1 / 32

Maximizing Biodiversity Impact: International Cooperative Initiatives Analysis

Explore the impact of International Cooperative Initiatives on biodiversity and their effectiveness compared to traditional conservation methods. Learn about community forest management, sustainable use actions, and voluntary sustainability standards. Discover the potential of ICIBs beyond protected areas.

rogerr
Download Presentation

Maximizing Biodiversity Impact: International Cooperative Initiatives Analysis

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Title slide The impact of ‘International Cooperative Initiatives on Biodiversity’ (ICIBs) Bas Arts

  2. Companies, cities, communities • With or without governments • Pledges of countries under UNFCCC ⋲ proposed measures of ICIs • Reduction GHGs

  3. Companies, cities, communities • With or without governments • Conservation and sustainable use BIODIVERSITY ACTION OUTSIDE THE CBD

  4. Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020 (incl. 20 Achi Targets)

  5. Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020 (incl. 20 Achi Targets)

  6. Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020 (incl. 20 Achi Targets)

  7. Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020 (incl. 20 Achi Targets) How to assess..??

  8. ICIBs • Bonn challenge: landscape and forest restoration • Citizens’ green initiatives in Europe • Community forest management (CFM)* • Re-naturing cities for green infrastructures • Voluntary Sustainability Standards (forest certification)

  9. Data sources: FAO, 2015; RRI, 2014

  10. Level 1: Community-managed forests: 10% to 15% of the world’s forests (400-515 mn. Ha.)

  11. Level 1: CFM (>1980) covers about 8 to 10% of the world’s forests (330-385 mn. Ha.)

  12. Level 1: CFM (>1980) covers about 8 to 10% of the world’s forests (330-385 mn. Ha.) Level 3: Meta-analysis case studies

  13. Success rate: 35%

  14. Level 1: CFM (>1980) covers about 8 to 10% of the world’s forests (330-385 mn. Ha.) Level 2: CFM / positive biodiversity impact: 115-135 mn. Ha.; MSA: +25%;

  15. Based on: Schippers, 2016

  16. Level 1: CFM (>1980) covers about 8 to 10% of the world’s forests (330-385 mn. Ha.) Level 2: CFM / positive biodiversity impact: 115-135 mn. Ha.; MSA: +25%; Additionality: 5-6% (PAs), 18-21% (FPAs)

  17. Additionality • CFM withpositivebiodiversity impact: 115-135 mn. Ha. Comparedto: • PAs: 2.2 billion Ha. • FPAs: 650 million Ha. [Overlap..??]

  18. Level 1: CFM (>1980) covers about 8 to 10% of the world’s forests (330-385 mn. Ha.) Level 2: CFM / positive biodiversity impact: 115-135 mn. Ha.; MSA: +25%; Additionality: 5-6% (PAs), 18-21% (FPAs) Level 3: Examples from Bolivia and Tanzania

  19. All forest cases... • Bonn challenge: forest and landscape restoration • Community forest management • Voluntary Sustainability Standards (forests)

  20. All forest cases... • Bonn challenge: forest and landscape restoration • Community forest management • Voluntary Sustainability Standards (forests) *About 300 (?) mn. Ha. forests contributing to conservation *MSA gains: about 20% *Additionality: about 45% (ct FPAs) *Overlap..??

  21. Some remarkable findings... • Sustainable use areas > protected areas • Nepstadt et al., 2004: inhabited reserves > national parks in Amazonia (less deforestation, less fires) • Hajes, 2006: FPAs ≈ FMAs (163 areas in 13 countries) • Porter-Bolland, 2012: CFM = less deforestation than FPAs (about (75 cases)

  22. Conclusions • ICIBs contribute to biodiversity conservation as much as protected areas do (and maybe even more) • Hence: need for ‘land sparing’ and ‘land sharing’ • GBO and other (national) nature policy evaluations should take ICIBs into account • ‘Funnel framework’ seems a valuable tool to connect general input data with in-depth case studies

  23. THANKS

More Related