world’s fish stocks continues to be exploited unsustainably, with 15 approximately one third of marine stocks overfished; although an increasing percentage of fisheries, 16 accounting for around 15 per cent of wild-caught seafood, is certified under a standard recognizing 17 progress towards sustainable management (Target 6). 18 19 - Despite an increasing proportion of land coming under organic agricultural management and 20 certified forestry, biodiversity continues to decline overall in landscapes used to produce food and 21 timber; agricultural expansion also remains one of the main drivers of global biodiversity loss, and 22 rapidly-expanding aquaculture has caused large-scale loss of coastal wetlands (Target 7). 23 24 - Pollution, most especially the accumulation of reactive nitrogen in aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems 25 continues to be a major driver of biodiversity loss, although nitrogen deposition has levelled off in 26 Europe following decades of reduced emissions; plastic pollution has accumulated at alarming rates 27 in the oceans, with severe impacts on marine ecosystems, and it is not yet clear whether action to 28 minimize plastic waste in many countries has had a significant impact (Target 8). 29 30 - Good progress has been made during the past decade on identifying and prioritizing invasive alien 31 species, and successful programmes to eradicate such species, especially on islands, have generated 32 substantial benefits to native biodiversity; however, there is no evidence of a slowing down in the 33 number of new introductions of alien species, and native species of birds, mammals and amphibians 34 affected by invasive species are on average moving closer to extinction (Target 9). 35 36 - Multiple threats continue to affect coral reefs and other vulnerable ecosystems impacted by climate 37 change and ocean acidification. Overfishing, nutrient pollution and coastal development compound 38 the effects of coral bleaching and corals have shown the most rapid increase in extinction risk of all 39 assessed groups; nevertheless the overall level of live coral cover has shown only insignificant 40 global decline in past decades due to highly variable responses and rates of recovery among different 41 reef systems. Other ecosystems especially in mountains and polar regions have experienced 42 significant impacts from climate change, compounded by other pressures (Target 10). 43 44 Goal C: Improve biodiversity status: 45 46 - The proportion of the planet’s land and oceans designated as protected areas is likely to reach the 47 targets for 2020, and will likely be exceeded when other effective area-based conservation measures 48 such as private reserves and territories managed by indigenous peoples and local communities are 49 taken into account; however, much more modest progress has been made to ensure that protected 50 areas safeguard the most important areas for biodiversity, that they protect a representative portion 51 of global biodiversity, are effectively and equitably managed and are adequately connected to one 52 another as well as to the wider landscape (Target 11). 53

5 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 - Species continue to slide towards extinction at an alarming rate, although the situation would be 2 even worse in the absence of conservation measures. With only 5% of described species having been 3 assessed for extinction risk, the best estimate is that nearly one quarter (23.7%) of all species in well- 4 assessed taxonomic groups may currently be threatened with extinction, and around one million 5 species are estimated to face extinction unless the drivers of biodiversity loss are drastically reduced. 6 Global populations of vertebrate species have fallen by approximately 60% since 1970, with the 7 steepest declines occurring in freshwater ecosystems and in tropical regions. Climate change is 8 anticipated to become an increasingly significant driver of extinction risk in coming decades (Target 9 12). 10 11 - Genetic diversity of cultivated plants, farmed and domesticated animals, and wild relatives, 12 continues to be eroded. The wild relatives of important food crops are poorly represented in ex situ 13 seed banks that help guarantee their conservation, important for future food security. The proportion 14 of livestock breeds that are at risk or extinct is increasing, although at a slower rate than in earlier 15 years, suggesting some progress in preventing the decline of traditional breeds. (Target 13) 16 17 Goal D: Enhance benefits to all: 18 19 - The capacity of ecosystems to provide the essential services on which societies depend continues to 20 decline. Species responsible for pollination are on average moving closer to extinction, as are species 21 used for food and medicine. However, the advance of protected areas has succeeded in safeguarding 22 and restoring benefits in many areas, especially where local communities have been involved in their 23 management (Target 14). 24 25 - The lack of global data makes it difficult to estimate progress towards the target of restoring 15 per 26 cent of degraded ecosystems by 2020, but available evidence suggests poor progress to date. 27 Nevertheless, ambitious restoration programmes are under way or proposed in many regions, with 28 the potential to deliver significant gains in ecosystem resilience and preservation of carbon stocks 29 (Target 15). 30 31 - The Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits 32 Arising from their Utilization came into force in October 2014, ahead of the target of 2015 set for 33 this milestone under the Aichi Biodiversity Targets. To date, 122 countries have ratified the 34 Protocol. An increasing number of countries are adopting legislation and policy frameworks to 35 implement the measures set out in the Protocol, although capacity challenges remain (Target 16). 36 37 Goal E: Enhance implementation: 38 39 - Since 2010, 168 Parties to the CBD have submitted a National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan 40 (NBSAP), of which 144 submitted revised plans. This means that 97 per cent of Parties have now 41 submitted at least one NBSAP, and 155 have taken the Strategic Plan on Biodiversity (2011-2020) 42 into account. Most national targets included in NBSAPs align with the Aichi Biodiversity Targets 43 but the level of ambition varies, and the collective ambition of national targets does not add up to the 44 global ambitions of the Strategic Plan (Target 17). 45 46 - While global information is difficult to assess, poor or moderate progress has been made towards 47 integrating traditional knowledge and customary use into implementation of the CBD. Despite the 48 importance of indigenous peoples and local communities as custodians of extensive lands, 49 freshwater and marine resources in all regions, their role is poorly recognized in the majority of 50 NBSAPs and national targets, with some notable exceptions. Additional information provided in the 51 Local Biodiversity Outlooks has helped to provide greater recognition of the role of indigenous 52 peoples and local communities in addressing biodiversity conservation and restoration. (Target 18). 53

6 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 - Significant progress has been made since 2010 in the generation and sharing of knowledge and data 2 on biodiversity, with big-data aggregation opening up new opportunities for improved understanding 3 of the biosphere. However, major imbalances remain in the location of studies and monitoring, with 4 biodiversity-rich countries in the developing world still greatly under-represented in databases and 5 research projects. Information gaps remain in the consequences of biodiversity loss for people, and 6 application of biodiversity knowledge in decision making lags behind responses to tackle climate 7 change (Target 19). 8 9 - Financial resources for implementing the objectives of the CBD have increased, but remain 10 inadequate and have not yet tapped the range of sources from which funding may potentially be 11 available. The proportion of overseas development assistance supporting the CBD has increased 12 significantly, and concern about climate change has boosted aid flows for biodiversity even when it 13 is a secondary objective – but the total funds available fall far below the amount needed to meet 14 conservation goals, and are especially lacking in those countries richest in biodiversity and in 15 threatened species (Target 20). 16 17 Overall conclusions on the progress towards the Aichi Biodiversity Targets 18 19 As we reach the end of the decade, the inevitable conclusion is that actions since 2014 have not been 20 sufficient to accelerate progress to the extent required – and consequently, that none of the 20 Aichi 21 Biodiversity Targets have been fully met, although some specific components or elements within the targets 22 have been achieved. 23 24 The failure to achieve the Aichi Biodiversity Targets threatens to undermine also the Sustainable 25 Development Goals. The disproportionate vulnerability of women to the loss of biodiversity and ecosystem 26 services, and the essential role of women in underpinning actions for conservation and sustainable use of 27 biodiversity, have been consistently undervalued, potentially undermining effective steps towards realizing 28 the 2050 Vision for Biodiversity unless gender issues better inform future policy decisions. 29 30 Possible pathways to reaching the 2050 Vision 31 32 Scenarios and pathways to 2050 33 34 Available evidence suggests that despite the failure to meet the goals of the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 35 2011-2030, it is not too late to slow, halt and eventually reverse current alarming trends in the decline of 36 biodiversity. Moreover, the actions required to achieve this turnaround (or ‘bending the curve’ of 37 biodiversity decline, as it is sometimes termed), are fully consistent with, and indeed crucial components of, 38 the goals and targets set out under the Paris Climate Change Agreement and the 2030 Agenda for 39 Sustainable Development. In summary, realizing the 2050 Vision on Biodiversity depends on a combination 40 of the following outcomes, each of which is necessary but none on its own sufficient: 41 42 - Efforts to conserve and restore biodiversity need to be scaled up at all levels using approaches that 43 will depend on local context. These need to combine major increases in the extent and effectiveness 44 of well-connected protected areas and other effective area-based conservation measures, large-scale 45 restoration of degraded habitats, and improvements in the condition of nature across farmed and 46 urban landscapes as well as inland water bodies, coasts and oceans. 47 48 - Climate change needs to be kept well below 2 degrees C and close to 1.5 degrees C above pre- 49 industrial levels, otherwise its impacts will overwhelm all other actions in support of biodiversity. 50 The conservation and restoration of ecosystems can play a substantial role in this. Such “nature 51 based solutions” can also be an important part of adaptation to climate change. On the other hand,

7 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 other proposed land-based climate mitigation measures relying on biofuels, if used on an excessive 2 scale, would add pressure on land and drive further destruction of habitat. 3 4 - Effective steps need to be taken to address all remaining pressures driving biodiversity loss, 5 including invasive alien species, pollution and the unsustainable exploitation of biodiversity 6 especially in marine and inland water ecosystems. 7 8 - Transformations need to be achieved in the way we both produce and consume food. This will 9 combine adopting agricultural methods that can meet growing global demand while imposing fewer 10 negative impacts of the environment, and reduce the pressure to convert more land to production; 11 and limiting the demand for increased food production by adopting healthier diets and reducing food 12 waste. 13 14 - Transformations are similarly needed in both production and consumption of other goods and 15 services affecting biodiversity for example in forestry, energy and provision of fresh water, as well 16 as reduction in the impact of new infrastructure on the ecosystems in which it is placed. 17 18 Key transitions to sustainable pathways 19 20 Each of the conditions necessary to achieve the 2050 Vision for Biodiversity requires a significant shift away 21 from ‘business as usual’ across a broad range of human activities. The shape and nature of such 22 transformative change can already be identified through a series of transitions under way to a limited extent 23 in key areas. This Outlook examines the promise, progress and prospects for the following interdependent 24 transitions, that collectively can move our societies into a more sustainable co-existence with nature: 25 26 - Land and forests: moving to a situation in which maintaining and improving food security no 27 longer involves the large-scale conversion of forests and other ecosystems to agricultural land. 28 29 - Sustainable agriculture: a global shift in the design of agricultural systems to make most efficient 30 use of land and water while minimizing negative impacts on natural resources and biodiversity. 31 32 - Sustainable food: a transition to healthier diets that include more moderate consumption of meat, 33 promote a greater emphasis on plant-based foods, and dramatically cuts waste in food supply chains. 34 35 36 - Sustainable fisheries: a shift in the management of global fishing such that marine and inland water 37 ecosystems are protected and restored, food security is maintained and profits from fishing are 38 protected into the long term. 39 40 - Sustainable cities: large-scale greening of urban areas, making space for nature within built 41 landscapes, improving the health and quality of life for citizens and reducing the footprint of cities 42 on surrounding and distant ecosystems as well as global climate 43 44 - Sustainable fresh water: an integrated approach for urgent recovery and better management of 45 freshwater systems, guaranteeing the river flows required by nature and people, improving water 46 quality, protecting critical habitats, controlling invasive species and safeguarding connectivity. 47 48 - Sustainable climate action: accelerating action to reduce the scale of climate change by favouring 49 nature-based solutions that simultaneously limit greenhouse gas emissions, enhance carbon storage 50 and provide positive benefits for biodiversity along with other sustainable development goals. 51 52 Already there are a number of incipient examples of such transitions, which, if scaled up, replicated, and 53 supported by economy-wide measures, could support the transformative changes necessary to achieve the

8 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 vision of living in harmony with nature by 2050. Such transitions would be enabled by fundamental changes 2 in values, institutions and behaviour. 3 4 Reflecting the multiple values of nature 5 6 Taking the actions necessary to achieve the 2050 vision involves a wide variety of choices that reflect 7 diverse aspects of our relationship with nature, and why we value it. To frame such choices, a new approach 8 is required to ensure that the outcomes of our collective actions respond to the preferences and wishes of 9 people measured against multiple dimensions of nature’s values. Under the emerging Nature Futures 10 Framework approach, scenarios are under development that assess policy options based on positive 11 outcomes for biodiversity measured against three broad perspectives: 12 13 - ‘Nature for Nature’, in which value is placed on the diversity of species, habitats and ecosystems that 14 form the natural world; 15 16 - ‘Nature for Society’, which emphasizes the utilitarian benefits that nature provides to people and 17 society; and 18 19 - ‘Nature as Culture’, which highlights the role of nature in shaping identities, traditions, faiths and 20 cultural landscapes. 21 22 A balanced and integrated approach incorporating each of these perspectives will guide us towards the future 23 we want, and ultimately enable the 2050 Vision for Biodiversity to become a reality. 24 25

9 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 Fifth edition of the Global Biodiversity Outlook (GBO-5) 2

3 1. Introduction 4 5 Overview 6 7 As we approach the third decade of the new millennium, humanity stands at a crossroads with regard to 8 current state of the global environment, the changes we are witnessing and the legacy we wish to leave to 9 future generations. Evidence in our hands demonstrates the consequences to people, cultures, economies, the 10 climate and the natural world if we continue along our current paths of behaviour and decisions. 11 12 Since the publication of the last Global Biodiversity Outlook, governments have come together around a set 13 of goals for the development of human societies, that combine the wishes we all share for improved well- 14 being of people with the environmental safeguards that will enable such gains to be achieved and sustained 15 into the future. The issue of climate change has moved up the global agenda and sparked citizens’ action and 16 protests around the world. The time is right for change in our approach to the natural world to take on a 17 similar sense of urgency and priority. 18 19 The critical role of biodiversity to underpin sustainable development was powerfully reinforced by the 20 IPBES Global Assessment of Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. The overwhelmingly negative trends on 21 the state of species and ecosystems threaten all other goals for the well-being of people and the prosperity of 22 our economies. On the other hand, concerted action addressing all direct and indirect causes of biodiversity 23 loss can still slow and eventually reverse current declines, and in doing so support all our goals for humanity. 24 25 This Outlook draws on the lessons learned during the first two decades of this century to clarify the 26 transitions needed if we are to realize the vision agreed by world governments for 2050, ‘Living in Harmony 27 with Nature’. 28 29 Background and context 30 31 In 2010, the third edition of the Biodiversity Outlook (GBO-3) concluded that the target to substantially slow 32 the loss of biodiversity by the end of the first decade of this century had not been met.2 The analysis carried 33 out for that Outlook demonstrated that while actions around the world had put in place important 34 conservation measures with significant positive impacts on particular species and ecosystems, the main 35 pressures driving biodiversity loss were all still increasing. Indicators of the status and trends of biodiversity 36 demonstrated that the risk of extinction continued to increase across taxonomic groups, and species 37 populations were in decline. It warned that without effective steps to address the origins of those pressures, 38 the planet’s ecosystems faced a number of thresholds or tipping points that if passed, would seriously 39 threaten the capacity of nature to provide the support for human societies that we take for granted at our peril 40 (see Box 1). 41 Box 1: The Third Global Biodiversity Outlook (GBO3)

Published in May 2010, the Third Global Biodiversity Outlook (GBO3) reached the following key conclusions:

2 Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity (2010) Global Biodiversity Outlook 3. Montréal, 94 pages; available at https://www.cbd.int/gbo3/

10 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

- The target agreed by the world’s governments in 2002, “to achieve by 2010 a significant reduction of the current rate of biodiversity loss at the global, regional and national level as a contribution to poverty alleviation and to the benefit of all life on Earth”, had not been met, based on multiple lines of evidence including: o Assessed species moving, on average, closer to extinction o The abundance of vertebrate species in assessed populations falling by nearly one third between 1970 and 2006 o Habitats continuing to decline, become more degraded and fragmented o Crop and livestock genetic diversity continuing to decline in agricultural systems o The five principal pressures directly driving biodiversity loss (habitat change, over- exploitation, pollution, invasive species and climate change) remaining either constant of increasing in intensity o The ecological footprint of humanity exceeding the biological capacity of the Earth by a wider margin than at the turn of the Millennium. - The continued loss of biodiversity had major implications for current and future human well-being - Biodiversity issues had been insufficiently integrated into broader policies, strategies and programmes, and the underlying drivers of biodiversity loss had not been significantly addressed - There was a high risk of dramatic biodiversity loss and accompanying degradation of ecosystem services, if certain thresholds or tipping points were exceeded, with the earliest and most severe impacts falling on the poorest. These tipping points included: o The risk of widespread dieback of the Amazon through the interaction of deforestation, fire and climate change o The shift of freshwater lakes and other inland water ecosystems into a long-term eutrophic state dominated by algae, due to nutrient pollution o The collapse of coral reef ecosystems due to the combination of ocean acidification, warmer sea temperatures, nutrient pollution, overfishing and other pressures - Biodiversity loss could be halted, and in some aspects reversed in the longer term, if urgent, concerted and effective action were initiated promptly in support of an agreed long-term vision - The linked challenges of biodiversity loss and climate change needed to be addressed with equal priority and in close coordination, if the most severe impacts of each were to be avoided - Effective action to address biodiversity loss depended on a strategic approach targeting: o Underlying causes or indirect drivers of biodiversity loss including unsustainable production and consumption, perverse subsidies, the absence of biodiversity in mainstream decisions, and lack of public awareness o Direct drivers of biodiversity loss such as deforestation, overfishing, pollution, unsustainable agriculture and introduction of invasive alien species o Specific conservation measures especially to protect threatened species and habitats, sites critical to biodiversity, and ecosystem services of importance to the poor o Restoration of terrestrial, inland water and marine ecosystems to re-establish valuable ecosystem functioning and key benefits to people

1 2 GBO-3 provided the background for the approach taken by the world’s governments in agreeing the historic 3 Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020, uniting the global community in recognizing the need to address 4 the issue on multiple fronts.3 The endorsement of the text of the plan at the CBD COP 10 meeting in Japan 5 marked the start of the UN Decade on Biodiversity, highlighting the urgency of timely and effective action to 6 achieve a more rational approach to the stewardship of our planet. 7

3 https://www.cbd.int/sp/

11 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 The strategy agreed in 2010, encapsulated by five strategic goals and the 20 Aichi Biodiversity Targets, as 2 well as the 2050 Vision on Biodiversity, recognized that without progress in reducing the underlying causes 3 of biodiversity loss, policies focussed specifically on conservation were unlikely to overcome the pressures 4 pushing nature in the opposite direction. The targets and indicators developed to monitor progress towards 5 the goals therefore focussed not only on the state of biodiversity itself and the pressures affecting it, but also 6 on drivers and responses well beyond the scope of environment ministries, nature protection agencies and 7 conservation organizations. The strategy depended on bringing biodiversity to the heart of decision making 8 on economic development, alleviation of poverty, financial subsidies and incentives, and the way in which 9 goods and services are produced, consumed and traded (see Box 2). 10 Box 2: The Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2030

11 12 13 In 2014, the fourth edition of the Global Biodiversity Outlook (GBO-4) served as a checkpoint on the way to 14 2020, the end date for most of the Aichi Biodiversity Targets established under the Strategic Plan.4 Based on 15 a detailed evaluation of each of the 20 targets, the conclusion was that while the majority were showing 16 movement in the right direction, progress was not sufficient to bring about achievement of the targets by the 17 end of the decade. GBO-4 outlined potential actions in each of the target areas that if stepped up, could still 18 result in achievement of the goals of the Strategic Plan. Importantly, extrapolation of trends at the mid-point 19 of the UN Decade on Biodiversity showed that while responses directly aimed at conservation, sustainable 20 use of biodiversity and equitable sharing of its benefits all suggested good progress by 2020, forecasts were 21 much less positive for indicators of the underlying drivers, direct pressures and the state of biodiversity itself 22 (see Box 3).

4 Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity (2014) Global Biodiversity Outlook 4. Montréal, 155 pages. Available at https://www.cbd.int/gbo4/

12 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 Box 3: The fourth edition of the Global Biodiversity Outlook (GBO-4)

Published in 2014 ahead of the 12th meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the CBD (COP12) in Pyeongchang, Republic of Korea, the fourth edition of the Global Biodiversity Outlook (GBO-4) included the following conclusions:

- There had been significant progress towards meeting some components of the majority of the Aichi Biodiversity Targets. Some components, such as conserving at least 17 per cent of terrestrial and inland water areas, were on track to be met - However, in most cases progress would not be sufficient to achieve the targets set for 2020, and additional action was required to keep the Strategic Plan on course. Key potential actions for accelerating progress towards each target were listed. - Extrapolations for a range of indicators suggested that based on trends analysed in 2014, pressures on biodiversity would continue to increase at least under 2020, and the status of biodiversity would continue to decline. This was despite a dramatic increase in the responses of society to biodiversity loss. Part of this may be explained by the time lag between taking positive actions and discernible impacts, but partly also by the insufficiency of responses relative to the pressures driving biodiversity loss - Meeting the Aichi Biodiversity Targets would contribute significantly to broader global priorities addressed by the post-2015 development agenda (later to become the Sustainable Development Goals); namely, reducing hunger and poverty, improving human health, and ensuring a sustainable supply of energy, food and clean water. - Plausible pathways existed for achieving the 2050 Vision for ending biodiversity loss, in conjunction with key goals such as limiting climate change to two degrees C, combating desertification and land degradation. However, reaching these joint objectives required changes in society including much more efficient use of land, water, energy and materials, rethinking consumption habits and in particular major transformations of food systems. - Analysis of the major primary sectors indicated that drivers linked to agriculture accounted for 70 per cent of the projected loss of terrestrial biodiversity. Solutions for achieving sustainable farming and food systems would include sustainable productivity increases, reducing waste and losses in supply chains, addressing shifts in consumption patterns.

2 3 Another important message of GBO4 was that longer-term achievement of the 2050 Biodiversity Vision 4 underlying the Strategic Plan was compatible with, and indeed critical to, the emerging priorities for 5 humanity outlined in the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), then still in preparation. In particular, 6 scenarios and models developed for GBO4 set out a number of pathways that would enable the global 7 community to meet the triple objectives of achieving food security, stabilizing the increase in global 8 temperatures and ending biodiversity loss. All potential routes to that desirable future would, however, 9 involve radical changes in key sectors of economic activity, most especially those concerning the production 10 and consumption of food. 11 12 Climate change and the Sustainable Development Goals 13 14 Since the publication of the last Global Biodiversity Outlook, two key global agreements have emphasised 15 the critical need to approach biodiversity loss in concert with broader ambitions for humanity and our 16 relationship with planet that sustains us. The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development incorporating the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), their accompanying targets and indicators explicitly includes goals 18 for biodiversity on land and in the oceans, based substantially on the goals set out in Strategic Plan for

13 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 Biodiversity.5 Beyond those SDGs directly addressing biodiversity, nature underpins the entire sustainable 2 development agenda including, among others, the goals dealing with improved human health, ending hunger, 3 addressing poverty, and tackling climate change (see Figure 1). 4

5 6 Figure 1. Summary of recent status of, and trends in, aspects of nature and nature’s contributions to people that 7 support progress towards achieving selected targets of the Sustainable Development Goals. Selected targets are 8 those where current evidence and target wording enable assessment of the consequences for target achievement 9 of trends in nature and nature’s contribution to people.6

5 https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/post2015/transformingourworld 6 Taken from Figure 7 in IPBES Global Assessment, Summary for Policymakers.

