|
21-25 February 2006, Plitvice Lakes National Park, Croatia
NGO preparatory meeting
1. Sharing experiences of the CEEweb coordinated project
"Measuring progress in nature conservation against the
CBD and PEBLDS" (supported by the Swiss Agency for Forest,
Environment and Landscape) in South-East-Europe in 2005
The NGO partners (Biotica Ecological Society, Green Action,
Makmontana and Young Researchers of Serbia) summarised their
experiences in utilising CBD and PEBLDS in their work (lobbying,
involvement in policy forming, nature conservation activities,
campaigning, etc.):
- CBD and other commitments can be used for influencing
governmental policies, decisions indeed, for this however,
NGOs should be more involved and informed about it
- CBD helps NGOs to focus on governmental work
- It also provides help in commenting law proposals
besides, it is also useful to share experiences with other
NGOs from other countries.
The need has been formulated for further NGO capacity-building,
and awareness raising about CBD. However, such work is not
only needed among NGOs, but also within the governmental sector.
Final assessments of the partner NGOs will be available on
the project website. National project websites in English
and national languages are available on project patrners'
websites:
2. Preparing NGO positions for the conference
During the NGO meetings before and during the conference
(21-25 February) written NGO positions on Invasive Alien Species,
Communication, Education and Public Awareness (CEPA) were
discussed and prepared.
NGOs also considered the draft conference recommendations
on Protected Areas and Ecological Networks, and agreed that
based on former commitments (the Programme of Work on Protected
Areas under the CBD, the Kyiv target and statement on the
Pan-European Ecological Network), the emphasis should be now
on the implementation, not on joint policy forming. Thus NGOs
prepared a questionnaire on the national implementation of
the elements of the Programme of Work on Protected Areas under
the CBD, which are due to be completed by 2006.
NGOs warmly welcomed the recommendations of SBSTTA-10 on
the inclusion of the ecological footprint into the 2010 indicators,
and agreed that European states should supports its adoption
at COP-8.
PEBLDS Council meeting
The Council meeting took place before the conference. A heated
debate took place about the future of PEBLDS, along with discussions
about the possible roles of the Biodiversity in Europe conferences.
The lack of financing mechanism for PEBLDS was stressed as
a main impediment for the effective operation of PEBLDS. Regarding
the conference, some NIS representatives insisted on organising
it before CBD COP meetings as before, as many countries do
not have other opportunities for international consultations
before COPs (as opposed to EU countries, which prepare joint
EU positions). France suggested that Pan-European consultations
could also take place right before COPs (one-two days before),
and it has been also pointed out, that Germany initiated consultations
before COP-8, but due to lack of registrations it was not
possible to hold the meeting. Finally no agreement could be
reached about the timing of the conference and the future
of PEBLDS.
In line with the suggestions of some governments and NGOs,
the Joint Secretariat of PEBLDS got the mandate to come up
with a proposal with different options for PEBLDS for the
future.
The PEBLDS Council reconvened after the closing of the 4th
Biodiversity in Europe conference and officially adopted the
conference conclusions.
4th Biodiversity in Europe conference
The conference as a Pan-European preparatory meeting for
CBD COP-8 adopted conclusions on some of the issues of the
COP-8 agenda. Though the conclusions are not binding for the
Parties in any way, they can help delegates to formulate their
position during the COP negotiations and to join (lobby) forces
from the Pan-European region.
However, after listening to the spectacular and sometimes
very useful presentations in the beginning of each session,
there have not been lively discussions on the agenda items
generally and on the whole rather a lack of interest could
be felt among the delegations. Debate took place though about
the issue of biodiversity and financing. A contact group was
convened on the initiative of ECNC during the conference with
some governmental representatives, which adopted some recommendations
for the future. The conference however was first reluctant
to welcome the recommendations. Finally it was included in
an annex to the Conclusions on the proposal of Switzerland.
In some cases the delegates did not discuss the agenda items
in detail (or at all) (as it happened to island biodiversity)
or reported about their own activities rather then shaping
the conference conclusions (e.g. in the case of the Global
Taxonomy Initiative).
Some highlights on the conference agenda for NGOs:
Communication, education and public awareness (CEPA)
A written NGO
position on CEPA was discussed at the NGO preparatory
meeting, then printed and disseminated to all delegations.
Klára Hajdu (CEEweb, Hungary) on behalf of NGOs also expressed
concerns and recommendations through an intervention from
the floor. NGOs pointed out to:
- Promoting communication and collaboration among educational
and cultural institutions, business sector, etc. that play
a practical role in the preservation and sustainable use
of biodiversity (school and farmers, traditional architects
and spatial planners, etc.)
