Global indicators of biological invasion: species numbers, biodiversity impact and policy responses

Aim Invasive alien species (IAS) pose a significant threat to biodiversity. The Convention on Biological Diversity’s 2010 Biodiversity Target, and the associated indicator for IAS, has stimulated globally coordinated efforts to quantify patterns in the extent of biological invasion, its impact on biodiversity and policy responses. Here, we report on the outcome of indicators of alien invasion at a global scale. Location Global. Methods We developed four indicators in a pressure‐state‐response framework, i.e. number of documented IAS (pressure), trends in the impact of IAS on biodiversity (state) and trends in international agreements and national policy adoption relevant to reducing IAS threats to biodiversity (response). These measures were considered best suited to providing globally representative, standardized and sustainable indicators by 2010. Results We show that the number of documented IAS is a significant underestimate, because its value is negatively affected by country development status and positively by research effort and information availability. The Red List Index demonstrates that IAS pressure is driving declines in species diversity, with the overall impact apparently increasing. The policy response trend has nonetheless been positive for the last several decades, although only half of countries that are signatory to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) have IAS‐relevant national legislation. Although IAS pressure has apparently driven the policy response, this has clearly not been sufficient and/or adequately implemented to reduce biodiversity impact. Main conclusions For this indicator of threat to biodiversity, the 2010 Biodiversity Target has thus not been achieved. The results nonetheless provide clear direction for bridging the current divide between information available on IAS and that needed for policy and management for the prevention and control of IAS. It further highlights the need for measures to ensure that policy is effectively implemented, such that it translates into reduced IAS pressure and impact on biodiversity beyond 2010.     

Plant Quarantine as a Measure Against Invasive Alien Species: The Framework of the International Plant Protection Convention and the plant health regulations in the European Union

The introduction of several plant pests into Europe in the 19th century with disastrous consequences called for the development of plant quarantine measures to prevent the spread and introduction of pests of plants and plant products. With the purpose of harmonising these measures, and of promoting measures for pest control, the International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC) was developed to address organisms that are both directly and indirectly injurious to plants. It supplies a framework for measures against invasive alien species according to the Convention on Biological Diversity, as far as they are plant pests. Three examples of invasive alien species within the scope of the IPPC are given in the article: the fungus Ceratocystis fagacearum, the pinewood nematode Bursaphelenchus xylophilus and the flatworm Arthurdendyus triangulatus. In its 1997 revision, the IPPC provides for the establishment of International Standards for Phytosanitary Measures, being acknowledged by the Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures of the World Trade Organisation. Standards most important for invasive alien species are those on pest risk analysis, on requirements for the establishment of pest-free areas, on surveillance, on pest eradication programmes, and on the import and release of exotic biological agents. Phytosanitary regulations in the European Union (EU) have been harmonised and up to now have regulated about 300 plant pests. The requirements also have a protective horizontal effect against the unintentional introduction of many other species, but the existing broader IPPC mandate for alien plant pests is not fully applied by the EU regulations. This revised version was published online in July 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

Are legislative frameworks in Canada and Ontario up to the task of addressing invasive alien species?

As a signatory to the international Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), Canada has committed to prevent, control, and eradicate invasive alien species (IAS). Yet, despite developing policy on biodiversity and IAS, the federal government has been criticized for its inaction on biological invasions over the past decade. In Canada’s most populous province, Ontario, similar concerns have been raised about the provincial government’s approach to dealing with IAS. The ongoing criticism of government response suggests that an effective legislative framework to guide and coordinate action on IAS may be lacking in Canada. In this paper, we examined how well existing legislation at the federal and Ontario levels addresses IAS threats, and thus contributes to CBD commitments. We reviewed a total of 98 pieces of legislation, comprised of 55 federal acts, two federal omnibus bills, and 41 Ontario acts. Of these, 20 federal and 12 Ontario acts were found to cover IAS either intentionally or incidentally, but IAS was not the central focus of most legislation. No consistent terminology existed across legislation referring to IAS, further highlighting a lack of focus on the issue. Legislation on IAS was administered by several different ministries both federally and in Ontario, but coordination of action among agencies was not explicitly addressed in laws and regulations. While many acts provided broad powers of enforcement, most provisions were not directly linked to IAS prevention and management. In general, Canada’s legislative framework on IAS is fragmented, and this complicates the development of a coordinated approach to the problem.     

