UNITED
NATIONS
BES
Intergovernmental Science-Policy
Platform on Biodiversity and
Ecosystem Services
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
Distr.: General
Original: English
Draft Scoping Report for the methodological assessment regarding
diverse conceptualization of multiple values of nature and its benefits,
including biodiversity and ecosystem services
Note by the Secretariat
IPBES-3 requested (IPBES-3/1, section V, para 3) to revise the report on scoping for the
methodological assessment regarding diverse conceptualization of multiple values of
nature and its benefits, including biodiversity and ecosystem functions and services
(IPBES/3/8), based on the comments following an open Government and Stakeholder
review and comments received during IPBES-3 for the consideration by the Plenary at its
fourth session. The scoping report for the methodological assessment was submitted for
review by governments and stakeholders from 26 February - 31 March 2015.
The comments from the open review were further discussed in the IPBES 3(d) Expert
Group meeting in Budapest, Hungary, June 8-12, and the scoping document was revised
based on these comments as well the comments made during the IPBES-3. After
addressing above mentioned comments, the scoping document went through short
internal Expert Group review, and draft scoping report for the full assessment is now
ready for the second round of open review.
The second round of open Government and Stakeholder review will run from 28th of
September until 31st of October.
I.
Introduction
1.
In accordance with the Plenary approved work programme 2014–2018, the
Bureau and the Multidisciplinary Expert Panel agreed to prepare, for consideration by
the Plenary at the fourth session, a scoping document for the methodological assessment
regarding diverse conceptualization of multiple values of nature and its benefits,
including biodiversity and ecosystem services, which is set out in this present note. It has
been developed by an expert group in accordance with the draft procedures for the
preparation of the Platform’s deliverables (IPBES/2/9).
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
II.
Scope, rationale, utility and assumptions
A. Scope
2.
The objective of the proposed methodological assessment is to assess the diverse
conceptualization of values of biodiversity and ecosystem services (provisioning,
regulating and cultural) consistent with the IPBES conceptual framework, valuation
methodologies, how to integrate the diverse concepts and values and valuation
methodologies for decision-making by relevant stakeholders, and assess the knowledge,
data gaps and uncertainties.
B. Geographic boundary of the assessment
3.
Global
C. Rationale
4.
Current governance, institutional and policy design rarely consider the diverse
conceptualizations of multiple values of nature and its benefits. The advantages of taking
into account the diversity and complexity of the multiple values of nature and its benefits
include: (i) making visible the wide spectrum of benefits we derive from nature, including
implicit or critical values: (ii) choosing and designing appropriate valuation assessments:
(iii) avoiding unnecessary conflicts or negative outcomes; and (iv) empowering
individuals and groups who are disadvantaged. Valuation is a key policy tool for informed
decisions by a range of stakeholders including governments, private sector, indigenous
peoples and community organizations and managers of terrestrial and marine
ecosystems.
5.
Therefore, a critical evaluation of the concepts and methodologies regarding the
diverse conceptualization of multiple values of nature and its benefits, including
biodiversity and ecosystem functions and services, will provide the knowledge base for
developing practical policy tools as well as assist with assessing the literature for the
different regional and thematic deliverables, taking into account the different worldviews
and national policies and circumstances.
6.
This assessment will build upon the revised preliminary guidelines for the
methodological assessment regarding the diverse values of nature and its benefits,
including biodiversity and ecosystem functions and services. The guide however, did not
critically assess different valuation techniques, or how to integrate and bridge, where
appropriate, different values, or how different world views and values have been
included in decision-making, or lead to the development of practical policy tools,
methodologies and approaches. The assessment, which will also take into account
experiences learnt during the regional assessments, will result in revised practical
guidelines, which will be available for the preparation of the second-order draft of the
global assessment.
7.
The assessment, and revised guidelines, will facilitate the undertaking of the
global assessment, as well as any future IPBES assessments, in a consistent manner and
focus on the relevance of the findings to a range of stakeholders. The assessment and
2
revised guidelines will also facilitate national assessments, national policy formulation
and implementation of Aichi targets 1 and 21, which require assessment, synthesis and
communications regarding the multiple values of biodiversity
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
D. Utility
8.