14 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 2 The other significant global agreement providing important context for this Outlook was the Paris 3 Agreement on Climate Change adopted under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate 4 Change, which produced a global consensus on taking ambitious action to limit global temperature increases 5 to well below 2 degrees C above pre-industrial levels, to increase the ability of countries to adapt to the 6 adverse impacts of climate change and to foster climate resilience.7 The issues of climate and biodiversity are 7 intricately connected, with climate change projected to become an increasingly important driver of 8 biodiversity loss. Recent research assessed by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has 9 emphasized significant differences in the outcomes for biodiversity depending on whether global 10 temperature increases can be kept close to 1.5 degrees C, or whether they exceed 2 degrees C above pre- 11 industrial levels. Addressing other pressures on biodiversity also helps to mitigate climate change by 12 increasing the capacity of marine and terrestrial ecosystems to capture and store carbon, and to support 13 adaptation to adverse climate impacts by increasing resilience of ecosystems and agricultural livelihoods. 14 15 The international focus on sustainable development as a pressing agenda for our century, with the particular 16 prominence of tackling climate change as an existential issue of high urgency in political and public 17 discourse, builds an opportunity to bring biodiversity into the mainstream. Many of the measures that are 18 required to tackle poverty, reduce hunger and tackle climate change are also those that are needed to support 19 biodiversity, so there is potential for a powerful shared agenda giving attention and resources to conservation 20 and sustainable use which have often been lacking in the past. On the other hand, some actions promoted to 21 tackle climate change, as well as some approaches to the fight against poverty and hunger, have the potential 22 to have significant negative impacts on biodiversity. For both of these reasons, it is essential for biodiversity 23 to be taken fully into account in choices relating to the wider sustainable development agenda. The final part 24 of this Outlook (Section 3) seeks to clarify the context of such choices, by identifying pathways and 25 transitions that can navigate the complex currents and avoid the potential obstacles to actions and decisions 26 that will address the joint needs of people, nature and climate in the coming decades. 27 28 IPBES and additional sources 29 30 The scale of the task ahead has been amply described by the Intergovernmental Science Policy Platform on 31 Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES), especially in the Global Assessment published in 2019 which 32 drew worldwide attention to the alarming trends facing biodiversity and nature’s contributions to people. 33 This assessment and other IPBES regional and thematic assessments, representing the largest-ever 34 accumulation and synthesis of expert knowledge and data on biodiversity and nature’s contributions to 35 people, provide a major source of the information in this Outlook. 36 The four highest level key messages8 of the IPBES global assessment are: - Nature and its vital contributions to people, which together embody biodiversity and ecosystem functions and services, are deteriorating worldwide; - Direct and indirect drivers of change have accelerated during the past 50 years; - Goals for conserving and sustainably using nature and achieving sustainability cannot be met by current trajectories, and goals for 2030 and beyond may only be achieved through transformative changes across economic, social, political and technological factors;

7 https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-paris-agreement/the-paris-agreement 8 Key messages under each of these four headings, together with background information, is provided in the summary for policymakers of the assessment and in the Executive Summaries of each of the Chapters of the Assessment. These are available from https://www.ipbes.net/global-assessment-report-biodiversity- ecosystem-services.

15 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

- Nature can be conserved, restored and used sustainably while other global societal goals are simultaneously met through urgent and concerted efforts fostering transformative change. 1 2 Supplementing and enriching the knowledge provided by the IPBES assessments are national reports 3 provided by governments to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), further analysis of indicators 4 and development of models and scenarios carried out since the drafting of the IPBES Global Assessment, as 5 well as more recent research literature and official reports. A full list of sources is provided in the appendix 6 to this report [to be added] as well as references in the text. 7 8 An important first step for this Fifth Global Biodiversity Outlook is to summarize the outcomes of the UN 9 Decade on Biodiversity and the ‘verdict’ on the goals and targets established by the Strategic Plan for 10 Biodiversity 2011-2020. The IPBES Global Assessment prepared the main ground for this summary and the 11 conclusion that all of the targets agreed in 2010 will be missed by the 2020 deadline, although some 12 components of them will be achieved. This Outlook does not attempt to gloss over this stark and sobering 13 assessment, nor to minimize the implications of a second failure to meet decadal goals on biodiversity set 14 since the turn of the Millennium. Nevertheless, the following summary of progress on each of the goals and 15 targets of the Strategic Plan includes examples of positive outcomes and important transitions relating to 16 many of the Aichi Biodiversity Targets, demonstrating that the changes required to achieve our shared vision 17 for biodiversity are within our grasp if we learn from what has worked, and what has not, during the past 18 decade. 19

16 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 2. Biodiversity in 2020 2 3 Messages from National Reports 4 5 The periodic reports from national Parties to the CBD provide rich information about the progress made by 6 governments to implement the commitments made under the Convention. The 6th National Reports were due 7 by the end of 2018, and at the time of the preparation of this Outlook, 137 reports had been received, 8 representing 69% per cent of CBD Parties.9 These reports give citizens the ability to explore in detail the 9 actions taken within their own countries to address the crisis facing biodiversity, based on the framework of 10 the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020 and the Aichi Biodiversity Targets. The introduction of an 11 online reporting tool enables interactive exploration of the reports submitted in this way, including an 12 overview of progress towards national targets aligning with the global targets, through the Clearing House 13 Mechanism of the CBD.10 14 15 This section of the Outlook includes many examples of actions and progress relating to the Aichi 16 Biodiversity Targets drawn from the national reports submitted to the CBD. They help to illustrate the range 17 of measures that governments, institutions and communities around the world have taken to address the 18 challenges identified within the Strategic Plan and organized around its goals and targets. By their nature 19 these examples are selective, and readers are encouraged to dig into the reports themselves to understand 20 better how individual countries have assessed their own progress towards the global objectives agreed for the 21 UN Decade on Biodiversity. 22 23 The overall messages from the 6th National Reports regarding the status of national implementation of the 24 Aichi Biodiversity Targets are analysed after the target-by-target analysis that follows. 25 26 The Aichi Biodiversity Targets: a target by target summary of achievement for 2020 27 28 This overview of the level of achievement of each of the 20 Aichi Biodiversity Targets is based on the best 29 available evidence by 2020. The baseline information for each of the targets has been taken from the analysis 30 in Chapter 3 of the IPBES Global Assessment, as summarized in Figure 2 below. This information is 31 supplemented by updated data from indicators, as well as studies and assessments published after the Global 32 Assessment was compiled. The information in these summaries is focussed especially on evidence that 33 supports analysis of trends since the mid-term assessment carried out for GBO4. 34 35 As well as examples from the 6th National Reports related to each target, illustrations drawn from the Local 36 Biodiversity Outlook demonstrate the role that indigenous and local communities have played in supporting 37 progress towards many of the targets.

9 These are the figures as of 15 November. The figures will be updated prior to the finalization of the report. All of the sixth national reports are accessible from https://www.cbd.int/reports/ 10 https://chm.cbd.int/search/reporting-map

17 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 2 Figure 2 - Target summary. Summary of progress towards each element of the Aichi Biodiversity Targets, as evaluated 3 by the IPBES Global Assessment.

18 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 Target 1 2 By 2020, at the latest, people are aware of the values of biodiversity and the steps they can take to conserve 3 and use it sustainably. 4

5 6 7 Summary of target achievement: 8 9 While difficult to measure at a global level, there appears to have been a significant increase in both 10 awareness and understanding of biodiversity in the past decade, based on a small number of countries where 11 comparative figures are available. Awareness and understanding of biodiversity are increasing more rapidly 12 among younger people. On the other hand, interest in biodiversity as measured by online searches appears to 13 have fallen since 2004. The target may be said to have been partially achieved. 14 15 Storyline 16 17 Improving public understanding of biodiversity and awareness of the steps that we can all take to conserve 18 and use it sustainably is clearly critical to underpin progress towards the 2050 Vision for Biodiversity. 19 Messages relating to biodiversity and its importance to us are available to the public in an ever-expanding 20 variety of formats and platforms, including through television documentaries, social media, museum 21 exhibitions and educational curricula, as well as through direct public engagement projects taking place from 22 neighbourhood or village level to global campaigns [see box 4]. 23 24 Scaling up the impact of all these activities into meaningful global metrics is challenging. A ‘biodiversity 25 barometer’ using standard questions to sample the public’s awareness and understanding of biodiversity now 26 covers 16 countries, but comparative figures over time are only available for four countries: France, 27 Germany, the United Kingdom and United States.11 Of those countries surveyed since 2009, substantial 28 increases are recorded both in the proportion of people who have heard of biodiversity, and in those able to 29 give a correct definition of biodiversity. The increase in both awareness and understanding is significantly 30 higher among people aged between 16 and 24. Further, while awareness of biodiversity varies widely in the 31 countries surveyed, in some countries ( Brazil, China, France, Mexico, Peru and Vietnam ) it reaches as 32 much as 90 per cent of people. Similarly Those able to provide correct definitions of biodiversity also varies 33 substantially (see figure 3).

11 http://www.biodiversitybarometer.org

19 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 2 Figure 3 - Biodiversity barometer. Summary of national responses in the 2018 Biodiversity Barometer report. 3 4 Another indicator of global interest in biodiversity, the proportion of online searches for the subject, shows a 5 substantial decrease since 2004, but with the trend levelling off since 2010. The trend may be influenced by 6 economic cycles as much as by change in public awareness of biodiversity, with environmental issues 7 tending to receive more interest in periods of relative prosperity.12 8 9 Relative to climate change the, attention paid to biodiversity, based on articles published in the media, is 10 low.13 Nevertheless, the heightened public alarm about the impacts of climate change is frequently expressed 11 alongside dismay at the state of biodiversity, in particular the extinction crisis. Increasingly, the two issues 12 are seen as intimately connected in the public mind, and such distinctions may become less relevant if this 13 trend continues.

12 Troumbis, A. Y. (2017). Declining Google Trends of public interest in biodiversity: semantics, statistics or traceability of changing priorities? Biodiversity and Conservation, 26(6), 1495–1505. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-017-1294-z 13 Legagneux, P., Casajus, N., Cazelles, K., Chevallier, C., Chevrinais, M., Guéry, L., … Gravel, D. (2018). Our House Is Burning: Discrepancy in Climate Change vs. Biodiversity Coverage in the Media as Compared to Scientific Literature . Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution , Vol. 5, p. 175. Retrieved from https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fevo.2017.00175

20 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 Box 4. Examples of national progress14:

Canada: Envirothon Canada15

Norway: Revised long term plan for research and higher education 2019-2028 emphasizes need for more knowledge about most serious environmental threats including biodiversity loss.

European Union: Special Eurobarometer survey on public attitudes to biodiversity carried out late 2018, published May 2019, shows increasing awareness and concern since previous survey in 2015 http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-19-2360_en.htm and http://data.europa.eu/euodp/en/data/dataset/S2194_90_4_481_ENG

Estonia: National survey on biodiversity awareness conducted every 2 years. Environmental awareness index increased from 37.9 in 2012 to 42 in 2016) (p. 20) – Estonians are more aware of the environment, appreciate nature more, and value biodiversity more (p. 25) Number of people visiting nature trails exceeds national 2020 target (from 1.55M in 2012 to 2.3M in 2016) (p. 12 and 22)

2 Box 5. Examples of progress involving Indigenous people and local communities16:

Philippines: Education on indigenous values in the school curriculum, including ‘Heirloom recipes of the Cordillera’17

3

14 These examples are are for illustration. The examples will be updated and completed on the basis of the sixth national reports and other information. 15 http://www.canadianforestry.com/html/education/envirothon_e.html 16 These examples are based on information provided through the draft of the second edition of the Local Biodiversity Outlooks. The examples will be updated and completed on the basis of that report. 17 https://pikp.org/

21 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 Target 2 2 By 2020, at the latest, biodiversity values have been integrated into national and local development and 3 poverty reduction strategies and planning processes and are being incorporated into national accounting, as 4 appropriate, and reporting systems. 5

6 7 8 Summary of target achievement 9 10 Lack of up to date global data relating to this target makes it difficult to assess overall achievement. Many 11 countries report examples of incorporating biodiversity into various planning and development processes 12 [see box 6] However, there is little indication that biodiversity has been truly integrated into development 13 and poverty reduction planning as required by the target, nor that it is being incorporated into national 14 accounting and reporting systems at a global scale. Overall, the assessment must be that, based on the limited 15 evidence available, this target has not been achieved. 16 17 Storyline 18 19 While global initiatives have attempted to increase the integration of biodiversity values into national 20 accounting and reporting systems, it is not clear that they are having an impact at a global scale. By 2019 ten 21 developing countries in Africa, Asia and Latin America were participating in ‘Wealth Accounting and 22 Valuation of Ecosystem Services (WAVES)’, a partnership led by the World Bank aiming to promote 23 sustainable development by ensuring that natural resources are mainstreamed in development planning and 24 national economic accounts (see figure 4).18

18 https://www.wavespartnership.org/en/partners

22 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 2 Figure 4: National accounts in ten developing countries participating in the WAVES partnership 3 Global standards for integrating environmental and economic information have been available through the 4 System of Environmental-Economic Accounting (SEEA) since 2012, following 20 years of development. 5 However, they have not yet achieved widespread uptake, and this appears to be due to lack of practical

23 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 understanding or ‘buy-in’ on the part of governments regarding how such integration of biodiversity values 2 will help long-term decision making.19 3 4 An analysis of 144 National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs) suggests that developing 5 countries, especially in Africa, show a greater awareness of the importance of biodiversity to key productive 6 sectors including agriculture, forestry and fisheries, with developed countries showing less evidence of such 7 mainstreaming in their NBSAPs.20 8 Box 6. Examples of national progress21

European Union+: Development and testing of series of ecosystem accounts since 2015; funding of Natural Capital Accounting and Valuation of Ecosystem Services project, jointly with UNSD, UNEP and SCBD, testing SEEA in Brazil, China, India, Mexico and South Africa.

Liberia: Study revealed increasing recognition of values of natural infrastructure and ecosystem services in local communities . TEEB project aiming to reduce pressure on mangrove by mainstreaming value of biodiversity conservation into coastal and marine planning policies.

Uganda: Progress to incorporate forest and wetlands values in national accounts22

Guinea: Biodiversity values are being increasingly integrated in sectoral and national decision making processes. Biodiversity conservation is also recognised in the 2035 Guinea Vision, in the National Plan for Economic and Social Development 2016-2020 as well as in the local development plans of 304 rural communities.

United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland – The Darwin Initiative is a government grants scheme that funds biodiversity conservation projects through locally based projects worldwide Projects financed by this initiative must include specific ways in which they plan on reducing gender inequality and poverty through biodiversity conservation, and provide sex disaggregated indicators 9

19 Vardon, M., Burnett, P., & Dovers, S. (2016). The accounting push and the policy pull: balancing environment and economic decisions. Ecological Economics, 124, 145–152. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2016.01.021 20 Whitehorn, P. R., Navarro, L. M., Schröter, M., Fernandez, M., Rotllan-Puig, X., & Marques, A. (2019). Mainstreaming biodiversity: A review of national strategies. Biological Conservation, 235, 157–163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2019.04.016 21 These examples are are for illustration. The examples will be updated and completed on the basis of the sixth national reports and other information.. 22 https://www.wavespartnership.org/sites/waves/files/kc/0302019_Uganda%20Country%20Brief.pdf

24 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 Target 3 2 By 2020, at the latest, incentives, including subsidies, harmful to biodiversity are eliminated, phased out or 3 reformed in order to minimize or avoid negative impacts, and positive incentives for the conservation and 4 sustainable use of biodiversity are developed and applied, consistent and in harmony with the Convention 5 and other relevant international obligations, taking into account national socio economic conditions. 6

7 8 9 Summary of target achievement 10 11 Progress has been made in reforming some harmful subsidies and creating incentives for conservation and 12 sustainable use of biodiversity. With limited global information available, there is little evidence that such 13 changes are on a scale to make a real impact of the kind envisaged by the target. Based on the current 14 evidence, the assessment must be that this target has not been achieved. 15 16 Storyline 17 18 Limited information is available at the global scale that would enable us to assess progress over the past 19 decades towards phasing out or eliminating subsidies and other incentives harmful to biodiversity. Elements 20 of government support to agriculture that are potentially most harmful to the environment have fallen 21 significantly in value since the 1990s – however, the most recent figures suggest that the trend of such 22 support has remained largely static in the past decade, remaining well above $100 billion worldwide. [see 23 Figure 5]23

Potentially most environmentally harmful

24 25 Figure 5: Trends in potentially environmentally harmful elements of government support to agriculture (OECD 26 countries)24 27 The use of taxation to encourage conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity has increased steadily in 28 recent years, with 150 biodiversity-relevant taxes identified in 49 countries by the Organization of Economic

23 OECD (2019), "Producer and Consumer Support Estimates", OECD Agriculture statistics (database), http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/agr-pcse-data-en ; https://www.bipindicators.net/indicators/trends-in-potentially- environmentally-harmful-elements-of-government-support-to-agriculture-producer-support-estimate 24 OECD (2019), "Producer and Consumer Support Estimates", OECD Agriculture statistics (database), http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/agr-pcse-data-en.

25 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 Cooperation and Development (OECD) in 2018. [see figure 6]25 Such taxes are applied, for example, on 2 pesticides, fertilizers, forest products and timber harvests – based on the ‘polluter pays’ principle, they place 3 an additional cost to reflect the negative environmental externalities generated by use of the natural resource 4 or pollutant, and thus provide an incentive for more environmentally choices both by producers and 5 consumers. To put the scale of these taxes into context, however, the total revenue they generate is 6 approximately $7.4 billion per year, a little over one per cent of total revenue from all environmentally- 7 relevant taxes in OECD countries.

8 9 Figure 6. Number of countries with biodiversity-relevant economic instruments26 10 Many countries and regional blocs have introduced positive incentives to encourage conservation and 11 sustainable use of biodiversity, for example through agri-environment schemes in which farmers receive 12 payments to implement agricultural techniques that support biodiversity in farmed landscapes [see Box 7]. 13 Initiatives to reduce deforestation and forest degradation through ‘REDD+’ schemes, while directed 14 primarily at reducing carbon dioxide emissions, also act as a positive financial incentive to support 15 biodiversity. However, such initiatives do not appear to be on a sufficient scale to deliver substantial 16 progress towards this target.27 17 18 A specific example in which action has been taken to reduce perverse incentives has been reform of the 19 European Union’s policy on the use of biofuels in the transport sector. Initial targets set in 2009 for a 20 minimum of 10% renewable content in vehicle fuels included sustainability criteria aimed at preventing the 21 sourcing of biofuels from areas of high biodiversity value – however, subsequent analysis suggested that the 22 increased investment in biofuels driven by the target had an indirect impact on forests and other carbon-rich 23 ecosystems by displacing food crops and thus increasing land pressure.28 This led to a review of European 24 Union biofuels policy and new safeguards introduced in 2015 to address these indirect impacts, including

25 OECD (2018) Tracking Economic Instruments and Finance for Biodiversity, available at https://www.oecd.org/environment/resources/Tracking-Economic-Instruments-and-Finance-for- Biodiversity.pdf 26 OECD (2018) Tracking Economic Instruments and Finance for Biodiversity, available at https://www.oecd.org/environment/resources/Tracking-Economic-Instruments-and-Finance-for- Biodiversity.pdf 27 IPBES Global Assessment 3.2.1, citing: Armsworth, P. R., Acs, S., Dallimer, M., Gaston, K. J., Hanley, N., & Wilson, P. (2012). The cost of policy simplification in conservation incentive programs. Ecology Letters, 15(5), 406–414. 28 Valin, H. (2015): The land use change impact of biofuels consumed in the EU - Quantification of area and greenhouse gas impacts https://ec.europa.eu/energy/sites/ener/files/documents/Final%20Report_GLOBIOM_publication.pdf

26 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 identification of those biofuels creating a high risk of indirect negative impacts on emissions from land use 2 changes.29 3 Box 6. Examples of national progress30

Italy. Negotiated tax waivers for properties that include significant green cover in urban environments.

Denmark. 100% of revenue from pesticides tax earmarked for environmental schemes and compensation for farmers ($78.1m in 2016)31 4

29 Directive (EU) 2015/1513 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 September 2015 amending Directive 98/70/EC relating to the quality of petrol and diesel fuels and amending Directive 2009/28/EC on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources 30 These examples are are for illustration. The examples will be updated and completed on the basis of the sixth national reports and other information. 31 OECD (2018) Tracking Economic Instruments and Finance for Biodiversity, available at https://www.oecd.org/environment/resources/Tracking-Economic-Instruments-and-Finance-for- Biodiversity.pdf

27 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 Target 4 2 By 2020, at the latest, Governments, business and stakeholders at all levels have taken steps to achieve or 3 have implemented plans for sustainable production and consumption and have kept the impacts of use of 4 natural resources well within safe ecological limits. 5

6 7 8 Summary of target achievement 9 10 While an increasing number of governments and businesses are developing plans for more sustainable 11 production and consumption, there is little indication that these are being implemented on a scale that 12 moderates the negative impact of unsustainable human activities on biodiversity. Trends suggest that while 13 natural resources are being used more efficiently, the impacts of their use remain well above safe ecological 14 limits. The assessment must be that the target has not been achieved. 15 16 Storyline 17 18 The most recent data suggests that the ecological footprint, measuring humanity’s use of biological resources 19 compared with Earth’s capacity to regenerate them, may have stabilized within the past decade. Before 2010, 20 the footprint had been steadily rising since it went into ‘deficit’ towards the end of the 1960s – that is, the 21 point at which resource use began to exceed the regenerative capacity of the entire planet. Between 2011 and 22 2016, the last year for which figures are available, the ecological footprint has remained at approximately 1.7 23 times the level of biocapacity – in other words, requiring ‘1.7 Earths’ to regenerate the biological resources 24 used by our societies. While it may suggest the ecological deficit is no longer widening, meeting the target of 25 ‘keeping the impacts of natural resource use well within safe ecological limits’ would require a significant 26 reduction of the ecological footprint, and there is no sign of this to date. [see figure 7]32

27 28

32 http://data.footprintnetwork.org/#/ ; https://www.bipindicators.net/indicators/ecological-footprint

28 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 Another measure of the impact of human activities on the biological resources of the planet is the proportion 2 of all potential plant growth that is diverted towards our own uses – known as human appropriation of net 3 primary production (HANPP). This takes into account both the impact of land conversion on the total 4 biomass generated through photosynthesis, and the proportion of the remaining vegetation harvested by 5 people. This proportion has doubled in the past century to reach approximately 25% of all potential 6 vegetation – the increase has been significantly slower than both population increase and economic growth, 7 suggesting that we are using land and plant resources more efficiently [see Figure 8]. However, future levels 8 of our appropriation of the foundation of all food chains will depend on many factors including human 9 population and the use of biofuels.33

10 11 Figure 8. HANPP and HANPP per capita from 1910 to 200534 12 There has been a significant increase since 2010 in the number countries with national legislation meeting 13 the requirements of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES), reaching 102 14 countries by 2018 or just over 55 per cent of those taking part in the Convention [see figure 9]. In practice, 15 this means that during the past decade more than 20 additional countries have acted to address the impact of

33 IPBES Global Assessment 3.2.1; https://www.bipindicators.net/indicators/human-appropriation-of-net- primary-production-hanpp; Krausmann, Fridolin et al. 2013. “Global Human Appropriation of Net Primary Production Doubled in the 20th Century.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 110(25): 10324 LP – 10329. http://www.pnas.org/content/110/25/10324.abstract; Haberl, Helmut, Karl-Heinz Erb, and Fridolin Krausmann. 2014. “Human Appropriation of Net Primary Production: Patterns, Trends, and Planetary Boundaries.” Annual Review of Environment and Resources 39(1): 363–91. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-121912-094620. 34 Taken from Krausmann, Fridolin et al. 2013. “Global Human Appropriation of Net Primary Production Doubled in the 20th Century.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 110(25): 10324 LP – 10329. http://www.pnas.org/content/110/25/10324.abstract and https://www.bipindicators.net/indicators/human-appropriation-of-net-primary-production-hanpp

29 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 trade on increasing the risk of species extinctions. On the other hand, it demonstrates that nearly half of all 2 countries have not yet put in place the laws and regulations required to control such trade.35

35 https://cites.org/legislation; https://www.bipindicators.net/indicators/percentage-of-parties-with- legislation-in-category-1-under-cites-national-legislation-project-nlp

30 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1

2 3 Figure 9: Trend in countries meeting with national legislation meeting the requirements of the Convention on 4 International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES).36 5 6 Two further indicators suggest that steps taken so far to use biological resources more sustainably are not yet 7 reversing the threat of extinction for those species directly targeted for human exploitation. The Red List

36 From https://cites.org/legislation and https://www.bipindicators.net/indicators/percentage-of-parties-with- legislation-in-category-1-under-cites-national-legislation-project-nlp

31 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 Index (impacts of utilization) tracks the status of birds, mammals and amphibians for which extinction risk is 2 either increased or reduced due to the impacts of their use by people. On average, such species are becoming 3 more threatened, suggesting that unsustainable use is driving more species towards extinction than those 4 species whose status has improved due to measures to manage their use more sustainably.37 Similarly, the 5 Red List Index (internationally traded species) shows a continued increase in extinction risk for those bird 6 species associated with international trade, typically meeting the demand for pet birds kept in cages. The 7 decline in the status of such birds is due to a combination of unsustainable capture and other pressures on 8 wild populations such as loss of habitat through unsustainable agriculture, logging and commercial or 9 residential development.38 10 Box 7. Examples of national progress39

Chile: Since 2016, Chile has a National Program for Sustainable Consumption and Production (Programa Nacional de Consumo y Producción Sustentables) aiming to decouple growth and development from environmental degradation. It includes an action plan (2017-2020) to coordinate national and private initiatives.40

