Glo lobal consultation on the Post 2020 Glo lobal Bio iodiversity - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Glo lobal consultation on the Post 2020 Glo lobal Bio iodiversity Framework in in relation to ABS and the Nagoya Protocol 25 August 2019, Nairobi, Kenya

Opening remarks Mr. David Cooper Deputy Executive Secretary

Objectives and outcomes • Discuss how to integrate ABS and the Nagoya Protocol in post 2020 framework • Share experiences on the impact of Aichi Target 16 • Identify potential elements on ABS and the Nagoya Protocol that could be included • Suggestions for next steps Report will contribute to the development of the post 2020 framework

Expectations What are your expectations from this workshop?

Morning programme Time Session Background and considerations on the post-2020 global biodiversity framework in 10.05 – 10.30 relation to access and benefit-sharing and the Nagoya Protocol (presentation of the a.m. background, Q&A) 10.30 – 11 Coffee break a.m. ABS and the Nagoya Protocol: looking at the big picture (small group discussions) 1. Impact of Aichi Target 16 on promoting ratification and implementation of the Nagoya Protocol and how the post-2020 global biodiversity framework can support Parties in their implementation of access and benefit-sharing and the 11 a.m. – Nagoya Protocol 12.15 p.m. 2. Visioning the world we want in 2050: contribution of access and benefit-sharing and the Nagoya Protocol 3. Access and benefit-sharing and the Nagoya Protocol in the light of technological changes: challenges and opportunities 12.15 – 1 Possible elements on access and benefit-sharing and the Nagoya Protocol in the p.m. post-2020 global biodiversity framework (general discussion) 1 – 2.30 p.m. Lunch break

Aft fternoon programme Time Session Possible elements on access and benefit-sharing and the Nagoya Protocol in 2.30 – 3.30 the post-2020 framework (continued) p.m. (small group discussions) 3.30 – 4 p.m. Coffee break Possible elements on ABS and the Nagoya Protocol in the post-2020 global 4 – 5.30 p.m. biodiversity framework (continued) (wrap-up and general discussion) Closure of the Consultation • 5.30 – 6 p.m. Participants’ reflections from the discussions and suggestions for next steps • Closing remarks

Background and considerations on the post 2020 Glo lobal Bio iodiversity Framework in in relation to ABS and the Nagoya Protocol

Relevant decisions COP-MOP decision NP-3/15 • Welcomes the decision by the COP (decision 14/34) • Invites Parties to the Protocol to participate in the process • Encourages Parties to undertake measures to enhance implementation of the Nagoya Protocol in the context of the post-2020 global biodiversity framework ➢ Parties decided not to have a separate implementation plan for the Nagoya Protocol

Relevant decisions COP-MOP decision NP-3/15 • Recommends that the findings on general issues of compliance as well as the outcomes of the first assessment and review of the effectiveness of the Protocol be considered in the development of the post-2020 framework • Requests that the Compliance Committee consider how to support and promote compliance with the Nagoya Protocol within the post-2020 framework

Relevant decisions COP decision 14/31 on enhancing integration under the Convention and its Protocols • Encourages Parties to consider further integration of ABS into other areas of work under the Convention as part of discussions on the post-2020 framework

Aichi Target 16 The target addresses several elements: • Entry into force of the Nagoya Protocol by 2015; • The Nagoya Protocol is operational, consistent with national legislation • Putting the necessary ABS measures and institutional structures for the Nagoya Protocol; • Publishing mandatory information in the ABS Clearing- House. ➢ 2010 Strategic Plan: ABS Target was about ratifying and implementing the Nagoya Protocol.

ABS and SDGs Target 15.6 “Promote fair and equitable sharing of the benefits arising from the utilization of genetic resources and promote appropriate access to such resources, as internationally agreed.” Indicator: Number of countries that have adopted legislative, administrative and policy frameworks to ensure fair and equitable sharing of benefits ➢ The indicator covers the Nagoya Protocol and International Treaty

120 Ratif ific ications/Accessions to the Nagoya Protocol August 2019 Dark green: NP Parties Lime green: NP signatories White: Non-CBD Parties Beige: CBD Parties Afghanistan, Albania, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Austria, Belarus, Belgium, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, China, Comoros, Congo, Côte D’Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba, Czech Republic, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, Eritrea, Estonia, Eswatini (Kingdom of), Ethiopia, European Union, Fiji, Finland, France, Gabon, Gambia, Germany, Ghana, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea Bissau, Guyana, Honduras, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lao PDR, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, the Federated States of Micronesia, Mongolia, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands, Niger, Norway, Pakistan, Palau, Panama, Peru, Philippines, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Samoa, Sao Tome and Principe, Senegal, Serbia, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Slovakia, South Africa, Spain, Sudan, Sweden, Switzerland, the Syrian Arab Republic, Tajikistan, Togo, Tuvalu, Uganda, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Vanuatu, Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of), Viet Nam, Zambia and Zimbabwe DISCLAIMER: The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries.

Status of f implementation Parties Non-Parties 120* 78 ABS National Focal 119 54 Point Competent National 77 8 Authority ABS measures 88 26 (national) Checkpoint 31 2 IRCCs 16 0 Sources: ABS-CH, INR, NBSAPs August 2019 * 2 countries have ratified but are not yet Parties

Progress in implementation First assessment and review of the Protocol at COP- MOP 3 • Decision NP-3/1: Outcomes and key findings • Parties and non-Parties are advancing in implementation • Parties to the CBD are at different stages • Further efforts are needed to make the Protocol operational • Areas where further work is needed • Capacity-building, awareness raising, resource mobilization, or the ABS CH • Parties may identify areas/issues where further guidance by COP-MOP could support Parties efforts in implementing the Protocol

ABS and the Nagoya Protocol: Looking at the big picture

Group dis iscussions on the following topics 1. Impact of Aichi Target 16 2. Visioning the state of nature we want in 2050 3. ABS and the Nagoya Protocol in the light of technological changes ➢ 15 Minutes per topic

Ambition of f national targets established towards Aichi Target 16 Target lower than Aichi Target 16 (or not all elements included) National target similar to overall scope and level of ambition of Aichi Target 16 No related national targets 30% 51% 19% Source: Analysis of level of ambition and scope of national and regional targets established in the NBSAPs

Im Impact of f Aichi Target 16 1. Did having Aichi Target 16 help promoting ratification and implementation of the Nagoya Protocol? • How did it help/not help? • What were the reasons? • What should be changed or done differently? 2. How can the post 2020 framework help facilitate the implementation of ABS and the Nagoya Protocol • What elements should be included in the framework to facilitate ABS (goal, milestones, targets, indicators, enabling mechanisms, etc.)? • What are the key requirements to make the element feasible, effective, successful (e.g. SMART, level of ambition) ?

Vision and Mission Vision: "Living in Harmony with Nature" where "By 2050, biodiversity is valued, conserved, restored and wisely used, maintaining ecosystem services, sustaining a healthy planet and delivering benefits essential for all people.“ The mission of the new plan is to "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. (...)

Visioning the state of f nature we want in 2050 1. How can ABS and the Nagoya Protocol contribute to the vision of “living in harmony with nature” ? 2. What would need to change in the implementation of the Nagoya Protocol to make the vision a reality by 2050?

ABS and the Nagoya Protocol in the light of technological changes 1. What technological changes and advances are (or can be) of relevance for the implementation of ABS and the Nagoya Protocol? • What are the challenges? • What are the opportunities? 2. How can the technological changes be addressed or promoted at national or international level?