The Convention on Biological Diversity: From Realism to Cosmopolitanism

2005 ◽  
Vol 31 ◽  
pp. 335-362 ◽  
Author(s):  
Virginie Maris

The decline of biodiversity is without a doubt one of the most important symptoms of what could be called a “global environmental crisis.” Our ability to stop this decline depends on the capacity to implement an effective, collective system of preservation on a global scale. In this paper, I will analyze the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), the international agreement that aims at creating this type of global cooperation.While I consider that cosmopolitan governance is desirable, given the legitimacy of the preservation of global biological diversity, I will not attempt to directly argue for it here. Still, it is worth mentioning some of the reasons that might lead us to adopt this position. First, certain past conservation measures have been harshly criticized as imperialistic. For example, Project Tiger in India, which Western environmentalists often cited as a success, have had a deleterious effect on local populations.

Author(s):  
Yrjö Haila

The term biodiversity was introduced in the 1980s as a novel framing for the human dependence on the Earth's biosphere. 'Biodiversity loss' became the way to capture a major dimension of global environmental problems. The chapter describes stages of this process. The first phase of the spread of the term was its enthusiastic reception among environmentalists. Second, concern was integrated into international environmental policy at the Rio Conference in 1992 through the adoption of the Convention on Biological Diversity. Efforts to implement the convention have created an environmental regime both internationally and within different countries. However, due to its broad coverage of processes of living nature and its huge ambition to regulate human modification of nature and exploitation of natural resources, there have been major difficulties with implementation. In particular, how to integrate specific issues manifested in local contexts, and the global concern, has proved problematic.


Author(s):  
Sergei Volis ◽  
Salit Kark

The study of biodiversity has received wide attention in recent decades. Biodiversity has been defined in various ways (Gaston and Spicer, 1998, Purvis and Hector 2000, and chapters in this volume). Discussion regarding its definitions is dynamic, with shifts between the more traditional emphasis on community structure to emphasis on the higher ecosystem level or the lower population levels (e.g., chapters in this volume, Poiani et al. 2000). One of the definitions, proposed in the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity held in Rio de Janeiro (1992) is “the diversity within species, between species and of ecosystems.” The within-species component of diversity is further defined as “the frequency and diversity of different genes and/or genomes . . .” (IUCN 1993) as estimated by the genetic and morphological diversity within species. While research and conservation efforts in the past century have focused mainly on the community level, they have recently been extended to include the within-species (Hanski 1989) and the ecosystem levels. The component comprising within-species genetic and morphological diversity is increasingly emphasized as an important element of biodiversity (UN Convention 1992). Recent studies suggest that patterns of genetic diversity significantly influence the viability and persistence of local populations (Frankham 1996, Lacy 1997, Riddle 1996, Vrijenhoek et al. 1985). Revealing geographical patterns of genetic diversity is highly relevant to conservation biology and especially to explicit decision-making procedures allowing systematic rather than opportunistic selection of populations and areas for in situ protection (Pressey et al. 1993). Therefore, studying spatial patterns in within-species diversity may be vital in defining and prioritizing conservation efforts (Brooks et al. 1992). Local populations of a species often differ in the ecological conditions experienced by their members (Brown 1984, Gaston 1990, Lawton et al. 1994). These factors potentially affect population characteristics, structure, and within-population genetic and morphological diversity (Brussard 1984, Lawton 1995, Parsons 1991). The spatial location of a population within a species range may be related to its patterns of diversity (Lesica and Allendorf 1995). Thus, detecting within-species diversity patterns across distributional ranges is important for our understanding of ecological and evolutionary (e.g., speciation) processes (Smith et al. 1997), and for the determination of conservation priorities (Kark 1999).


Oryx ◽  
1994 ◽  
Vol 28 (2) ◽  
pp. 101-106
Author(s):  
Russell A. Mittermeier ◽  
Ian A. Bowles

Biodiversity – a measure of the wealth of species, ecosystems and ecological processes that make up our living planet –received public prominence as a result of the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro in June 1992. The loss of biodiversity, say the authors, is the greatest environmental problem the world faces but the issue has not been given the attention it deserves. With the emergence of the Global Environmental Facility in 1990 came the chance to fund biodiversity conservation on a unprecedented scale and in 1992 the GEF was adopted as the interim funding mechanism for the Convention on Biological Diversity signed at the Earth Summit. Three years after its foundation, the authors of this paper suggest that the GEF has to be reformed radically if it is to become an effective force in conservation. Their conclusions are based on Conservation International's experience with the GEF over the last 3 years in more than 10 countries.


2021 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer Rae Pierce ◽  
Sabrina Drill ◽  
Michael D. Halder ◽  
Mika Mei Jia Tan ◽  
Anushri Tiwari ◽  
...  

Cities have a critical role to play in meeting global-scale biodiversity targets. Urban socio-ecological systems connect human and ecological well-being. The outsized impact of cities reaches well-beyond their geographic borders through cultural, ecological, and economic interactions. Although cities account for just 2% of the earth's surface, they host over half of the human population and are responsible for 75% of consumption. The Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and others have acknowledged the important role cities can play in achieving global targets. In response, at least 110 cities have produced plans focused on biodiversity, but we do not know the extent to which these city plans align with global targets or what role they play in achieving these targets. Here, we explore the relationship between global biodiversity conservation targets and local biodiversity plans to identify how elements at the two scales align or diverge. We compared the CBD Strategic Plan 2011–2020 (Aichi Targets) with 44 local biodiversity plans (often called LBSAPs) from cities around the world. We analyzed more than 2,800 actions from the local plans to measure the relationship with these global targets. Our results show how local approaches to biodiversity conservation can inform post-2020 global frameworks to improve coordination between global and local scale processes. We identify actions particular to the local scale that are critical to conserve global biodiversity and suggest a framework for improved coordination between actors at different scales that address their respective roles and spheres of influence.


