European Union

The following events were covered by IISD Reporting Services on Thursday, 8 December 2016: GEF Investments and Donor Coordination to Address the Poaching and Illegal Wildlife Trade (IWT) Crisis Synthetic Biology — Opportunities, Challenges, and Environmental Benefits Multiple Approaches to Valuing Nature: The Work of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) on Diverse Values and its Echo in Practice Sustainable Agriculture for Biodiversity: Taking Concrete Transformative Steps Operation Target 16 - Operationalization of the Nagoya Protocol on Access and Benefit Sharing (ABS) in Germany “Let Nature be the Solution” Insights in National Access and Benefit Sharing (ABS) Capacity Building Needs – Tools, Measures and (Regional) Approaches to Address Them IISD Reporting Services, through its ENBOTS Meeting Coverage, is providing daily web coverage of selected side-events from the UN Biodiversity Conference. Photos by IISD/ENB | Diego Noguera For photo reprint permissions, please follow instructions at our Attribution Regulations for Meeting Photo Usage Page. GEF Investments and Donor Coordination to Address the Poaching and Illegal Wildlife Trade (IWT) Crisis Presented by the Global Environment Facility (GEF) and the World Bank This event, moderated by Jaime Cavelier, GEF, presented the GEF-funded Global Partnership on Wildlife Conservation and Crime Prevention for Sustainable Development (the GPW project), which aims to tackle the poaching and the IWT crisis. Mohamed Bakarr, GEF, said the GPW project follows GEF funding principles, including country-driven actions and partnerships. Cavelier presented an overview of the GPW project, highlighting components including: reducing poaching through enhancing wildlife benefits to communities; reducing IWT through increased law enforcement; and reducing demand for illegal wildlife products. Elisson Wright, World Bank, presented a report analyzing international funding to tackle IWT. The report, he noted, maps out donor contributions from 24 bilateral agencies involving 1100 projects that tackled IWT in Africa and Asia between 2010 and 2016. He discussed: interventions in protected area management; promotion of sustainable use and alternative livelihoods; policy, research and assessment; and communication and awareness. Matthias Krause, Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ), Germany, reported on the ‘Wildlife Crime in Africa: from Crisis to Solution’ consultative meeting, held in June 2016 in Berlin, emphasizing that the magnitude of the IWT crisis requires international coordinated efforts. He reported German support of €800 million to support 400 protected areas. Christine Dawson, US Department of State, said that, in 2010, the US contributed US$10 million towards IWT, which was up to US$95 million in 2015. She noted that an interministerial taskforce has been set up in the US involving 17 agencies, including the Departments of Justice and Defense, to address this issue from a crime perspective. Kenichiro Tanaka, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Japan, said as one of the largest donor of the GEF, his country is committed to continued work on IWT, including support for law enforcement particularly in customs. Midori Paxton, UN Development Programme (UNDP), said her organization supports 13 national projects relating to IWT, including aspects of capacity building for enforcement, intelligence and landscape management with communities. She urged for long-term investment in sustaining successes in combatting IWT. Johan Robinson, UN Environment, cited community projects providing incentives to prevent IWT and work with UNEP’s World Conservation Monitoring Centre (UNEP-WCMC) on issues regarding the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES). Presenting GWP project recipient country experiences, Hoang Thanh Nhan, Viet Nam Environment Administration, pointed out that tackling IWT requires involvement of all ministries and agencies, and not just those dealing with wildlife conservation. She noted an additional US$10 million from the US Agency for International Development to support the GWP project. She also reported on the Hanoi IWT conference held in November 2016 in Hanoi. Agostinho Mangueze, National Administration for Conservation Areas (ANAC), Mozambique, demonstrated progress in addressing IWT, including: legislative changes to increase jail terms for wildlife crimes; regional collaboration with Tanzania and South Africa; capacity building of law enforcement; collaboration with Viet Nam to address supply chains; and community awareness. Theresa Mundita Lim, Biodiversity Management Bureau, the Philippines, said that besides being a transit point for IWT, her country was also losing revenue amounting to US$ 230 million annually from IWT in marine biodiversity. She drew attention to the recently developed National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan that will enhance wildlife protection. In ensuing discussions, participants noted the need to measure success of IWT interventions alongside funding trends. Nepal said whereas they have halted rhino poaching, tiger poaching is on the rise. Participants also noted the important role played by the media in reducing the value of ivory by almost half in China. Mohamed Bakarr, GEF, said the GPW project has received US$131 million to date to combat IWT. Jaime Cavelier, GEF, said the GPW project involves 19 countries for work on elephants, pangolins, rhino, gorilla and big cats and has leveraged an additional US$703 million. Participants watched a WildAid video on the illegal wildlife trade. Elisson Wright, World Bank, said the establishment of a donor engagement platform on IWT would allow proactive discussions and information sharing to enhance efforts in combatting IWT. Partners of the GWP project Contact: Jaime Cavelier (Coordinator) | jcavelier@thegef.org Elisson Wright (Coordinator) | ewright1@worldbank.org More Information: www.thegef.org www.worldbank.org Synthetic Biology — Opportunities, Challenges and Environmental Benefits Presented by CropLife International (CLI) This event, moderated by Taiwo Koyejo, CLI, addressed different applications of synthetic biology and how this technology should be regulated. Henrik Toft Simonsen, Technological University of Denmark, noted different research aims of bioengineering, including: the production of chemicals, such as those used in drugs, vaccines, biofuels and vitamins, in a sustainable manner; novel use of engineered cells, such as through tissue engineering and diagnostics; and novel tools for engineering, such as “transformation tricks” and sequencing of DNA. Robert Friedman, J. Craig Venter Institute, highlighted his Institute’s work on synthetic biology, and said the ongoing synthetic biology discussions at the thirteenth meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD COP 13) contact group provide a good basis for risk assessment regarding living organisms developed through current and near-future applications of synthetic biology, noting such methodologies may need to be updated and adapted in the future. Mark Tizard, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), distinguished between gene editing, genetic modification and gene drives, highlighting an opportunity, through gene editing to move from a “responsive” approach, typified by “slowness and luck,” to a “directed” approach, typified by “precision and speed.” On the possible release of gene drives, he called for: “a route with flashing