The assessment will result in the development of revised guidelines for thematic
and regional, sub-regional and global assessments and the development of tools and
methodologies for incorporating economic, social and cultural values and health
implications into decision-making by a range of stakeholders, including governments, the
private sector, indigenous peoples and civil society.
9.
This work will be directly applicable to the work of the Task Force on Policy
support tools and methodologies and the Task Force on Knowledge, Information and
Data. It will help identify important gaps in the scientific literature and in practical policy
making that need to be addressed, capacity building needs, and highlight approaches and
methodologies that are particularly helpful for taking into account the diverse
conceptualizations of multiple values of nature and its benefits.
10.
The assessment will be based on the recognition of the different worldviews,
visions and approaches to achieve sustainable development in the context of the
conceptual framework of the IPBES.
E. Assumptions
11.
The work will be carried out by a multi-disciplinary group of experts [including
experts with a range of backgrounds (ecology, geography, policy, economics, ecosystem
accounts, anthropology, sociology, philosophy), stakeholders and practitioners relevant
to biodiversity and ecosystem services decisions (e.g., business, governments, NGOs),] as
well as traditional knowledge holders and a range of cultural traditions, nominated by
governments and stakeholders and selected by the MEP in accordance with the
procedures for the preparation of the Platform’s deliverables and will build upon the
work done by TEEB and MEA, and interact and cooperate with ongoing programmes such
as the Waves initiative of the World Bank and the SEEA project of the UN Statistical Office.
12.
Integration of the different world views, disciplines and knowledge systems
within each chapter will be ensured, as will collaborations among chapters.
III.
Chapter outline
13.
Chapter 1 of the assessment report will be an introduction that makes explicit the
relevance of a diverse conceptualization of values of nature and its benefits for
governance, institutional and policy design and the explicit links to the IPBES Conceptual
Framework.
40
41
42
43
44
1
Aichi target 1 states that “by 2020, at the latest, people are aware of the values of biodiversity and the steps that can be taken to conserve and
use it sustainably”. Aichi target 2 states that “by 2020, at the latest, biodiversity values have been integrated into national and local
development and poverty reduction strategies and planning processes and are being incorporated into national accounting, as appropriate,
and reporting systems”.
3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
14.
Chapter 2 will assess the coverage of diverse conceptualizations of values of
nature and its benefits, including biodiversity and ecosystem functions and services in
the scientific literature and in practical policy making. This work will identify how well
the different world views, foci of value (Mother Earth/nature, nature’s benefits to people,
good quality of life), types of values (non-anthropocentric, anthropocentric,
instrumental, and relational) have been included into decision making context, and how
ecosystem accounts have been incorporated into national policies and accounting
systems, as appropriate to national circumstances. It will also assess how the inclusion of
diverse values into decision making contexts have been addressed across: (i) spatial
scales, (ii) temporal scales, (iii) social-organization scales, (iv) types of stakeholders, and
how the impacts of (i) environmental change, (ii) social change and social learning, (iii)
power relations, (iv) inclusion and agency, and (v) institutions have impacted on the
values at stake in decision making process.
15.
Chapter 3 will assess different valuation methodologies and approaches, including
biophysical and ecological, cultural and social, economics, national accounting, holistic
and indigenous and local knowledge, public health related, and approaches for the
integration and bridging of different values. It will emphasize those methods that allow
for the articulation, integration and bridging among the valuation approaches, and the
inherent differences between valuation approaches considering different worldview and
knowledge systems. Emerging key findings will be identified, especially those related to
assessing the links between different types of values from different world views, and
those linking nature, nature’s benefits and a good quality of life.
16.
