Guide to the Global Taxonomy Initiative - Convention on Biological

GUIDE TO THE GLOBALTAXONOMY INITIATIVE

CBD Technical Series

ii

Guide To The Global Taxonomy Initiative

GUIDE TO THE GLOBALTAXONOMY INITIATIVE

CONTENTS

FOREWARD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .v

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .vi

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .vii

1 INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11.1 Taxonomy and the taxonomic impediment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11.2 The Global Taxonomy Initiative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .71.3 Purpose of the Guide . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8

2 BACKGROUND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .92.1 The Convention on Biological Diversity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .92.2 How does the CBD run? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .102.3 The Global Taxonomy Initiative to support implementation of the CBD . . . . . . . . .11

2.3.1 GTI and the 2010 biodiversity target . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .122.4 Who is responsible for the GTI? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12

3 THE PROGRAMME OF WORK FOR THE GTI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .163.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .163.2 Planned activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16

3.2.1 National taxonomic needs assessments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .163.2.2 Regional taxonomic needs assessments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .263.2.3 Global taxonomic needs assessments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .273.2.4 Public awareness and education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .283.2.5 Global and regional capacity-building to support

access to and generation of taxonomic information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .293.2.6 Strengthening of existing networks for regional co-operation . . . . . . . . . . . .323.2.7 Development of a coordinated Global Taxonomy Information System . . . .333.2.8 Forest biological diversity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .403.2.9 Marine and coastal biological diversity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .413.2.10 Dry and sub-humid lands biodiversity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .433.2.11 Inland waters biological diversity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .443.2.12 Agricultural biological diversity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .45

3.2.12.1 Soil biodiversity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .463.2.12.2 The International Pollinators Initiative (IPI) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .463.2.12.3 Pests and pathogens . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .48

3.2.13 Mountain biological diversity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .483.2.14 Island biological diversity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .493.2.15 Access and benefit-sharing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .493.2.16 Invasive alien species . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .533.2.17 Support in implementation of

Article 8(j) - Traditional knowledge, innovations and practise. . . . . . . . . . .58

iii


3.2.18 Support for ecosystem approach and CBD work on assessmentincluding impact assessments, monitoring and indicators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .59

3.2.19 Protected areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .59

4 DEVELOPING THE GTI AND MONITORING ITS PROGRESS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .624.1 Roles and responsibilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .62

4.1.1 The CBD Secretariat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .624.1.2 The GTI Coordination Mechanism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .624.1.3 National Focal Points . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .634.1.4 COP and SBSTTA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .65

4.2 Mechanisms to facilitate implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .654.2.1 National reporting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .654.2.2 NBSAPs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .664.2.3 Roster of experts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .664.2.4 Outreach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .664.2.5 Taxonomic needs assessments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .674.2.6 Pilot projects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .68

4.3 Obstacles to implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .68

5 FUNDING FOR THE GTI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .715.1 Sources of funding for the GTI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .71

5.1.1 National support to taxonomy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .715.1.2 The Global Environment Facility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .725.1.3 Other multilateral sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .755.1.4 Bilateral sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .755.1.5 Nongovernmental sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .765.1.6 Special fund for the GTI under BioNET-International

and other organizations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .775.2 Examples of GTI projects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .77

5.2.1 National Project – Partnerships for EnhancingExpertise in Taxonomy (US) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .77

5.2.2 GEF Project – The Indonesian Biodiversity Collection Project . . . . . . . . . .785.2.3 GEF Project – SABONET(the Southern African

Botany Diversity Network) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .795.2.4 GEF Project – Botanical and Zoological Taxonomic

Networks in Eastern Africa (BOZONET):Linking Conservation to Taxonomy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .80

5.2.5 GEF Project – Biodiversity Resources DevelopmentProject for Costa Rica . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .80

5.2.6 Bilateral – Example projects supportedby the UK Darwin Initiative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .81

5.2.7 Bilateral – Example projects supportedby the Belgian Development Corporation and theRoyal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .81

iv


5.2.8 Regional European Union Initiatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .815.2.9 Non-governmental – Investing in Nature:

an eco-partnership between the HSBC Group,WWF, Botanic Gardens Conservation International and Earthwatch . . . . . .81

5.3 Mobilizing funding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .82

6 INFORMATION SOURCES AND USEFUL CONTACTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .866.1 Taxonomic tools and information sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .86

6.1.1 Nomenclature references . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .866.1.2 Other taxonomic tools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .86

6.2 Key partners . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .906.3 Further information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .91

ANNEX 1. ACRONYMS USED IN TEXT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .93

ANNEX 2. REFERENCES AND FURTHER READING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .106

ANNEX 3. CONVENTION DOCUMENTS SPECIFICALLY ONTAXONOMY AND THE GLOBAL TAXONOMY INITIATIVE . . . . . . . . .110

ANNEX 4. KEY ELEMENTS OF COP DECISIONSRELEVANT TO THE GTI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .114

ANNEX 5. OUTLINE STRATEGY FORTAXONOMIC CAPACITY-BUILDING. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .133

ANNEX 6. SAMPLE QUESTIONNAIRE FOR A TAXONOMICNEEDS ASSESSMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .138

ANNEX 7. USEFUL CONTACT ADDRESSES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .148

ANNEX 8. COP DECISION III/10 ENDORSINGSBSTTA RECOMMENDATION II/2 ON PRACTICALAPPROACHES FOR CAPACITY-BUILDING FOR TAXONOMY . . . . . .151

ANNEX 9. COP DECISION IV/1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .153

ANNEX 10. COP DECISION V/9: GLOBAL TAXONOMYINITIATIVE: IMPLEMENTATION AND FURTHERADVANCE OF THE SUGGESTIONS FOR ACTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .157

ANNEX 11. COP DECISION VI/8: GLOBAL TAXONOMY INITIATIVE . . . . . . . . . . .160

ANNEX 12. COP DECISION VII/9: GLOBAL TAXONOMY INITIATIVE . . . . . . . . . .185

ANNEX 13. COP DECISION VIII/3: GLOBAL TAXONOMYINITIATIVE: IN-DEPTH REVIEW OF THEIMLEMENTATION OF THE PROGRAMMEOF WORK FOR THE GLOBAL TAXONOMY INITIATIVE . . . . . . . . . . .187

v


FOREWARD

Achievement of the objectives of theConvention on Biological Diversity – con-servation of biodiversity, sustainable use ofits components, and the fair and equitablesharing of the benefits arising out of the uti-lization of genetic resources – depends inlarge part on our understanding of biodiver-sity. Yet, only a fraction of the total numberof species that make up the life on earthhave been named or described. What’smore, progress in taxonomy, the science ofnaming, describing and classifying organ-isms, is suffering from a shortage of exper-tise and declining resources. This so-called“taxonomic impediment” to implementationof the Convention was acknowledged byParties to the Convention several years ago,and resulted in development of the GlobalTaxonomy Initiative (GTI).

The GTI is a crucial cross-cutting issueunder the Convention and is relevant for vir-tually all of the work under the CBD. Theprogramme of work for the GTI, which wasadopted at the sixth Conference of the Partiesin 2002 and further supplemented after in-depth review at the eighth Conference of theParties in March 2006, is comprehensive inits scope and bold in its objectives. At a timewhen Parties are increasing their focus onimplementation of the work under the

Convention, and striving to achieve the 2010target of reducing the rate of biodiversityloss, the importance of taxonomy and theGTI cannot be understated.

The information presented in this Guideto the GTI demonstrates the important linksbetween taxonomy and the conservationand sustainable use of biological diversity.It is my hope and belief that the Guide willbe extremely useful, not only for thosedirectly involved in implementing theConvention, and for taxonomists, but foranyone with a deep interest in biologicaldiversity.

I wish to thank all those who have con-tributed to the development of this Guide, inparticular Dr. Chris Lyal of the NaturalHistory Museum in London, as well as thedelegations to the tenth meeting of theSubsidiary Body on Scientific, Technicaland Technological Advice and the variousindividuals who reviewed the Guide andcontributed to its refinement.

Dr. Ahmed DjoghlafExecutive SecretaryConvention on Biological Diversity

vi


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The Secretariat of the Convention onBiological Diversity wishes to thank all thosewho have contributed to development of thisGuide to the Global Taxonomy Initiative.The initial draft of the Guide was reviewedby the tenth meeting of the Subsidiary Bodyon Scientific, Technical and TechnologicalAdvice. The Guide was revised following thein-depth review of the Global TaxonomyInitiative at the eighth Conference of theParties to the Convention in March 2006.

External reviewers, including manymembers of the Coordination Mechanism forthe Global Taxonomy Initiative, provideduseful and important comments whichimproved the Guide considerably. TheSecretariat would like to give special thanksto Dr. Chris Lyal of the Natural HistoryMuseum in London, who prepared the firstdraft of the Guide and devoted considerabletime and energy to ensuring that the finalproduct would be of the highest quality.

vii


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Taxonomy is the science of naming,describing and classifying organisms.Taxonomists have named and describedsome 1.78 million species of animals, plantsand microoganisms, only a fraction of theestimated 5 to 30 million species on Earth.Taxonomy is the tool by which the compo-nents of biological diversity are identifiedand enumerated, and therefore providesbasic knowledge underpinning managementof biodiversity.

The Parties to the Convention onBiological Diversity (CBD) have acknowl-edged the existence of a ‘taxonomic impedi-ment’ to implementation of the Convention,referring to the shortage of taxonomic exper-tise, taxonomic collections, field guides andother identification aids, as well as to the dif-ficulty in accessing existing taxonomicinformation. Consequently, the GlobalTaxonomy Initiative (GTI) was developedby the Parties to:

• Identify taxonomic needs and priorities;• Develop and strengthen human capac-

ity to generate taxonomic information;• Develop and strengthen infrastructure

and mechanisms for generating taxo-nomic information, and for facilitatingsharing of and access to that informa-tion; and

• Provide taxonomic information neededfor decision-making regarding the con-servation of biological diversity, sus-tainable use of its components, and thefair and equitable sharing of the bene-fits arising out of the utilization ofgenetic resources (the three objectivesof the CBD).

Effective implementation of the GTI willundoubtedly contribute to progress towardsthe 2010 Biodiversity Target. This is toachieve, by 2010, a significant reduction of

the current rate of biodiversity loss at theglobal, regional and national level as a con-tribution to poverty alleviation and to thebenefit of all life on earth.

The programme of work for the GlobalTaxonomy Initiative developed by theParties has 19 planned activities. The firstthree of these relate to assessment of taxo-nomic needs at national, regional and globallevels. There have been some assessmentsat national and regional levels, and furtherresults of national assessments are expectedover the next couple of years. The globalassessment is currently being planned.

The fourth planned activity addressespublic awareness and education. There hasbeen some implementation of this activity,and more is expected including throughthe Global Initiative on Communication,Education and Public Awareness (CEPA)under the Convention.

The fifth and sixth planned activitiesaddress capacity-building to support accessto and generation of taxonomic information,and strengthening of networks for regionalcooperation. In spite of many efforts andinitiatives that contribute to capacity-build-ing, it is well-established that the world’staxonomic expertise is shrinking. Regionalcooperation has been fostered to someextent, but more needs to be done and coop-eration alone will not alleviate the need forincreased capacity.

The seventh planned activity envisagesdevelopment of a coordination global taxo-nomic information system. In this regard,the Global Biodiversity Information Facilityand others have made considerable progressin improving interlinkages and in harmoniz-ing approaches so that information can beshared.

The remaining 12 planned activities inthe programme of work for the GTI addressthe role of taxonomy in supporting work

under the CBD on thematic areas andcross-cutting issues. The GTI is itself across-cutting issue, and the use of taxonomyis necessarily driven by user needs, so it isappropriate that the programme of workfocuses on users. The specific plannedactivities address the following:

• Marine and coastal biodiversity; • Agricultural biodiversity • Forest biodiversity; • Inland waters biodiversity; • Dry and sub-humid lands biodiversity;• Mountain biodiversity;• Island biodiversity; • Access to genetic resources and bene-

fit-sharing;• Invasive alien species;• Traditional knowledge, innovations

and practise;• Ecosystem approach, impact assess-

ment, monitoring and indicators; and• Protected areas.

The Conference of the Parties, the governingbody of the CBD, develops and refines theGTI, with support from various mechanismsand actors, including the CBD Secretariat,the Coordination Mechanism for the GTI,national focal points, and the SubsidiaryBody on Scientific, Technical andTechnological Advice. Responsibility forimplementation of the GTI lies with manyactors, in particular national governments,but also relevant organizations, fundingagencies, and taxonomists themselves alongwith their institutions. Implementation of theGTI is facilitated and/or monitored throughseveral means including national biodiversity

strategies and action plans, nationalreports, and various outreach activities andinitiatives.

Implementation of the GTI dependslargely on funding, not only for projects andinitiatives specific to taxonomy but also forbiodiversity-related projects and initiativeswith a taxonomic component. To date, theGlobal Environment Facility has been a keysupporter of many of the planned activitiesin the programme of work. There are alsomany other donors that support taxonomicactivities and thereby contribute to imple-mentation of the GTI.

This Guide is intended for all stakehold-ers, and its purpose is three-fold:

• Describe the rationale and context forthe GTI;

• Describe the programme of work ofthe GTI, including examples of howand where various activities are beingimplemented; and

• Assist institutions, initiatives and indi-viduals to become engaged in theactivities mandated by the GTI, byproviding information on funding,sources of further information anduseful contacts.

This Guide cannot hope to deal in depthwith an extremely complex and rapidly-developing field. Users are encouraged toseek further information from the numerousreferences to other sources made in the text,and to also visit the GTI portal on the CBDwebsite, which provides links to furtherinformation sources about the GTI and itsimplementation.


viii

1


“The governments of the world that recognisethe Convention on Biological Diversityhave affirmed the existence of a taxonomicimpediment to sound management and con-servation of biodiversity. Removal of thisimpediment is a crucial, rate-determiningstep in the proper implementation of theConvention’s objectives. There is an urgentneed to train and support more taxonomicexperts, and to strengthen the infrastructurerequired to discover and understand therelationships among the world’s biologicaldiversity.”

Darwin Declaration, 1988(Anon. 1998)

The Global Taxonomy Initiative (GTI) wasput in place specifically to remove the taxo-nomic impediment – the crucial need identi-fied in the Darwin Declaration.

By 1998, the hindrance to Conventionimplementation caused by the lack of appro-priate taxonomic information had becomevery apparent. Unless action was taken toredress the situation, the impact of theConvention on Biological Diversity (CBD -see text Box 1-1) would be blunted, andprogress in meetings its objectives slowed.

1.1 Taxonomy and the taxonomicimpediment

Taxonomy is the science of naming, describ-ing and classifying organisms, and covers allplants, animals and microorganisms of theworld. Using observations of organisms (mor-phological, behavioural, genetic, biochemicaletc), taxonomists identify species and arrangethem into classifications, describing as newany that are not scientifically known. In the250 years since Linnaeus introduced the bino-mial system of naming, which is used forscientific names today (see text box 1-2), tax-onomists have described and named some1.78 million species of animals, plants andmicrooganisms. The full number of specieson Earth is unknown, but probably liessomewhere between 5 million and 30 million(Millennium Ecosystem Assessment 2005).

Taxonomy is the tool by which the com-ponents of biological diversity are identi-fied, named and enumerated. Consequently,it provides basic knowledge underpinningbiodiversity management and implementa-tion of the CBD. Locating informationabout an organism is very difficult if noname for it is available, since the name is

1. INTRODUCTION

Box 1-1 The Convention on Biological Diversity

At the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, world leaders agreed on a comprehensivestrategy for “sustainable development” – meeting our needs while ensuring that weleave a healthy and viable world for future generations. One of the key agreementsadopted at Rio was the Convention on Biological Diversity. This pact among the vastmajority of the world’s governments sets out commitments for maintaining the world’sbiodiversity and associated ecological functions. The Convention establishes three maingoals: the conservation of biological diversity, the sustainable use of its components,and the fair and equitable sharing of the benefits from the use of genetic resources. It isa political and legal agreement, and identifies priorities for action and puts in place theglobally-agreed policies to support such actions

2


the unifying reference for all data. This is apotentially disastrous limitation to the abil-ity to take informed management decisions(Hopkins and Freckleton, 2002; McNeely,2002). If Parties to the Convention do notknow what species live within their nationalboundaries, they will find it difficult toenact effective legislation concerning them,plan for conservation and sustainable use orprotect national or subnational rights con-cerning benefits of the genetic resources oftheir biodiversity. Taxonomy provides abasic and vital tool for the implementationof the Convention on Biological Diversity.

Identification of some species may be easy,particularly in the case of large mammals;however, this is not the case for most organ-isms. The majority of invertebrates and manyplants, for example, require expert skills toensure a correct identification. This is not justbecause there are no simple-to-use identifica-tion guides – in many cases the species are notsimple to identify and production of suchguides is not possible. However, even wheresimple guides might be possible, these orother identification aids to assist the non-tax-onomist are available for comparatively fewgroups and in comparatively few geographic

areas. The rate of production of such guides isvery slow, other than for some charismaticgroups such as birds and large mammals.Moreover, while much of the information thatis currently available is in formats and lan-guages suitable for the needs of taxonomists inthe regions where the work is being done, it isnot always sufficiently accessible in countriesof origin, nor in styles useful to non-taxono-mists (Lyal, 2004). The inability to identify(or obtain identifications for) the biota is amajor part of the taxonomic impediment.

Not only can it be difficult to tell somespecies apart, but the majority of them havenot been categorized or given formal scien-tific names (Text box 1-3). Although there isextensive taxonomic work on groups such asbirds, most mammals and some higher plants,little is known of the distribution, biology, andgenetics of the vast majority of species, evenin those groups. Perhaps only 10% of verte-brates remain to be described, but well over50% of terrestrial arthropods and up to 95%of protozoa are undescribed (Figure 1). At themost conservative estimate, the subject of theConvention on Biological Diversity - thebiota itself - comprises more unknownspecies than known ones.

Box 1-2 What’s in a name?

Different kinds of animals, fungi and plants and microorganisms are called different‘species’. This reflects a real biological difference – a species is defined as a potentiallyinterbreeding group of organisms that can produce viable offspring that themselves caninterbreed. Thus animals of two different species, like a horse and a zebra, cannot inter-breed, while animals of the same species can. Taxonomists provide unique names forspecies, labels that can help us find out more about them, and enable us to be sure thatwe are all talking about the same thing. Of course, there are names for organisms in manylanguages, but it is important, for example, when discussing the hedgehog to knowwhether one is talking about the small spiny insectivore Erinaceus europaeus, othermembers of the same family, cacti of the genus Echinocerus, or the orange fungusHydnum repandum, all of which have the same ‘common’ name in English. For this rea-son the Latin ‘scientific’ name, is given as a unique universal identifier.

3


Box 1-3 How to name a species: the taxonomic process

Taxonomists begin by sorting specimens to separate sets they believe represent species.Once the specimens are sorted the next job is to see whether or not they already havenames. This may involve working through identification guides, reading descriptionswritten perhaps 200 years ago, and borrowing named specimens from museums orherbaria to compare with the sample. Such comparison may involve external characters,a need to dissect internal structures, or even molecular analysis of the DNA. If there isno match the specimens may represent a new species, not previously given a name. Thetaxonomist then has to write a description, including ways in which the new species canbe distinguished from others, and make up a name for it, in a Latin format. The name andthe description must then be properly published so that other taxonomists can see whathas been done, and be able to identify the species themselves. From finding the speci-mens to the name appearing in print can take several years.

Figure 1. Known and unknown species in the world. The numbers ofunknown species are an estimate, based largely on data in 'The Web of life',UK Systematics Forum, 1988.

4


Although there are many species waitingto be described, there are far too few taxon-omists to do the job, particularly in thecountries where they are arguably mostneeded, the biodiversity-rich developingcountries (Figures 2 and 3). Most taxono-mists work in relatively biodiversity-poorbut resource-rich industrialised countries.Institutions in these countries also hold thelargest reference collections of specimensfrom developing countries, as well as thebooks and scientific papers required toidentify species and to carry out taxonomicresearch. Collections, with the specimensproperly identified and with the names up-to-date, are vital tools, especially in theabsence of simple-to-use guides. Manyspecies are only known to have been col-lected once, and are represented in collec-tions only by the type specimen (Text box1-4). However, if this collection is in an

institution not in the country of origin, andno good images are available, many otherspecimens may have been collectedbut remain unidentified or incorrectlyidentified.

Extensive libraries are needed because ofthe vast amount of taxonomic literature thathas been published in thousands of journalsand books over the past 250 years. This liter-ature, just like collections, is a vital part ofthe taxonomist’s equipment. For a largenumber of species only one description hasever been written, and that is in the originalpublication where the species was named.Without access to this publication and inthe absence of an authoritatively-namedcollection there is no way of a taxonomistbeing sure of making a correct identification.Making this legacy literature accessibleto workers in developing countries is amajor undertaking. There is a current

Figure 2. Number of taxonomists in Asia working on each major taxon. FromShimura, 2003.

5


Figure 3. Ratio of sizes of major taxa based on known species in Asia. FromShimura, 2003.

Box 1-4 The role of taxonomic collections

Collections of organisms are vital tools for taxonomists. Although a great deal ofvaluable information can be gained from published studies, the specimens or culturesthemselves are the ultimate reference. However good a published description of a speciesmay be, the author will inevitably leave out some characteristics. However, for studiesafter the publication, when more specimens of other species are found, some character-istics not originally described might need to be studied. With named specimens in a col-lection this is possible; without them it is very difficult. Some specimens are particularlyimportant: the ‘types’. These are specimens used by a taxonomist when describing aspecies for the first time, and form the ‘international standard’ – the reference specimensto which all others can be compared to assess whether or not they are of the same species.Most types are held in the large collections in industrialised countries rather than in thecountries of origin. However, because species are often distributed across nationalboundaries, these collections provide a globally-invaluable resource for comparisonand identification. A major need for all taxonomic institutions, however, is a collectioncontaining specimens or cultures which have been authoritatively named, ideally bycomparison with the type.

6


(and inevitable) move to transfer literature tothe internet, which will certainly improveaccessibility. However, this carries with it anabsolute requirement for taxonomists in allcountries to be connected to the internet witha high enough bandwidth to access the infor-mation vital to their work.

Although identification and the largenumber of unknown species have been high-lighted above, these are by no means theonly aspects of taxonomy of importance tothe implementation of the CBD. TheScientific and Technical Advisory Panel(STAP) of the Global Environment Facility(GEF) concluded that the some of the keyreasons for the importance of taxonomyinclude an understanding of key organismsthat enable:

i) A scientific basis for conservation,management and benefit-sharing ofall levels of the biodiversity hierarchy;

ii) Development of food security;iii) Identification and control of human

disease vectors;iv) Identification and control of

vectors’ contribution to ecosystemdysfunction; and

v) The promotion of health through anunderstanding of preventive andcurative agents found in biodiversity1

Information arising from properly identifiedspecimens includes data that can be usedoutside taxonomy. For example, they canhelp predict distributions of species, bothactual and potential (e.g. as a response toclimate change, or if the organism is intro-duced into a new geographic area), and theycan inform identification of priority areas for

protection based on distributions and rarityof taxa. In addition, they can provide base-line data to plot the changing fortunes oftaxa and ecosystems under anthropogenicinfluence, predictions of interactionsbetween species which come into contactthrough natural or artificial changes in distri-bution, linkages between different life-stages of organisms where these lookdissimilar, and so on. The importance of tax-onomy to the implementation of the CBDhas been emphasized at great length in theexpert meetings which led up to the GTI(Anon, 1998; Anon, 1998b; Anon, 1998c;Anon, 1999; Anon, 2000), by the meetingsadvising the CBD decision-making process,by the CBD Conference of the Parties, bythe GEF STAP (Anon, 1999a), and bynumerous other authors2. As evidencedby the programme of work for the GTIdescribed in this guide, taxonomy plays akey role in supporting virtually all of thework of the CBD.

