BIODIVERSITY MAINSTREAMING Building legal & policy frameworks 18 November 2015 International Workshop on Mainstreaming Biodiversity Ms. Yolanda Saito, ysaito@idlo.int
For discussion today: Th The Good, , th the Bad and th the Opportunities • What are the latest advances in law and policy? The Good • What challenges remain that block progress? The Bad • From what we know now, how can we do better? The (missed) opportunities
We agree law and policy is important …but Attainment most of the Aichi Biodiversity Targets will require implementation of a package of actions, typically including: : leg legal l an and d po polic icy fr framework rks, socioeconomic incentives aligned to such frameworks, public and stakeholder engagement, monitoring and enforcement. Coh ohere rence of of pol polic icie ies ac acro ross s sectors sec rs an and d the the corr rrespondin ing go govern rnment min inis istrie ies is necessary to deliver an effective package of actions. Global Bio Gl iodiv ivers ersity ity Outl tlook ok - 4 4
But why? What is the value? Because mainstreaming calls for us to: • change to ch o th the valu alue str tructures of institutions and individuals • modify fy decis ision-makin ing an and practices of production and political regimes • reach ou out to o a a lar large number of of in instit itutions an and se sectors s due to the breadth and complexity of landscape and seascape level mainstreaming • sc scale le up act actions for biodiversity, beyond government, to engage business, citizens and communities to be agents for biodiversity. Mainstreaming needs both tec echnic ical l and no norm rmativ ive tools for success. We must not only set out the processes and pathways to sustainability, but also the social conditions for people to take those steps towards a new vision.
Just quickly…what do we mean by laws?
The Good - what progress has been made? • At t poli olicy le level • Since 2010, 62 NBSAPs submitted, 53 incorporate SP-B • More nati tional poli olicie ies incorporate biodiversity concerns • At t le legis isla lative le level • More biod iodiv iversit ity-specific la laws an and pol olic icies • Adjustments to se sectoral l la laws to consider biodiversity moving from command + control to incentives • A new generation of of biod iodiversity main ainstreaming la laws (spatial planning law, PES law, food waste, urban farming) • Innovative le In legal l tools ls (EIA/SEA, fishing / resource rights, community protocols, benefit sharing agreements) • On legal l reform • Increased commitment to ad adap aptive le legal al reform – better assessments, selection of legal approach, implementation
The Good – what has law contributed? Setting biod iodiv iversit ity main ainstreamin ing as as a a national l prio riority (raising awareness, debate) Enshrining biod iodiv iversit ity prin rincip iples in into decis ision-makin ing (setting norms, EIAs, safeguards) Setting a le legal l bas asis is for biod iodiversity poli olicy/planning across sectors and levels of government Setting out cle clear man andates for cr cross-cuttin ing biod iodiversit ity in institutions (policy-setting, information hub) Build ildin ing con onfid idence of of stakeholders in new processes and incentives (reform of perverse incentives, MBIs) Recognizin ing community rig rights + + cu customary ry la law, also sui generis regimes and rights-based approaches Building in equit ity, ju justice an and fair irness into outcomes
The Bad - what challenges remain? • Lack of La of ac action on on la laws with ith perverse im impacts: • PA legislation without effecting M&E – tragedy of the commons • Incorrect pricing of subsidies, whether too high or too low • Beneficial use laws • More attention needed to o ch choosin ing th the rig right le legal in instrument, matching legal approach with capacity and raising ambition with experience. • Build ildin ing up th the con onditions for su successful l le legal l reform, avoiding reactionary legislative action towards building legal preparedness. • Commitment to legal reform as a lon long-term ad adaptive process le led by y national le legal l ch champions – within govt, civil society, communities. • Use of rights-based approaches to emphasize biodiversity not only a technical issue, but an is issu sue of of ju justice an and equity.
Where do we go from here? Finding solutions Sustainable Development Goals highlight the importance of law & justice: 16.3 Promote th the ru rule le of of la law at the national and international levels and ensure equal access to justice for all 16.6 Develop effective, ac accountable an and tr transparent in institutions at all levels 16.7 Ensure resp sponsive, in inclu clusive, par articipatory ry an and representativ ive deci cision-makin ing at all levels 16.10 Ensure publi lic ac access to o in information and protect fundamental freedoms, in accordance with national legislation and international agreements 16.b Promote and enforce non on-discrimin inatory la laws an and poli olicie ies for or su sustainable le development
Opportunities – building methodologies How? What? 1. Se 1. Settin ing up up conditi tions - Clear policy goals Strengthened laws Str s - Cross-cutting assessments (legal frameworks + - Awareness raising + consultations flexible legal tools) 2. Cho 2. Choosing leg egal ap approach - Selecting best-fit instrument Cap Capable ins nstitutio ions - Legislative drafting Empowered peo Em people (govt, civil society, - Validation (core values, academia) motivations) 3. 3. Imp Implementati tion - Building capacity - Legal empowerment - Monitoring + adapting
Country example – Engaging individuals and communities into conservation Peru, priv rivate con onserv rvation/landscape ap approach Govt-run PAs could not meet targets for size and connectivity. Rural livelihoods needed. Civil society worked closedly with government throughout legal reform + implementation Certainty through natl legal framework Conservation agreements negotiated Conservamos por Naturaleza program uses social media, crowd-sourcing to keep citizens inspired/interested. Landscape-level conservation, with over 1.2 million hectares and +170 private areas.
Next steps – making the case for law/policy How do we make the case for increased action / investment in law and policy support for biodiversity mainstreaming? What are other examples of good/bad mainstreaming laws? What have been the catalysts for success? Are they worth the investment? Is law and policy being adequately assessed in the design of mainstreaming tools? What do countries need to catalyse action? What is the role of natl vs intl actors? Is biodiversity mainstreaming an issue of justice and equity? If so, how can we communicate this better? How do we make law/policy not just an enabling condition but also a bottom-up tool for change?
For more information: ID IDLO materia ials on on SD SDGs: Materials ls fr from th the ID IDLO-SCBD In Initi itiative on on Le Legal l Preparedness for Ach chie ievin ing th the Aic ichi i Biod iodiversity Tar argets: • Doing Justice to Sustainable Development, 2014 Scoping Paper on Legal Aspects of Target 3 - Incentives, 2014 Scoping Paper on Legal Aspects of Target 11 – Protected Areas and other effective area-based conservation measures, 2014 Scoping Paper on Legal Aspects of Target 16 – Nagoya Protocol, 2014 Roundtable on Legal Preparedness for NBSAP Implementation and Mainstreaming, WGRI-5, 2014 Experts’ Retreat: Promoting Laws for Biodiversity , CBD COP 12, 2014 E-learning modules – Building Legal Frameworks to Implement the Nagoya Protocol (forthcoming)
The International Development Law Organization (IDLO) enables governments and empowers people to reform laws and strengthen institutions to promote peace, justice, sustainable development and economic opportunity. www.idlo.int Twitter@IDLOnews
Recommend
More recommend