- Developing key messages about the holistic nature of environmental,
social and economic issues
- Providing capacity building for journalists and editors
on biodiversity and its relation to ecosystem services and
human well-being
- Encouraging publication and production of programmes on
local natural assets by local media
- Introducing integrated knowledge systems in education
- Basing the education system as much as appropriate on
empirical studies
- Developing the content and methodology of an education
that is based on holistic approach and the system of values,
which take into account the needs to:
o develop problem solving skills complementary to lexical
knowledge, which can also tackle the complex problems
and cause-effect relationships behind biodiversity loss
o support the development of priorities in decision-making
in everyday life and profession (based on ethics and
values)
o provide continuous monitoring of these priorities,
and give confirmation and feed-back from various aspects.
o develop cooperation and communication skills.
o build stronger relationship of individuals to their
environment and the neighbouring countryside.
The Conclusions briefly included these issues as "NGO
recommendations".
Streamlining European 2010 Biodiversity Indicators
In the opening presentation the progress within the SEBI
2010 project was reported to the participants. As it was explained,
the PEBLDS and thus the SEBI 2010 project originally adopted
the indicators of the CBD set, and supplemented it with additional
ones (e.g. on public awareness). In January 2006 the 69 candidate
indicators were ranked as A, B and C depending on how much
they are ready for use. The A ranking indicators will be soon
(in some weeks) made available on the Internet, and the B
ranking could be hopefully ready by the end of this year.
However, on the C ranking ones further work is need in 2006-2007.
The states should produce the indicators themselves and provide
feed-back on their experiences, which helps to further elaborate
the methodologies.
Later Belgium reported in their presentation on the national
experiences in using biodiversity indicators.
The Conference supported the SBSTTA recommendations, including
the concept of the Ecological Footprint.
András Krolopp (CEEweb, Hungary) raised the question, how
the outcomes of the biodiversity indicators will be incorporated
into the policy forming processes, like into the CAP or the
use of the EU funds. Gordon McInnes (European Environmental
Agency) responded that this is the key question of course,
however this the responsibility of the decision-makers, and
rather they should provide the answer (however, they did not
intervene from the floor).
Protected Areas and Ecological Networks
Based on the received feed-back from governments on the national
implementation of some elements of the Programme of Work on
Protected Areas under the CBD, Petra Djuric (Green Action,
Croatia) on behalf of NGOs expressed the NGOs' concerns and
called for more implementation in the field. NGOs also pointed
out to the urgency of establishing the Pan-European Ecological
Network, and by this providing the connectivity of habitats
and allow for species to adapt to the changing environment,
especially in the view of the ongoing climate change. They
also stressed the importance of linking the establishment
of the PEEN to donors and financial institutions, in the ways
that are also reflected in the recommendations developed during
this conference on biodiversity financing.
Invasive alien species
On the issue of IAS, NGOs warmly welcomed the draft conclusions,
among others on preparation of national strategies, reporting
on actions, comprehensive European IAS policy. In addition,
Maarten de Groot (Slovenian Entomological Society of Štefan
Michieli) on behalf of NGOs called for additional actions:
- Governments should establish intersectoral coordination
bodies - involving relevant stakeholders - to develop and
implement the commitments.
- Relevant expert NGO groups should be part of the preparation
process and their expertise and practical local knowledge
should be used, as well as their potential for disseminating
information on IAS to the local public. NGOs offer their
capacities for this work.
- Annual budgets for human and institutional capacity for
the practical implementation of IAS strategies should be
increased.
- States should report on actions taken at the next Pan-European
meeting (Serbia, 2007) in the Environment for Europe process,
making this topic a key theme for international cooperation
at that meeting.
- NGOs would welcome an EU Directive or other legal instrument
to address the growing problems of IAS. This would also
be an incentive for countries outside the EU to take similar
actions.
- Serious penalties for introduction of invasive alien species
should be developed and applied.
- European States should prepare effective communication
strategies in order to inform the wider public on the threats
caused by the IAS. NGOs are committed to offer their communications
tools and channels for helping such communication activities.
- The topic of IAS should be incorporated in the national
education curricula.
The detailed
NGO recommendations were disseminated to the delegations.
On the NGOs' recommendation, the final conclusions also recommend
the involvement of NGOs, research institutes and other stakeholders
when carrying out national efforts.
For further information please turn to Klára
Hajdu.
The participation of 17 NGOs from Europe
at the conference was realised with the generous support of
UNEP Regional Office for Europe.
|