The majority of developing countrieslack a sufficient number of taxonomists,collections of their flora and fauna, andadequate libraries and collections of scien-tific papers to assist the taxonomicprocess. All these are needed; just hiringtaxonomists without the necessary toolsfor them to do their work effectively willnot be sufficient.

The lack of taxonomists, of collections,of libraries, of field guides and other identi-fication aids, the difficulty in accessinginformation, coupled with the overwhelmingnumber of species, both described and unde-scribed, make up the ‘taxonomic impedi-ment’ to implementation of the Conventionon Biological Diversity.

1 Report of the STAP brainstorming on the use of taxonomic information. Key outcomes and suggestions. (1999).2 (e.g. Wemmer et al., 1993; Cresswell & Bridgewater, 2000; Blackmore, 2002; Hopkins & Freckleton, 2002; Klopper et al, 2002; McNeely, 2002;Steenkamp & Smith, 2002; Chavan & Krishnan, 2003; Golding & Timberlake, 2003; King & Lyal, 2003; Lowry & Smith, 2003; Navarro et al, 2003;Raxworthy et al, 2003; Canhos et al, 2004; Iguchi et al, 2004; Samper, 2004; Smith, 2004, Smith et al, 2004; Suarez & Tsutsui, 2004; Yahner, 2004).

7


1.2 The Global Taxonomy Initiative

The response of the CBD to the recognitionof the taxonomic impediment has been todevelop a ‘cross-cutting’ programme toaddress it, the ‘Global Taxonomy Initiative’(GTI). Because the GTI is a part of the CBD,the taxonomic activities that it espouses are insupport of the three aims of the Convention.

The GTI has a dual nature, encompassingboth policy and implementation. Firstly, as a‘cross-cutting issue’ of the CBD it is part ofan agreement that provides the legal andpolitical backing for activities in support ofits threefold objective3. This is the forumthrough which the Parties to the CBDdevelop policy, as articulated in the deci-sions of the Conference of the Parties(COP). This international policy can then beused to inform national policies by theParties to the CBD4. Input to the COP comesfrom its Subsidiary Body on Scientific,Technical and Technological Advice(SBSTTA), the ‘Coordination Mechanism’of the GTI (an informal advisory group), andany other expert meetings or processes thatmay be convened. Assistance in bringingthis information together, and providingother documentation to develop the process,is provided by the Executive Secretary of theCBD and the Secretariat (SCBD), whichincludes a GTI Programme Officer.

The other aspect of the dual nature of theGTI is that of implementation. The adoptionby the COP of a particular decision does notautomatically mean that the aspirationsexpressed within it are implemented.Countries first have to take decisions of theirown as to what extent they will put in placepolicies to implement locally what has been

decided globally. The activities outlined inthe policies (e.g. the GTI Programme ofWork (PoW)) need to be undertaken by,among others, taxonomists themselves. Thesuccess of the GTI depends largely on theparticipation of taxonomists and others, andthe successful integration of taxonomicwork with other Convention activities. Thisis a challenge. Mechanisms must be put inplace to support implementation, and torecord when and how implementation hastaken place. Those implementing the GTIare by and large not engaged in policy devel-opment, and there may be very tenuous linksbetween the implementers and the policy-makers. Taxonomists and their institutionsmay not be aware of the policy decisions thathave been made, and how these can supportthe work that is required. Conversely, thosetasked with reporting on the progress of theGTI (specifically GTI and CBD NationalFocal Points) may not be aware of whatprogress has been made, or, indeed, of whomight be involved, since there is generallyno mechanism in place to gather and synthe-sise this information.

The GTI is necessarily driven by userneeds, those needs being identified in thecontext of Convention implementation.Taxonomists already produce vast amountsof basic, valuable information. However, thepractices of information dissemination havenot always done justice to the importance ofthat information. One aspect of the GTI is toensure that the taxonomic informationreaches not only taxonomists but also deci-sion-makers and other non-taxonomistusers, and in a format that they can employ.

In addition to effective disseminationof existing information, generation of new

3 Conservation of biodiversity, the sustainable use of its components, and the fair and equitable sharing of the benefits arising out of the utilizationof genetic resources.4 The Parties to the CBD are the countries or regional economic organizations that have ratified, accepted, or approved the Convention (see Article34 of the CBD text for details).

8


information is also a part of the GTI. Asnoted above, the majority of species are notyet described and named. Any taxonomicactivity will at some level assist in imple-mentation of the Convention, because betterunderstanding of biodiversity should ulti-mately support better decisions about con-servation and sustainable use of biodiversity.Nevertheless, the GTI focuses somewhat ontaxonomy applied in the context of theimplementation of the CBD. End-users oftaxonomic information, be they protectedarea managers, scientists combating alienspecies, or national governments definingaccess regimes for medicinal plants, have animportant short-term need for good informa-tion upon which to base their decisions. Inshort, effective implementation of the CBDdepends largely on taxonomic information.

1.3 Purpose of the Guide

This Guide is for all stakeholders, in thehope that they can use it to enable and speedup implementation of the GTI. The purposeof the Guide is three-fold:

• Describe the rationale and context forthe GTI;

• Describe the programme of work ofthe GTI, including examples of how

and where various activities are beingimplemented; and

• Assist institutions, initiatives and indi-viduals to become engaged in theactivities mandated by the GTI, byproviding information on funding,sources of further information anduseful contacts.

Importantly, this Guide tries to use languagethat is easy to understand for those notdirectly involved in CBD processes.Therefore, although references to decisionsof the Conference of the Parties are oftenprovided, the language used is not necessar-ily the same. If further clarity is needed,readers need to refer to the original text ofCOP decisions and other documents. A listof acronyms used in the document is pro-vided at the end of the Guide.

Finally, although this volume outlinesGTI activities, it cannot hope to deal indepth with an extremely complex andrapidly-developing field. The reader isurged to use the bibliography to understandfurther some of the activities taking place,in a multiplicity of fora, to remove the taxo-nomic impediment. In addition, those withweb access are encouraged to visit the GTIportal on the CBD website, which provideslinks to further information sources aboutthe GTI and its implementation.

9


The Convention on Biological Diversity

The Convention on Biological Diversity isthe largest of the environmental conven-tions, and is so far signed and ratified by188 Parties, including 187 countries. Theobjectives of the Convention are:

• Conservation of biological diversity;• Sustainable use of its components; and• Fair and equitable sharing of the bene-

fits arising out of the utilization ofgenetic resources.

The agreement covers all ecosystems,species, and genetic resources.

The CBD, as an international agreement,identifies a common problem, sets overallgoals and policies and general obligations,and organizes technical and financial coop-eration. However, the responsibility forachieving its goals rests largely with thecountries themselves. The Convention setsout a series of binding commitments in itsarticles; countries that join it are obliged tofulfil these commitments. The decisionstaken by the COP are not legally bindingbut, having been agreed by all of the Parties,are likely to at least inform national poli-cies. Under the Convention, Governmentsundertake to conserve and sustainably usebiodiversity. They are required to developnational biodiversity strategies and actionplans (NBSAPs), and to integrate these intobroader national plans for environment anddevelopment. Other commitments include:

• Identifying and monitoring the impor-tant components of biodiversity thatneed to be conserved and usedsustainably.

• Establishing protected areas to con-serve biodiversity while promoting

environmentally sound developmentaround these areas.

• Rehabilitating and restoring degradedecosystems and promoting the recov-ery of threatened species.

• Respecting, preserving and maintain-ing traditional knowledge of the sus-tainable use of biodiversity with theinvolvement of indigenous peoplesand local communities.

• Preventing the introduction of, con-trolling, and eradicating alien speciesthat could threaten ecosystems, habi-tats or species.

• Controlling the risks posed by organ-isms modified by biotechnology.

• Promoting public participation, partic-ularly when it comes to assessing theenvironmental impacts of developmentprojects that threaten biodiversity.

• Educating people and raising aware-ness about the importance of biodiver-sity and the need to conserve it.

All of these commitments require, to agreater or lesser extent, the use of taxonomy.

The Convention has identified work tobe carried out in seven ‘thematic’ work pro-grammes, addressing:

• Marine and coastal biodiversity; • Agricultural biodiversity; • Forest biodiversity; • Inland waters biodiversity; • Dry and sub-humid lands biodiversity;• Mountain biodiversity; and• Island biodiversity.

Each thematic programme sets out keyissues for consideration, basic principles toguide the necessary work, expected outputs;as well as timelines and means for achiev-ing these outputs.

2. BACKGROUND

10


In addition to the thematic areas thereare a number of key ‘cross-cutting issues’of relevance to all thematic areas. Theseinclude:

• Access to genetic resources andbenefit-sharing;

• Traditional knowledge, innovationsand practise;

• Biological diversity and tourism;• Climate change and biological diversity;• Economics, trade and incentives;• Ecosystem approach;• Global strategy for plant conservation;• 2010 biodiversity target;• Global Taxonomy Initiative;• Impact assessment, liability and

redress;• Indicators;• Liability and redress; • Invasive alien species;• Protected areas;• Public education and awareness;• Sustainable use; and• Technology transfer and cooperation.

The CBD does not itself fund projects, anddoes not provide grants. However, there aremany sources of funding used by thoseseeking to implement the Convention. The‘financial mechanism’ of the CBD, theGlobal Environment Facility (GEF), cansupport taxonomic activities under certaincircumstances. The GEF, and other sourcesof funding, are discussed in more detailbelow in section 5.

2.2 How does the CBD run?

The Convention’s governing body is theConference of the Parties (COP), compris-ing representatives of all governments (andregional economic integration organiza-

tions) that have ratified the treaty. The COPreviews progress under the Convention,identifies new priorities, and sets workplans. It can also make amendments to theConvention, create expert advisory bodies,review progress reports by member nations,and collaborate with other internationalorganizations and agreements. The COP hastaken a number of ‘decisions’, setting out indetail how the various aspects of work ofthe Convention should be developed.

The COP decisions provide a text whichinforms the national policies of the govern-ments of the Parties. Given that the Partieshave agreed to the text, this text provides abasis upon which work can be built.Throughout this document references to therelevant COP decisions are given as foot-notes in the text.

The Conference of the Parties is sup-ported and advised by several other bodiesthat are established by the Convention(see section 4 for further information):

• The Subsidiary Body on Scientific,Technical and Technological Advice(SBSTTA). The SBSTTA is a commit-tee composed of experts from membergovernments competent in relevantfields. It plays a key role in makingrecommendations to the COP on sci-entific and technical issues.

• The Secretariat of the Convention onBiological Diversity (SCBD) based inMontreal, is linked to United NationsEnvironment Programme. Its mainfunctions are to organize meetings,draft documents, assist member gov-ernments in the implementation of theprogramme of work, coordinate withother international organizations, andcollect and disseminate information.

• The COP also establishes ad hoc com-mittees or mechanisms as appropriate,in order to address particular issues.

11


The texts of all recommendations ofSBSTTA and of COP decisions can befound on the web site of the CBD5. COPdecisions dedicated to the GTI are annexedto this Guide and are found in the GTI por-tal within the CBD website.

2.3 The Global Taxonomy Initiative tosupport implementation of the CBD

The main elements of the taxonomic imped-iment, and the consequent need for a specialemphasis on taxonomy to enable the CBDto be implemented effectively, were identi-fied quite early in the Convention’s exis-tence. Within the remit of the Convention,the need for taxonomic input has been rec-ognized in a number of areas:

• Developing national biodiversitystrategies and action plans (Articles ofthe Convention 6, 7);

• Monitoring and assessing the effectsof management practices and impactsof environmental and use changes(Articles 7, 14);

• Identifying appropriate in-situ conser-vation areas (Article 8);

• Developing protocols for sustainableuse of biological resources (Article 10);

• Training and research programmes inconservation and sustainable use ofbiological diversity (Article 12);

• Promoting understanding of the impor-tance of biological diversity (Article 13);

• Enabling access to genetic resources(Article 15);

• As part of technology transfer, informa-tion exchange and technical and scien-tific cooperation (Articles 16, 17, 18);

• Managing the distribution of benefitsof biotechnology (Article 19);

• Addressing issues on biosafety(Cartagena Protocol); and

• Addressing problems within the thematicand cross-cutting areas of the CBD.

In all these areas a lack of available taxo-nomic expertise, data and national capacityamong the majority of the Parties hindersimplementation of the Convention. Theimpediments to the implementation of Article7 on Identification and Monitoring have beenparticularly apparent. Following this recogni-tion, the COP authorised and developed a tax-onomic component of Convention activitiesthrough a number of decisions, from its thirdmeeting to the eighth. A programme of workfor the GTI was adopted in 2002 and supple-mented in 2006 (COP decisions VI/8 andVIII/3), which among other things attemptedto include all of the activities mentioned inearlier decisions (III/10, IV/1.D, V/9),although not all the detail available wasincluded. The relevant texts of these decisionsare annexed to this Guide.

Many of the problems forming the taxo-nomic impediment, and their possible solu-tions, were also explored in a series ofexpert meetings (Anon, 1998, 1998b,1998c, 1998d, 1999, 2000). These docu-ments have been strongly influential in thedevelopment of the GTI, and all were sub-mitted to the COP, or to the SBSTTA to pro-vide information to help formulaterecommendations to the COP.

Overall, the COP has asked the GTI to“seek to provide the key informationrequired for the implementation of theConvention on Biological Diversity, partic-ularly Article 7, on identification and moni-toring, through increasing the fundamentalbiological data essential to underpin theconservation, sustainable use and equitablesharing of the benefits from the utilization

5 http://www.biodiv.org

12


of biological diversity. That is, to addressthe problems of insufficient knowledge ofall components of biological diversity(including their classification, description,value and function) and lack of taxonomiccapacity, to overcome what has been termed“the taxonomic impediment”.” (decisionVI/8 – see annex 11). The decision went onto note that “In formulating the programmeof work to achieve this end, the GTI shouldprovide the global platform to help acceler-ate current taxonomic efforts in areas iden-tified as high priority by countries andregional groupings of countries”. The GTIprogramme of work has been designed tofocus on supplying the needed taxonomicinformation to support the major work areasof the Convention, and the need to supportcapacity-building to ensure the ability ofcountries to undertake the priority taxo-nomic work required to implement theConvention. This programme of work isintended to fulfil the following functions:

(a) To contribute to the implementa-tion of the Convention’s StrategicPlan;

(b) To set operational objectives withclear expected outputs and waysand means through which toachieve the set objectives;

(c) To provide the rationale for thechoice of the operational targets,with indications of opportunitiesfor further elaboration of the pro-gramme of work; and

(d) To serve as a guide to all biodiver-sity stakeholders on specific objec-tives to which they can contributeindividually or collectively, at thelocal, national or internationallevel.

2.3.1 GTI and the 2010 biodiversity target

In a mission statement accompanying theStrategic Plan for the Convention onBiological Diversity (decision VI/26) theParties to the Convention committed them-selves to a more effective and coherentimplementation of the three objectives ofthe Convention, and to achieve by 2010 asignificant reduction of the current rate ofbiodiversity loss at the global, regional andnational level as a contribution to povertyalleviation and to the benefit of all life onearth. This last is the 2010 biodiversitytarget, which was subsequently endorsedby the World Summit on SustainableDevelopment. The WSSD also stated that“[Actions are needed to] Promote theimplementation of the programme of workof the Global Taxonomy Initiative.”6

In an attempt to set out recommendationsfor monitoring progress towards the 2010target the COP has identified a number ofparameters7. These include “Reducing therate of loss of the components of biodiver-sity, including: (i) biomes, habitats andecosystems; (ii) species and populations;and (iii) genetic diversity”. Measuringspecies, populations and genetic diversitywill require taxonomy. Importantly, taxo-nomic information could be of great valuein working towards the 2010 target by pro-viding, from specimens housed in collec-tions worldwide, the baseline data to assessthe rate of loss before 2000, so that progresstowards attaining the target can be assessed.

2.4 Who is responsible for the GTI?

As noted above, the GTI is both a policy-development forum and a set of activitiesthat need to be implemented to remove the

6 WSSD Plan of Implementation, Paragraph 44(s)7 see decision VII/30

13


taxonomic impediment. Roles and responsi-bilities for the administration and policyaspects of the GTI are discussed in section 4 ofthis Guide.

Regarding implementation, Parties – inparticular national governments – arerequired to implement the relevant Articles,and are obliged to put the decisions of theCOP into practice. COP decisions fre-quently identify initiatives, institutions orsectors which, COP believes, should act in

implementation of the GTI because it fallswithin their remit. COP also asks fundingbodies, and particularly the GEF, to financeGTI implementation. In that sense all ofthese are responsible to ensure that the GTIfulfils the requirements of the COP.

Importantly, there is an important role inimplementation of the GTI not only for gov-ernments, but also for individual taxonomists,taxonomic institutions, conservationists, andfunding agencies (see text box 2-1).

Box 2-1 Why should I participate in the GTI?

Governments and Government departments

In the texts of the decisions on the GTI the COP has asked its constituent Parties and theirGovernments to undertake numerous actions, including provision of appropriateresources to ensure actions by others are carried out. The Governments themselves, hav-ing supported and agreed to the texts of these decisions, thus implicitly express theirintention to be guided by them and have some obligation to support action to turn thepolicies into implementation. They would do this by developing appropriate nationalpolicies, providing resources in such a way that the COP decision elements can be imple-mented, and causing publicly-funded bodies to adopt the relevant policies. Governments,in the national reports, state how they have responded to these commitments. Thesenational reports can be found on the website of the CBD. The routes through whichGovernment departments inform and resource appropriate bodies can be used to gatherinformation and appropriate performance indicators for use in the reports, otherwise adifficult and costly activity.

Taxonomic institutions

Taxonomy as a discipline has been in decline for the past few decades. This has been andcontinues to be a matter of concern. The decline has been associated with a lack of under-standing of the importance of taxonomic information, and taxonomists have expressedconcern that their work is not fully appreciated, nor taken up by other sectors. The mas-sive political support for taxonomy expressed in the COP decisions is in direct contrastto this perception, and demands a response if it is to continue. Several funding organisa-tions are supporting GTI activities, and this can be expected to develop furtherwith demonstrations of the successful integration of taxonomy with work in otherimplementing sectors. Such integrated activities can also lead to a better quality of data

for use in related research, and long-term externally-funded activity. Taxonomicinstitutions are called upon in some decisions to take action, and indeed took part in themeetings leading up to the creation of the GTI. Many of the activities that are requiredto turn GTI into a reality will rest on the willingness of these institutions, and the indi-viduals working within them, to undertake GTI implementation. The onus is now on tax-onomy to grasp the opportunity that is presented by the GTI.

Individual taxonomists

Many funding opportunities are tied to biodiversity-related outcomes, rather than beingfor taxonomy alone. An individual taxonomist applying has to show how the taxonomicwork proposed will contribute to the biodiversity aim, often in a logical framework thatdemands clear linkage of what taxonomy is undertaken and how the results are dissem-inated to the benefits to biodiversity that form the focus of the project from their point ofview. This is essentially the GTI, and use of the ideas and examples discussed in thisbooklet may assist in preparation of grants of this type. Even if no direct linkage betweentaxonomic work and benefits to biodiversity (or CBD implementation) is required,donors are increasingly interested in the broader context into which the research theyfund fits, and again the GTI provides this context. Many countries now require productsfrom taxonomists in return for permission for collecting or undertaking research withintheir borders. These products, including lists of species, descriptions of new species pub-lished in the country, distributions of rare species etc, if useful and contributing tonational policies, will assist both the countries and current and future researchers justi-fying continued work in the country. Such products may also facilitate additional fund-ing for projects within the country and region. A key to identifying the relevantinformation lies in the GTI and the convention-related policies of the country and region,including the NBSAP. Taxonomists should become involved in taxonomic needs assess-ments in order to ensure that appropriate needs are taken into account.

Conservationists and other sectors implementing the CBD

There is a vast amount of information generated by taxonomic work that could be usedto support and inform conservation and related activities. Examples of such successes areavailable as models referenced throughout this document. However, there is a wide-spread assumption that taxonomic information should be readily and freely available andequal disappointment when this proves to be a misapprehension. Partially because of thedifficulty of obtaining appropriate taxonomic information, there has been a trend to avoidthe need by simply using what can be identified, and operating on the assumption thatthe rest of the biota can be covered by the focus on the selected species. While it is truethat in many cases decisions must be made with incomplete taxonomic information, thevalue of more complete taxonomic information in improving decision-making has beendemonstrated a number of times. The provision of rapid assessment and monitoring oflarge components of the biota that are currently inaccessible will be a valuable tool. The


14

15


case has been made powerfully for involvement of taxonomy in the way set out by theGTI. However, without the willingness of the conservation and related sectors to ensureresources for production of needed taxonomic work and products are included in pro-jects, this necessary information will continue to be unavailable.

Funding bodies

Many funding bodies, including the GEF, insist on a logical framework for any imple-mentation activity to be drawn out. A common ‘killer assumption’ that is far too rarelyrecognised in such analyses is that all of the organisms that are encountered can be iden-tified or, alternatively, that such identifications will not be necessary. Taxonomists areoften used at the last minute for input on projects that belatedly realise the need for expertidentification. Often, no resources in funding have been allocated to pay for the workneeded on such projects, nor are resources included in the funding provided. TheScientific and Technical Advisory panel of the GEF has emphasised the importance offunding taxonomy for implementation of the CBD and to support the work of other UNagencies. The taxonomic impediment is a large problem, but the way to address largeproblems is to fund concerted action to solve them.

16


3.1 Introduction

The objectives and major activities of theGTI have been summarized in a Programmeof Work (PoW)8. Although this identifiescertain priorities, it is not intended to be pre-scriptive, and flexibility must be maintainedin order to meet the multitude of needs andpriorities identified by individual Parties.

The PoW comprises 19 ‘planned activi-ties’9 within five ‘operational objectives’(Text box 3-1), plus one specific targetunder operational objective 310. These areintended to contribute to the overall objec-tive of implementation of the CBD (see thefigure contained in the programme of workon the GTI, in annex 11). They outline whatis needed, and provide some activities thathave been identified already as priorities.Further work is being done to develop thePoW, and a set of desirable outputs arebeing identified.11

The first operational objective aims to assesstaxonomic needs and capacities at national,regional and global levels. This is an impor-tant first step because it determines wherehuman and institutional capacity-buildingefforts should be focused. Certain types ofcapacity may best be addressed at regionallevels, while other needs may be most effec-tively addressed at national levels. Amongcountries, national needs may vary widely.

Operational objective 2 focuses on build-ing and maintaining the infrastructureand capacity needed to obtain, collate andcurate the biological specimens that arethe basis for taxonomic knowledge.Operational objective 3 aims to make infor-mation available, including ensuring that

countries of origin gain access to informa-tion concerning elements of their biodiver-sity. Taxonomic information needed fordecision-making can only be generated andmade available through an appropriate com-bination of capacity and infrastructure.Thus, operational objectives 2 and 3 are thebasis for supporting operational objectives4 and 5, which focus on the generation ofinformation to support decision-making forconservation and sustainable use of biologi-cal diversity, within the thematic work pro-grammes (operational objective 4) andcross-cutting issues (operational objective5) addressed by the Convention.

Section 3.2 below describes each of theplanned activities in the programme ofwork. Examples and elements related toimplementation of the planned activities areprovided in some cases, but these examplesare by no means exhaustive – there aremany tools and data sources now availableboth in written form in libraries, and in elec-tronic form on the internet, and no publica-tion like this can hope to list them all. Thediscussions under each planned activity areby no means complete and should spur thedevelopment of further activity towardsaddressing the taxonomic impediment.

3.2 Planned activities

3.2.1 National taxonomic needs assessments

For most countries in the world, there is sim-ply too little taxonomic expertise, informa-tion and infrastructure available to enablethem to work with their biota in the waythey need. This deficiency is known as the

3. THE PROGRAMME OF WORK FOR THE GTI

8 Adopted in decision VI/8 and supplemented in decision VIII/3.9 18 planned activities were adopted in decision VI/8; one was added in decision VIII/3, and three of the others were elaborated.10 Decision VIII/3, paragraph 711 In decision VIII/3, paragraph 11(f) the COP requested the development of specific taxonomic, outcome-oriented deliverables for each of theplanned activities. These will be developed and considered at COP-9.

