The future of nature: Perspectives from the Global Biodiversity

Outlook 4 (GBO4) & IPCC AR5 assessments

Green Week 2015

Paul Leadley Professor, Univ. Paris-Sud, Lab. ESE

Coordinator of the center of excellence Biodiversity, Agroecosystems, Society & Climate (BASC)

GBO-4: A mid-term assessment of progress towards the implementation of the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-

2020

IPCC WG II: Climate change 2014 – Impacts, Adaptation & Vulnerability

Summary of Leadley et al. 2014 See also Tittensor et al. 2014 Science

Organisation of the report

Main report summaries

CBD Technical Reports 78 (+79 & 81)

detailed analysis

• Scientific literature and other reports • National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPS) • National reports • Indicator-based extrapolations of trends to 2020 • Model-based scenarios to 2050…

Sources of information used

for the assessment

GBO-4 addresses four questions:

1. Are we on track to reach the Aichi Targets by 2020?

2. What actions need to be taken to achieve the Aichi Targets?

3. How do the Aichi Targets and progress towards them position us to attain the 2050 Vision of the Strategic Plan?

4. How does implementation of the Strategic Plan and progress towards the Aichi Targets contribute to broader development goals?

Scope of the Global Biodiversity Outlook 4

Assessment of progress towards the Aichi Targets in the “dashboard” of the GBO-4 Executive Summary

Moving away from

Target

No progress towards

target

Progress towards target,

but not to achieve it

On track to achieve Target

On track to exceed Target

Insufficient information to evaluate

progress

No clear evaluation

Giant Hogweed (Heracleum mantegazzianum)

Dashboard for Target 9: Invasive Alien Species

Assessment has been done by key elements of Targets

Stars indicate level of confidence

No clear evaluation

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

No clear evaluation

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

No clear evaluation

Overview of the “Dashboard” for the Aichi Targets

A

B

C

D

E

Un

de

rlyi

ng

Cau

ses

Target elements Target elements D

ire

ct p

ress

ure

s

Stat

us

of

bio

div

ers

ity

Enh

ance

be

nef

its

Enh

ance

Im

ple

me

nta

tio

n

Overview of trends and extrapolation of indices across the 20 Aichi Targets

Tittensor et al. (2014) Science

National Reports Based on an analysis of the 81 submitted reports and 30 advance drafts: • 12% - provide no information • 2% - moving away • 22% - no progress • 62% - progress, but insufficient • 2% - will meet

NBSAPS Example: EU Biodiversity Targets - Comprehensive European IAS legislation due to take effect in 2015.

Percentage of countries adopting invasive alien species legislation

Pe

rce

nt

Year 2020 2010 1970

0

100

Trends and projections of country’s responses to Invasive Alien Species

Butchart et al. (2010) + update

Introduction events in Europe

Cu

mu

lati

ve In

tro

du

ctio

ns

Year 2020 1960

40

100 EU

Biodiversity Targets 2011

EU IAS legislation adopted Oct 2014

Trends and projections of species introductions

21 country studies of invasives

Year

Cu

mu

lati

ve In

tro

du

ctio

ns

1800 2000

Pagad et al. (2014)

Worsening

Improving

Researchers, managers and policy makers have identified evidence-based actions for

dealing with Invasive Alien Species

Simberloff et al. (2012)

Climate change and increasing global trade will pose long-term difficulties for managing

invasive alien species

Bellard et al. (2013)

Number of the “100 Worst” Invasive Alien Species that are projected to find suitable climate conditions in by 2050

latitude

longitude

CBD Aichi Target 5: By 2020, the rate of loss of all natural habitats, including forests, is at least halved

and where feasible brought close to zero, and

degradation and fragmentation is

significantly reduced.

1990-2000

2000-2005

2000-2005

Forest losses and gains between 2000-2012 show very contrasting

dynamics across regions

Hansen et al. (2013) Science

Indonesia Brazil

An

nu

al F

ore

st

Lo

ss

(k

m2)

2000 2012 2000 2012

There is evidence that tree mortality is increasing globally, but confidence in attribution of this to recent climate change is low – IPCC AR5, WGII Chapter 4

Photo: P. Leadley

Cheaib et al. 2012 Ecology Letters

Model intercomparison to help quantify uncertainty in climate change

impacts on trees: Scots pine in 2055

Climate IPCC A1B SRES

Downscaled ARPEGE +2.4 °C; -20 mm in monthly summer

precip.

Conclusions

• Progress is being made towards reaching the majority of the Aichi Targets. • However, this progress is insufficient to attain most of the Aichi Targets by 2020, meaning that a redoubling of efforts is needed. • Despite considerable progress in a wide range of actions to improve the status of biodiversity and ecosystems, most indicators of the status of biodiversity continue to decline, in part due to persistent increases in pressures. • Examples of coordinated national actions show that treating multiple drivers and multiple targets can lead to improvements of biodiversity status. • Scenarios show that it is possible with strong, concerted action to couple improvements in the status of biodiversity, reduce greenhouse gas emissions and improve the well-being of all people.