Dominican Republic: The Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources hosted the 4th iteration of the national award for cleaner production (Premio Nacional Producción Más Limpia) that recognizes companies that make the use of natural resources more efficient (e.g. reduce water or energy use). As part of this imitative, 35 projects were implemented resulting in 615,000 m3 of water saved, as well as 25,800 mega Watts/year of energy.41

European Union: In 2015, the European Commission adopted a Circular Economy Package, which includes measures that will help stimulate Europe’s transition towards a circular economy, boost global competitiveness, foster sustainable economic growth and generate new jobs. It includes a strategy for plastics.42

France: “Feuille de route économie circulaire” launched in April 2018 by the prime minister, presenting 50 actions to better produce, consume, manage waste and mobilize all relevant actors.43

Gambia: The National Forest Assessment and National Wildlife Inventory aim to support understanding of consumption patterns to develop plans for more sustainable measures. Gambia also has plans to encourage sustainable consumption among corporations.44

United Kingdom: The UK Government’s 25 Year Environment Plan highlights the government’s commitment to “leave a lighter footprint on the global environment by enhancing sustainability and supporting zero deforestation supply chains”, in a way which “avoids improving our domestic environment at the expense of the environment globally”.45

37 https://www.bipindicators.net/indicators/red-list-index/red-list-index-impacts-of-utilisation 38 https://www.bipindicators.net/indicators/red-list-index/red-list-index-internationally-traded-species 39 These examples are are for illustration. The examples will be updated and completed on the basis of the sixth national reports and other information. 40 Chile sixth national report, page 114 41 Dominican Republic sixth national report, page 203. 42 European Union sixth national report, Section II, page 36 43 France sixth national report, page 21 44 Gambia sixth national report, page 64-65 45 United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland sixth national report, page 99

32 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

United Arab Emirates: The UAE strategy for green development aims to establish a green economy by putting in place multiple projects and regulations in place by 2021 involving sustainable production and recycling industries, as well as renewable energies, promotion of investments in green businesses and the green economy.46

Uruguay: New law concerning the sustainable use of plastics has been approved. Ley de Gestión Integral de Residuos aiming to promote recycling and give impetus to the circular economy of the country.47 1

46 United Arab Emeriates sixth national report, page 33 47 Uruguay sixth national reportm page 188

33 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 Target 5 2 By 2020, the rate of loss of all natural habitats, including forests, is at least halved and where feasible 3 brought close to zero, and degradation and fragmentation is significantly reduced. 4

5 6 7 Summary of target achievement 8 9 There has been a slowing in the rate of net deforestation worldwide, including for mangroves. However, loss 10 and degradation of habitats remain worryingly high, especially in the most biodiversity-rich ecosystems in 11 tropical regions. Primary forests, wilderness areas and global wetlands continue to decline. Land degradation 12 and fragmentation of rivers remain critical threats to biodiversity and the services from nature on which 13 people depend. The conclusion must be that the target has not been achieved. 14 15 Storyline 16 17 Global trends on deforestation present a complex picture. According to the Global Forest Resources 18 Assessment of the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), the net loss of forests reduced 19 by more than half between 1990 and 2015. These figures showed widely varying trends in different countries 20 and regions of the world, with net forest gains in Europe, North America and East Asia contrasting with 21 continued net forest losses in South America, Central America, sub-Saharan Africa and Southeast Asia, 22 albeit at reduced levels compared with the 1990s [see Figure 10].48 On the other hand, consistent analysis of 23 satellite data through the Global Forest Watch initiative showed that the annual loss of tree cover increased 24 globally from approximately 170,000 square kilometres in the first decade of this century to more than 25 210,000 square kilometres during the period 2011-2018 [see Figure 11].49 In part, this apparent discrepancy 26 is due to different definitions and methodologies regarding what is being measured.50 Further analysis of the 27 Global Forest Resources Assessment shows that the area of primary forest lost between 1990 and 2015 28 accounted for 310,000 square kilometres or 2.5% of the global total, with tropical regions experiencing a 29 10% net loss of primary forest during this period.51

48 IPBES Global Assessment 3.2.1; https://www.bipindicators.net/indicators/forest-area-as-a-proportion-of- total-land-area ; FAO Global Forest Resources Assessment (2015) http://www.fao.org/forest-resources- assessment/en/ ; Keenan, R. J., Reams, G. A., Achard, F., de Freitas, J. V., Grainger, A., & Lindquist, E. (2015). Dynamics of global forest area: Results from the FAO Global Forest Resources Assessment 2015. Forest Ecology and Management, 352, 9–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.FORECO.2015.06.014 49 IPBES Global Assessment 3.2.1; Global Forest Watch https://www.globalforestwatch.org/dashboards/global 50 For comparison of the GFRA and Global Forest Watch methodologies see Harris et al (2016) https://blog.globalforestwatch.org/data-and-research/global-forest-watch-and-the-forest-resources- assessment-explained-in-5-graphics-2 , cited in IPBES Global Assessment 3.2.1. 51 Morales-Hidalgo, D., Oswalt, S. N., & Somanathan, E. (2015). Status and trends in global primary forest, protected areas, and areas designated for conservation of biodiversity from the Global Forest Resources Assessment 2015. Forest Ecology and Management, 352, 68–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.FORECO.2015.06.011

34 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1

2

3 4 Figure 10. Trends in forest area change based on the Global Forest Resources Assessment.52

52 Taken from FAO Global Forest Resources Assessment 2015 via https://www.bipindicators.net/indicators/forest-area-as-a-proportion-of-total-land-area

35 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 2 Figure 11. Global annual tree cover loss as recorded by Global Forest Watch.53 3 4 Deforestation rates in the Brazilian Amazon have not returned to the very high rates of the 1990s and the 5 early years of this century; however, the dramatic reductions in deforestation following an integrated policy 6 approach have not been sustained during the past decade, with the most recent figures from satellite imagery

53 https://www.globalforestwatch.org/dashboards/global accessed 08/08/19

36 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 suggesting that deforestation may be on an upward trend following the record low loss of Amazon forest 2 cover of 4,600 square kilometres in 2012 (see figure 11). 3

4 5 Figure 11- Annual deforestation rates for the Brazilian Amazon, and cumulative deforestation per state, based on 6 analysis of satellite images through the PRODES programme of the Brazilian Space Research Institute.54

7 Up to date global metrics for the trends in extent of other types of habitat are less complete than for forests. 8 A global database of mangrove forest cover developed in 2016 found that between 2000 and 2012 the rate of 9 deforestation had decreased globally, but remained worryingly high in Southeast Asia where half of all 10 mangroves are located.55

11 The area covered by natural wetlands has continued to decline, having reduced by an average of 35% 12 worldwide between 1970 and 2015. Latin America and the Caribbean showed the greatest loss of wetlands. 13 During the same period, the area covered by human-made wetlands more than doubled. [see Figure 12]. 56

54 http://terrabrasilis.dpi.inpe.br/app/dashboard/deforestation/biomes/amazon/increments [accessed 11/11/19] 55 Hamilton, S. E. and Casey, D. (2016), Creation of a high spatio‐temporal resolution global database of continuous mangrove forest cover for the 21st century (CGMFC‐21). Global Ecol. Biogeogr., 25: 729-738. doi:10.1111/geb.12449 ; https://www.bipindicators.net/indicators/cgmfc-21-continuous-global-mangrove- forest-cover-for-the-21st-century 56 Darrah, S. E., Shennan-Farpón, Y., Loh, J., Davidson, N. C., Finlayson, C. M., Gardner, R. C., & Walpole, M. J. (2019). Improvements to the Wetland Extent Trends (WET) index as a tool for monitoring natural and human-made wetlands. Ecological Indicators, 99, 294–298. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ECOLIND.2018.12.032; https://www.bipindicators.net/indicators/wetland-extent- trends-index

37 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 2 Figure 12. Wetland Extent Trend (WET) index relative to 1970 for A) global natural and human-made wetlands, B) 3 global marine/coastal and inland wetlands and C) natural wetlands in six regions.57 4 5 Habitats continue to experience significant degradation and fragmentation, in addition to the loss of extent 6 noted above. Over the past two decades, approximately 20 per cent of the Earth’s vegetated surface has 7 shown persistent declining trends in productivity [see figure 13]. Land degradation affects human well-being 8 through loss of biodiversity and ecosystems, which has reached critical levels in many parts of the world 9 through impacts such as loss of food and water security, as well as human health, cultural identity and 10 vulnerability to disasters.58

57 Copied from Figure 2 in Darrah et al. 2019. Natural regional wetland trends are reported from 1970 to 2015 except for Europe (1970–2013) due to data availability. Global natural trends are weighted by regional wetland area estimates whilst regional and human-made trends are unweighted. A decrease in the index means that wetland extent has declined on average while a flat index represents no overall change in wetland extent (gains and declines cancel each other out). Dashed lines show 95% confidence intervals. 58 United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification. 2017.The Global Land Outlook, first edition. Bonn, Germany; IPBES (2018): Summary for policymakers of the assessment report on land degradation and restoration of the Intergovernmental SciencePolicy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. R. Scholes, L. Montanarella, A. Brainich, N. Barger, B. ten Brink, M. Cantele, B. Erasmus, J. Fisher, T. Gardner, T. G. Holland, F. Kohler, J. S. Kotiaho, G. Von Maltitz, G. Nangendo, R. Pandit, J. Parrotta, M. D. Potts, S. Prince, M. Sankaran and L. Willemen (eds.). IPBES secretariat, Bonn, Germany. 44 pages

38 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 2 Figure 13: Proportion of land area degraded between 2000 and 2015 per global region, as measured by changes in 3 land cover, land productivity and organic carbon in soil.59 4 5 Rivers are becoming increasingly fragmented, further threatening freshwater biodiversity. An assessment in 6 2014 found that of 292 large river systems worldwide, fewer than half (120) were still free-flowing; and of 7 those that remained free from human-made barriers, a further 25 large river systems would be fragmented by 8 ongoing or planned construction of dams.60 More recently, an assessment of the connectivity status of 12 9 million kilometres of rivers globally found that only 37 per cent of rivers longer than 1,000 kilometres 10 remained free-flowing over their entire length, and just 23 per cent flowed uninterrupted to the ocean.61 11 12 Overall, an estimated 3.3 million square kilometres of wilderness has been lost since the early 1990s, 13 accounting for nearly one tenth of the total wilderness remaining at that time. In this context, wilderness 14 refers to landscapes that are largely intact and mostly free of human disturbance – although many are 15 occupied by and critical to communities including indigenous peoples. The largest losses of wilderness took 16 place in South America (29.6% loss) and Africa (14% loss). By 2015, less than one quarter of the Earth’s 17 land surface (23.2%) was estimated to remain as wilderness, providing critical strongholds for endangered

59 https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/report/2019/goal-15/ ; https://knowledge.unccd.int/topics/sustainable- development-goals-sdgs/sdg-indicator-1531 60 IPBES Global Assessment 3.2.1; Zarfl, C., Lumsdon, A. E., Berlekamp, J., Tydecks, L., & Tockner, K. (2015). A global boom in hydropower dam construction. Aquatic Sciences, 77(1), 161–170. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00027-014-0377-0 61 Grill, G et al. 2019. “Mapping the World’s Free-Flowing Rivers.” Nature 569(7755): 215–21. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-1111-9.

39 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 biodiversity, for carbon storage and sequestration, for regulating local climates and for supporting many of 2 the world’s most politically and marginalized communities [see figure 14].62 3 4 A further indication of the continuing impact on biodiversity from loss and degradation of habitat comes 5 from the Red List Index (forest specialist species). This indicator shows that species of birds, mammals, 6 amphibians and cycads dependent on forests for their habitat are, on average, moving closer to extinction.63

7

8 9 Figure 14 (a) Change in the Distribution of Wilderness and Globally Significant Wilderness Areas since the Early 10 1990s. Globally significant wilderness areas are defined as wilderness areas >10,000 km2. The insets are focused on 11 the Amazon (A), the western Sahara (B), the West Siberian taiga (C), and Borneo (D). (b) Historic and Current Extent 12 of All Wilderness Area and the Degree to which It Is Protected. (A) Historic (grey) and current (green) extent of all

62 IPBES Global Assessment 3.2.1; Watson, J. E. M., Shanahan, D. F., Di Marco, M., Allan, J., Laurance, W. F., Sanderson, E. W., … Venter, O. (2016). Catastrophic Declines in Wilderness Areas Undermine Global Environment Targets. Current Biology, 26(21), 2929–2934. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CUB.2016.08.049 63 https://www.bipindicators.net/indicators/red-list-index/red-list-index-forest-specialist-species

40 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 wilderness area, as well as the area lost since the early 1990s (red) across the world’s terrestrial biomes. (B) The 2 wilderness area lost (red) and protected (gray) during 1990–2015.64 3 Box 8. Examples of national progress65 [to be complete] 4

64 Taken from Watson, J. E. M., Shanahan, D. F., Di Marco, M., Allan, J., Laurance, W. F., Sanderson, E. W., … Venter, O. (2016). Catastrophic Declines in Wilderness Areas Undermine Global Environment Targets. Current Biology, 26(21), 2929–2934. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CUB.2016.08.049 65Examples will be updated on the basis of the sixth national reports and other information.

41 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 Target 6 2 By 2020 all fish and invertebrate stocks and aquatic plants are managed and harvested sustainably, legally 3 and applying ecosystem based approaches, so that overfishing is avoided, recovery plans and measures are 4 in place for all depleted species, fisheries have no significant adverse impacts on threatened species and 5 vulnerable ecosystems and the impacts of fisheries on stocks, species and ecosystems are within safe 6 ecological limits. 7

8 9 10 Summary of target achievement 11 12 Overall, we have made poor progress towards meeting Aichi Target 6, with trends in some aspects moving in 13 the opposite direction. A growing proportion of assessed fish stocks are overfished. Nevertheless, an 14 increasing volume of wild-caught seafood is landed by fleets committed to more sustainable practices under 15 an independent certification scheme. The target has not been achieved. 16 17 Storyline 18 19 The proportion of assessed fish stocks that are within biologically sustainable levels has continued to decline, 20 falling from 90 per cent in 1974 to just 66.9 per cent in 2015 – in other words, one third of the world’s stocks 21 are overfished according to the latest indicators.66 The area with the highest percentage of unsustainable 22 stocks is the Mediterranean and Black Sea (62.2%) closely followed by the Southeast Pacific (61.5%) and 23 Southwest Atlantic (58.8%). In contrast, the Eastern Central, Northeast, Northwest and Western Central parts 24 of the Pacific Ocean had the highest percentage of sustainable stocks (all above 80%). [see Figure 15].

66 IPBES Global Assessment 3.2.1; FAO. 2018. The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture 2018 - Meeting the sustainable development goals. Rome.; https://www.bipindicators.net/indicators/proportion-of- fish-stocks-in-safe-biological-limits.

42 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1

2 3 Figure 15. Percentage of marine fish stocks within safe biological limits, over time and by ocean area. Tuna stocks are 4 singled out as they are largely migratory and straddle statistical areas67.

43 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 Despite the continuing global trend towards less sustainably managed fish stocks, initiatives in many ocean 2 regions have introduced management practices and incentives designed to ease the relentless pressure that 3 global fisheries have placed on marine ecosystems. For example, around 15 per cent of wild-caught seafood 4 consumed worldwide by 2019, accounting for 11.8 million tonnes per year, was landed by fleets certified by 5 the Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) based on verifiable commitments towards more sustainable 6 practices. The volume of fish catch certified under this market-based instrument has more than doubled since 7 2010, although there is wide regional variation, with certification much higher in temperate ocean regions 8 than in the tropics [see Figure 16].68

9 10 Figure 16. Growth in the volume of global fish catch managed by fisheries certified by the Marine Stewardship 11 Council. Source: MSC (2019) Global Impacts report. 12 Box 9. Examples of national progress69 [to be complete]

13 Box 10. Examples of progress involving Indigenous people and local communities70: United States: The role of the Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission (NWIFC) in co-management of Pacific salmon stocks.

14

67 FAO (2018) The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture 68 https://www.bipindicators.net/indicators/msc-certified-catch ; MSC, 2019. Marine Stewardship Council: Global Impacts Report 2019. MSC, London, UK. 69Eexamples will be completed on the basis of the sixth national and other sources of information. 70 These examples are based on information provided through the draft of the second edition of the Local Biodiversity Outlooks. The examples will be updated and completed on the basis of that report.

44 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 Target 7 2 By 2020 areas under agriculture, aquaculture and forestry are managed sustainably, ensuring conservation 3 of biodiversity. 4

5 6 7 Summary of target achievement 8 9 Despite an increasing proportion of land coming under organic agricultural management and certified 10 forestry, biodiversity continues to decline overall in landscapes used to produce food and timber; agricultural 11 expansion also remains one of the main drivers of global biodiversity loss, and rapidly-expanding 12 aquaculture has caused large-scale loss of coastal wetlands. The target has not been achieved. 13 14 Storyline 15 16 Agricultural expansion is one of the major drivers of biodiversity loss. Such expansion is in turn driven by a 17 combination of global population growth, demand for grain-fed meat and production of biofuels.71 Impacts 18 from unsustainable monoculture-based agriculture with high levels of external inputs include soil 19 degradation and erosion, impoverishment of soil biodiversity, loss of genetic diversity depletion of nutrients 20 and water, contamination of soil and water, and emergence of new pests and diseases.72 The degradation of 21 agricultural land drives further agricultural expansion. 22 23 A move towards more sustainable practices in agriculture is indicated by the significant increase in the area 24 of land under organic or conservation agriculture since 2000.73 Nevertheless, the impacts of such change are 25 not yet reflected in the overall status of biodiversity in productive landscapes. 26 27 A report by the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) on the state of the world’s biodiversity in food 28 and agriculture in 2019 concluded that while the use of a wide range of biodiversity-friendly practices was 29 increasing, many key components of biodiversity in food and agriculture at genetic, species and ecosystem 30 levels were in decline. Based on the reports of countries on the trends of micro-organisms, invertebrates, 31 vertebrates and plants across 12 production systems of agriculture, forestry and aquaculture, 33 per cent 32 indicated decreasing trends, 15 per cent stable trends and 19 per cent increasing trends, with the remainder 33 indicating lack of information [see figure 17].74

71 IPBES Global Assessment, 3.2.1.; Eisner, R., Seabrook, L. M., & McAlpine, C. A. (2016). Are changes in global oil production influencing the rate of deforestation and biodiversity loss? Biological Conservation, 196, 147–155. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.BIOCON.2016.02.017; Sachs, I. 2007. The Biofuels Controversy. Geneva: United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, UNCTAD/DITC/TED/2007/12 72 IPBES Global Assessment 3.2.1 73 FiBL, Data collection on organic agriculture world-wide (available at http://www.organic- world.net/statistics/statistics-data-collection.html); FAO, AQUASTAT database (FAO, 2014). 74 FAO. 2019. The State of the World’s Biodiversity for Food and Agriculture, J. Bélanger & D. Pilling (eds.). FAO Commission on Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture Assessments. Rome. 572 pp. (http://www.fao.org/3/CA3129EN/CA3129EN.pdf)

45 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 2 Figure 17. Trends in biodiversity associated with different production systems, based on 91 country reports prepared 3 for The State of the World’s Biodiversity for Food and Agriculture (2019).75 4 Another indicator that unsustainable practices in productive landscapes are still predominant in terms of the 5 current trends in biodiversity is the Wild Birds Index. This shows that in bird populations where surveys 6 provide enough information to track trends of abundance over time, currently only in North America and 7 Europe, those species specializing in forest and farmland habitats are on average declining at a faster rate 8 than bird species as a whole [see figure 18]. 9

10 11 Figure 18. The Wild Birds Index showing trends in abundance of species in North America and Europe specializing in 12 forest and farmland habitats. The top chart shows that on average, these specialist species are declining in abundance 13 at a faster rate than bird species as a whole.76

75 Taken from Figure 4.3 of FAO (2019) The State of the World’s Biodiversity for Food and Agriculture. 76 https://www.bipindicators.net/indicators/wild-bird-index

46 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 The area of forestry certified under the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) and Programme for the 2 Endorsement of Forest Certification (PEFC) under forest certification schemes has increased rapidly within 3 the last decade (by 37.2% during 2010-2016), indicating that a growing proportion of timber production is 4 moving towards more sustainable practices.77 Nevertheless, much forestry remains unsustainable. 5 6 Aquaculture is the fastest growing sector of global food production, although the growth rates have slowed 7 from the very rapid expansion of the first decade of this century [see Figure 19].78 Expansion of aquaculture 8 has caused large-scale loss and destruction of coastal wetlands (especially mangroves) and pollution of soil 9 and water.79

10

11 12 Figure19- Aquaculture. Growth rates in production of aquaculture since 1990, with regional variation since 200180

77 IPBES Global Assessment 3.2.1; https://www.bipindicators.net/indicators/area-of-forest-under- sustainable-management-certification. 78 FAO. 2018. The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture 2018 - Meeting the sustainable development goals. Rome. 79 IPBES Global Assessment 3.2.1; Ottinger, M., Clauss, K., & Kuenzer, C. 2016. Aquaculture: Relevance, distribution, impacts and spatial assessments - A review. Ocean and Coastal Management, 119, 244-66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2015.10.015 80 FAO (2018) State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture

47 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

Box 11. Examples of national progress81

Niger - A programme was put in place to improve the food and nutrition security of rural people built on traditional systems such as zaï82 and demi-lunes (half-moons)83 . The programme targeted women as well as men and youth for activities ranging from land rehabilitation, alternative income generation and local seed banks, clean cooking stoves and training to reduce pressure on land and improve agricultural productivity. The programme results included increased biodiversity and a gradual return of wildlife such as rodents, birds, reptiles and mammals related to the improvement of habitat quality, as well as woody species. Soil cover increased by up to 70% in some places, allowing much greater agricultural productivity, and carbon sequestration is estimated at over 6,142,000 tonnes of CO2 equivalents. Incomes rose between 40% and 90%, contributing to reduced migration of males and thus easing the burden on women and families.84 1 Box 12. Examples of progress involving Indigenous people and local communities85: Thailand: Reversing biodiversity loss while enhancing community wellbeing and opportunities for the youth in Hin Lad Nai village, northern Thailand Villagers turned crisis (caused by a logging company in the 1970s) into opportunity in recent years through a gradual but steady process of environmental and social recovery and revitalization, by combining traditional knowledge and customary natural-resource management with innovative livelihood options and modern knowledge and technology. At the heart of their socio-ecological landscape is a traditional rotational farming system that sustains an exceptionally rich biodiversity of edible cultivars and semi domesticated crops, driven by traditional knowledge and wisdom backed by centuries of experience in conservation and sustainable use of natural resources. Together with the village’s wet-rice fields and forest products, the swidden system provides the community with its food security. The latest innovation includes professional processing and marketing of honey coming from forest beekeeping (since 2010) and increasingly from experimental bee-keeping in the rotational farm areas (since 2015), which is already producing significant amount of honey. The knowledge transferred have done between elders to younger generation and the youth group also work on this area to younger youth or students in school. Several youth in the village recently stated that they prefer to live in the village and earn income from bee keeping and other agro-forestry activities rather than moving to the cities in search of work. In recognition of the community’s efforts and achievements, Hin Lad Nai was a recipient of the international Green Globe Award for 1999-2009. It has also received a number of local and national awards over the past 20 years. The latest award is “Kha Khong Phaen Din” (values of earth) from Ministry of Prime Minister. 2

81 These examples are are for illustration. The examples will be updated and completed on the basis of the sixth national reports and other information.. 82 Improved traditional planting pits, dug with a hoe to break surface crust before the onset of rains. They collect and store water and run-off, and organic matter is often placed in them to improve soil fertility. 83 Earthen embankments in the shape of a semi-circle, used for growing crops and rangeland rehabilitation. They also capture run-off from sloping land and concentrate water and organic matter. 84 IFAD. 2016. Project Report. Project to Support Food Security in the Region of Maradi. The project was by co-financed by the Global Environment Facility (project I.D. 3383). 85 These examples are based on information provided through the draft of the second edition of the Local Biodiversity Outlooks. The examples will be updated and completed on the basis of that report.