17


(note: the target under operational objective 3, and planned activity 13b, were added by decisionVIII/3)

Operational objective 1: Assess taxonomic needs and capacities at national, regional and globallevels for the implementation of the Convention.

Planned Activity 1: Country-based taxonomic needs assessments and identification of priorities.Planned Activity 2: Regional taxonomic needs assessments and identification of priorities.Planned Activity 3: Global taxonomic needs assessments.Planned Activity 4: Public awareness and education.

Operational objective 2: Provide focus to help build and maintain the human resources, systemsand infrastructure needed to obtain, collate, and curate the biological specimens that are the basisfor taxonomic knowledge.

Planned Activity 5: Global and regional capacity-building to support access to and generation oftaxonomic information.

Planned Activity 6: Strengthening of existing networks for regional cooperation in taxonomy.

Operational objective 3: Facilitate an improved and effective infrastructure/system for access totaxonomic information; with priority on ensuring countries of origin gain access to informationconcerning elements of their biodiversity.

Target under operational objective 3: A widely accessible checklist of known species, as a steptowards a global register of plants, animals, microorganisms and other organisms.

Planned Activity 7: Develop a coordinated taxonomy information system

Operational objective 4: Within the major thematic work programmes of the Convention includekey taxonomic objectives to generate information needed for decision-making in conservation andsustainable use of biological diversity and its components.

Planned Activity 8: Forest biological diversity.Planned Activity 9: Marine and coastal biological diversity.Planned Activity 10: Dry and sub-humid lands biodiversity.Planned Activity 11: Inland waters biological diversity.Planned Activity 12: Agricultural biological diversity.Planned Activity 13: Mountain biological diversity.Planned Activity 13b: Island biological diversity

Operational objective 5: Within the work on cross-cutting issues of the Convention include key tax-onomic objectives to generate information needed for decision-making in conservation and sus-tainable use of biological diversity and its components.

Planned Activity 14: Access and benefit-sharing.Planned Activity 15: Invasive alien species.Planned Activity 16: Support in implementation of Article 8 (j).Planned Activity 17: Support for ecosystem approach and CBD work on assessment including impact

assessments, monitoring and indicators.Planned Activity 18: Protected areas.

Box 3-1 The Global Taxonomy Initiative Programme of Work

18


‘taxonomic impediment’ to implementingthe Convention on Biological Diversity. Thetaxonomic impediment is therefore specifi-cally about the taxonomic needs of non-taxonomists: conservationists, environmen-tal managers, quarantine officers, forestersand so on. It is distinct from the taxonomiccapacity of a country, which refers to whattaxonomy can be done, and the levels ofexpertise, information and infrastructure,without considering needs.

Understanding the taxonomic impedimentin a country or region so that it can beremoved can only be done by working withthe users of taxonomy in these other fields,and identifying their taxonomic needs andthe way they use taxonomy. This process isknown as a taxonomic needs assessment.

The Parties to the CBD have repeatedlyidentified the importance of national taxo-nomic needs assessments in decisions of theCOP (see annexes 8 to 13). The PoW envis-aged that the results of such assessmentswould be compiled in 2002, but progresshas been slow. Some countries have usednational biodiversity strategies and actionplans (NBSAPs) as well as national reportsunder the Convention to indicate their needfor taxonomic capacity, but few details havebeen provided. So far, national needsassessments have been or are being carriedout by a few countries, for example UK andSouth Africa. In each case the assessmentdoes not cover all possible stakeholderswith an interest in taxonomic information,since resources have been too few to allowsuch a comprehensive process.

The GEF was requested to provide fundsfor countries to conduct capacity-buildingneeds assessments for biodiversity (notlimited to taxonomy), and there are approxi-mately 50 such projects underway. Althoughmany were scheduled to have been

completed by the end of 2005, progress hasbeen slow, and it is not clear to what extentthey will address taxonomic needs in detail.The GEF is not the only possible source offunds to support needs assessments, andnational taxonomic needs assessments havebeen or are being carried out by a number ofcountries using other sources of funding –examples include:

• Assessment of needs associated withconservation issues by the UK12;

• Brazil’s comprehensive strategy forthe modernization of Brazilian biolog-ical collections and consolidation ofintegrated biodiversity informationsystems13; and

• An assessment of national taxonomicneeds for Ghana, currently underwaywith support from the United Kingdom.

Taxonomic needs information from allavailable sources will be gathered and madeavailable through the GTI portal on theCBD website in 2006 and 2007.

Understanding what taxonomic informa-tion is required in order to meet CBD-related needs is vital for good managementand of great importance in building nationalbiodiversity strategies and action plans.Once the needs are known the availableresources can be assessed and the resultsused to set goals and priorities for buildingnecessary capacity. If countries are involvedin regional taxonomic networks, needs canalso be assessed within the context of thosecollaborations, especially when participa-tion may include complementarities andsharing of research effort.

As with so many Convention-relatedactivities, a taxonomic needs assessmenthas both policy and implementation outputs.For policy, assessments should state clearly

12 http://www.Nbn.org/downloads/files/Questionnaire.1.doc (Accessed 17/11/2004)13 Ministry of Science and Technology, March 2006

19


if and how lack of taxonomic capacity and/or information impedes implementation ofNBSAPs. The needs assessment is also aworking document which can be used toinform taxonomists and funding bodies ofthe taxonomic input required. The processof conducting a needs assessment itself canbe used to raise awareness of the CBD andof taxonomic needs.

Some valuable suggestions on how tocarry out a national needs assessment wereprovided by the report of the DIVERSI-TAS/Systematics Agenda 2000 Workshop(Anon, 1998c14). These suggestions are sum-marized below, with additional ideas andprotocols developed through the UK andGhanaian assessments.

The process can be seen as a seven-stepoperation:

a) Selection of assessment focus;b) Assessment of national user needs and

priorities for taxonomic information;c) Assessment of existing taxonomic

knowledge about national biodiver-sity, its availability to and employ-ment by users, and the sustainabilityof these sources;

d) Assessment of current national taxo-nomic infrastructure;

e) Assessment of current national humanresources in taxonomy;

f) Analysis of results; andg) Recommendations for action.

(a) Selection of assessment focus

The focus of the assessment is likely to beone or more of the focal areas of the CBD(‘thematic areas’ and ‘cross-cutting issues’).Alternatively, it might be a sector such as‘Conservation’ (the focus of the recentUK Assessment). Such targeting will assist

mapping to CBD COP decisions, which willbe useful in formulating questions, subse-quent analysis and targeting and prioritisationof resources as a response to the assessment.It will also assist the National CBD FocalPoint in reporting on activities, since these areorganised by CBD thematic areas and cross-cutting initiatives. The methodologiesdescribed below can also be applied to areasoutside the direct focus of CBD, such ashealth or farming, although both of these haveCBD implications.

Within these focal areas there are manynon-taxonomist users of taxonomic infor-mation. Some of the most significant ofthese from the point of view of CBD imple-mentation are:

• Conservation managers, environmen-tal managers, resource managers, pro-tected area managers;

• Environmental protection agencies;• Agencies involved in managing and con-

trolling invasive alien species and pests;• Agencies responsible for quarantine;• Agencies responsible for biosafety,

including related to genetically modi-fied organisms;

• Departments involved in implementingaccess and benefit-sharing legislation;

• Agriculture, horticulture, forestry, andfishery agencies;

• Forest product industries;• Biotechnology industries;• Ecotourism industries;• Agencies and organizations involved in

applied health and medical research; and• The research community (biological

science, global change, environmentalscience).

This list is not exclusive, and other areas offocus might be appropriate for an assessment.

14 UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/4/INF/7 - http://www.biodiv.org/doc/meetings/sbstta/sbstta-04/information/sbstta-04-inf-07-en.pdf

20


These users may be government depart-ments, NGOs, research institutions, amateursocieties, educational bodies, private com-panies etc. Each might have different needs,and different sources for the informationthey use.

Ultimately, taxonomic information isused by individuals, and it is those whodetermine what is useful and desirable.Consequently, a taxonomic needs assess-ment may include gathering informationfrom people such as quarantine officers,extension workers, village communities etc.

In addition to the users, there are likely tobe national policy documents or reports thatdeal with the focal area. These might con-tain information on taxonomic needs, eitherexplicitly or by inference (any call for‘monitoring and assessment’, for example,implies a need for a taxonomic resource toidentify the organisms being monitored).Since one of the benefits of carrying out ataxonomic needs assessment is to informpolicy, and allow policies to be put in placeto meet the needs identified, particularattention needs to be paid to extant policydocuments.

Finally, having identified the sector orsectors that will be the focus for the assess-ment, a steering group representing differ-ent sectors including the focal sectors maybe valuable. This group can inform the teamcarrying out the assessment of priority areasand suggest lines of questioning. In thatcase, the initial steps in the assessment pro-ject might be to:

• Decide which sector or sectors tofocus on;

• Identify the stakeholders that shouldbe included;

• Decide the paper and policy docu-ments that should be examined; and

• Set up a multi-sector steering group.

(b) Assessment of national user needs andpriorities for taxonomic informationThere are two tools that will be of value inassessment of user needs. These are a ques-tionnaire and interviews. Ideally, theyshould be used in conjunction, so that thesubject can think about the questionnaireand enter data that, being of a standard for-mat, is more simply analysed, and then inter-viewed to discover aspects that either do notfit on the questionnaire, or can be promptedby the questions. As the assessment contin-ues, the interviewer will become increas-ingly aware of issues and needs that were notrecognised initially, and can use the inter-views to explore these. Although such issuesmay be discovered, the questionnaire shouldnot be changed, since this will make subse-quent analysis more difficult.

QuestionnaireA sample questionnaire is provided inAnnex 6 to this Guide. This is based on theone used for the UK taxonomic needsassessment of conservation bodies, and maynot be fully appropriate for other purposes.However, it does give some ideas whichcould be used.

Before sending out the questionnaire therecipient should have been contacted to givethem warning, and an explanatory letteraccompanying the questionnaire will needto be drafted.

In the UK and Europe, legislation givespeople certain rights over data about them heldelectronically. For this reason the questionnaireincludes a form on which the person filling it incan signify their agreement to the use of thedata. Other countries may or may not havesimilar legislation, but it might be useful toinclude on the form a statement of the use ofthe information collected, and its distribution.

The first part of the form collects infor-mation about the organisation being

21


questioned, including their status. Differenttypes of organisations may use taxonomicinformation in different ways, so this classi-fication will assist analysis. A classificationnot included on the draft of the questionnaireis the nature of the ‘customers’ of the organ-isation. For example, an organisation mayneed taxonomic information because its staffmanage the environment directly, becausethey advise those who do, because theyadvise government, or because they createanalyses that are used by other researchers.

A potentially useful figure not includedin the draft questionnaire is the number ofpeople in the organisation that are workingon the focal area. For example, the ques-tionnaire may be completed by someoneworking in a one-man ecotourism business,or a government body with several hundredstaff who might be using the resources.Such a figure, appropriately scaled, willassist in providing levels of need.

Although the focus has been determinedby this stage, the users selected might beasked to identify the areas of CBD imple-mentation they are focussed on. It may bethat their interpretation differs from that ofthe assessment team, or that their interests(and resources) extend more widely thananticipated.

The thematic areas of the CBD arereferred to in the draft questionnaire asecosystems. However, this breakdown isquite possibly insufficiently detailed toaccount for sectoral interests in all coun-tries, and a more detailed term for theecosystem or environment may be useful(e.g. ‘mangroves’, ‘savannah’, ‘desert’ etc.).

In addition to the ecosystem the draft ques-tionnaire has a table investigating the highergroups of organisms the users may be inter-ested in. This table is grouped by broadecosystem, and it might be useful to changethis grouping. In addition, not all users may be

interested in groups as set out; ‘forest pests’,or ‘grassland herbivores’ are equally validgroups from a non-taxonomist user point ofview, and the questionnaire may need to bemodified to accommodate such assemblages.

The draft questionnaire also seeks toestablish to what extent the activities of theuser involve different taxonomic activitiesand tools. There is some overlap with earlierquestions as the draft is written, and thiscould be changed. This table is essentiallyabout what the organisation does rather thanwhat it needs; needs, however, may beinferred from the responses, and investi-gated during an interview.

The next part of the form is focussed onwhat taxonomic products the organisationuses or needs. Before finalising the ques-tionnaire the various categories and itemsshould be considered carefully to see if anyshould be omitted or more added. Forexample, currently the form includes a setof ecological information elements which,although they fall under the heading of theGTI (taxonomy operating at ecosystem,species and genetic levels) may be outsidethe remit of most taxonomic organisations.For each item the organisation is asked to:

1. Rank the importance of the item on ascale of 1-5, 1 being ‘very important’and 5 ‘unimportant’;

2. State whether the resources are avail-able or unavailable;

3. Identify the source of the resources(e.g. in-country professionals, ama-teurs, local library);

4. Indicate whether the source is in theirview sustainable; and

5. Make additional comments.

Finally, the questionnaire includes a blankpage where the user is invited to add moredetail to their taxonomic needs.

22


Interviews

Following the questionnaire it may be valu-able to carry out an interview with the cor-respondent, during which points made in theanswers can be followed up, and moredetailed questions asked to clarify orexplore problems and needs. For example:

• The interviewee should be encouragedto think of both current and expectedfuture needs for taxonomic information.

• Where do they currently obtain taxo-nomic information, and are thesesources adequate and sustainable?

• What kinds of taxonomic knowledge(e.g. species lists, identification tools,authoritative images, data from speci-mens in collections) about thosegroups are most essential?

• What format (e.g. field guides, formaltaxonomic publications, dedicatedreports, dynamic web-based) do theyprefer the information to be in?

• What gaps in knowledge need to befilled?

It is difficult, and probably counter-produc-tive, to set a prescriptive list of questions.

(c) Assessment of existing taxonomic knowl-edge about national biodiversity, its avail-ability to and employment by users, and thesustainability of these sources

At least some taxonomic information aboutnational biota exists for all countries, but thisis scattered over a myriad of differentsources, is of uneven quality, and may not beeasily available electronically. Moreover,where it exists it may not be in a format orlanguage that makes its employment simplefor non-taxonomic users or even many tax-onomists, especially in the country of origin.

Consequently an assessment of availabilitymust include its main formats and the possi-bilities of distributing it to the appropriatepersonnel (Lyal, 2004). The types of knowl-edge that might be considered arise from theneeds assessment, but are likely to include:(i) species lists for the country and areaswithin it, particularly protected areas; (ii)detailed data associated with specimens; (iii)taxonomic literature (including field guidesand electronically-mediated information)pertaining to the biota of the country.

Two key data sources for species lists areexisting literature and specimens held incollections. An important consideration isthat taxonomic names do change throughtime, and consequently any list must bechecked and corrected if it is to be of value.

Some information from the literaturemay be relatively easy to retrieve. This ismost likely to be so for well-known groups,such as many vertebrates, some groups ofvascular plants, and some of the more spec-tacular or economically important inverte-brates. Such information can often be foundin field guides, extant national or regionalchecklists and reports, and electronic data-bases. On the other hand some faunal orfloristic lists, reports, and databases may beunavailable within the country, and willneed to be sought elsewhere. More difficultto collect are species data discussed indetailed and specialist sources, such asmonographs and primary taxonomic litera-ture, both because of the distributed natureof the information within the publications,and the likelihood that they will not beavailable within the country.

Natural history collections potentially pro-vide the most reliable records of species dis-tribution, whether at national or othergeographic scales, and thus have a role incompilation of species lists. A benefit of datafrom this source is that records can be

23


associated with voucher specimens, theidentity of which can be checked. For the pur-poses of a national assessment, key nationaland extra-national collections could be identi-fied and information of the holdingsrequested from the institution concerned.Routes to identifying these key collections are(a) asking institutions within the countryabout contacts and long-term scientificinvolvement with extra-national institutions;(b) searching the internet for relevant collec-tions information; (c) checking the major webportals to such information (see section 615);(d) checking available taxonomic literaturefor references to specimen repositories; and(e) asking the major world collection-holdinginstitutions, which can generally be named byany competent taxonomist. Provision of theinformation by collection-holding institutionsmay, however, require a considerable amountof work, not least because many institutionsdo not keep records of their holdings associ-ated with geographic origin. Informationdelivery might therefore involve a cost, whichshould be factored into the budget of theneeds assessment. A valuable exercise thatmight arise from this part of the assessmentcould be networking relevant institutions topool collections data.

For many taxonomic groups, informationretrieval will be extremely time consumingand may not be possible with availableresources. In such cases, estimates ofspecies richness of such groups would bevaluable so that plans can be made toacquire or develop additional informationsubsequently. Moreover, the informationthat is gathered may highlight gaps in dataavailability, and provide the basis for subse-quent data- or specimen-collection projects.Plans for subsequent projects could beincluded within the NBSAP.

The creation of a list of species foundwithin a country is not an academic exer-cise. Apart from supporting implementationof Article 7 of the Convention, it underpinsmany other aspects of Convention imple-mentation. One key aspect is that of accessand benefit-sharing, where knowledge ofthe species, subspecies, varieties and strainswithin a country’s borders is a vital prereq-uisite to protecting genetic resources andtheir benefits (see below).

Detailed data associated with specimenscan be of value for a number of reasons,including ecological modelling of speciesdistributions. This system has been used togreat effect in Mexico, where databases ofspecimen-level information have informedpolicy on a number of issues including inva-sive alien species, living modified organ-isms, and protected areas. The assessmentwill determine what collections are readilyavailable and what can be found outside thecountry. Plans and priorities can then bedeveloped for data repatriation. Issuesregarding location of collections apply herealso.

Taxonomic literature is a necessary toolfor the majority of users. In order to main-tain any functional taxonomic activity theremust be access to the appropriate specialistliterature. This is covered under ‘libraries’below. Literature of a more generalist typeincluding field guides and electronically-mediated information pertaining to thebiota of the country is also of considerablevalue, particularly to non-taxonomistscharged with implementation work. Areview of field guides that deal with biotaof the country would be comparativelysimple, and stem perhaps from responses toquestions by the users targeted in theassessment.

15 Many specimen records from numerous institutions are accessible through the Global Biodiversity Information Facility: http:/www.gbif.org

24


(d) Assessment of current nationaltaxonomic infrastructure

A survey of scientific infrastructure support-ing taxonomic research is a key element ofany taxonomic assessment. Three broad cat-egories of taxonomic infrastructure include:i) collection facilities, ii) libraries, and iii)associated technical, management and otherinstitutional support for taxonomists.

i) Collections facilitiesThese include museums, herbaria,

arboreta, zoos, botanical gardens, culturecollections and seed banks. The facilitiesmight be housed in stand-alone institutions,universities, private institutions or govern-mental agencies such as agriculturalresearch stations. As part of any assessment,the following information should be gath-ered for each collection:

• Taxonomic coverage and the kind(s)of specimens housed;

• Curation of collection (the proportionof specimens which are identified and /or sorted, those which are available forresearch, and whether specimen track-ing systems are in place);

• Capacity for growth, in terms of spaceand infrastructural support;

• Quality of the facilities (e.g. adequacyof collection housing such as cabinets,supplies, maintenance, specimen prepa-ration areas, curatorial and staff officeand research space);

• Security (whether the collection isadequately protected from fire, pests,and other adverse conditions);

• Information availability and commu-nications infrastructure (e.g. printedcatalogues, electronic database(s)

and electronic links to other databases);

• Institutional structure (e.g. relevantpolicies, quality of business manage-ment, budgetary support, sustainabil-ity, whether loans of specimens can bereceived from other institutions); and

• Institutional long-term planning, par-ticularly in terms of GTI goals.

ii) LibrariesTaxonomic research requires access to

libraries with reference collections. Thus thelibraries in natural history institutions, univer-sities, agricultural or medical research centres,and other agencies should be surveyed fortheir capacity to support taxonomic research.General information to be gathered willinclude:

• Numbers and kinds of libraries;• Extent of holdings (e.g. books, mono-

graphs, journals, electronic databasesetc relevant to the particular area ofthe world and group(s) being studied);

• Financial support to enable continuedpurchase of relevant journals and books;and

• Communication capabilities (e.g. elec-tronic access to holdings; electroniclinkages to other libraries, ability toreceive books on interlibrary loan).

iii) Associated scientific support (poli-cies, infrastructure)

All scientific research, including taxon-omy, requires a broad range of generalsupporting infrastructure. An assessmentmight include the following broad cate-gories:

• Universities with appropriate exper-tise, relevant governmental and

25


nongovernmental institutions, fieldstations, etc.;

• Computing capacity and quality;• Molecular, biochemical, morphological,

cytological and other laboratory facilities;• Research equipment available (micro-

scopes, field vehicles, etc.);• Ocean-going ships, other research ves-

sels, and sorting gear; and• Existing strategies and frameworks to

develop and promote in-countryresearch (including funding proce-dures, agencies, project evaluation,legislation, permit access policies, andmultilateral institutional agreements).

(e) Assessment of current national humanresources in taxonomy

For the GTI to contribute adequately tothe implementation of NBSAPs, action maybe needed to strengthen the human resourcessupporting taxonomic work. No country hasall the taxonomists it needs, nor taxonomicexpertise in all groups. Therefore, countrieswill want to assess current human resourcesin the light of national goals and needs, tak-ing into account accessibility of expertise atregional levels. The following informationwill be useful in evaluating capacity:

i) Professional research staff in eachtaxonomic institution (curators,research scientists):• Numbers;• Demography (age structure of

experts in the various areas ofwork);

• Taxonomic coverage (expertise);and

• Status (e.g. qualifications, par-ticipation in professional activi-ties within the country andinternationally).

ii) Support staff:• Professional collection man-

agers;• Technicians or research assistants;• Students (undergraduate, gradu-

ate, and postdoctoral);• Parataxonomists (non-profes-

sionals having some curatorial orresearch responsibilities);

• Collectors;• Interns and trainees;• Volunteers (retired scientists,

trained lay persons, amateurs etc.);• Financial support staff (with

expertise in funding agencies,financial administration, etc.); and

• Managers.

iii) Capacity for education and train-ing in taxonomy:• Education or training available

(taxonomic coverage, content,course titles);

• Level of education available(B.Sc, M.Sc., Ph.D., other quali-fication, parataxonomy training,collections management, etc.);

• Numbers and kinds of trainees;• Facilities for training; and• Prospects for productive employ-

ment in relevant taxonomic work(institutions, number and kind ofposts available, sustainability).

The results of such a survey could be usedto inform prospective students and traineesthrough publication either as hard copy oron the internet.

While national human resources in tax-onomy are being evaluated, countries couldassess human resources at the internationallevel that may have a relevant role in

26


building in-country capacity. Critical areasof needed information include:

• A list of in-country specialists workingin foreign countries;

• A list of foreign taxonomists workingin-country;

• A list of foreign taxonomists experi-enced in relevant groups; and

• The availability of training opportuni-ties in foreign countries.

3.2.2 Regional taxonomic needsassessments

In many regions of the world it will beadvantageous to pool resources and to actcooperatively in building taxonomic capac-ity. Regional activities in taxonomy as a keymechanism for implementing the GTI havebeen supported by the Conference of theParties (see annexes 8 to 13). Assessment ofneeds and capacity at a regional level istherefore a valuable exercise.

The ideas presented for a national taxo-nomic needs assessment can be used in amodified form at regional level. To an extentthis has been done in Africa, Central Americaand Asia in the context of regional GTI work-shops (Herrera, 2001; Shimura, 2003),although in these cases the emphasis hasbeen on the current and predicted capacityrather than the fully-articulated user needs.Country-level needs assessments themselvescan provide the core input into the develop-ment of an assessment of regional capacity,the gaps in capacity across the region, andfinally the setting of priority actions to fill thegaps. The African GTI workshop (Klopperet al., 2001) took more this approach by requir-ing national reports from its participants and

then attempting to obtain an overview ofthem. A similar approach has been taken byparticipants in some of the formulation work-shops for BioNET-INTERNATIONAL.

