The “Fossil of the Day” Awards exist since 1999 and are an initiative of the Climate Action Network (CAN) to ironically honor those parties, countries or organisations which act in a bad manner, hindering the progress of the negotiations at COP and counteracting the common will to achieve the climate target set in the Paris Agreement. Aiming for the attention of delegates and directly pointing fingers at the “bad ones”, the Award “winner” of every conference day is announced at 6 pm in the Bula zone in the foyer of the
World Conference Center.

“To those who are the best at being the worst, to those who do the most to do the least”

In the first week of the COP23 the following bodies have been awarded with the ironic “Fossil of the Day” price:

Day 1:

• United States “We are still in” movement as exceptional non-ironic “Ray of the Day” for giving hope for the continuation of joint climate action

Day 2:

• Australia for approving and funding fossil fuel mines which threaten habitats, such as the Great Barrier Reef, and increase emissions
• Poland for trying to convert the EU Emissions Trading Scheme into a coal power subsidy scheme instead of phasing out from fossil fuels

Day 3:

• France for postponing their nuclear energy phase down target (to reduce nuclear energy in the national energy mix from 75% to 50% by 2020)

Day 4:

• Developed Countries for refusing to include pre-2020 actions into the COP23 agenda
• Japan for promoting nuclear and coal technologies in developing countries within the Japan-United States Strategic Energy Partnership
• Kuwait for voting to exclude observers from a session on Loss and Damage within the Subsidiary Body for Implementation (SBI)

Day 5:

• International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) for negotiating on carbon offsets and biofuels for this sector in private

Day 6:

• Australia, Canada, European Union and United States for forgetting about the solidarity principle when it comes to loss and damage finance

The post COP23: Fossil of the day appeared first on Global Change Ecology.

IPBES Chair Sir Robert Walton released the following statement:
“The issue of gender is of paramount importance to IPBES, but we still have a long way to go to get balanced representation. I encourage all governments to nominate women to all IPBES structures and activities.”

While there clearly is a great deal of work remaining to better promote and elevate gender equality, one thing is certain: the work of IPBES would not be possible without the superb contributions and leadership of women.

The future is female!

The post IPBES5- International Women’s Day appeared first on Global Change Ecology.

Group 1 has discussed issues of local and indigenous knowledge and the review of IPBES. Issues discussed include the scope of the review, who will conduct the review, budget considerations, and how the results of the review will be used.

Group 2, meanwhile, has discussed the pending assessments, the scope of the sustainable use of wild species scoping document and capacity building. Specific issues under consideration include which of the pending assessments should be prioritised and whether the pending assessments should be commenced—questions which garnered a great deal of debate and disagreement among member nations. As commencement of the pending assessments is very much dependent upon budget considerations, Group 2 will meet with the budget group today.

As the discussions within the contact groups are open negotiations, details of country positions and the issues discussed cannot be published on the blog.

The post IPBES5, Day 3: Contact Group Meetings appeared first on Global Change Ecology.

1. A values assessment
2. An assessment of invasive species
3. An assessment of sustainable use of wild species.

Each of these assessments would cost approximately $1 million USD and take three years to complete.

Numerous countries, including Mexico, Colombia, and the Africa Group have stressed the critical importance of these new projects and their immediate implementation in 2017. However, not all countries agree on which thematic area should be prioritized. Several countries, including Japan, Sweden and China see the values assessment as being critical for direction of future policy. The Africa Group and the CITES secretariat highlighted the importance of the assessment of the sustainable use of wild species.

Other nations, however, noted the great limitations on financial and human resources, and argued that beginning the pending assessments before the current assessments have been completed would not be prudent or advisable. Among these countries were Germany, the United States, and New Zealand. Several countries also pointed out that it may be worthwhile to wait for the results of the regional assessments so that these can be used in scoping the pending assessments. Norway suggested that this may result in more targeted assessment and prevent duplication of work.

Contact groups on budget and the pending assessments will meet this afternoon. The assessments group will have to discuss whether any of the pending assessments should start–if so, which one and when. The two contact groups will also have to meet with one another to determine how any further assessments can be funded.

Owing to the diverse views on all of these issues, discussions are likely to be lively. The Chair Sir Robert Walton noted that parties should be polite and friendly with one another.

The post IPBES 5, Day 2: Should pending IPBES assessments be started? appeared first on Global Change Ecology.

The pollination assessment has had a wide impact. It has been taken up by governments of member states, the FAO, the scientific community, and CBD among others. There is now a coalition of the willing on pollinators who are now acting to protect pollinators; collaborating, sharing information, providing funding for research etc. Other member states were invited to join this coalition of the willing.