lights, check points and off-ramps, rather than barricades.” Kate Wildauer, SynBioBeta, highlighted potential positive impacts of synthetic biology, including: production of biodegradable forms of products such as plastics and inks, and conservation of plants and animals by providing alternatives to them. She said limiting the growth of synthetic biology tools with “disproportionate regulation” could have negative economic, ecological and security impacts, and called for supporting industry with appropriate regulation and governance that allows for safe outcomes. In the discussion, participants considered, inter alia: ethical concerns, such as the loss of livelihoods in Africa due to the proliferation of synthetic biology; the risks of promoting synthetic biology versus the risks of banning it; dialogue as key to addressing the concerns of different groups; the need for adequate national biotechnology regulatory systems as the field progresses; the value of connecting early-phase start ups with regulatory agencies prior to commercialization; and the need for capacity building in the area of synthetic biology. (L-R): Robert Friedman, J. Craig Venter Institute; Kate Wildauer, SynBioBeta; Mark Tizard, CSIRO; and Henrik Toft Simonsen, Technological University of Denmark Mark Tizard, CSIRO, highlighted “the dynamic tension between conserving biodiversity and feeding the planet,” underscoring: “we are not in full control and new tools are urgently needed to help.” Kate Wildauer, SynBioBeta, stressed that “synthetic biology is part of the next industrial revolution.” Henrik Toft Simonsen, Technological University of Denmark, stated that over the next 40 years the world will need to build “a new Manhattan” every eight weeks due to increasing urbanization, and will need to do so in a different way from the past, noting bioengineering can assist. Robert Friedman, J. Craig Venter Institute, noted his organization’s work on creating a “minimal cell” with the smallest set of genes necessary for growth, “to help us understand the fundamentals of life.” Taiwo Koyejo, CLI, moderated the event. A view of the room during the event Contact: Taiwo Koyejo (Moderator) | taiwo.koyejo@croplife.org More Information: https://croplife.org/ Multiple Approaches to Valuing Nature: The Work of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) on Diverse Values and its Echo in Practice Presented by the UN University Institute for the Advanced Study of Sustainability (UNU-IAS), Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH and IPBES This side event, moderated by Ulrike Tröger, GIZ, presented the IPBES guide on multiple values of nature to support more holistic decision making and for incorporating these values into social and environmental assessments. Anne Larigauderie, Executive Secretary, IPBES, spoke on the IPBES Work Programme 2014-2018 in providing scientific and methodological assessments for biodiversity and ecosystem services, and stressed the importance of considering plural or multiple values for nature to design appropriate methods which take these into account. David González, National Autonomous University of Mexico, described a framework illustrating how to integrate different “ways of knowing and relating to nature” to encompass the diverse meanings of value. He compared the use of a single worldview for valuing nature, which often results in the use of cost-benefit analysis to measure economic value, with a plural perspective of worldviews for identifying the variety of policy instruments and governance systems that reflect diverse values for nature. Suneetha Mazhenchery Subramanian, UNU-IAS, described a valuation methodology to strengthen access and benefit sharing (ABS) of biological resources in India. She noted that in order to go beyond economic valuation, it is necessary to consider the uncertainty of values, which varies according to the type of resource, ownership regime and sector involved. She stressed the need for mediation by competent authorities to ensure that the equity considerations of multiple actors are addressed, and the need to account for sectoral business models, uncertainty and the product life cycle for ABS. Unnikrishnan Payyappallimana, UNU-IAS, described the work of the Regional Centres of Expertise (RCEs) in promoting education for sustainable development. He noted RCEs are innovative platforms for multisectoral and interdisciplinary information sharing and collaboration, which link formal education with networks and informal forms of learning, and, thus, provide added value in promoting multiple values for nature. The ensuing discussions took place through a “fishbowl” style discussion in which panelists addressed topics raised by participants, such as, inter alia: the role of future generations in articulating values for nature; the challenge of accounting for “non-visible” values; raising political interest in identifying plural values for ecosystem services; and the need to consider continua and gradients in the assessment of ecosystem service values. (L-R): Ulrike Tröger, GIZ; Suneetha Mazhenchery Subramanian, UNU-IAS; Anne Larigauderie, Executive Secretary, IPBES; Unnikrishnan Payyappallimana, UNU-IAS; and David González, National Autonomous University of Mexico Ulrike Tröger, GIZ, described the ValuES Initiative, which provides an inventory of methods and instruments to assess and value ecosystem services. Unnikrishnan Payyappallimana, UNU-IAS, described how RCEs promote “community-to-community” learning.   David González, National Autonomous University of Mexico, stressed that plural values for nature are needed to design management and policy interventions in a transparent manner. Suneetha Mazhenchery Subramanian, UNU-IAS, stated that plural valuation for ABS need not focus only on economic values.   Participants during the discussion Contact: Ulrike Tröger (Coordinator) | ulrike.troeger@giz.de More Information: http://www.ipbes.net/work-programme/values http://www.aboutvalues.net Sustainable Agriculture for Biodiversity: Taking Concrete Transformative Steps Presented by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the UN (FAO) This session was moderated by Dan Leskien, FAO. Braulio Ferreira de Souza Dias, Executive Secretary, Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), highlighted the challenges facing agriculture including droughts and floods, and noted the need to adapt agriculture to new realities such as the impacts of climate change. He said that due to some unsustainable practices, agriculture is also a source of biodiversity loss and degradation, and called for robust actions to promote mainstreaming biodiversity into agriculture. Chikelu Mba, Seeds and Plant Genetic Resources Team, FAO, called for a transition to a narrative that reflects the mutually reinforcing nature of agriculture and biodiversity. Noting that the focus has often been on the negative impacts of agriculture on biodiversity, he cited an example of agroforestry as a sustainable agricultural practice, which has the additional benefit of climate mitigation. He stressed the need to go beyond research on the positive impacts of agriculture, to making farmers embrace sustainable practices as part of their regular routines. Rafael Obregón Viloria, National Commission for Knowledge and Sustainable Use of Biodiversity (CONABIO), Mexico, presented on innovations by the Mesoamerican Biological Corridor in Lacandon Tropical Forest, noting that the country began working on this multisectoral, participatory