首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
相似文献
 共查询到10条相似文献,搜索用时 78 毫秒
1.
生物多样性和生态系统服务政府间科学-政策平台(IPBES)的目的,是为了缓解生物多样性持续减退的趋势,推动政策和科学之间的互动。2012年成立至今构建了概念模型,确定了2014—2018年的工作方案。分析IPBES工作方案的4个目的和相应交付成果可以看出,通过推出不同专题评估报告,将为全球提出生物多样性相关的新问题,给生物多样性相关的谈判和履约提出新挑战。一系列区域和全球评估报告的推出,可能通过持续积累效益,引起公众和媒体的关注,使生物多样性问题迅速政治化,形成科学驱动政策决策的趋势。应对IPBES及其生物多样性相关公约的谈判,我国需要制定深入和持续参与其国际过程的策略,需要通过培养和推荐专业水平高且政治敏感的专家,参与IPBES评估报告的具体工作,从科学层面影响评估结果,把握生物多样性领域国际政策决策动向,在保护生物多样性的基础上,维护国家利益。  相似文献   

2.
生物多样性和生态系统服务为人类的生计和良好的生活质量奠定了重要基础。然而, 越来越多的研究表明, 生物多样性和生态系统服务在全球范围内的持续下降使自然对人类的贡献大幅降低。多尺度评估能够说明不同尺度下生物多样性的现状, 有利于制定适合区域特点、符合国情的决策建议。2013年12月, 生物多样性和生态系统服务政府间科学政策平台(Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, IPBES)通过第一轮工作方案, 决定开展“区域/次区域生物多样性和生态系统服务评估”(简称“区域评估”), 即评估亚洲-太平洋(简称亚太)、美洲、非洲以及欧洲-中亚四大地理区域的生物多样性和生态系统服务。区域评估报告及其决策者摘要已在IPBES第六次全体会议上(2018年3月, 哥伦比亚麦德林)审议通过。本文概述了四大地理区域的生物多样性的重要性、生物多样性保护领域取得的进展、面临的主要危机和机遇, 探讨了评估对其他国际进程的影响, 综合分析了各区域生物多样性和生态系统服务的特点以及各区域评估结果的差别, 总结了评估的政策经验, 以期为中国的生物多样性保护提供科学参考。  相似文献   

3.
潘玉雪  张博雅  吴杨  戴逢斌  田瑜 《生物多样性》2020,28(10):1286-2461
作为生物多样性保护领域的首个政府间机制, 生物多样性和生态系统服务政府间科学政策平台(IPBES)正在对全球生物多样性和生态系统保护政策的制定和实施产生重要影响, 其评估成果大大提升了全球决策者对生物多样性的关注。2019年4月, IPBES在法国巴黎召开第七次全体会议, 会议总结了第一轮工作方案(2014-2019)各目标的实现情况, 通过了第二轮工作方案(2019-2030), 为未来10年重点工作和评估方向提供指导。本文结合两轮工作方案的具体目标, 分析研判了IPBES工作及评估进展, 对各成员国主要观点进行了梳理, 提出了中国的应对策略。IPBES评估发现, 人类面临的生物多样性问题越来越多元化、复杂化, IPBES正通过发布一系列的评估报告, 将生物多样性保护问题进一步主流化、政治化。我们建议, 作为全球生物多样性最为丰富的国家之一, 中国应该充分认识到IPBES的作用, 积极参与有关进程, 加强跨部门跨学科协助, 促进国际合作与交流, 提升我国在生物多样性领域相关谈判中的主动权和话语权。  相似文献   

4.
吴杨  田瑜  戴逢斌  李子圆 《生物多样性》2022,30(5):21549-A2
生物多样性和生态系统服务政府间科学政策平台(IPBES)的目标是加强科学政策对生物多样性和生态系统服务的影响。为了更好地理解和展示IPBES目标的基本要素及其相互关系, 在千年生态系统评估(MA)的基础上, IPBES融合多种知识体系, 不断完善、创新, 逐步形成了以“自然对人类的贡献” (NCP)为核心的概念框架。本文首先梳理了NCP的发展历程, 论述了NCP与生态系统服务的关系, 指出两者均关注人类福祉, 但与生态系统服务不同的是, NCP涵盖了自然对人类生活的消极影响, 强调社会文化因素、传统知识和土著居民的地位以及人与自然共同作用的重要性。其次, 本文阐述了人与自然共同实现NCP进而影响人类良好生活质量的机制, 并分析了NCP大幅下降的全球趋势, 提出世界各国应不断推动生物多样性保护主流化, 增加国际交流与合作, 致力实现“人与自然和谐共生”的2050年愿景。最后, 本文讨论了NCP在IPBES评估和《生物多样性公约》磋商谈判中的应用前景, 为今后NCP理论研究和实践提供科学支持。  相似文献   

