Presentation by OECD at CBD COP13 on biodiversity and development, mainstreaming and managing for results

Editor's Notes

1. Research focus and scope: recap Reciprocal mainstreaming at national level Next steps Discussion: participants’ feedback & comments
2. Draws on countries’ existing experiences for good practice insights. Biodiversity and development are intricately linked, yet biodiversity and ecosystem services continue to be lost at unsustainable levels Objective of this OECD project: To provide policymakers and practitioners with good practice insights into effectively mainstreaming biodiversity and development for enhanced results, including for development co-operation Focus Countries based on: Mega-diversity /biodiversity hotspots Income group Role of development co-operation Scope: Mainstreaming at national level Mainstreaming at sectoral level Monitoring & evaluation
3. Strong integrated institutions with clear mandates are crucial for mainstreaming & policy coherence. The existence of cross-sectoral institutional mechanisms, such as inter-ministerial committees and/or working groups, is one way to help coordinate,  formulate and implement more coherent policy reforms associated with mainstreaming. For these to be effective however, there needs to be strong leadership from the government and adequate capacity for ministries involved to take on board and implement mainstreaming measures. A number of countries have these in place in some form or another.
4. Development co-operation to strengthen: Institutional capacity Policy coherence at national, subnational in different sectors Data collection and management systems Stakeholder engagement Developing and improving M&E TEEB initiatives in Mexico, India, Brazil, and South Africa; WAVES Botswana, Colombia, Costa Rica, Guatemala, Indonesia, Madagascar, Philippines and Rwanda. Development finance may play a number of roles in supporting partner countries in bridging the biodiversity financing gap, for instance, by co-funding projects and leveraging new capital. Looking at bilateral ODA data by OECD DAC members, biodiversity seems to be increasingly mainstreaming in ODA, reaching USD 6.44 billion on average per year in 2012-14. Despite the increase as can be seen in the graph, biodiversity-related ODA represents only 4.8% of total ODA commitments. Moreover, of this total, 39% (i.e. USD 2.49 billion on average per year) targets biodiversity as the principal objective, i.e. these activities would not have been funded but for their biodiversity-related objective. This implies that while there is an effort to mainstream biodiversity into development co-operation portfolios, for projects with biodiversity as their prime objective ODA remains limited. For more information, please pick up as you leave the venue the updated statistical flyer on bilateral biodiversity-related ODA. For more information: Germany, United States and EU institutions together provided 45% of total biodiversity-related ODA over 2012-14 (Chart 3). United States, Germany and Japan are the top three development co-operation providers targeting biodiversity as a principal objective. Iceland, Norway and Denmark dedicated to biodiversity activities the highest shares of their ODA portfolios (17%, 15% and 12% respectively).
5. >37% global land area under agricultural use Employment 1.3 billion people
6. While there is an increase in biodiversity-related ODA, the level of mainstreaming in top sectors varies, signalling potential for further mainstreaming, e.g. in climate Key entry points: Prioritisation: Biodiversity strategies Project screening & safeguards Staff training
7. While there is an increase in biodiversity-related ODA, the level of mainstreaming in top sectors varies, signalling potential for further mainstreaming, e.g. in climate Key entry points: Prioritisation: Biodiversity strategies Project screening & safeguards Staff training
8. Galina, let’s delete one of the ODA ones, there are now three relevant to this. The first one in any case is not a great indicator for mainstreaming in my view (biodiversity as % of overall ODA). Can you think of one relevant to mainstreaming forestry so we have covered all sectors? How about % of forestry under sustainable certification? Or better would be one that is OUTCOME/IMPACT related. E.g. Percentage change in forest loss. (or rate of loss of natural forests, which is the example of Vietnam in next slide). (second part DONE).
9. South Africa Indicator under Objective 3. Biodiversity considerations are mainstreamed into policies, strategies and practices of a range of sectors Target 3.1 Effective science-based biodiversity tools inform planning and decision-making Indicator: Number of tools developed to support mainstreaming of biodiversity assets and ecological infrastructure in production sectors and resource management. By 2020, ten new tools produced and fifteen knowledge resources demonstrating the value of biodiversity developed and disseminated. India: indicators under Target 2: BY 2020 values of BD are integrated into national and state planning processes, development programmes and poverty alleviation strategies. ‘’Description of Indicators”: Trends in number of studies on biodiversity inclusive EIA, Cumulative EIA and SEA (to be conducted by Ministry of Economic Affairs and Planning Commission); and Trends in identification, assessment, establishment and strengthening of incentives that reward positive contribution to biodiversity and ecosystems (to be undertaken by Ministry of Corporate affairs). Monitoring/Reporting frequency is every three years
10. Institutional co-orodination & capacity at all levels of governance Relevant, comprehensive and accessible data Adequate financial & human resources