Chapter 4 will assess robust findings and lessons learnt of the applicability of
valuation approaches in decision and policy making at different levels and contexts
(including, private, community and public). This will allow for the identification of the
most commonly used and the most robust methods used for linking the diverse
conceptualization of multiple values of nature and its benefits to governance,
institutional and policy design. The chapter will also assess how values have and can
address equity (between generations, between countries, between sectors within
countries, etc.), i.e., justice between social actors who value an entity (nature and its
benefits in this case) differently, even when agreeing on the values underneath the
process of valuation. Special importance will be placed on those methods that have been
successful in particular context or at particular spatial, temporal or social-organization
scales. Emerging key findings will be identified, especially those related to the
identification of tools and approaches that have proven to be successful.
17.
Chapter 5 will highlight knowledge and data gaps and uncertainties for the
integration of diverse conceptualizations of values of nature and its benefits into
governance, institutional and policy design relevant to policy and decision-making. This
will draw from the previous ones and emphasize: (i) which types of conceptualizations
of Mother Earth and nature and its benefits have not been explicitly addressed or have
not been explicitly incorporated into decision-making; (ii) which types of valuation
approaches as well as their articulation, integration and bridging are under-developed or
have not been explicitly incorporated into decision-making; and (iii) which obstacles
have hindered the incorporation of diverse conceptualizations of values of Mother Earth
and nature and its benefits into a range of decisions and policy making contexts and
levels.
4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
18.
Chapter 6 will highlight capacity building needs and steps to respond to those
needs, including capacities for policy uptake. This will draw from the previous ones and
emphasize what kind of capacity building is needed for the explicit valuation of the
different types of conceptualizations of nature and its benefits, the different types of
valuation approaches and their integration and bridging, and their explicit incorporation
into decisions and policy making are needed at different levels and within different
contexts.
IV.
19.
Relevant peer-reviewed journals, books, international assessments (e.g., TEEB,
and Millennium Ecosystem Assessment), UN System of Environmental-Economic
Accounting (SEEA), United Nations reports from UNEP, FAO and UNESCO, World Bank
reports, national assessments, e.g., UK NEA, national and International NGO reports, and
indigenous and local knowledge (in accordance with the ILK task force
recommendations).
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
V.
40
41
42
43
Operational structure
20.
The operational structure will consist of a TSU (1 full-time equivalent Professional
staff and 1 full-time equivalent Administrative staff). 3 Co-Chairs, 80 authors and 14
review editors will be selected by the MEP, in accordance with the procedures for the
preparation of the platform’s deliverables. Both the 3 co-chairs and the TSU will have
proven abilities in facilitation to ensure the communication across disciplines and
sectors, as well as the incorporation of different types of knowledge held by the
participants.
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
Key information to be assessed
21.
The
3
co-chairs
will
hold
different
backgrounds
from
the
biophysical/geographical, social sciences and the humanities, with strong experience in
incorporating a diversity of values of nature and its benefits. Each of the chapters will
include 15 core authors, including 3 chapter co-chairs, experts from the academia, key
stakeholder groups and ILK knowledge holders to ensure the coverage of a diversity of
worldviews. The 15 authors within the chapters will cover the 5 UN regions, a range of
disciplinary backgrounds, and will be invited to lead the different sections of each
chapter.
22.
The management committee will consist of the TSU, the 3 Co-Chairs and 1 CLA per
chapter, as well as 1 MEP and 1 Bureau member.
VI.
Process and timetable
23.
The proposed process and timetable for undertaking and preparing the
methodological assessment report.
Time frame
Actions
5
February
The Plenary at its fourth session reviews and approves the initial
scoping exercise prepared by the expert group on the diverse
conceptualization of the multiple values of nature and its benefits,
including biodiversity and ecosystem functions and services, in
coordination with the Multidisciplinary Expert Panel (MEP) and
Bureau.
March – The MEP issues a call, through the secretariat, to Governments and
mid April
other stakeholders for nominations of experts (co-chairs, coordinating
lead authors, lead authors and review editors) to conduct the
assessment based on the results of the scoping exercise approved by
the fourth Plenary.