Developing a list of invasive alien species likely to threaten biodiversity and ecosystems in the European Union

The European Union (EU) has recently published its first list of invasive alien species (IAS) of EU concern to which current legislation must apply. The list comprises species known to pose great threats to biodiversity and needs to be maintained and updated. Horizon scanning is seen as critical to identify the most threatening potential IAS that do not yet occur in Europe to be subsequently risk assessed for future listing. Accordingly, we present a systematic consensus horizon scanning procedure to derive a ranked list of potential IAS likely to arrive, establish, spread and have an impact on biodiversity in the region over the next decade. The approach is unique in the continental scale examined, the breadth of taxonomic groups and environments considered, and the methods and data sources used. International experts were brought together to address five broad thematic groups of potential IAS. For each thematic group the experts first independently assembled lists of potential IAS not yet established in the EU but potentially threatening biodiversity if introduced. Experts were asked to score the species within their thematic group for their separate likelihoods of i) arrival, ii) establishment, iii) spread, and iv) magnitude of the potential negative impact on biodiversity within the EU. Experts then convened for a 2‐day workshop applying consensus methods to compile a ranked list of potential IAS. From an initial working list of 329 species, a list of 66 species not yet established in the EU that were considered to be very high (8 species), high (40 species) or medium (18 species) risk species was derived. Here, we present these species highlighting the potential negative impacts and the most likely biogeographic regions to be affected by these potential IAS.     

建立生物多样性保护相关国际公约的国家履约协同战略

目前国际层面已有多个与生物多样性保护有关的多边公约(包括条约和协定), 如《生物多样性公约》、《濒危动植物种国际贸易公约》、《湿地公约》等。本文基于相关国际公约的既有战略目标, 分析了这些战略目标与保护生物多样性之间的关系。这些公约的实施在国际层面是由联合国的不同机构负责, 在国家层次也是由不同的政府部门来牵头。在中国, 生物多样性相关公约的履行机构主要有环境保护、林业、农业等多个政府主管部门。我国现有履约机制的模式是针对某一公约建立一个多部门的履约协调委员会, 并在牵头部门建立一个行政办事机构。履约工作中常见的问题有: 各履约机构在参与公约国际谈判和开展国内履约工作中因缺少沟通和协调, 造成对外政策不一致、对内工作重复的现象; 部门间缺少信息共享机制, 甚至相互不提供数据。最后, 作者建议在国家层次上建立生物多样性国际履约的协同战略, 包括为协调生物多样性议题的国际谈判立场而建立协同工作组, 为增强国家履约效率而综合各部门履约行动, 以及建立国家生物多样性信息交换机制等。     

Genetic diversity is overlooked in international conservation policy implementation

The importance of genetic variation for maintaining biological diversity and evolutionary processes has been recognized by researchers for decades. This realization has prompted agreements by world leaders to conserve genetic diversity, and this is an explicit goal of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). Nevertheless, very limited action has been taken to protect genetic diversity on a global scale. International conservation efforts to halt biodiversity loss focus on habitats and species, whereas little or no attention is paid to gene level variation. By this year, 2010, world leaders have agreed that a significant reduction of the rate of biodiversity loss should have been achieved. However, gene level diversity is still not monitored, indicators that can help identify threats to genetic variation are missing, and there is no strategy for how genetic aspects can be included in biodiversity targets beyond 2010. Important findings and conclusions from decades of conservation genetic research are not translated into concrete conservation action in the arena of international policy development. There is an urgent need for conservation geneticists worldwide to become involved in policy and practical conservation work beyond the universities and research institutions.     

企业与生物多样性:《生物多样性公约》新议题的产生与谈判进展

《生物多样性公约》(以下简称《公约》)是三大环境国际公约之一。随着《公约》谈判的不断推进, 企业与生物多样性(Business and Biodiversity)逐渐由《公约》中的一个概念发展成为《公约》谈判中的一个重要议题。1996年召开的《公约》缔约方大会第三次会议(COP-3)首次提出企业(私营部门)参与生物多样性的概念后, COP-5将企业参与列入《公约》议题, COP-6正式将企业参与纳入《公约》全球战略, COP-8首次将企业参与生物多样性单独纳入《公约》决定, 并提出下一步开展推动企业参与生物多样性的做法, COP-9拟定了《企业优先行动框架(2008-2010年)》, COP-10决定开展企业参与生物多样性对话论坛。迄今为止, 《公约》秘书处共组织了4次全球企业界与生物多样性伙伴关系(Global Partnership for Business and Biodiversity, GPBB)论坛, 就这一议题进行专题交流和探讨。企业与生物多样性也是当前我国生物多样性管理工作中的一个新课题, 中国对此十分重视, 并派代表团参加了GPBB-3和GPBB-4两次会议。鉴于目前中国经济发展状况与生物多样性保护面临的形势, 作者提出以下建议: (1)积极参与国际合作, 利用GPBB国际平台适时宣传我国生物多样性和生态文明建设成果; (2)加强技术研究, 制定我国企业参与生物多样性的相关标准、规范或指南; (3)深化平台建设, 搭建企业参与的中国生物多样性伙伴关系; (4)建立跨部门的企业参与生物多样性协调机制。     

