Sub-regional Analysis of the Status of Aichi Biodiversity Targets 11 & 12 Capacity-building workshop for East Asia and Southeast

Asia on achieving Aichi Biodiversity Target 11 and 12

Yanji City, Jilin Province, China

Dr. Sarat Babu Gidda

Convention on Biological Diversity 15 September 2015

Explanation of the Elements for Aichi Targets 11

By 2020,

at least 17 % of terrestrial and inland water areas, and 10 % of coastal and marine areas,

… especially areas of particular importance for biodiversity and ecosystem services,

… are conserved through … protected areas that are…

… effectively and equitably managed,

… ecologically representative,

… well connected systems, integrated into the wider landscapes and seascapes,

… and other effective area-based conservation measures

Target 11- quantitative aspects

17% terrestrial and 10 % of coastal and marine areas ?

Target 11

What are areas of particular importance for biodiversity?

Key Biodiversity Areas (KBAs)

Important Bird Areas

Important Plant Areas

Alliance for Zero Extinction sites

Areas rich in wild relatives of crops

Vulnerability and Irreplaceability

Target 11 Ecosystem services of Protected Areas

Water security

Food and health security

subsistence, livelihoods

CC adaptation & mitigation

Ecologically Representative

.

Ecological Gap Assessment

Target 11 What is effectively managed ?

Effective management

By 2020, areas are conserved through effective management…

• Conservation needs equity: a fair sharing of the costs and benefits of preserving biodiversity and managing natural resources in a sustainable way

• Conservation needs respect to human rights: “do not harm”…and have a positive impact on livelihoods wherever possible

• So…what can we do to avoid further loss of habitats, species and natural resources?

• How can we ensure the very base of life, of livelihoods, and development ?

Equitable Management: IUCN matrix of protected areas categories and governance types

Governance

type

Category

(mngmt.

objective)

A. Governance by

Government

B. Shared Governance C. Private

Governance

D. Indigenous Peoples &

Community Governance

Federal

or

national

ministry

or

agency

Local/

municipa

l ministry

or agency

in change

Governm

ent-

delegated

managem

ent (e.g.

to an

NGO)

Trans-

boundary

managem

ent

Collabora

tive

managem

ent

(various

forms of

pluralist

influence)

Joint

management

(pluralist

management

board)

Declared

and run

by

individu

al land-

owner

…by

non-

profit

organisat

ions (e.g.

NGOs,

univ.

etc.)

…by for

profit

organisatio

ns (e.g.

corporate

land-owners

)

Indigenous bio-

cultural areas &

Territories-

declared and run

by Indigenous

Peoples

Community

Conserved Areas

- declared and

run by

traditional

peoples and local

communities

I - Strict Nature

Reserve/

Wilderness Area

II – National

Park (ecosystem

protection;

protection of

cultural values)

III – Natural

Monument

IV – Habitat/

Species

Management

V – Protected

Landscape/

Seascape

VI – Managed

Resource

i.e. Indigenous and Community Conserved Areas, ICCA

WCPA

Equitable Management

ICCA

Community Management

Government Private Community Shared

governance

By 2020, areas are conserved through equitably managed…

Integration and Connectivity

By 2020, areas are conserved through well connected systems, integrated into the wider landscapes and seascapes

Target 11 What are other effective area-based conservation measures?

ICCAs including LMMAs

Private PAs

Building on tradition, tenure and social capital

Ngella, Solomon Islands

Siviri, Vanuatu Photos: Hugh Govan

Aichi Biodiversity Target 12

By 2020,

…the extinction of known threatened species has been prevented and…

…their conservation status, particularly of those most in decline, has been improved and sustained.

Status of Target 11s and 12

17 per cent of terrestrial and inland water are protected

10 per cent of coastal and

marine areas are protected

Areas of particular importance for biodiversity and ecosystem services are

protected

Protected areas are

ecologically representative

Protected areas are effectively and equitably

managed

Protected areas are well connected and

integrated into the wider landscape and seascape

Extinction of known threatened species has been

prevented

The conservation status of those species most in decline

has been improved and sustained

15.37%

8.4%

10.9%

13.07%

2.20%

7.83%

0.00% 2.00% 4.00% 6.00% 8.00% 10.00% 12.00% 14.00% 16.00%

Percentage of global areas protected in 2004 (red)

and 2014 (blue)

