Biosphere Reserves as sites of excellence

Transcription

1 Biosphere Reserves as sites of excellence EuroMAB 2013 Conference Brockville, Canada October 17, 2013

2 Long term objective for the WNBR A network consisting entirely of Sites of excellence for conservation and development at the regional scale

3 Some history (1) BRs have been designated since 1976 Initial concept (1973/4) Strong emphasis on conservation and research No requirement to have all zones Revised concept (1986) Increased emphasis on involvement of local people demonstration sites of harmonious relationships between man and the natural environment Outer zone = transition area / zone of cooperation

4 Some history (2) 1995: c. 50% of BRs = national park + buffer zone limited involvement of stakeholders 1996: Seville Congress > Statutory Framework Sites of excellence for conservation and development at the regional scale All three zones Management policy/plan Stakeholder engagement Periodic review process

5 Dynamics: setting up BR in EuroMAB Num ber of BRs

6 Dynamics: setting up BRs in EuroMAB: 266 BRs and 10 TBRs Number of BRs Years

7 Key questions Why do we have a Periodic Review process? How does it work? What have the results been? How could it become more effective?

8 Periodic Review processes Quality control : to ensure that sites in networks continue to exhibit the characteristics for which they were designated contribute to other goals sustainable development aims of the network Reporting period varies European Diploma: annual, field visit every 5 years Ramsar sites: 3 years World Heritage Sites: 6 years

9 Periodic Review of BRs (1) Statutory Framework of the WNBR Article 9 the status of each biosphere reserve should be subject to a periodic review every 10 years 1. report prepared by the concerned authority, on the basis of the criteria of Article 4 2. forwarded to the secretariat by the State concerned 3. considered by the Advisory Committee for Biosphere Reserves 4. recommendation to International Coordinating Council (ICC)

10 Periodic Review of BRs (2) Statutory Framework of the WNBR Article 9 5. ICC Either recognises satisfactory status Or recommends measures to be taken Can notify Director-General that an area is removed from the Network

11 Withdrawal Statutory Framework of the WNBR Article 9, paragraph 8 Should a State wish to remove a BR under its jurisdiction, it notifies the Secretariat This notification shall be transmitted to the ICC for information The area will then no longer be referred to as a BR which is part of the Network

12 EuroMAB: Biosphere Reserves withdrawn Year of withdrawal Country Name of BR Approval Number of BRs 1997 Norway Northeast Svalbard UK Caerlaverock UK Isle of Rhum 1976 UK St. Kilda 1976 UK Claish Moss 1977 Bulgaria Maritchini Ezera Germany Bayerischer Wald UK Taynish Sweden Lake Torne UK Moor House / Upper Teesdale 2013 UK Loch Druidibeg TOTAL 11

13 Assessments of extent that biosphere reserves meet Statutory Framework criteria based on examination of their Periodic Reviews (287) 2% 2% 19% 49% 28% 2% (6 BRs) model 28% (80 BRs) meet 49% (141 BRs) partly 19% (55 BRs) not 2% (6 BRs) not: SUGGEST WITHDRAWAL

14 Positive outcomes Overall Compilation of information Better knowledge of status Strengthening of concept and BR identity A few sites withdrawn At BRs Improved zonation / expansion Some via proposals for new BRs Integration of functions Involvement of stakeholders Collective learning

15 Challenges No periodic review yet for 112 BRs including 9 countries with 60 BRs Lack of response to letters from MAB Secretariat October 2012 letter: Variable quality of reports Actions proposed after periodic review are often not followed up & information is not provided October 2012 letter: 31 32

16 2013 ICC: Exit strategy (1) 1. Request for submission of periodic review 2. If no response after 3 months reminder letter 3. If no response after 6 months recommendation to ICC Bureau for last warning 4. If no response after 3 more months Bureau recommends to ICC that site should be withdrawn from WNBR

17 2013 ICC: Exit strategy (2) 2a: if response is received MAB Secretariat puts BR on pending list, with deadline of 1 year to submit report Guidance/help from MAB Secretariat, UNESCO field offices, MAB regional networks After one year, recognition of willingness to comply with BR criteria Removal from pending list