At least two European regional work-shops have been held on the GTI. One ofthese led to development of the EuropeanGTI Toolkit16, an important resource for tax-onomists and anyone involved in the GTI.

The GTI regional workshops were amechanism proposed by COP to both iden-tify regional issues and propose ways ofdealing with them. The intent was to holdregional meetings of scientists, managersand policy-makers to prioritize the mosturgent regional taxonomic needs and facili-tate the formulation of specific regional andnational projects to meet them. Combinedwith best available information on nationaltaxonomic needs, the workshops wereexpected to produce regionally agreed plansof action with prioritised activities thatwould provide a clear focus for activitiesunder the GTI. Four regional workshopshave been held to date, in Central America,(Herrera, 2001) Africa (Klopper et al.,2001) and two in Asia (Shimura, 200317).

The main actors in this process wereexpected by COP to be national governments,taxonomic institutions and global, regionaland bilateral funding agencies. Existing andproposed regional biodiversity projects suchas SABONET in South Africa andBOZONET18 in East Africa as well asNBSAPs were expected to provide the mainmechanism to identify the most urgent taxo-nomic information requirements at theregional level. Active regional networks oftaxonomists would be best placed to facilitatethe compilation of national needs assessmentsinto cohesive regional syntheses. Some

16 http://www.gti-kontaktstelle.de/toolkit/index.html17 http://www.biodiv.org/doc/meetings/sbstta/sbstta-09/information/sbstta-09-inf-17-en.doc18 http://www.gefweb.org/Projects/Pipeline/Pipeline_6/BOZONET.pdf

27


regional assessments have already been doneby such networks. For example, SABONET19

carried out an assessment of the needs ofusers of botanical information (Smith et al.,1999; Steenkamp & Smith, 2002). Anotherapproach was taken by ASEANET20 in theirassessments of pathogens and pests in theirregion (Evans, Lum & Muroch, L., 2002;Naumann & Jisoh, 2002).

The Parties to the CBD agreed that fund-ing for regional needs assessments could beprovided by the national Governments andbilateral funding agencies.

Needs assessments with a wider remitwere carried out under the UNDP CapacityDevelopment Initiative. This looked at allcapacity development needs, includingthose for taxonomic activity, although notonly in terms of the CBD. Reports for allregions, together with a summary report,have been placed on the internet21.

3.2.3 Global taxonomic needs assessments

The lack of knowledge of key groups oforganisms of importance to humankind,many of which have global or multiregionaldistributions, calls for a global dimension totaxonomic activities. This is particularlyimportant in the context of certain groups oforganisms such as invasive alien species.Global cooperation to work on globallyimportant groups will of necessity involveboth developed and developing countries,and capacity-building in both will undoubt-edly be required to achieve this.

The COP, at its eighth meeting, called onthe CBD secretariat to consult with relevantorganizations and funding agencies in order

to ensure that a global taxonomic needsassessment is carried out as soon aspossible. There are many ways in whichsuch an assessment could be carried out,and it is likely that the assessment will usemultiple approaches. For example, regionaltaxonomic needs assessments could be eval-uated and any actions that could be under-taken at the global level could be identified.

Regardless of the approaches used, it isclear that a global needs assessment will needto identify priorities. A global workshop heldin Pretoria in 2002, with a follow-up in Paris2003, attempted to identify global needs fordemand-driven taxonomic capacity-build-ing22. The first result of this was a ‘Plan ofAction and Resource Kit for TaxonomicCapacity-building’23 (An outline strategyarising from the detailed discussions in thesemeetings is given in Annex 5). A global panelof experts made a number of recommenda-tions at a workshop held under the auspices ofDIVERSITAS in 1998 (Anon, 199924). Theparticipants stressed the importance of a pri-ority approach from the taxonomic perspec-tive, and set some common criteria that couldbe applied at national as well as regional orglobal levels. These criteria are as follows:

Taxa of economic value. Because ofinteractions at both community and ecosys-tem levels, all species have a degree of eco-nomic value and, in some way, influencehuman welfare. Perhaps of greatest signifi-cance are species that have direct and imme-diate effects on human health, food supplies(including agricultural crops and fisheries),timber, biotechnology, and similar benefits.This includes both beneficial (e.g. pollina-tors, seed dispersers, scavengers) and

19 The Southern African Botanical Diversity Network - http://www.sabonet.org.za/index.htm20 The ASEAN taxonomic network21 http://www.gefweb.org/Site_Index/CDI/cdi.html22 document UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/9/INF/16 available at www.biodiv.org23 http://www.bionet-intl.org/opencms/opencms/resourceCentre/onlinePublications/3GTW/index.htm 24 document UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/4/INF6 available at www.biodiv.org

28


non-beneficial species (e.g. disease vectors,crop pests, pathogens, invasive alien speciesthat threaten indigenous biodiversity).

Taxa that characterize ecosystems.These species define structure and functionwithin an ecosystem. For example, amongplants many species of the familyRubiaceae occur as shrubs or small trees inthe wet-dry tropical regions of the world,the Ericaceae and Epacridaceae characterizeshrublands or heathlands, while theLaminariales are important structural deter-minants of temperate near-shore marineecosystems. In the animal kingdom, coralsand sponges are key marine organismswhile many invertebrates have importantrecycling roles in terrestrial and aquaticecosystems.

Marine and fresh water ecosystems arepoorly known yet are extremely importantas fish habitats, and as water and foodsources for humans. Characterisation oftheir structure and function, and identifica-tion of indicator species that signal health orspecific problems, are critical actions. Otherecosystems requiring attention are mountainareas, arid and semi-arid regions whereorganisms may have ephemeral lives asso-ciated with changes in moisture balance,and lowland tropical forest (in SouthAmerica, Africa and Asia), where habitatloss is high. With a better understanding ofthe species composition of each ecosystemand interspecific interactions, identifyingareas for appropriate land uses, and devel-oping methods for the restoration ofdegraded sites will be greatly accelerated.

Taxa living in threatened areas. Thiscategory includes heavily exploited species,such as marine fishes that are poorly knowntaxonomically; species that form the biotaof rapidly deteriorating or disappearinghabitats or ecosystems; species threatened

with extinction; and species with very lim-ited distributions.

Taxa which are indicator species orspecies groups. These are species or speciesgroups that are highly sensitive to changes ineither biotic or abiotic conditions in the envi-ronment, and that are useful in monitoringsuch change. A criterion for indicator speciesfrequently met with in Convention docu-ments is that choice of such species shouldinclude ease of identification – indicating apriority for taxonomic action.

By using these criteria and indicating theexisting gaps in our knowledge of biodiver-sity, expert groups have suggested toolsnecessary to develop regional or global pri-orities. Taxonomic priorities might also beinfluenced towards important but poorlystudied taxa; biogeographically little-knowntaxonomic groups, or geographically lesswell studied taxa (as found in most develop-ing countries).

A global assessment is under way at thetime of writing, focussed on the taxonomicneeds associated with invasive alienspecies. The results of this will be madeavailable through the GTI Portal once it iscompleted.

National Governments, taxonomic insti-tutions and global, regional and bilateralfunding agencies are expected to contributeto the development of global taxonomicneeds assessments and priorities

3.2.4 Public awareness and education

The need to raise awareness and to educatethe wider community on the importanceof taxonomy as an underpinning of theConvention is critical to the success of theGTI. There is no doubt that the necessity fortaxonomic input to CBD implementation isgenerally poorly-recognised, and perhaps few

29


realise the enormity of the task of establishinga taxonomic knowledge framework to sup-port other biodiversity activities. Within theGTI PoW, and built on by the workshop inParis the following groups have been identi-fied as important ‘targets’ for increasedawareness and education: a) officials of rele-vant Government sectors, including NationalFocal Points, and policy- and decision-mak-ers; b) research scientists; c) conservationmanagers, and those involved with sustainableuse and access and benefit-sharing issues;d) funding agencies; e) international bodies;and f) the general public.

Action to meet this need can and must betaken by those who understand the problemof the taxonomic impediment and the meansto resolve it. Research institutions and non-governmental organizations are well posi-tioned to advise and convince their respectivegovernments of the taxonomic needs of acountry. However, action will almost alwaysdevolve upon individuals motivated to raisetheir voices, an observation that led to partic-ipants in the 3rd Global Taxonomy Workshopto call for ‘champions’ of the GTI. The will-ingness and ability of individuals to make thecase for the GTI in whatever fora are avail-able to them is a key resource. In particular,taxonomists and their national CBD and GTIfocal points should meet to discuss issues anddevelop ways together of meeting the taxo-nomic impediment.

Activities have taken place, both throughpresentations on the GTI made by SCBDstaff and others, and the development ofresources for general use. A brochure on theGTI is available in several languages fromthe SCBD. A series of case studies high-lighting taxonomy’s value to society,entitled ‘Why taxonomy matters’ has been

compiled by BioNET-INTERNATIONALfollowing suggestions at the Paris work-shop, and are available on the web25 and asseparate folders for use in public awarenessactivities. In addition, case studies havebeen made available through the EuropeanGTI Toolkit26.

At its eighth meeting in 2006, the COPdecided that awareness-raising activities fortaxonomy should be part of the GlobalInitiative on Communication, Educationand Public Awareness (CEPA) under theConvention.

3.2.5 Global and regional capacity-build-ing to support access to and generation oftaxonomic information

A root cause for the taxonomic impedimentlies in the limited taxonomic capacity inmany nations, and its world-wide decrease.This hinders progress towards increasing theworld’s taxonomic information base and theutilization of current taxonomic knowledge.A key objective of the GTI is necessarily toaddress capacity development, at country,regional and global levels.

The priorities for capacity developmentat national and regional levels should beclearly indicated in the results of nationaland regional taxonomic needs assessments.Of course, most national assessments have,at the time of writing, not been completed.Additional information is available from theresults of the UNDP Capacity DevelopmentInitiative27, which in 2000/2001 carried outa global survey of capacity developmentneeds in a variety of sectors, and notedtaxonomic requirements. In order to provideguidance for action until more detailedinformation is available, some clear needs

25 http://www.bionet-intl.org/26 http://www.gti-kontaktstelle.de/toolkit/index.html27 http://www.gefweb.org/Documents/Enabling_Activity_Projects/CDI/cdi.html

30


for taxonomic capacity-building in develop-ing countries have been enumerated in deci-sions of the COP, and which have also beennoted under almost every planned activityin the GTI PoW.

Much has been published on methods ofcapacity development and how they shouldbe implemented. For example, a workshopheld under the auspices of DIVERSITASand Systematics Agenda 2000 discussed thedevelopment of a national taxonomy devel-opment strategy in some detail (Anon,1998c)28. Additional information and astrategy on how to build capacity weredeveloped at the global workshop inPretoria in 2002 and elaborated at a subse-quent meeting in Paris in 2003 (Annex 5).

Three main areas of concern need to beaddressed simultaneously: a) human capac-ity-building (training and employment), b)infrastructure capacity-building (i.e. build-ings, collection furniture, information tech-nology and laboratory equipment, utilities,management structure etc), and c) informa-tion availability. The last of these will bedealt with in section 3.2.7 below.

It is well-established that the world’staxonomic expertise is shrinking at the verytime when the global taxonomic knowledgebase needs to be expanded. The objectivenow must be to develop a new cadre of tax-onomists and parataxonomists, capableof working independently within theirown countries, but also being part ofregional and global networks. This can onlybe achieved though major increases in train-ing programmes throughout the world.There are numerous ways of delivering andtargeting training, and these should be deter-mined in accordance with the needs of indi-vidual countries and regions. Broadly,training could include vocational, technical

and academic delivery. It might includein-country and external courses, academicdegrees, and joint work undertakenwith appropriate individuals and teams.Developing university curricula is an issue,since relatively few students are interested intaking courses in taxonomy, and not manyuniversities are now offering courses in thesubject. These factors cannot be ignored inany capacity-building programme.

Human capacity-building includes notjust taxonomic skills, but also those requiredto manage and support taxonomic institu-tions. If a taxonomic institution is to be suc-cessful, staff capabilities must encompassnot only taxonomic, curatorial and informa-tion management skills, but also financialmanagement, and skills in accessing grantsand donor funds. Sharing some of these staffamong institutions, or with a parent institu-tion such as a university, may be an appro-priate measure.

There is clearly little point in trainingpersonnel if no employment opportunitiesexist, and training should ideally be linkedto availability of jobs in taxonomy.Increasingly, development agencies areinsisting on this as a component of projectsinvolving training, and the need has beenrecognized by COP (in decision IV/1.D).There is also a need to make employment asustainable matter, since continuing grantsmay be difficult to maintain.

A key element in capacity-building isdevelopment of reference collections. Suchcollections in a country or region are vitalfor local identification capacity. These col-lections should contain specimens that havebeen identified authoritatively, preferablycompared by taxonomic experts with ‘type’specimens and exhibiting as broad a rangeof morphological variation from the same

28 http://www.biodiv.org/doc/meetings/sbstta/sbstta-04/information/sbstta-04-inf-07-en.pdf

31


area as possible. Newly-collected speci-mens can be compared directly with these;enhancing the identification procedure andensuring correct naming of specimens.Identification keys and guides are valuable,but greater confidence in identification canbe gained though comparison with otherspecimens. Unfortunately, collections areexpensive to maintain and require dedicatedhousing with high standards of environmen-tal control. Many countries have at least aninstitute holding some collections of itsfauna and flora. These are often part of anagriculture or forestry department, and linksbetween such collections and their associ-ated personnel and those in dedicated taxo-nomic institutions and networks are oftenlacking or at best informal, and these mustbe developed and maintained. Such collec-tions may also lack the funding to be able toassist in meeting needs identified withinNBSAPs for implementation of the CBD.Consequently, Parties and authoritiesresponsible for museums and herbaria havebeen asked to strengthen reference collec-tions in countries of origin, invest, on along-term basis, in the development ofappropriate infrastructure for their nationalcollections, and develop appropriate collec-tion housing to ensure the protection of thecollections (see annexes 8 and 9). COP alsonoted that “As part of that investment,donors, both bilateral and multilateral, intheir commitment to the conservation andsustainable use of biological diversity incountries where they provide investmentsupport, should support infrastructuralneeds of collection-holding institutions.”(see annex 9)

It may be difficult to find specimens thathave been collected from a country andidentified, but stored in a collection outsidethat country. There may be no record of thespecimen, or the species to which it

belongs, within the country. This has beendiscussed above under ‘taxonomic needsassessments’. Despite the availability ofloans between museums and othercollection-holding organisations, there is aneed for countries to amass sufficient iden-tified specimens to make their designatednational collections functional. Often a corecollection of such specimens is available,but collection development will includeidentification of newly-collected and legacymaterial, and the acquisition of previously-collected and identified specimens fromelsewhere, when possible.

In some cases specimen repatriationagreements have been developed, but this isunlikely to be the most practicable route tobuild up the collections required. Manyinstitutes operate a loaning system, wherebyspecimens can be lent to users worldwide.An alternative is for users to visit the insti-tutes and use the collections to facilitateidentification of their material. This hasadded value, in that it also enables theresearchers to access libraries and forgerelationships with colleagues in other coun-tries. All collections facilities should makespecimen images available where this ishelpful or possible for the taxon concerned,either in paper publications or on the web.As with all activities, each of these alterna-tives can be costly, both to the developingcountry and the institute in the developedcountry. In a time of diminishing resources,these costs cannot be underestimated orignored. All Governments, international andnational funding agencies, biosystematicinstitutions and taxonomic organizationshave a role to play in financing and other-wise supporting this activity.

Funding is of course needed for allcapacity-building exercises, including train-ing programmes, strengthening referencecollections, making information housed in

32


collections available to countries of origin,producing and distributing taxonomicguides, strengthening infrastructure and dis-seminating taxonomic information. Fundingis discussed in more detail in section 5below.

Expert institutions in both developed anddeveloping countries clearly have to beinvolved in any capacity-building projects.However, support is needed to ensure thatthis capability is capitalised on. SABONETin South Africa and BioNET-INTERNA-TIONAL with a number of regional net-works spread over the world are bothexamples of capacity-building on a regionalbasis, the latter having a global dimensionalso.

3.2.6 Strengthening of existing networksfor regional co-operation

Capacity-building needs are particularlyapparent in developing countries, most ofwhich have far too few human or infrastruc-tural resources to deal with the taxonomicneeds of the Convention (Anon, 1998c;Herrera, 2002; Smith et al., 2002; Shimura,2003). Much of the work being undertakenand which will be discussed belowaddresses issues particularly pertinent todeveloping countries. However, rather thanattempt to build sufficient capacity nation-ally to address all taxonomic needs that areprioritised within a country, global andregional resources also need to be examinedand tapped. The greatest concentrations oftaxonomic activity, along with the largestcollections and libraries, are in industri-alised countries. Part of the strategy toimplement the GTI must be to ensure theirinvolvement. Such institutions, becausethey hold massive collections of organismsfrom other countries, wish to meet theobligations that this imposes. These include

repatriation of specimen data to countries oforigin, loan of specimens, identificationservices and advice on a global scale, andreceiving large numbers of scientific visi-tors. However, institutions in this class alsohave capacity-building needs, since extantresources are often insufficient for the tasksthe institutions are called upon to undertake.There is no basis for any assumption thatmuseums and herbaria in developed coun-tries can meet all requests for informationand specimen loans that they receive with-out additional resources.

At the regional level, there should be aclear balance between national andregional solutions. Convention-relatedissues, and the biota itself, often extendacross national boundaries, and regionalactivities and resource use may be the mosteffective and efficient mode of action. Forexample, because countries within a regionwill share at least some of their biota, usingthe same names for the same species isbasic tool to ensure efficient communica-tion. With a common understanding of thenames used, policies can be formulated todeal with transborder issues such as theconservation status of species, and controlsover species with potential or actual bene-fits arising from their genetic makeup.Moreover, with the increasing importanceof invasive alien species, cross-border col-laborations are of greater importance. It isvital that all contiguous countries, and allcountries along a particular pathway forinvasive species, can recognise suchspecies and concur on their nomenclature.However, gaining multinational accep-tance and agreement on names is not assimple as it perhaps should be, especiallyas not all species will have been collectedfrom each country, and each country maybe using national and subnational listscompiled at different times and providing

33


different forms of names29. Thus achievinga unified list will involve taxonomicscrutiny of the various name lists andprobably of collections30.

From an economic perspective, fewnations can maintain sufficient taxonomicexpertise and infrastructure to provide neces-sary information about the whole of theirbiota. Given the small proportion of existingspecies that have been formally identified –about 1.7 to 2 million out of a total number ofsomewhere between 5 and 30 million (MEA2005) – the employment of sufficientnumbers of taxonomists for the task is unfea-sible for almost every nation. Regional capac-ity development may be a viable solution,building strong links at both operational andpolitical levels between different institutesand Governments. The COP has recognisedthis in many of its decisions (see annexes 9 to11) that call for prioritisation of a) strengthen-ing regional and sub-regional networks fortaxonomy; b) promoting regional collabora-tion in setting up regional agendas; c) pro-moting regional and sub-regional trainingprograms; d) identifying … regional prioritytaxonomic information requirements; and e)holding regional meetings of scientists, man-agers and policy-makers to prioritize the mosturgent … taxonomic needs and facilitate theformulation of specific regional and nationalprojects to meet the needs identified. Asnoted, this model works well with many con-servation and sustainable use issues, sincethese are often regional in nature, and are bestaddressed through multi-national consortia.

There are several models for the success-ful development of taxonomic capacity on aregional or sub-regional basis, includingthe regional LOOPS of BioNET-

INTERNATIONAL and GEF-funded net-works such as SABONET and BOZONET.

3.2.7 Development of a coordinatedGlobal Taxonomy Information System

Removing the taxonomic impedimentrequires an increase in provision of taxo-nomic information. This must be in terms ofcontent, accessibility and rate of informa-tion development.

A considerable problem in accessing tax-onomic information is that it is mostlywidely scattered and not accessible throughany one source. At the time the GTI PoWwas prepared, the expected strategy to dealwith this problem was that (i) the currentstatus of major taxonomic information sys-tems (including their major foci) would beidentified and then (ii) a coordinatedapproach to the development of a global tax-onomic information infrastructure would beplanned. While such a structured approachhas not happened, a considerable amount ofwork is going toward addressing the prob-lem. However, because of resource limita-tions and the relatively small numbers ofpeople involved, this has not occurred to theextent that many users would like.

There are various sorts of information thatare needed to underpin the GTI. The GTIPoW is not explicit about the concept of ‘tax-onomic information’, but realistically itshould be considered as the information thatallows taxonomists to do their job asefficiently as possible, and allows non-taxonomists to access the information theyneed in the format most suitable for theirneeds. There is an overlap in needs betweenthe different user sets, particularly in lists of

29 For systematic and taxonomic reasons there is a gradual change in scientific names over time. Although the goal is stability of nomenclature, inmany groups the rate of discovery of new species and the consequent changes in nomenclature prevent this state from being achieved in the nearfuture. Although work is going on to address this aspect of the taxonomic impediment, a result of the situation to date is that different lists citing thesame species may use different names for them.30 In Europe the Fauna Europaea project was put in place to achieve this end.

34


names, distributions, images etc. Currentlythe taxonomic information system is develop-ing as a large number of independent,semi-independent or associated databases andinformation delivery services. In future, digi-tal interoperability will allow a seamlessinteraction between the different informationsources, and the possibility of interactionbetween data users and data providers. This isultimately the goal of the global taxonomicinformation system as it is now envisioned.

Many information systems are increas-ingly being delivered via the internet, andoverall there is a move to make taxonomymore internet-based. Given this trend, andthe limitations of internet connectivity inmany developing countries, a component ofany capacity-building initiatives should be toensure adequacy and sustainability of con-nection to the internet. This might (ideally)be accessed by all taxonomists and users oftaxonomic information to the internet, or atleast access by the appropriate libraries.These could then be a resource for people tocome and use, or as a document or CD-ROMdelivery service for downloaded materials.