project to ensure that farmers continue to be stewards of nature by engaging in sustainable agricultural practices, diversifying their livelihoods, and conserving and restoring the landscapes around them. He stressed the importance of involving farmers, “respecting their value as producers,” and incentivizing them to voluntarily engage in biodiversity conservation. Tauti Fautino M-Leota, Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment, Samoa, spoke on the overall policy framework facilitating the mainstreaming of biodiversity into national planning processes in her country, including the Strategy for the Development of Samoa, which considers the environment as a cross-cutting issue throughout. She pointed to the objectives of the environment sector, including governance, administering natural capital, and mainstreaming climate and disaster resilience, and noted the synergies between the agriculture and environment sectors. Gunnstein Bakke, Directorate of Fisheries, Norway, presented on the ecosystems-based fisheries management in his country, noting the evolution of the sector from the 1970s when there was an overfishing crisis, to the current ecosystems-based system, which maintains both profitability of the fisheries sector as well as ecological sustainability. He stressed the need to maintain the adaptive capacity of the fisheries sector even after the recovery of fishstocks, including through the reduction of fishing vessels, and underscored the need for political will to ensure the sustainability of the sector. Jeanine Volken, Federal Department of Economic Affairs, Switzerland, spoke on the role of agriculture in not only food production but also in the conservation of biodiversity. She drew attention to national agricultural policies, including the Proof of Ecological Performance tool to ensure sustainable agricultural practices. Moderating the discussion, Kim Friedman, FAO, noted the need to strengthen mainstreaming efforts already underway, underscoring the need to include both farmers and consumers in these efforts. Participants and panelists then considered, inter alia: the need for community engagement to promote the achievement of the Aichi Biodiversity Targets; the role of markets in creating more sustainable fishing patterns; and the need for national-level institutional frameworks to successfully implement the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). (L-R): Chikelu Mba, Seeds and Plant Genetic Resources Team, FAO; Dan Leskien, FAO; Irene Hoffmann, Commission on Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture, FAO; and Braulio Ferreira de Souza Dias, Executive Secretary, CBD Braulio Ferreira de Souza Dias, Executive Secretary, CBD, noted “huge opportunities” for win-win solutions between the agriculture and environment sectors. Dan Leskien and Irene Hoffmann, FAO A slide from Chikelu Mba’s presentation Chikelu Mba, Seeds and Plant Genetic Resources Team, FAO, called for packaging solutions tailored to farmers and providing the financial and technical solutions to incentivize them to move towards sustainable practices. (L-R): Jeanine Volken, Federal Department of Economic Affairs, Switzerland; Tauti Fautino M-Leota, Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment, Samoa; Rafael Obregón Viloria, National Commission for Knowledge and Sustainable Use of Biodiversity (CONABIO), Mexico; and Gunnstein Bakke, Directorate of Fisheries, Norway A slide from the presentation of Rafael Obregón Viloria Rafael Obregón Viloria, CONABIO, Mexico, noted the country’s promotion of local and regional agricultural value chains. Jeanine Volken, Federal Department of Economic Affairs, Switzerland A view of the room during the side event Contact: Chikelu Mba (Coordinator) | Chikelu.Mba@fao.org More Information: http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/user_upload/ebs/CBDCOP13_FAO_AG__Flyer-A5.pdf Operation Target 16 - Operationalization of the Nagoya Protocol on Access and Benefit Sharing (ABS) in Germany Presented by the German Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation, Building and Nuclear Safety (BMUB), and the German Federal Agency for Nature Conservation (BfN) This side event, moderated by Stefan Lütkes, BMUB, provided an overview of the steps undertaken by Germany to operationalize the Nagoya Protocol in order to achieve Aichi Biodiversity Target 16 (on ABS). Lütkes cited the German Act Implementing the Obligations under the Nagoya Protocol and Transposing Regulation of July 2016, noting that Germany is taking its obligations under the Nagoya Protocol very seriously. He elaborated on the relationship between BMUB as the Protocol’s national focal point and BfN, the competent national authority for the Protocol. Thomas Ebben, BMUB, presented a case study on the practical and legal aspects of implementing the Protocol in Germany. He said four institutions have national experience in ABS: BfN; the Federal Agency for Agriculture and Food; Robert-Koch-Institut; and the German Patent and Trade Mark Office. BfN, he noted, is the “one-stop-shop,” providing users with services, such as information, advice, declarations, checks and sanctions in regards to ABS issues. Thomas Greiber, BfN, said the role of his institution includes: processing and verifying criteria for applications for inclusion in the EU register of collections; checking user compliance; enforcing compliance and sanctioning infringements; and providing information and advice. He demonstrated the ABS Clearing-House Mechanism and highlighted some challenges, including constraints in identifying risk criteria for compliance checks. In discussions, participants asked for clarification on how BfN deals with confidentiality and assures adequate checkpoints. Panelists noted that confidentiality of information requires clarity on why this should be private, and noted two control point stages during declaration of due diligence. Participants were also informed that the EU regulates compliance measures but that ABS is under the sovereignty of individual member states. (L-R): Thomas Ebben, BMUB; Thomas Greiber, BfN; Stefan Lütkes, BMUB; and Ellen Frederichs, BfN Stefan Lütkes, BMUB, moderated the event, discussing the legal framework for implementing the Nagoya Protocol on ABS in Germany. Thomas Ebben, BfN, discussed the role of his institution in promoting and monitoring compliance and enforcement and demonstrated submissions of due diligence through the EU-developed online DECLARE platform. Thomas Greiber, BfN, discussed the role of his institution in promoting and monitoring compliance and enforcement and demonstrated submissions of due diligence through the EU developed online DECLARE platform. A participant asks a question during the discussion. Contact: Thomas Greiber (Coordinator) | thomas.greiber@bfn.de Thomas Ebben (Coordinator) | thomas.ebben@bmub.bund.de More Information: http:/abs.bfn.de “Let Nature be the Solution” Presented by the European Commission (EC) This event, moderated by Marco Fritz, EC, and Barbara Livoreil, Foundation for Biodiversity Research, France, discussed “Nature-Based Solutions” (NBS) which provide business opportunities for regenerating urban areas, improving air and water quality, -and disaster risk reduction (DRR). Andrew Deutz, The Nature Conservancy (TNC), highlighted the investment opportunities that exist in reframing nature as infrastructure, stressing that nature improves water and air quality and is the first line of defense in protecting coastal developments from disasters. He