BRIG020210 Post 2008 Reporting – further developments and next steps
BRIG 21
2 February 2010
Agenda item 8.ii
Post-2008 reporting:
Further developments and next steps
For other BRIG papers and minutes of BRIG meetings visit
http:// www.jncc.gov.uk/page-5700
For more information about the UK Biodiversity Action Plan (UK BAP) visit
http://www.jncc.gov.uk/page-5155
Post 2008 Reporting – further developments and next steps
Paul Rose, JNCC
1. Background
1.1. In September 2009 BRIG discussed a paper that described the reasons why UK scale biodiversity reporting is needed and presented several options for future UK biodiversity reporting. Discussion at BRIG focussed on the frequency of reporting, the role of lead partners, coordination with other reporting activities but none of these issues were resolved and more work is required. Following the meeting, BRIG produced a paper for the October 2009 meeting of the UK Biodiversity Standing Committee. This paper set out the options for reporting as presented to BRIG and raised the important unresolved issues around process that had been identified by BRIG.
1.2. The minutes from the October 2009 UK Biodiversity Standing Committee discussion of post 2008 reporting point to a number of conclusions made by Standing Committee that can be summarised as follows:
§ Full knowledge of the CBD’s views on post 2010 targets, as agreed at Nagoya in October 2010, is a pre-requisite to future UK biodiversity reporting
§ Useful tools such as indicators should be retained.
§ Reporting on BAP must come second to reporting on EU and International obligations.
§ It was premature to consider reporting until important uncertainties had been ironed out, which meant reporting would not be possible until after 2011.
§ While reporting on a 3 yearly basis might be too frequent 10-15 years is certainly too long.
§ It would not be possible to replicate what had been done in previous BAP reporting rounds.
§ Reporting based on robust datasets as opposed to expert opinion should be the bedrock on which future reporting is based.
§ The important NGO role in gathering and interpreting data will remain a key role.
§ Reporting should show what is working on the ground.
§ Consideration should be given to collating information from country reports.
1.3. It was concluded that the BRIG role was to continue to consider BAP reporting options in light of emerging clarity around the some of the areas of uncertainty and report progress to Standing Committee in April 2010.
1.4. BRIG also needs to consider some of the targets signed off by all countries in 2006 that have an end date or milestone in 2010 and that apply to the UK list of priority species and habitats. Reporting against these targets is desirable but no reporting round will take place before 2012 at the earliest.
1.5. This paper provides an update on some of the key uncertainties surrounding UK biodiversity reporting and makes some suggestions for reporting on agreed targets with a 2010 end date or milestone.
2. Global and EU Post 2010 Targets.
2.1. The final CBD strategic plan will contain a 2050 vision and post 2010 targets and will be agreed at CBD COP 10 in Nagoya, Japan in October 2010. Prior to this the strategic plan will have been subject to consultation with parties and further developed by several international and regional meetings. More formal CBD preparations will take place at the meeting of the CBD Working Group on Review of Implementation (WGRI) in Kenya in May 2010. Based on initial feedback from the joint UK/Brazil hosted CBD meeting in London (18-20 January 2010) the latest version of the Strategic Plan (http://www.cbd.int/doc/meetings/sp/em-stratplan-01/official/em-stratplan-01-sp-prep-03-en.pdf) was poorly received. This is a pity for the UK and the EU as the draft paper met most of our major requirements. The Global Vision, Mission and Targets as they currently stand have been taken from the latest version of the CBD paper and included in Annex 1.
2.2. In parallel to the CBD work, the EU is considering its position on a post 2010 target through the development of Council conclusions on the global CBD position (http://register.consilium.europa.eu/pdf/en/09/st17/st17785.en09.pdf), the development of policy options post 2010 (http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/biodiversity/policy/pdf/communication_2010_0004.pdf) and discussions on the Island of Vilm, Germany scheduled for March 2010. Regular meetings of the EU Working Party on International Environmental Issues (WPIEI) will also take place until the global and EU targets are finally agreed.