2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 1-12
Author(s):  
Olena Khrushch

Evidently, a globalized society causes global environmental crises. Undoubtedly, survival of human life on the planet Earth is threatened. Is there any connection between globalization, environmental crises and psychological manifestations? What are the psychological perspectives linking the ecological damages from local to the global scale? This article explores such intricate relationships and discusses the implications. The underlying principal cause is human’s unending greed to acquire maximum materials and power to control the planet and entire humanity. The greed is believed to be a bottomless pit which exhausts the person in an endless effort to satisfy the need without ever reaching satisfaction. The greedy people are supposed to have biological, psychological and sociological drives. Evidently, global destruction of the ecosystems and natural environment are directly or indirectly linked to unprecedented chronic human greed and self-indulgence. Undoubtedly, unencumbered chronic greed of a few elite institutions led by top capitalists has put the entire planet in havoc and infiltrated widespread sufferings at the global scale. Conclusively, psychological basis of environmental problems has a sociological and socio-historical scope within the frame of globalization. Psychological account of the environmental crisis is explained subsequently in this article followed by a case study of deforestation of Carpathian Mountains staged by a greedy Austrian man.


Author(s):  
Melanie Zurba ◽  
Anastasia Papadopoulos

AbstractGlobal environmental governance (GEG) forums, such as those convened through the United Nations, result in the development of monumental guiding frameworks such as the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) Conference of Parties (COPs) Aichi and post-2020 targets. The ratification of policy frameworks by member and/or signatory states can result in major shifts in environmental policy and decision-making and has major implications for Indigenous communities. In this article, we present systematic review of the peer-reviewed literature on Indigenous participation in GEG forums, and focus on the specific questions: (1) what GEG forums include Indigenous participation and (2) how do Indigenous peoples participate in GEG forums, including how their perspectives and knowledges are framed and/or included/excluded within governance discussions, decisions, and negotiations. We provide a bibliometric analysis of the articles and derive seven inductively determined themes from our review: (1) Critical governance forums and decisions; (2) inclusion and exclusion of Indigenous voices and knowledge in GEG forums; (3) capacity barriers; (4) knowledge hierarchies: inclusion, integration, and bridging; (5) representation and grouping of Indigenous peoples in GEG; (6) need for networks among and between Indigenous peoples and other governance actors; and (7) Indigenous peoples influence on GEG decisions and processes. Our findings can be used to improve GEG forums by contributing to the development strategies that address the barriers and inequities to meaningful and beneficial Indigenous participation and can contribute to future research that is focused on understanding the experiences of Indigenous peoples within GEG forums.


2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (15) ◽  
Author(s):  
Nikolas Sellheim

At the 10th Conference of the Parties (CoP) of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) in 2010. the so-called Aichi Biodiversity Targets were adopted. In Target 11, states are to use protected areas and ‘other effective area-based conservation measures’ (OECMs) to achieve quantitative goals of biodiversity protection. However, only at CoP14 in 2018 a definition of OECMs was put in place. This paper presents how despite the absence of a definition countries and organisations have made use of OECMs in their endeavours to protect biodiversity. Focusing particularly on Arctic countries, it is shown that OECMs constitute an important tool for indigenous and local recognition and how the discourse within the CBD has made increasing reference to indigenous and local communities. It is furthermore discussed how OECMs, despite challenges of application, can contribute to a redefinition of ‘conservation’ and to the reaching of biodiversity targets 2020 and beyond.


2014 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 1-20 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lisa M. Campbell ◽  
Catherine Corson ◽  
Noella J. Gray ◽  
Kenneth I. MacDonald ◽  
J. Peter Brosius

This special issue introduces readers to collaborative event ethnography (CEE), a method developed to support the ethnographic study of large global environmental meetings. CEE was applied by a group of seventeen researchers at the Tenth Conference of the Parties (COP10) to the Convention of Biological Diversity (CBD) to study the politics of biodiversity conservation. In this introduction, we describe our interests in global environmental meetings as sites where the politics of biodiversity conservation can be observed and as windows into broader governance networks. We specify the types of politics we attend to when observing such meetings and then describe the CBD, its COP, challenges meetings pose for ethnographic researchers, how CEE responds to these challenges generally, and the specifics of our research practices at COP10. Following a summary of the contributed papers, we conclude by reflecting on the evolution of CEE over time.


2018 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 141-170 ◽  
Author(s):  
Louisa Parks

This article discusses the existence and shape of a discursive space for local and indigenous voices in the arena of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). Critical literature on global environmental governance argues that dominant or hegemonic discourses shape international-level decision making on environmental protection, and delimit the boundaries of possible policy choices. These discourses are identified by such scholarship as reflecting a dominant worldview stemming from a capitalist view of value and a dichotomous view of nature as separate from culture, which precludes discursive spaces for worldviews based on different conceptions of value and more holistic views of nature as inextricably bound up with culture. Such worldviews are often held by indigenous peoples and local communities considered to be crucial in protecting the environment and natural resources. The present article aims to contribute to this debate by looking in detail at decisions of the parties to the CBD, which is an arena argued by some to be more open to local and indigenous voices. The article presents a discourse analysis of the CBD's decisions since its creation and up to its most recent meetings held in late 2016. The analysis applies the arguments of the critical literature to the decisions of the CBD in order to investigate how far they conform to the critical view of them, or whether, and if so to what extent, they host spaces for local and indigenous voices.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document