The scope of the information requiredincludes:

a) Lists of taxonomic experts of particulartaxa at national, regional and globallevels (as called for in decision IV/1.D).Access to such lists should help peoplewho need specific taxonomic expertiseto find who might be available and suit-able for a particular issue. A number ofsuch databases are being developed atglobal, regional, national and taxon lev-els, and often overlapping. The most

complete at present is perhaps thatmaintained by the Expert Center forTaxonomic Identification (ETI)31 – thisand others are listed in the GTI Portalon the CBD website.

b) Contact information of museums orherbaria worldwide. This, althoughnot highlighted in any COP decisions,is a clear need raised by many in meet-ings on the GTI. Increasingly, taxo-nomic centres are making contactdetails available on their web sites. Atleast one more inclusive database isavailable at ‘Collection ManagersOnline’32. For botanical institutionsIndex Herbariorum33 provides infor-mation for 3,240+ herbaria in 165countries and 9,869+ staff membersassociated with these herbaria.

c) Bibliographic information to supporttaxonomic research (called for in deci-sion IV/1.D). Finding the appropriatepublications can be a major challengefor researchers, especially if they donot have access to a large library.Increasingly, electronic media arebeing used, because of ease of compi-lation and updating, and the complex-ity of relationships between differentdatabases that is possible. There aresome services that can provide infor-mation. The Zoological Record34 is anabstracting service that is available on-line35 and, for years prior to 1978, as aset of printed volumes. Botanical taxo-nomic literature can be found on theinternet at several sites, including theKew Record of Taxonomic Literature36

and in the botanical indexes at Harvard31 http://www.eti.uva.nl/32 http://www.unm.edu/~museum/herb/cmo.htm33 http://sciweb.nybg.org/science2/IndexHerbariorum.asp34 http://www.biosis.org/products/zr/35 http://library.dialog.com/bluesheets/html/bl0185.html36 http://www.rbgkew.org.uk/bibliographies/KR/KRHomeExt.html

35


University37. For bacteria the situationis more controlled, in that bacterialnames prior to 1980 have been sup-pressed, and the Bacteriological Coderequires that new names are publishedeither in the International Journalof Systematic and EvolutionaryMicrobiology (formerly InternationalJournal of Systematic Bacteriology),published by the Society for GeneralMicrobiology in Reading, U.K., or arevalidated by this journal. The journalcan be found online38. Similarly, invirology all accepted names are kept inan “Index” by the ICTV, and can beaccessed, with other useful informa-tion including a key to viruses and anindex of viruses, at ‘Virus TaxonomyOnline’39. Although the bacteria andviruses are probably of an appropriatesize that the sources will answer manyquestions, animals and plants, becausethey are such large groups, may beserved also by smaller sources of morefocussed data. For example, there areseveral projects to make bibliogra-phies relating to single taxa accessiblevia the internet (e.g. for mosquitoes atthe Walter Reed BiosystematicsUnit40). Of course, there are numerousbibliographies and catalogues inprinted form, but these can be difficultto locate, and there is no centralresource that provides any informa-tion as to what and where they are.Corresponding directly with librariesin major collection-holding institu-tions is one possible route. The nextstep from making bibliographicresources available on the internet is

for the literature itself to be madeavailable in this fashion.

d) Relevant publications, either as hardcopy or in digitised formats (called forin decision IV/1.D). Taxonomy isperhaps unique among scientific disci-plines in requiring access to all of itspublished literature (unlike many sec-tors whose literature becomes outdatedin a few years and is then of primarilyhistorical and not scientific interest).Because taxonomists need to refer tothe original descriptions of taxa, infor-mation about taxa is cumulative, andmany species have been described orlisted in the literature only once, thewhole body of literature is required,not just the most recent papers. Thisgives a tremendous problem of scale.At present, the output of much taxon-omy is expensive printed monographs,or papers in low-circulation journalsavailable only in specialised libraries.A few of these libraries hold signifi-cant amounts of taxonomic literature,and these can provide copies, some-times at cost. There are attempts tomake literature accessible on the inter-net, in various formats, and thisprocess is moving very rapidly. A pro-ject involving major systematic institu-tions in the UK and USA to digitise thenet contents of their libraries and placemore than 2 million items on the web,the ‘Biodiversity Heritage Library’project, is now under way. The GlobalBiodiversity Information Facility(GBIF) has a programme for “Digitalbiodiversity literature resources”planned as one of six integrated

37 http://www.huh.harvard.edu/databases/cms/addenda.html38 http://ijs.sgmjournals.org/39 http://www.virustaxonomyonline.com/40 http://www.mosquitocatalog.org/main.asp

36


thematic areas. PubMed41 is the USNational Library of Medicine’s freedigital archive of biomedical and lifesciences journal literature, althoughcurrently there are relatively few taxo-nomic papers there. Some teams aremaking PDFs of papers pertaining to aparticular taxonomic group available.The Smithsonian Institution and theNatural History Museum (London)have collaborated in placing the40,000 pages of the BiologiaCentralia-Americana on the web42

(dealing with more than 50,000species of animals and plants) as JPEGimages that can be downloaded and areworking to place all of the text intoXML. The advantage of this is that thetext will ultimately be in a form that isinteroperable with other forms of datasuch as specimen data and names. Thiswill be an important part of the globaltaxonomic information system.Although this component of the over-all system is developing, it stillrequires support to assist both the tech-nical developments needed and alsothe digitisation itself, given the vastamount of literature that will berequired. In Europe, there have been anumber of initiatives aimed at makingliterature available on the internet – seethe European GTI Toolkit for links43.

e) Location of collected specimens (typeand vouchers) (called for in decisionIV/1.D). Although many specimens areknown to be held in institutions outsidetheir country of origin, there is rela-tively little information available as towhere those specimens are. Most insti-tutions do not have full catalogues of

their holdings and, where such cata-logues exist, they often list only thenames of the species held, but notcountry or region of origin. This situa-tion is slowly changing with the adventof electronic cataloguing. However,while both paper and electronic cata-logues are of great importance in assist-ing countries with assessing whatanimals and plants have been recordedfrom within their borders, they arecostly to develop and maintain.Information enabling location of speci-mens is also available in original andsubsequent literature dealing with indi-vidual species, which itself can be verydifficult to obtain without good libraryfacilities. In all likelihood the informa-tion will only become availablethrough work on digitisation of speci-men information, literature, and thecollection-level descriptive programmebeing undertaken by some institutions.However, most institutions that holdthe specimens do not have theresources available to develop or main-tain the content of such systems. One model of solving the problem ofaccess to these data has been demon-strated by the National Commissionfor the Knowledge and Use ofBiodiversity, Mexico (CONABIO).CONABIO staff members were sentto institutes outside the country todatabase specimens from Mexico.Both CONABIO and the collection-holders benefited from this activity, inthat Mexico gained access to data onspecies occurring within the countryand the institutions gained databasesof their holdings, which otherwise

42 http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/42 http://www.sil.si.edu/digitalcollections/bca/43 http://www.gti-kontaktstelle.de/toolkit/index.html

37


44 www.conabio.gob.mx45 http://www.biocase.org/46 http://www.gbif.org

would not have been compiled.CONABIO44 has repatriated about 1.5million specimens with a collection ofnearly 120,000 high resolution digitalimages. These data are used on analmost daily basis by the generalpublic and decision-makers.

f) The contents of collections at thespecies level. This data component isclosely related to the one above. Theinformation is available only in apatchy manner. Information can beobtained by searching the web sites ofcollections or published catalogues ofcollection contents if these can belocated. Many collections now pro-vide data of their holdings at the spec-imen level through web portals suchas GBIF or BioCASE and these canbe searched to find species holdings.

g) Specimen-level information from col-lections, including all the data associ-ated with the specimens held.Information associated with speci-mens in natural history collectionsmay facilitate conservation and sus-tainable use of biodiversity (Navarroet al., 2003; Petersen et al., 2003;Iguishi et al, 2004; Suarez & Tsutsui,2004). Such information oftenincludes: identification(s) (with theauthority responsible); date of collec-tion; precise geographic location (lati-tude, longitude, altitude, depth); sex;breeding condition; habitat type; hostidentification; food preferences; soil,water, or sediment type; as well asother types of information such asabundance, song types, behaviouraldisplays, and genetic tissue samples.If this information is not accessible inelectronic databases or at least in pub-

lished monographs and reports (andmuch of it is not, or the publicationsthemselves are unavailable), countriesshould consider plans to gather thisinformation. The CONABIO modelmentioned above is a good example ofa solution to this problem. However,the cost has been high. Before GBIF,CONABIO spent around US$1 foreach repatriated record (around $1.5million on repatriating data was spentpre-GBIF). Currently, GBIF has repa-triated for Mexico about 400,000records for free. GBIF requires furtherfunding to continue this work andthereby save developing countries aconsiderable amount of money.

Increasingly this information isbeing made available, particularlythrough gateways such as BioCASE45

and GBIF46, although institutions arealso placing such data on their ownweb sites for individual collections.This type of data is potentiallyextremely valuable for CBD imple-mentation, especially when associ-ated with adequate nomenclatureinformation to ensure confidence inthe identity of the taxa being covered.

h) Organism names, in the form ofauthority files (called for in decisionsIV/1.D, VI/8 and VIII/3). The COPadopted a target under operationalobjective 3 which is “a widely accessi-ble checklist of known species, as astep towards a global register of plants,animals, microorganisms and otherorganisms”, which is adapted from tar-get 1 of the Global Strategy for PlantConservation (GSPC) adopted in deci-sion VI/9 (see text box 3-2 for a list ofthe 16 targets of the Global Strategy for

Plant Conservation). Such lists ofnames might also include classificationdetails, synonymy etc. Because of thenature of taxonomic work, there areoften changes in the names given tospecies over time. There are variousreasons why this is necessary, althoughtaxonomists strive for stability innomenclature. The problem of beingable to keep track of what namesshould be used47 is being addressed bythe development of widely-accessiblelists of names for the various groups ofplants, animals and microorganisms. Inaddition to printed catalogues which,while numerous, suffer from the prob-lems of becoming rapidly out of dateand can be difficult to obtain, databasesare available sometimes on CD-ROMand more generally on the internet. Thenumber of electronic databasesprobably runs into the thousands, and apublication such as this cannot hope togive an exhaustive list. However, a fewexamples serve to show what is avail-able, and the sorts of product that canbe developed to fill a need. Forviruses48 and bacteria49 complete listsof names are accessible on the internet.Plant names can be found on theInternational Plant Names Index

(IPNI)50, although this does not statewhether the name is currently in useor not. There are an increasing numberof global initiatives such as the cata-logue of world Diptera (flies)51, theInternational Legume Database &Information Service (ILDIS)52 andFishbase.53 There are also numerousregional databases or checklists cover-ing a range of organisms, both bytaxon (e.g., checklist of the flora ofParaguay54) and some aspect of theirbiology (e.g., the US Invasive speciesinformation system55, LarvalBase –dedicated to larval stages of fish56), oras a total biota. (e.g. the UK NationalBiodiversity network57). Some of theseare searchable together via single webportals at Species 200058 and GBIF59.Species 2000, together with theIntegrated Taxonomic InformationSystem (ITIS)60, make up the Catalogueof Life Partnership, and release annuallya CD-ROM of all the names to whichthey give access (as of 2006 this covers880,000 species, about half of all knownspecies). Other large-scale initiativesthat give access to names of multiplebiotic kingdoms are Asia-Oceania61,Ecoport62, and the Universal BiologicalIndexer and Organizer (uBio)63.

38


47 COP IV/1.D, stated: “Institutions, supported by Parties and international donors, should coordinate their efforts to establish and maintain effec-tive mechanisms for the stable naming of biological taxa.”. In practice this will involve taxonomists, their parent institutions and the bodies respon-sible for the International Codes of nomenclature48 http://www.danforthcenter.org/iltab/ictvnet/asp/iVirusIndex.asp49 http://www.bacterio.cict.fr/50 http://www.ipni.org/index.html51 http://www.sel.barc.usda.gov/diptera/biosys.htm52 http://www.ildis.org/53 www.fishbase.org54 http://www.ville-ge.ch/cjb/bd/checklist/index.php55 http://www.invasivespecies.gov/56 http://www.larvalbase.org/57 http://www.nbn.org.uk/58 http://www.sp2000.org/59 http://www.gbif.org60 http://www.itis.usda.gov/61 http://www.sp2000ao.nies.go.jp/text/about/62 http://www.ecoport.org/index.html63 http://www.ubio.org/

39


a) Understanding and documenting plant diversity: (i) A widely accessible working list of known plant species, as a step towards a

complete world flora; (ii) A preliminary assessment of the conservation status of all known plant species,

at national, regional and international levels; (iii) Development of models with protocols for plant conservation and sustainable

use, based on research and practical experience;

b) Conserving plant diversity: (iv) At least 10 per cent of each of the world’s ecological regions effectively con-

served; (v) Protection of 50 per cent of the most important areas for plant diversity assured; (vi) At least 30 per cent of production lands managed consistent with the conservation

of plant diversity; (vii) 60 per cent of the world’s threatened species conserved in situ; (viii) 60 per cent of threatened plant species in accessible ex situ collections, prefer-

ably in the country of origin, and 10 per cent of them included in recovery andrestoration programmes;

(ix) 70 per cent of the genetic diversity of crops and other major socio-economicallyvaluable plant species conserved, and associated indigenous and local knowl-edge maintained;

(x) Management plans in place for at least 100 major alien species that threatenplants, plant communities and associated habitats and ecosystems;

c) Using plant diversity sustainably: (xi) No species of wild flora endangered by international trade; (xii) 30 per cent of plant-based products derived from sources that are sustainably

managed; (xiii) The decline of plant resources, and associated indigenous and local knowledge,

innovations and practices that support sustainable livelihoods, local food secu-rity and health care, halted;

d) Promoting education and awareness about plant diversity: (xiv) The importance of plant diversity and the need for its conservation incorporated

into communication, educational and public-awareness programmes;

e) Building capacity for the conservation of plant diversity: (xv) The number of trained people working with appropriate facilities in plant conser-

vation increased, according to national needs, to achieve the targets of this Strategy; (xvi) Networks for plant conservation activities established or strengthened at

national, regional and international levels.

BOX 3-2 The 16 targets of the Global Strategy for Plant Conservation

40


A major need is to develop standards andprotocols to allow electronic databases to beinteroperable, so that all available informa-tion can be accessible through a singlequery, rather than having to address eachdatabase separately. Initiatives such as GBIFand the Taxonomic Database WorkingGroup (TDWG)64, are working on this issue.

One important feature necessary for thedeveloping systems is the facility to accom-modate different systems of nomenclature(see decision VI/8 in annex 11). Althoughideally for any one group of organisms asingle Linnean classification would beaccepted by all workers worldwide, in prac-tice this is rarely the case, and differentworkers recognise different species andhigher taxon categories. In such cases, it isimportant to be able to match the conceptsso that misunderstanding is avoided.Similarly, in the context of colloquial andtraditional nomenclatures, it is important tobe able to identify how the different con-cepts relate to one another, even when theconcepts of the different systems do not pre-cisely match.

i) Images of organisms, particularly oftype specimens and important characteris-tics for identification. It is of paramountimportance that recently collected speci-mens be compared to type specimens andother authoritatively identified specimens.When direct comparison to specimens is notpossible, comparison to images of speci-mens, especially images that feature (mag-nified if necessary) characteristics neededfor identification. These images may also

include drawings of particular features orkinds of organisms that do not lend them-selves to photographs (e.g. various soft-bodied invertebrates). Examples where thishas been done are Harvard University’sMCZ type database65, which has images oftheir insect types (and some useful softwareto manage collection data includingimages), the University of MichiganMuseum of Zoology’s bird collection66, theZoological Museum of Amsterdam’s ‘birdtype specimens online’, which providesaccess to 3D images of the types67, and theNew York Botanical Gardens Vascular PlantType Catalog68. Interestingly from the pointof view of collections security, free provi-sion of the images in the last-named institu-tion has reduced the demand for loans ofspecimens. In addition to these types of ini-tiatives, there are also many smaller initia-tives by groups of people on specific taxasuch as spiders, ants, earwigs, etc.

3.2.8 Forest biological diversity

The taxonomic needs associated withforests globally are immense. In the wettropical forests, especially, the number ofundescribed species is estimated to be in themillions, particularly of smaller organisms.Moreover, the most biologically rich areastend to be in the lesser-developed regions ofthe world, where taxonomic expertise isleast accessible. The importance of taxon-omy to forest biodiversity in terms of theCBD has been stressed repeatedly, alongwith the requirement for capacity-buildingto respond to these needs.

64 http://www.tdwg.org/65 http://mcz-28168.oeb.harvard.edu/mcztypedb.htm66 http://www.lsa.umich.edu/ummz/areas/bird/index.asp67 http://ip30.eti.uva.nl/zma3d/home.html68 http://www.nybg.org/bsci/hcol/vasc/

41


Specific needs for taxonomy in this the-matic area highlighted through COP deci-sions are for taxonomic studies to supportbasic assessment and monitoring of forestbiodiversity, with particular emphasis on theimpact of climate change and of soil, air andwater-borne pollution (decision VI/22).Inventories of forest species at the local andnational levels are also required (decisionIV/7). Not only monitoring tools areneeded, but also the identification and selec-tion of indicators of below-ground diversityin tropical, temperate, and boreal forests hasbeen highlighted (decision VI/8). Suchsupport is important for basic assessments,for identifying status and trends of forestbiodiversity and to underpin restoration offorest ecosystems (decision V/4). Otheruses are to provide guidance in the selectionof sites to be protected, and in the valuationof resources (decision V/4).

Although much of the work called for isimplicitly at the species level, some is at afiner grain. Assessment of “the diversity offorest genetic resources, taking into consid-eration the identification of key func-tional/keystone species populations, modelspecies and genetic variability at thedeoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) level” hasbeen stated as a need (decision VI/22).

The outputs of work under the GTI willbe, broadly, an increased knowledge of thespecies composition of forests, through bothtaxonomic studies and inventories. Anexpectation of the COP is that much of thiswork will be carried out at national level.Taxonomic resources additional to thosecurrently available will be required to meetthe needs imposed by the identification ofcriteria and indicators of forest biodiversity.

3.2.9 Marine and coastal biologicaldiversity

Some 15% of all species described so far aremarine, 80% of which belong to phylarestricted to the seas. The lack of knowledgeof marine organisms is exemplified by thediscovery in the past few decades of mas-sive cold-water coral reefs at great depth inthe oceans and the discovery of the firsthydrothermal vent in 1977. In addition, tensof thousands of seamounts are estimated tolie in the world’s oceans, but only a rela-tively small number of those have beensampled biologically, and a vast number ofseamounts remain to be discovered. Notonly are new ecosystems being found but,inevitably, many new species are still beingdiscovered. In 2004 106 new species of fishwere added to the Census of Marine Life(CoML) database69 - some two new speciesa week arising from surveys. The CoMLalso found that “a specimen collected below2000m is about 50 times more likely to benew to science than one found at 50m.”(CoML press release, Nov., 2004). Currentknowledge of much of the marine ‘micro-fauna’ such as molluscs, crustaceans, poly-chaete worms and multicellular algae isincomplete, and that of nematodes and pro-tists probably very poor. The biomass ofsmall deep-sea organisms such as the meio-fauna (mainly nematodes) probably equalsor exceeds the biomass of larger organisms;but data on comparative species richness arelacking. Concerns over the impact ofdestructive fishing practices (such as bot-tom trawling) and the potential loss of bio-diversity of deep-water systems such ascold-water coral reefs are amplified by thelimited information about the taxonomy,

69 http://www.coml.org/coml.htm

42


biology and ecology of most of the speciesfound in deep ocean areas70

Most marine ecosystems are essential forthe economy of many islands and archipela-gos, as well as coastal countries relyingheavily on biotic resources from the seas.Exploration of deep-sea systems and othermarine ecosystems in international watersdeserves special consideration, and the tax-onomic component of this is of particularimportance. The need for taxonomic capac-ity related to deep seabed biodiversity hasbeen highlighted by COP (decisionVIII/21). Marine research has lagged behindterrestrial research because sampling andobserving require the use of ships andequipment that are expensive to own andmaintain. Recent work, under initiativessuch as the CoML, is reversing this rela-tionship, and the concomitant demands ontaxonomy to support the work are huge.

The need for taxonomic work to supportthe Convention’s marine and coastal biodi-versity work programme has been identifiedin the programme of work (see references todecision VII/5 in annex 4). In particular,emphasis has been given to:

• Strengthening of taxonomic expertiseat regional and national levels;

• In the context of the work plan oncoral bleaching, supporting the train-ing of and career opportunities for rel-evant marine taxonomists, ecologistsand members of other relevant disci-plines, particularly at the national andregional level; and

• In the context of mariculture, support-ing basic global-scale taxonomic stud-ies and updating taxonomic databasesincluding genetic diversity at the intra-specific level.

The coral reef work is focused largely on theneed to assess and manage coral bleaching,but also accommodates other issues perti-nent to this type of ecosystem. There areneeds to assess the taxonomic, genetic,physiological, spatial, and temporal factorsgoverning the response of corals, zooxan-thellae, and other coral-reef-associatedspecies to increases in sea-surface tempera-ture. In the light of these findings, imple-mentation of management actions andstrategies to support reef resilience, rehabili-tation and recovery should be put in place.These also require a taxonomic input, in thebaseline assessments, long-term monitoring,and rapid response teams that are needed tomeasure biological and meteorological vari-ables relevant to coral bleaching, mortalityand recovery. Clearly, as with many aspectsof the work of the GTI, the taxonomic activ-ity will ideally be undertaken in partnershipwith organisations active in the field; suchas the International Coral Reef Initiative,its partners and The IntergovernmentalOceanographic Commission (IOC) ofUNESCO. As an example, the IOC WorkingGroup on Coral Bleaching and RelatedIndicators of Coral Reef Health is undertak-ing work including indicators to detect envi-ronmental stress.

Another area where taxonomic work isneeded is to address marine invasive alienspecies which are transported globally in bal-last water. Taxonomic work in this area willrequire, among other things, a focus onpelagic juvenile stages of benthic organisms.The needs identified include identificationguides for major groups, and of the appropri-ate taxa within them. Such guides should betargeted at non-specialists to help them iden-tify and monitor such organisms, especiallynon-native fauna and flora. The mid-term

70 http://www.biodiv.org/doc/meetings/cop/cop-07/information/cop-07-inf-25-en.pdf

43


evaluation report on the GloBallastProgramme71 (Vousden & Okamura, 2003)noted “Identification of introduced speciesrequires training and considerable expertise.It would be highly ambitious to expect any ofthe countries to be able to identify introducedspecies with any certainty without assistancefrom experts in the field of invasion biologyand taxonomy. The methodology taught dur-ing the PBS (Project baseline survey) relieson identifying all specimens collected to leasttaxonomic unit. The PBS consultancy teamprovided the PCU (project coordination unit)with a list of global taxonomic experts fordistribution to all participating countries.”The same report noted the importance of sus-tainability in the monitoring of ballast organ-isms, and in this context stated “countriesalso realise that they will need advice on thetaxonomy and other pertinent scientificaspects of any invasive species as, by theirvery nature, such species will probably notbe familiar to local or even regionalexperts.” (Vousden & Okamura, 2003).

For deep sea systems, priority areas forprotection in the deep seas includeseamounts, hydrothermal vents, cold-watercorals and other vulnerable ecosystems(decision VII/5). Furthermore, the COPrequested for a compilation and synthesisof information of deep seabed geneticresources, and has adopted a specific deci-sion on the issue of deep seabed geneticresources beyond the limits of nationaljurisdication (decision VIII/21). Becausedeep sea areas are difficult to sample and

require expensive technology, researchefforts require considerable financial out-put, and thus collaborative efforts betweenorganizations would provide a cost-effec-tive approach. Some examples of thisapproach are the Census of Marine Life, theOASIS (Oceanic seamounts: an integratedstudy)72 project, the Sea Around UsProject73, and Seamounts online74. DIVER-SITAS, in a report submitted to SBSTTA75,included a Sample Framework Project onMarine waters.

Several tools providing information onmarine organisms are available on the web,including databases of fish names, somewith biological information or images ofboth larvae and adults76, while Cephalopodsare covered at ‘Cephbase’77. These andmany other data providers can be accessedthrough the Ocean Biogeographic informa-tion System, OBIS78

3.2.10 Dry and sub-humid landsbiodiversity

The programme of work for biologicaldiversity in dry and sub-humid lands,encompasses Mediterranean, arid, semi-arid, grassland, and savannah ecosystems(decision V/23) and includes several ele-ments for which taxonomic input isrequired. These include assessment ofstatus and trends, identification of specificareas within dry and sub-humid lands ofparticular value for biological diversityand/or under particular threat, the develop-

71 http://globallast.imo.org/72 http://www.rrz.uni-hamburg.de/OASIS/Pages/page1.html73 www.seaaroundus.org74 http://seamounts.sdsc.edu75 document UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/4/INF/176 http://www.nmfs.hawaii.edu/library/tax.html provides links to the California Academy of Sciences Catalog of Fishes, FishBase, LarvalBase, andthe USFDA Regulatory Fish Encyclopedia.77 http://www.cephbase.utmb.edu/78 http://www.iobis.org/

44


ment of indicators, and in situ and ex situconservation of dry and sub-humid landsbiodiversity.

