Hiroyuki Matsuda (Yokohama National University)

1. 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

2. 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

3. 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?

4. 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.

5. Galileo’s Inquisition 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

6. Biodiversity science-policy interfaceby A. Larigauderie Research (DIVERSITAS, ESSP) Assessment (MA, IPBES, IPCC) Policy (CBD, UNFCCC) Observations (GEO BON)

7. 9. Set preliminary numerical goal 10. Choose monitoring measures 11. Select method of control Flow diagram for ecological risk management Consensus building Scientific procedure public scientists 0. Concerns, issues 1. Screening 2.Delimit management scope, invite stakeholder 3.Organize local council and scientific committee 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 not agreed 8. Check necessity and purpose of management Reset goals when infeasible 13. Decide measures & goals 12. Check feasibility of goals 14. Initiate management 15. Continue management and monitoring Revision required 16. Review numerical goals and purposes Rossberg et al. 2007 Lands Ecol Eng 1:221- Finish program

8. 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

9. 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

10. After action plan is executed… 16. Review numerical goals and purposes

11. 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

12. Today’s my talk - overview • Role of scientists • Check & seek SMART policy for CBD • Specific, Measurable, Ambitious, Realistic and Time-bound • Indicators for Post 2010 Target of CBD Scientific?

13. 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.

14. 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 these options.

15. 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

16. 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) MA 2005

17. Past & Future Extinction in Japanese vascular plants (Fujita, Yahara, Matsuda et al. in prep) 7000 6800 6600 6400 553 Extinct 7.9% Past Endemic species loss 6200 Future Non-endemic species loss 6000 2000 2020 2040 2080 2100 2060 CR(PE*) EX or EW Number of indigenous flora in Japan No of extinction Un known Year Year 8.6 species 55.3 species Extinction rates (per decade) 6.3-times larger *PE = Probably extinct (no report of extant grids)

18. How many reserves should be requiredfor conservation?-Complementarity analysis (Margules,C.R & Pressey,R.L., 2000)- ・ half of the taxa : 20 grids（0.4% in Japan） were required ・ All threatened taxa: 251 grids （5.4% in Japan） were required Maximizing the number of species conserved with the minimum land 100 600 500 400 Number of extinctions in next 100 years Ratio of Conservation Area ％ (National park etc..) 251 (5.6%) 50 300 200 100 0 0 20 (0.4%) Japan includes 4457grids 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 Number of conserved grids

19. 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

20. 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.

21. Direct indicators to measure biodiversity and ES • Ecological Footprint Living Planet Index Conserve both threatened & common species?

22. 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

23. 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.

24. 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

25. Global Millennium Ecosystem Assessment(MA) scheme • Indirect DFs • Demographic • Economic • Sociopolitical • Cultural & Religious • Science & Technology • Human Well-being • Security • Basic material… • Health • Good relationship… • Freedom of choice.. • Japan NSBAP* • Over-use • Under-use • Disturbance • Climate Change • Ecosystem S. • Biodiversity • Supporting S. • Provisioning S. • Regulating S. • Cultural S. • Direct DFs • Habitat change • Climate change • Invasive species • Over-exploitation • Pollution *NSBAP=Nat’l Strategy for Biodiversity and Action Plan

26. （Global Biodiversity Outlook 2: GBO２） Main direct drivers of change in biodiversity and ecosystems

27. Forecast of invasive species expansion

28. 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 No data 0 1 - 4 5 - 8 9 - 21 22 - 28 29 - 36 37 - 46 47 - 62 63 - 84 85 - 108 Recorded species per grid

29. Catch and marine trophic index in Japan

30. Changes in the Marine Trophic Index GBO2 Pauly D., Watson R. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B;2005;360:415-423

31. 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!

32. 多様性損失指数Expected loss of biodiversity • ELB = BD(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

33. Biodiversity Asian Strategies by Eco-Risk COE

34. Thank you for attention! I like to try real time case studies with field ecologists! Plant Red Data Book Deer management Hokkaido, Kanagawa Pelagic fish management EXPO2005 at Aichi, Revision of RDB Mainichi Shimbun Bear management in Hokkaido, Shikoku Shiretoko World Heritage Pew Marine Cons.Fellow 2007 Cons. Committee of WWF Japan H.M. at Shiretoko N. Ishii Mongoose eradication program at Amami Island External adviser of Nissui Co. Ltd. 34 34