Capacity-Building and Development

The draft elements of the long-term strategic framework for capacity development include proposals of key principles and approaches for ensuring effective capacity development (see Section IV, page 8).  Please provide your views on the proposed principles and approaches. For example:
(a) Are there other principles and approaches that should be included to improve capacity development?
(b) What proposals would you suggest to help foster the sustainability of capacity development efforts for the implementation of the post-2020 global biodiversity framework?
(c) How could capacity development providers move towards more long-term programmatic interventions?

Hi, this is Eugenia from Costa Rica.  Regarding the principles and approaches I think there are ok.  Overall, I would like to underline the importance of the different levels of capacity development, including the organizational structure.  Capacity building or development is comprenhensive process.  I really like the approach of this document.

This section on the Principles and Approaches for effective Capacity Development is one of the key areas which, when captured properly, could promote the success of the capacity development plan. Under sub-section (b)- Country ownership being be a key cornerstone for capacity development actions, I wish to propose a third bullet on "sustainability mechanism" under the responsibility of the owning local authorities, be it as the local, national, sub-regional and regional level. Any project-led capacity development intervention may die off, as alluded to in the document, unless there is a clear laid down sustainability plan. The local authorities should be made responsible as part of the "ownership" scheme.
Thanks

Under sub-section (c)- Strategic and integrated approaches to capacity development; when the capacity needs have been identified, the capacity development donor partners, should also be organized to co-contribute towards common activities. This will prevent duplication of efforts and lead to effective use of resources.

Thanks

Dear colleagues, I am Trevor Sandwith of IUCN, which is a member of the PANORAMA: Solutions for a Healthy Planet initiative, which has been testing out various methods for collating, analysing, understanding, disseminating and applying effective solutions towards meeting CBD targets and goals, as well as more broadly the Sustainable Development Goals.

It is generally true that capacity development needs to be targeted towards what has been agreed in the objective frameworks i.e. the NBSAP or the Global Biodiversity Framework with their underlying targets and indicators. But this pre-supposes that it is completely understood what kind of capacity will lead to these results. In many cases, it is not known either exactly how to deliver a result or how to target specific capacity to achieve that result. An important part of capacity development is to understand what is effective and what works in a particular situation, to derive best practices from these examples and then to translate these into effective learning programmes. Capacity development must include a strong component of knowledge accumulation and analysis to be able to confidently propose methods that are transferable into new situations. There is also a need to determine which methods work best for understanding, assimilation and transfer of knowledge, and this can be very context-specific.

The PANORAMA partnership led by GIZ and IUCN, with several further partners, is an example of a strong effort to derive lessons from good practices, to understand why these approaches are effective and to translate these into practice through recombining building blocks in new situations. These can then be drawn from and applied to targeted efforts to build new capacity.   http://www.panorama.solutions

For example, for protected and conserved areas, IUCN WCPA has developed a Register of Competences for Protected Area Professionals that systematically identifies all of the different capacities required to be exercised by different levels of manager to achieve the basic standards of effectiveness for protected area systems and sites.  These can be applied for example to address the many different capacity development needs to achieve Aichi Target 11 of the current strategic plan, and will continue to be needed to meet quality standards in the post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework where protected areas and other effective area-based conservation measures are concerned.  PANORAMA also deals with other thematic topics, including marine and coastal conservation, ecosystem-based adaptation, agriculture and business and biodiversity.

Capacity development is not only framed and characterised by a hierarchy of goals. It can also be supply driven from the local level. Good practices engaging local actors can provide examples and demonstrations of what can work, and this can be elevated into capacity development programmes. Learning is a process of progressively engaging with situations, working out possible solutions and applying these, and adapting knowledge and understand on the basis of what is effective. PANORAMA: Solutions for a Healhty Planet is a mechanism to link learning solution providers and solution seekers/users rather than a top down or completely bottom-up process. The draft framework being considered here ties capacity development very strongly to the hierarchy of targets, goals and objectives of the Global Biodiversity Framework, which characterises and largely forces capacity development into complex institutional delivery mechanisms. Another approach is to foster peer to peer learning and exchange and to bring providers and users of new capacity to interact more directly. As the draft framework suggests, there are many delivery models possible, including the work of BIOFIN but also that of PANORAMA.

