A vivid discussion by parties and stakeholders on guidelines for implementation (section B. bis) has still not been resolved. CBD Alliance member Lim Li Ching has made the statement below:
"The elements in the guidance are critical principles and standards to include in the GBF, but must not result in their removal from the operative parts of the text.
We believe it is critically important that the principles and standards of equity, Indigenous Peoples’ and other relevant rights such as the rights of peasants, gender equality, empowerment of women and girls and youth remain firmly attached to any such goals or targets, as well as their indicators, in a way appropriate to each. We do not believe this can be achieved through generic guidance alone.
In addition, Targets 20 and 21, which are principally concerned with “cross-cutting issues”, especially with regard to rights and Indigenous Peoples and local communities, must remain.
We also oppose the proposal to include a definition of NBS in this section. The CBD is its own legal treaty with its own terminology.”
Letter to the Co-Chairs of the Open-Ended Working Group on the Post-2020 GBF, concerning the
proposal for a new section on ‘Guidance for the implementation of the framework’
11th March 2022
Dear Co-Chairs
We are writing to express our concern about, and opposition to, the proposal included in the document ‘Reflections by the Co-Chairs following the first session of the third meeting of the working groups on the post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework’ concerning the inclusion of a new section on guidance for the implementation of the framework. We do not wish to address the specific draft text proposed for this guidance, but the very principle of it.
It is stated that the intention of the proposal is to “avoid overburdening the text and to ensure that the post-2020 framework remains clear, concise and communicable.” As we understand it, this will involve removing all the “cross cutting issues” - actually important principles and standards, such as rights-based approaches, gender equality, gender-responsive approaches, empowerment of women and girls and youth and Indigenous Peoples and local communities – from the operative parts of the text, including the vision, Goals and specific Targets, and replacing them with one general set of guidance which would apply across the entire document.
In our view, this would serve to downgrade these important “cross-cutting issues”/principes and standards to a weaker status than if they are included in the operative texts. It also raises the prospect that important points of principle would be removed altogether. The existing references to cross-cutting issues are generally weak and need strengthening, not removing.
Without endorsing at all the current draft targets, we believe it is critically important that the principles and standards of equity, Indigenous Peoples’ and other relevant rights remain firmly attached to any such goals or targets, as well as their indicators, in a way appropriate to each. We do not believe this can be achieved through generic guidance. We believe Parties will be less likely to pursue, for example, the equity conditions of goals and targets if the wording concerning equity is not included within them.
We also question whether all or major parts of Targets 20 and 21 might disappear altogether because these targets are principally concerned with “cross cutting issues”, especially with regard to rights and Indigenous Peoples and local communities.
Whilst we appreciate the need for the GBF to be communicable, we also believe this should not drive changes in the document rendering it even more lacking in key principles and standards on rights and equity. As is typically done with major reports such as those from IPBES, a ‘policy-makers’ summary of the GBF could be provided for simplicity and ease of understanding – but leaving the actual negotiated texts fully intact.
We thank you for considering these issues.
Sincerely
AbibiNsroma Foundation, Ghana - Nana Kenneth Amoateng
Avaaz - Oscar Soria
Econexus - Helena Paul
Ecoropa - Christine von Weizsäcker
Environmental Paper Network China - Wen Bo
ETC Group - Ronnie Hall
FIAN International - Philip Seufert
Global Forest Coalition - Simone Lovera
Iniciativa Amotocodie, Paraguay - Miguel Lovera
Initiative for Equality - Dr. Deborah S. Rogers
Landelijk Netwerk Bossen- en Bomenbescherming, Netherlands - Marjan Houpt
Minority Rights Group - Joshua Castellino
Noble Delta Women for Peace and Development International - Caroline Usikpedo
O le Siosiomaga Society Inc., Samoa - Fiu Mata’ese Elisara-La’ulu
Population Matters - Andrew Howard
Rainforest Foundation UK - Joe Eisen
Rainforest Foundation Norway – Silvana Bustillo Restrepo
Seeds Action Network, Germany - Rüdiger Stegemann
Survival International – Fiore Longo
The Development Institute - Ken Kinney
Third World Network – Lim Li Ching
Water Justice and Gender - Juana Vera-Delgado
Women Engaged for a Common Future - Sascha Gabizon
Zambia Alliance for Agroecology and Biodiversity - Frances Davies
________________________________________________________________________________
The opinions,commentaries, and articles printed in ECO are the sole opinion of the individual authors or organizations, unless otherwise expressed.