2016
May
April
June
The MEP selects the co-chairs, coordinating lead authors, lead authors
and review editors using the approved selection criteria
– Setting up the TSU, organise the Management Committee meeting
End of July 1st authors meeting to further develop the annotated outline and the
sections and chapters, and assign writing roles and responsibilities
August - Preparation of draft 1 of the assessment report
November
2nd week Management Committee meeting to finalise draft 1 ready for the
December expert review process
JanuaryFebruary
Expert peer review process
April
2nd authors meeting to address the review comments to develop Draft
2 of the assessment report and Draft 1 of the Summary for Policy
Makers
May-July
Prepare Draft 2 of the assessment report and Draft 1 of the Summary
Policy Makers.
2017
August - Government and expert review process of the Draft 2 of the
September assessment report and the Draft 1 of the Summary for Policy Makers.
6
Early
October
3rd authors meeting to address the review comments to develop Final
draft of the assessment report and Final draft of the Summary for
Policy Makers
OctoberDecember
Prepare Final draft of the assessment report and Final draft of the
Summary Policy Makers.
January
Management Committee meeting to finalise the assessment report and
the Summary for Policymakers
MidFebruary
Submit final documents to Secretariat for editing and translation of the
Summary for Policy Makers
January – Revision of the guidance document by assessment Co-Chairs, CLAs and
10 key lead authors
2018 March
Early April Documents submitted Governments for IPBES-6 (6 weeks prior to
IPBES-6)
Late April
Governments submit written comments on the Summary for Policy
Makers in preparation for IPBES-6
Mid-May
IPBES-6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
VII. Cost estimate
24.
The table below shows the estimated cost of conducting and preparing the
methodological assessment report.
(United States dollars)
Year
2016
Cost item
1st Management
Committee meeting
at the Secretariat in
Bonn (and monthly
thereafter)
First author meeting
(68; co-chairs,
coordinating lead
authors and lead
authors, plus
4 Multidisciplinary
Expert Panel/ Bureau
members, plus 1
technical support
staff member)
Assumptions
Meeting costs (3 days, 13
participants)
Cost
Travel and DSA (8 x $3,750)
30,000
Meeting costs (1 week, 55
participants) (25 per cent in kind)
11,000
Travel and DSA (50 x $3,750)
187,500
0
7
2nd Management
Committee meeting
Technical support
2017
Second author
meeting (81
co-chairs,
coordinating lead
authors and lead
authors, plus 14
review editors, plus
4 Panel/Bureau
members, plus 1
technical support
staff member)
Third author meeting
(34, co-chairs,
coordinating lead
authors, and14
review editors, plus
4 Panel/Bureau
members, plus 1
technical support
staff member)
Technical support
3rd Management
Committee meeting
Authors meeting to
revise the guidance
document
2018
Dissemination and
outreach (summary for
policymakers (10
pages) and report (200
pages))
Participation by 2 cochairs and 1
coordinating lead
author per chapter in
the fifth session of the
Plenary
Virtual meeting (video-conferencing)
1 full-time equivalent professional
position and 1 full-time equivalent
administrative position (50 per cent
in kind)
Meeting costs (1 week, 90
participants) (25 per cent in kind)
0
112,500
16,875
Travel and DSA (60 x $3,750)
225,000
Meeting costs (1 week, 40
participants) (25 per cent in kind)
7,500
Travel and DSA (30 x $3,750)
112,500
1 full-time equivalent professional
position and 1 full-time equivalent
administrative position (50 per cent
in kind)
Virtual meeting (video-conferencing)
112,500
0
Meeting costs (1 week, 25
participants)
5,000
Travel and DSA (19 x $3,750)
71,250
Translation of the Summary for
Policymakers into all the official
languages of the United Nations,
publication and outreach
117,000
Travel and DSA (7 x $3,750)
26,250
8
Total
1,034,875
1
2
VIII. Communication and outreach
25.
The Assessment report and its Summary for Policy Makers will be published and
the Summary for Policymakers will be available in all official languages of the United
Nations. These reports will be made available on the IPBES website (www.ipbes.net). In
accordance with the IPBES communication strategy, relevant international fora will be
identified with a view to present the findings of the report and its SPM.
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
IX.
Capacity building
26.
Activities on capacity building will be in accordance with the implementation plan
of the Capacity building Task Force, for example the fellowship programme.
9