Many non-EU countries lack resources to produce the biodiversity indicators required under the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF), a survey by the UN Environment Programme (UNEP) has shown.
UNEP’s World Conservation Monitoring Centre (WCMC) developed a capacity assessment needs survey to analyse global progress in adopting the headline indicators of the GBF, including the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List of Ecosystems, the Red List Index, and the extent of natural ecosystems.
Headline indicators are defined as high-level means to capture the overall scope of the GBF goals and targets, mainly used for planning and tracking progress.
Results showed that out of 44 countries that responded to the investigation – 12 in Africa, 12 in the Americas, 10 in Europe, eight in Asia, and two in Oceania – most non-EU states pointed to a shortage in funding, stressing that more resources are needed to produce the indicators within the next five years.
“There are more non-EU countries saying there’s not available funding, or it’s far from sufficient, compared to answers from EU member states or associated countries,” said Matea Vukelic, programme officer at UNEP WCMC, during the Biodiversa+ Science Policy Forum.
Source: UNEP WCMC
“[Data] is showing that EU countries will be in a better position to produce these indicators in the short or medium term compared to the rest of the world.”
Producing an indicator requires a monitoring system to gather primary data, including field observations or remote sensing, as well as the analysis and presentation of the derived information, according to the CBD.
Vukelic said that even EU countries flagged the need for assistance with data collection and analysis.
“There is a need to mobilise resources from all sources to support national capacity building and development, and help create an enabling environment,” the UNEP report stated.
“We encourage key partners and stakeholders to address the capacity gaps, to utilise the adopted indicators, including through alignment of their capacity building and development action with the framework, and establishment of coalition and community of practice.”
The survey also showed that, among the surveyed EU countries, the majority have not yet identified a national institution tasked with reporting on several headline indicators.
Notably, no country has selected an institution dedicated to reporting on the number of companies disclosing their biodiversity-related risks, dependencies, and impacts.
This indicator addresses Target 15 of the GBF, which aims to reduce the risks related to biodiversity loss faced by business and finance as well as their negative impacts on biodiversity.
Biodiversity-related disclosure frameworks, such as the Taskforce on Nature-related Financial Disclosures (TNFD) recommendations and the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI), have gained traction in the last few months. Last week, TNFD and GRI announced they are tightening their collaboration to better support corporate nature and biodiversity reporting.
By Giada Ferraglioni – giada@carbon-pulse.com
*** Click here to sign up to our twice-weekly biodiversity newsletter ***
