English  |  Español  |  Français

E-Forum on the Post 2010 Strategic Plan of the CBD: An Invitation to Contribute to the Updating and Revision of the Strategic Plan of the Convention

Question 13
Are these issues that were observed/noted for the period prior to 2002 still valid after the adoption of the 2010 target in 2002 and bearing in mind the activities and reported achievements toward the target? Is there a need to modify/emphasize/delete some of these messages or add new ones? If yes, provide your changes and, if possible, the reasons for the changes.]
submit as Anonymous
Please note: Once submitted, you can no longer modify the answer
You need to Sign In to be able to submit
Others' Replies
The subheadings are still valid. Some changes/updates need to be made to the content of the messages, bearing in mind what has happened since 2002. We may provide some input on this at a later stage, but one addition that we would like to suggest now is:
- add ‘livelihoods’ before ‘industry’ in the second-last line of first issue (paragraph 3 of the Strategic Plan), so that it would read: ‘Second, it provides products such as food, medicines and materials for livelihoods and industry’.

Maurizio and Caroline, Forest Peoples Programme

submitted by Maurizio Ferrari
Since the revised SP will also be addressed to the general public, and to stakeholders with an insufficient level of awareness of their reliance and/or impact on biodiversity, this section would benefit from more detail on the major biodiversity domains and priority conservation/use issues involved. In particular I would welcome if the SP made more explicit mention of the critical role of agricultural biodiversity (ABD), which –relative to its importance to human well-being- is a badly neglected topic in the overall biodiversity debate. Expansion of agriculture is widely perceived as having major negative impact on biodiversity outside agricultural systems, but there is very little appreciation in the public debate for the equally critical threat to intra-specific diversity of crop and animal species arising from under-use and uniformity demands in market, trade and seed legislation contexts.
submitted by Michael Hermann
Le texte actuel reste, hélas, d’actualité
Le titre du point A pourrait être révisé car la question de la diversité biologique n’est pas le seul fondement du développement durable. Comme il est indiqué au paragraphe 4, le maintien de la diversité biologique est une condition nécessaire pour le développement

Dans le paraphe 7, il faudrait rajouter l’adoption des 7 programmes de travail thématiques et les programmes de travail des questions transversales (stratégie mondiale de la conservation des plantes, aires protégées, etc.) ainsi qu’une référence au sommet de Johannesbourg de 2002

submitted by Jean-Patrick LE DUC
See question 11.
submitted by Anonymous

  • United Nations
  • United Nations Environment Programme