ePeerReview: Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services

Comments

Found 17 items (out of 590 total)

Reset Your search: International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) | Round 1

Concept Note
1. Concept Note Page(s): 0 Line(s): 0 Issue: Other	Neville Ash Institutional (Neville.Ash@iucn.org) International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN)

IUCN welcomes and supports the ongoing discussion on enhancing the science-policy interface on biodiversity and ecosystem services, and thanks UNEP for playing a key role in moving this process forwards. However, we have a number of comments on the scoping document, in addition to those submitted by various IUCN members directly, which we hope will help to bring further clarity to what is being proposed.

Response: Noted.

Concept Note
1. Concept Note Page(s): 0 Line(s): 0 Issue: Role of IPBES	Neville Ash Institutional (Neville.Ash@iucn.org) International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN)

In order to better define the scope of what is proposed, the principal objective to bring the best-available science to bear on decision makers and decision making processes should be more explicit, and be used to better guide the scope of proposed activities. Following on from this, we believe that the scope of the mechanism would most appropriately be characterized as: a- bringing together and assessing the best-available science for decision-makers (including, but not limited to, policy-makers); b- highlighting policy-relevant knowledge gaps (that can then be filled by the scientific community); c- delivering and communicating the assembled science into policy processes; and d- facilitating the uptake of science into policy and decision-making processes. In doing so effectively, IPBES will need to operate and function in a nimble and responsive manner, and revisions to the document should keep this in mind.

Response: Hopefully concerns are addressed by the revised programme of work.

Concept Note
1. Concept Note Page(s): 0 Line(s): 0 Issue: Role of IPBES	Neville Ash Institutional (Neville.Ash@iucn.org) International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN)

Some of the current proposed tasks, as described in this document, go beyond the scope of IPBES, particularly undertaking research itself, building capacity, and policy support for applications of the ecosystem services framework. All of these are critical tasks that need to be done to enhance the impact and effectiveness of IPBES, but would not be appropriate tasks for the Platform itself.

Response: Programme of work streamlined to reflect concerns.

Concept Note
1. Concept Note Page(s): 0 Line(s): 0 Issue: IPBES and other ongoing processes	Neville Ash Institutional (Neville.Ash@iucn.org) International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN)

The relationship between this process and the ongoing MA follow-up needs to be clarified to readers, and to delegations to the November meeting. Elements of the MA follow-up are mentioned at various points of the document without a clear link or clarity in what is already underway (filling science gaps, SGA network, etc), and therefore what is being proposed as additional activities in this document. Certainly a more coordinated approach to the MA follow-up would be welcomed, but it should be made clear that this proposal is not all about MA follow-up, and likewise not all MA follow-up is (or should be) contained in this proposal.

Response: Clarified in revised concept note.

Concept Note
1. Concept Note Page(s): 0 Line(s): 0 Issue: IPBES and other ongoing processes	Neville Ash Institutional (Neville.Ash@iucn.org) International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN)

Links between the proposed IPBES and the scientific subsidiary bodies of the biodiversity related MEAs should be made clearer – with a documented summary, or annex, of the consultation process with the various subsidiary bodies that has been undertaken, and a proposal for how IPBES will relate to, and support, these bodies.

Response: See working documents UNEP/IPBES/1/4 and UNEP/IPBES/1/5.

Concept Note
1. Concept Note Page(s): 0 Line(s): 0 Issue: IPBES and other ongoing processes	Neville Ash Institutional (Neville.Ash@iucn.org) International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN)

With a scope of focus on biodiversity and ecosystem services, there’s very little on the international assessment agenda that IPBES is not in some way connected to. The positioning of IPBES in the assessment landscape should therefore be made clearer – for example with respect to the IPCC (will IPBES not address carbon-related services, for example?), UNEP’s GEO assessment, and the World Water Assessment Report.

Response: Language inserted in revised concept note which explicitly mentions that IPBES will draw from these assessment processes.

Concept Note
1. Concept Note Page(s): 0 Line(s): 0 Issue: Other	Neville Ash Institutional (Neville.Ash@iucn.org) International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN)

Much more needs to be included in this document on the proposed mechanism for communications of the IPBES findings and activities. Lessons can be learned from both the MA and IPCC in this regard.

Response: Incorporated in revised programme of work under policy support and outreach component.

Concept Note
1. Concept Note Page(s): 5 Line(s): 13-14 Issue: Institutional arrangements	Neville Ash Institutional (Neville.Ash@iucn.org) International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN)

A credible, legitimate and salient governance structure should also include representation from civil society and the private sector, and IUCN supports the branding and concept of the mechanism to be along the lines of “intergovernmental and multistakeholder”. Note that the annex already includes the involvement of NGOs and the private sector in the proposed Plenary and Operational Steering Group.

Response: Various options on the governance structure and rules and procedures are presented in working documents UNEP/IPBES/1/4 and UNEP/IPBES/1/5 to be used as a basis for deliberations in the November meeting.