48 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 Target 8 2 By 2020, pollution, including from excess nutrients, has been brought to levels that are not detrimental to 3 ecosystem function and biodiversity. 4

5 6 7 Summary of target achievement. 8 9 Pollution, most especially the accumulation of reactive nitrogen in aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems, 10 continues to be a major driver of biodiversity loss, although nitrogen deposition has levelled off in Europe 11 following decades of reduced emissions; plastic pollution has accumulated at alarming rates in the oceans, 12 with severe impacts on marine ecosystems, and it is not yet clear whether action to minimize plastic waste in 13 many countries has had a significant impact. The target has not been achieved. 14 15 Storyline 16 17 Global emissions of reactive nitrogen have been increasing rapidly since the 1950s. With the exception of 18 Europe, where nitrogen deposition rates have recently levelled off owing to decreasing emissions since the 19 1980s, nitrogen deposition is projected to continue to increase globally[see figure 20].86 20

21 22 Figure 20. The global Nitrogen (N) deposition rate per km2 is projected to continue to increase by 2030 and 2100. 23 Increases in N deposition are projected across Asia, Africa, and Central and South America, while decreases are 24 projected in North America, Europe and the Middle East.87 25 26 Increased reactive nitrogen addition caused by agricultural fertilization or atmospheric deposition to 27 terrestrial ecosystems is considered one of the main drivers of global change, while nitrogen accumulation is 28 the main driver of changes in species composition across a wide range of ecosystem types. Nitrogen 29 pollution causes widespread plant biodiversity loss (including through impacts on soil micro-organisms), 30 which can lead to cascading effects. Impacts include direct toxicity of nitrogen gases and aerosols, soil-

86 IPBES Global Assessment 3.2.1; Shibata H., Branquinho C., McDowell W. H., Mitchell M. J., Monteith D. T., Tang J., Arvola L., Cruz C., Cusack D. F., Halada L., Kopacek J., Máguas C., Sajidu S., Schubert H., Tokuchi N., Záhora J. 2015. Consequence of altered nitrogen cycles in the coupled human and ecological system under changing climate: The need for long-term and site-based research. Ambio, 44: 178–193. 87 https://www.bipindicators.net/indicators/trends-in-nitrogen-deposition

49 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 mediated effects of acidification, long-term negative effects of increased ammonia and ammonium 2 availability, eutrophication of aquatic ecosystems, soil and surface water acidification, and reductions in air 3 quality.88 4 5 No overall progress has been made in minimizing pollution from pesticide use, which continues to grow 6 although at a slower rate than in the 1990s and the first decade of the 21st century. The level of pesticide use 7 varies widely across regions, with the quantity per hectare in Asia and the Americas exceeding the use in 8 Africa more than tenfold (see Figure 21).89 9

10

11 12 Figure 21: Rates of pesticide use on cropland between 1990 and 2016, globally and per region90. 13 Plastic pollution is increasing in marine ecosystems, with recent estimates that between 4.8-12.7 million 14 tonnes of plastic waste are entering the oceans every year, between 1.15-2.41 million tonnes carried by 15 rivers. One recent study estimated that there were over 5.25 trillion plastic particles, weighing over 260,000 16 tons in the world’s oceans, endangering fish, seabirds and other taxa. Coral reefs may be particularly 17 vulnerable, with plastic debris significantly increasing the likelihood of disease.91 Public concern about 18 plastic pollution has risen sharply in many countries, and this has given rise to a wide range of policies and 19 campaigns to reduce or prohibit single-use plastics in products such as bags, straws and cups. A recent

88 IPBES Global Assessment 3.2.1; Bobbink R., Hicks K., Galloway J., Spranger T., Alkemade R., Ashmore M., Bustamante M., Cinderby S., Davidson E., Dentener F., Emmett B., Erisman J.-W., Fenn M., Gilliam F., Nordin A., Pardo L., De Vries W. Global assessment of nitrogen deposition effects on terrestrial plant diversity: a synthesis. Ecological Applications, 20(1), 2010, pp. 30–59. 89 Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. FAOSTAT. Pesticides (use). http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/EP/visualize [accessed 15 November 2019]. 90 FAOSTAT 91 IPBES Global Assessment 3.2.1;

50 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 review found that measures to reduce single-use plastic bags, including bans and levies, ranged in 2 effectiveness from a 33% reduction to a 96% reduction in bag use (see Figure 22).92

3 4 Figure 22: Current global plastic bag interventions showing national tax/levy strategies (solid green); national bans 5 (solid red); national mixed strategies (solid blue); lower jurisdictional bans (red dots); lower jurisdictional mixed 6 strategies (blue dots); and lower jurisdictional tax/levy strategies (green dots)93. 7 Box 13. Examples of national progress94

Ethiopia - Support for energy-efficient and clean-burning cookstoves has helped reduce pressures on forests, diminish indoor air pollution and its associated health impacts, as well as eased the burden of firewood collection on women and children.95 8 Box 14. Examples of progress involving Indigenous people and local communities96: Panama: Guna indigenous authorities have recently addressed the impacts of plastic on the way of life of the people and on biodiversity, following an increase in plastic waste on the coasts of the Gunaya region, affecting the way of life of its inhabitants and the marine biodiversity of the region. The indigenous authorities have taken recent initiatives to try to minimize the consumption of products that contain plastic and look for alternatives for their sustainable management. 9

92 Schnurr, R. E. J., Alboiu, V., Chaudhary, M., Corbett, R. A., Quanz, M. E., Sankar, K., … Walker, T. R. (2018). Reducing marine pollution from single-use plastics (SUPs): A review. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 137, 157–171. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.MARPOLBUL.2018.10.001 93Schnurr et al. (2018). Reducing marine pollution from single-use plastics (SUPs): A review. Marine Pollution Bulletin. December 2018, Pages 157-171 94 These examples are are for illustration. The examples will be updated and completed on the basis of the sixth national reports and other information. 95 United Nations Development Programme. 2014. Communities in action for landscape resilience and sustainability – The COMDEKS Programme. United Nations Development Programme, New York, 148 pages. 96 These examples are based on information provided through the draft of the second edition of the Local Biodiversity Outlooks. The examples will be updated and completed on the basis of that report.

51 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 Target 9 2 By 2020, invasive alien species and pathways are identified and prioritized, priority species are controlled 3 or eradicated and measures are in place to manage pathways to prevent their introduction and 4 establishment. 5

6 7 8 Summary of target achievement. 9 10 Good progress has been made during the past decade on identifying and prioritizing invasive alien species. 11 Successful programmes to eradicate invasive alien species, especially on islands, have generated substantial 12 benefits to native species. However, there is no evidence of a slowing down in the number of new 13 introductions of alien species, and native species of birds, mammals and amphibians are being driven 14 towards extinction ever faster, on average, owing to the negative impacts of invasive species. The target 15 could therefore be said to have been partially met. 16 17 Storyline 18 19 Information and data about the occurrence and distribution of invasive alien species are increasingly 20 available and accessible, with multiple organizations collaborating to help link up previously disconnected 21 data sources. This includes the role of citizen scientists whose observations on the ground can now be made 22 available in real time to researchers and decision makers. The availability of comprehensive data on the 23 threats posed by invasive species has been especially valuable in helping to prioritize eradication 24 programmes on islands.97 More than 800 eradications of invasive mammals on islands have been successful, 25 with positive benefits for an estimated 236 native terrestrial species on 181 islands. Such eradications have 26 benefited more than one hundred highly threatened species of birds, mammals and reptiles, including for 27 example the island fox (Urocyon littoralis ) and Seychelles magpie-robin (Copsychus sechellarum) – see 28 Figure 23.98. There are far fewer examples of successful efforts to eradicate invasive alien species in 29 continental ecosystems.99

97IPBES Global Assessment 3.2.1, citing: Dawson, J. et al. (2014). Prioritising islands for the eradication of invasive vertebrates in the UK overseas territories. Conserv. Biol 29: 143- 153; Spatz, D. et al. (2014) The biogeography of globally threatened seabirds and island conservation opportunities. Conserv. Biol. 28: 1282–1290; Spatz, D. R. et al. (2017) Globally threatened vertebrates on islands with invasive species. Sci Advances. doi:10.1111/conl.12; Helmstedt, K. J. et al. (2016), Prioritizing eradication actions on islands: it's not all or nothing. J Appl Ecol, 53: 733–741. doi:10.1111/1365-2664.12599. 98 IPBES Global Assessment 3.2.1, citing: Jones, H. P. et al. (2016) Invasive mammal eradication on islands results in substantial conservation gains. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci USA. 113: 4033–4038. 99 IPBES 3.2.1

52 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 2 Figure 23 - Island Eradications. Cumulative number of successful invasive mammal eradication projects by year since 3 1950. Data are restricted to whole island events, where data quality is scored as good or satisfactory only, and 4 excludes domestic animals and reinvasion events100. 5 6 Recent analysis has identified 107 priority islands where eradication of invasive mammals could feasibly 7 start in the near future, improving the survival prospects for 80 highly threatened vertebrates, thus making a 8 significant contribution to the fight against global extinctions (see Table 1).101 9

10 11 Table Feasible Eradications. Source: Holmes et al. (2019). 12 13 It is less clear to what extent introductions of invasive species and their establishment in the environment 14 have been successfully prevented, through managing the various pathways by which species are moved from 15 native to alien ecosystems. Preventing introductions in the first place is likely to be far more cost-effective 16 than attempting to eradicate alien species once they become established and start to impact native species.

100Database of Island Invasive Species Eradications (DIISE) http://diise.islandconservation.org/ [accessed 15 November 2019] 101 Holmes ND et al. (2019) Globally important islands where eradicating invasive mammals will benefit highly threatened vertebrates. PLoS ONE 14(3): e0212128. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0212128

53 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 While many countries are introducing measures to identify and address these pathways, more information is 2 needed to quantify the application and cost effectiveness of such efforts.102 3 4 The most recent data on the number of new species introductions showed no sign of slowing (see Figure 5 24).103 An analysis of longer-term trends found that for most taxonomic groups, the number of alien species 6 recorded for the first time in a region each year increased exponentially since 1950.104 It appears that past 7 efforts to combat species invasions have not been effective enough to keep up with increasing globalization, 8 and in particular the impact of massively expanded trade providing additional opportunities to carry species 9 into alien environments.

10 11 Figure 24. Trend indicator showing the mean index of the cumulative number of invasive alien species across 21 12 countries. 13 14 Current indicators also suggest that on balance, more species are moving closer to extinction due to 15 increased pressure from invasive alien species, than those native species given a better survival chance 16 thanks to eradication or control of biological invaders. This is shown in the negative trend of the Red List 17 Index for birds, mammals and amphibians known to be affected by invasive alien species.105 18 Box 15. Examples of national progress106

Antigua and Barbuda: eradication of rats and removal of goats from Redonda Island.

Belgium: TrIAS, an innovative data-driven workflow using citizen science reporting to track emerging IAS to inform policy https://www.belspo.be/belspo/brain-be/projects/TrIAS_en.pdf https://osf.io/7dpgr/

Republic of Congo: Use of insect biological control to combat aquatic invasive species.

102 IPBES 3.2.1 103 https://www.bipindicators.net/indicators/trends-in-numbers-of-invasive-alien-species-introduction-events 104 IPBES 3.2.1; Seebens H et al. (2017). No saturation in the accumulation of alien species worldwide. Nature Communications, 8, 14435. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms14435 105 https://www.bipindicators.net/indicators/red-list-index/red-list-index-impacts-of-invasive-alien-species 106 These examples are are for illustration. The examples will be updated and completed on the basis of the sixth national reports and other information..

54 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

United Kingdom: Rodent eradication in South Georgia. 1 2

55 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 Target 10 2 By 2015, the multiple anthropogenic pressures on coral reefs, and other vulnerable ecosystems impacted by 3 climate change or ocean acidification are minimized, so as to maintain their integrity and functioning. 4

5 6 7 Summary of target achievement. 8 9 Multiple threats continue to affect coral reefs and other vulnerable ecosystems impacted by climate change 10 and ocean acidification. Overfishing, nutrient pollution and coastal development compound the effects of 11 coral bleaching and corals have shown the most rapid increase in extinction risk of all assessed groups; 12 nevertheless the overall level of live coral cover has shown only insignificant global decline in past decades 13 due to highly variable responses and rates of recovery among different reef systems. Other ecosystems 14 especially in mountains and polar regions have experienced significant impacts from climate change, 15 compounded by other pressures. The target was already missed in 2015, and has not moved closer to 16 being achieved. 17 18 Storyline 19 20 Multiple pressures continue to threaten coral reefs, with accelerating impacts from climate change and ocean 21 acidification, interacting with other threats. More than sixty per cent of the world’s coral reefs face 22 immediate direct threats, with overfishing being the most pervasive immediate driver, combined with climate 23 change. Corals have shown the steepest declines in status of all taxonomic groups assessed in the Red List 24 Index (see figure Red List Index in Target 12 section). Mass coral bleaching due to warming and ocean 25 acidification is becoming more frequent.107 Plastics have recently been identified as another major cause of 26 coral reef loss, due to light interference, release of toxins, physical damage, depletion of oxygen and a 20- 27 fold increase in the likelihood of disease.108 28 29 Despite these severe pressures, the global long-term trend of live coral cover has declined only slightly since 30 the early 1970s (see Figure 25). This is because the response of reefs is highly variable, and only a small 31 proportion of reefs experience severe die-off – in the Western Indian Ocean, for example, the proportion is 32 ten per cent.109

107 IPBES Global Assessment 3.2.1; Hughes, T.P., Barnes, M.L., Bellwood, D.R., Cinner, J.E., Cumming, G.S., Jackson, J.B.C. et al. (2017). Coral reefs in the Anthropocene. Nature, 546, 82-90 108 Lamb, J. B., Willis, B. L., Fiorenza, E. A., Couch, C. S., Howard, R., Rader, D. N., … Harvell, C. D. (2018). Plastic waste associated with disease on coral reefs. Science, 359(6374), 460–462. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aar3320 109 Obura et al. 2017. Coral reef status report for the Western Indian Ocean (2017). Global Coral Reef Monitoring Network. In: https://www.icriforum.org/sites/default/files/COI%20REEF%20LR%20F2.compressed.pdf

56 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 2 Figure 25- Live Coral. Long term change in the average percentage of live coral cover, compiled from more than 470 3 reefs in over 30 countries in all oceans.110 4 5 Negative impacts from climate change and ocean acidification have also been observed in other marine 6 environments, including the zone close to the bottom of the oceans, cold-water corals and seamounts. Other 7 vulnerable ecosystems showing widespread impacts from climate change include mountains and glaciers, 8 where the normal regulation of water flows and run-off are affected – for example in Mount Kilimanjaro in 9 Tanzania, the Andes and mountain regions of Asia.111 Polar regions are especially badly affected with 10 reported impacts on marine mammals, birds and Arctic marine ecosystems in general. 11 12 Estimates of the large-scale impacts of climate change on biodiversity are detectable only among species for 13 which long-term monitoring data is available, most especially birds. The Climate Impact Index demonstrates 14 that among North American and European bird populations, the signal of climate change can be clearly 15 observed with changes in abundance, both negative and positive, following the predicted response to 16 warming temperatures based on the climatic niches occupied by these species (see Figure 26).

17 18 Figure 26- The Climate Impact Index showing the extent to which climate change is affecting abundance of 145 19 European and 380 North American common bird species, whether negatively or positively. The selected species are 20 those predicted to be affected by climate change based on their distributions. An upward trend indicates that climate is 21 having an increasingly significant impact on the populations of these species.112

110 Global Coral Reef Monitoring Network (GCRMN).https://www.bipindicators.net/indicators/live-coral- cover; https://gcrmn.net/ 111 IPBES Global Assessment 3.2.1. 112 https://www.bipindicators.net/indicators/climatic-impacts-on-european-and-american-birds ; Stephens, P. A., Mason, L. R., Green, R. E., Gregory, R. D., Sauer, J. R., Alison, J., … Willis, S. G. (2016). Consistent

57 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 Box 16. Examples of national progress113

Djibouti - A project to assesses the impact of climate change on coastal habitats and marine ecosystems, while supporting the resilience of marine and coastal areas, including maintaining water quality has been initiated. Specific actions include a coastal zone co-management system and participatory plans to restore coastal habitats affected by climate change. These engage and benefit communities through employment linked to restoration, including through women’s groups.114 2

response of bird populations to climate change on two continents. Science, 352(6281), 84 LP – 87. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aac4858 113 These examples are are for illustration. The examples will be updated and completed on the basis of the sixth national reports and other information. 114 Programme to reduce vulnerability to climate change and poverty of coastal rural communities, in IFAD. 2017. The Marine Advantage. Empowering coastal communities, safeguarding marine ecosystems. Rome.

58 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 Target 11 2 By 2020, at least 17 per cent of terrestrial and inland water areas and 10 per cent of coastal and marine 3 areas, especially areas of particular importance for biodiversity and ecosystem services, are conserved 4 through effectively and equitably managed, ecologically representative and well-connected systems of 5 protected areas and other effective area-based conservation measures, and integrated into the wider 6 landscape and seascape. 7

8 9 10 Summary of target achievement. 11 12 The proportion of the planet’s land and oceans designated as protected areas is likely to reach the targets for 13 2020, and will likely be exceeded when other effective area-based conservation measures such as private 14 reserves and territories managed by indigenous peoples and local communities are taken into account; 15 however, much more modest progress has been made to ensure that protected areas safeguard the most 16 important areas for biodiversity, that they protect a representative portion of global biodiversity, are 17 effectively and equitably managed and are adequately connected to one another as well as to the wider 18 landscape. The target has been partially achieved. 19 20 Storyline 21 22 The world’s protected area network continues to expand and may exceed numerical targets for coverage of 23 terrestrial and marine environments by 2020. By November 2019, the World Database on Protected Areas 24 showed that 14.9% of the world’s terrestrial and freshwater environments was covered by protected areas, 25 with 7.44% of the marine realm area covered (17.2% of marine areas within national jurisdiction, and 1.18% 26 of marine areas beyond national jurisdiction) – see Figure 27. Specific commitments made by particular 27 countries for new or expanded protected areas amount to more than 3.9 million square kilometres on land 28 and over 13 million square kilometres in the oceans. If these commitments are fulfilled, coverage is expected 29 to exceed 10% of the global ocean and 17% of land and inland waters within the period established for this 30 component of the target (see Figure 28).115 31 32 Recent growth in the global protected area network has been greatest in the marine environment, with the 33 total size of marine protected areas more than ten times greater now than in 2000. This increase has resulted 34 in particular from the establishment of some extremely large marine protected areas in the Pacific Ocean, 35 such as the Marae Moana Marine Park in the Cook Islands in 2017 (1.97 million square kilometres) and the 36 expansion in 2016 of the Papahānaumokuākea Marine National Monument in the Hawaiian Islands (1.5 37 million square kilometres), representing the second and fourth largest marine protected areas worldwide 38 respectively.116 39

115 CBD (2018b) Updated status of Aichi Biodiversity target 11. Document CBD/SBSTTA/22/INF/30. Available at https://www.cbd.int/doc/c/5a93/21ba/d085c6e64dcb8a505f6d49af/sbstta-22-inf-30-en.pdf 116 Gannon P., Seyoum‐Edjigu, E., Cooper, D., Sandwith, T., Ferreira de Souza, B., Dias, C., Palmer, P., Lang, B., Ervin, J., Gidda, S. 2017. Status and Prospects for achieving Aichi Biodiversity Target 11: Implications of national commitments and priority actions. Parks, 23.2: 9-22.

59 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 The component of this target dealing with ‘other effective area-based conservation measures’ relates to 2 privately-managed areas and territories managed by indigenous peoples and local communities, for example, 3 which collectively are not well documented, and only recently defined. It is likely that once such areas are 4 taken into account, the elements of the target relating to conserved area will be even further exceeded.117 5

6 7

8 9 Figure 27: Protected area coverage by terrestrial ecoregion, and by Exclusive Economic Zones in the ocean118s.

117 IPBES Global Assessment 3.2.1; CBD (2018h) Recommendation adopted by the Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical and Technological Advice: 22/5 Protected Areas and Other Effective Area-based Conservation Measures. Document CBD/SBSTTA/REC/22/5. Available at https://www.cbd.int/doc/recommendations/sbstta-22/sbstta-22-rec-05-en.pd f. 118 Protected Planet.

60 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 2 Figure 28-. Current global protected area coverate (as of June 2019) that is expected if national commitments are 3 completed as proposed by 2020. Dashed lines show the global coverage targets for marine (10%) and terrestrial (17%) 4 protected areas119. 5 Moderate progress has been made towards making protected areas ecologically representative, effectively 6 managed and encompassing areas of importance for biodiversity. Only 43.4% of the world’s 823 terrestrial 7 ecoregions have at least 17% of their area covered by protected areas and 42.7% of the 232 marine 8 ecoregions (and 10.8% of pelagic provinces) have at least 10% of their area covered. Protected area coverage 9 of species distributions also remains insufficient with more than half (57%) of 25,380 species assessed to 10 date having inadequate coverage of their distributions by protected areas.120 11 12 Only around one- 13 fifth (20.7%) of Key Biodiversity Areas (‘sites contributing significantly to the global persistence of 14 biodiversity’) are completely covered by protected areas. The global mean percentage area of terrestrial Key 15 Biodiversity Areas covered by protected areas increased from 35.0% in 2000 to 46.6% in 2018, with the 16 equivalent figures being 31.9% to 43.5% for freshwater Key Biodiversity Areas and 31.7% to 44.3% for 17 marine Key Biodiversity Areas (see Figure 29). While there has been progress in this component of the 18 target, a significant proportion of the most important areas for biodiversity remains without formal 19 protection.121.

119 Gannon et al (2019) Editorial essay: An update on progress towards Aichi Biodiversity Target 11. PARKS VOL 25.2 NOVEMBER 2019. 120 Butchart, S. H. M., Clarke, M., Smith, R. J., Sykes, R. E., Scharlemann, J. P. W., Harfoot, M., … Burgess, N. D. (2015). Shortfalls and Solutions for Meeting National and Global Conservation Area Targets. Conservation Letters, 8(5), 329–337. https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.12158 121 BirdLife International, IUCN and UNEP-WCMC (2018) Protected area coverage of Key Biodiversity Areas. Available at www.keybiodiversityareas.org ; https://www.bipindicators.net/indicators/protected-area- coverage-of-key-biodiversity-areas

61 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1

2 3 Figure 29-. The proportion of Key Biodiversity Areas falling within protected areas, shown (top) worldwide and 4 (bottom) as a total percentage of terrestrial, freshwater and marine realms with changes over time. Source: Birdlife 5 International, KBA Partnership. 6 7 Consistent global information is lacking to assess the extent to which protected areas are effectively and 8 equitably managed, as also required for achievement of this target. However, a number of studies have 9 indicated significant factors threatening the effectiveness of protected areas, including multiple human 10 pressures such as unsustainable use of biological resources, and inadequate size to protect target species. 11 Without a comprehensive global dataset on protected area management effectiveness, it is difficult to 12 estimate what percentage of the terrestrial/freshwater and ocean environments is effectively protected, but it 13 is likely to fall far short of the percentages for absolute coverage reported above.122 14 15 Maintaining or creating connections for nature between protected areas, across landscapes, through 16 freshwater basins and ocean areas – collectively known as ecological connectivity -- is an essential 17 component of effective conservation, and recently recognized as an ‘emerging issue of environmental 18 concern’ by the United Nations Environment Programme.123 Such connectivity is essential to enable species

122 IPBES Global Assessment, 3.2.1. 123 Tabor, G. Ecological Connectivity: A bridge to preserving biodiversity. In UNEP (2019). Frontiers 2018/19 Emerging Issues of Environmental Concern. United Nations Environment Programme, Nairobi.

62 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 to migrate, to reproduce, to adapt their range in response to climate, among many other requirements 2 essential to the purpose of effective protection. While specific targets or comprehensive indicators of 3 connectivity are not yet available, the most recent assessment indicated that a little over half of terrestrial 4 protected areas (7.7% of all land area) were adequately connected, a modest increase from the 6.5% of 5 ‘protected, connected’ area in 2010 (see Figure 20).