2.3. Further information on the development of the post 2010 target framework globally and in Europe can be found in the recent paper to the Joint Nature Conservation Committee. http://www.jncc.gov.uk/pdf/comm09P24.pdf.
3. Habitats and Birds Directive Reporting.
3.1. The European Commission and EU member states are currently considering various aspects of reporting under the habitats and Birds directives in anticipation of the third Habitats Directive reporting round in 2013. The work is being taken forward by the Expert Group on Reporting and its 7 work packages that deal with detailed issues. This expert group is accountable to the Coordination group for Biodiversity and Nature (CGBN) for which the UK has been asked to provide a strategic paper on reporting to help develop a common high level understanding across member states and to guide the work of the expert group. This strategic paper from the UK is being developed at this moment by JNCC, Defra and the Devolved Administrations and will be publicly available by March 2010. Work to establish the requirement to monitor under the Habitats Directive (Article 11) is being undertaken as part of the Terrestrial Biodiversity Surveillance Strategy by the Terrestrial Biodiversity Surveillance Strategy Implementation Group.
3.2. In summary, the nature of the European reporting obligations relating to biodiversity are also still developing and at too early a stage to make strong links to UK BAP reporting options.
4. UK and Country Biodiversity Targets and Reporting
4.1. The Wales Biodiversity Partnership are in the process of setting targets, agreeing actions and appointing actions for the UK priority species and habitats that they have included on their section 42 list and are considering habitat targets and actions within the Ecosystem Groups. For the advanced species groups (Lepidoptera, Mammals, some vascular plants etc) draft targets have been set for 2010, 2015, 2020 and 2025 and lead partners have been appointed for all species on the list including those which occur more widely across the UK.
4.2. In Scotland and England, the lists of species and habitats of principal importance to the countries have been agreed and Ecosystem scale groups have been established to oversee implementation of actions necessary for priority habitats. Further detail will emerge as the ecosystem scale groups proceed with their work.
4.3. Northern Ireland have set themselves a target to halt biodiversity loss by 2016 and have recently published their second progress report towards this target covering the years 2005-2009 (http://www.doeni.gov.uk/ni_biodiversity_group_report_2009.pdf). Discussion and planning of the style and format of subsequent reporting in Northern Ireland has yet to take place. Northern Ireland established Implementation Groups at the start of their strategy implementation process in 2002/03.
4.4. In conclusion, it is too early to identify what various types of reporting will be needed within each country and how the country reporting processes will work. It is already clear that Wales will probably appoint Lead Partners for all species on their Section 42 list and all countries have implementation groups organised at an ecosystem scale to deal with the implementation of actions necessary for habitats and species of principle importance to the country.
5. Reporting on Targets with a 2010 end date.
5.1. Around 200 UK priority habitat targets were agreed in 2006 and countries have indicated that these are likely to continue to guide implementation of actions for the new UK list of priority species and habitats but possibly slightly revised to reflect new approaches. The first milestone for approximately 85 of these targets was 2010. For species approximately 569 targets were agreed in 2006 and about 179 have a first milestone in 2010. Some of these will be for species no longer on the UK list of priority species and habitats but this analysis has not been done yet and it will be relatively few.
5.2. It would seem desirable to try and report progress against these targets but not through a full UK reporting round. An alternative could be for countries to update progress with these targets through BARS which would allow a short summary report to be produced either on the UK BAP website or country web sites or both. Given there is now no formal responsibility for these targets within the partnership, the only practical solution would seem to be to delegate responsibility for progress reporting to the country delivery bodies for habitats and to coordinate the summary reporting through the UK Habitat groups. It is not likely that this option would work particularly well for many of the species targets.
5.3. Another option would be to report progress whenever the next BAP reporting round is scheduled. This is not ideal for because the majority of targets agreed in 2006 expire in 2010 raising another issue around how they will be incorporated into new country implementation plans if they have end dates that have passed.
6. Next Steps
· Map current strands of UK and country reporting to the emerging global framework of post 2010 targets. This should include existing indicators, NEA, country and UK targets, BAP implementation etc.