Linking political and scientifically derived targets for global biodiversity conservation: implications for the expansion of the global network of protected areas

Despite the global network of protected areas covers 12% of the world's land surface, its performance is still unsatisfactory. Although political and scientifically sound conservation targets usually portray different pictures of the task ahead, we show that in terms of priority areas for expanding the global network of reserves, there is much agreement between the political targets of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), and the scientifically derived goals endorsed by international conservation organizations. Here we analyse four global databases to identify priority areas for fulfilling the CBD target of representing 10% of every ecological region within protected areas, and compare the distribution of priority regions for fulfilling that political target, with the distribution of the priority areas for global biodiversity conservation identified by Conservation International, the WWF, and the Wildlife Conservation Society on scientific basis. For 63% (549) of the world's terrestrial ecoregions the CBD 10% target is still not met; fulfilling it requires protecting another 4.6% of the Earth's land surface (6,239,894 km²). Yet, at least 78% of the priority regions for fulfilling that target lay within priority regions for the main global conservation strategies. By pursuing the political target set by the CBD much ancillary gains in terms of other global conservation objectives can be obtained.     

Convention on Biological Diversity: a review of national challenges and opportunities for implementation

The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) lies at the heart of biodiversity conservation initiatives. It offers opportunities to address global issues at the national level through locally grown solutions and measures. This article reviews the national challenges and opportunities in meeting requirements of the CBD by analysing twenty Third National Reports (TNRs), covering five different CBD regional clusters from the three global economic groups. While there is a plethora of challenges, the predominant ones discussed in this study include: institutional and capacity, knowledge and accessible information, economic policy and financial resources, cooperation and stakeholder involvement, and mainstreaming and integration of biodiversity. The underlying problem is that limited capacity in developing countries and transition economies undermines conservation initiatives. Lack of capacity in science, coordination, administration, legislation, and monitoring are barriers to on-ground implementation of biodiversity programmes. Opportunities to overcome these challenges embrace use of knowledge products, information-sharing mechanisms, participatory platforms, educational programmes, multi-level governance, and policy coherence. Innovative market-based instruments are also being trialled in various countries, which seek to offer incentives to local communities. The article concludes that conservation measures should be supported by multiple sectors and secure high level political support. Political, economical, and legislative sectors are more likely to show interest in CBD implementation and use it as a tool for managing biodiversity when they know the Convention processes and perceive it as a benefit. Modest investments in capacity building and training, and engaging different sectors in setting priorities would have a significant pay-off.     

简述《2020年后全球生物多样性框架》谈判进展

《生物多样性公约》(简称《公约》)第十五次缔约方大会(COP15)第二阶段会议上将审议通过正在编制的2020年后全球生物多样性框架(简称“框架”)。该框架具有里程碑意义, 对未来全球生物多样性保护、经济和社会发展有重要指导作用。由于生物多样性的持续丧失, 只有通过变革式的转型, 才能实现到2050年人与自然和谐发展的美好愿景。框架以变革理论为基础, 拟制定雄心勃勃又务实平衡的生物多样性保护目标。生物多样性与人类息息相关, 目标的制定将对人类社会的生产、消费等产生重大影响。由于《公约》机制和框架磋商的复杂性等多种原因, 仅极少数人完整地了解框架的内容和谈判进程。经过框架不限成员名额工作组(以下简称“OEWG”) 4次会议的磋商, 框架结构和要素已基本确定, 其中最受关注的是22个2030年行动目标, 包括减少对生物多样性的威胁(行动目标1‒8)、通过可持续利用和惠益分享来满足人的需求(行动目标9‒13)和执行工作和主流化的工具和解决方案(行动目标14‒22) 3个部分。本文介绍了OEWG第四次会议磋商的框架草案中行动目标的谈判进展, 对框架中30 × 30目标、资源调动等核心议题进行了分析, 从而为管理部门、科研机构、企业、社会组织、从事生物多样性教育和保护的广大工作者等社会各界了解全球生物多样性治理对国际经济秩序的重塑提供视角和方法上的参考, 从而更好地把握参与科技、贸易、投资、制造等领域国际竞争的环境政治动态与方向, 促进人与自然和谐共生, 共建地球生命共同体。