Canada and the World fail to deliver on biodiversity targets in time for International Year of Biodiversity, 2010 deadline
Submitted by Guest on Thu, 2010-05-13 08:54
By Patrick Marchand-Smith
The loss, due to extinction, of species continues unabated despite the signing, almost twenty years ago, of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD, http://www.cbd.int/convention/), a legally binding international treaty designed to protect biodiversity worldwide. Recent estimates are that, between 1970 and 2006, wild vertebrate populations declined worldwide by 31%. With further losses projected due to climate change, habitat loss, over-exploitation of fisheries and other human-driven factors, loss of biodiversity and the looming ecological crisis are shaping up to be one of the defining characteristics of our era. As pressure from human activities and their impacts on our planet's natural systems grows, so too does the sense of urgency surrounding the fulfillment of commitments made at the international level. To meet these obligations, signatory nations must make genuine efforts to bring the issue of biodiversity in from the margins to occupy a more central place in political agendas and government budgets.
This week through to the end of the month, eighteen years after the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro and the opening for signing of the CBD, meetings will be taking place in Nairobi, Kenya, as a preparatory session for the 10th round of Conference of Parties (COP) negotiations pursuant to the adoption of the CBD, which will be held this October in Nagoya, Japan. Of note are the meetings of the Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical and Technological Advice (SBSTTA, http://www.cbd.int/sbstta14/), a UN working group charged with providing scientific and technical advice to members of the Conference of Parties (COP), and of the Working Group on Review of Implementation of the Convention (WGRI, http://www.cbd.int/wgri3/). Specific recommendations from these groups on new biodiversity targets and other strategic matters will be considered and potentially adopted by the COP in October. The deadline for implementation of the measures to be adopted is expected to be 2020. Some of the measures under negotiation are the cutting of subsidies which threaten ecological systems, legislative action on overfishing, the reduction of pollution from industrial and agricultural sources below threshold levels, the implementation of measures to drastically reduce habitat loss and limiting the exploitation of natural resources to ecologically viable levels.
These meetings coincide with the release on the 10th of May of the third report by members of the SBSTTA on the status of global biodiversity and the measures that have been taken by the international community to curb species loss. According to the authors of the report, the 193 signatory states have so far failed to achieve the primary goal of significantly reducing the rate at which species are being lost to extinction by 2010. The report, entitled Global Biodiversity Outlook 3 (available at http://gbo3.cbd.int/), takes stock of current trends in 15 indicators of global biodiversity and tracks states' performance in achieving the 11 goals seen as instrumental in halting loss of biodiversity. Of the 15 indicators, only two showed decisive signs of progress: the coverage of protected areas and the amount of Official Development Assistance that was allocated to biodiversity-related projects. Of the 11 goals, none has been achieved globally.
In Canada, the federal government has remained publicly silent on its position in this round of negotiations. Furthermore, Environment Canada has postponed the release of its assessment of ecosystem health in Canada until after the Nagoya meetings have concluded. This silence is hardly surprising given the nature of the recommendations likely to be produced and the government's decidedly pro-industry track record. Let us review some recent developments.
Particularly damning are recent efforts by the Conservatives to pass changes to the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act last year in the budget implementation bill and last Tuesday in budget bill C-9. Environmental Assessment (EA) is internationally recognized as one of the most valuable policy tools that can be brought to bear in protecting biodiversity as it formalizes attempts to mitigate the environmental impacts of development projects and includes special consideration for at-risk species. The most recent jab at this important piece of legislation would see infrastructure projects exempted from the process, the National Energy Board responsible for assessing energy-related projects and the Minister of the Environment granted the authority to determine the scope of any given EA.
This past March in Doha, Qatar, at a meeting of the Convention on the International Trade of Endangered Species (CITES) Canada voted against constraints being placed on the fishing of bluefin tuna. As a result, this threatened species will continue to be fished rapaciously. Now, with the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico contaminating the bluefin's spawning zones, the species faces the real threat of eventual extinction. As in many such cases, Canada has lost an opportunity to contribute positively in its international dealings and the opportunity cost could be the loss of a magnificent aquatic species.
The large scale extraction of bitumen from the Athabasca Tar Sands continues to be a black mark against Canada's name not only in terms of its contribution to Climate Change but also to habitat loss and to the contamination of local ecosystems. A dramatic example of this is the poisoning of migratory birds who land in tailing ponds.
Canada's weak position on climate change also reflects poorly on the nation's commitment to protecting biodiversity. In its 2007 report on the impacts of climate change, the IPCC estimates that with a 1.5°C rise in mean global temperatures 9-31% of currently existing species could become extinct. This is a best-case scenario as the panel also projects that the planet will experience between 1.5-4.5°C of warming by the end of the century. In Canada such warming will not only mean shifts in current ecological boundaries but could also lead to the loss of entire biomes in the Arctic. In light of these possibilities Canada's uncooperative stance internationally and the federal government's persistent softening of emission reduction targets amounts to gross neglect of its commitments under the CBD.
On September 22nd 2010 the UN General Assembly will be holding a special session and signatory nations will be expected to make known their position prior to the commencement of COP 10 negotiations on the 18th of October. So far the issue has passed under the radar politically and vital signs are not good for Canada to play a leading role in shaping how the world addresses its ecological crisis. There is however hope that the federal government's hand could be forced on the issue. The passing this month of the Climate Change Accountability Act shows how an uncooperative government can be held to account by opposition parties with support from the public. Let us hope that 2010's designation as the International Year of Biodiversity inspires Canadians to take up the cause.