Lead Authors of the Technical Report

Paul Leadley coordinator; Lead Authors: Rob Alkemade, Patricia Balvanera, Celine Bellard, Ben ten Brink, Neil Burgess, Silvia Ceausu, William Cheung, Villy Christensen, Franck Courchamp, Barbara Goncalves, Stephanie Januchowski-Hartley, Marcel Kok, Jennifer van Kolck, Cornelia Krug, Paul Lucas, Alexandra Marques, Peter Mumby, Laetitia Navarro, Tim Newbold, Henrique Pereira, Eugenie Regan, Carlo Rondinini, Louise Teh, Derek Tittensor, U. Rashid Sumaila, Peter Verburg, Piero Visconti, Matt Walpole.

Consortium Leading the Preparation of the Technical Report

DIVERSITAS, UNEP-WCMC, PBL-Netherlands, the University of British Colombia Fisheries, Centre Faculty of Science, Lisbon and the German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDIV)

Contributing Authors of the Technical Report

Michel Bakkenes, Jan Janse and Hans van Grinsven, Olaf Banki, Donald Hobern and Tim Robertson Katherine Blackwood, Alex Borisenko, Robert Hanner, Sujeevan Ratnasingham, Stuart H.M. Butchart, Marta Coll, Robert J. Diaz, Moreno Di Marco, Luca Santini, Britaldo Silveira Soares Filho, Fawziah Gadallah, Piero Genovesi, Ben Halpern, Serena Heckler, Mark Huijbregts, Lisa Ingwall-King, Miranda Jones, Daniel Karp, Christopher J. Kettle, Rainer Krug, Cui Lijuan, Georgina M. Mace, Peter B. McIntyre, Marc Metian, Scott E. Miller, Mans Nilsson, Thierry Oliveira, Shyama N. Pagad, James C. Russell, John Paolillo, Maria do Rosario Partidario, Alan Paton, Ben Phalan, Leo Posthuma, Kees Versluijs, Anne-Helene Prieur-Richard, Andrew Purvis, Sandra Quijas, Alex Rogers, Belinda Reyers, Michiel Rutgers v.d. Loeff, Rene Sachse, Carlos Alberto de Mattos Scaramuzza, Santiago Saura, Kirsten Thonicke, Megan Tierney, Britta Tietjen, Ariane Walz.

Preparation of the Main Report Tim Hirsch, Kieran Mooney, Robert Hoft, David Cooper and David Ainsworth. Braulio F. de Souza Dias provided guidance.

Contributions from the Secretariat of the CBD

David Ainsworth, H. David Cooper, Olivier de Munck, DavidDuthie, Kathryn Garforth, Sarat Babu Gidda, Beatriz Gomez-Castro, Robert Hoft, Markus Lehman, Kieran Noonan-Mooney, Nadine Saad, Junko Shimura, John Scott, Gisela Talamas, Tristan Tyrrell, Yibin Xiang and Atsuhiro Yoshinaka

Contributors to underlying technical studies

Joseph Appiott, Didier Babin, Jennifer Bansard, Katherine Blackwood, Mateusz Banski, Charles Besancon, Catherine Bloom, Lijie Cai, Adam Charette Castonguay, Monique Chiasson, Annie Cung, David Coates, Edwin Correa, Gilles Couturier, Olivier de Munck, Matthew Dias, David Duthie, Joshua Dutton, Amy Fraenkel, Kathryn Garforth, Sarat Babu Gidda, Beatriz Gomez -Castro, Julie Freeman, Jennifer Gobby, Jacquie Grekin, Oliver Hillel, Lisa Janishevski, Elena Kennedy, Sakhile Koketso Kerri Landry, Jihyun Lee, Markus Lehmann, Andre Mader, Manoela Pessoa de Miranda, Ian Martin, Johany Martinez, Praem Mehta, Leah Mohammed, Brianne Miller, Jessica Pawly, Aliya Rashid, Chantal Robichaud, Cristina Romanelli, Nadine Saad, Atena Sadegh, Djeneba Sako, Catalina Santamaria, Simone Schiele, John Scott, Mitchell Seider, Junko Shimura , David Steuerman, Andrew Stevenson, Gisela Talamas, Tristan Tyrrell, Ardeshir Vafadari, Paige Yang, Atsuhiro Yoshinaka, Yibin Xiang and Tatiana Zavarzina.

GBO-4 Advisory Group Adjima Thombiano, Risa Smith, Haigen Xu, Teresita Borges Hernandez, Jan Plesnik, Moustafa Mokhtar Ali Fouda, Anne Teller, Asghar Mohammadi Fazel, Tohru Nakashizuka, Roxana Solis Ortiz, Yvonne Vizina, Joji Carino, David Morgan, Linda Collette, Tim Hirsch, Thomas Lovejoy, Stuart Butchart, and Matt Walpole.

The Partnership is coordinated by UNEP-WCMC. Indicator partners include Biodiversity International, BirdLife International, Cardiff University, CITES, FAO of the United Nations, Forest Peoples Programme, Forest Stewardship Council, Global Biodiversity Information Facility, Global Footprint Network, International Nitrogen Initiative, IUCN, IUCN SSC Invasive Species Specialist Group, University of Auckland, Marine Stewardship Council, McGill University, National Centre for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis, Organisation for Economic Co-operation, Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB), TEAM Network, Terralingua, TRAFFIC International, UBC Fisheries Centre (University of British Columbia), UNEP GEMS Water Programme, Union for Ethical BioTrade, United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, University of Queensland, Australia, and WWF.

Biodiversity Indicators Partnership