Speakers emphasized the need to find synergies between work on climate change and biodiversity. Biodiversity will play a key role in both mitigation of emissions and adaptation to climate change. Country level integration of biodiversity into development and investment strategies and across sectors will be critical to achieving climate change goals and the SDGs – and time is short. We need to reduce emissions, increase resilience and have a long-term vision of stewardship for biodiversity and ecosystem services. Emphasis was placed on the need to strengthen partnerships across sectors. This will be key in the future as the traditional approach of dealing with biodiversity in isolation is not sufficient if goals e.g. Aichi targets are to be met.

Opening statements were made by speakers representing different regions. Most regions expressed enthusiasm and continued support for the IPBES. The USA, however, took a notably pessimistic tone. The United States representative regarded the goals and direction of IPBES as “overly ambitious”; emphasizing the need to focus on realistic goals based on the current budget, the USA stated that it would not support the start of any new assessments or activities unless others are eliminated.

The EU has requested enhanced observer states, similar to that which it maintains in the IPCC. This would enable active engagement in terms of right to speak and reply, and to provide financial support to IPBES. Although many countries supported this move, the Africa Group repeatedly expressed its opposition.

The post IPBES 5, Day 1: Getting Started appeared first on Global Change Ecology.

The incorporation of indigenous knowledge cannot be limited to late-stage discussions. Rather, successful implementation of the IPBES work programme must necessarily involve local and indigenous actors from the very beginning. This includes engaging with local communities to determine questions about what kind of research is valuable; these conversations can guide planning and prioritization. Showcasing the impact of issues relevant to biodiversity and ecosystem services on these communities is likewise stressed as essential. To enable these types of dialogue, local dialogue workshops were proposed.

The involvement of indigenous and local peoples in the mission and activities of IPBES is truly one of mutual benefits. All to often, the needs of these groups go unrecognized in strategy and policy planning. Equally problematic is the failure to recognize these groups’ unique skills and contribution regarding local habitats and ecosystems in the plans that will directly affect them. Local and indigenous people have demonstrated elite-level skills in such activities as mapping from which IPBES can greatly beneficial.

What is certain is that any effort to incorporate the skills and contributions of indigenous peoples must be conscious of the imbalance of our relationship with these people. Too often, such knowledge has been used without true consent or any respect for the intentions of the contributors. A peer-to-peer relationship–one of true collaboration, consent, listening, and learning–with indigenous people is needed to address these ethical concerns.

The political marginalization–both historical and present–of indigenous peoples has suppressed and inhibited the contribution of indigenous knowledge of ecosystem. Hopefully, the concentrated efforts of IPBES will allow the invaluable skills and offerings of these groups to be implemented into the work of promoting and protecting biodiversity and ecosystem services in a productive, respectful, and mutually beneficial manner.

The post Stakeholder Day: Indigenous & Local Knowledge appeared first on Global Change Ecology.

Involving more actors, including local communities and indigenous people, in creating knowledge about biodiversity is a major focus. Opportunities and challenges for incorporating more stakeholders need to be identified.

Several potential solutions and strategic directions were raised. Innovation was highlighted, noting the goal of improving web usage, capabilities, and presence for the purpose of increasing accessibility. A broader web presence is intended to be implemented not only for IPBES, but likewise for IPCC. Thus, the external outreach and activities of these organizations can be complemented and expanded.

A question from the floor raised a specific problem within the broader issue stakeholder engagement: How can we improve communication with local—in particular, rural—communities. These communities directly affect land use and have been shown to create significant political upset when decision makers become perceived as elites.

Addressing this problem requires simple-level communication, which is especially difficult for the academic-types which largely make up the body of organizations like IPBES. While it was accepted that this type of communication is a persistently difficult task, early education in relevant issues was raised as a potential solution. As the popular movement for recycling demonstrated, directly involving children in environmental issues can have a trickle-up effect and yield parental involvement. This strategy may help to improve engagement with local community members.

“No more new assessments!”. There are currently six assessments underway: land degradation, global, and four regional assessments. Budget issues will limit the ability of IPBES to coordinate more assessments in the near future.

However, improving communication of assessment content is a consistent priority. Robert Spaull, head of IPBES communication, spoke at length about communication strategies–both broad and minutely technical.

Engaging traditional media was underscored as a goal with significant room for improvement; contact consolidation and collaboration are particular goals that are stressed within a 12 month media outreach plan that is underway. An emphasis on opinion pieces and the formation of regional communication and outreach networks likewise hold a prominent place within this strategy.