also identified the role of NBS in regenerating cities, offering insurance values in the face of hydrological risks, and for climate mitigation. Sarah Bekessy, Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology (RMIT), highlighted the critical role of “everyday nature” for the future of urban development, emphasizing its role in, inter alia: mitigating and adapting to climate change; “re-enchanting” people with nature; providing health benefits for adults and children. She also emphasized opportunities to connect urban dwellers with indigenous knowledge through urban greening projects. Karen Sudmeier-Rieux, IUCN Commission on Ecosystem Management, spoke about the role of NBS for DRR. She stressed that ecosystems can: prevent or mitigate hazards; reduce exposure by functioning as natural buffers; and reduce vulnerability by supporting livelihoods before, during and after disasters strike. She noted that a key challenge for incorporating biodiversity and ecosystems into DRR lies in convincing engineers and finance ministries to compare the costs and benefits of “grey” versus “green” infrastructure. Ángela Andrade, IUCN Commission on Ecosystem Management, summarized lessons learned from the event, noting that NBS is a “problem-oriented approach” that addresses the key challenges facing urban areas by enhancing flood protection, food security, climate mitigation and the health of urban populations. She underlined the importance of showcasing the social, cultural and economic benefits of NBS, as well as the need to adopt a collaborative approach across different sectors, including for agriculture, mining and engineering. In the ensuing discussion, participants discussed the potential of NBS to rejuvenate the most industrialized areas within urban settings. Andrew Deutz, TNC, said that people tend to think of nature as a “victim in the face of infrastructure development,” but that “we need to think of nature as part of the solution.” Sarah Bekessy, RMIT, stressed that we must shift thinking from biodiversity as an urban constraint to a massive opportunity for sustainable urban development. Ángela Andrade, IUCN Commission on Ecosystem Management, stressed that a “big opportunity” exists to change people’s perceptions about development as being synonymous with ecosystem restoration. Karen Sudmeier-Rieux, IUCN Committee on Ecosystem Management, highlighted the multiple benefits of ecosystem approaches to DRR. A view of the room during the event Contact: Marco Fritz (Coordinator) | marco.fritz@ec.europa.eu More Information: http://europa.eu/!Jg99bW https://ec.europa.eu/research/environment/index.cfm Insights in National Access and Benefit Sharing (ABS) Capacity-Building Needs – Tools, Measures and (Regional) Approaches to Address Them Presented by the ABS Capacity Development Initiative (ABS Initiative) This event, moderated by Andreas Drews, Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit GmbH (GIZ), saw representatives of the ABS Initiative and several African partner countries present and discuss progress made, success factors and challenges. Drews introduced the multi-donor ABS Initiative, noting its work in Africa, the Caribbean and the Pacific. He said the Initiative’s core activities in its 10 African partner countries comprise support for: national capacity building, focusing on national institutional regulatory ABS frameworks; ensuring effective participation of Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities (IPLCs); and the development of ABS agreements. Melle Assia Azzi, Algeria, highlighted ABS activities in her country, including: contribution to the analysis o=f the national legal framework; an inception workshop of the Algerian ABS policy and legal framework project; capacity building of national focal points and stakeholders; and a national diagnostic study. She said work on IPLCs may commence in 2017. Kavaka Watai Mukonyi, Kenya, highlighted activities including: institutional approaches for improved coordination on ABS permits and decisions; legal gap analysis; training; support to three pilot community-based ABS projects; studies on genetic resources and traditional knowledge (TK) utilization; and dialogue between the private sector and providers. Albun William Banye Lemnyuy, Cameroon, noted, inter alia: the drafting of a national ABS strategy; support for development of an interim ABS regulation; and negotiation of, support for, and comments on, various mutually agreed terms (MATs). Prudence Galega, Cameroon, additionally highlighted her country’s intent to develop a law, rather than an interim regulation, on ABS by April 2017. Naritiana Rakotoniaina Ranaivoson, Madagascar, highlighted: a “political letter” on ABS, which provides an overall ABS strategy; development of an interim ABS regulation; clarification of the involvement of local communities in the prior informed consent procedure process; the establishment of a biodiversity community register; and the piloting of valorization activities. Hugues Adeloui Akpona, Benin, noted activities in his country include: popularization of the national ABS strategy; support to the development of an interim ABS regulation; a pilot bio-cultural community protocol project; preparatory consultations on a TK documentation strategy; creating the basis for a valorization strategy; and capacity building to make existing partnerships ABS compliant. Opening the discussion, Suhel al-Janabi, ABS Initiative, called for input from speakers on lessons learned. Speakers expressed an interest in learning from other countries: about experiences of developing ABS laws and signing MATs; how to get “a good deal” within an agreement; how to put in place a fair benefit-sharing mechanism; how to ensure monetary benefits reach communities; and how to identify who represents communities. They also expressed an interest in sharing research. In closing, Mahlet Teshome Kebede, African Union, reflected on the potential for regional or continental implementation. Suhel al-Janabi, ABS Initiative, highlighted very different capacity building and support needs in different countries. Melle Assia Azzi, Algeria, noted that “sometimes it is easy to adopt a law, but difficult to implement it in the field.” Hugues Adeloui Akpona, Benin, noted ongoing efforts to clarify the representation of local communities at the national level. Albun William Banye Lemnyuy, Cameroon, offered to share experiences on MAT negotiation and signature.   Prudence Galega, Cameroon, highlighted training parliamentarians who work with communities as an important entry point for training on IPLCs. Kavaka Watui Mukonyi, Kenya, stressed effective ABS laws are a driver for research and development, which is key for the economy. Contact: Andreas Drews (Coordinator) | andreas.drews@giz.de More Information: www.abs-initiative.info