· Track the developing process for reporting on the EU Habitats and Birds Directives and identify datasets and reporting formats that could contribute to meeting the UK reporting and monitoring obligations.
· Keep abreast of target setting and reporting developments within Country biodiversity implementation and keep country groups informed of developments within Europe and globally.
· All to make UK datasets and information for which they are responsible more widely available and pertinent to the various options for future UK reporting as laid out in the October 2009 UKSC paper. All to encourage other members of the partnership to do likewise.
7. Reporting to April 2010 Standing Committee
7.1. Many of the International and European strands of work will produce outputs after BRIG have met and before UK Biodiversity Standing Committee. It is proposed that JNCC produce a Standing Committee paper based on the outcome of discussions at BRIG on 2 February 2010 and update this paper according to outcomes from key global and European work strands before standing Committee. If BRIG are willing to comment on the final draft with a deadline of a few days only, the final draft can be circulated before submission to Standing Committee on approximately 1 April.
BRIG February 2010
Annex 1
Extracts from paper UNEP/CBD/SP/PREP/2
Revision and updating of the Strategic Plan: Possible outline and elements of the new Strategic Plan
II. Vision:
To be achieved by 2050
“Living in harmony with nature - Biodiversity is conserved, restored and wisely used, sustaining a healthy planet and delivering benefits essential for all people”.
III. The 2020 Mission of the Strategic Plan:
An overall mission statement could be as follows:
“To have taken by 2020 the necessary urgent and concerted actions to reduce the threats facing biodiversity so as to stop biodiversity loss, and have started to restore ecosystems, thus ensuring the continued provision of ecosystem services, while equitably sharing the benefits, avoiding change that is irreversible or has dangerous consequences for human well-being, and contributing to the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals. To ensure that all countries have the means to achieve this.” [1]
Other options include:
“By 2020, to halt biodiversity loss, and restore it to ecologically sound levels, and enhance the capacity of ecosystems to provide services, while equitably sharing the benefits contributing to human wellbeing and poverty reduction. To ensure that all countries have the means to achieve this.”
Framework of targets, activities and indicators for implementation and monitoring
This is an early draft of the framework provided for illustrative purposes only.
Suggestion for SMART Target / Means and examples of activities / Possible Indicators(Parenthesis) = new indicator
Italic = not developed / Most relevant CBD programmes of work and cross-cutting issues / Possible Synergies and partnerships / Examples of existing national biodiversity target
Strategic Goal A. Initiate strategic actions to address the indirect drivers of biodiversity loss through communication, education and public awareness, the realignment of economic incentives and the mainstreaming of biodiversity across government and society:
1. By 2020, everyone is aware of the value of biodiversity and what steps they can take to protect it. / Implement CEPA programmes
Active engagement of citizens
Develop Citizen action lists / (# opinion surveys)
(#/time of biodiversity volunteers)
(#education programmes)
(# visits to museums, parks) / Communication, Education and Public Awareness / UNESCO
List of voluntary actions for citizens. / By 2012 all environmental themes will be incorporated into curriculum of universities and schools. (Yemen)
10 million Europeans actively engaged in biodiversity conservation by 2010, and 15 million by 2013. (European Community)
2. By 2020, the value of biodiversity, and the opportunities derived from its conservation and sustainable use, and the fair and equitable sharing of benefits from the use of genetic resources, are recognized and reflected in all countries, in national development policies and strategies, national accounts, economic sectors and spatial planning processes at all levels of government, and by the private sector, applying the ecosystem approach / Application of strategic environmental assessment
Value biodiversity and ecosystem services.
Apply environmental accounting
Mainstream biodiversity in poverty reduction, development strategies and development cooperation
Develop and apply payment for ecosystem services mechanisms
Develop private Sector guidelines and practices
Action by cities and local authorities / (# countries with PRSP/NDP incorporating biodiversity)
(# countries with biodiversity indicators among national headline indicators)
(# countries requiring SEA)
(# countries with policies for ecosystem based management)
(# countries with systematic conservation planning)