As is the case in almost every 21^st century issue, the strategic role of social media was reinforced. It was here that the technical strategies were raised to better focus the social media outreach of IPBES—such as advising the use of a consistent hashtag (#IPBES5) for the current conference.

And, even more essential than a consistent hashtag, the issue of a consistent acronym pronunciation was addressed. Is the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services to be referred to as “I-P-B-E-S”? “I-P-bes”? Or perhaps the phonetic pronunciation, “Ip-bes”?

As Spaull concluded, phonetic pronunciations are memorable, and should be utilized when verbally possible. And so, the pronunciation “Ip-bes” was settled upon.

One small issue of IPBES successfully accomplished! Many more to go.

The post Engaging Stakeholders at IPBES 5 appeared first on Global Change Ecology.

But why are we, a group of Masters students, here after all? The GCE study programme has UN observer status, so throughout the next days we’ll be listening in on plenary discussions and debates within the smaller groups, which work on issues of budgeting, rules of procedure, communication, and outreach and the work programme per se. We’ll be learning how a myriad of national interests can (hopefully) be integrated through consensus decisions—as well as how to stay awake during the evening sessions without access to coffee, an important skill in our future careers!

In this blog, we’ll be discussing our impressions and insights into the proceedings at IPBES-3.

We were welcomed at the conference by Dr. Axel Paulsch, who consults the German delegation at IPBES, and also teaches a course to on The Convention on Biological Diversity and the IPBES to GCE students each year. For those who haven’t taken his course yet, he gave us an overview on IPBES history, and a quick introduction into “IPBES speak,” the aims of the current conference, and the procedures by which IPBES makes decisions.

We then sat in on our first session, a joint convention of the contact groups (i.e. subgroups dedicated to work on particular problems within the IPBES) ‘budget’ and ‘work program.’ After lunch in the adjacent UN building (overlooking Bonn from the 29^th floor, with a river-view, no less), we attended afternoon sessions before continuing our own discussions in a local restaurant in the heart of Bonn.

–Henrike Schulte to Bühne

The post An Exciting Introduction to IPBES appeared first on Global Change Ecology.

In GCE, we talk a lot about the importance of biodiversity and ecosystem services, and how frustrating it is that these issues are often not prioritized in international politics. Yet, as students, we too have difficulties finding time to prioritize actual engagement with these issues while also juggling extra courses, guest lectures, and research. But sometimes, we get a great chance to put engage with our studies in the real world—and we take it.

So in the spirit of engagement, on January 14, 2015, we, an enthusiastic delegation of 31 Global Change Ecology students, Alumni, and Instructors from University of Bayreuth, convened in Bonn, Germany to be official Observers of the third session of the plenary of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES). Our group is comprised of 19 first-semester students, eight third-semester students, one fifth-semester student, several Alumni, and led by Professor Dr. Thomas Koellner, Chair of Ecological Services. And of course, I, Helen Sitar, am also part of this cheerful gaggle of young faces at IPBES. As a third-semester global change ecologist focusing on land-use changes and their human impacts, I am particularly interested to hear international debates surrounding deforestation and habitat loss, as points of conflict often illuminate where the most interesting work can be done.

It was an energetic journey from Bayreuth to Bonn on Wednesday evening. Some 25 of us took the train together, in the name of ecological and low-impact traveling, to meet others already in Bonn.

When we arrived, we met up with Yrneh and Ervin, classmates also in the third semester, who are volunteering for the week at IPBES. They are administering check-in, distributing papers to delegates, recharging head-sets, and generally doing all the behind-the scenes help to keep the Platform going smoothly.

It was exciting to meet GCE alumni in Bonn, who share with us the common experience of studying in Bayreuth. Hanna Skiba, who started GCE in 2007, gave us a warm welcome at the World Conference Center on Thursday morning, where she is currently working as a scientific advisor to the German delegation at IPBES. Later in the day, we met Heera Lee, from South Korea, who started GCE in 2010, and is now doing her Ph.D. in Bonn, in a group which “seeks to bridge the gap between ecosystem science and practice” (http://www.operas-project.eu/). We also met Daniel Kachelriess, who started GCE in 2008, and was working at the United Nations in New York, as a scientific advisor for the island nation of Maldives. We enjoyed dinner with Heera and Daniel on Thursday evening, and listened to their adventures in working in ecology and ecosystem services.

Having gotten to know our own group, we were excited to see representatives from around the world debate about how to prioritize biodiversity and ecosystem services. And to hear about our impressions from IPBES itself, you’ll have to have to keep reading!

–Helen Sitar

The post GCE at IPBES-3: An enthusiastic delegation of Observers arrives in Bonn! appeared first on Global Change Ecology.