Agenda of CBD-COP10 Pre-conference for strengthening scientific basis for conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity Hiroyuki Matsuda (Yokohama National University) Asia Pacific Biodiversity Observation Network (AP-BON) Workshop, United Nations University, Dec. 11, 2009 J-BON 1st Meeting May 8, 2009 U. of Tokyo 1 Today’s my talk - overview • Role of scientists – “strengthening scientific basis” does not mean “strengthening the role of scientists” • Check & seek SMART policy for CBD • Indicators for Post 2010 Target of CBD 2 Questions about role of scientists • Do you support Gov’t or NGOs? • Do you like to commit to global issues or make a solution of local problems? • Do you really consider your research field as the biggest environmental issue? 3 Two types of scientists • Emphasize their own research field as the biggest issue in the world – Input importance of their research plan into consensus of international meetings • Give moderate comments even against fund-raising of their own research field – Don’t make agreement to get our own fund at IPBES or CBD. – We are just advisors for CBD issues, and other environmental issues. 4 Four standpoints of scientists • • • • Say no societal comments to the public Say what supports government policies Say what supports NGOs Say what are believed by him/herself, even disagree with Gov’t or NGOs 5 Galileo’s Inquisition Biodiversity science-policy interface by A. Larigauderie Research Assessment (DIVERSITAS, ESSP) (MA, IPBES, IPCC) Observations Policy (CBD, UNFCCC) (GEO BON) 6 Flow diagram for ecological risk management Consensus building public scientists 0. Concerns, issues Scientific procedure 1. Screening 2.Delimit management scope, invite stakeholder 3.Organize local council and scientific committee Reset goals when not agreed 8. Check necessity and purpose of management 4.Characterize “undesired events” 5. Enumerate measures of effects 6. Analyze stress factors by modelling 7. Risk assessment for no-action case Reset goals when infeasible 9. Set preliminary numerical goal 10. Choose monitoring measures 11. Select method of control 13. Decide measures & goals Revision required 12. Check feasibility of goals 14. Initiate management 15. Continue management and monitoring Rossberg et al. 2007 Lands Ecol Eng 1:221- 16. Review numerical goals and purposes Finish program 7 Before consensus of aims 4. Characterize “undesired events” 5. Enumerate measures of effects 6. Analyze stress factors by modeling 7. Risk assessment for no-action case 8 Between consensus of aims and building action plan 9. Set a preliminary numerical goal 10. Choose monitoring measures 11. Select method of control 12. Check feasibility of goals 9 After action plan is executed… 16. Review numerical goals and purposes 10 This is • Tailor-made conservation planning – Process of consensus building is important – Global unique numerical standard is difficult – Unlike human health standard • Similar ideas – Adaptive management, – Systematic conservation planning – Strategic environment assessment (SEA) – Framework convention 11 Today’s my talk - overview • Role of scientists • Check & seek SMART policy for CBD – Specific, Measurable, Ambitious, Realistic and Scientific? Time-bound • Indicators for Post 2010 Target of CBD 12 New strategic plan: Elements for the 2020 Mission by (J. Shimura) • Option: by 2020 the necessary urgent and concerted actions to address the threats facing biodiversity so as to stop biodiversity loss, and started to restore ecosystems, thus ensuring the continued provision of ecosystem services and avoiding dangerous or irreversible environmental change. 13 New strategic plan: Elements for the 2020 Mission by (J. Shimura) • Another option: by 2020 to halt biodiversity loss, and restore it to ecologically sound levels, and enhance the capacity of ecosystems to provide services, … •Now we recognize the 2010 target (significant reduction in the speed of biodiversity loss) may not be achieved. “Halt by 2020” seems unrealistic. •However, it depends on definition and indicator of biodiversity. •Scientists can advise indicators and feasibility of 14 these options. Another problem “Smart” depends on nations • CBD has agreed… – Biodiversity conservation – Sustainable use of its component – Access for Benefit Sharing • Ecosystem approach Living in Harmony with Nature Evaluation of ecosystem services 15 Significant and largely irreversible changes to species diversity – Humans have increased the species extinction rate by as much as 1,000 times over background rates typical over the planet’s history (medium certainty) – 10–30% of mammal, bird, and amphibian species are currently threatened with extinction (medium to high certainty) 16 MA 2005 Past & Future Extinction in Japanese vascular plants (Fujita, Yahara, Matsuda et al. in prep) Past Number of indigenous flora in