Global Biodiversity Outlook

Global Biodiversity Outlook
Name	Global Biodiversity Outlook
Publisher	Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity
Country	Canada
Language	English
Subject	Biodiversity, conservation, policy
Media type	Print, digital
First	2001

Global Biodiversity Outlook

The Global Biodiversity Outlook is a periodic assessment produced under the auspices of the Convention on Biological Diversity and the Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity that synthesizes evidence on biodiversity status, trends, drivers, and responses to inform decisions by parties such as the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity, United Nations Environment Programme, and national agencies like the Environment and Climate Change Canada. It serves as a bridge between scientific assessments from bodies like the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, data custodians such as the International Union for Conservation of Nature, and multilateral policy processes including the Sustainable Development Goals negotiations and the Paris Agreement climate forums.

Overview

The report integrates findings from institutions including the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, World Wildlife Fund, BirdLife International, Conservation International, The Nature Conservancy, International Union for Conservation of Nature, Global Environment Facility, and research centers like the Smithsonian Institution and the Natural History Museum, London to provide a global synthesis. It draws on data from networks such as the Global Biodiversity Information Facility, Ocean Biogeographic Information System, and monitoring programmes run by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization and the International Coral Reef Initiative while aligning with targets set in frameworks such as the Aichi Biodiversity Targets, Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework, and related agreements like the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety and the Nagoya Protocol. Users include policymakers from entities like the European Commission, United States Fish and Wildlife Service, and subnational actors such as the California Department of Fish and Wildlife.

Publication History

First published in 2001 following preparatory work by the Convention on Biological Diversity secretariat and scientists from institutions such as the Royal Society and the Academy of Sciences of the United States (via contributors), subsequent editions were released in 2006, 2010, 2014, and 2020 with synthesis reports produced around major meetings of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity and the United Nations General Assembly. Major contributors have included researchers affiliated with universities like Oxford University, Harvard University, Stanford University, University of Cambridge, and research organizations such as the Max Planck Society and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Funding and oversight have involved multilateral funders such as the Global Environment Facility and partnerships with NGOs including WWF, BirdLife International, and Wildlife Conservation Society.

Key Findings and Trends

GBO editions summarize trends identified by analytic efforts from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, and data sources like the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species, showing declines in many vertebrate populations monitored by the Living Planet Index and habitat loss documented by remote-sensing programmes at NASA and the European Space Agency. The reports highlight pressures from drivers identified in studies from institutions such as the World Bank, International Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, and United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, including land-use change, invasive species monitored by the Global Invasive Species Database, overexploitation reported by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, pollution issues raised by the United Nations Environment Programme, and climate impacts assessed in collaboration with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Conservation successes and lagging targets are illustrated with case studies involving protected area expansions led by entities like the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization World Heritage sites, community conservation projects supported by ICLEI – Local Governments for Sustainability, and species recovery programs from organizations like Zoological Society of London and Sea Shepherd Conservation Society.

Methodology and Data Sources

Methodological approaches synthesize data streams from global repositories such as the Global Biodiversity Information Facility, the IUCN Red List, satellite datasets from NASA and the European Space Agency, fisheries assessments from the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, and forest monitoring from the World Resources Institute and Global Forest Watch. Scientific inputs derive from peer-reviewed literature in journals like Nature, Science, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, and syntheses by institutions including the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services and national academies such as the National Academy of Sciences (United States). Scenario analyses reference models developed by groups at IIASA, CSIRO, Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, and Stockholm Resilience Centre.

Policy Impact and Implementation

GBO findings have informed negotiations at the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity and contributed evidence to multilateral processes led by the United Nations Environment Programme, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, and the Sustainable Development Goals review mechanisms. National responses have been influenced in jurisdictions including the European Union, Brazil, India, China, South Africa, and Australia via integration into national biodiversity strategies and action plans submitted to the Convention on Biological Diversity. The report has been used by funders such as the Global Environment Facility and philanthropic actors including the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and Bloomberg Philanthropies to prioritize investments, and by intergovernmental bodies such as the Commonwealth of Nations and regional organizations like the African Union.

Criticism and Controversies

Critiques have come from academics affiliated with University of Oxford, Imperial College London, University of California, Santa Cruz, and policy analysts in think tanks like the International Institute for Environment and Development and the World Resources Institute, focusing on issues including aggregation obscuring regional variation, reliance on uneven data from sources like the Global Biodiversity Information Facility, and challenges in linking reported trends to causation emphasized by researchers at Columbia University and Yale University. Controversies have involved debates at the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity over interpretations of progress toward the Aichi Biodiversity Targets and the framing used in interactions with actors such as the World Bank and private-sector partners including BlackRock and Unilever.

Future Directions and Recommendations

Future editions advocate enhanced integration with monitoring frameworks from organizations such as the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, expanded use of earth observation platforms by European Space Agency and NASA, improved national reporting through capacity building by the Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity and the Global Environment Facility, and deeper engagement with stakeholders including indigenous groups represented by bodies like Forest Peoples Programme and International Union for Conservation of Nature commissions. Recommendations encourage alignment with finance mechanisms involving the Green Climate Fund, biodiversity financing initiatives led by the World Bank, and private finance stewardship frameworks promoted by entities such as the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures and the International Union for Conservation of Nature while calling for collaboration with academic centers including Stockholm Resilience Centre, University of Oxford, and Harvard University to refine scenarios and metrics.

Category:Conservation