5.
The recently created Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES), originally focused on multilateral and global issues, is shifting its focus to address local issues and to include in its assessments local stakeholders and indigenous and traditional systems of knowledge. Acknowledging that full biodiversity governance is unavoidably rooted in participation of local actors and their problems and knowledge, we suggest that to deal successfully with the complexity and diversity of local issues, including indigenous knowledge systems, IPBES must recognize a key role of local institutions.  相似文献   

6.
After years of protracted negotiations, the Intergovernmental science–policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) was finally established in 2012. One year on and we have already witnessed two plenary sessions which have, so far, defined procedures for nominating members for observatory and decision-making panels as well as experts and knowledge holders for the compilation of reports. The sessions also determined the work programme for the next 4 years (2014–2018). According to its internally formulated criteria, the success of IPBES will be determined by how credible, relevant and legitimate its institution and operations are. More specifically, these criteria suggest that success is contingent on the transparency of the processes within IPBES, the autonomy and quality of scientific knowledge, and the early integration of different stakeholders and diverse knowledge and value systems. Currently, we see IPBES encompassing open and integrative approaches as well as providing a convenient trading floor for particulate and opaque agendas formulated elsewhere. In any case, without the backing of large and effective publics the policy–support function of IPBES will be limited. Local capacity building and supporting communities to actively participate in research projects dealing with biodiversity are essential for furthering a practical and emancipatory understanding of the relationship between political and economic decisions, the state and functioning of biodiversity and ecosystems, and current and future human well-being.  相似文献   

7.
吴军  徐海根  丁晖 《生态学报》2011,31(22):6973-6977
生物多样性和生态系统服务政府间科学-政策平台(IPBES)是一个类似于气候变化专门委员会(IPCC)的独立的政府间机构,其目标是建立科学界和决策者之间的沟通平台,推动全球生物多样性和生态系统服务的保护.从2008年11月到2010年6月,联合国环境规划署(UNEP)主持召开了三次政府间谈判会议.在最后一次会议上各国同意建立IPBES,并形成了一份《釜山成果》文件,确定其基本职能主要是开展评估,还确定IPBES的决策机构是全体会议,向联合国所有会员国和区域经济一体化组织开放,政府间组织和其他利益相关方可作为观察员.IPBES的建立将会在国际社会产生深刻的影响,但其未来走向也有一定的不确定性:一是如何保持科学独立性的问题,二是评估尺度可能会影响其成功,三是能否促进发展中国家的广泛参与.为使我国能在IPBES中发挥重要作用,建议今后应加强对IPBES运作模式的研究,加强评估工具和方法的开发以及加强生物多样性的监测.  相似文献   

8.
The Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform for Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) held its 6th plenary session in Medellin (Colombia) during March 2018. Several assessments were due for acceptance by the plenary. We here give news from the plenary and the platform, sketch out important key messages from the regional assessments as well as of the global thematic assessment on land degradation and restoration. We further give an outlook on the work ahead and potential for contributions from the scientific community to the important work of IPBES.  相似文献   

9.
After a long incubation period, the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) is now underway. Underpinning all its activities is the IPBES Conceptual Framework (CF), a simplified model of the interactions between nature and people. Drawing on the legacy of previous large-scale environmental assessments, the CF goes further in explicitly embracing different disciplines and knowledge systems (including indigenous and local knowledge) in the co-construction of assessments of the state of the world’s biodiversity and the benefits it provides to humans. The CF can be thought of as a kind of “Rosetta Stone” that highlights commonalities between diverse value sets and seeks to facilitate crossdisciplinary and crosscultural understanding. We argue that the CF will contribute to the increasing trend towards interdisciplinarity in understanding and managing the environment. Rather than displacing disciplinary science, however, we believe that the CF will provide new contexts of discovery and policy applications for it.  相似文献   

10.
The Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform for Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) held its 5th plenary session in Bonn during March 2017. After last year’s pollinator assessment, the biodiversity assessments currently being undertaken are shortly to be available for peer review. The scientific community can play an important role in both conducting assessments and in the peer-review process. Independent scientists can contribute to ensure that these assessments are comprehensive with respect to the current state and future trends of biodiversity and the ecosystem services. We outline possibilities for deeper involvement of the scientific community in the IPBES process and draw attention to upcoming reviews in 2017.  相似文献   

设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号