18 2013 ICC: Exit strategy (3) If site not able to fully comply with criteria after 30 months: ICC decision: site no longer a BR which is part of the WNBR If report or information is provided, but criteria are not met Request for report by end of 2015 If criteria are still not met Advisory Committee recommends withdrawal ICC may then decide that site is no longer a BR

19 Long term objective for the WNBR A network consisting entirely of Sites of excellence for conservation and development at the regional scale

20 PERIODIC REVIEW REPORT for BR 2 PARTS SUMMARY AND MAIN REPORT Report should include information on: (1) involvement of stakeholders and partners (2) significant changes in the Biosphere Reserve over the past 10 years Updating on conservation function, development function, logistic support function Updating on governance management and coordination Updating to cooperation/management policy/plan, for the next 5 10 years Strategies (communication, networking, socio cultural aspect, using traditional local knowledge etc.), participation of different groups

21 PERIODIC REVIEW REPORT for BR (3) ECOSYSTEM SERVICES Update on the ecosystem services provided by each ecosystem of the BR and the beneficiaries of these services Any changes regarding the indicators of ecosystem services used to evaluate the three functions of BR Update description on biodiversity involved in providing ecosystem services in the BR Any recent/updated ecosystem services assessment for the BR since its nomination/last report

22 PERIODIC REVIEW REPORT for BR (4 6): Trends over the past decade in conservation function changes, if any, in the main habitat types, ecosystems, species or varieties of traditional or economic importance; conservation programmes development function agriculture and forest activities, renewable resources, non renewable resources, manufacturing and construction, tourism and other service industries), other sectors of economy, cultural services etc. logistic support function institutional structure, internal and external communication, collaboration with other WNBR sites

23 PERIODIC REVIEW REPORT for BR (7) GOVERNANCE, BIOSPHERE RESERVE MANAGEMENT AND COORDINATION technical and logistic resources, framework for governance, means for conflict resolutions, management/cooperation plan (8) CRITERIA AND PROGRESS MADE brief justification of the how the BR fulfills each criterion of article 4 of the Statutory Framework (9) Supporting documents maps: location, zonation, vegetation/or land cover legal documents

24 PERIODIC REVIEW REPORT for TBR 2 PARTS SUMMARY AND MAIN REPORT Report should include information on: (1) description of the TBR (2) zonation (3) Significant Progress and Changes in the Transboundary Biosphere Reserve During the Past Ten Years (4) Goals I: Use Biosphere Reserves to Conserve Natural and Cultural Diversity (5) Goal II: Utilize Biosphere Reserves as Models of Land Management and of Approaches for Sustainable Development (6) Goal III: Use Biosphere Reserves for Research, Monitoring, Education and Training (7) Institutional and financial Aspects of the Transboundary Biosphere Reserve (8) Conclusion: Progress Made (9) Supporting documents

25 Paras 4 6 should reflect progress and achievements on cooperative programs (4) to protect biodiversity at landscape and site levels and/or ecological functions that provide ecosystem goods and services in the transboundary biosphere reserve (5) sustainability issues at the individual livelihood and community levels, including: economic trends in different sectors that drive the need to innovate and/or adapt the main adaptive strategies being implemented within the TBR initiatives to develop new sectors to compensate for losses in others, employment, and community well being over the past 10 years

26 Paras 4 6 should reflect progress and achievements on cooperative programs (6) enhance the capacity of people and organizations in the TBR to address conservation and development issues for sustainable development research, monitoring, demonstration projects and education needed to deal with the specific context and conditions of the TBR (4 6) Strategies (communication, networking, sociocultural aspects, using traditional local knowledge etc.), participation of different groups of population

27 PERIODIC REVIEW REPORT for TBR (7) INSTITUTIONAL AND FINANCIAL ASPECTS OF THE TRANSBOUNDARY BIOSPHERE RESERVE Update on the validity of the official agreement between the governmental authorities, regarding the TBR Coordinating structure of the TBR Financial source(s) and yearly budget of the coordinating structure of the TBR and of workplan and common programmes, shared staff respectively Cooperative activity with other TBRs

28 PERIODIC REVIEW REPORT for TBR (8) Conclusion: Progress Made (lessons learnt, achievements, progress made) (9) SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS Updated location and zonation map with coordinates Updated cooperation plans and common workplan(s) Updated official agreement between the governmental authorities, if appropriate