This has prompted the CBD to look another ten years ahead and develop a new strategic plan of action which includes 20 SMART (Specific, Measurable, Ambitious, Realistic, Timebound) targets for 2020.
These targets will then be negotiated at the upcoming 10th Conference of the Parties held in Nagoya, Japan.
Putting colours on the targets
In an upcoming article in Science, centre researcher Thomas Elmqvist, along with researchers from the US, Argentina, Chile, France, Germany and the UK, has evaluated the 20 targets set by CBD.
The evaluation has been done through a set of colour-codes where:
- Red targets refer to imminent threats of loss of biodiversity and ecosystem services due either to the collapse of ecosystems or populations, or to the rapid growth of pests or pathogens
- Green targets are those related to protected areas and conservation of species
- Blue targets address the longer-term scientific, socio-economic and institutional conditions required to meet and sustain the red and green targets.
Elmqvist and his colleagues considered the most urgent issues - red alerts - to those related to the end of overfishing, curbing pollution from excess nutrients and control of invasive alien, indicating an urgency to solve them within the next ten years.
A significant improvement, but...
Overall, Elmqvist and his colleagues found that the 2020 targets are a significant improvement over the previous 2010 single target. However, the new targets could also be strengthened in several ways:
- If there have to be 20 targets, then they should address the 20 biggest threats to critical ecosystem services, says Elmqvist.
Using the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment as a template, they found that four things were missing:
- Functional diversity: the targets are too focused on hierarchical classification rather than assessing the function the species have
- Trade-offs among targets: different services require different diversity, we cannot have it all
- Conditionality of targets: targets should be conditional since ecological functioning may change because the environmental conditions change
- Side-effects of targets: most targets ignore potential side effects of achieving the target
To deal with these issues, the researchers welcome the establishment of an Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) which would create the capacity needed to evaluate the progress on several of the 20 targets.
- It provides an ideal opportunity to put in place a more structured sequence of objectives for the collective management of the biosphere, says Elmqvist.
See interview with Gretchen Daily, Gretchen Daily, professor of biological sciences at Stanford University on why biodiversity is important:
About Thomas Elmqvist:
Research news | 2018-07-10
The World in 2050 initiative launches new report outlining synergies and benefits that render the goals achievable
Educational news | 2018-07-02
LEAP our leadership programme designed for changemakers that want to lead social-ecological transformations to sustainability. Application deadline is 5 August 2018.
Research news | 2018-06-27
Overfishing, fractured international relationships and political conflicts loom as fish migrate more unpredictably because of climate change. Here is how to deal with it
Research news | 2018-06-26
Profit-maximizing approaches are most likely to produce outcomes that harm people or the environment. But it depends on the circumstances whether a sustainable or a safe approach is most suitable, new study argues
General news | 2018-06-20
Will lead a redesign of the organisational structure at the centre
Research news | 2018-06-20
New book chapter looks into the economic, cultural and ecological reasons why some people leave the fisheries and aquaculture sector, and what could be done to reverse the trend