IUCN Consider Successor to Biodiversity 2010 Target

The BES Policy Team yesterday attended an international conference in Brussels, to explore the successor to the target to 'halt biodiversity loss by 2010'. Organised by Countdown 2010, the meeting brought together representatives from the European Parliament, NGOs, learned societies, European agencies and academics to consider whether the 2010 target would be reached, including how to build on successes and mitigate potential failures in policy.

Stavros Dimas, European Commissioner for the Environment, was frank in acknowledging that the target would not be met. However, speakers and participants recognised that the existence of a target has spurred on the development of policy, and led to actions which would not otherwise have occurred. Developing a successor to the target was therefore acknowledged as a vital next step.

The 2010 biodiversity target 'had teeth'; this was the prevailing view of the audience. The Birds and Habitats Directives had provided core, useful components to allow member states to take steps towards addressing biodiversity loss. The Natura 2000 network should also be recognised as taking steps towards success. However, there was general recognition that more needed to be done, and that a successor to the target should be far broader.

Gathered from discussion during the day, participants were broadly calling for the target to possess the following, post-2010:

• a broader focus, incorporating ecosystem services and encouraging an ecosystem-wide approach to biodiversity conservation.
• to include sub-targets to assess progress on the way to achieving the overall goal by 2020 or 2025.
• to take into account the unique conservation needs, incredible biodiversity, and incredible challenges, faced by the Overseas Territories.
• a recognition that EU-wide policy is important, but that implementation should be sensitive to local needs and conditions.

To make any target a success, broad societal change would be necessary, not least the shift to a 'Green New Deal'; a change to the economic and policy framework underlying society, a re-think of GDP and the development of an economic successor to this tool which measures natural capital. Integration of land-use for multiple needs will be absolutely vital. Education of the public, raising the profile of biodiversity to public consciousness in the same way as climate change over recent years, will also be integral to success. Perhaps to facilitate this there should be a change in terminology. Is 'biodiversity' too sterile, too devoid of any 'spiritual significance' - is it too 'scientific'. Do we need to shift to present the target as 'halting declines in life on earth'?

Ladislav Miko, Director of 'Protecting the Natural Environment' at DG Environment, stressed that although the European Commission had its own ideas about the successor to the 2010 target, the target would be developed through stakeholder engagement. He called on NGOs, individual ecologists, economists and others, to participate in the development of the target over the coming months. It was hoped that a successor to the target could be introduced in the first half of 2010.

The BES is working with the IEEM to deliver a reception in the UK parliament in October 2009, exploring the 2010 biodiversity target, and successor, from a UK perspective. If you would like more information, please contact Policy@BritishEcologicalSociety.org.

New Approach Needed to Conserving UK Biodiversity - EAC

The Environmental Audit Committee has today published its report into 'Halting UK Biodiversity Loss'. The Committee call for a new approach to address dramatic declines in biodiversity across England and in the UK's Overseas Territories (OTs).

The Committee find that the Government is on course to miss the key target to halt biodiversity loss by 2010, with many species and habitats facing severe declines and local extinctions across England. The Committee has particularly criticised the Government's policies with respect to the UK's OTs; it's failure to act in relation to previous recommendations of the Committee to protect the environment of the territories means that the biodiversity of these areas now faces its 'eleventh hour'.

The Committee call upon the Government to adopt an ecosystems approach to conservation, taking into account the implications of the policy of all Government Departments for the natural environment when making decisions and thinking beyond simply a 'protected area' approach to conservation. The Committee welcome the Government's decision to conduct an ecosystem assessment for England, but state that this should be just a first-step to a wider cross-departmental initiative.

Calling on the Government to take urgent action to protect the environment of the UK's Territories, Tim Yeo MP, Committee Chair, said: "One of the most important contributions the Government could make to slow the catastrophic global diversity loss currently occurring, would be to accept its environmental responsibility for our Overseas Territories." The Committee recommend that responsibility for the OTs is transferred from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office to Defra.

See Full Report
Read the joint BES- Institute of Biology response to the consultation on 'Halting UK Biodiversity Loss'

POSTnote Published on Biodiversity Indicators: Assessing the 2010 Biodiversity Target

The UK Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology has recently released its latest publication on the theme of Biodiversity Indicators. The article is published at a time when the European-led target of halting the loss of UK Biodiversity by 2010 is widely perceived to be failing. As confirmed by the BES's expert membership, in the BES Science Policy Team's official response to the environmental audit committee's enquiry.

The POSTnote examines the value of the biodiversity indicators identifying two key questions posed by an inquiry launched by the Environmental Audit Committee:

1. Are the indicators meaningful?
2. Are there enough data to assess progress and define targets?

1) The indicators have been good where knowledge has been available, in terms of their usefulness to policy-makers, whereas others have suffered as they more difficult to unravel in terms of biological meaningfulness.

2) For some groups, e.g. birds, there is more than enough biologically meaningful data to draw confident conclusions from about their status, whilst for other groups as found in the Red List Index, data are available for only a few species and even where found the resolution of the data is at too coarse a scale to make competent assessments. Many species are 'data deficient' making it almost impossible to assess their true status.

The BES offers the opportunity to third year PhD students to work in the Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology on a relevant ecological topic. For further information go to: http://www.britishecologicalsociety.org/articles/publicaffairs/POST/