❗️❗️❗️Global Biodiversity framework just approved @UNBiodiversity#COP15. Extraordinary achievement of the global policy and scientific community. Years in the making. Now the hard work starts: implementing those targets and goals.
Some last minute reservations from Democratic Republic of Congo hopefully will not come back to haunt this agreement.
There’s a lot of work for the scientific community ahead. How to support decision-makes in translating targets to national level, how to create enabling conditions for implementation and of course monitoring, monitoring!
As one of the delegates wisely said, it’s a proposal that makes everyone unhappy, the only way to achieve consensus in the UN system.
But as that delegate also mentioned, it’s much better than many had expected. In my opinion, as I explained in my thread yesterday, it’s very good. It’s a major step forward in relation to past targets.
And a major demonstration of the vitality and importance of the biodiversity global community of decision-makers, practitioners and a scientists. What a remarkable moment!
A link to my brief analysis of the final document, with some comments about the approved targets:
It retains much of the original ambition, and particularly the parts that I felt were more solid and important. Such as the "all areas" in Target 1 under integrated spatial planning.
Ambitious restoration (Target 2), protected area (Target 3) and endangered species (Target 4) targets. And ambitious Target 10 on agriculture that still recognises the need for sustainable intensification in some areas.
Last week @IPBES welcomed the #naturefuturesframework, an approach to develop a new generation of nature-centred scenarios exploring desirable futures. Why is this important and how did we arrive here? A thread👇
In 2016 @IPBES published an assessment on scenarios and models. It found that existing scenarios failed to fully incorporate the multiple benefits of biodiversity to people at multiple scales. It encouraged the scientific community to develop a new generation of scenarios.
The assessment called for scenarios that addressed multiple temporal and spatial scales, that addressed multiple components of the @IPBES conceptual framework, and that used a participatory approach to develop intervention and exploratory scenarios.
So after a bit of a delay, the @EU_Commission finally published the proposal of #RestoreNature. This is a major step forward in the implementation of the @EUEnvironment Biodiversity Strategy for 2030. However there is still some potential for improvement. A thread.
First a brief examination of the many positive aspects of the proposal. It’s ambitious but arguably achievable in most of its goals. It covers agricultural, forest, freshwater, marine and habitats with specific targets, indicators and approaches for each.
It is progressive over time, with targets for 2030, 2040 and 2050. And aims for a positive future for biodiversity as in the #naturefuturesframework@ipbes or the ideas of bending the curve of biodiversity loss, by Georgina Mace and others.
We provide a synthetic review of major policy-relevant developments on biodiversity science around multiple values, remote responsibility, restoration, positive futures, multidimensional change, and monitoring/ modelling biodiversity change.
We hope that this can have an impact on the negotiations of COP 15 of the @UNBiodiversity but the relevance of our framework goes beyond that to laying down what needs to be done in each country.
So I get this question a lot - how to write a paper review - and decided to write a short thread with a few recommendations.
1. Be kind. Think about what style of comments you’d like to receive yourself. Feedback can be hard to receive, and there’s no need to be harsh.
2. Be rigorous but respect that the authors may have a different way of doing things. A reviewer is not an author. Suggestions that really improve the paper should be given, but don’t try to push your favorite approach just because. Don’t micromanage the paper.