Developing the UK Biodiversity Indicators James WilliamsIndicators & Reporting Manager,Joint Nature Conservation Committee,Monkstone House, City Road, Peterborough, PE1 1JY. United Kingdom.James.Williams@jncc.gov.uk+44 (0)1733 86 68 68www.jncc.gov.uk/biyp June 2013
Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020 Framework for all Conventions and stakeholders. Vision: Living in harmony with nature. By 2050, biodiversity is valued, conserved, restored and wisely used, maintaining ecosystem services, sustaining a healthy planet and delivering benefits essential for all people.” Mission Take effective and urgent action to halt the loss of biodiversity in order to ensure that by 2020 ecosystems are resilient and continue to provide essential services, thereby securing the planet’s variety of life, and contributing to human well-being, and poverty eradication 20 Aichi Biodiversity Targets under 5 Strategic Goals http://www.cbd.int/sp/targets/
Amainstreaming Targets on: awareness, values/accounting, incentives, mainstreaming sustainable use Bpressures Targets on: habitat loss, fisheries, sustainable land use, pollution, invasive aliens, climate change impacts Csafeguarding Targets on: protected areas, threatened species, domesticated species and wild relatives Dbenefits Targets on: ecosystem services, restoration, access to genetic resources Eknowledge and capacity Targets on: NBSAPs, local communities, science base, resources http://www.cbd.int/sp/targets/ Strategic Plan Goals & Targets
UK indicators post-2010 • 2010/11: UK biodiversity indicators reviewed • gap analysis & data quality check • all of the indicators can be re-used, albeit with some requiring modification • some new indicators will need to be developed to fill gaps • 2012: new framework implemented • interim set of 24 indicators (35 measures) published May 2012 • assigned existing indicators to specific goals and targets • some may be relevant to multiple targets / goals • work begun to adjust the UK biodiversity indicator suite, and to create new indicators to fill the gaps identified in the review
The Strategic Plan and the UK biodiversity indicators • Each indicator is assigned to a Strategic Goal • e.g. indicators with the prefix ‘A’ are considered to be of most direct relevance to Goal A. • Each indicator is mapped against target(s) as ‘primary indicator(s)’, or as ‘other relevant indicator(s)’. • e.g. Target 4 is represented by 3 ‘primary indicators’ (A3, A4, B3), and 3 ‘other relevant indicators’ (B1, B2, D1) • ‘Primary indicators’ are most closely linked to a target • ‘Other relevant indicators’ have less strong links but still relevant • Indicators may also be of relevance to targets within other goals • e.g. Indicator E2 is a ‘primary indicator’ for Target 20 in Goal E, but is also an ‘other relevant indicator’ for Targets 2 and 3 in Goal A.
Targets on: awareness, values/accounting, incentives, mainstreaming sustainable use Strategic Goal A mainstreaming Under development A1: Awareness, understanding & support A3: Value of biodiversity integrated into decision making A4: Global impact A2: Conservation volunteering
Strategic Goal B pressures Targets on: habitat loss, fisheries, sustainable land use, pollution, invasive aliens, climate change B4: Spring Index B6: Invasive species B1a:Agri-environment Schemes B5a: Air pollution Under development B3: Integration of biodiversity into business activity B4: Climate change adaptation B7: Water quality B1b: Sustainable forestry B2 Sustainable fisheries B5b: Marine pollution
Strategic Goal C safeguarding Targets on: protected areas, threatened species, domesticated species and wild relatives C6: Butterflies C5: Birds C1: Protected sites C7: Plants Under development C2: Habitat connectivity C3: Threatened habitats C4: Threatened species C9: Plant genetic resources C8: Bats C9: Animal genetic resources
Strategic Goal D benefits Targets on: ecosystem services, restoration, access to genetic resources Under development D2: Ecosystem Services D1: Marine fish size classes
Strategic Goal E knowledge and capacity Targets on: NBSAPs, local communities, science base, resources E2a: Expenditure on UK biodiversity Under development E1: Biodiversity data for decision making E2b: Expenditure on international biodiversity
Mapping the UK biodiversity indicators to the Aichi Targets • Comparison of UK indicators with global-level indicators developed by the CBD demonstrates a fairly good fit. • At present, no indicators have been identified for Targets 16, 17 and 18. • Target 16 is about the Nagoya protocol on access and benefits sharing – it would be premature to develop an indicator until how this is going to work is resolved • Target 17 is about National Biodiversity Strategy and Action P;lan (NBSAP) – effectively this is a yes/no response at a national level, so is suitable for a global indicator, but not a national one • Target 18 is about indigenous communities – less relevant for UK
