UN Decade on Biodiversity

Contents

UN Decade on Biodiversity

The UN Decade on Biodiversity was a global initiative endorsed by the United Nations General Assembly and coordinated by the Convention on Biological Diversity and the United Nations Environment Programme to accelerate implementation of the Aichi Biodiversity Targets and support the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011–2020. Launched following decisions at the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity and discussed at sessions of the United Nations General Assembly, it sought to mobilize states, indigenous bodies, and civil society through partnerships involving institutions such as the World Wildlife Fund, International Union for Conservation of Nature, and multilateral banks like the World Bank.

Background and Origins

The initiative emerged after concerns raised at the Nagoya Protocol negotiations, the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety meetings, and the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity sessions held in Nagoya, Aichi Prefecture and later in Cancún. High-level advocacy from actors including the United Nations Environment Assembly, representatives from Brazil, South Africa, India, Kenya, and inputs from the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services shaped the Decade’s formulation. Discussions referenced outcomes of the Rio+20 summit, the Millennium Development Goals, and coordination mechanisms used by the United Nations Development Programme and the Food and Agriculture Organization.

The Decade aimed to mainstream biodiversity into policy instruments used by institutions such as the European Union, African Union, Association of Southeast Asian Nations, and national agencies in Canada, Australia, and Japan. Strategic priorities mirrored commitments under the Aichi Biodiversity Targets and included integration with the Sustainable Development Goals agenda, linkages to the Paris Agreement, and support for implementation of frameworks promoted by the Global Environment Facility. Emphasis was placed on conserving hotspots identified by researchers affiliated with institutions like the Smithsonian Institution and the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, strengthening protected areas in networks coordinated by the International Union for Conservation of Nature and enhancing genetic resource stewardship reflected in instruments like the Nagoya Protocol.

Governance combined oversight from the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity with execution support by the Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity and coordination through the United Nations Environment Programme. Implementation relied on national biodiversity strategies and action plans endorsed by ministries in capitals such as Brasília, Pretoria, New Delhi, and Ottawa and operationalized by agencies including the United States Fish and Wildlife Service and the European Environment Agency. Funding and technical assistance leveraged mechanisms administered by the Global Environment Facility, bilateral donors like the United Kingdom, the Germany, and philanthropic partners such as the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation.

Major initiatives included collaborations among the World Wide Fund for Nature, the Conservation International, the Wildlife Conservation Society, and the Nature Conservancy to expand networks of Ramsar Convention sites and to support ecosystem restoration promoted under the Bonn Challenge. Partnerships with scientific bodies such as the International Union for Conservation of Nature Species Survival Commission, the Royal Society, and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change facilitated knowledge transfer. Private sector engagement featured alliances with multinational firms listed on exchanges such as the London Stock Exchange and coordination with standards bodies like the International Organization for Standardization to incorporate biodiversity considerations into supply chains influenced by agreements such as the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora.

Monitoring employed reporting frameworks used by the Convention on Biological Diversity and national submissions to the UN Statistics Division, drawing on biodiversity indicators developed by the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services and research centers such as Pew Charitable Trusts-funded projects and the Natural History Museum, London. Impact assessment referenced national reports filed with the Global Biodiversity Outlook process and evaluated progress relative to the Aichi Biodiversity Targets as analyzed by academic publishers including Nature and Science. Data platforms linking contributions from the European Space Agency, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and the Group on Earth Observations supported remote-sensing of land-cover change and informed policy dialogues at venues like the High-level Political Forum on Sustainable Development.

Critiques arose from civil society groups such as Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth regarding insufficient finance from donors including the World Bank and lack of binding commitments comparable to the Paris Agreement. Scholars associated with universities like Oxford University, University of Cambridge, and Yale University highlighted shortcomings in meeting the Aichi Biodiversity Targets and questioned reliance on voluntary partnerships with corporations listed on the New York Stock Exchange. Indigenous organizations, for example participants representing communities in Sápmi and the Amazon Basin, noted tensions between protected area expansion supported by the Decade and rights recognized under instruments such as the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Operational challenges included coordination across multilateral processes like the Convention on Biological Diversity and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.

Category:International environmental initiatives