The following events were covered by IISD Reporting Services On Tuesday, 6 December 2016: Towards a Modular Approach to Reporting Against the Aichi Biodiversity Targets and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) Mutually Supportive Implementation of the Nagoya Protocol and the Plant Treaty Summary for Policymakers from the IPBES Thematic Assessment on Pollinators, Pollination and Food Production Capacity Building for National Biodiversity Strategic Action Plan (NBSAP) Implementation: Lessons learned from pilot projects under the Japan Biodiversity Fund (JBF) To Halt the Tide of Invasive Alien Species (IAS) - Honolulu Challenge 2016 CRISPR Gene Drives: The Implications of Extinction Technologies and Species-Scale Engineering Are We Improving and Supporting Sustainable Methods of Livestock and Agriculture to Achieve Aichi Target 7? IISD Reporting Services, through its ENBOTS Meeting Coverage, is providing daily web coverage of selected side-events from the UN Biodiversity Conference. Photos by IISD/ENB | Diego Noguera For photo reprint permissions, please follow instructions at our Attribution Regulations for Meeting Photo Usage Page. Towards a Modular Approach to Reporting Against the Aichi Biodiversity Targets and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) Presented by the Swiss Confederation, Federal Office for the Environment (FOEN), and UN Environment Programme's World Conservation Monitoring Centre (UNEP-WCMC) This side event presented innovative approaches to help parties to streamline their reporting to intergovernmental processes, through modular reporting based on the Aichi Biodiversity Targets, which also facilitates reporting on the SDGs by improving ways to use information more effectively. Norbert Bärlocher, Swiss Confederation, FOEN, moderated the event, emphasizing the increasing need to ease reporting burdens on biodiversity-related multilateral environment agreements (MEAs) due to the increased amount of information available. Gaston Akouehou, Chargé de Recherches au CAMES, Benin, presented on forest monitoring in West Africa, describing the structure of an action plan for regional collaboration that involves multipurpose forest monitoring. He said streamlined biodiversity-related reporting is feasible for reporting to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the UN (FAO) and REDD+. Han De Koeijer, Focal Point, CBD Centre for Information Exchange, Belgium, reported on the Target Cross-linking Tool (TCT), aimed at facilitating data and information management. He demonstrated the complementarity of the TCT with the CBD voluntary online reporting tool and crosslinking with targets of biodiversity-related conventions including the CBD, the Ramsar Convention and the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS). Christoph Reusser, FOEN, and Katharina Bieberstein, UNEP-WCMC, presented jointly on elements for modular reporting against the Aichi Biodiversity Targets. Reusser said this project provides opportunities to explore the common use of national reporting data to increase information coherence and reduce the national reporting burden. Bieberstein said a more integrated approach to biodiversity loss resulting from the use of modular reporting will influence the development of a post-2020 global biodiversity framework and tools and processes related to the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Frank Wugt Larsen, European Environment Agency, presented on the Data Reporting Tool (DaRT) for MEAs developed by the EU to cross-link biodiversity-related targets from national, to regional and global levels. The tool, he noted, will be made available to parties through UN Environment’s InforMEA platform. In discussions, participants said any tools that relieve the reporting burden, while saving resources, should be used by all parties. Some noted that biodiversity-related national institutions are fragmented and that modular reporting tools would enable integration of the data they generate. They also noted the disparity in reporting among the different biodiversity-related conventions, saying the CBD has the highest reporting rate. Speakers and participants during the event Norbert Bärlocher, FOEN, said that national reporting burdens on biodiversity will be eased through new, innovative approaches.   Han De Koeijer, Focal Point, CBD Centre for Information Exchange, Belgium, demonstrated the interoperability between the TCT and the CBD voluntary online reporting tool.   Christoph Reusser, FOEN, said modular reporting will enable streamlining of data from biodiversity-related conventions. Frank Wugt Larsen, European Environment Agency, said a volunteer initiative will be launched to establish concrete proposals for a modular approach to national reporting and to make DaRT available to all parties. Katharina Bieberstein, UNEP-WCMC, said modular reporting requires countries to manage biodiversity data in a way that is useful for multiple processes. Contact: Christoph Reusser (Coordinator) | Christoph.RC.Reusser@bafu.admin.ch Anne Teller (Coordinator) | ENV-BIODIVERSITY@ec.europa.eu More Information: http://www.sib.admin.ch/de/aktuell/modular-reporting/index.html https://www.informea/org https://demo.chm-cbd.net Mutually Supportive Implementation of the Nagoya Protocol and the Plant Treaty Presented by Bioversity International, the Access and Benefit Sharing (ABS) Capacity Development Initiative, the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture (ITPGRFA) This event addressed mutually supportive implementation of the Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits Arising from their Utilization to the CBD (the Nagoya Protocol) and the ITPGRFA (Plant Treaty) at international, regional, national and community levels. Noting that the Multilateral System under the Plant Treaty and Nagoya Protocol are not self-executing Michael Halewood, Bioversity International, highlighted joint work of partner organizations in building stakeholder capacity. Andreas Drews, Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH, introduced the ABS Capacity Development Initiative to support the development and implementation of national ABS regulations. He noted that countries should identify those responsible for regulating and permitting access to genetic resources. Pierre du Plessis, Namibia and Africa Region representative for the Conference of the Parties serving as the meeting of the Parties (COP/MOP) to the Nagoya Protocol, and the Governing Body of the Plant Treaty, stressed that implementing ABS correctly would lead to a “quadruple win” in Africa: ensuring conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity; promoting science, technology, knowledge and education; promoting climate change adaptation; and addressing poverty. Alicja Kozlowska, European Commission (EC), highlighted the European Union’s (EU) legislation in this area, which is comprised of: the EU ABS Regulation; the Implementing Regulation; and complementary measures. Naritiana Rakotoniaina Ranaivoson, National Focal Point for ABS, Madagascar, presented on a three-year project on mutually supportive implementation of the Nagoya Protocol and the Plant Treaty in Madagascar and Benin. Among key conclusions reached in Madagascar, she highlighted: the need to strengthen community structures before advancing participatory decision-making activities; and the value of knowledge on existing genetic resources for implementing both agreements, as well as for climate adaptation. Kathryn Garforth, CBD Secretariat, expressed appreciation for assistance from the Japan Biodiversity Fund, which provides funding to follow up on commitments made at CBD COP 10 in Nagoya, Japan. Kent Nnadozie, ITPGRFA Secretariat, highlighted the need for enhanced coordination among intergovernmental processes, as well as within donor countries and organizations. During discussions, participants addressed, inter alia, “inherent tensions” between environmental and agriculture ministries that are less evident at the community level, and making guidance for implementation of the two agreements available in a flowchart. Participants during the presentation of Pierre du Plessis, Namibia and and Africa Region representative for the COP/MOP to the Nagoya Protocol and the Governing Body of the Plant Treaty Michael Halewood, Bioversity International, stressed capacity building is critical to enable stakeholders to take advantage of the Nagoya Protocol and Plant Treaty. Pierre du Plessis, Namibia and Africa Region representative for the COP/MOP to the Nagoya Protocol and the Governing Body of the Plant Treaty, said Africa’s Agenda 2063 provides an optimistic global strategy to optimize the use of African resources, and stressed “we should do everything we can to make the dream come true.”   