Land

Areas within national jurisdiction (0-200 nautical miles)

Territorial Seas (0-12 nautical miles)

65

46

83

79

49

66

0 20 40 60 80 100

0-7.99%

8-16.99%

>17%

Number of CBD Parties at different levels of protection (percentage) for terrestrial areas

in 2004 (red) and 2014 (blue)

15.4%

28.1%

24.4%

16.0%

15.2%

14.8%

14.5%

13.9%

12.3%

11.7%

13.1%

27.3%

18.3%

14.9%

15.0%

11.1%

11.1%

13.7%

11.8%

10.9%

0.0% 5.0% 10.0% 15.0% 20.0% 25.0% 30.0%

World

Central America

South America

Europe

Middle East

Africa

Oceania

Caribbean

Asia

North America

Percentage of terrestrial area protected in 2004 (red) and 2014 (blue)

59

46

49

72

44

38

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

0-1.99%

2-9.99%

>10%

Number of CBD Parties at different levels of protection (percentage) for territorial seas up to 12

nauticle miles in 2004 (red) and 2014 (blue)

10.9%

18.7%

18.3%

17.9%

14.3%

9.0%

7.9%

4.3%

4.2%

3.1%

7.8%

13.8%

11.5%

14.1%

9.1%

7.9%

4.9%

2.5%

3.3%

2.7%

0.0% 2.0% 4.0% 6.0% 8.0% 10.0% 12.0% 14.0% 16.0% 18.0% 20.0%

World

Europe

Oceania

South America

Central America

North America

Africa

Asia

Middle East

Caribbean

Percentage of territorial seas protected in 2004 (red) and 2014 (blue)

88

111

150

124

221

129

0 50 100 150 200 250

<2%

2-4.99%

5-9.99%

10-16.99%

17-39.99%

>40%

Number of terrestrial ecoregions at different levels of protection (2014)

80

40

34

78

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

<2%

2-4.99%

5-9.99%

>10%

Number of marine ecoregions at different levels of protection (2014)

48

88

85

26

28

31

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

0-16.99%

17-49.99%

>50%

The number of countries with different levels of protected area coverage for Alliance for Zero Extinction Sites (red) and Important Bird and

Biodiversity Areas (blue)

Percentage of Protected Areas in East Asia and Southeast Asia

By 2020, (globally)

at least 17 % of terrestrial and inland water areas, and 10 % of coastal and marine areas, are conserved through protected areas

National targets should be accumulative to reach global target

4.6

3.6

4.8

16.1

16.9

14.0

0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0

Total East Asia + Southeast Asia

East Asia

Southeast Asia

% Terrestrial PA

% Marine PA

Percentage of terrestrial protected areas in 2004 and 2014 in East Asia and Southeast

Asia

17.0

2.5

19.4

17.2

7.6

44.1

26.0

14.6

16.7

18.4

7.2

11.0

5.8

18.8

8.7

6.5

16.9

2.5

18.9

13.6

5.4

44.1

25.4

14.4

16.6

18.3

6.9

10.9

5.8

17.3

3.4

6.4

0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0 45.0

China

DPR of Korea

Japan

Mongolia

Republic of Korea

Brunei Darussalam

Cambodia

Indonesia

Lao PDR

Malaysia

Myanmar

Philippines

Singapore

Thailand

Timor-Leste

Viet Nam % PA 2004 % PA 2014

Percentage of marine protected areas in 2004 and 2014 in East Asia and Southeast

Asia

2.3

0.1

5.1

4.3

1.5

0.5

5.8

2.3

0.2

2.5

1.4

5.2

3.8

1.8

2.0

0.1

5.0

3.8

1.5

0.5

2.7

2.0

0.2

2.5

1.4

5.0

1.7

0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0

China

DPR Korea

Japan

Republic of Korea

Brunei Darussalam

Cambodia

Indonesia

Malaysia

Myanmar

Philippines

Singapore

Thailand

Timor-Leste

Viet Nam % PA 2004

% PA 2014

Protection Status of Important Bird and Biodiversity Areas (IBAs) in East Asia and

Southeast Asia By 2020,

areas of particular importance for biodiversity and ecosystem services, are conserved