6

7 8 Figure 30. Status and trends in the connectivity of protected areas, 2000-2018.124

Available at https://www.unenvironment.org/resources/frontiers-201819-emerging-issues-environmental- concern 124 Saura, S., et al.(2019) Global trends in protected area connectivity from 2010 to 2018. Biological Conservation, 238: xx-xx. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2019.07.028

63 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

Box 17- Examples of national progress125

China: Ecological Conservation Red-lining. Rwanda - Land tenure reforms that reduce gender barriers to land ownership have been put in place. These have led to a substantial increase in soil conservation investment in structures such as bunds, terraces, and check dams, particularly from female-headed households.126 1 Box 18 - Examples of progress involving indigenous peoples and local communities127

Senegal: Kawawana community conserved area—restoring an ancient territory of life among the Djola people of Casamance, Senegal. The Rural Community of Mangagoulack, in the Casamance region of Senegal, is a relatively remote area inhabited nearly exclusively by Djola people. Responding to the degradation of their coastal environment, less and less productive because of indiscriminate fishing and resource extraction by outsiders, the fishermen of all the eight villages of the rural community decided to create an association. Their association began by getting active in mangrove reforestation and others small local initiatives but, after a few years, it was ready to scale up ambitions. It was at that time that the Indigenous Peoples’ and Community Conserved Areas (ICCA) Consortium and the Global Environment Facility Small Grants Programme (GEF SGP) provided timely support so that they could inform themselves about options and plan together to create and set up a Community Conserved Area (ICCA, or APAC, following the French abbreviation) covering nearly 10,000 hectares of land and water in their extremely productive riverine mangrove ecosystem. The fishermen decided to call their conserved area Kawawana— a Djola abbreviation for the phrase: “our ancestral patrimony that we all wish to conserve”.128 2

125 These examples are are for illustration. The examples will be updated and completed on the basis of the sixth national reports and other information.. 126 Ayalew Ali, D., Deininger, K. and M. Goldstein. 2014. Environmental and gender impacts of land tenure regularization in Africa: Pilot evidence from Rwanda. Journal of Development Economics, 110, 262-275. 127 These examples are based on information provided in the sixth national reports are are for illustration. The examples will be updated and completed on the basis of the sixth national reports available when the GBO-5 is finalised. 128 https://www.iccaconsortium.org/index.php/2014/12/15/an-icca-in-casamance-the-story-of-kawawana/

64 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 Target 12 2 By 2020 the extinction of known threatened species has been prevented and their conservation status, 3 particularly of those most in decline, has been improved and sustained. 4

5 6 7 Summary of target achievement 8 9 Species continue to slide towards extinction at an alarming rate, although the situation would be even worse 10 in the absence of conservation measures. With only 5% of described species having been assessed for 11 extinction risk, the best estimate is that nearly one quarter (23.7%) of all species in well-assessed taxonomic 12 groups may currently be threatened with extinction, and around one million species are estimated to face 13 extinction unless the drivers of biodiversity loss are drastically reduced. Global populations of vertebrate 14 species have fallen by approximately 60% since 1970, with the steepest declines occurring in freshwater 15 ecosystems and in tropical regions. Climate change is anticipated to become an increasingly significant 16 driver of extinction risk in coming decades. The target has not been achieved. 17 18 Storyline 19 20 A total of 28,338 species are listed as threatened with extinction out of 105,732 species assessed for the 21 IUCN Red List, with 95% of described species not yet evaluated. Best estimates of the proportion of species 22 threatened with extinction average 23.7% across comprehensively assessed taxonomic groups, ranging from 23 7.5% for selected families of bony fishes, to 14% of birds, 25% of mammals, 30% of sharks and rays, 33% 24 of reef-forming corals, 34% of conifers, 36% of selected families of dicots (magnolias and cacti), 40% of 25 amphibians, and 63% of cycads (see Figure 31).129

129 https://www.iucnredlist.org/resources/summary-statistics

65 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 2 Figure 31 - Red List. Summary of extinction risk status across different taxonomic groups130 3 Recent extinctions include Bramble Cay melomys (Melomys rubicola) in Australia (last seen in 2007, 4 declared extinct in 2016; Western black rhinoceros (Diceros bicornis longipes) in Cameroon (last reported in 5 2006, declared extinct in 2011; Javan rhinoceros (Rhinoceros sondaicus annamiticus) in Vietnam in 2011, 6 the Pinta Giant Tortoise (Chelonoidis abingdonii) in Galapagos in 2012 and the Alagoas Foliage-gleaner 7 (Philydor novaesi) in Brazil in 2011.131 8 9 While extinctions themselves are very difficult to detect, the Red List Index shows that, overall, species are 10 continuing to move towards extinction rapidly, with cycads, amphibians and particularly corals declining 11 most rapidly (See Figure 32).132

130 130. Source: IUCN Red List 2019. 131 IPBES Global Assessment 3.2.1. 132 https://www.bipindicators.net/indicators/red-list-index

66 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 2 Figure 32. Red List Index of species survival for mammals, birds, amphibians, warm-water reef-building corals, and 3 cycads. A Red List Index value of 1.0 equates to all species within a group qualifying as Least Concern (i.e., not 4 expected to become Extinct in the near future). An index value of 0 equates to all species having gone Extinct 5 133 6 Although difficult to quantify, conservation actions have succeeded in reducing the risk of extinction of 7 many species, and indeed have prevented some dozens of species from going extinct. A recent study finds 8 that global conservation efforts have reduced the effective extinction rate of birds by at least 40%, but mostly 9 through preventing critically endangered species from going extinct, rather than by preventing species at low 10 risk from moving to higher risk categories. This suggests an accumulation of ‘extinction debt’ causing a 11 wave of extinctions in future, unless conservation efforts focus more on reducing the threat to species before 12 they reach the most critical level of risk.134 13 14 The Living Planet Index, tracking trends for more than 16,000 well-surveyed populations of over 4,000 15 vertebrate species, showed a decline of 60 per cent overall between 1970 and 2014. This means that, on 16 average, animal populations worldwide are well under half the size they were in 1970. The average decline 17 in freshwater ecosystems has been even steeper (83%), while vertebrate population declines in tropical 18 regions have been much greater over the past four decades than in temperate zones (see Figure 33).135

133 . Source: IUCN and BirdLife International 2019. 134 Monroe et al. in prep (2019) 135 WWF. 2018. Living Planet Report - 2018: Aiming Higher. Grooten, M. and Almond, R.E.A.(Eds). WWF, Gland, Switzerland.

67 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1

2

3 4 Figure 33 - Living Planet. Trends in vertebrate populations 1970-2014, measured by the Living Planet Index (LPI), 5 globally (top); in the biogeographic realms (middle) and in freshwater systems (bottom136).

68 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 Progress towards this target is being hampered by the increasing impacts of climate change, which is 2 exacerbating the challenge of conserving species. Projected impacts suggest that climate change will greatly 3 increase the number of species under threat. Examples of observed impacts include: 4  shifts in species ranges, causing mismatches in the interaction of species such as pollinators and host 5 plants, predator and prey 6  changes in the timing of events such as reproduction, migration, flowering etc (phenology) 7  infestations of pests, invasive species and disease 8  mass bleaching of coral reefs (see Target 10) 9  changes to the physical, chemical and biological environment especially of the Arctic.137 10 Box 19- Examples of national progress138 [to be completed]

11 Box 20 - Examples of progress involving indigenous peoples and local communities139

Canada/United States: Restoration of Bison (or Buffalo) populations through cooperation among indigenous peoples in the Great Plains Bison were crucial to the lives of the Plains tribes in Canada and the USA, providing both food and shelter, as well as having broad cultural and spiritual significance. Before the arrival of Europeans, tens of millions of bison roamed vast areas of Central Canada and the American Midwest. By the end of the 1890s, the population had been reduced to under 2000 animals. In 2014, the Northern Tribes Buffalo Treaty was signed by 21 tribes and First Nations in Canada and the USA, focused on cross-border bison restoration. There is growing recognition that the absence of buffalo has led to a deterioration of the ecological integrity of grasslands, diminished the health of Indigenous peoples, and has led to incalculable cultural losses. With about 20,000 wild bison in North America today, a focus on this cultural keystone species will highlight the significance of Indigenous bison restoration efforts in North America. 12

137 Detailed references for these observed impacts are listed in IPBES Global Assessment, 3.2.1. 138 These examples are are for illustration. The examples will be updated and completed on the basis of the sixth national reports and other information.. 139 These examples are based on information provided in the sixth national reports are are for illustration. The examples will be updated and completed on the basis of the sixth national reports available when the GBO-5 is finalised.

69 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 Target 13 2 By 2020, the genetic diversity of cultivated plants and farmed and domesticated animals and of wild 3 relatives, including other socio-economically as well as culturally valuable species, is maintained, and 4 strategies have been developed and implemented for minimizing genetic erosion and safeguarding their 5 genetic diversity. 6

7 8 9 Summary of target achievement 10 11 Genetic diversity of cultivated plants, farmed and domesticated animals, and wild relatives, continues to be 12 eroded. The wild relatives of important food crops are poorly represented in ex situ seed banks that help 13 guarantee their conservation, important for future food security. The proportion of livestock breeds that are 14 at risk or extinct is increasing, although at a slower rate than in earlier years, suggesting some progress in 15 preventing the decline of traditional breeds. The target has not been achieved. 16 17 Storyline 18 19 Wild plants useful for economic, social or cultural reasons are in a poor state of conservation worldwide. An 20 indicator recently developed to assess the conservation status of nearly 7,000 useful wild plant species found 21 that fewer than three per cent were sufficiently conserved either through protected areas (in situ), or in 22 seedbanks or botanic gardens (ex situ). These plants are used, among other purposes, for plant breeding 23 (from wild relatives of crops), medicines, materials, foods, environmental services such as shade and erosion 24 control, and lack of conservation across their range in the wild suggests an erosion of the plant genetic 25 resources on which human societies depend (see Figure 34).140 26

27

140 Khoury, C. K., Amariles, D., Soto, J. S., Diaz, M. V., Sotelo, S., Sosa, C. C., … Jarvis, A. (2019). Comprehensiveness of conservation of useful wild plants: An operational indicator for biodiversity and sustainable development targets. Ecological Indicators, 98, 420–429. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ECOLIND.2018.11.016 ; https://www.bipindicators.net/indicators/comprehensiveness-of-conservation-of-socioeconomically-as-well- as-culturally-valuable-species;

70 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 2 Figure 34 - Wild Plants. (top) Conservation priority category of nearly 7,000 useful plant species, measured with 3 regard to ex situ conservation, in situ conservation, and as a combined final metric. The global indicator is the 4 measurement of the proportion of species sufficiently conserved or of low priority for further conservation action, i.e. 5 the area in green. (bottom) an example species, Coffea liberica, showing the level of conservation through ex situ 6 germplasm collection and protected areas across its modelled distribution. 7 8 The proportion of domesticated breeds of livestock categorized as at risk or extinct is increasing, indicating a 9 decline in livestock diversity, but the rate of increase is slowing, suggesting that countries may be making 10 some progress in safeguarding domesticated animals. Out of 7,155 local breeds (i.e. breeds occurring in only 11 one country, not extinct), 1,940 are considered to be at risk of extinction. However, for 4,668 of them, the 12 risk status remains unknown due to a lack of data or updated data. Results between regions differ: in Europe 13 among the breeds with known risk status, 84% are considered to be at risk, while this proportion is 44% for 14 South America and 71% for Southern Africa. Due to the scarce information available, results for other 15 regions are considered not to be representative (see Figure 35).141

141 http://www.fao.org/sustainable-development-goals/indicators/252/en/

71 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 2 Figure 35 - Local Breeds. Proportion of local livestock breeds at risk of extinction142 3 The extinction risk of wild relatives of domesticated or farmed birds and mammals is increasing, as shown 4 by declining Red List Index trends, suggesting that potentially valuable genetic diversity is being lost.143 5 Box 21- Examples of national progress144 [to be completed]

6

142 FAO 143 https://www.bipindicators.net/indicators/red-list-index/red-list-index-wild-relatives-of-domesticated- animals 144 These examples are are for illustration. The examples will be updated and completed on the basis of the sixth national reports and other information.

72 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 Target 14 2 By 2020, ecosystems that provide essential services, including services related to water, and contribute to 3 health, livelihoods and well-being, are restored and safeguarded, taking into account the needs of women, 4 indigenous and local communities, and the poor and vulnerable. 5

6 7 8 Summary of target achievement 9 10 The capacity of ecosystems to provide the essential services on which societies depend continues to decline. 11 Mammal and bird species responsible for pollination are on average moving closer to extinction, as are 12 species used for food and medicine. However, the advance of protected areas has succeeded in safeguarding 13 and restoring benefits in many areas, especially where local communities have been involved in their 14 management. The target has not been achieved. 15 16 Storyline 17 18 The degradation of ecosystems is continuing to threaten the contributions that nature makes to people, 19 indicating that this target is very far from being achieved. Loss of forests and native vegetation has affected 20 smallholder subsistence systems by lowering yields, pollination, water provisioning, and access to animals 21 and plants used as food, medicine and fuelwood, as well as aspects of human well-being including identity, 22 autonomy, traditional lifestyles and knowledge. Deforestation and land degradation have had a negative 23 impact on freshwater quality and quantity. Approximately half of the global population is expected to be 24 living in water scarce areas by 2050, especially in Asia. Loss of native vegetation has also been linked to 25 increase in flood-related disasters and soil erosion.145 26 27 Pollination services undertaken by wild colonies of honeybees and native insects are essential to crops and 28 natural ecosystems; animal pollination is directly responsible for between 5-8% of current global agricultural 29 production by volume. However, wild pollinators have declined in distribution and diversity (and in some 30 cases, abundance) at local and regional scales in North West Europe and North America, the only regions 31 with adequate data; local declines have been recorded elsewhere.146 According to the IUCN Red List, 16.5% 32 of vertebrate pollinators are threatened with global extinction, while the Red List Index for vertebrate 33 pollinators is declining, indicating that their extinction risk is increasing.147 In Europe, 9% of bee and 34 butterfly species are threatened, and populations are declining for 37% of bees and 31% of butterflies. 35 Where national Red List assessments are available, they show that often more than 40% of bee species may 36 be threatened.148 These results suggest that the ecosystems upon which pollinators depend are not being 37 sustained, and hence that we are moving away from meeting Target 14 for this component of nature’s 38 contribution to people. 39 40 Wild species used for food and medicine are increasingly threatened with extinction, owing to a combination 41 of unsustainable use and other pressures, such as habitat loss driven by unsustainable agriculture, logging

145 IPBES (2018) Chapters of the thematic assessment report on land degradation and restoration of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. Available at: https://www.ipbes.net/system/tdf/ipbes_6_inf_1_rev.1_2.pdf?file=1&type=node&id=16514. 146 IPBES (2016). The assessment report of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services on pollinators, pollination and food production. S.G. Potts, V.L. Imperatriz-Fonseca, and H.T. Ngo (eds). IPBES secretariat, Bonn, Germany. 552 pages. 147 https://www.bipindicators.net/indicators/red-list-index/red-list-index-for-pollinating-species 148 IPBES (2016) Pollinators assessment.

73 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 and commercial and residential development. About 14% of the world’s birds are thought to be used for food 2 and/or medicinal purposes, and 23% are threatened with extinction (compared with 13% of all bird species). 3 Similarly, mammal species used for food and medicines (22% of all known mammal species) are more 4 threatened on average than those not used in this way. In contrast, amphibians used for food and medicine 5 appear overall to be less threatened than amphibians not used for these purposes. However, the conservation 6 status of these species is declining more rapidly than that of amphibian species not used for food and 7 medicine (see Figure 36).149

8 9 10 Figure 36 - RLI Food/Medicine. Red List Index (species used for food and medicine) from 1986 to 2016. Dashed lines 11 indicate the upper and lower confidence interval. A declining trend indicates that species in this category are on 12 average moving closer to extinction. 13 14 Protected areas are a key mechanism for safeguarding ecosystems that provide essential services, and hence 15 potentially play a key role in achieving Target 14. Protected areas deliver 20% of the global total of 16 continental runoff, providing freshwater to nearly two-thirds of the global population living downstream.150 17 Positive conservation and socioeconomic outcomes are more likely to occur when protected areas are co- 18 managed, empower local people, reduce economic inequalities, and maintain livelihood benefits. Co- 19 management of protected areas by local communities and conservation agencies tends to be associated with 20 delivery of greater local benefits than state management, according to a global meta-analysis of 171 studies 21 involving 165 protected areas.151 22 Box 22- Examples of national progress152 [to be completed] 23

149 https://www.bipindicators.net/indicators/red-list-index/red-list-index-species-used-for-food-and-medicine 150 Harrison I. J., Pamela A. Green, Tracy A. Farrell, Diego Juffe-Bignoli, Leonardo Sáenz, Charles J. Vörösmarty. 2016. Protected areas and freshwater provisioning: a global assessment of freshwater provision, threats and management strategies to support human water security. Aquatic Conserv: Mar. Freshw. Ecosyst. 26 (Suppl. 1): 103–120. 151 Oldekop, J. A., G. Holmes, W. E. Harris, and K. L. Evans. 2016. A global assessment of the social and conservation outcomes of protected areas. Conservation Biology 30:133-141. 152 These examples are are for illustration. The examples will be updated and completed on the basis of the sixth national reports and other information.

74 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

Box 23 - Examples of progress involving indigenous peoples and local communities153

Antigua and Barbuda: Community mobilization for ecological and heritage revitalization in Barnes Hill, Antigua and Barbuda. Community group restore degraded land affected by invasive plants, restoring local services including water management and pollination. 1

153 These examples are based on information provided in the sixth national reports are are for illustration. The examples will be updated and completed on the basis of the sixth national reports available when the GBO-5 is finalised.

75 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 Target 15 2 By 2020, ecosystem resilience and the contribution of biodiversity to carbon stocks has been enhanced, 3 through conservation and restoration, including restoration of at least 15 per cent of degraded ecosystems, 4 thereby contributing to climate change mitigation and adaptation and to combatting desertification. 5

6 7 8 Summary of target achievement 9 10 The lack of global data makes it difficult to estimate progress towards the target of restoring 15 per cent of 11 degraded ecosystems by 2020, but available evidence suggests poor progress to date. Nevertheless, 12 ambitious restoration programmes are under way or proposed in many regions, with the potential to deliver 13 significant gains in ecosystem resilience and preservation of carbon stocks. The achievement of this target 14 is inconclusive. 15 16 Storyline 17 18 Assessing progress towards Target 15 is challenging owing to lack of agreement on how to measure 19 ecosystem resilience, absence of baseline data on land degradation and lack of standardized protocols for 20 measuring and reporting soil erosion. Additionally, evaluations of the success of reforestation programs tend 21 to focus on short-term establishment success indicators and fail to assess long-term growth, maturation 22 success and socio-economic indicators.154 23 24 The Bonn Challenge is a global effort to bring 150 million hectares (1.5 million square kilometres) of 25 deforested and degraded land into restoration by 2020, and 350 million hectares by 2030. To date, 61 pledges 26 have been received, for a total restoration area of more than 170 million hectares. The climate benefit of 27 these restoration efforts is estimated at 15.66 gigatonnes of CO2 sequestered.155 Specific restoration efforts 28 reported under way through the Bonn Challenge for 2018 were: 29 - United States: 17 million hectares under restoration, out of 15 million hectares committed 30 - Brazil: 9.42 million hectares under restoration, out of 12 million hectares committed 31 - Rwanda: 690,629 hectares under restoration, out of 2 million hectares committed 32 - Mexico: 170,944 hectares under committed, out of 700,000 hectares committed 33 - El Salvador: 122,094, out of one million hectares committed.156 34 35 The concept of ‘rewilding’ is receiving growing attention in some regions, as a means of restoring particular 36 features and functions of ecosystems in response to local and national choices. The return of some aspects of 37 ‘wildness’ is not always popular, for example carnivores that threaten livestock, disruption caused by natural 38 fire and flood regimes, or the disappearance of traditional managed landscapes with strong cultural 39 associations. On the other hand, successful rewilding can bring a range of economic, social and health 40 benefits associated with the return of key ecosystem services. A framework for promoting the benefits of 41 rewilding through a participatory process has recently been proposed.157 Box 24- Examples of national progress158

154 IPBES (2018) Land degradation assessment. 155 http://www.bonnchallenge.org/ 156 https://infoflr.org/bonn-challenge-barometer 157 Perino, A., Pereira, H. M., Navarro, L. M., Fernández, N., Bullock, J. M., Ceaușu, S., … Wheeler, H. C. (2019). Rewilding complex ecosystems. Science, 364(6438), eaav5570. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aav557 158 These examples are are for illustration. The examples will be updated and completed on the basis of the sixth national reports and other information.

76 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

Brazil. Restoration of the Atlantic Forest, successful implementation of the Atlantic Forest Restoration Pact.159

Belarus. Ecosystem and wildlife recovery in the Chernobyl exclusion zone [featured as a case study in Perino et al. (2019)]. 1

159 Crouzeilles, R., Santiami, E., Rosa, M., Pugliese, L., Brancalion, P. H. S., Rodrigues, R. R., … Pinto, S. (2019). There is hope for achieving ambitious Atlantic Forest restoration commitments. Perspectives in Ecology and Conservation, 17(2), 80–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.PECON.2019.04.003

77 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 Target 16 2 By 2015, the Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of 3 Benefits Arising from their Utilization is in force and operational, consistent with national legislation. 4

5 6 7 Summary of target achievement. 8 9 The Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits Arising 10 from their Utilization entered into force on 12 October 2014. As of November 2019, 123 Parties to the CBD 11 have ratified the Protocol. Further, actions continue to be taken to support its operationalization, however 12 additional efforts are required in this respect. As a result this target is assessed to have been have been 13 partially achieved. 14 15 Storyline 16 17 The fair and equitable sharing of the benefits arising out of the utilization of genetic resources is one of the 18 three objectives of the Convention on Biological Diversity. The Nagoya Protocol, adopted in 2010, provides 19 a transparent legal framework for the effective implementation of this objective. The Protocol covers genetic 20 resources and associated traditional knowledge, as well as the benefits arising from their utilization, by 21 setting out core obligations for its contracting Parties to take measures in relation to access, benefit-sharing 22 and compliance. 23 24 As of November 2019, 123 Parties to the CBD have ratified the Protocol (see figure 37)160. Based on 25 available information, almost all of the Parties to the Convention (90 per cent) have either ratified the 26 Protocol, are working towards its ratification or are planning to ratify it. 161 The first assessment and review 27 of progress in the implementation of the Nagoya Protocol revealed that Parties and non-Parties to the 28 Protocol are at different levels of implementation162. Parties, as well as non-Parties, have made considerable 29 progress in putting in place ABS frameworks. However, it was also recognised that further efforts were 30 needed to make the Protocol fully operational. According to information available to the Secretariat as of 31 May 2019163, 87 Parties and 27 non-Parties have some ABS measures in place, 74 Parties to the Protocol and 32 9 non-Parties have established one or more competent national authorities and 31 Parties and 2 non-Parties 33 have designated one or more checkpoints. Many Parties to the Protocol are currently working on revising 34 existing ABS measures or developing new ones to implement the Protocol. 64 Parties and 22 non-Parties are 35 currently in the process of revising existing or developing new ABS measures or planning to do so. Progress 36 in establishing institutional arrangements is closely related to progress in adopting ABS measures. The 37 results of this work will soon bear fruit. Even though the Nagoya Protocol is not fully operational globally 38 for all the Parties that have ratified it. 39

160 https://www.cbd.int/abs/nagoya-protocol/signatories/default.shtml 161 As of March 2019, a process towards ratification is under way in 25 Parties to the Convention, and there are indications that 36 additional Parties to the Convention are planning to ratify the Protocol. 162 The outcomes and key findings of the first assessment and review of the effectiveness of the Protocol can be found in decision NP-3/1: https://www.cbd.int/doc/decisions/np-mop-03/np-mop-03-dec-01-en.pdf 163According to information shared by countries through the ABS Clearing-House (https://absch.cbd.int/ ), the interim national report (https://absch.cbd.int/reports ), NBSAP or the sixth national report. Latest information will be included in the next draft.

78 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 For many Parties, the Protocol is operational at national level and therefore they have achieved Aichi Target 2 16. For example 25 Parties have issued permits164 and 16 of them have published this information as 3 internationally recognised certificates of compliance in the ABS Clearing-House (a total of 406 certificates 4 have been published). Some Parties that do not require prior informed consent have put all necessary 5 measures and arrangements in place to implement the Protocol and are currently implementing their 6 compliance measures (18 Parties). In addition, 27 Parties have reported having received benefits from 7 granting access to genetic resources and/or associated traditional knowledge for their utilization and some of 8 those benefits are contributing to the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity. 9

10 11 Figure 37 - Parties to the Nagoya Protocol on Access and Benefit sharing as of November 2019.165

Box 25. Examples of national progress166 Examples of country experiences with monetary and non-monetary benefits  Ethiopia reported that the initial phase of an ABS agreement created job opportunities for 857 youth in local communities.  In Madagascar users of genetic resources have financed research institutions, master students and the installation of a new arboretum of endemic species.  Bhutan received capacity-building on laboratory techniques for plant analysis, natural product development and documentation of traditional knowledge. Examples of country experiences on how implementation of the Nagoya Protocol has contributed to conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity

164 According to information provided by Parties through the interim national report (https://absch.cbd.int/reports ). 165 The Access and Benefit-Sharing Clearing-House (November 2019) - https://absch.cbd.int/ 166 These examples are are for illustration. The examples will be updated and completed on the basis of the sixth national reports and other information.

