Set B: Questions based on the text of the existing Strategic Plan
Note: You must sign in or sign up for an account to be able to submit your answers.
In the preamble of decision IX/9
, in particular in its paragraph (b), the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity recognized that the revised and updated Strategic Plan should inter alia build upon the existing Strategic Plan (adopted in decision VI/26
) and avoid unnecessary changes. If you would like to base you suggestions for the revised and updated Strategic Plan on the text of the existing Strategic Plan, please address the questions below. However, it is useful to read the open questions in Set A above. You may find some questions interesting and decide to answer them.
11. There are two introductory paragraphs in the Strategic Plan stating that the Plan is “to guide further implementation the Convention at the national, regional and global levels”; and that its purpose is “to effectively halt the loss of biodiversity so as to secure the continuity of its beneficial uses”
Do we need to modify these paragraphs, delete them and/or add new ones? If yes, make the changes and, if possible, explain the reasons for the changes.
12. In addition to the two introductory paragraphs, the Strategic Plan comprises four sections and an appendix:
Is it necessary to add or delete section(s) from the above list? If yes, please list them and, if possible, explain why they should be added or deleted?
- A. The issue
- B. Mission
- C. Strategic goals and objectives
- D. Review
13. Section “A. The issue ” has six subheadings/messages
on what biodiversity is, its importance, and, during the period before 2002, the increasing rate of its loss, the threats, the adoption and importance of the Convention on Biological Diversity, the main achievements since the adoption of the Convention, the challenges in implementing the Convention and thus the expected added value of the Strategic Plan.
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.
14. What are the strategic actions that should be taken to address the issues identified in question 13 above?
15. Section “B. Mission”
states that Parties commit themselves to a more effective and coherent implementation of the three objectives of the Convention, to achieve by 2010 a significant reduction of the current rate of biodiversity loss at the global, regional and national level as a contribution to poverty alleviation and to the benefit of all life on earth. The "Mission" of the Strategic Plan and the 2010 Biodiversity Target are one and the same. This target was subsequently endorsed by the World Summit on Sustainable Development and the United Nations General Assembly and was incorporated as a new target under the Millennium Development Goals
, as target 7.B (“Reduce biodiversity loss, achieving, by 2010, a significant reduction in the rate of loss”). In paragraph (d) of the preamble to decision IX/9
, the Conference of the Parties recommends that the Plan include short-term targets or milestones and a long-term target or vision, developed on the basis of robust scientific evidence.
15.1 What should be the years for the short and long-term-targets, bearing in mind that 2015 (target for MDGs), 2020 and 2050 have been mentioned? If possible, explain your choice. See some views in para 20 in document UNEP/CBD/COP/9/14/Add.1
15.2 What should the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity aim to achieve in the short term e.g. by 2020 and in the long term e.g. by 2050?
15.3 Is there a need to change the content of the statement of the post 2010 biodiversity target, in other words the content of the Mission of the Strategic Plan? Explain your answer and, if possible, specify the scientific basis of your explanation. See some views in paras 15 to 19 in document UNEP/CBD/COP/9/14/Add.1
16. Section “C Strategic goals and objectives”
sets out four goals, each with four to six objectives. Many Parties emphasized that the revision of these goals and objectives should be based on a thorough assessment of progress made. Assessment of these goals and objectives was carried out at COP-8 and COP-9 resulting in decisions VIII/8, IX/8 and IX/9.
16.1 Is there a need to modify/fine-tune the goals and their objectives? If yes, describe how and explain whenever possible.
16.2 Is there a need to add new goals and objectives? If yes, list them and explain whenever possible. In particular is there a need to add strategic goals and objectives that will ensure closer links with the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) in light of the fact that the 2010 biodiversity target was endorsed by the World Summit on Sustainable Development and the United Nations General Assembly, and incorporated as a new target under the MDGs?
17. Section “D: Review”
: ”states that the Plan will be implemented through the programmes of work developed under the Convention, national biodiversity strategies and action plans, and other activities, and that better methods should be developed to evaluate progress. Accordingly, a framework for assessing progress in the implementation of the Strategic Plan and achievement of the 2010 biodiversity target was developed in decision VII/30 and refined in decision VIII/15. This framework provides global sub-targets and indicators. Monitoring according to the framework complements national reports provided periodically by countries according to a timetable established by COP.
17.1 What are your views about better methods that should be developed to evaluate progress?
17.2 What are your views on the past review of the Strategic Plan, including the value of national and thematic reports, and the role of the clearing house mechanism of the Convention, if possible?
18. The “Appendix”
lists obstacles to the implementation of the Convention. Is it necessary to revise the list of obstacles?