Key elements of dry and sub-humidecosystems, both in terms of sensitivity todisturbance and as indicators, are the organ-isms that maintain the crucial soil crust.Increasing knowledge of what these organ-isms are, how they are distributed and howthey can be identified, has been recognisedas important both for maintaining theintegrity of dry and sub-humid ecosystemsand for their value as indicators of ecosys-tem health. Thus particular needs that havebeen highlighted (in the GTI PoW) areincreasing taxonomic capacity to identifycrust-forming lichens and develop identifi-cation tools, improving knowledge of themicro-organisms in nutrient cycling, andincreasing taxonomic information on pestsand diseases. Dry and sub-humid lands alsocontain a significant number of land racesand wild relatives of important crops suchas wheat, barley, durum, and lentil. Thegenetic diversity of these land races andwild relatives, once catalogued, can providean important source of genetic material witha high tolerance for drought, salinity, etc.for cross breeding. However, it has alsobeen recognised that many countries, partic-ularly developing countries, have so far notbeen able to provide sufficient financialsupport for the required assessment and tax-onomic studies, and that there is a need todevelop appropriate skills in taxonomy.79

This is of particular relevance to dry andsub-humid lands, which encompass manydeveloping countries especially in Africaand Asia.

Although there is a clear need for taxo-nomic skills to carry out identifications in

the first place, there is an equal need to pro-vide easy to use tools for the subsequent useof non-specialists. A common theme throughmuch of the GTI is that taxonomists ulti-mately do not carry out all identifications,but provide identification tools – keys, fieldguides, identification cards etc – that enableothers without their specialised knowledgeto identify organisms. The taxonomiststhemselves can then serve as backup supportin the case of particular problems.

3.2.11 Inland waters biological diversity

Some groups of animals and plants in inlandwaters (e.g. many fish, crustacea) are ofgreat social and economic importance.Moreover, monitoring and assessment offresh-water ecosystems involves access todetailed taxonomic knowledge of a varietyof groups, or the distillation of such knowl-edge in field-guides. However, there areserious gaps in taxonomic knowledge formany of the groups involved (see excerptsfrom decision VII/4 in annex 4).

The programme of work on biodiversityof inland waters (decision VII/4) identifiesa focus for field guide production: “thedevelopment of the series of regionalguides to the taxonomy of freshwater fishand invertebrates (including adult terres-trial forms where appropriate) as an inputto ecosystem monitoring for river and lakehealth”. The production of such guides is,like many taxonomic activities that supportthe Convention, already in progress.Perhaps uniquely for taxonomic products,however, some of these are available on theinternet in a site hosted by the World Bank(Kottelatt, 2001) (see section 5.2.1.5 of thisGuide).

79 AHTEG report on Biological Diversity of Dry and Sub-humid Lands, 2003 – document UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/8/INF/2

45


A DIVERSITAS report submittedto SBSTTA80, included two proposals ontaxonomy and inventory of inland waterbiodiversity.

3.2.12 Agricultural biological diversity

‘Agricultural biodiversity’ is a broad termthat includes all components of biologicaldiversity of relevance to food and agricul-ture, and that constitute the agro-ecosystem(see decision V/5). The first GlobalBiodiversity Outlook (SCBD, 2001) identi-fied three constituent functional groups:

• Producers (“the domestic, cultivated,farmed and semi-wild species (mainlyflowering plants, fishes, birds andmammals) whose production provideshuman food, together with the vari-eties and wild relatives that expand thegenetic resource base for future breed-ing improvements”);

• Support services (“the wild and semi-managed species (mainly micro-organisms and invertebrates) thatprovide services supporting agricul-tural production, notably the soilbiota, pollinators and the predatorsthat affect pest species”);

• Pests and pathogens (“the wild species(mainly micro-organisms and inverte-brates) that decrease agricultural pro-duction by causing disease or damageto producers”).

Because the CBD has stressed the impor-tance of mitigating the negative effects ofagricultural systems and practices on otherecosystems (decision V/5), ‘agricultural

biodiversity’ also covers organisms in envi-ronments that may be impacted by farmingpractices. This is a natural concomitant ofthe application of the ‘ecosystem approach’espoused by the CBD.

Some degree of taxonomic input isneeded on each of these functional groups inorder to deliver fully on their objectiveswithin the thematic Programme of Work.This need ranges from basic identification ofspecies living in agricultural ecosystems(beneficial, neutral and pests), to taxonomicresearch to establish the identity of wild rela-tives of agriculturally important species. Alsoimportant is basic knowledge on the func-tional relationships between organisms; thesort of data often recorded by taxonomists.

While the importance of broadening thegenetic resource base of agricultural productsthrough wild relatives has been mentioned inConvention literature several times81, therehas been little discussion on what must bedone, this perhaps being perceived as part ofthe work of the FAO under the various Plantand Farm Animal genetic resources pro-grammes. However, the identities of the wildrelatives of many crops are not well known,and considerable taxonomic work is requiredto identify and, in some cases, describe them.For example, Ethiopia represents one of theworld’s eight major centres of crop plantdiversity, the region providing the origin of 12widespread crops and a number of othersused within the area. However, the country’sflora and vegetation types are not fully known(Groombridge, 1992). This has led to a pro-ject proposed as a GTI Pilot from Ethiopia tocomplete a study of the country’s flora.

The organisms providing the ‘supportservices’, include those responsible for

80 document UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/4/INF/181 e.g., decisions III/11 and V/5

46


maintaining natural processes and cyclesboth below ground and above it. Two areashave been highlighted: soil biodiversity andpollinators.

3.2.12.1 Soil biodiversityThe importance of taxonomic work on soilmicro-organisms (including symbionts) hasbeen highlighted several times in COP deci-sions. An International Initiative for theConservation and Sustainable Use of SoilBiodiversity has been established as a cross-cutting initiative within the programme ofwork on agricultural biodiversity (decisionVI/5). The FAO and other relevant organiza-tions have been invited to facilitate and coor-dinate this initiative, and more informationcan be found through the Soil BiodiversityPortal82. Soil biodiversity work requires amajor taxonomic component, especiallygiven the numbers of species (and relativelyfew of those species are believed known)and the difficulties involved in distinguish-ing them. Notably, the report of the AsianGTI workshop in 2002 stressed the very lownumbers of taxonomists of micro-organismswho were active in the region (Wilson et al.,2003).

A framework for action was adopted bythe COP in 2006 (decision VIII/23, sectionB) in order to facilitate further implementa-tion of the soil biodiversity initiative, andthe framework highlights the importantcross linkage between the initiative and theGTI. Products in this area are likely toinclude development of standard methodsfor identification of soil biodiversity todifferent taxonomic levels; and increasedknowledge of soil biodiversity to aid in theidentification of indicators of the “health”of below-ground biological diversity. Oneof the proposals submitted as a prospective

GTI Pilot Project focused on termites ofsignificance to agricultural biodiversity,both as pest and beneficial elements, andincluded collecting data on termites inmajor taxonomic collections at a globallevel. These data would be used to elucidatethe distribution patterns of beneficial soil-inhabiting species linked in with existingstudies on the role of such termites in soilquality and fertility, and assess the declineof beneficial species in agricultural lands.

3.2.12.2 The International PollinatorsInitiative (IPI)

Pollination is an essential ecosystem servicethat depends to a large extent on symbiosisbetween species, the pollinated and the pol-linator. Reduction in numbers, or loss, ofeither will affect the survival of both taxa.Not all plants depend on animals for polli-nation, of course. Many plants are wind pol-linated, such as grasses and many staplefood crops. However, at least one-third ofthe world’s agricultural crops depend uponpollination provided by insects and otheranimals. Some forest trees and other plantsalso require pollination by animals in orderto reproduce. Pollinators, therefore, areessential for diversity in diet and for themaintenance of natural resources. Theassumption that pollination is a “free eco-logical service” is somewhat misleading, inthat resources, such as refuges of naturalvegetation, are required. Where these arereduced or lost they become limiting andadaptive management practices arerequired. Such management must be basedupon good information on the identities ofthe pollinators in order to be successful.

Throughout the world, agricultural pro-duction and agro-ecosystem diversity, as wellas populations of native vegetation, are

82 http://www.fao.org/AG/AGL/agll/soilbiod/fao.stm

47


threatened by declining populations of polli-nators. Many pollinators are bees, of whichthere are over 25,000 different species, andwhich visit and pollinate a diverse range ofplants. Both the diversity of wild plants andthe variability of food crops depend on thisbee diversity. Though bees form the mostimportant group of pollinators, other insectssuch as butterflies and moths, flies and bee-tles, and vertebrates such as bats, squirrels,birds and some primates, also pollinateplants. Some plants are visited by many dif-ferent pollinators, while others have specificrequirements. The same applies to the polli-nators, some being generalists and othersspecialists. Therefore, pollination as ascience requires detailed investigation, andthe application of management practices isintricate. In most cases, there is a lack ofknowledge about the exact relations betweenindividual plant species and their pollinators,but studies in this field demonstrate that theyare often quite specific.

Considering the urgent need to addressthe issue of worldwide decline of pollinatordiversity, the COP established anInternational Initiative for the Conservationand Sustainable Use of Pollinators in 2000(decision V/5, section II), and subsequentlya plan of action, which includes an objectiveto address the lack of taxonomic informa-tion about pollinators (see excerpts of deci-sion VI/5 in annex 4). The taxonomicrequirements of the IPI are made explicitthroughout the text of the plan of action, andclearly the availability of taxonomic knowl-edge on pollinators should be part of taxo-nomic needs assessments for the GTI. Theplan of action is very specific about some ofthe needs already recognised. For example,there is a requirement to promote the devel-opment of identification keys for bee gen-era, since the number of bee generafor which such keys are not available is

‘unacceptably high’. As noted, there areother insect and vertebrate pollinators ofagricultural and other important plants (forexample the weevil pollinators of oilpalms). Therefore easy-to-use keys and / orautomated identification systems tofamilies, genera and species of pollinatorsare required. This activity forms part of thefirst stage of activities on global monitoringof pollinators.

Element 3 of the plan is capacity-build-ing, which states: “One major area whichneeds addressing is the capacity of countriesto address the taxonomic impediment, whichderives from serious shortfalls in investmentin training, research and collections man-agement. It seriously limits our capability toassess and monitor pollinator decline glob-ally, in order to conserve pollinator diversityand to manage it sustainably. The globaltaxonomic impediment is costly, especiallywhen expressed in terms of those researchinitiatives in pollination and conservationecology which are wholly dependent onaccess to sound bee taxonomy and are ren-dered wholly non-viable in its absence.There is also a global taxonomic deficit, thatis, the unacceptably high numbers of beegenera for which identification keys are notavailable.” An action to meet this is to“Build taxonomic capacity to carry outinventories of the pollinator diversity anddistribution in order to optimise their man-agement, through, inter alia, the training oftaxonomists and parataxonomists of beesand other pollinators.” Additional activitiesin this section which involve a strong taxo-nomic element are to “Develop tools andmechanisms for the international andregional exchange of information for theconservation, restoration and sustainableuse of pollinators. This may include …Developing and updating global andnational lists of threatened pollinator

48


species, and produce multilingual manualson pollinator conservation and restorationfor farmers.” Further suggested actions inthe same text are: strengthening nationalinstitutions to support taxonomy of bees andother pollinators, through, among otherthings, (a) Maintaining continuity of taxo-nomic and reference collections of bees andother pollinators; (b) Recognition of centresof excellence in bee taxonomy and estab-lishment of centres of excellence as appro-priate; and (c) Repatriation of data throughcapacity-building and benefit-sharing.

The taxonomic needs outlined in the IPIare perhaps the most explicit in anyConvention document other than the GTIdecisions themselves.

3.2.12.3 Pests and pathogensA major component of agricultural work allover the world has been associated withidentifying the pests and diseases affectingdomesticated plants and animals, and find-ing ways of treating them (including the useof natural enemies). The work identifiedranges from basic alpha-taxonomy of pestsand natural enemies, to how the informationis presented and distributed, to assessment(and the taxonomic capacity that underliesit). Two needs assessments similar to thishave been carried out recently byASEANET, focussed on pests andpathogens in South East Asia (Evans et al.,2002), and the other on arthropod pests ofthe same region (Naumann & Jisoh, 2002).Both made a number of recommendations,focussed on the necessity of bringing therelevant collections of organisms held incountries of the region up to a standardappropriate to meet the identification needsidentified, and provision of information.

The COP suggested a collection of casestudies of pest and disease control mecha-nisms, including the role of natural enemiesand other organisms at field and landscapelevels (decision V/5). The clear linkbetween pests and GTI was made whenCOP requested that the GTI be included inthe joint work plan between the secretariatsof the CBD and the International PlantProtection Convention83.

3.2.13 Mountain biological diversity

Mountains cover about 25 per cent of theearth’s terrestrial surface and are particu-larly fragile and important systems. Theyserve as refuges for many species, includingendemic and endangered species, are fre-quently biological diversity hotspots, andcan harbour a high genetic diversity ofcrops, livestock, and their wild relatives.Ecosystem types such as forests, dry andsub-humid lands, inland waters and agricul-tural systems, are an integral part of moun-tain habitats, and taxonomic informationneeds pertaining to these thematic areas isalso applicable to their occurrence in moun-tain ecosystems. The only priority so far setfor the GTI in this thematic area is for taxo-nomic work underpinning identification,monitoring and assessment of mountainbiological diversity, but COP has requestedothers be developed (decision VII/27).

Within the programme of work for theGTI, the planned activity on mountain bio-diversity was elaborated by COP in 2006(see annex 13), with a focus on collatingrelevant information and expertise atregional levels. Several existing initiativesare identified as key actors including theGMBA84, the Mountain Partnership, and theMountain Forum. Others such as ICIMOD85

83 see paragraph 11(g) of decision VIII/3, contained in annex 1284 http://gmba.unibas.ch/index/index.htm85 http://www.icimod.org/

49


are not specifically mentioned but are keyactors nonetheless. Together these actorsshould identify research priorities and for-mulate of programmes and projects, ashighlighted by workshops directed at devel-oping technical cooperation networks oftaxonomic institutions in the ANDEAN andSouth Asian subregions (ANDINONET86

and SACNET87 respectively).

3.2.14 Island biological diversity

A programme of work on island biologicaldiversity was developed and adopted by theCOP in 2006 (decision VIII/1). One of thepriority actions (3.2) for Parties is to “com-pile detailed inventories of island species,assess their conservation status, includingthe main threat criteria, and develop the tax-onomic expertise necessary to facilitatethis.” (see excerpts from the decision inannex 4). Suggested activities to supportthis priority action included taxonomicstudies or revisions of important island taxa,including marine, freshwater and terrestrialspecies, as well as taxonomic training andpreparation of guides to enable researchersto identify poorly known biological groups,coral species and other associated islandspecies.

Also in 2006, the COP adopted a plannedactivity on island biodiversity as part of theGTI programme of work. In this regard, theCOP noted that islands incorporate all typesof biodiversity and therefore the plannedactivities 8 to 18 of the existing programmeof work also contribute to conservation andsustainable use of island biodiversity.Nevertheless, the COP recognized that spe-cial support is needed in the case of islands,

in particular for regional approaches tomeeting taxonomic needs and buildingcapacity.

3.2.15 Access and benefit-sharing

One of the three objectives of theConvention is “the fair and equitable shar-ing of benefits arising out of the utilizationof genetic resources”. Article 15 of theConvention recognises the sovereignty ofStates over their natural resources and pro-vides that “access to genetic resources shallbe subject to the prior informed consent ofthe Contracting Party providing suchresources”. It “shall also be based on mutu-ally agreed terms” in order to ensure thepossibility of sharing of benefits arisingfrom the commercial or other utilization ofthese genetic resources.

However, no benefits can be shared if thegenetic resources themselves are not knownand utilized. The first step to bring aboutbenefit-sharing is knowledge of the identityof species and strains of potential interestand their distributions. Thus inventories atsub-national and national levels can providean immediate value as a base for both leg-islative action and investigation of potentialor actual benefits.

These activities are of particular impor-tance at the country level, at which mostarrangements regarding access and benefitsharing must, or are most effectively, handled.The importance of inventories for access andbenefit-sharing issues has led to the identifi-cation of their assessment and inventory(together with the information managementsystems to deal with this information) as keyactivities in this context. Parties are already

86 http://www.andinonet.org.ve/87 http://www.biodiversityasia.org/sacnet/

50


committed to developing inventories of theirbiodiversity under Article 7 of the Conven-tion. The more each country can properlyinventory, collect, classify and utilize its bio-logical resources, the greater will be thepotential benefits to that country. A key com-ponent of this is national capacity-building intaxonomy and related disciplines. However,as discussed above, taxonomy is one sciencewhere no country has all of the expertise itneeds. It is a globally collaborative science,which when handled well, builds supportivenetworks globally.

The primary goal of the GTI in thisrespect is to assist countries in carrying outinventory work in a timely and efficientmanner. Inventory data can come from fivesources:

1. Published data: These include check-lists, catalogues, taxonomic revisions etc.Access to these may involve working withnatural history libraries in major museumsand herbaria. Increasingly, key works in the‘legacy literature’ are being digitised andplaced on the internet (e.g. the BiologiaCentrali-Americana for animals and plantsof Mesoamerica88). However, in most casespast publications have not been digitised, andmust be sought with the aid of specialists andlibrarians. Modern works are increasinglyappearing electronically as well as in print,although it is still a very small proportion andcannot yet be considered an adequate source.

2. On-line databases: These, while alsoincomplete, are rapidly increasing in numberand scope and give names and localitieswhere the species concerned have beencollected. They may be drawn from collec-tions held in museums on a regional basis(e.g. the European Natural History

Specimen Information Network, ENHSINor its successor, BioCASE89, a global basis(GBIF90, a portal which gives access to spec-imen, observational and nomenclatural datamade available from many providers on aglobal basis) or be fully compiled lists fromcountries (e.g. the list of trees of ElSalvador91). This action is meeting a needidentified by the Convention, which agreedthat such access is a necessity (decisionIV/1.D), and an output for GTI in this area isinteractive catalogues of material available,linked to taxonomic collections.

3. Collections held by museums andherbaria both in and outside a country:Most large institutions now regard repatria-tion of information as an important activity,and are willing to partner with countries toobtain grants for data capture and develop-ment. The issues associated with data repa-triation have been explored in detail by Ruiz& Pooma (2000). A successful example inrepatriating data from foreign collections, isa collaborative project among CONABIO,INBio, and the Missouri Botanical GardenHerbarium with the support of GBIF.

4. Collecting and identifying newmaterial: This may be done by nationals orin partnership with non-nationals. The lattermethod is likely to be of particular value tocountries with an under-developed taxo-nomic infrastructure. In this case, an agree-ment between the partners should clearlyspecify terms and conditions for collections,curation, management, and use of the speci-mens collected (based on full prior informedconsent). All collecting must reflect nationallaws and permit regulations. Such agree-ments need to be realistic, of course. Someattempts made to protect genetic resources

88 http://www.sil.si.edu/digitalcollections/bca/89 http://www.biocase.org/90 http://www.gbif.org91 htthp://internt.nhm.ac.uk/cgi-bin/botany/ESTrees/index.dsml

51


from misappropriation through overlyrestrictive legislation affecting collectinghave slowed down implementation of theConvention, including the development ofnational inventories. A requirement that allspecimens be identified to the species level,for example, would be very difficult for anynon-national partner to deal with, particu-larly in the case of microfauna such asinsects. In many collecting enterprises non-target taxa are collected by chance as a ‘by-catch’ of the target organisms and areunlikely to be identifiable by the collectors.Moreover, for collections of species-richand poorly known organisms such as inver-tebrates and micro-organisms, most of thespecies collected within the target taxawould be unknown and need to be describedbefore names are available, a time-consum-ing process. It should also be noted that dis-couraging such ‘by-catch’ by allowing onlytargeted collecting is a waste of precioustime and resources, and will, in the long run,only slow the process of inventory anddeprive future generations of key ecologicaland biodiversity data.

Among other priorities, the GlobalTaxonomy Initiative will concentrate ondeveloping capacity in the collection andclassification of biodiversity. Projects in thisarea will be designed to develop capacity incollecting and maintaining biological col-lections. Taxonomic information, specifi-cally including genetic level data, will becritical in tracing the origin of resources.

A major element in increasing capacity toproperly inventory and access biologicalresource information is effective informa-tion management. Therefore, a key elementof the GTI is the development of appropriateIT tools to allow access to existing data, and

to provide efficient data entry of new infor-mation generated.

5. Use of indigenous knowledge:Indigenous and local communities havedetailed knowledge of biodiversity elementswhich may be databased with the priorinformed consent of these communities andappropriate safeguards (Pfeiffer & Uril,2003). Traditional knowledge of the uses ofa particular organism may be associatedwith the nomenclature used in the inventory.This provides evidence of prior use and isimportant to establish appropriate intellec-tual property rights. It also safeguards suchknowledge in a period when oral traditionsare being lost and with them the taxonomicand associated knowledge of the people.The people of the Cook Islands have pro-duced a valuable database of their fauna andflora, in their National Heritage project92

There are increasing issues regarding collec-tion by non-nationals and subsequent taxo-nomic work on specimens collected takingplace outside the country of origin. As part oftheir implementation of the CBD provisionson access and benefit-sharing, many coun-tries are evaluating and changing the permitsystems for researchers. It is an importantstep to safeguard rights, but if the systemdeveloped is too difficult, restrictive, expen-sive or time-consuming, researchers will notbe able to do the key taxonomic work that thecountry needs, hindering the development ofinventories, and other information needed toimplement the Convention. Strong but prac-tical processes of research, collections, andexport permits are key components of astrong national access and benefit-sharingstrategy. Current analyses of best practicesand lessons learned from early regulatory

92 The Cook Islands Biodiversity Database: http://www2.bishopmuseum.org/pbs/cookislands/

52


changes will make it easier for all nations toeffectively build a proper system.

This issue is of prime importance toregional and subregional initiatives beingencouraged by the GTI. During the GTIregional meeting in Asia in 2000, trans-bor-der research issues and permits were dis-cussed and the workshop called for astreamlined approach to obtaining permis-sion to undertake taxonomic research underthe GTI (Wilson et al., 2003). The issue hasalso been highlighted by the CoordinationMechanism of the GTI, who in their firstmeeting noted: “Biological species do notobserve national boundaries, and can onlybe understood and sustained if their varia-tion can be studied and assessed in thenatural habitats throughout their entire geo-graphic range. Much taxonomic researchdepends on transnational activities andinternational cooperation involving jointfieldwork, travel of personnel, and the fre-quent exchange of data, samples, and bio-logical specimens. The CoordinationMechanism advises the Executive Secretaryto urge Parties to the Convention to facili-tate such efforts of international cooperationfor taxonomic research as are needed to helpimplementing activities of the Conventionby, inter alia, establishing clear and unam-biguous mechanisms for granting the neces-sary permissions for approved researchprojects, field work, collection of biologicalspecimens, and free exchange of personnel,data and relevant materials.”93

The Convention has provided the “BonnGuidelines on Access to Genetic Resourcesand the Fair and Equitable Sharing of theBenefits Arising out of their Utilization”(decision VI/24). These guidelines weredeveloped to assist Parties, Governmentsand other stakeholders in developing an

overall access and benefit-sharing regime.They include a number of references totaxonomic research, and recommendationsas to how activities to implement theGTI might be accommodated. Relevantportions of the text are given in Annex 4.Specifically they recommend that“Taxonomic research, as specified in theGlobal Taxonomy Initiative, should not beprevented, and providers should facilitateacquisition of material for systematic useand users should make available all informa-tion associated with the specimens thusobtained”. An important provision is thatpermission for collection and research canbe given for a particular set of uses, andany change of use may require a new appli-cation for prior informed consent. Uses asso-ciated with taxonomic research in thedevelopment of inventories might include:conducting research; collecting specimens;exporting specimens; retaining specimens;conducting different types of analysis(e.g. morphological, molecular or genetic);exchanging specimens freely outside thecountry; publishing data about the speci-mens (particularly distributional); importingnecessary equipment and chemicals to carryout the research (preferably with tax exemp-tion), etc.