79 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

 In Madagascar, as the local communities of Analavory and Antavolobe were developing a community protocol, they also established community seed banks, as well as an investment plan in which they are defining activities to collaborate proactively with users, research institutions and breeders. This is also the case for the Degbe Aguinninnou community in Benin. As part of the process of developing a community protocol they also documented use of traditional knowledge and identified traditional medicine recipes made of genetic resources from the sacred forest, 40 of which were selected by a national research institute for further utilisation.  South Africa indicated that implementation of the Nagoya Protocol has led to the development a national species management plan for Pelargonium species and a resource assessment for Aloe ferox species, and that a number of species utilized for ABS are being cultivated in order to reduce pressure on the wild population. 1

80 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 Target 17 2 By 2015 each Party has developed, adopted as a policy instrument, and has commenced implementing an 3 effective, participatory and updated national biodiversity strategy and action plan. 4

5 6 7 Summary of target achievement. 8 9 National biodiversity strategies and action plans (NBSAPs) are the principal planning tool for the 10 implementation of the Convention at the national level. Almost all Parties (97%) have developed at least one 11 NBSAP since they became a Party. By the December 2015 deadline established in Aichi Biodiversity Target 12 17, 69 Parties had submitted an NBSAP prepared or revised/updated after the adoption of the Strategic Plan 13 for Biodiversity 2011-2020. As of 21 September 2018, 92 additional countries have submitted an NBSAP, 14 bringing the total to 161 (see figure 38). Of these 52 NBSAPs have been adopted as “whole-of-government” 15 instruments167. As a result, this target is assessed to have been partially achieved. 16

17 18 Figure 38 - Preparation and revision/updating of national biodiversity strategies and action plans as of 21 19 September 2018.168 20 21 Storyline

22 National biodiversity strategies and action plans (NBSAPs) are a crucial elements in efforts to implement the 23 Strategic Plan for biodiversity 2011-2020. The majority of Parties have gone through a process to allign their 24 national biodiversity strategies and action plans with the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020. This 25 process was a signifigant effort of Parties and partners to make NBSAPs and associated processes more 26 effective implementing the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020 and the Convention. As a result the 27 majority of Parties have reflected the Strategic Plan for or Biodiversity 2011-2020 in their NBSAPs. 28 However, despite these efforts, the degree to which they have done this variable. Similarly the extent to 29 which they follow the guidance of the Convention related to NBSAPs is also varaible. For example in 30 adopting the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020, Parties were invited to establish their own national 31 targets in support of it. The majority of NBSAPs contain targets related to the Aichi Biodiversity Targets, 32 though for some Aichi Targets, such as Targets 3, 6, 10, 14 and 17, there were many NBSAPs without 33 associated national targets or commitments. Aichi Biodiversity Targets 1, 8, 9, 11, 12, 16, and 19 were the 34 Aichi Targets with the greatest number of broadly similar national targets or commitments. Overall, the 35 majority of national targets and/or commitments contained in the NBSAPs were lower than the Aichi Targets 36 or did not address all of the elements of the Aichi Target. Therefore while signifigant efforts have been made 37 to translate the Aichi Biodiversity Targets into national commitments, and national actions, these

167 CBD/COP/14/5/Add.1 168 These figures will be updated in the final version of the report

81 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 commitments and efforts have not been comenserate with the level of ambition set out in the Strategic Plan 2 for Biodiversity 2011-2020169.

3

Box 26 – Gender Plan of Action

The 2015-2020 Gender Plan of Action adopted under the on Biological Diversity includes mainstreaming gender in national biodiversity strategies and action plans as an objective for Parties. However reviews have found that only about half of NBSAPs were found to contain references to gender and women; this represents missed opportunities to integrate gender into biodiversity policy,.170 171. Actions to beteer reflect gender in NBSAPs include:  collecting and applying sex-disaggregated data;  ensuring equitable participation,  enhancing women’s agency and leadership,  ensuring equal access to, control over and benefits from biological resources;  building awareness and capacity and ensuring adequate resources for gender-responsive biodiversity initiatives.

4

Box 27. Examples of national progress172

Eritrea -In its revised National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan, the government identified the National Union of Eritrean Women to be responsible for mobilizing women to participate in biodiversity planning and implementation, building on the Union’s role in mobilizing local communities in programmes and projects related to natural resources management and sustainable development.

Liberia - The government allocated US$500,000 to micro-credit projects to support women’s empowerment in the budget of its NBSAP.173 5

169 CBD/COP/14/5/Add.2 170 IUCN. 2016. Inclusion and characterization of women and gender equality considerations in National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs). 171 https://www.cbd.int/doc/c/fcc3/ac3d/eba5d8364fbe8d5950fef9bf/sbi-02-02-add3-en.pdf 172 These examples are are for illustration. The examples will be updated and completed on the basis of the sixth national reports and other information. 173 Clabots. B. and M. Gilligan. 2017. Gender and biodiversity: analysis of women and gender equality considerations in National Biodiversity Strategies and Actions Plans (NBSAPs). IUCN Global Gender Office, Washington D.C., 49 pages.

82 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 Target 18 2 By 2020, the traditional knowledge, innovations and practices of indigenous and local communities relevant 3 for the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity, and their customary use of biological resources, are 4 respected, subject to national legislation and relevant international obligations, and fully integrated and 5 reflected in the implementation of the Convention with the full and effective participation of indigenous and 6 local communities, at all relevant levels. 7

8 9 Summary of target achievement. 10 11 There has been an increase in recognition of the value of traditional knowledge and customary sustainable 12 use, both in global policy fora and in the scientific community. However there is limited information, at the 13 global level, indicating that that traditional knowledge has been widely respected and/or reflected in national 14 legislation related to the implementation of the Convention. As a result, while there has been progress, this 15 target its overall level of acheivement is unknown 16 17 Storyline 18 19 Traditional knowledge contributes to both the conservation and the sustainable use of biological diversity. 20 This target aims to ensure that traditional knowledge and customary sustainable use is respected, protected 21 and encouraged with the effective participation of indigenous peoples and local communities. Currently the 22 role of traditional knowledge and of indingenous peoples and local communities in conserving and 23 sustainably using biodiversity is poorly recognized in national progresses. For example only 37 Parties 24 reported that indingenous people and local communities were involved in the revision processes of their 25 national biodiversity strategies and action plans. Relatedly, with regard to the integration of traditional 26 knowledge in the operations of the Convention, it has been observed that countries often include actions 27 related to the respect and integration of traditional and local knowledge in their NBSAPs but that 28 participation mechanisms are limited174. Further, that there is often limited capacity to meaningfully engage 29 indigenous peoples and local communities in policy decisions more generaly175. 30 31 With regards to traditional knowledge broadly, there is limited global level information, but several studies 32 have noted a general decline or erosion of traditional knowledge176. For example it is estimated that nine 33 languages are lots each year177 and that 2,680 languages and endangered178. Many of these languages are 34 ingigenous languages. 35 36 Further though there is growing documentation on the potential value of traditional knowledge, it has been 37 noted that there is often a lack of communication between indigenous peoples and local communities and the

174 Ferrari, M. et al (2015) Community-based monitoring and information systems (CBMIS) in the context of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), Biodiversity, 16:2-3, 57-67, DOI: 10.1080/14888386.2015.1074111 175 Escott, H. et al (2015). Incentives and constraints to Indigenous engagement in water management, Land Use Policy,49,382-393. Brondizio, E. S.and Tourneau, F (2016). Environmental governance for all. Science. 352 (6291) 176 Hidayati, S. et al (2017). Using Ethnotaxonomy to assess Traditional Knowledge and Language vitality: A case study with the Urang Kanekes (Baduy) of Banten, Indonesia. Indian journal of traditional knowledge. 16. 576-582. 177 Simons (2019:1), see: Proc Ling Soc Amer 4. 27:1-12. https://doi.org/10.3765/plsa.v4i1.4532 178 https://en.iyil2019.org/

83 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 scientific community179. For example, it has been noted that global assessments of biodiversity often do not 2 take local and traditional knowledge into account180. This is despite there being numerous examples of how 3 bringing traditional knowledge together with science can lead to constructive solutions to various 4 challenges181, as well as result in policies which are more tailored to on-the-ground realities182. However, one 5 example which is counter to this general trend is the conceptual framework of the Intergovernmental 6 Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services which gives explicit consideration of diverse scientific 7 disciplines, stakeholders, and knowledge systems, including indigenous and local knowledge183. 8 Box 28. Examples of national progress184 [to be completed] 9 Box 29 . Local Biodiversity Outlooks

The Local Biodiversity Outlooks (LBO), through a collaboration of the International Indigenous Forum on Biodiversity, the Indigenous Women’s Biodiversity Network, the Centres of Distinction on Indigenous and Local Knowledge, Forest Peoples Programme (FPP) and the Secretariat of the UN Convention on Biological Diversity. Now in its second edition, it has been prepared, in part, as a complement to the Global Biodiversity Outlook, as a means of sharing the views, perspectives and experiences of indigenous peoples and local communities from around the world. It brings together information from indigenous peoples, communities and community-based organisations around the world with information from published academic and non-academic sources. 10

179 Abreu, J. S. et al (2017). Is there dialogue between researchers and traditional community members? The importance of integration between traditional knowledge and scientific knowledge to coastal management,Ocean & Coastal Management,141, 10-19. 180 Sutherland, W., et al (2014). How can local and traditional knowledge be effectively incorporated into international assessments? Oryx, 48(1), 1-2. doi:10.1017/S0030605313001543 181 Tengö, M., et al. AMBIO (2014) 43: 579. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-014-0501-3 182 Barua, Prabal. (2017). Indigenous Knowledge Practices for Climate Change Adaptation in the Southern Coast of Bangladesh. International Journal of Knowledge Management. 15. 1-21. 183 Diaz, S. et al (2015). The IPBES Conceptual Framework – connecting nature and people. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 14, 1-16. IPBES Decision 2/4: Conceptual framework for the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. https://www.ipbes.net/sites/default/files/downloads/Decision%20IPBES_2_4.pdf 184 These examples are are for illustration. The examples will be updated and completed on the basis of the sixth national reports and other information.

84 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 Target 19 2 By 2020, knowledge, the science base and technologies relating to biodiversity, its values, functioning, status 3 and trends, and the consequences of its loss, are improved, widely shared and transferred, and applied. 4

5 6 7 Summary of target achievement 8 9 Significant progress has been made since 2010 in the generation and sharing of knowledge and data on 10 biodiversity, with big-data aggregation opening up new opportunities for improved understanding of the 11 biosphere. However, major imbalances remain in the location of studies and monitoring, with biodiversity- 12 rich countries in the developing world still greatly under-represented in databases and research projects. 13 Information gaps remain in the consequences of biodiversity loss for people, and application of biodiversity 14 knowledge in decision making lags behind responses to tackle climate change. The target not been 15 achieved. 16 17 Storyline 18 19 There has been substantial growth in the knowledge, information and data relating to biodiversity, 20 demonstrated by a number of metrics. For example, the number of species assessed for extinction risk in the 21 IUCN Red List has doubled in the past decade, passing 100,000 species during 2019. Nevertheless, the Red 22 List assessments still cover little more than five per cent of described species (see figure 39).185

185 https://www.iucnredlist.org/resources/summary-statistics ; https://www.bipindicators.net/indicators/red-list-index/proportion-of-known-species-assessed-through-the- iucn-red-list

85 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1

2 3 Figure 39 - Red List growth. (a) Number of species assessed for the IUCN Red List, 2000-2019, (b) 4 Proportion of known species assessed for the IUCN Red List, 2000-2017).

5 The number of species occurrence records freely accessible through the Global Biodiversity Information 6 Facility (GBIF) passed one billion during 2018, and stood at more than 1.35 billion by November 2019. 7 These records, each based on collection or observation of an organism in the wild, cover a steadily growing 8 number of species, currently standing at more than 1.6 million. Such data are widely used in research. 9 relating to conservation, impacts of climate change, invasive alien species, food security and human health, 10 among other policy-relevant areas.186 Nevertheless, the data accessible through GBIF is still strongly biased 11 towards animal species, especially birds, and many of the most diverse ecosystems, especially in the tropics, 12 are still greatly under-represented . While institutions in developed countries remain by far the greatest 13 source of data available through GBIF, the number of institutions increased from 562 in 2013 to 1,527 in 14 2019, with many countries especially in Africa, the Caribbean and Pacific sharing data for the first time 15 during this period. (see Figure 40).187

186 GBIF Secretariat. (2019). GBIF Science Review 2019. https://doi.org/10.15468/QXXG-7K93 187 https://www.gbif.org/analytics/global

86 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 2

3

4 5 Figure 40 - GBIF. Mobilization of open-access data through the Global Biodiversity Information Facility 6 (GBIF), shown as (top left) number of species occurrence records accessible through GBIF over time, (top 7 right) number of species having occurrence records accessible through GBIF, over time, (middle) number of 8 institutions sharing data through GBIF, in 2013 and 2019, by country (bottom) density of georeferenced 9 species occurrence records, by location of collection or observation (2019)188 10 Similar biases are evident in research relating to biodiversity. An analysis of more than 2,500 articles 11 published on conservation science between 2011 and 2015 found that some 40% were carried out in just 12 three countries (United States, United Kingdom and Australia), and thematically were greatly biased towards 13 terrestrial vertebrates at species level. Nevertheless, the representation of invertebrates, genetic diversity and 14 aquatic systems increased by 50%-60% since the period before 2010 (see figure 41).

188 GBIF.

87 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1

2 3 Figure 41 - Biases. Focus of 2553 articles on conservation science published between 2011 and 2015, 4 showing biases in taxonomy, ecological systems (terrestrial, marine, freshwater), biological level (genes, 5 species, ecosystems) and geography189. 6 7 Biodiversity data which is linked to more socio-economic considerations is often generally limited. 8 This creates challenges for linking biodiversity to issues related to sustainable development more 9 generally as well as can lead to inaccurate information. For example a review of 106 small-scale 10 fisheries case studies found that quantitative data on the catch size of women fishers was largely 11 absent, mainly due to the underestimation of women’s roles and participation. This was found to

189 Source: Di Marco et al. (2017).

88 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 lead to an underestimation of the total catch, as well as an underestimation of the diversity of 2 animals and habitats targeted by fishers. This information gap complicated the management of 3 species mainly harvested by women, such as clams and other marine invertebrates, for which 4 biological and life-history data was lacking.190 5 Box 30- Examples of national progress191 [to be completed] 6 Box 31 - Examples of progress involving indigenous peoples and local communities192

Australia: Engaging indigenous communities in monitoring marine environmental health Torres Strait contains extensive and diverse seagrass meadows of great environmental and cultural value. Seagrass meadows show measurable responses to changes in environmental condition, so are ideal sensitive receptors for monitoring marine environmental health. The Torres Strait Regional Authority supports three out of the four programs currently monitoring seagrass in Torres Strait: the Torres Strait Seagrass Observers Program, Ranger Subtidal Monitoring Program, and Reef-top Monitoring Program. Ports North supports the Queensland Ports Seagrass Monitoring Program. This report provides the first integrated condition assessment of Torres Strait seagrass using a report card approach for all four monitoring programs. 7

190 Kleiber, D., Harris, L.M. and A.C.J. Vincent. 2015. Gender and Small Scale Fisheries: A Case for Counting Women and Beyond. Fish and Fisheries, 16(4), 547-562. 191 These examples are based on information provided in the sixth national reports are are for illustration. The examples will be updated and completed on the basis of the sixth national reports available when the GBO-5 is finalised. 192 These examples are based on information provided in the sixth national reports are are for illustration. The examples will be updated and completed on the basis of the sixth national reports available when the GBO-5 is finalised.

89 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 Target 20 2 By 2020, at the latest, the mobilization of financial resources for effectively implementing the Strategic Plan 3 for Biodiversity 2011–2020 from all sources, and in accordance with the consolidated and agreed process in 4 the Strategy for Resource Mobilization, should increase substantially from the current levels. This target will 5 be subject to changes contingent to resources needs assessments to be developed and reported by Parties. 6 7 8 9 Summary of target achievement. 10 11 There has been good progress in increasing the amount of fiancial resources for biodiversity through 12 international flows and official development assistance. While there is some evidence of increases in 13 domestic resources for biodiversity, information is limited. There is also limited information on identifying 14 funding needs, gaps and priorities and the development of natiaonal fiancial palns and assessments of 15 biodiversity values. As a result, this target is assessed to have been have been partially achieved. 16 17 Storyline 18 19 The overall objective of this target was to increase the amount of resources available to implement the 20 Strategic Plan for Biodiversity. To further operationalize this target, the Conference of the Paties adopted a 21 set of target for resource mobilization, under Aichi Target 20 and adopted an associated financial reporting 22 framework. As of 1 March 2018, 77 Parties had provided information through this reporting framework. 23 Information provided through this framework indicates that 10 Parties had doubled their international aid 24 flows by 2015. Collectively information from Parties suggests that, depending on the methodology use, there 25 has been up to an 86% increase in international flows for biodiversity based on a 2006-2010 baseline. With 26 regards to domestic biodiversity expenditures, 73 Parties (40%) reported on this issue. Based on this 27 information it is possible to observed trends for some countries. 28 Parties reported an increasing trend in 28 domestic biodiversity resources while 19 report no change and 8 reported a decrease (see figure 42)193 29 30 Parties have also adopted a set of more operational targets to help achieve Aichi Biodiversity Target 20. 31 These targets address issues related to inlcuding biodiversity in national priorites and development plans, 32 reporting on funding needs, gaps and priorities, and the preparation of national fiancial plans and 33 assessments of values. On these issues limiated information is available, suggesting that limited progress has 34 been made.

Increase Decrease Neutral N/A Total DAC members 7 4 7 3 21 Non-DAC members 16 3 10 9 38 Megadiverse countries 5 1 2 0 8 35 Figure 42 - Trends in domestic expenditure related to biodiversity 36 37 There has been significant growth in Official Development Assistance in support of the CBD and funding 38 provided by the Global Environment Facility. In 2014-2015 bilateral biodiversity-related ODA was, on 39 average, 8.7 billion USD$. This represented about 6% of total bilateral ODA commitments194. Of this 8.7 40 billion USD$, about 4.1 billion USD$ targeted biodiversity as primary or ‘principal’ objective and 4.6 USD$ 41 as a secondary or ‘significant’ objective. This represents a doubling of total, principal and signifigant ODA 42 from a 2006-2010 baseline (see figure 43).

193 CBD/COP/14/6 194 OECD (2016). Biodiversity related official development assistance 2015. http://www.oecd.org/dac/environment-development/Biodiversity-related-ODA.pdf

90 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 All DAC members Average 2006-2010 2013 2014 2015 Principal (marker 2) 2,007.86 1,682.00 3,374.47 4,160.06

Significant (marker 1) 2,009.33 4,319.63 3,853.28 4,613.07

Note: Commitments, in millions of current United States dollars195. 2 Figure 43 - Biodiversity-related bilateral ODA, OECD CRS 3 Box 32- Examples of national progress196 [to be completed] 4

195 CBD/COP/14/6, OECD Creditor Reporting System database; own calculations. 196 These examples are based on information provided in the sixth national reports are are for illustration. The examples will be updated and completed on the basis of the sixth national reports available when the GBO-5 is finalised.

91 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 Taking stock: overall trends from the indicators and other sources of information 2 3 The overall messages coming from the assessment of progress towards the Aichi Biodiversity Targets have 4 remained similar since the mid-term assessment in GBO4, and indeed have been reinforced by more recent 5 indicators analysed by the IPBES Global Assessment [see Figure 44]. In summary, policies and actions in 6 support of biodiversity (responses) have shown positive trends (22 of 34 indicators showing significant 7 increases); but the drivers of biodiversity loss are getting stronger (9 out of 13 showing significantly 8 worsening trends), and indicators of the current state of nature itself are in a negative direction (12 out of 16 9 indicators getting significantly worse).197 10 11 It is especially concerning that that indicators within Goal B of the Strategic Plan (Reduce Direct Pressures) 12 are mostly in a negative direction, and that all of the associated targets (Targets 5-10) have been missed, with 13 the exception of one component of Target 9 on identifying priority invasive alien species. This suggests that 14 despite all the measures taken to date in support of conservation, sustainable use and sharing the benefits of 15 biodiversity, a continuing decline in biodiversity can be expected based on the pressures currently faced by 16 the world’s ecosystems. It is hard to foresee an improvement in current trends without a fundamental change 17 of approach. 18 19 Overall biodiversity loss is continuing, despite substantial ongoing efforts for biodiversity conservation and 20 sustainable use. While current conservation and management actions are having positive impacts, their 21 effects are overwhelmed by the growing pressures on biodiversity, in particular those related to increased 22 levels of consumption of food, energy and materials and to the development of infrastructure, as well as 23 increasing human populations. Accordingly, the world is not on track to achieve most of the current globally 24 agreed targets for biodiversity, or the targets for land degradation and climate change. However this 25 assessment also provides examples that when well implemented, conservation actions are effective. For 26 example, it is estimated that conservation investments from 1996 to 2008 reduced the extinction risk for 27 mammals and birds by a median value of 29 per cent per country. Without such measures the status of 28 biodiversity would be even poorer. There is thus a strong justification to maintain and enhance investments 29 in the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity.

197 IPBES Global Assessment 3.2.2.

92 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 2 Figure 44. Trends in indicators of drivers, the state of nature, nature’s contributions to people, and 3 responses (policies and actions of institutions and governance) across all Aichi Targets, as assessed in 4 Tittensor et al. (2014), and for the IPBES Global Assessment in 2018.198 In the 2014 assessment 55 5 indicators were used while in the 2018 assessment 68 were used, may of which had updated time series. 6 Despite the difference in indicators, both assessments show similar patterns and trends. However in the 2018 7 assessment the increase in the drivers of biodiversity loss and the responses to it are clearer as is the decline 8 in state of biodiversity.

198 Figure taken from Figure 3.5 in IPBES Global Assessment. 2014 graphs are taken from extrapolations of 55 indicators for GBO4, detailed in Tittensor, D. P. et al. 2014. “A Mid-Term Analysis of Progress toward International Biodiversity Targets.” Science 346(241). http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/doi/10.1126/science.1257484 (October 3, 2014); 2018 graphs taken from extrapolations of 68 indicators carried out for the IPBES Global Assessment, detailed at section 3.2.2 and in Supplementary Online Materials S3.1.1.

93 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 2 Progress towards achievement of national targets 3 4 It is challenging to scale up and aggregate the information in the national reports to the CBD, to provide 5 common messages that contribute to the overall conclusions of a Global Biodiversity Outlook. This is partly 6 because the reporting from different countries is not fully comparable, despite efforts in recent years to 7 gather information in more standardized formats. Progress towards each Aichi Biodiversity Target at 8 national level is generally reported based on national targets included in National Biodiversity Strategies and 9 Action Plans (NBSAPs) that have varying alignment to the global targets, address different thematic 10 priorities, and have different levels of ambition.199 11 12 Recognizing these constraints, and the incomplete set of 6th National Reports available for analysis, an 13 overall picture of the progress they communicate in relation to the Aichi Biodiversity Targets, is shown in 14 Figure 45. Even given the variable alignment and ambition of the national targets, this analysis shows that in 15 the majority of the Aichi Biodiversity Target categories (12 out of 20), fewer than half of the targets within 16 the national reports were on track to be met by 2020. Relatively greater progress was reported in national 17 targets aligning with Target 1 (awareness of biodiversity), Target 11 (increase in protected areas), Target 16 18 (Implementation of the Nagoya Protocol), Target 17 (submission of national biodiversity strategies and 19 action plans) and Target 19 (sharing of knowledge).