Alicja Kozlowska, EC, presented on elements of the Plant Treaty within and outside the scope of the EU ABS Regulation. Nartiana Rakotoniaina Ranaivoson, National Focal Point for ABS, Madagascar, stressed the need to consider how international instruments can respond to communities’ aspirations and needs. Participants during the event Contact: Michael Halewood (Coordinator) | m.halewood@cgiar.org More Information: http://www.bioversityinternational.org/research-portfolio/policies-for-plant-diversity-management/mutual-implementation-of-nagoya-protocol-and-plant-treaty/ http://www.abs-initiative.info/ Summary for Policymakers from the IPBES Thematic Assessment on Pollinators, Pollination and Food Production Presented by the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) Secretariat This event, moderated by Anne Larigauderie, Executive Secretary, IPBES, focused on countries’ reflections, plans and actions to implement key findings of the IPBES pollination assessment. Simon Potts, University of Reading, summarized key messages in the Summary for Policymakers, emphasizing the value of pollinators for agriculture production and other ecosystem services. He reported that the annual market value linked to pollinators is US$235-577 billion. Lejo van der Heiden, Ministry of Economic Affairs, the Netherlands, introduced the “Coalition of the Willing on Pollinators,” launched at the High-Level Segment of COP 13. He reported that this Coalition aims to encourage strategies for pollinator conservation through sustainable agricultural practices, improved management of pollinators and restoration of natural habitats in urban areas. Jean-Patrick Le Duc, Cabinet Director, Ministry of Biodiversity, France, reported on the French National Pollinator Action Plan, which lays out strategies to use tools and approaches to enhance awareness and protect pollinators, adding that 4,000 local authorities are committed to zero pesticide use. Chengshou Bai, Protected Areas National Focal Point, China, highlighted his country’s pollinator’s assessment and implementation strategies. He reported on the need to, inter alia: survey pollinator diversity; assess the value of pollination services; establish a pollination monitoring system; formulate pollinator conservation and restoration activities; enhance policy support; and expand publicity and increase public participation. Shonisani Munzhedzi, Department of Environmental Affairs, South Africa, reported on scientific research and policy interventions including the honeybee forage project and policy precaution measures. He noted the need to enhance legislation and to consider the role of indigenous knowledge systems. Carlos Scaramuzza, Ministry of Environment, Brazil reported on actions to ensure the coexistence between agriculture and conservation and increased food production including: improved use of pesticides and promotion of biological control agents; pesticide risk assessments that include bees; and improved family farm production methods. In ensuing discussions, some participants noted that the report on pollination, pollinators and food production does not recognize the existence of laboratory and field-based data on the effects of genetically-modified crops; and the need to include more information on the protection of urban species of pollinators. (L-R): Hien Ngo, IPBES Secretariat; Simon Potts, University of Reading; Anne Larigauderie, Executive Secretary, IPBES; Chengshou Bai, Protected Areas National Focal Point, China; Shonisani Munzhedzi, Department of Environmental Affairs, South Africa; and Lejo van der Heiden, Ministry of Economic Affairs, the Netherlands Anne Larigauderie, Executive Secretary, IPBES, said the Thematic Assessment on Pollinators, Pollination and Food Production was presented to and welcomed by the 12th meeting of the Subsidiary Body on Scientific Technical and Technological Advice. Simon Potts, University of Reading, reported a more than 300% increase in the volume of agricultural production that depends on pollinators since 1961. Jean-Patrick Le Duc, Ministry of Biodiversity, France, reported that the France National Assembly has recently approved a ban on bee-harming neonicotinoid pesticides, which will take effect in late 2018. Chengshou Bai, Protected Areas National Focal Point, China Shonisani Munzhedzi, Department of Environmental Affairs, South Africa, said the science-policy interface needs to be broadened to include “society and practice.” Participants listening to panelists Contact: Hien Ngo (Organizer) | hien.ngo@ipbes.net More Information: http://www.ipbes.net/ Capacity Building for National Biodiversity Strategic Action Plan (NBSAP) Implementation: Lessons learned from pilot projects under the Japan Biodiversity Fund (JBF) Presented by the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) This side event, moderated by Nadine Saad and Nicolaas van der Werf, CBD, presented demonstration projects that several countries have undertaken to implement NBSAPs, including through spatial data and mainstreaming biodiversity across sectors. Fumiko Nakao, Ministry of Environment, Japan, emphasized that JBF’s priority is to ensure capacity building for NBSAP implementation. Macarena Bustamante, Consortium for the Sustainable Development of the Andean Ecoregion (CONDESAN), presented a pilot project to: review and align Ecuador’s NBSAP to the Aichi Biodiversity Targets; collect and organize data available to support NBSAP monitoring; and integrate socioeconomic and spatial information to analyze the impact of mangrove conservation for human wellbeing. Leel Randeni, Ministry of Mahaweli Development and Environment, Sri Lanka, noted the priorities of the capacity-building pilot project as: identifying priorities for the country’s NBSAP; integrating those priorities into the country’s development plans; and building capacity within governmental agencies for improved biodiversity planning. Ruth Spencer, Marine Ecosystem Protected Area Trust, Antigua and Barbuda, presented the ‘Biodiversity is our Business’ pilot project, which aims to value ecosystem services for biodiversity protection given the crucial role of biodiversity for tourism and for the protection of coastal areas. She said the outputs of the project would be to develop island-wide ecosystem services valuation through the use of digital maps to inform policymakers. Abisha Mapendembe, UN Environment Programme-World Conservation Monitoring Centre (UNEP-WCMC), presented a method of digitally mapping biodiversity priorities to assist in national biodiversity assessment and prioritization. He highlighted the role of maps in classifying ecosystem types, setting biodiversity targets according to ecosystem, and identifying priority areas for achieving targets. In the ensuing discussion, participants considered: who should be responsible for implementing NBSAPs; who assesses biodiversity priorities; the role of indigenous peoples and local communities in