3rd UK Biodiversity Indicators
Forum
6 July 2004, Joint Nature Conservation
Committee,
Monkstone House, Peterborough.
The following notes provide a summary of the discussions held;
they are not intended as a detailed record of individual
presentations or interventions.
Background papers
Background
At the World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg
in 2002 it was agreed to:
'achieve by 2010 a significant reduction of the
current rate of biodiversity loss at the global, regional and
national level as a contribution to poverty alleviation and to the
benefit of all life on earth'
At the 7th Conference of the Parties of the
Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) a framework of indicators
(Decision VII.30) was adopted to measure the achievement of the
target. The European Commission Biodiversity Expert Group and
a number of meetings have worked to develop how these indicators
might be implemented at European and Pan-European scales.
This has recently culminated in the discussions at the Malahide
Biodiversity and the EU - Sustaining Life, Sustaining
Livelihoods Conference, which have been welcomed by the June
Environment Council.
Summary of presentations and discussion
The agreement at the CBD CoP7 has led to significant progress,
and the processes for development of indicators at global, EU and
Pan-European levels have converged. There is now momentum for
rapid progress to production of global and European indicators
within a year to 18 months, leading to publication of a first
assessment in 2006.
The meeting reviewed these developments and looked forward to
the way the EU indicators would be developed (co-ordination through
the European Environment Agency and Biodiversity Expert Group), and
how these developments could/should fit with global developments
under CBD (e.g. via a liaison group and ad-hoc expert technical
group in autumn 2004, leading into the 10
th meeting of
the Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technology and Technological
Advice). The UK's plan to deliver international biodiversity
commitments is documented at
http://www.sustainable-development.gov.uk/eac-wssd/pdf/biodiversity.pdf
(PDF, 200 kb).
In parallel, work is being undertaken by the CBD Secretariat
and UNEP-WCMC to prepare an outline for the second Global
Biodiversity Outlook report, which will be used as the mechanism to
present the global indicators when they have been developed.
The expectation is that all the indicators will be based on
existing data. The intention is not to produce something
perfect, but which can communicate at a high political level the
progress towards the 2010 target. There is flexibility in the
CBD framework for Parties to use similar but not identical
information within their indicators.
Within Europe there is still debate to be had about a
top-level biodiversity indicator (which would hopefully form part
of the set of structural indicators reviewed by Heads of
State in spring Council each year). In terms of development
of the individual indicators, a number of expert groups are
expected to be convened. The UK (through Defra and JNCC) have
expressed willingness to be involved in this work – we now need to
work out the best ways to engage, including who to nominate to
which group. Details should become clearer after the first
EEA co-ordination group meeting on 7 July.
With respect to reporting, it has become more obvious over the
past couple of years that the reporting burden is increasing, and
that there is little outcome information / biological data used in
reports (as opposed to process and activity summaries). A
vision for moving to state of biodiversity reporting, updated with
minimal process information was presented, and generated
considerable discussion. There was recognition that evolution
rather than revolution is required, and that care must be taken in
influencing the international agenda to avoid a perception of
'megaphone diplomacy'. Defra's review of UK biodiversity
statistics may offer the opportunity to make reports more
information based. A state of the seas report being prepared
by Defra may provide lessons on doing such overview biodiversity
reporting.
Within the marine environment, CEFAS have made good progress
since BIF2 in developing indicators relating to fish
abundance. The presentation generated considerable
interest, particularly the analysis of over what period trends
could be detected. It may be possible to develop EU-wide
indices in a similar way given the data are collected by all ICES
countries.
Within England, a mapping of the indicators chosen for the
England Biodiversity Strategy and those coming out of the CBD and
EU processes showed a reasonably good correlation. This has
yet to be done for other countries. There are some obvious
gaps such as genetic biodiversity and invasive non-natives.
Three sets of indicators were described for Scotland: for
sustainable development, for the Scottish biodiversity strategy,
and for measuring SNH's performance. A useful approach to
code data availability was described. Unfortunately, speakers
for Wales and Northern Ireland were not available.
In general discussion it was recognised that there is
potential not just for the UK to provide what it is already doing
to Europe and beyond in terms of indicators and underlying data,
but that there may be new reporting requirements arising out of the
habitats and water framework Directives.
What next?
International and UK indicators
- There was support for the CBD and EU frameworks for
biodiversity indicators and focus on the 2010 targets and
beyond. These were seen as not only useful for the
international stage but also for the UK itself in order to develop
a UK set of (headline) indicators which could be used both
internationally and also to communicate to the public and
stakeholders the UK picture.
- The meeting recognised the considerable work done in the UK on
indicators and monitoring and thought it vital for the UK to
continue to actively contribute to the international
work and agreements on biodiversity indicators based on our own
experience. Offers of help should be sent to Andrew Stott (
) Following the EU
coordination group meeting on Wednesday 7 July, progress made and
any new proposals will be communicated to Forum members.
- Mapping the various biodiversity indicators produced for
England, Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland and the UK as a whole
against the CBD and EU frameworks and proposed indicators would be
a useful next step.
- Defra will follow up the need for and possible development of,
a UK set of (headline) biodiversity indicators with the UK Standing
Committee.
- The idea of a State of Biodiversity Report for the UK was
mooted and discussed. This might be used to refine UK ideas
for country reporting and could be used to influence reporting to
international bodies. However, in view of the other
international commitments (particularly falling to JNCC over the
next year) it was agreed that work on any such report should not be
started at present.
Outputs
- It was agreed that the Forum should not just rely on annual
meetings to update members and other interested stakeholders of
progress. The JNCC website will be used (at least initially)
to provide additional reports between meetings.
- A report of the meeting will be provided to the UK Biodiversity Reporting and Information Group
(BRIG).
- It was agreed that further meetings would be held. The
4th meeting will be arranged in Summer 2005.