In order to enable researchers to obtaininformation on what regulations are inforce, and what permits are required, coun-tries have been asked to designate ‘NationalFocal Points’ and establish ‘CompetentNational Authorities’, the first of whommight be responsible for informing thoseseeking information of relevant procedures,and information on the competent nationalauthority responsible for granting access toa specific genetic resource. Together theycould take a number of practical steps to

93 available through the GTI Portal at www.biodiv.org

53


facilitate access to genetic resources for tax-onomic research, such as:

1. Undertaking necessary steps at thenational level for the requirements oftaxonomic research to be taken intoaccount.

2. Making information related toresearch, collecting and export permitrequirements available on an appro-priate national web site, together withappropriate contact points, at each oftheir Embassies or Consulates, andthrough the National CBD/GTI FocalPoint and access & benefit-sharingFocal Point (recognizing that in mostcountries these permits are given bydifferent offices and generally differ-ent Ministries, and may be multiple).

3. Making information regarding legalrequirements for exchange of biologi-cal specimens and about current legis-lation and rules for access andbenefit-sharing available through theGTI portal as recommended byCOP94.

A database on access and benefit-sharingmeasures including national and regionalstrategies, policies, legislations and regula-tions developed by Parties to assist with theimplementation of access and benefit-shar-ing provisions of the Convention is avail-able on the Convention website95.

At the World Summit on SustainableDevelopment, in 2002, Governments calledfor action to “negotiate within the frameworkof the Convention on Biological Diversity,

bearing in mind the Bonn Guidelines, aninternational regime to promote and safe-guard the fair and equitable sharing of bene-fits arising out of the utilization of geneticresources”. The CBD Ad Hoc Open-endedWorking Group on access and benefit-shar-ing was mandated by the Conference of theParties to elaborate and negotiate the interna-tional regime on access and benefit-sharingand to complete its work before the tenthmeeting of the Conference of the Parties. Inthis context, it will be important for the nego-tiators of the international regime to keep inmind the need to develop a regime that willtake into account the particular requirementsof taxonomic research.

3.2.16 Invasive alien species

Invasive alien species (IAS) are speciesintroduced deliberately or unintentionallyoutside their natural habitats to placeswhere they have the ability to establishthemselves, out-compete natives and takeover the new environments96. They arewidespread in the world and occur in all cat-egories of living organisms and all types ofecosystems. The threat to biodiversity dueto invasive alien species is considered sec-ond only to that of habitat loss, and theimpacts are predicted to increase in futurefor many types of ecosystems (MEA 2005).There are a large number of pathways ormechanisms by which invasive alienspecies can affect biodiversity97.

The work under the Convention on IAShas highlighted the important role of taxon-omy for understanding and management of

94 see paragraph 6(b) of decision VI/8, in annex 1095 http://intranet.biodiv.org/programmes/socio-eco/benefit/measures.aspx96 This is not intended as a formal definition. There are various definitions for terms such as invasive alien species, alien species, exotic species, non-native species, etc. A glossary of relevant terms used in international fora is being developed and will be available through the portal on invasivealien species on the CBD website.97 see document UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/11/INF/4

Workshop on Development of Regional Invasive Alien Species Information Hubs,Including Requisite Taxonomic Services, In North America and Southern Africa

14-15 February 2001, Davis, California

We the participants in the aforementioned scientific workshop:

Recognize: The negative impacts of invasive alien species (IAS) on native biodiversity;ecosystem functions and services; the productivity of agriculture, forestry, wildlife, andfisheries; and human health are very costly to society. These costs are measured not justin economic terms, but also in damaged goods and equipment, food and water shortages,environmental degradation, loss of native species, increased rates and severity of naturaldisasters, disease epidemics, and harm to human welfare.

Every country has been impacted by IAS. Unless coordinated efforts involving the coop-eration of all stakeholders are implemented to minimize the movement of IAS, invasions

54


Box 3-3 The Davis Declaration

IAS98. The following points in particularhave been noted:

• Research and monitoring activities onIAS should attempt to include a base-line taxonomic study of biodiversity.At the national (or other appropriate)level this will ensure that IAS can berecognised and distinguished from thebiota naturally present;

• Such a survey should include localcommunities; and

• Relevant extant databases pertaining toIAS should be inventoried and synthe-sised, including incident lists, potentialthreats to neighbouring countries,information on taxonomy, ecology andgenetics of invasive alien species andon control methods. Since this deci-sion, progress has been made and a listof IAS-related databases compiled99.

The Global Invasive Species Programme(GISP), a key partner in implementation of

the Convention’s work on invasive alienspecies, has produced a Global Strategy onInvasive Alien Species (McNeely et al.,2001). This strategy also emphasises theneed for building research capacity using across-sectoral and multi-disciplinaryapproach, and including “Strengtheninginfrastructure for research on IAS (e.g. sys-tematics, taxonomy, ecology) at nationaland regional levels”. It suggests that aninternational committee to correlate andmanage updated taxonomic nomenclaturefor all IAS would be a useful resource. Alsohighlighted is the importance of buildingcapacity to identify, record and monitorinvasions and provide current lists of poten-tial and established IAS.

The capacity necessary to meet theinformation needs was outlined in theDavis Declaration100, an output from aWorkshop on Development of RegionalInvasive Alien Species Information Hubs,held in Davis, USA in 2001 (see Textbox 3-3). The concept is to establish a

98 decisions V/8, VI/8, VI/2399 http://www.gisinetwork.org/Documents/DRAFTIASDB.html 100 http://www.invasivespecies.gov/laws/declarations.shtml

55


will become more frequent and their impacts more severe as the globalization of trade,transport and human travel increase.

Coordinated efforts to restrict the movement of IAS require that all nations have accessto taxonomic capabilities, information services, and useful tools to support and imple-ment prevention policies and develop effective response strategies.

Invasions of non-native species are greatly increasing the need for taxonomic services,while the number of taxonomists and resources for taxonomic capacity-building aredecreasing worldwide.

Initiatives relevant to strengthening IAS information services are proliferating, withagencies and organizations providing information for many purposes and on many geo-graphic scales. These initiatives are not well coordinated. Some are overlapping orduplicative. Major gaps remain in coverage for some taxonomic groups and regions ofthe world.

Therefore, we

Conclude that: There is an urgent need to develop a comprehensive global strategy tostrengthen and coordinate IAS taxonomic and information services.

Thus, we:

Encourage:

• Establishment of a global information system based on a network of regional infor-mation hubs for providing information services and tools relating to IAS and buildingwherever possible on existing efforts178.

• Support of IAS information services by strengthening of the infrastructure for infor-mation technology and management, taxonomic identification, systematics research,vouchering and collections management worldwide.

• Development of tools to increase taxonomic capacity worldwide. These tools, whichshould be made available wherever possible in hard copy, on CD, and on the Internet,include, inter alia, a guide to taxonomic services for IAS; common nomenclaturalstandards; identification aids; searchable lists of floras and faunas; and trainingprograms for new taxonomists and parataxonomists.

• Establishment of partnerships with key stakeholder groups, including industry, non-governmental organizations, and the general public, for developing and applying tax-onomic services and information to combat IAS.

Note with Approval: The Global Invasive Species Programme’s plans to promote tax-onomy as a key component of national capacity in IAS prevention and management,encourage research to address taxonomic needs, and help coordinate a distributed IASinformation network to include early warning and predictive functions.

56


Call upon:• The Integrated Taxonomic Information System (ITIS), the Global Biodiversity

Information Facility (GBIF), BioNET-INTERNATIONAL, and the Global TaxonomyInitiative (GTI) to make IAS a priority, establish global standards for IAS taxonomicclassification, and improve the availability of accurate IAS taxonomic information.

• The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), International Plant ProtectionConvention (IPPC), and other relevant bodies to recognize the need and encouragesupport for better coordination, additional tools, and immediate capacity-building inIAS information and taxonomic services.

• National, regional and international research and development agencies to makeresources available to better coordinate and increase the capacity of IAS informationand taxonomic services, in order to meet the immediate needs of both developing anddeveloped countries.

APPENDIX

Background The workshop brought together scientists from Africa, North America, andinternational organizations who are participating in national, regional and global efforts todevelop taxonomic services and/or information networks to better inform work on inva-sive alien species (IAS). The objectives of the workshop were to share experience indeveloping distributed information networks relevant to IAS and to provide recommen-dations on concepts and criteria for developing and coordinating IAS regional informationhubs and requisite taxonomic services in order to facilitate identification, assessment, andrapid response to IAS. The workshop was sponsored by the U.S. Geological Survey(USGS) in cooperation with the Global Invasive Species Programme (GISP). It washosted by the University of California at Davis, which is providing technical support tovarious domestic and international efforts for developing and coordinating IAS informa-tion services. Workshop presentations assessed the need for a distributed IAS informationsystem, supported by essential taxonomic services, and provided overviews of initiativesat the global level, in eastern and southern Africa, and in the Western Hemisphere.Working sessions focused on IAS information management and technical issues, and onissues at the interface between IAS taxonomic services and information systems.

The workshop produced the Davis Declaration to focus international attention andresources on development and coordination of IAS information and taxonomic services,and a report (in preparation) containing specific recommendations for strengthening IAS-related taxonomic capacity and for implementing a global network of regional informationhubs. The workshop products will provide important support for ongoing taxonomic ini-tiatives (e.g., ITIS, GTI, BioNET-INTERNATIONAL) and for GISP plans to develop aglobal IAS information network. They will also provide guidance for planning pilotregional invasive species hubs in Mexico and South Africa, for which seed grants are beingprovided through the Environmental Diplomacy Fund of the U.S. Department of State.

57


global information network based on aseries of regional information hubs provid-ing information services on IAS. Each hubwould develop a core set of informationproducts, coordinate existing informationsystems and encourage new initiatives tomeet regional needs, facilitate synthesisand integration of information from manycountries and sources, ensure application ofappropriate data standards and vocabular-ies, and provide quality control and docu-mentation. A Global Invasive SpeciesInformation Network has been set up toachieve some of these objectives101.

Other recommendations from Davisinclude:

(i) Support of IAS information servicesby strengthening the infrastructurefor information technology andmanagement, taxonomic identifica-tion, systematics research, voucher-ing and collections managementworldwide;

(ii) Development of tools to increase tax-onomic capacity worldwide. Thesetools, which should be made avail-able wherever possible in hard copy,on CD, and on the internet, include,inter alia, a guide to taxonomicservices for IAS; common nomen-clatural standards; identification aids;searchable lists of floras and faunas;and training programs for new taxon-omists and parataxonomists; and

(iii) Establishment of partnerships withkey stakeholder groups, includingindustry, non-governmental organi-zations, and the general public, fordeveloping and applying taxonomicservices and information to combatIAS.

Further work on the information manage-ment element of the proposal was carriedout at a joint meeting with the Clearing-houseMechanism in Montreal in 2002 (SCBD,2002)102. The meeting endorsed the conceptof regional hubs, and suggested that extantnetworks, such as those affiliated toBioNET-INTERNATIONAL, explore oppor-tunities to utilise their infrastructure in theirdevelopment. A number of technical issueswere discussed, including standards fortaxonomy, which were:

(i) Increase the standardization oftaxonomic usage within the net-work, taking into account the fol-lowing:

(ii) Encourage cooperation amonghubs to ensure that all are usingthe same names for species;

(iii) Recognize and communicatechanges in taxonomic concepts ofindividual invasive species with-out delay across hubs;

(iv) Encourage adoption by hubs ofstandard nomenclatures of highertaxonomic groups, where devel-oped and accepted under theappropriate nomenclatural codes;

(v) Use the taxonomic resources ofGBIF, ITIS and/or Species 2000that provide access to baselinetaxonomic data to ensure interop-erability;

(vi) Enable the inclusion of unidenti-fied or partially identified speci-mens in the information system;

(vii) Allow species level updates of spec-imen-associated data, such as distri-bution and ecological impact, upontheir eventual naming or re-identifi-cation in the information system;

101 http://www.gisinetwork.org/; http://www.biodiv.org/doc/meetings/cop/cop-08/information/cop-08-inf-35-en.pdf102 http://www.biodiv.org/doc/meetings/cop/cop-06/information/cop-06-inf-18-en.doc

58


(viii) Encourage hubs to recommend toaffiliated institutions to followbest practices, such as:i. Maintenance of voucher col-

lections of invasive species(including genetic material),whether named or not;

ii. Specimen identification track-ing systems with the potentialof active links to the informa-tion network in the case ofvoucher specimens;

iii. Mechanisms for actively link-ing species-level data and thespecimen-level data uponwhich they are based.

(ix) Allow for multiple taxonomicinterpretations by the informationsystem. Where conflicting interpre-tations create confusion as to thestatus of a species as invasive, theseshould be flagged as requiring pri-ority investigation.

Additional contributions to the implementa-tion of Article 8(h) (the Convention Articledealing with IAS) are ongoing within otherinternational fora including, but not limitedto, the International Plant ProtectionConvention (IPPC), regional plant protec-tion organizations, the Food and AgricultureOrganization of the United Nations, theInternational Maritime Organization, andthe Ramsar Convention.

3.2.17 Support in implementation ofArticle 8(j) - Traditional knowledge, inno-vations and practise. Article 8(j) of the Convention concerns theknowledge, innovations and practices of

local and indigenous communities relevantto implementation of the Convention103.Traditional knowledge systems include tax-onomic information, which, if used in com-bination with Linnean taxonomies, couldbe of wider value, and also serve to protectthe rights of the originators. However,access to and use of traditional knowledgemust have the prior informed consent of theholders of that knowledge and be based onmutually agreed terms (see discussion ofaccess and benefit-sharing and the GTIabove). The value to indigenous peoples ofthis activity is to enhance their ability toparticipate in decision-taking with regard toConvention implementation and to enablethem to manage their knowledge in a periodwhen oral traditions are breaking down andwritten records are not available. Guidesshould be made available to ensure thatthere is clarity on species or variants in dis-cussions between peoples in differentregions or with different cultural back-grounds. As part of this process methods ofdepicting and correlating taxonomies basedon traditional knowledge and those basedon Linnaean nomenclature need to bedeveloped.

Local and indigenous communities areencouraged to be involved in the imple-mentation of the Convention, including theGTI. This aspiration is included within theGTI PoW, and formed part of a reportby UNESCO, DIVERSITAS and WWF(Anon, 2000). However, care must betaken to ensure that such involvement isundertaken in the most effective mannerand respects the rights of the peoplesconcerned.

103 Article 8. In-situ conservation. Each contracting party shall, as far as possible and as appropriate: (j) Subject to its national legislation, respect,preserve and maintain knowledge, innovations and practices of indigenous and local communities embodying traditional lifestyles relevant for theconservation and sustainable use of biological diversity and promote their wider application with the approval and involvement of the holders ofsuch knowledge, innovations and practices and encourage the equitable sharing of the benefits arising from the utilization of such knowledge, inno-vations and practices.

59


3.2.18 Support for ecosystem approachand CBD work on assessment includingimpact assessments, monitoring andindicators

The GTI was originally developed in theface of problems in implementing Article 7:Identification and Monitoring. The need foridentification of components of biologicaldiversity, and for assessment and monitor-ing of their status, underpins many imple-mentation activities under the Convention.It follows that, wherever identification andmonitoring activities are called for in awork programme, there is an implicit, if notexplicit, requirement for taxonomicsupport104 - work under the GTI. Where therequirement is not explicitly stated in a COPdecision, there is often an acknowledgmentof the need by the inclusion of a require-ment for taxonomic capacity-building.Capacity-building in taxonomy is funda-mental to identification, monitoring, indica-tors and assessments activities105.

The ecosystem approach is a strategy forthe integrated management of land, waterand living resources that underliesConvention implementation. Within theConvention the term ‘ecosystem’ is definedin Article 2: “’Ecosystem’ means a dynamiccomplex of plant, animal and micro-organ-ism communities and their non-living envi-ronment interacting as a functional unit”.Humans, with their cultural diversity, are anintegral component of ecosystems in thisapproach. What this means is that anyimplementation activity should considernot only the animals, plants and micro-

organisms of a system, but also the way inwhich humans are engaged with that sys-tem, and how human activities, even at adistance, impact upon it.

Under the ecosystem approach, theMillennium Ecosystem Assessment(MEA)106 was a key activity, and in fact wasthe main focus of the planned activity forthe ecosystem approach under the GTIPoW. The MEA found, not surprisingly, thatthe taxonomic knowledge available forcharacterizing ecosystems varied consider-ably. The detailed findings of the MEA pro-vide good insights into the extent of thetaxonomic impediment for management ofvarious types of ecosystems.

The GTI also has relevance to the suite ofassociated environmental conventions (e.g.the Convention on Migratory Species (CMS),the Convention on International Trade inEndangered species of Flora and Fauna(CITES) the Convention to CombatDesertification (CCD) and to the Commissionon Sustainable Development (CSD)).

3.2.19 Protected areas

The COP adopted a programme of work onprotected areas in 2004 (decision VII/28)and reviewed progress in 2006 (decisionVIII/24). In addition to recognizing theimportant linkages between protected areasand GTI, the COP elaborated a plannedactivity on protected areas as part of theprogramme of work for the GTI.

The 2003 UN list of protected areasincluded more than 100,000 sites covering anarea of 18.8 million square kilometres of

104 Monitoring in a form which would require taxonomic support has been stated as necessary in, for example, the work on Marine and CoastalBiodiversity (decisions V/3, VI/3); Invasive Alien Species (decision VI/23); Agriculture (decisions III/11, V/5, VI/5); inland waters (decision VII/4);Forest Biodiversity (decision V1/22); Implementation of Article 8(j) (decision V/16); Biodiversity and tourism (decision V/25); and the Global PlantConservation Strategy (decision VI/9).105 See decisions III/10 and VI/7106 http://www.millenniumassessment.org/en/index.aspx

60


which 17 million square kilometres are ter-restrial – some 11.5% of Earth’s land surface.These protected areas represent almost allecosystem types: forests, savannahs, grass-lands, wetlands, and coastal and marine sys-tems, although with different degrees ofcoverage. Between 10% and 30% of theplanet’s Amazonian rain forests, the ArcticTundra and the tropical savannah grasslandsare now held in protected areas. However,less than 10% of the world’s wetlands andless than 0.5% of the world’s coastal andmarine systems are protected.

Protected areas support biodiversity bymaintaining essential ecosystems and eco-logical services. They provide refuge forsome of the world’s spectacular, valuableand often threatened biota. However, pro-tected areas established for the conservationof biota are likely to be placed and managedin terms of the larger better known speciesrather than the much greater number ofsmaller species that may occur there107, andmanagement decisions may be biased bythis (Caro & O’Doherty, 1999; Andelman,& Fagan, 2000; Lindenmayer et al., 2002).Accurate information about various biodi-versity components of protected areas canconsiderably improve the management andselection of those areas. However, for mostof the designated protected areas such infor-mation is not available. The PoW on pro-tected areas includes the need for studies toimprove the knowledge of the distribution,status and trends of biological diversity inprotected areas, an activity that must

involve taxonomic work to identify thecomponents of that biodiversity108. In addi-tion, the protected areas PoW calls forestablishment of a comprehensive system ofrepresentative national systems of protectedareas by 2010 by parties through expansionof protected areas in any remaining large,un-fragmented natural areas. In terms ofdetermining appropriate sites for protectedareas, data are needed on the range andecological needs of the most speciespossible, and in particular about endemicand RET (Rare, Endangered, Threatened)species. However, such data are frequentlyeither unavailable due to lack of description,or available only in large collections held inmuseums and herbaria. To meet these chal-lenges, the following should be consideredfor any actual or proposed protected area:

• Access to specimen data from thatarea (i.e. via GBIF and the taxonomicinstitutions), particularly of endemicsand locally/regionally rare entities;

• Knowledge of the role of the area inrelation to the distribution of as manyspecies as possible (using programmessuch as WORLDMAP109, and ecologi-cal niche modelling (Raxworthy et al.,2003; Canhos et al., 2004) againdependant on taxonomic input andaccess to collections);

• Rapid surveys on a selection of targetgroups of lower organisms, using ini-tiatives such as Conservation Interna-tional’s Rapid Assessment programme;

107 The approximately 1.78 million described species are not evenly spread across taxa, but are rather concentrated in the larger organisms such asvertebrates and vascular plants (where perhaps 90% have been discovered and named). There are, however, huge gaps among the smaller organ-isms, such as insects, fungi, algae and protozoa, which are both far more species-rich and often more important for ecosystem function. Moreover,listing of conservation status through the red databook system seems biased in favour of the larger organisms. Although there is no reason to believethat extinction rates are any lower for invertebrates than vertebrates, 24% of the 4,763 species of mammals are threatened, while only 0.06% of the950,000 insects have so far been assessed as threatened (SCBD, 2001). 108 UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/9/6109 http://www.nhm.ac.uk/science/projects/worldmap/

61


• Rapid treatment of the survey results toproduce (1) list of RTUs (recognizabletaxonomic units, or morphospecies,which are likely to be species-level taxabut are not named and thus cannot becompared between sites) and their likelyecological roles; (2) list of species,including newly-described ones;

• Long-term monitoring of these taxawith continuing description of newspecies as collected; and

• Free sharing of these data, includingidentification aids, between geographi-cally and ecologically related reserves.

Rigorous planning and management of pro-tected areas requires close associationbetween the conservation and taxonomiccommunities, including at the level of datasharing. It also demands focused capacity-building of taxonomy (King & Lyal, 2003).

62


As noted in the introduction to this Guide(section 1.2), the GTI has a dual nature,with both policy and implementation com-ponents. The function of the policy compo-nent of the GTI is to identify the prioritiesfor action, which culminate in decisions ofthe COP including the programme of work.The policy aspect involves the NationalFocal Points within each country, theConference of the Parties (COP) of theCBD and its Subsidiary Body on Scientific,Technical and Technological Advice(SBSTTA), the Secretariat of the Convention(SCBD) and the Coordination Mechanismof the GTI. Implementation occurs primar-ily as Parties translate that policy at interna-tional level into policies, strategies andactivities at national level.

This section of the Guide first introducesthe roles and responsibilities of the keyactors in the development of policy, includ-ing the CBD secretariat, the CoordinationMechanism for the GTI, National FocalPoints, the COP, and SBSTTA. In addition,it reviews some of the main mechanismsavailable to facilitate implementation of theGTI, including national reporting, nationalbiodiversity strategies and action plans(NBSAPs), the roster of experts, outreachactivities, taxonomic needs assessments,and pilot projects. Finally, some key obsta-cles and challenges to implementation ofthe GTI are discussed.

4.1 Roles and responsibilities

4.1.1 The CBD Secretariat

Responsibility for the administration of theGTI under the Convention rests with theExecutive Secretary of the SCBD inMontreal. There is a programme officer

primarily responsible for the GTI, and otherprogramme officers responsible for the the-matic work programmes and other cross-cutting issues who may contribute to workon the GTI from time to time. On a day-to-day basis, some of the main duties of theCBD Secretariat include preparing docu-mentation for SBSTTA, COP and othermeetings, gathering and analyzing informa-tion for these documents, correspondingwith interested parties and focal points,maintaining the GTI portal on the CBD web-site, forwarding requests of COP to Partiesand others, following up on implementationof various activities under the GTI, and liais-ing with key organizations and partners inorder to inform people of the GTI and howthey can contribute to its implementation.

4.1.2 The GTI Coordination Mechanism

In managing the GTI the ExecutiveSecretary is advised by a CoordinationMechanism, comprising delegates fromeach of the UN regions as well as from rel-evant international organisations. This wasset up by the COP at its fifth meeting in2000110 with a series of tasks to undertake,including the development of the PoW inconcert with the Executive Secretary, andthe in-depth review of the PoW thatoccurred at COP-8 in 2006. There areseveral aspects of the decision on GTI takenby COP-8 for which the CoordinationMechanism will be able to provide advice tothe Executive Secretary, including but notlimited to;

• Design and implementation of the globaltaxonomic needs assessment envisagedas planned activity 3 in the PoW;

• Development of specific taxonomic,outcome-oriented deliverables for

4. DEVELOPING THE GTI AND MONITORING ITS PROGRESS

110 See the annex to decision V/9, contained in annex 9 to this guide.

63


111NOTIFICATION. Suggested actions for promoting implementation of the programme of work for the Global Taxonomy Initiative. Ref.:SCBD/STTM/LR/44307 http://www.biodiv.org/doc/notifications/2004/ntf-2004-073-gti-en.pdf

each of the planned activities of thePoW, in advance of COP-9; and

• Fundraising and implementation for aproject development seminar to assistcountries in developing projects toaddress identified taxonomic needs.