20 21 Figure 45 - National Reports. Analysis of progress towards national targets reported in the Sixth National 22 Reports to the CBD, as they align to the Aichi Biodiversity Targets as of July 2019200

23 Global Strategy for Plant Conservation 24

199 The challenges of interpreting aggregated information from the CBD national reports, based on analysis of the 5th National Reports, are noted in section 3.2.3 of the IPBES Global Assessment, and in an ‘Analysis of the contribution of targets established by Parties and progress towards the Aichi Biodiversity Targets’ carried out by the CBD Secretariat for the 2nd meeting of the Subsidiary Body on Implementation (SBI2) in July 2018 (CBD/SBI/2/2/Add.2). 200 This assessment will be updated in the final version of GBO-5 to take into account all of the sixth national reports received. The national reports are accessible from https://www.cbd.int/reports/

94 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 The Global Strategy for Plant Conservation (GSPC) with its 16 outcome-orientated targets aimed at 2 achieving a series of measurable goals by 2010, was originally adopted by the Conference of the Parties to 3 the Convention on Biological Diversity at its sixth meeting (COP-6) in 2002. This was the first time targets 4 for biodiversity conservation had been adopted by the international community. At COP-7 in 2004, the 5 Global Partnership for Plant Conservation (GPPC) was established to support national implementation of the 6 GSPC. The GSPC was updated in 2010 and a set of revised targets for 2020 were agreed at COP-10 in 2010, 7 with a decision that implementation of the GSPC should be pursued as part of the broader framework of the 8 Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020.201 9 10 A summary of progress towards the GSPC targets, and their alignment to the Aichi Biodiversity Targets, is 11 given in figure 46.202 12 GSPC Target Progress Contributes to Aichi Target 1. An online flora of all known plants World Flora Online available at 19 www.worldfloraonline.org. Global consortium of >40 institutions established to support development. 2. An assessment of the conservation ThreatSearch database provides 300,000 19 status of all known plant species, conservation assessments, representing over as far as possible, to guide 180,000 taxa, combining global and national conservation action assessments. Global Tree Assessment aims to complete conservation assessments for all 60,000 tree species by 2020 3. Information, research and Plants2020 website available in all UN 19 associated outputs, and methods languages providing tools and resources to necessary to implement the support GSPC implementation Strategy developed and shared 4. At least 15 per cent of each Ecological Restoration Alliance of botanic 15 ecological region or vegetation gardens established to support scientifically – type secured through effective based and horticulturally sound restoration management and/or restoration activities 5. At least 75 per cent of the most Database of Important Plant Areas established 11 important areas for plant diversity including data on 1,684 IPAs from 24 countries. of each ecological region protected Criteria for identifying Tropical Important Plant with effective management in Areas developed and work on-going in 7 place for conserving plants and tropical countries. their genetic diversity 6. At least 75 per cent of production Biodiversity and Business initiatives established 7 lands in each sector managed in several countries sustainably, consistent with the conservation of plant diversity 7. At least 75 per cent of known Analysis for threatened trees shows that 65% of 12 threatened plant species conserved threatened species have at least one population in situ in a protected area.

202 Botanic Gardens Conservation International (2020) Plant Conservation Report (in prep.). A final assessment of the level of achievement of these targets is given in the Plant Conservation Report, published alongside GBO5

95 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

8. At least 75 per cent of threatened PlantSearch database records plants in ex situ 12 plant species in ex situ collections, collections of botanic gardens and their preferably in the country of origin, seedbanks. Analysis indicates at least 41% of and at least 20 per cent available threatened species are in ex situ collections. for recovery and restoration programmes 9. 70 per cent of the genetic diversity Global indicator for conservation of useful wild 13 of crops including their wild plants shows only 2.8% are adequately relatives and other socio- conserved at global level. For Crop Wild economically valuable plant Relatives, 28% are conserved ex situ species conserved, while respecting, preserving and maintaining associated indigenous and local knowledge 10. Effective management plans in International Plant Sentinel Network 9 place to prevent new biological established as an early warning system for new invasions and to manage important pests. areas for plant diversity that are invaded 11. No species of wild flora Implemented through CITES 4 and 6 endangered by international trade 12. All wild harvested plant-based Introduction of the FairWild Standard and 4 and 6 products sourced sustainably Certification provides a tool for measuring progress 13. Indigenous and local knowledge Initiatives mainly at national level – difficult to 18 innovations and practices measure global progress associated with plant resources maintained or increased, as appropriate, to support customary use, sustainable livelihoods, local food security and health care 14. The importance of plant diversity Botanic gardens receive over 500 million 1 and the need for its conservation visitors annually. incorporated into communication, education and public awareness programmes 15. The number of trained people Capacity building for GSPC activities supported 20 working with appropriate facilities by Japan Biodiversity Fund and other donors. sufficient according to national Training by GPPC members reaches thousands needs, to achieve the targets of this of people each year. Strategy 16. Institutions, networks and Global Partnership for Plant Conservation 17 partnerships for plant conservation includes >50 institutions with international established or strengthened at plant conservation programmes national, regional and international levels to achieve the targets of this Strategy 1 Figure 46 – Progress towards targets of the Global Strategy for Plan Conservation. This table will be 2 updated to ensure consistency with the 2020 edition of the Global Plant Conservation Report. 3 4 At the national level, a number of countries have developed national responses to the GSPC, including 5 several of the world’s most biodiverse countries (e.g. Brazil, China, Colombia, Indonesia, Mexico,

96 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 Philippines and South Africa). Other countries are implementing the GSPC – explicitly or implicitly - 2 through their National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs). While reporting on progress 3 towards the GSPC targets is voluntary, 43 countries (36%) that had submitted 6th National Reports to the 4 CBD by October 2019 provided an indication of national progress towards the GSPC, with the majority 5 reporting against the global targets. Figure 47 shows that most countries report at least some progress 6 towards all the targets, with Targets 1, 2 and 14 (e-floras, red listing and public awareness of plant diversity) 7 being most likely to be achieved at the national level, while targets 7 (in situ conservation), 10 (invasive 8 species) and 12 (sustainable use), being those where least progress has been made. 9

10 11 Figure 47: National progress towards targets under the Global Strategy for Plant Conservation, as reflected 12 in Sixth National Reports to the CBD. Green bars indicate countries reporting the relevant target to be on 13 track for achievement, yellow progress towards the target, and red no progress towards the target. For 14 explanation of the GSPC targets, and their relationship with the Aichi Biodiversity Targets, see figure 46203

15 16 Gender and Biodiversity204 17 18 The disproportionate vulnerability of women to the loss of biodiversity and ecosystem services, and the 19 essential role of women in underpinning actions for conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity, have 20 been consistently undervalued, potentially undermining effective steps towards realizing the 2050 Vision for 21 Biodiversity unless gender issues better inform future policy decisions. However despite their significant 22 roles, women remain under-represented in biodiversity-related decision-making processes, and 23 receive a lower share of benefits as compared to men, while bearing a disproportionate share of costs 24 associated with biodiversity use and loss. Underestimating or overlooking women’s roles in 25 management of biodiversity means that their knowledge, needs and priorities are not taken into 26 account, and information on their activities may not be collected, meaning it cannot contribute to 27 conserving and managing pressures on ecosystems

203 BGCI (2020) Plant Conservation Report (in prep.) 204 This section will be further developed on the basis of additional information, including from the sixth national reports.

97 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 Women play key roles in managing biodiversity in sustainable ways, as primary land managers, 2 farmers, fishers, scientists and entrepreneurs. A greater recognition of and support for the roles and 3 activities of women can help improve food and nutrition security, health, poverty alleviation and other 4 societal development objectives, in addition to gender equality. Conversely, failing to account for the 5 role of women in conservation planning and management can undermine conservation actions 6 A greater reflection of gender issues in biodiversity management can be supported in various ways. 7 However, a particularly important avenue is collecting and applying sex-disaggregated data. Data is 8 lacking on many aspects of women’s and men’s engagement in, influence and impacts on and from 9 actions to conserve and sustainably use biodiversity. Sex-disaggregated data on women’s and men’s 10 participation in relevant sectors, including benefits derived, could help inform and target biodiversity 11 policy, planning and programming to needed issues, groups, and ecosystem services. Further 12 allocating adequate resources, including gender expertise and financing, is necessary to ensure the 13 effective implementation of gender-responsive actions. Gender-responsive budgeting ensures that 14 biodiversity interventions take into account the needs and interests of both women and men.

98 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 3. Transitions to a better future 2 3 Interpreting the Vision – what does ‘living in harmony with Nature’ look like? 4 5 ‘‘Living in harmony with Nature’ may seem an abstract and lofty aspiration. As we take stock in 2020, 6 however, it emerges as a concrete and urgent necessity. As a vision, it encapsulates much that we both need 7 and wish for ourselves, for our children, for our societies and for our planet: 8 9 “by 2050, biodiversity is valued, conserved, restored and wisely used, maintaining ecosystem services, 10 sustaining a healthy planet and delivering benefits essential for all people” 11 12 Based on current trends and the mixed results of the decade on biodiversity, the consequences of not finding 13 ways to live in harmony with nature by the middle of this century confront us as a reality that will inevitably 14 be upon us unless we act quickly, decisively, and together. 15 16 We need to realize this vision to achieve the goals set out for the sustainable development of human 17 societies. Reducing poverty, hunger and disease, providing clean water and making our cities decent places 18 in which to live: each of these is threatened by current trends relating to biodiversity. So are the efforts to 19 address the causes and impacts of climate change. 20 21 We wish to achieve a greater balance with nature for reasons that are as diverse as human societies and the 22 individuals that constitute them. The disappearance of species, landscapes, seascapes and freshwater 23 ecosystems matters to us in ways we may find difficult to define, but nevertheless disturb us deeply. In some 24 contexts, the persistence of particular species or other components of biodiversity is closely linked with a 25 sense of identity, whether as ingredients of traditional foods, elements of religious or spiritual practices, 26 cultural symbols or simply as reminders of ‘home’. 27 28 In setting goals and framing decisions relating to biodiversity, the diverse reasons for caring about nature 29 need to be addressed. Approaches that focus exclusively on narrow objectives, reflecting only one dimension 30 of biodiversity’s importance, will ignore broader concerns of society and ultimately risk failing in the 31 specific objectives they are designed to meet. 32 33 For example, a set of policies directed only at protecting and restoring ecosystems and preventing extinctions 34 (‘Nature for Nature’), while addressing the wishes of millions to reverse the alarming declines now in 35 evidence, might prohibit sustainable activities using biodiversity to support local livelihoods or national 36 economies (‘Nature for Society’), and potentially distance people from the connections that define our 37 relationship with the natural world (‘Nature as Culture’). Finding the right balance between enhancing these 38 diverse values attached to biodiversity, held in different combinations by each of us, will require an inclusive 39 process to understand the needs and preferences of society from the local to global scales (see 47).205

205 Lundquist et al. (2020) A Pluralistic Nature Future Framework (in prep.)

99 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 2 Figure 47 - Nature Futures Pluralistic Nature Futures Framework to capture multiplicity of relationships 3 between people and nature: Nature as Culture (blue) where society lives in harmony with nature, Nature for 4 Society (green) where utilitarian values for nature dominate, and Nature for Nature (orange) where 5 intrinsic values for nature, its species, habitats, and ecosystems, are given higher value than benefits 6 to humans206. 7 8 While the potential pathways for getting there will vary greatly, the 2050 Biodiversity Vision remains the 9 most powerful benchmark for defining the specific goals and targets for the global community in coming 10 decades. It is clear from the available evidence that by any definition, our current actions and behaviour, 11 taken as a whole, are moving us further away from realizing the Vision. 12 13 It is equally clear that to stand a chance of meeting a set of goals consistent with the 2050 Vision, changes 14 need to be made within a short timescale that represent significant transformations in human impacts on 15 biodiversity. Given the missed opportunities of the past decade, even a dramatic scaling up of conservation 16 actions, while necessary, will not be sufficient to slow the current negative trends, let alone reverse them to 17 the extent needed to reach a sustainable balance between human needs and the natural world on which we 18 depend. 19 20 The IPBES and IPCC reports indicate the need for transformative change. As noted in the IPBES Global 21 Assessment, such change can expect opposition from those with interests vested in the status quo, but such

206 Lundquist et al. (2019) In prep

100 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 opposition can be overcome for the broader public good. Commitment to mutually supportive international 2 goals and targets, supporting actions by indigenous peoples and local communities at the local level, new 3 frameworks for private sector investment and innovation, inclusive and adaptive governance approaches and 4 arrangements, multisectoral planning and strategic policy mixes can help to transform the public and private 5 sectors to achieve sustainability at the local, national and global levels. The prerequisites for effecting such 6 change are summarized in Box 32: Levers and Leverage Points.

Box 33: Levers and Leverage points.207 The IPBES global assessment identifies five main “levers” to generate transformative change by tackling the underlying indirect drivers of nature deterioration and which could help to inform the development of the post- 2020 global biodiversity framework. These levers are: (a) Developing incentives and widespread capacity for environmental responsibility and eliminating perverse incentives; (b) Reforming sectoral and segmented decision-making to promote integration across sectors and jurisdictions; (c) Taking pre-emptive and precautionary actions in regulatory and management institutions and businesses to avoid, mitigate and remedy the deterioration of nature, and monitoring their outcomes; (d) Managing for resilient social and ecological systems in the face of uncertainty and complexity to deliver decisions that are robust in a wide range of scenarios; (e) Strengthening environmental laws and policies and their implementation, and the rule of law more generally. 2. The IPBES global assessment further concludes that the levers for transformations noted above could be further supported by: (a) Enabling visions of a good quality of life that do not entail ever-increasing material consumption; (b) Lowering total consumption and waste, including by addressing both population growth and per capita consumption differently in different contexts; (c) Unleashing existing widely held values of responsibility to effect new social norms for sustainability, especially by extending notions of responsibility to include impacts associated with consumption; (d) Addressing inequalities, especially regarding income and gender, which undermine capacity for sustainability; (e) Ensuring inclusive decision-making, fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from the use of and adherence to human rights in conservation decisions; (f) Accounting for nature deterioration from local economic activities and socioeconomic- environmental interactions over distances (telecouplings), including, for example, international trade; (g) Ensuring environmentally friendly technological and social innovation, taking into account potential rebound effects and investment regimes; (h) Promoting education, knowledge generation and maintenance of different knowledge systems, including the sciences and indigenous and local knowledge regarding nature, conservation and its sustainable use. 7

207 Taken from IPBES Global Assessment, Summary for Policymakers.

101 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 The next section analyses the combination of actions that, if applied urgently to the underlying causes of 2 biodiversity loss as well as to the direct pressures affecting biodiversity, can still bring the 2050 Vision 3 within reach. 4 5 Fortunately, we already have evidence of transitions in key areas of human activity that if scaled up and 6 sustained, point the way towards the kind of transformative change needed. The final section of this part of 7 the Outlook offers examples of some of these transitions as practical guidance for the collective action that 8 can be taken to move us onto a better path. 9 10 Such transitions are increasingly in tune with a growing section of society in many countries, alarmed by the 11 consequences of human activities and patterns of consumption on the natural environment, and determined 12 to shape a better future for the generations reaching adulthood in the remainder of this century and beyond. 13 While this alarm has been sounded most loudly around the causes and consequences of climate change, the 14 risks of large-scale species extinctions and impacts of pressures such as marine plastic pollution [see Target 15 8 section above] are increasingly prominent in the discourse of public debate and activism. Such concerns 16 are already leading to a wide range of transitions at individual and local levels, whether through dietary 17 choices, neighbourhood and community conservation projects, cleaner and healthier transport options such 18 as cycling or car-sharing or avoiding the use of plastic packaging. Policy makers can leverage such public 19 support to accelerate nature-focussed transitions into large-scale and evidence-based actions – recognizing 20 that they will often involve facing up to trade-offs and vested interests. 21 22 Pathways to the Vision: it’s not too late to get there 23 24 The prospect of relentless decline in species populations, accelerating species extinctions, impoverished 25 ecosystems and consequent threats to the benefits from nature on which people depend, can make the vision 26 of living in harmony with nature seem so distant as to be unattainable. Available evidence suggests that in 27 fact, the 2050 Vision is still within our reach, if we act decisively and urgently both in scaling up bold 28 conservation actions and addressing the underlying drivers of biodiversity loss. 29 30 To stimulate and guide actions in support of this Vision, we first need to propose a set of outcomes that 31 match it, forming the basis of specific goals to which the global community can commit, and develop targets 32 and indicators to define and measure progress. 33 34 The setting of such goals involves a political decision-making process taking place in parallel with the 35 development of this Outlook, and it is not the role of this document to pre-empt that process. However, an 36 analysis of realistic pathways towards realizing the Vision involves selecting some potential goals 37 representing aspects of the Vision, and attempting to model the consequences of different combinations of 38 actions based on our best understanding of the response of nature to pressures created by people. 39 40 Available evidence (see Box 34) suggests that despite the failure to meet the goals of the Strategic Plan for 41 Biodiversity 2011-2030, it is not too late to slow, halt and eventually reverse current alarming trends in the 42 decline of biodiversity. Moreover, the actions required to achieve this turnaround (or ‘bending the curve’ of 43 biodiversity decline, as it is sometimes termed), are fully consistent with, and indeed crucial components of, 44 the goals and targets set out under the Paris Climate Change Agreement and the 2030 Agenda for 45 Sustainable Development. In summary, realizing the 2050 Vision on Biodiversity depends on a combination 46 of the following outcomes, each of which is necessary but none on its own sufficient: 47 48 - Efforts to conserve and restore biodiversity need to be scaled up at all levels using approaches that 49 will depend on local context. These need to combine major increases in the extent and effectiveness 50 of well-connected protected areas and other effective area-based conservation measures, large-scale

102 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 restoration of degraded habitats, and improvements in the condition of nature across farmed and 2 urban landscapes as well as inland water bodies, coasts and oceans. 3 4 - Climate change needs to be kept well below 2 degrees C and close to 1.5 degrees C above pre- 5 industrial levels, otherwise its impacts will overwhelm all other actions in support of biodiversity 6 (see Box 35). The conservation and restoration of ecosystems can play a substantial role in this. Such 7 “nature-based solutions” can also be an important part of adaptation to climate change. On the other 8 hand, other proposed land-based climate mitigation measures relying on biofuels, if used on an 9 excessive scale, would add pressure on land and drive further destruction of habitat. 10 11 - Effective steps need to be taken to address all remaining pressures driving biodiversity loss, 12 including invasive alien species, pollution and the unsustainable exploitation of biodiversity 13 especially in marine and inland water ecosystems. 14 15 - Transformations need to be achieved in the way we both produce and consume food. This will 16 combine adopting agricultural methods that can meet growing global demand while imposing fewer 17 negative impacts of the environment and reduce the pressure to convert more land to production; and 18 limiting the demand for increased food production by adopting healthier diets and reducing food 19 waste. 20 21 - Transformations are similarly needed in both production and consumption of other goods and 22 services affecting biodiversity for example in forestry, energy and provision of fresh water, as well 23 as reduction in the impact of new infrastructure on the ecosystems in which it is placed. 24 25 A key element in the development of pathways for living in harmony with nature will be the evolution of 26 global financial and economic systems towards a globally sustainable economy, steering away from the 27 current limited paradigm of economic growth. 28 Box 34 -Scenarios

a.

103 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

b.

c. Approaches to achieving the 2050 Vision for Biodiversity have focussed on the concept of ‘bending the curve’ of biodiversity loss, in other words identifying the interventions that can slow and eventually reverse the loss of biodiversity. (a) Three alternative modelled pathways developed for GBO-4 each succeeding in reaching the outcomes required for the 2050 Vision, but with contrasting policy mixes and changes in society208; (b) a conceptual diagram demonstrating the need to ‘bend the curve’ by 2030 in order to achieve the recovery of biodiversity sufficient to meet the 2050 vision209; (c) Results of a ‘fast track’ analysis of the combination of actions that would succeed in bending the biodiversity curve focussing on a combination of ambitious conservation and restoration measures, ‘supply side’ actions such as more efficient use of land for agriculture while reducing environmental impacts of production, and ‘demand side’ measures such as reducing food waste and adopting healthier diets210. Further scenario analysis under way for GBO5 is investigating alternative pathways for achieving the 2050 Vision

208 Kok 2018 209 Mace et al. 2018 210 from IPBES Global Assessment, Box 5.3

104 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

for Biodiversity while adopting the measures required to keep climate change below 1.5 degrees above pre-industrial levels. 1 Box 35 - Differing outcomes for biodiversity between 1.5 deg C, 2 deg C and higher global temperature rise.

The IPCC’s Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5 deg C (SR15) responded to an invitation from the countries that adopted the Paris Climate Agreement in 2015, and aimed to ‘strengthen the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty’. As shown in Figure 48, the difference between a global temperature rise close to 1.5 deg C above pre-industrial levels and rises of 2 deg C or more were judged to be highly significant for terrestrial ecosystems, moving from a situation in which some impacts and risks are detectable and attributable to climate change ‘with at least medium confidence’, to one in which severe and widespread climate-related impacts and risks are expected. One study highlighted in SR15 used data on some 105,000 species to project that the number of insect species losing at least half their range would be three times higher with 2 deg C warming than with 1.5 deg warming (from 6% to 18%) , while the number would double for both plants and vertebrates (from 8% to 16% and from 4% to 8% respectively) – see Figure 49.

Figure48. A summary of selected impacts and risks across sectors and regions based on the ‘Reasons for Concern’ (RFC) framework developed by the IPCC. Purple indicates very high risks of severe impacts/risk and the presence of significant irreversibility or persistence of climate-related hazards with limited ability to adapt; red indicates severe and widespread impacts/risks; yellow indicates impacts/risks are detectable and attributable to climate change with at least medium confidence; white indicates that no impacts are detectable and attributable to climate change.211

211 IPCC, 2018: Summary for Policymakers. In: Global Warming of 1.5°C. An IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty [Masson-Delmotte, V., P. Zhai, H.-O. Pörtner, D. Roberts, J. Skea, P.R. Shukla, A. Pirani, W. Moufouma-Okia, C. Péan, R. Pidcock, S. Connors, J.B.R. Matthews, Y. Chen, X. Zhou, M.I. Gomis, E. Lonnoy, Maycock, M. Tignor, and T. Waterfield (eds.)]. World Meteorological Organization, Geneva, Switzerland, 32 pp. Available at: https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/chapter/spm/b/spm2/

105 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

Figure 49. Proportion of modeled species projected to lose more than half their climatically determined range by 2100 at specific levels of global warming.212 (A) Invertebrates (n = 34,104), ( B) Chordata (n = 12,640), (C) Plantae (n = 73,224), (D) Insecta (n = 31,536), (E) Mammalia (n = 1769), (F) Aves (n = 7966), (G) Reptilia (n = 1850), and (H) Amphibia (n = 1055). Colors: Including (blue) and excluding (orange) realistic dispersal. Data are presented as the mean projection across 21 alternative climate model patterns with error bars indicating the 10 to 90% range. 1

212 Based on Figure 1 from Warren, R. et al. 2018. “The Projected Effect on Insects, Vertebrates, and Plants of Limiting Global Warming to 1.5°C Rather than 2°C.” Science 360(6390): 791–95. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aar3646 (May 22, 2018). Species occurrence data citation: GBIF.org (25 May 2015) GBIF Occurrence Download https://doi.org/10.15468/dl.kecdhx

106 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 Key transitions 2 3 To achieve a deep transformation towards an economy within ecological boundaries that offers prosperity to 4 all is the grand challenge of our time, and is at the heart of the solutions implied by the analysis in this 5 Outlook. It requires a reinvention of the ways in which we collectively produce, consume and live. This 6 means a fundamental change in what we value and how, shifting from prioritizing economic growth at the 7 expense of society and ecology to living well in balance with nature and biodiversity. 8 9 Governments have a critical role to play in this great transformation by changing their own roles and 10 cultures, as well as by helping to create enabling environments for business and civil society to build this 11 new sustainable economy. 12 13 A framework for bringing about such change is the ‘sustainability transitions’ perspective, defined as large- 14 scale systemic changes in sub-systems of our economy. The framework shown in Figure 50 provides a 15 roadmap through which these transitions may be effected in each of the thematic areas detailed in this 16 section, following four broad stages: 17 18 - ‘Top down’ transformation to ensure government agencies are working together, supporting 19 collaborative approaches with business and civil society, sharing data and information, mapping 20 natural capital and introducing regulatory frameworks to support sustainable approaches 21 - ‘Bottom up’ encouragement of early-adopter businesses and sectors, exploring new technologies and 22 creating space for niche experiments (‘sustainability startups’) based on strategic transition agendas 23 - ‘Envision and adapt’ to facilitate transitions in relevant sectors, identifying willing partners in 24 relevant sectors, developing specific goals for the transition and standardizing practices that meet the 25 objectives of the transition 26 - Phasing out of unsustainable practices through a ‘policy check’ to ensure all government policies are 27 in line with the goal for the transition, introduce taxes/regulations to penalize unsustainable 28 activities, and use funds raised by such taxes to reward positive behaviour.213 Key components of 29 such transitions as applied to six areas of economic activity critical to the achievement of the 2050 30 Vision for Biodiversity are outlined in the following pages. 31

213 Adapted from Loorbach and Oxenaar (2018), Counting on Nature: transitions to a natural capital positive economy by creating an enabling environment for Natural Capital Approaches. Dutch Research Institute for Transitions (DRIFT), available at https://drift.eur.nl/publications/counting-nature-transitions- natural-capital-positive-economy/ .