Using the UK indicators • UK biodiversity indicators anticipated to form a major part of the UK’s 5th CBD national report • Need to analyse progress for each Aichi target • Likely to need to integrate messages from different indicators • Other data sources and information also likely to be necessary • Some parts of some targets may not be covered
UK Biodiversity Indicators – governance & implementation Statutory and Non Governmental Organisations, Academia Biodiversity Indicators Forum Four Countries Group Decisions Review Defra, Devolved Administrations, JNCC UK Biodiversity Indicators SG Advice Defra, Devolved Administrations, Country Agencies, JNCC, NGOs Advice Project Group Decisions Defra, JNCC
Choosing Indicators Each indicator should have the following characteristics: • Policy relevant and meaningful • Biodiversity relevant • Scientifically sound and methodologically well founded • Show progress towards the 2020 targets • Easy to understand • Based on affordable monitoring, available and routinely collected data • Amenable to modelling of cause-effect relationships • Good spatial and temporal coverage of data • Applicable at a national scale • Aggregation possible at a range of scales • Sensitive to change The set as a whole should be: • Representative • Limited in number
CBD 5th National Report • Reports due to be submitted end March 2014 • Part I – An update on biodiversity status, trends, and threats and implications for human well-being • Key information: State of biodiversity reports (e.g. birds, butterflies, …) • Part II – The National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (NBSAP), its implementation, and the mainstreaming of biodiversity • Key information: Biodiversity and Environment Strategies. http://www.cbd.int/nr5/ http://www.cbd.int/nr5/
5th National Report • Part III – Progress towards the 2015 and 2020 Aichi Biodiversity Targets and contributions to the relevant 2015 Targets of the Millennium Development Goals • Key information: biodiversity indicators • + Appendices on thematic Programmes of Work & cross-cutting issues • Yet to decide what to include http://www.cbd.int/nr5/
Individual indicators can contribute to the assessment of multiple targets (or goals) Flexible framework; do not need to have the same indicator at each scale Goal Target 2 Target 3 Target 1 Regional Targets (e.g. EU) National targets
Why are we losing biodiversity? What do we do about biodiversity loss? Framework from AHTEG How is the status of biodiversity changing? What are the implications of biodiversity loss?
Choosing Indicators (1) • Policy relevant and meaningful: Each indicator should be policy relevant. It should send a clear message at a level appropriate for policy and management decision making. It should be meaningful on a regional level. • Biodiversity relevant: Each indicator should be relevant for biodiversity. • Scientifically sound and methodologically well founded: A clear description of the methodology used should be available as the indicator may be used in other indicator initiatives also. • Progress towards target: Each indicator should show progress towards the 2020 targets. • Broad acceptance and understandability: Each indicator should be easy to understand and to document.
Choosing Indicators (2) • Affordable monitoring, available and routinely collected data: Each indicator should be able to be updated regularly. • Affordable modelling: Information on cause-effect relationships should be achievable and quantifiable. • Spatial and temporal coverage of data: the data should be consistent in space and cover all or most of [select spatial resolution]. The temporal coverage of data should be as long as possible, and relevant to the timescale for policy making. • National scale and representativeness of data: Each indicator should apply to the national and relevant supra-national. • Sensitive: Each indicator should be able to detect changes in systems in timeframes and on the scales that are relevant to policy decisions, but also be robust so that measuring errors do not affect their interpretation.
Traffic Light Assessments • Two assessment periods for each indicator • Long-term – assessment of change since the earliest date for which data are available • If data do not precede 1996 a long term assessment is not made • Short-term - assessment of change since 2000 • Assessment of trend, not distance to target