Japan 10 8 6 4 7000 ほぼ絶滅 CR(PE*) EX or野生絶滅 EW 絶滅・ 2 0 19 20 19 30 19 40 19 50 19 60 19 70 19 80 19 90 20 00 不明 No of extinction 種数 14 12 Future 6800 6600 6400 6200 Endemic species loss Non-endemic species loss 6000 Year Extinction rates (per decade) 553 Extinct 7.9% Year 8.6 species 55.3 species 6.3-times larger *PE = Probably extinct (no report of extant grids) 17 How many reserves should be required for conservation? -Complementarity analysis (Margules,C.R & Pressey,R.L., 2000)- 100 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 251 (5.6%) 50 0 0 20 50 100 150 200 (0.4%)Number of conserved grids 250 Ratio of Conservation Area ％ (National park etc..) Number of extinctions in next 100 years Maximizing the number of species conserved with the minimum land 300 Japan includes 4457grids ・ half of the taxa : 20 grids（0.4% in Japan） were required ・ All threatened taxa: 251 grids （5.4% in Japan） were required 18 Today’s my talk - overview • Role of scientists • Check & seek SMART policy for CBD • Indicators for Post 2010 Target of CBD – Direct evaluation of biodiversity and ecosystem services – Efforts of conservation and sustainable use – Socio-economic incentives to pay for ecosystem services 19 Indicators must be • Measurable throughout the world – NaGISA, Ecol Footpr? • Verified whether the target is satisfied or not in the future – Extinct sp., habitat loss • To encourage SMART action plans. – Good practice guideline for actions plans It is difficult to satisfy all of these. 20 Direct indicators to measure biodiversity and ES • Ecological Footprint Living Planet Index Conserve both threatened & common species? 21 Indicators by efforts of conservation and sustainable use • Area of MPAs – Definition of MPA is diverse among nations – Cultural diversity is important too. • Number of action plans • Area of potential habitat by HEP – Rarely proved if this actually conserve habitat – Rarely used it for mitigation of threatened species 22 Make linkage between various organizations for biodiversity In the case of Japan • Japan Biodiversity Outlook by MoEJ, J-BON • Millennium Ecosystem Assessment – Japan Subglobal Assessment by UN Univ. • SATOYAMA Initiative by MoEJ, UN Univ. • UNESCO’s Man & Biosphere Programme by MEXT, Yokohama Nat’l Univ. I feel overlapping of these programs and lack of communication between them. 23 Indicators using socio-economic incentives to pay for ecosystem services • For Cap & Trade – Catch limit of fisheries (ITQ system) – Bio-banking, biodiversity offsets • Eco-labels (FSC, MSC) – Good, but probably may not used for numerical goals 24 Global Millennium Ecosystem Assessment Indirect DFs Human Well-being (MA) scheme • • • • • •Security •Basic material… •Health •Good relationship… •Freedom of choice.. Demographic Economic Sociopolitical Cultural & Religious Science & Technology Japan NSBAP* Ecosystem S. •Biodiversity •Supporting S. •Provisioning S. •Regulating S. •Cultural S. 1. 2. 3. • Over-use Under-use Direct DFs Disturbance A) Habitat change B) Climate change Climate Change C) Invasive species D) Over-exploitation E) Pollution *NSBAP=Nat’l Strategy for Biodiversity and Action Plan 25 Main direct drivers of change in biodiversity and ecosystems （Global Biodiversity Outlook 2: GBO２） 26 Forecast of invasive species expansion 27 Threatened plant database in Japan Database contents • Candidate taxa: 1,972 taxa • Field investigations in 1994-1995 and 2003-2004 • Unit of investigation: 10×10km2 map grids • Area: 3,781 map grids covered 84.8 % in Japan • Participant: over 530 amateurs and botanists • Records: 34,662 raw data Recorded species per grid No data 0 1-4 5-8 9 - 21 22 - 28 29 - 36 37 - 46 47 - 62 63 - 84 85 - 108 28 Catch and marine trophic index in Japan 29 Changes in the Marine Trophic Index 30GBO2 Pauly D., Watson R. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B;2005;360:415-423 Seek simplicity, but distrust it --Alfred N Whitehead -- Begon, Harper, Townsend “Ecology” Seek simple indicators, but distrust them. Experts (scientists) judgment is very important, rather than indicators. However, we need indicators! 31 多様性損失指数 Expected loss of biodiversity • ELB = B D(1/T) ＝生物多様性貢献度 ×絶滅リスク上昇 Contribution of biodiversity ×increment of extinction risk Overfishing of tunas T: ca 1 million to ca 500yrs D(1/T) = 0.002 Small habitat loss of VU sp. T: 100 yrs to 99yrs D(1/T) = 0.001 32 Biodiversity Asian Strategies by Eco-Risk COE 33 Thank you for attention! Plant Red Data Book I like to try real time case studies with field ecologists! Pelagic fish management EXPO2005 at Aichi, Revision of RDB Bear management in Hokkaido, Shikoku Mainichi Shimbun Shiretoko World Heritage Deer management Hokkaido, Kanagawa Pew Marine Cons. Fellow 2007 Cons. Committee of WWF Japan External adviser of Nissui Co. Ltd. N. Ishii Mongoose eradication program at Amami Island H.M. at Shiretoko 34 34 34