hiroyuki matsuda (yokohama national university)
DESCRIPTION
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. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
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 MeetingMay 8, 2009U. 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
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
Galileo’s InquisitionGalileo’s Inquisition
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
0. Concerns, issues
2.Delimit management scope, invite stakeholder
3.Organize local council and scientific committee
14. Initiate management
15. Continue management and monitoring
Scientific procedure
Consensus building
4.Characterize “undesired events”
5. Enumerate measures of effects
6. Analyze stress factors by modelling
7. Risk assessment for no-action case
Revision required
Reset goals when not agreed
Reset goals w
hen infeasible
8. Check necessity and purpose of management
13. Decide measures & goals 12. Check feasibility of goals
16. Review numerical goals and purposes
1. Screening
Finish program
scientistspublic
Rossberg et al. 2007 Lands Ecol Eng 1:221-
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)
55.3 species
6000
6200
6400
6600
6800
7000
20002020
20402060
20802100
Endemic species lossNon-endemic species lossN
umbe
r of
indi
geno
us f
lora
in J
apan
Year
Future553
Extinct7.9%
8.6 species
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
種数
ほぼ絶滅絶滅・野生絶滅CR(PE*)EX or EW
No
of e
xtin
ctio
n
Un kno
wn
Past
Year
6.3-times larger
Extinction rates(per decade)
*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
Number of conserved grids
Nu
mbe
r of
ext
inct
ions
in n
ext
100
year
s
20(0.4%)
251(5.6%)
Japan includes4457grids
Rat
io o
fC
onse
rvat
ion
Are
a %
(Nat
iona
l par
k et
c..)100
0
50
0100200300400500600
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
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 IndexConserve 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 spe
cies
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
Ecosystem S.•Biodiversity•Supporting S.•Provisioning S.•Regulating S.•Cultural S.
Human Well-being•Security•Basic material…•Health•Good relationship…•Freedom of choice..
Japan NSBAP*1. Over-use2. Under-use3. Disturbance• Climate Change
Direct DFsA) Habitat changeB) Climate changeC) Invasive speciesD) Over-exploitationE) Pollution
*NSBAP=Nat’l Strategy for Biodiversity and Action Plan
26
( Global Biodiversity Outlook 2: GBO 2)Main direct drivers of change
in biodiversity and ecosystems
28
Threatened plant database in JapanDatabase 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
Recorded speciesper grid
0
1 - 45 - 89 - 2122 - 2829 - 3637 - 4647 - 6263 - 8485 - 108
No data
29
Catch and marine trophic index in Japan
30
Changes in the Marine Trophic Index
GBO2Pauly D., Watson R. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B;2005;360:415-423
31
Seek simplicity, but distrust it
--Alfred N Whitehead--Alfred N Whitehead-- Begon, Harper, Townsend “Ecology”-- Begon, Harper, Townsend “Ecology”
Seek simple indicators, but distrust them.Seek simple indicators, but distrust them.Experts (scientists) judgment is very importaExperts (scientists) judgment is very importa
nt, rather than indicators. However, we nent, rather than indicators. However, we need indicators!ed indicators!
32
多様性損失指数Expected loss of biodiversity
• ELB = B (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 (1/T) = 0.002Small habitat loss of VU sp. T: 100 yrs to 99yrs (1/T) = 0.001
33
Biodiversity Asian Strategies by Eco-Risk COE
3434
Thank you for attention!
I like to try real time case studies with field ecologists!
34
Shiretoko World Heritage
Pelagic fish management
Mongoose eradication program at Amami Island
Mainichi Shimbun
N. IshiiH.M. at Shiretoko
Plant Red Data Book
Deer managementHokkaido, Kanagawa
EXPO2005 at Aichi,Revision of RDB
Bear management in Hokkaido, Shikoku
Cons. Committee of WWF Japan
External adviser of Nissui Co. Ltd.
Pew Marine Cons.Fellow 2007