Je Dr. Handaine Mohamed Président. IPACC ( Comité de Coordination des Peuples Autochtones d'Afrique)
 Membre du Comité de Pilotage de l'année internationale des langes autochtones UNESCO 2019
Directeur du Centre des Etudes Amazighes Historiques et environnementales

Dear colleagues, Thanks very much for these draft elements. I'm Rob Hendriks from the Netherlands. Although the document is very useful across the board, I'm placing my personal response under this particular section because of its specific relevance. Particularly paragraphs b) and c) regarding Country ownership and Strategic and integrated approaches contain important notions. Additionally: In relation to these principles there seems to be a clear potential for synergies with the planned IPBES work on national and (sub)regional science-policy platforms and networks (see IPBES Rolling work programme up to 2030, page 21, top: https://ipbes.net/sites/default/files/ipbes-7-10_en.pdf).

This is Hartmut Meyer, working for the ABS Capaicty Development Initiative at GIZ/Germany. Our team welcomes the opportunity to take part in this online discussion and thanks the SCBD for preparing the draft document. I agree with the general structure and guidance the draft documents is providing. In the following I comment on specific paragraphs.

As already mentioned in my contribution on general comments, the issue of coordination of capacity devlopment programs at country level should be mentioned specifically in the framework. Para 25 and Para 26 would be the ideal paces to insert bullet point on that issue.

Dear colleagues, Ms. Paguaga, this is Roger Rivero from subnational government in México. I'm representative of Campeche State Government in the Ministry of Environment, Biodiversity and Climate Change (SEMABICC). We celebrate and thanks for to be part of this preparation process of CBD. Also, we are members of Regions 4 Advisory Committee of Subnational Governments (AC SNG), and we are participating in the Edinburgh Process. I share my ideas and comments about this thread. Thanks.
(a) Are there other principles and approaches that should be included to improve capacity development? The Framework must include approach interactions with Climate Change global agreements, the Nature-Based Solutions, 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and Social and Environmental Safeguards including Indigenous Peoples. These are suggested to be consider specially in bullets a), c) and d). Also, you can consider to add the wording “subnational” into bullet (d) number 27, in the phrase “appropriate context, whether at national, landscape, or local levels”.
(b) What proposals would you suggest to help foster the sustainability of capacity development efforts for the implementation of the post-2020 global biodiversity framework? To secure the involving of local and subnational actors including governments,  communities, private sector, academic institutions, in the implementation; to develop innovative financial mechanisms for providing funds an resources at different levels of actions; and to establish national, subnational and local commitments to foster the implementation.
(c) How could capacity development providers move towards more long-term programmatic interventions? The governments need to take in national, subnational and local programs and plans according to the specific elements of capacity development, fostering the actions related to the needs and conditions. This capacity development efforts must turn the actions and projects into the official programs and plans for sharing benefits with all society.

Elena Makeyeva, ABS NFP and a Head of the ABS National Coordination Centre in Belarus.
The guiding principles formulated in the part IV “Principles and approaches for effective capacity development” is OK for me in total. 
I just want to add that a very important factor in achieving effective results is the cooperation of conventions and other international agreements related to the conservation of biodiversity. If a country is a party to several international agreements in this area, an integrated (synergistic) approach to planning activities can be recommended to countries in order to achieve significant results.

I am Levon Aghasyan, PhD in Biology, Legal Advisor to the Minister of Environment of Armenia., Director of the Zoological Museum of the Scientific Center of Zoology and Hydroecology, National Academy of Sciences, Armenia. IPBES National Focal Point.

I would like to express my gratitude to the CBD Secretariat for the hard work and organizing this discussion forum to support implementation of the Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework.

I would like to mention about the importance of technical and financial support for developing countries for the implementation of NBSAPs.

It is important to promote partnerships and networks for implementation of NBSAPs within the related Scientific Institutions such as National Academy of Sciences, subnational, regional and local governments for mobilizing capacities, knowledge and expertise.

In addition, capacity development for youth generation is important tool to achieve long-term biodiversity conservation, (awareness rising, workshops and etc.)

Also I would like to mention about the importance of continues capacity development for the Nature Protected Areas effective management such as technical and scientific support.

Thank you

Kind regards,
Levon Aghasyan

Dear Colleagues,

From the perspective of the BioTrade Initiative of UNCTAD, the principles and approaches are well developed and explained. The question is what is specific for biodiversity and what is applicable to capacity development in general. As was mentioned in this forum, developing the capacity at a local and even individual level is particularly important for the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity and ABS. Moreover, this also requires considering the different needs and circumstances of all stakeholders involved such as communities, businesses, government, academia and civil society.

Kind regards, Lorena

Respected Executive Secretary and CBD Secretariat team,
I am Amit Dutta expressing our views on post 2020 Global Biodiversity Framework on behalf Young Naturalist Network. Section IV is good drafted text for consideration. Nothing to say additional.