Implementation of the NBSAP
Mexico adopted its first NBSAP in 2000. Its implementation contributed to increasing the level of biodiversity knowledge, including status and threats, institutional capacity and social awareness.
Mexico is currently updating its NBSAP along six strategic lines (knowledge, conservation and restoration, sustainable management and use, factors related to pressures and threats, environmental education and culture, mainstreaming and governance), first identified in the document Natural Capital of Mexico: Strategic actions for valuation, preservation and restoration (2012)
, on which the revised NBSAP is based.
Since 2002, through the National Commission for the Knowledge and Use of Biodiversity (CONABIO), the development of State Biodiversity Strategies has been promoted to improve human and institutional local capacities in planning and managing biodiversity activities. Twenty-two states in Mexico are currently involved in this initiative, which includes the formulation of both state biodiversity studies and state biodiversity strategies. With the participation of close to 2500 local, national and international experts, twelve states of Mexico have published their own biodiversity studies, of which 9 (Morelos, Michoacan, Aguascalientes, Veracruz, Chiapas, Puebla, Guanajuato, Chihuahua and Campeche) have already begun implementing their strategies. Furthermore, in 2013, Morelos decreed the creation the first State Commission for Biodiversity, while the second Commission was established in Veracruz in 2014.
Actions taken to achieve the 2020 Aichi Biodiversity Targets
Positive incentives have been developed for the environmental sector and, even though a comprehensive analysis of incentives offered by other sectors is yet to be developed, the merging of common agendas between the environmental sector and the forestry, agricultural, fisheries and tourism sectors is currently underway in order to mainstream the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity within their plans, programs and policies.
In 2005, efforts were initiated to identify and assess areas of priority for conservation in three environments (terrestrial, marine, epicontinental aquatic). Results revealed that a significant portion of these areas was not contained within a protected area or protection scheme. In 2012, a proposal aimed at addressing conservation priorities for the most vulnerable species and areas in an integrated manner, and in the context of sustainable territorial development strategy, resulted in the designation of priority sites for conservation in the three environments. The results of ecoregional analyses were also considered. Today, this classification serves to guide implementation of various in situ conservation tools, such as protected areas, biological corridors, social and private reserves, integrated management programmes, payment for environmental services, management units for the conservation of wildlife and sustainable forest management programmes.
Between 2009 and 2015, 11 new protected areas were established bringing the total number to 176, increasing coverage by 1.44 million hectares, for a total current coverage of 25.63 million hectares (12.96% of the country). Likewise, the past five years have been very important in developing management programs for protected areas; currently 76% of the protected areas under federal jurisdiction have management programs. In 2012, the National Wetland Inventory was developed, through which 6,331 wetland and wetland complexes were identified covering 10.03 million hectares (5% of the surface country). Of this total, 8.64 million hectares are registered as Ramsar sites. Between 2009 and 2015, 30 additional Ramsar sites were registered bringing the current total to 142.
In 1997, the System of Management Units for the Conservation of Wildlife (SUMA) was established. As of December 2015, a total 12,586 units had been created, with an extension of around 39 million hectares, representing 19% of the national area. Further to the General Law on Sustainable Fisheries and Aquaculture, six networks of fish refuge zones have been established, covering an area of 889,798.9 hectares in February 2016.
Knowledge, use and conservation of genetic diversity is an emerging field in Mexico with progress to date achieved mainly at the academic and research levels. CONABIO is currently promoting research in the field of agricultural biodiversity, particularly in relation to native maize.
Mexico was the first megadiverse country to ratify the Nagoya Protocol on ABS in 2012. Two projects are currently underway to address the participation of key stakeholders and strengthen the legal and institutional framework in this area.
Support mechanisms for national implementation (legislation, funding, capacity-building, coordination, mainstreaming, etc.)
Recently-adopted laws include the Federal Law on Environmental Responsibility (2013) and the General Law on Climate Change (2012). The list of Priority Species and Populations for Conservation (2014) was also formalized. Mexico’s revised NBSAP will address harmonizing the legal and regulatory frameworks at all levels of government in order to support institutions and conduct functions in a coordinated manner, with the effective participation of citizens.
The Biosafety Law on Genetically Modified Organisms was adopted in 2005. Mexico also possesses a National Biosafety Policy and is undertaking considerable efforts to strengthen mechanisms to ensure biosafety.
A positive trend exists regarding national (public expenditure) and international funding for biodiversity; however, no systematic analysis has been conducted regarding the funding available to other sectors in this regard.
Mexico has a wide variety of institutional information systems for collecting current information on biodiversity components (e.g. National System on Biodiversity Information; National System of Information on the Environment and Natural Resources; National System of Forest Information (CONAFOR); System of Information on Agrifood and Fisheries). Support is also provided by the National Institute on Statistics and Geography. Capacity for developing bioinformatic applications also exists.
Monitoring programmes for certain species, such as the Morelet’s crocodile (Mexico-Belize-Guatemala) and the felines of Manantlán, are being carried out.
The National Development Plan (2013-2018) concretely addresses the issue of biodiversity under one of the Plan’s five national goals entitled “Mexico Próspero”. This goal contains objectives, strategies and lines of action for the country’s production sectors and the environmental sector. Sectoral programmes were developed in 2013 and derived from the National Development Plan and cover the 2013-2018 period. Impact indicators to monitor and evaluate implementation of these sectoral programmes have been developed which constitutes a key difference between these programmes and those developed by other administrations.
Mexico has also recently developed important development strategies and policies linked directly to biodiversity. Examples include the National Strategy on Invasive Species in Mexico: Prevention, Control and Eradication (2010), the Climate Change Strategy for Protected Areas (2010), the National Strategy for Sustainable Land Management (2010), and the Mexican Strategy for Plant Conservation (2012-2030).
Through the strategy on biological corridors in southeastern Mexico, models for sustainable land management are promoted through the coordination of public policy, the strengthening of local governance and the sustainable use of natural resources to improve the quality of life of the population. Activities are currently being carried out in eleven biological corridors in six states. The strategy stems from experience gained since 2001 from the implementation in Mexico of the Mesoamerica Biological Corridor initiative.
Mechanisms for monitoring and reviewing implementation
A mechanism for comprehensively monitoring and reviewing NBSAP implementation is absent. While the existence of the various aforementioned public information systems facilitates the collection of information, there is a need to increase the quantity and quality of information on various issues, develop ad hoc indicator and monitoring systems, among other needs, to fulfill the goals of the Convention and the current global framework.