552

282 270

546

266

280

237

169 68

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

Total East Asia + Southeast Asia East Asia Southeast Asia

Number of IBAs with complete protection

Number of IBAs with partial protection

Number of IBAs with no protection

Protection Status of Important Bird and Biodiversity Areas (IBAs) in East Asia and

Southeast Asia

125

26

64

35 32 15

92

8 14

36 53

1 11

8

31

148

7

83

21 7

4

23

70

15

41 11

41

2

44

5

24

137

19

12 1

1

2

36

3

4

11

5

3

3

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450 Number of IBAs with complete protection

Number of IBAs with partial protection

Number of IBAs with no protection

Protection Status of Important Bird and Biodiversity Areas in danger (IBAs in danger)

in East Asia and Southeast Asia

19

1

18

3 3

4 4

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Total East Asia + Southeast Asia

East Asia Southeast Asia

Number of IBAs in danger with complete protection

Number of IBAs in danger with partial protection

Number of IBAs in danger with no protection

Protection Status of Important Bird and Biodiversity Areas in danger (IBAs in danger)

in East Asia and Southeast Asia

1 1

4

2 2 2

3

2

3

1 2

1

3

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

DPR Korea Japan Cambodia Indonesia Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Thailand Viet Nam

Number of IBAs in danger with complete protection

Number of IBAs in danger with partial protection

Number of IBAs in danger with no protection

Protection Status of Alliance for Zero Extinction Sites (AZEs) in East Asia and

Southeast Asia

26

7

19

23

9

14

25

13

12

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Total East Asia + Southeast Asia East Asia Southeast Asia

Number of AZEs with complete protection

Number of AZEs with partial protection

Number of AZEs with no protection

Protection Status of Alliance for Zero Extinction Sites (AZEs) in East Asia and

Southeast Asia

6

1 1

14

1 3

1

6

3 3

7

2

2 3

11

2 2

10

2 0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

China DPR Korea Japan Indonesia Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Viet Nam

Number of AZEs with complete protection

Number of AZEs with partial protection

Number of AZEs with no protection

Ecological Representativeness in East Asia and Southeast Asia

Number of terrestrial ecological regions (ER) and level of protection

58

21

37

47

24

23

125

50

75

0

50

100

150

200

250

Total East Asia + Southeast Asia

East Asia Southeast Asia

Number of terrestrial ER with >10% protection

Number of terrestrial ER with 5% to 10% protection

Number of terrestrial ER with < 5% protection

14

4 2 1 1

5 2 2

11

5 3

8

18

1

4 1

11

1 1

3

2

1

1 1

2

30

8

11

1 4

7

22

6

10

6

5 11 4

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Number of terrestrial ER with >10% protection

Number of terrestrial ER with 5% to 10% protection

Number of terrestrial ER with < 5% protection

Ecological Representativeness in East Asia and Southeast Asia

Number of terrestrial ecological regions (ER) and level of protection

48

15

33

4

4

9

2

7

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Total East Asia + Southeast Asia

East Asia Southeast Asia

Number of marine ER with >10% protection

Number of marine ER with 5% to 10% protection

Number of marine ER with < 5% protection

Ecological Representativeness in East Asia and Southeast Asia

Number of marine ecological regions (ER) and level of protection

3

2

6

3

1

10

6

3

4

1

3

5

1

2

1

2

5

1

1 0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

Number of marine ER with >10% protection

Number of marine ER with 5% to 10% protection

Number of marine ER with < 5% protection

Ecological Representativeness in East Asia and Southeast Asia

Number of marine ecological regions (ER) and level of protection

Group Work Element of Aichi Target 11 and 12 Status Gaps Opportunities

Quantitative aspects

i.e. % of total protected areas for terrestrial and marine

i.e. % to reach national target i.e. % gap between current status + implementation and national target

Improving ecological representation

i.e. % of ecoregions protected to national target

i.e. % of ecoregions needing protection to reach national target i.e. tools and partnerships needed to develop ecological gaps assessment

i.e. 20% of 5 endemic ecoregions will be protected i.e. partnership with X for national training on ecological mapping

….

Summarize quantitative

information collected from the

questionnaire in one or two points.

What is needed to complete conservation

gap? Points made can be: - tangible/ quantitative - in-tangible/ qualitative

What specific elements are feasible?

Points made can be: - tangible/ quantitative - in-tangible/ qualitative