determining priorities; and the potential for collaboration with universities and local research institutes to promote capacity building. (L-R): Leel Randeni, Ministry of Mahaweli Development and Environment, Sri Lanka; Ruth Spencer, Marine Ecosystem Protected Area Trust, Antigua and Barbuda; and Macarena Bustamante, CONDESAN Macarena Bustamante, CONDESAN, emphasized how a capacity-building pilot project in Ecuador is contributing to aligning the country’s NBSAP with the Aichi Biodiversity Targets and the National Development Plan of Buen Vivir. A slide from Macarena Bustamante’s presentation A slide from Leel Randeni’s presentation Leel Randeni, Ministry of Mahaweli Development and Environment, Sri Lanka, highlighted the use of “smart” infrastructure designs, restoration of forest cover in strategic areas and the use of payments for ecosystem services to ensure biodiversity conservation. Ruth Spencer, Marine Ecosystem Protected Area Trust, Antigua and Barbuda, emphasized that ecosystems must not be given away to hotel projects in Antigua if these initiatives are not enhancing the country’s resilience to climate change. Fumiko Nakao, Ministry of Environment, Japan, said it is Japan's responsibility to ensure capacity building to achieve the Aichi Biodiversity Targets. Participants during the event Contact: Maroun Abi Chahine (Coordinator) | maround.abichahine@cbd.int More Information: https://www.cbd.int/jbf/ http://biodiversityadvisor.sanbi.org http://wcmc.io/mapping_biodiversity_priorities To Halt the Tide of Invasive Alien Species - Honolulu Challenge 2016 Presented by the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), BirdLife International, the Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF) and the IUCN Invasive Alien Species Specialist Group (ISSG) This side event, moderated by Piero Genovesi, ISSG, discussed the challenges posed by invasive alien species (IAS) and described the Honolulu Challenge on IAS, welcoming future commitments. Jane Smart, IUCN, described the work of IUCN, including the creation of a unit to forward the knowledge and action-oriented work on IAS pathways and sensitive sites through a user-friendly portal. Marina von Weissenberg, Department of the Natural Environment, Finland, drew attention to the International Agreement for the Control and Management of Ships’ Ballast Water and Sediments and its relation to IAS in marine ecosystems. Andrew Bignell, New Zealand, highlighted a US$3 billion project to eradicate possums, rats and stoats. He stressed the importance of new science, a participatory approach and investment; and highlighted the country’s Cancún Commitment on the mobilization of international efforts to address IAS. A representative of Barbara Pompili, Minister of State for Biodiversity, France, said that the country has passed a new law to address IAS, noting that a decree on IAS is in the pipeline. She called for caution in addressing IAS, noting that some methods could have negative unintended consequences. Carolina Hazin, BirdLife International, underscored that IAS have been the major driver of bird extinctions in the past century, noting the organization’s commitment to the Honolulu Challenge and highlighting BirdLife International’s target to have 35 high-biodiversity islands IAS-free by 2020. Heath Packard, Island Conservation, noted the organization’s focus on ridding biodiversity-rich islands of IAS, and pointed to a database of island invasive species eradications, which has been successful in addressing 1,100 IAS cases. Federico Méndez Sánchez, Grupo de Ecologia y Conservacíon de Islas (Group on Conservation and Ecology of Islands), reiterated his organization’s commitment to eradicate invasive mammal species, noting that 58 IAS have already been addressed and that in four years, 37 more IAS are projected to be eradicated in many islands in Mexico. Stuart Chape, Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme, highlighted actions to address IAS in the Pacific, including information sharing, awareness raising, the establishment of a peer learning network of Pacific invasive species practitioners, biosecurity training and the development of biological controls. Stefan Leiner, European Commission, stressed that IAS is a top priority in the EU and is addressed through the development of legislation applicable in all 28 states, with guidance from the CBD. Braulio Ferreira de Souza Dias, CBD Executive Secretary, stressed that although addressing IAS is not cheap, it is cost effective. He lauded the Honolulu Challenge as well as the leadership of New Zealand in addressing IAS, expressing hope that Aichi Biodiversity Target 9 (IAS) will be achieved in time. Speakers and participants during the event Piero Genovesi, ISSG, noted that IAS are a growing problem in all environments in the world and require urgent action, but lamented that although the solutions are known, urgent action is yet to be taken.   Braulio Ferreira de Souza Dias, CBD Executive Secretary, stressed that in order to be credible, the Conference of the Parties (COP) to the CBD must achieve the Aichi Biodiversity Targets by 2020 so as to adopt an even more ambitious strategic plan.   Andrew Bignell, New Zealand, highlighted the losses from agriculture and administration costs due to inaction on IAS which far surpass the US$3 billion required to eradicate these species. Jane Smart, IUCN, highlighted that IAS considerations are being integrated into the IUCN Red List. Contact: Piero Genovesi (Coordinator and Moderator) | piero.genovesi@isprambiente.it More Information: https://www.iucn.org/theme/species/our-work/invasive-species/honolulu-challenge-invasive-alien-species CRISPR Gene Drives: The Implications of Extinction Technologies and Species-Scale Engineering Presented by the Federation of German Scientists (FGS), ETC Group and EcoNexus This session, moderated by Helena Paul, EcoNexus, focused on the potential ethical, social and environmental implications of Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats (CRISPR) gene drives technology, and how it should be addressed. Jim Thomas, ETC Group, described gene drives as a genetically engineered trait which will “mostly or always” be passed on to future generations and become dominant in a population, take over a population and potentially take over a species. Noting that this “ecological engineering” technology has the potential to change or eradicate entire species and ecosystems, Thomas said that laboratory work should not move ahead until we have very clear standards on how to contain this technology. Christine von Weizsäcker, European Network for Ecological Reflection and Action (ECOROPA), highlighted: the importance of the precautionary principle; “a problem-and-solution-oriented discourse” as being more appropriate than one centered on technology; and a need to slow down the release of new products while speeding up research on their impacts. Neth Daño, ETC Group, highlighted ongoing applications of gene drives technology, such as for controlling vector-borne diseases and in agriculture, in which hundreds of millions of dollars are being invested. She cautioned against losing sight of the political economy and the “context in which these technological hypes are happening.” Ricarda Steinbrecher, FGS, noted that altering or causing extinction of entire species raises major ethical, social and environmental issues, and that “we do not even know which questions we should be asking.” She called for additional time to ensure appropriate biocontainment facilities are in place for any research, and to develop appropriate risk assessment guidance, safety requirements and governance. In the discussion, participants questioned: the duration of a potential moratorium on gene drives technology, given that “people are dying of malaria and hunger”; and whether holding a dialogue between civil society and scientists would be more appropriate than a moratorium. Panelists stressed, inter alia, the need to address the “very unequal power relations” of any such dialogue, and for guidelines to be in place before applications are discussed. (L-R): Christine von Weizsäcker, ECOROPA; Helena Paul, EcoNexus; Ricarda A. Steinbrecher, FGS; and Neth Daño, ETC Group Neth Daño, ETC Group, stressed “we should not be deluding ourselves that these technologies are free from the socio-political context.”   