Convention on Biological Diversity

About: Convention on Biological Diversity is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 2232 publications have been published within this topic receiving 65599 citations. The topic is also known as: CBD & United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity.

Four Steps for the Earth: mainstreaming the post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework

Abstract: The upcoming meeting of the parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity, and the new Global Biodiversity Framework, represent an opportunity to transform humanity's relationship with nature. Restoring nature while meeting human needs requires a bold vision, but this will only succeed if biodiversity conservation can be mainstreamed in society. Here, we present an overarching framework that could support this mainstreaming: the Mitigation and Conservation Hierarchy. This novel framing places the well-established four-step Mitigation Hierarchy for mitigating and compensating the impacts of developments on biodiversity (1: Avoid, 2: Minimise, 3: Restore, 4: Offset, towards a target such as No Net Loss of biodiversity) within a broader framing that encompasses proactive conservation actions. The Mitigation and Conservation Hierarchy supports both the choice of actions to conserve and restore nature, and evaluation of the effectiveness of those actions, in a consistent manner across sectors and scales. As such it has the potential to guide actions towards a sustainable future for people and nature.

The role of biotechnology in the conservation of biodiversity

Abstract: Biological diversity provides the variety of life on the Earth and can be defined as the variability among and between the living organisms and species of surrounding ecosystems and ecological complexes of their life support. It has been estimated that one third of the global plant species are threatened in different level according to the International Union of Conservation of Nature (IUCN).The major threat to rapid loss and extinction of genetic diversity due to habitat destruction, pollution, climate change, invasion of exotic species, human population pressure, ever increasing agricultural pressure and practices, life style change etc. are well-known. Biodiversity conservation is a global concern. All member states of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) took measure to preserve both native and agricultural biodiversity. The global concern of biodiversity conservation initiated either by in situ or ex situ methods. In situ methods protect both plants and their natural habitat. On the other hand, ex situ methods involves preservation and maintenance of plant species or plant parts (such as seeds, cuttings, rhizomes, tubers etc.) outside their natural habitat for the purpose of developing seed banks or more preciously gene banks following classical / advanced methods of plant propagation. Classical methods of plant propagations have certain limitations in terms of rapid production of plants or plant propagules and their long term conservation. So, the biotechnological methods such as plant tissue culture, plant cell culture, anther culture, embryo culture etc. are quite applicable and useful techniques for ex situ conservation. On the other hand, the production of superior quality seeds has enhanced by the application of plant biotechnology. So, plant biotechnology offers new means of improving biodiversity conservation rather than threatening biodiversity in various ways.

Three challenges to contemporaneous taxonomy from a licheno-mycological perspective

Abstract: This paper discusses three issues that challenge contemporaneous taxonomy, with examples from the fields of mycology and lichenology, formulated as three questions: (1) What is the importance of taxonomy in contemporaneous and future science and society? (2) An increasing methodological gap in alpha taxonomy: challenge or opportunity? (3) The Nagoya Protocol: improvement or impediment to the science of taxonomy? The importance of taxonomy in society is illustrated using the example of popular field guides and digital media, a billion-dollar business, arguing that the desire to name species is an intrinsic feature of the cognitive component of nature connectedness of humans. While continuous societal support of a critical mass of taxonomists is necessary to catalogue all species on Earth, it is shown that this is a finite task, and a proposal is made how a remaining 10 million species can be catalogued within 40 years by 1,000 well-trained and dedicated taxonomists, with an investment of $4 billion, corresponding to 0.0001% of the annual global GDP or 0.005% of annual military expenditures. Notorious undercitation of actually used taxonomic resources and lack of coverage of impact metrics for monographs and other taxonomic work that cannot be published in indexed journals is discussed and suggestions are made how this problem can be remedied. An increasing methodological gap in approaches to taxonomy, between classic morphological and advanced genomic studies, affects in particular taxonomists in biodiversity-rich countries and amateurs, also regarding proper training to apply advanced methods and concepts. To counterbalance this problem, international collaborations bringing different expertise to the table and undertaking mutual capacitation are one successful remedy. Classic taxonomy still works for many groups and is a first approach to catalogue species and establish taxon hypotheses, but ultimately each taxonomic group needs to be studied with the array of methods proper to the group, including descriptive work. Finally, the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and the Nagoya Protocol has put additional burden on basic biodiversity science. Using lichenology in Latin America and Brazil as an example, it is shown that the spirit of non-monetary benefit-sharing proper to taxonomy and systematics, namely capacitation, joint publications, and shared reference collections, has been increasingly implemented long before the CBD and the Nagoya Protocol, and does not need additional “policing”. Indeed, the Nagoya Protocol puts the heaviest burden on taxonomy and researchers cataloguing biodiversity, whereas for the intended target group, namely those seeking revenue gain from nature, the protocol may not actually work effectively. The notion of currently freely accessible digital sequence information (DSI) to become subject to the protocol, even after previous publication, is misguided and conflicts with the guidelines for ethical scientific conduct. Through its implementation of the Nagoya Protocol, Colombia has set a welcome precedence how to exempt taxonomic and systematic research from “access to genetic resources”, and hopefully other biodiversity-rich countries will follow this example.

Important Bird and Biodiversity Areas (IBAs): their impact on conservation policy, advocacy and action

Abstract: BirdLife International´s Important Bird and Biodiversity Areas (IBA) Programme has identified, documented and mapped over 13,000 sites of international importance for birds. IBAs have been influential with governments, multilateral agreements, businesses and others in: (1) informing governments’ efforts to expand protected area networks (in particular to meet their commitments through the Convention on Biological Diversity); (2) supporting the identification of Ecologically or Biologically Significant Areas (EBSAs) in the marine realm, (3) identifying Wetlands of International Importance under the Ramsar Convention; (4) identifying sites of importance for species under the Convention on Migratory Species and its sister agreements; (5) identifying Special Protected Areas under the EU Birds Directive; (6) applying the environmental safeguards of international finance institutions such as the International Finance Corporation; (7) supporting the private sector to manage environmental risk in its operations; and (8) helping donor organisations like the Critical Ecosystems Partnership Fund (CEPF) to prioritise investment in site-based conservation. The identification of IBAs (and IBAs in Danger: the most threatened of these) has also triggered conservation and management actions at site level, most notably by civil society organisations and local conservation groups. IBA data have therefore been widely used by stakeholders at different levels to help conserve a network of sites essential to maintaining the populations and habitats of birds as well as other biodiversity. The experience of IBA identification and conservation is shaping the design and implementation of the recently launched Key Biodiversity Areas (KBA) Partnership and programme, as IBAs form a core part of the KBA network.