Concept Note
1. Concept Note Page(s): 6 Line(s): 10-26 Issue: Role of IPBES	Neville Ash Institutional (Neville.Ash@iucn.org) International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN)

Influencing the research agenda - Although a key task of the IPBES will be to build knowledge, it should be made clear that IPBES will not be doing research itself, but rather it will be bringing together and assessing the research and monitoring outputs. It will hopefully influence the research agenda, and hopefully stimulate the scientific community to fill gaps in policy relevant knowledge, but it won’t do the research. As such, the expected accomplishments are inappropriate – in both cases because they go beyond the scope of IPBES. In the case of the accomplishment ii), this is the role of CBD SBSTTA. However, IPBES could certainly provide the information that would allow SBSTTA to propose more robust, relevant, representative, and realistic targets. It is also inappropriate for this section objective to include developing tools for mainstreaming ecosystem services into development and economic decision making, as this is not a part of influencing the research agenda.

Response: Component deleted.

Concept Note
1. Concept Note Page(s): 6-7 Line(s): 27-14 Issue: Role of IPBES	Neville Ash Institutional (Neville.Ash@iucn.org) International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN)

Sub-Global Assessments - It’s likely that the network of SGAs will form a key resource base for IPBES. However, it’s not clear how what is being proposed in this document differs from the existing network of SGAs, or whether it is proposed that additional support (financial and otherwise) be given to the current SGA network. Either way, the activity to initiate new SGAs is welcomed, and it should be made clear that the SGA network already exists. This section should also include the scoping for future global assessments, as introduced on p4 line 31 through reference to “multiple scales”. Indeed, one of the key values of IPBES compared to the various SGAs is to synthesise at global scales, and undertake global assessment.

Response: Global assessment is now stated in expected accomplishments. Existing SGA network developed under MA follow-up initiative will be subsumed under IPBES if, and when, it is established.

Concept Note
1. Concept Note Page(s): 7-8 Line(s): 15-5 Issue: Role of IPBES	Neville Ash Institutional (Neville.Ash@iucn.org) International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN)

Policy support - This task as written goes beyond the mandate and capacity of IPBES. Whilst the objective for building understanding of the ecosystem services framework, and the assessment of effectiveness of environmental governance in the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity and ecosystem services is an important task of IPBES, subsequent application is rather the task of governments and existing international organisations – both intergovernmental and NGO.

Response: Policy support section revised.

Concept Note
1. Concept Note Page(s): 8 Line(s): 6-19 Issue: Role of IPBES	Neville Ash Institutional (Neville.Ash@iucn.org) International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN)

Horizon scanning and awareness - IPBES will have a key role to play in evaluating the emerging issues as identified by the scientific community, and to identify the science available to support decision-making on emerging issues as identified by the policy community.

Response: Concept paper makes a distinction between horizon scanning (science driven) and assessment (policy driven). Concern will be captured in this framework.

Concept Note
1. Concept Note Page(s): 8-9 Line(s): 20-4 Issue: Role of IPBES	Neville Ash Institutional (Neville.Ash@iucn.org) International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN)

Capacity building - Building capacity for both doing and using assessments is extremely important. That said, this should not be a primary role for the Platform itself, but rather for Governments and other organisations, as a linked activity, and in support of increasing the effectiveness of IPBES and national level science-policy interfaces.

Response: Component deleted.

Concept Note
1. Concept Note Page(s): 9 Line(s): Section 5 Issue: Other	Neville Ash Institutional (Neville.Ash@iucn.org) International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN)

Budget - How much is IPBES going to cost? Who is going to pay? Predicted and potential sources of funding for the first phase at least should be clear, and a preliminary 4 yr budget should be included in this document. At the moment, there is only a brief reference to a trust fund.

Response: Budget indicated in working documents UNEP/IPBES/1/3.

Concept Note
1. Concept Note Page(s): 10 Line(s): 2-24 Issue: Institutional arrangements	Neville Ash Institutional (Neville.Ash@iucn.org) International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN)

A key role for the proposed OSG will be to oversee communications from IPBES. It is suggested that this be added explicitly in the ToR.

Response: Proposed responsibility assigned to secretariat as done in IPCC.

Concept Note
1. Concept Note Page(s): 13 Line(s): Figure Issue: Clarity of text	Neville Ash Institutional (Neville.Ash@iucn.org) International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN)

The figure as it stands isn’t particularly helpful. Perhaps an organogram of structures would be useful, but probably the most useful non-text item to add to the document is the budget.

Response: Removed.

Concept Note
1. Concept Note Page(s): 14 Line(s): 17-33 Issue: Clarity of text	Neville Ash Institutional (Neville.Ash@iucn.org) International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN)

The purposes of IPBES described here in the Annex are not consistent with the purposes for IPBES described in the main document.

Response: This section has been deleted.