Jim Thomas, ETC Group, highlighted a recent call, supported by 168 civil society groups, for a moratorium on genetically-engineered gene drives. Ricarda Steinbrecher, FGS, emphasized the need to question “who is making the decisions, and what if the technology falls in the wrong hands.” Participants during the event Contact: Helena Paul (Moderator) | h.paul@gn.apc.org More Information: http://www.synbiowatch.org/gene-drives/gene-drives-moratorium/ Are We Improving and Supporting Sustainable Methods of Livestock and Agriculture to Achieve Aichi Target 7? Presented by the Global Forest Coalition (GFC)   This side event, moderated by Simone Lovera, Executive Director, GFC, discussed industrial agriculture as the major cause of biodiversity loss, particularly in Latin America, which compromises Aichi Biodiversity Target 7 on sustainably-managed forests and agriculture. Mary Louise Malig, GCF, presented findings from the GFC’s report titled ‘What’s at Steak? The Real Cost of Meat,’ noting, inter alia, the direct link between the corporate growth of the livestock sector and growing deforestation, and that distorted World Trade Organization subsidies enable large agri-businesses to “dump” their goods at prices lower than the cost of production. Ines Franceschelli, Namoseke Monsanto, Paraguay, stressed that globalized meat production is “controlling the territory” of the country by destroying the biodiversity of its soils and forests. She underscored the dangers of the industrialization of agriculture in terms of reducing human health, increasing poverty, preventing food sovereignty and failing to respect basic human rights. Leticia Tura, Federation of Organs for Social and Educational Assistance (FASE), highlighted that Brazil: is one of the world’s largest global exporters of soy, beef and poultry; adopts a production model that is based on monocultures; and is a “world champion in the use of agro-toxins” which damage the soil, contaminate water, reduce food sovereignty and cause health impacts. She stressed that meat production is one of the major causes of deforestation in Brazil, but lamented that public subsidies for large transnational agri-industries have only been increasing in recent years. Pablo Solón, Solón Foundation, spoke about a technique in Bolivia to create forest fires to produce new pasture for the country’s expanding cattle industry. He noted the need to promote agroforestry, soil conservation measures, strict regulation and behavioral change to curtail the impacts of the growing livestock industry on Bolivia’s biodiversity. Ashlesha Khadse, Amrita Bhoomi, discussed the growing agrarian crisis in India in which 1.5 million farmers have committed suicide in recent years due to indebtedness from expensive inputs, low prices and unfavorable trade policies. She noted that the growth of industrial “mega-dairies” and poultry farms by multinational companies imposes high penalties and disadvantages to smallholders, who represent 80% of India’s farmers. In the ensuing discussion, participants discussed: ways to ensure perverse incentives are discouraged if biodiversity financing is to be assured; the gap between discourse and practice in Bolivia’s actions towards biodiversity conservation; and the political aspects of global food production. (L-R): Ashlesha Khadse, Amrita Bhoomi; Simone Lovera, Executive Director, GFC; Pablo Solón, Solón Foundation; Mary Louise Malig, GFC; and Leticia Tura, FASE Ashlesha Khadse, Amrita Bhoomi, stressed that the government must ensure minimum support prices for India’s dairy farmers and that “foreign direct investment in agriculture must be prohibited.” Simone Lovera, Executive Director, GFC Pablo Solón, Solón Foundation, noted that the number of fires to produce new pastures for cattle grazing in Bolivia has markedly increased in 2016. A participant during the discussion   Contact: Mary Louise Malig (Coordinator) | marylouisemalig@globalforestcoalition.org More Information: http://globalforestcoalition.org/

On Monday morning, plenary heard statements from participants and high-level representatives, including the President of Mexico. In the afternoon, WG I reviewed progress towards implementation of the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020 and achievement of the Aichi Targets. WG II addressed issues related to marine and coastal biodiversity, including ecologically or biologically significant marine areas, biodiversity and acidification in cold-water areas, marine debris and underwater noise, and marine spatial planning; and started deliberations on invasive alien species. IISD Reporting Services, through its ENB Meeting Coverage, has provided daily web coverage, daily reports and a summary and analysis report from the UN Biodiversity Conference. The summary and analysis report is available in HTML and PDF. Photos by IISD/ENB | Francis Dejon For photo reprint permissions, please follow instructions at our Attribution Regulations for Meeting Photo Usage Page. Plenary L-R: David Cooper, Deputy Executive Secretary, CBD Secretariat; Tia Stevens, Australia, on behalf of COP 13 President; and CBD Executive Secretary Braulio Ferreira de Souza Dias Laetitia Navarro, Executive Secretary, Group on Earth Observations Biodiversity Observation Network (GEOBON) Inger Andersen, Director-General, IUCN Lily Rodriguez, International Union of Biological Sciences (IUBS), speaking on behalf of the Science Biodiversity Forum Eva Ursula Müller, Food and Agriculture Organization of the UN (FAO) L-R: Ibrahim Thiaw, Deputy Executive Director, UN Environment; Enrique Peña Nieto, President of Mexico; CBD Executive Secretary Braulio Ferreira de Souza Dias; and Rafael Pacchiano Alamán, COP 13 President Carlos Manuel Joaquín González, Governor of the State of Quintana Roo, Mexico Rafael Pacchiano Alamán, COP 13 President Ibrahim Thiaw, Deputy Executive Director, UN Environment CBD Executive Secretary Braulio Ferreira de Souza Dias Enrique Peña Nieto, President of Mexico Working Group I WG I Chair Mette Gervin Damsgaard (Denmark) WG I dais Khalid Lalami, Morocco Hesiquio Benitez Diaz, Mexico Theresa Mundita Lim, the Philippines Zaninka Peninnah, International Indigenous Forum on Biodiversity (IIFB) Alfred Oteng-Yeboah, Ghana Maja Stade Aarønæs, Norway Emmanuel Bayani Ngoyi, Gabon Working Group II WG II dais L-R: Robert Höft, CBD Secretariat and WG II Chair Malta Qwathekana (South Africa) Clarissa Nina, Brazil Ilham Atho Mohamed, Maldives Enny Sudar-Monowati, Indonesia Alexander Shestakov, the Russian Federation Branislav Hrabkovský, EU COP 13 Snapshots Coalition of the Willing on Pollinators launched by the Netherlands Delegates from Portugal Biodiversity Conference bags