107 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1

2 3 Figure 50 - A conceptual view of the stages of achieving transitions towards a Natural Capital approach, 4 moving from top-down transformation and bottom-up building (left), to envisioning/adaptation of new 5 approaches and phasing out of unsustainable practices through enforcement (right214). 6

214 From Loorbach and Oxenaar (2018).

108 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 The land and forests transition 2 3 Summary of the transition 4 5 Moving to a situation in which maintaining and improving food security no longer requires conversion of 6 forests and other ecosystems to agricultural land. 7 8 Rationale 9 10 The destruction of forests and other ecosystems to make way for farmland is among the most persistent 11 pressures affecting biodiversity [see Target 5 summary above]. While driven largely by the demand for food, 12 the loss of forests also threatens human livelihoods by disrupting the water cycle and impoverishing soils, as 13 well as removing direct sources of nutrition and income from the wide range of species supported by forests 14 themselves. Deforestation accelerates climate change by reducing the removal of carbon dioxide from the 15 atmosphere and the storage of carbon in trees, other plants and soils. 16 17 Breaking the cycle of large-scale forest conversion requires a new approach to the use of land, in which the 18 benefits of healthy ecosystems are fully taken into account in public policies and economic incentives. 19 Removing the land pressure on biodiversity-rich forests, is an essential transition if the 2050 Vision is to be 20 met. 21 22 Benefits of the transition 23 24 Reduction of land pressure on forests will reduce the risk of extinction for many species by avoiding further 25 loss of habitat, and creating conditions for more habitat to be restored. It will preserve and enhance sources 26 of income and nutrition that depend on living forest ecosystems. Many cultural connections with forest 27 species and landscapes will be protected, along with benefits to health and well-being through recreation. 28 Broader benefits to society at local, regional and global scales will flow from maintenance of the role of 29 forests in harbouring pollinator species, supporting air and water quality as well as in moderating climate 30 change through capture and storage of carbon. 31 32 Progress towards the transition 33 34 The need for fundamental change to reduce land pressure is demonstrated by continuing high levels of net 35 increase in agricultural land and net loss of forests in tropical countries [see Target 5 summary above]. 36 Nevertheless, a significant number of countries are already showing that it is possible to improve food 37 security while at the same time maintaining forest cover and in some cases increasing it substantially. The 38 UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) has identified 22 countries in which food security has 39 improved since 1990 while forest cover has increased or remained stable. In the case of 12 of these countries, 40 forest cover increased by more than 10 per cent [see Figure 51]. Identifying the ‘formula’ for this 41 combination of trends lies at the heart of this transition if it is to be scaled up into change that has global 42 impact.215

215 FAO. 2016. State of the World’s Forests 2016.Forests and agriculture: land-use challenges and opportunities. Rome.

109 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 2 Figure 51 - Forest Transitions. Selected countries in which an overall increase in forest cover from 1990- 3 2015 was accompanied by an improvement in food security. Source: FAO 2016.

4 5 Key components of the transition 6 7 Based on experience of those countries that have successfully decoupled the drive for food security and land 8 pressure on forests, the following can be regarded as necessary conditions to achieve this transition: 9 10 - Effective legal and institutional frameworks 11 - Coordinated policies covering forests, agriculture, food, land-use and rural development 12 - Secure land tenure and regulations for changes in land use 13 - Collaboration on research and development to encourage innovation among farmers 14 - Adequate funding and investment to improve agricultural productivity and sustainable forest 15 management 16 - Strong involvement of local communities and small holders in forest management 17 - Promotion of agro-forestry and stronger connections between farms and forests 18 - Integrated land use planning to support landscape-level balance between food production, forest 19 management and conservation 20 21 Guiding examples – [to be completed216] 22 23 Dependencies on other transitions 24 25 - Sustainable agriculture transition 26 27 Contributions to other transitions 28 29 - Sustainable climate action transition 30

216 This section will be completed with information from the sixth national reports to the Convention, FAO 2016, and other relevant information

110 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 The sustainable agriculture transition 2 3 Summary of the transition 4 5 A global shift in the design of agriculture systems, making full use of techniques that maximize productivity 6 and reduce the need to create more farmland [see Land and Forests transition], while minimizing the 7 negative impacts of agriculture on natural resources and biodiversity (sustainable intensification). 8 9 Rationale 10 11 All possible approaches to achieving the 2050 Vision while meeting other key goals for humanity must 12 involve getting more from less – in other words, producing food and materials for a growing and more 13 prosperous population with less impact on the life support systems of the planet. As shown by the trends 14 regarding sustainable production and consumption [see Target 4 summary above] and sustainable 15 management of agriculture, aquaculture and forestry [see Target 7 summary above] progress in this direction 16 is nowhere near sufficient to alleviate the underlying pressures affecting biodiversity. On the other hand, 17 technologies and practices for sustainable intensification of agriculture are now available and being used in a 18 growing number of countries. Transition to these practices as a global norm offers great potential to address 19 the underlying causes of biodiversity loss. 20 21 Benefits of the transition 22 23 Sustainable intensification of agriculture is one of the necessary conditions enabling the land and forest 24 transition [see above], and it therefore enables the benefits associated with reduced land pressure on forests 25 and other biodiverse ecosystems. Additionally, the adoption of sustainable farming techniques reduces the 26 negative impacts of agriculture on biodiversity and human societies including through soil erosion, pollution 27 and climate change. Agricultural systems that allow more natural features in a farmed landscape will reduce 28 extinction risk by preserving and restoring habitats, improve connectivity to prevent isolation of species, and 29 support the health and well- being of local people through a cleaner, more diverse and resilient rural 30 environment. 31 32 Progress towards the transition 33 34 As noted in the summary of progress towards Aichi Biodiversity Target 7 [see Target 7 summary above], 35 biodiversity in farmed landscapes continues to decline globally, indicating that this is an area requiring 36 radical change. Nevertheless, organic and conservation-focussed agriculture is on the increase, and many 37 initiatives around the world are seeking to achieve a more sustainable balance between the needs of people, 38 nature and food production in rural landscapes, for example through the Satoyama Initiative217. 39 40 A global assessment in 2018 estimated that 29 per cent of all farms worldwide, covering nine per cent of 41 agricultural land in more than 100 countries, had substituted or redesigned some part of their agricultural 42 production in ways that could be defined as sustainable intensification.218 While still involving a minority of 43 farm enterprises and a small portion of land under cultivation, this suggests a critical mass of global 44 agriculture is already moving in a direction that can significantly improve outcomes for biodiversity, as well

217 UNU-IAS and IGES (eds.) 2015. Enhancing knowledge for better management of socio-ecological production landscapes and seascapes (SEPLS) (Satoyama Initiative Thematic Review vol.1), United Nations University Institute for the Advanced Study of Sustainability, Tokyo. 218 J. Pretty et al., Global assessment of agricultural system redesign for sustainable intensification. Nat. Sustain. 1,441–446 (2018). doi: 10.1038/s41893-018-0114-0

111 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 as supporting broader goals for sustainable development. The potential exists for a ‘second Green 2 Revolution’ applying a range of technologies and practices directed specifically at improved biodiversity 3 outcomes, rather than the narrow focus on maximizing production that defined the first Green Revolution. 4 However, this transition needs to take place on a much larger scale, with continuous and sustained 5 improvements, to have a truly transformative effect of the kind needed to support the 2050 Biodiversity 6 Vision. 7 8 Key components of the transition 9 10 Getting more out of the land for a reduced environmental impact can involve a wide range of technologies 11 and practices, with different approaches appropriate for particular sectors and local conditions and the need 12 to adapt based on changing circumstances and continuous review. The emphasis must be on outcomes to 13 support long-term goals and objectives, rather than the selection of particular technologies as the focus of the 14 transition.The following broad categories define the major types of change that can be applied for a 15 transition to sustainable agriculture 16 17 - Integrated pest management, including replacement of pesticides with non-toxic alternatives, use 18 of biological control (introduction of natural enemies, predators or parasites) to combat pests, and 19 the rotation or combination of crops to limit the occurrence of pests and diseases 20 - Conservation agriculture, for example techniques to minimise tillage of the soil, prevent erosion 21 and enhance soil health 22 - Integrated crop and biodiversity redesign, including organic agriculture, mixed systems 23 combining fish and crop production, ‘farmer wisdom networks’ to inform change based on local 24 experience and knowledge 25 - Pasture and forage re-design, for example through mixed crop and forage systems, and rotation of 26 grazing managed for productivity and ecological benefits 27 - Trees in agricultural systems, for example through agro-forestry in which trees are incorporated 28 into crop or pasture land for various purposes including provision of shade and prevention of erosion 29 - Irrigation water management, for example involving farmers and local communities in the 30 management of water use across watersheds, and ‘micro-irrigation’ technologies aimed at more 31 targeted application of water to crops, reducing both water use and run-off of nutrients. 32 - Intensive small and patch-scale, such as community farms, local food production in backyard and 33 allotment gardens, raised beds, vertical farms. 34 35 Guiding examples – [to be completed219] 36 37 Dependencies on other transitions 38 39 - The sustainable cities transition 40 41 Contributions to other transitions 42 43 - The land and forest transition 44 - Sustainable food transition 45 - Sustainable fresh water transition 46 - Sustainable climate action transition 47

219 This section will be completed with information from the sixth national reports to the Convention, FAO 2016, Pretty et al. (2018)] and other relevant information

112 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 The sustainable food transition 2 3 Summary of the transition 4 5 A transition to healthier diets that include more moderate consumption of meat, promote a greater emphasis 6 on plant-based foods, and dramatically cuts waste in food supply chains [to be developed220]. 7

220To be developed for final version of GBO5 with substantial input from the Food and Land Use report https://www.foodandlandusecoalition.org/news-blog/2019/2/4/the-report-shaping-a-movement-for-change]

113 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 The sustainable fisheries transition 2 3 Summary of the transition 4 5 A shift in the management of global fishing such that marine and inland water ecosystems are protected and 6 restored, food security is maintained and profits from fishing are protected into the long term. 7 8 Rationale 9 10 Unsustainable overfishing remains among the most destructive pressures on biodiversity in the world’s 11 oceans and inland waters (see Target 6 summary above). Nearly one third of fisheries worldwide are beyond 12 safe biological limits, bringing the risk of collapse of fish populations that threaten not only aquatic and 13 coastal food webs, but also the livelihoods and food security of millions of people around the world. If 14 current fishing management practices continue, both fish stocks and profits from fishing would be expected 15 to decline further (see Figure Fishery Scenarios).221 Examples of changes in policies and practices around 16 the world can demonstrate significant and sometimes dramatic results over a short period where some of the 17 key drivers towards overfishing are addressed. Transition to sustainable fishing at global scale is a necessary 18 condition if we are to realize the 2050 Vision as it applies to living in harmony with nature in our oceans, 19 coastal regions and inland waters.

20 21 Figure 52 - Fishery Scenarios. Projected outcomes for of selected fisheries of conservation concern, and 22 levels of profitability, under alternative policies for recovery, contrasted with business as usual222. 23 Benefits 24 25 A transition to sustainable fisheries addresses the long-term survival not just of the species targeted for 26 consumption, but for all levels of the food webs of which they are part. This includes, for example, marine 27 mammals and other large ocean-going predators, seabirds and terrestrial or freshwater animals that depend 28 on migrating fish. Healthy and sustainable fish stocks contribute to food security and income for millions of 29 people around the world, and also provide resilience against the impacts of climate change in highly diverse 30 ecosystems such as coral reefs where overfishing further weakens reef communities making them vulnerable 31 to bleaching and ocean acidification. 32

221 Costello, C. et al. (2016). Global fishery prospects under contrasting management regimes. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113(18), 5125–5129. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1520420113 222 Costello et al. (2016).

114 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 Progress 2 3 Movement towards more sustainable fishery management is suggested by the increase in the number of 4 fisheries certified by the Marine Stewardship Council (see Target 6 summary above), now accounting for 5 some 15 per cent of all fish caught in the world’s oceans.223 On the other hand, the impact of improved 6 practices is not yet evident at a global level based, for example, on the state of fish stocks or the increased 7 extinction threats to those species impacted by destructive or poorly-targeted fishing practices. In cases 8 where bold action has been taken for example to crack down on illegal fishing by fleets from distant 9 countries, the level of fishing pressure has dropped very significantly in a short period, with no negative 10 impact on local fishing livelihoods (see Indonesia and Gambia examples below).224 11 12 Key components – [to be completed225] 13 14 Guiding examples226 15 16 - Indonesia case (from Cabral et al. (2018) 6th national report on firm action to control illegal, 17 unreported and unregulated fishing while maintaining profits of national fleets) 18 19 - Gambia case (from Cabral et al.), 6th national report, on positive impact of banning all industrial 20 distant-water fishing] 21 22 - Liberia case (from 6NR). - World Bank and GEF funded West African Fishing Program (WAFP) 23 for coastal protection - Liberia ranked top performer in implementation, monitoring, surveillance and 24 control of UUI fishing] 25 26 Contributions to other transitions 27 28 - Food transition 29 - Sustainable climate action transition 30

223 MSC, 2019. Marine Stewardship Council: Global Impacts Report 2019. MSC, London, UK. 224 Cabral et al. (2018) Rapid and lasting gains from solving illegal fishing. Nature Ecology & Evolution volume 2, pages 650–658 225 For the final version of GBO5 this section will include synthesis of benefits from aggressive action to control illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing, plus advantages of rights-based fishery management as a means of increasing both biomass and profits into the long term 226 These examples will be further developed in the final version of GBO-5

115 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 The sustainable cities transition 2 3 Summary of the Transition 4 5 Large-scale greening of urban areas, making space for nature within built landscapes, improving the health 6 and quality of life for citizens and reducing the footprint of cities on surrounding and distant ecosystems as 7 well as global climate. 8 9 Rationale 10 11 Population continues to grow globally. While the rate of growth is slower than at any time since 1950, world 12 population is expected to grow from 7.7 billion people in 2019 to around 8.5 billion by 2030 and 9.7 billion 13 by 2050227. In 2018 it was estimated that 55 percent of the world’s population resided in urban areas. By 14 2050 this proportion is expected to reach 68%. While almost half of the people living in urban environments 15 live in towns or cities with fewer than 500,000 people, there are currently 33 cities with more than 10 million 16 inhabitants (megacities). By 2030 the number of megacities is expected to reach 43, with most of these being 17 in developing regions228. Growing urban populations and the associated need for infrastructure will place 18 increasing demands on resources and constitute an important driver of land use change. The status of 19 biodiversity, and the prospects for reaching the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development more generally, 20 will depend in large part on how these demands are managed. Further, the increasing trend towards 21 urbanization will result in people being increasing separated or kept at a distance from nature, with potential 22 negative effects on human health and reduced understanding of biodiversity, the ecosystem services it 23 provides and their importance. 24 25 Benefits of the transition 26 27 The management of cities and urbanization can help to reduce the impacts of growing population on 28 biodiversity while also helping to account for other societal challenges including human health. The 29 concentration of people in urban centres makes the delivery of resources more efficient, reduces 30 consumption of certain goods as a result of shared or common infrastructure (such as public transportation 31 and apparent style housing). As a result of higher population densities, urban areas, if properly managed, 32 reduce the need for land-use change. Links between urban and surrounding rural areas can facilitate 33 sustainable development and infrastructure improvements and expanding opportunities for off-farm 34 employment to rural dwellers. In additional better accounting for biodiversity in the management of cities 35 and urbanization can create co-benefits for other societal challenges. For example, green spaces in urban 36 areas can help to improve mental health229. Access to green spaces also increases opportunities for physical 37 activity which may reduce the risk of several noncommunicable diseases, as well as improved immune 38 function. Trees in urban areas can also help to address issues associated with air pollution230. 39 40 By contrast, unmanaged urbanization or urbanization which does not account for biodiversity risks further 41 exacerbating already negative trends for biodiversity and undermines the prospects for reaching the 2030 42 Agenda for Sustainable Development. It does this by contributing to habitat loss, pollution, overexploitation 43 and climate change.

227 United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division (2019). World Population Prospects 2019: Highlights (ST/ESA/SER.A/423). 228 United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division (2019). World Urbanization Prospects 2018: Highlights (ST/ESA/SER.A/421) 229 Engemann etal (2019). Residential green space in childhood is associated with lower risk of psychiatric disorders from adolescence into adulthood. PNAS March 12, 2019 116 (11) 5188-5193. 230 World Health Organization and Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity (2015). Connecting global priorities: biodiversity and human health: a state of knowledge review.

116 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 2 Progress towards the transition 3 4 There is a growing recognition of the importance of urbanizations and infrastructure development to 5 biodiversity and sustainable development more generally. Numerous networks and initiatives have emerged 6 in recent years to promote a transition towards more sustainable models of urbanization. For example, in 7 2016 the United Nations Conference on Housing and Sustainable Urban Development adopted the New 8 Urban Agenda which put forward a vision for better and more sustainable development through well-planned 9 and well managed urbanizations. This agenda envisions, among other things, that cities and human 10 settlements that “Protect, conserve, restore and promote their ecosystems, water, natural habitats and 11 biodiversity, minimize their environmental impact and change to sustainable consumption and production 12 patterns.”231 However overall there has been limited progress in reflecting or accounting for biodiversity in 13 the planning and management of cities, urbanisation and infrastructure development. 14 15 Key components of the transition 16 17 The necessary components for a transition towards more sustainable and biodiversity friendly urbanisation 18 and infrastructure development all center around maintaining biodiversity and its ecosystems services to 19 people within cities and their broader regions232. To accomplish this: 20 - Local-level governance and transdisciplinary planning, which account for biodiversity among other 21 societal needs, will need to be promoted. 22 - Greater use of natural infrastructure, such as green spaces and green belts, and more effectively 23 integrating it with built infrastructure will be required. Related more efforts will needed to safeguard 24 ecosystems, within and outside urban environments, upon which cities depend, such as watersheds 25 - Reflecting biodiversity considerations into the planning and development of infrastructure 26 investments, such as the design and management of transportation systems, will be necessary 27 - Policies and programmes for collective action and which take advantage of urban areas 28 environments relatively high populations will need to be promoted. Such policies and programmes 29 can help to drive policy decisions both within and outside of urban areas. 30 - The geographic expansion of cities will need to be effectively managed to avoid negatively 31 impacting key biodiversity areas at the margins of urban environments 32 - City-specific targets related to biodiversity will need to be established to facilitate planning and 33 monitoring of urban development.

231 Habitat III Secretariat (2016). The New Urban Agenda. http://habitat3.org/wp-content/uploads/NUA- English.pdf 232 IPBES (2019). IPBES Global Assessment on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, Chapter 5. Pathways towards a Sustainable Future.

117 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 The sustainable fresh water transition233 2 3 Summary of the transition 4 5 An integrated approach for urgent recovery and better management of freshwater systems, guaranteeing the 6 river flows required by nature and people, improving water quality, protecting critical habitats, controlling 7 invasive species and safeguarding connectivity. 8 9 Rationale 10 11 Freshwater ecosystems host a significant diversity of life. Covering less than 1% of Earth’s surface, these 12 habitats are home to approximately one third of vertebrate species and 10% of all species234 and provide 13 ecosystem services to billions of people. However, the exploitation of freshwater resources for human 14 consumption has taken place with little regard to freshwater ecosystems and the services they provide235. As 15 a result, the current rate of wetland loss is three times that of forest loss236 and populations of freshwater 16 vertebrate species have declined at more than twice the rate of land or ocean vertebrates237. An estimated 17 30% of natural freshwater ecosystems have disappeared since 1970, and 87% of inland wetlands since 18 1700238. Maintaining freshwater for nature and humanity is therefore an urgent challenge, with an estimated 19 1.8 billion people likely to live under conditions of regional water stress239. 20 21 Benefits of the transition 22 23 Safeguard freshwater ecosystems and the services they provide and secure a sustained supply of good quality 24 water necessary for human and environmental needs240. 25 26 Progress towards the transition 27 28 While overall progress on sustainable freshwater biodiversity has remained low, actions towards it have been 29 successfully implemented in different contexts and regions across the world, demonstrating the feasibility of 30 these actions and providing guidance on scalability and replicability. 31 32 Key components of the transition 33 34 Bending the curve of freshwater biodiversity loss requires a comprehensive plan underpinned by integrated 35 water resource management (see Figure 53). The elements for a transition to sustainable freshwater 36 ecosystems are derived from the major causes of freshwater biodiversity loss and include: 37 38 - Integrating environmental flows into water management policy and practice, which requires 39 communication, stakeholder participation, awareness raising, adaptive management and 40 demonstration of the benefits of flows for people and nature241. The flows of water and nutrients are

233 This section is largely based on Tickner et al. (in prep) 2019. Bending the Curve of Global Freshwater Biodiversity Loss – An Emergency Recovery Plan, Bioscience Forum 234 Strayer and Dudgeon 2010 235 IPBES Global assessment 236 Gardner and Finlayson 2018 237 Grooten and Almond 2018 238 Davidson 2014, and Dixon et al. 2016 239 Schlosser et al., 2014 240 IPBES Global assessment 241 https://www.iucn.org/downloads/water_briefing_eflows.pdf

118 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 important in maintaining the overall health of the ecosystem and many species depend on 2 connectivity for their migration and reproduction242. Environmental flows provide tools to coordinate 3 upstream-downstream water allocations to maintain healthy ecosystems while taking into 4 consideration socio-economic and cultural objectives. Applying environmental flows in practice, 5 policy and law allows a society to build the knowledge, capacities and institutions needed to 6 implement integrated water resource management, and to adapt to climate change. 7 8 - Combatting pollution and improving water quality needs to be done at the source to protect public 9 health and the environment and to increase water availability243, including through wastewater 10 treatment and re-use, regulation of polluting industries, market-based solutions, improved 11 agricultural practices, and nature-based solutions such as floodplain wetland restoration and riparian 12 buffer zones244. 13 14 - Preventing exploitation of freshwater species and riverine aggregates through improved biological 15 assessments, science-based management and development of a global freshwater fisheries action 16 plan as described in the 2016 Rome Declaration245. In addition, preventing bycatch through 17 identifying and using the temporal and spatial differences between target species and bycatch and by 18 mandating reporting on bycatch246. A reduction in riverine sand and gravel mining can be achieved 19 through lifting demand-side pressures by using recycled materials for construction, avoiding over- 20 design and improving the supply chain process. 21 22 - Preventing and controlling invasive alien species in freshwater ecosystems to eliminate their impacts 23 on native populations, which can be done by identifying and regulating major introduction pathways 24 such as trade and ballast water transfers as well as through the removal of existing invasive alien 25 species. 26 27 - Protecting and restoring critical habitats is crucial for societal wellbeing and economic growth. It 28 can be done through the establishment of protected areas, land-use planning and habitat restoration 29 programs247, all requiring stakeholder engagement to identify synergies and resolve trade-offs 30 between biodiversity goals and other priorities, thereby rendering the biodiversity and ecosystem 31 services outcomes more effective and resilient to future conditions248. It is also necessary to address 32 threats from riverine sand and gravel mining. This could be achieved through lifting demand-side 33 pressures by using recycled materials for construction, avoiding over-design and improving the 34 supply chain process. 35 36 Guiding examples 37 38 - South Africa: incorporation of environmental flows into water-related legislation, implemented 39 through legally-mandated catchment management agencies. [to be elaborated] 40 41 - Mexico: Water reserves programme aiming to preserve sufficient water supplies for millions of 42 people, resulting in sustainable water allocation limits for 189 rivers taking into account 43 environmental flows [to be elaborated] 44

242 McIntyre et al. 2016 243 SDG 6 Synthesis Report 2018 on Water and Sanitation 244 WWAP 2017 245 Taylor and Bartley 2016 246 Cairns et al. 2013 247 UN Water 2018 248 Speed et al. 2016

119 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 2 Figure 53 - Freshwater Transition. A proposed recovery plan to ‘bend the curve’ of biodiversity loss in 3 freshwater ecosystems.249

249 Tickner et al. 2019 (in prep)

120 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 The sustainable climate action transition 2 3 Summary of the transition 4 5 Accelerating action to reduce the scale of climate change by favouring nature-based solutions that 6 simultaneously limit greenhouse gas emissions, enhance carbon storage and provide positive benefits for 7 biodiversity along with other sustainable development goals. 8 9 Rationale [to be developed250]

250 To be developed for the final version of GBO5, drawing substantially on Griscom et al (2017)250 and Strassburg (2019) in prep, on priority areas for ecosystem restoration.

121 DRAFT FOR REVIEW – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, REPRODUCTION OR QUOTATION

1 4. Conclusion: facing up to an emergency 2 3 [text to be developed on the final draft of GBO5]

122