Reports of formal meetings of theCoordination Mechanism are available onthe GTI Portal. The group also communi-cates via email and is likely to use onlinediscussion forums on the GTI Portal as anadditional means to interact.

4.1.3 National Focal Points

All Parties have a CBD National Focal Point– an individual or office within Governmentthat takes the lead in CBD matters. However,

in order to provide a more focused linkbetween the SCBD and individual Parties onthe GTI, Parties have been invited to desig-nate National Focal Points for the GTI111.These GTI National Focal Points should beone or more expert individuals or institutionswho have the appropriate technical back-ground and expertise to understand taxo-nomic needs in relation to the CBD. FocalPoints have been or will be designated for anumber of activities under the Convention,including the GTI. The identities and contactpoints of the GTI National Focal Points canbe found on the GTI Portal or can berequested by contacting the Secretariat.

In order to help the GTI Focal Points beas effective as possible, some of the respon-sibilities of the job have been summarized(see Text-box 4-1). These activities are only

These were identified by the meeting of the Coordination Mechanism for the GlobalTaxonomy Initiative (GTI) held in Kuala Lumpur on 8 February 2004, and circulated toFocal Points in a Notification by the Executive Secretary on 16 September 20041.

Parties should:• Appoint National Focal Points for the GTI (in accordance with decisions V/9 and VI/8

of the Conference of the Parties). These focal points should comprise one or moreexpert individuals or institutions who together have the appropriate technical back-ground and expertise to understand taxonomic needs in relation to the Convention onBiological Diversity and have the capacity to fully perform the focal point role.

National Focal Points for the Convention on Biological Diversity should:• Empower and support national focal points for the GTI in their efforts to make con-

tact and communicate regularly with the taxonomic community in their country, wherepossible making use of existing networks.

National Focal Points for the Convention on Biological Diversity and the GTI should:• Integrate taxonomy into all projects as appropriate to ensure implementation of deci-

sion VI/8, on the GTI programme of work, and that taxonomic needs are met in all the-matic areas of the Convention on Biological Diversity.

Box 4-1 Suggestions for action by CBD and GTI National Focal Points

64


• Create links with national biodiversity strategy and action plans, the clearing-house mechanism, (NCSAs), the Global Environment Facility and other relevantprocesses so that the need for taxonomy is understood in each of these processesand so that taxonomists understand what is required to fulfil the relevantcommitments.

• Utilize opportunities within national capacity self-assessments and GEF enablingactivities to identify priority taxonomic needs for implementing the Convention onBiological Diversity.

• Take responsibility for provision of information to the Secretariat of the Conventionon Biological Diversity on:a. Taxonomic needs assessments, including reviews or studies on specific taxonomic needs;b. Directories of taxonomic expertise;c. Registers of biological collections; andd. Taxonomic initiatives and networks.

National Focal Points for the GTI should:• Initiate, complete and/or update as, appropriate, national taxonomic needs assess-

ments, ensuring that these address the taxonomic needs identified in the workprogrammes for each thematic and cross-cutting issue under the Convention onBiological Diversity.

• Prepare plans for the full national implementation of the GTI programme of work, uti-lizing national, regional and global capacities as appropriate.

• Work with government and relevant organizations to mobilize resources for the taxo-nomic capacity-building required to meet national obligations under the Conventionon Biological Diversity.

• Participate in and help ensure the sustainability of national, regional and globalinitiatives and networks aimed at taxonomic capacity-building and technicalcooperation.

• Work to bridge the gap between taxonomists and all user groups involved (through theestablishment of web sites, mailing lists, bulletin boards, presentations at scientificconferences, workshops with end-users and other means).

• Popularise the GTI among taxonomists and provide an interface between taxonomyand the end-users of taxonomy.

• Raise the level of in-country recognition for the applied nature of much taxonomicwork and the critical contribution of baseline taxonomic work to all activities relatedto the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity and the effective implementa-tion of the Convention on Biological Diversity.

• Be proactive in seeking to realize the benefits of cooperation with other sectors, forexample, plant protection services, that have relevant capacities and capacity-build-ing needs.

• Provide relevant information and ongoing feedback to the taxonomic and end-usercommunities (on the Convention on Biological Diversity and the GTI, other

65


organizations and processes, contacts, government decisions, funding possibilities aswell as case studies, etc.).

• Help to increase recognition that most taxonomic expertise can only be provided bytaxonomists.

• Build an understanding in government of the costs involved in providing taxonomicservices and support the development of programmes aimed at improving long-termemployment and career opportunities for taxonomists.

• Facilitate regional and global implementation of the GTI programme of work throughcommunication and cooperation with GTI National Focal Points and other stake-holders internationally.

a suggestion from the SCBD, and may bemodified by Parties according to local needsand priorities. However, they do go someway to attempting to bridge the gap betweenpolicy and implementation.

4.1.4 COP and SBSTTA

The COP, as the governing body for theConvention, makes requests and invitationsto Parties to carry out certain activitiesrelated to the GTI. In addition, however, theCOP can also alert other organisations andinitiatives as to the priorities and encouragethem to play a role in meeting needs, and itcan also alert funding bodies to prioritiesand needs, and encourage them to providefunding. The CBD itself is not a fundingbody and cannot provide financial supportfor implementation.

The COP often bases its decisions on theGTI on recommendations of the SubsidiaryBody on Scientific, Technical and Techno-logical Advice (SBSTTA), which in recentyears meets twice in each inter-sessionalperiod between COPs. The SBSTTA helpsto ensure that decisions of COP aregrounded on scientific inputs, because gov-ernment delegations tend to comprise scien-tific experts.

4.2 Mechanisms to facilitateImplementation

4.2.1 National reporting

Parties use various reporting mechanisms inorder to monitor and provide informationregarding their implementation of theConvention. Reporting provides feedbacknot only to the COP but also to the Partiesthemselves regarding the effectiveness oftheir activities towards implementation.

National reports under the Conventionare prepared periodically, the most recentbeing the third national reports. The report-ing formats are agreed by COP wellin advance of reporting deadlines, and todate the formats have been comprehensive,inclusive of questions regarding implemen-tation of Article 7 and the GTI.

In order to facilitate reporting in moredetail on particular topics, the COP alsorequests or invites Parties to provide spe-cific thematic reports. A few such thematicreports or questionnaires have been devel-oped, including one for the GlobalTaxonomy Initiative which was distrib-uted by the Secretariat in 2004 to solicitinformation for the in-depth review ofthe GTI.

66


The information contained in thenational and thematic reports is posted onthe website of the Convention112 and can beanalysed by any visitor to the website.

Unfortunately, not all governments sub-mit national reports and thematic reports,and among those that do, the level of detailand rigour varies significantly. Governmentdepartments that compile the reports do notalways have direct contact with the organisa-tions or individuals providing the taxonomicexpertise to implement the GTI. For this rea-son, and because gathering detailed informa-tion is costly, the reports cannot alwaysprovide a level of detail on implementationthat would be helpful. Clarity in what hasbeen achieved would not only demonstratethe progress that is being made, but wouldalso identify more clearly what obstaclesneed to be overcome. In several GTI-relatedworkshops the participants have identifieda need for taxonomists and other peopleimplementing the GTI to interact moreclosely with National Focal Points of the GTIand CBD (Klopper et al., 2001; the ThirdGlobal Taxonomy Workshop113; the Paris2003 meeting114). This might assist the FocalPoints in compiling the reports.

4.2.2 NBSAPs

Governments use national biodiversitystrategies and action plans (NBSAPs) toarticulate their plans for implementing COPdecisions in a national context. Ideally, theresults of taxonomic needs assessmentsshould be made clear in an NBSAP, speci-fying how the taxonomic impediment toimplementation of the CBD can beaddressed at national level. Many of these

NBSAPs are accessible through the CBDweb site115.

4.2.3 Roster of experts

The clearing-house mechanism maintaineda roster of experts for the various thematicareas and cross-cutting issues under theConvention, including the GTI. However,the maintenance of the roster was discontin-ued in 2006 (decision VIII/10). Other avail-able databases of taxonomic expertise arehighlighted on the GTI Portal.

4.2.4 Outreach

If people do not understand the importanceof the Convention, or indeed of taxonomyto underpin its implementation, the imple-mentation of the CBD will be impaired.Thus the need to raise awareness and toeducate on the importance of taxonomy tounderpin the Convention is critical to thesuccess of the Global Taxonomy Initiative.

At its eighth meeting in 2006, the COPrequested the Executive Secretary to under-take awareness-raising activities specific totaxonomy, as part of the Global Initiative onCommunication, Education and PublicAwareness (CEPA) under the Convention116.

In the Global Taxonomy Workshop inPretoria the participants produced a strategyfor building taxonomic capacity as part of theGTI. This strategy, refined at a subsequentmeeting in Paris (Annex 5), includesa set of activities that stretch from thepolicy level to implementation. Key aspectsinvolve outreach to all stakeholders, whetherengaged in policy-level work, implementingthe CBD in one of the thematic areas or other

112 http://www.biodiv.org/reports/analyzer.aspx113 http://www.bionet-intl.org/opencms/opencms/resourceCentre/onlinePublications/3GTW/index.htm114 http://www.biodiv.org/doc/meetings/sbstta/sbstta-09/information/sbstta-09-inf-16-en.pdf115 http://www.biodiv.org/world/nbsaps.asp - actual NBSAPs are accessible using the link from the side-bar on this page.116 decisions VIII/3 and VIII/6.

67


117 See in particular http://www.biodiv.org/doc/publications/cbd-ts-21.pdf

cross-cutting issues, or in taxonomy itself.This is to ensure that they all are aware of theGTI as an overarching political frameworkand as a necessary integrated component ofCBD implementation, and their own role inensuring its success. The table reproduced inAnnex 5 provides a list of partners who havecommitted themselves in one or other meet-ing to undertaking these actions. However,where outreach is concerned, every stake-holder, whether institutional or individual,has an equal responsibility and right toparticipate.

The very existence of the GTI and themassive endorsement it has received in asuccession of CBD, COP and SBSTTAmeetings is itself a powerful argument to usein explaining the importance of taxonomicintegration with other CBD implementation.

Numerous activities have taken place inthe past few years, including presentationson the GTI by the CBD Secretariat,members of the GTI CoordinationMechanism, and others at a number of work-shops and meetings, including four regionaland one global workshops on the GTI, andset-up meetings for Regional TaxonomicTechnical Cooperation Networks. A numberof papers have been written and published invarious books and journals, includingCresswell & Bridgewater, (2000); Klopperet al. (2002); Lyal (2001, 2004, 2004a),Samper, (2004); Shimura (2003, 2004). Abrochure on the GTI has been produced bythe SCBD, the GTI Portal is maintained onthe CBD site, and other websites are main-tained by various GTI National Focal Pointsglobally. There have also been publicationsin the CBD Technical Series related totaxonomy117.

While all of these things are useful andnecessary, there needs to be a greater effort

at outreach outside of those already activein Convention activities. These include tax-onomists themselves, funders, and users oftaxonomic information.

4.2.5 Taxonomic needs assessments

As has been noted in Section 3, taxonomicneeds assessments can be used to identifypriority needs across the various sectorsimplementing the CBD. They may be car-ried out across whatever geographic area isdeemed appropriate, and either attempt toexamine the whole gamut of activitiesunder the CBD or focus on one area, suchas aspects of agricultural biodiversity(Naumann & Jisoh, 2002; Evans et al.,2002), or conservation (UK report,unpublished).

The results of the needs assessment canbe incorporated into the NBSAP, or taken asa free-standing document. In either respect,however, it displays needs, and allows thetaxonomic community, the other sectors,and the policy-makers to prioritise actionsand resources. Thus priorities can be simul-taneously placed on the implementation andpolicy agendas. Moreover, in identifyingparticular needs, the output required to meetthem, and the users of that information, theassessment results will provide informationand a route for monitoring for the NationalCBD Focal Point, to assist understanding ofhow implementation is progressing.

In addition to providing a basis for futureactivities the process of preparing theassessment can act as a mechanism to high-light taxonomic needs that had been over-looked, and for raising the profile oftaxonomy, the GTI and other aspects of theCBD, an outcome reported by the UK GTIFocal Point (pers comm.).

68


118 The COP, in decision V/9: "Urges parties, Governments and relevant organizations to…communicate to the Executive Secretary and the GlobalTaxonomy Initiative Coordination mechanism, by 31 December 2001, … suitable programmes, projects and initiatives for consideration as pilot pro-jects under the Global Taxonomy Initiative."; and in decision VI/8: "Endorses…further submission and elaboration of potential pilot projects."119 http://www.biodiv.org/doc/meetings/sbstta/sbstta-06/information/sbstta-06-inf-04-en.pdf120 UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/6/INF/4121 primarily description of species

4.2.6 Pilot projects

A helpful guide in the development of theGTI would be some model projects to helpthe various communities understand the ben-efits and possibilities arising from the GTI.With this in mind some pilot projects of theGTI were identified in the PoW, under each ofthe planned activities. In addition, calls havebeen made118 for projects to exemplify theimplementation of the GTI. Some 21 individ-uals and institutions responded to these calls,and some of these were listed in an informa-tion document to SBSTTA119 Overall, themain characteristic of a GTI project, be itcapacity-building, information provision ortaxonomic studies, is that it should be directedtowards the removal of a taxonomic impedi-ment hindering implementation of theConvention. This does not limit the workneeded in any way; the only requirement isthat an impediment is being addressed and theoutputs will be used in a clear way to removethis impediment. Criteria that might be con-sidered are clarity on:

(a) Which identified taxonomic impedi-ments are addressed (humanresources, information, collectionsand facilities, etc.), including howsuch impediments were identifiedand the process through which theywould be overcome;

(b) How the project would provide taxo-nomic support to activities under theConvention;

(c) How the proposed activities wouldallow parties to meet their obliga-tions under the Convention, withparticular reference to the mainte-

nance of long-term sustainability ofin-country taxonomic information(if appropriate); and

(d) How robust taxonomic informationshall be made available openly anddynamically, while allowing for futureupgrading, meeting protocols on intel-lectual property rights, and ensuringfuture access and benefit-sharing.120

This is no different from the types ofrequirements that should be addressed for anyimplementation project – the work has to berooted in a need and it has to be shown howthe outputs will be used to meet that need.However, as has been noted above, with thevast numbers of species undescribed there isroom for projects including monographicalpha-taxonomy121, cataloguing, producingkeys and other identification aids identifica-tions, training and a multiplicity of others.

A number of projects implementing theGTI are in place, some funded by the GEF(see next section), and others by a variety ofdifferent organisations. Many projects arelisted in the GTI Portal, and some are dis-cussed further under the section on funding.

4.3 Obstacles to implementation

The most important obstacle to implementa-tion of the GTI is the inadequacy of globaltaxonomic resources to meet all of the prior-ities that have been or might be identified toimplement the CBD. Even the extant muse-ums, herbaria, university taxonomists andculture collections face a number of compet-ing priorities, some more attuned to meetingCBD objectives, others less so.

69


Capacity-building is noted as a needthroughout this Guide, and throughout theCOP decisions, but this takes financial andhuman resources, both to develop and sus-tain. When capacity exists, it has to beenabled to meet the needs, and this gener-ally takes financial resources. Taxonomicwork, just like other professional advice,needs to be paid for. In perhaps the majorityof cases, taxonomic needs for CBD imple-mentation are identified and met (or notmet) on an ad hoc basis, and discussion onthem does not extend beyond the projectlevel. Practicing taxonomists are oftenasked advice (and expected to give it freely)on identities of species or to provide deter-minations for projects funded by multilat-eral or bilateral agencies where an originaltaxonomic component of the budget waseither never considered, or even removed asunnecessary. This state of affairs is clearlynot satisfactory, and does not encourage theestablishment of systems that could dealwith CBD needs most effectively. A keyaim of the GTI must be to modify the man-ner in which taxonomy is perceived andpracticed.

A second key obstacle to implementationof the CBD is poor communication and lackof understanding about the GTI. First, thedecisions of the COP are not known tomany practicing taxonomists and othersimplementing the CBD. Many do not evenrealise that what they are doing is imple-menting the CBD, or understand the CBDand its operation. Even those who do readthe decisions do not necessarily understandthe implications for their work, or just whatis being asked of them. The National CBDor GTI Focal Point may not be able to com-municate with all taxonomists, probablybecause they do not know who they are,they are not in the same government

department, or they are not governmentemployees at all, but researchers at non-governmental institutions.

As noted earlier, this communicationproblem applies to national reporting aswell. Within countries there is generally noline of communication between thoseimplementing the GTI and the CBD. Thusthe Focal Point will not be able to contactthe taxonomists, and the taxonomists willnot know that their activities with respect tothe GTI are being reported on or that thereis a need for such reports. This is not alwaysthe case, of course; in some countries thelines of communication are being devel-oped. However, even here there is a wide-spread ignorance of the CBD and howtaxonomic work might be developed to helpimplement it.

Taxonomists, like any other scientists,will have a set of scientific objectives thatdetermine the work that they do. These areboth individually and institutionally set, andboth individuals and institutions are judgedupon how well they meet their targets.While some of these targets may accordwith activity to implement the GTI, not allof them will, and consequently there may bea conflict in priorities (Lyal & Weitzman,2004). It cannot be assumed that by identi-fying a set of needs for implementing theConvention that this ensures that taxono-mists will start work to meet them. Clearincentives in different forms are needed tochange this situation. Institutional prioritiesand performance indicators might be broad-ened to include relevant targets, somethingthat might involve discussions at govern-ment level between departments chargedwith implementing the CBD and those con-trolling museums, herbaria or universities.There will also certainly have to be fundingconsiderations.

70


A third obstacle to implementation of theGTI is the perception that there will be notaxonomic problem in implementing theconvention, or that it can somehow be over-come by focusing on organisms for whichthere is no problem. This, of course,deprives projects of information on the

majority of species which they willencounter, deprives ecosystem managers oftools with which they might do their job,and deprives countries of knowledge oftheir biodiversity and thus of the chance toassert rights of access and benefit-sharing.

Funding is necessary to address the shortageof taxonomists, of taxonomic informationand of taxonomic infrastructure. In manycases, developing countries have very littleor no physical reference collections of localbiodiversity, nor trained personnel, and indeveloped countries taxonomy has beenunder-resourced for many years, leading to ageneral decline in infrastructure, and adearth of younger professionals.

The CBD is not a funding agency, anddoes not provide financial support forimplementation projects. Instead, it sets outthe policy background which in turn pro-vides a mandate to funding organizationsand other donors to support implementationof the GTI. As taxonomy is a cross-cuttingissue, support to the GTI is not limited toprojects with a taxonomic focus – it alsoincludes taxonomic components of any bio-logical diversity project. Indeed, it is likelythat most taxonomic funding opportunitieslie in projects and programmes aimed ataddressing particular sectors.

This section of the Guide provides anoverview of the main sources of funding forthe GTI, and then gives examples of projectsthat have been funded. Finally, some keypoints that need to be considered in mobiliz-ing funding for the GTI are reviewed.

5.1 Sources of funding for the GTI

The Convention commits each country Partyto provide financial incentives and resourcesfor national biodiversity activities, andrequires developed country Parties to pro-vide financial resources including new andadditional financial resources to enabledeveloping country Parties to meet the costsof implementing measures which fulfil the

obligations of this Convention. A specialfinancial mechanism in this regard wasthereby established and its operation waslater entrusted to the Global EnvironmentFacility – a relatively new multilateral trustfund established to promote internationalcooperation for global environment benefits.Although the GEF is frequently identified asthe main source of funding, this is mostapparent for large-scale projects. Smaller-scale activities tend to take place with fund-ing from other sources. Even the setting upof multinational taxonomic networks hasbeen undertaken more times without GEFfunding than with it.

The GTI PoW and other COP decisionsmake it very clear that funding may besought from many sources. This sectionhighlights a few funding sources, includingall of the types of sources anticipated byParties to the Convention – national sources,the GEF, and other multilateral, regional andbilateral mechanisms. A comprehensive list-ing of sources of biodiversity-related fund-ing is available on the CBD website122.

5.1.1 National support to taxonomy

National budgetary supports to taxonomymay take varied forms depending on theadministrative tradition and culture, and thelevel of available funding may also differaccording to national circumstances andfinancial capabilities. In many countries,taxonomic funding is organized as bud-getary support to such taxonomic institu-tions as museums, universities, libraries,herbaria, arboreta, zoos, botanical gardens,culture collection and seed bank.

In some countries, a significant portionof available funding is channelled throughparticular agencies or foundations. In the


71

5. FUNDING FOR THE GTI

122http://www.biodiv.org/financial/sources.shtml

72


United States, for example, the NationalScience Foundation accounts for about one-fourth of federal support to academic insti-tutions for basic research, and thus is thenation’s principal support of fundamentalacademic research on plant biology, envi-ronmental biology and biodiversity. Its sys-tematic biology and biodiversity inventoriescluster seeks to discover, describe andinventory global species diversity, to ana-lyze and synthesize the information derivedfrom this global discovery effort into pre-dictive classification systems that reflect thehistory of life, and to organize the informa-tion derived from this global program inefficiently retrievable forms that best meetthe needs of science and society.

5.1.2 The Global Environment Facility

When the Convention on BiologicalDiversity was negotiated, governments real-ized that substantial investments would berequired to conserve biological diversity,and agreed that the extent to which develop-ing country Parties will effectively imple-ment their commitments under thisConvention will depend on the effectiveimplementation by developed countryParties of their commitments under thisConvention related to financial resourcesand transfer of technology. A special finan-cial mechanism was thus created to facili-tate flow of new and additional financialresources from developed countries todeveloping countries, and the GlobalEnvironment Facility was officially desig-nated as the institutional structure to operatethe financial mechanism.

The Global Environment Facility operatesas the financial mechanism for several globalenvironmental treaties, in particular thosethat combat climate change, land degrada-tion, loss of biodiversity and persistent

organic pollutants. Although being adminis-tratively linked to the World Bank, theGlobal Environment Facility has its ownindependent organizational identity, includ-ing its own Assembly, Council, Secretariat,three Implementing Agencies (UnitedNations Environment Programme (UNEP),United Nations Development Programme(UNDP) and the World Bank) and sevenExecuting Agencies (Food and AgriculturalOrganization of the United Nations (FAO),United Nations Industrial DevelopmentOrganization (UNIDO), African Develop-ment Bank (ADB), Asian Development Bank(ADB), European Bank for Reconstructionand Development (EBRD), Inter-AmericanDevelopment Bank (IDB), and InternationalFund for Agricultural Development (IFAD)),as well as Scientific and Technical AdvisoryPanel (STAP)).

While designating the Global Environ-ment Facility to operate the financial mech-anism of the Convention, the Conference ofthe Parties established a memorandum ofunderstanding with the GEF Council provid-ing that the GEF financing in the focal areaswill be in full conformity with guidancefrom the Conference of the Parties and itseffectiveness will be reviewed periodically.Thus the GEF operational policy to financetaxonomy needs to be based on guidancefrom the Conference of the Parties. TheConference of the Parties has so far identi-fied the following priority taxonomic areasfor financial support by the GEF:

(i) Identification and monitoring ofwild and domesticated biodiversitycomponents, in particular thoseunder threat;

(ii) Capacity-building, including tax-onomy, to enable developing coun-tries to develop and carry out aninitial assessment for designing,

73


implementing and monitoringprogrammes in accordance withArticle 7, taking into account thespecial need of small island States;

(iii) Country-driven activities withinthe context of its operation pro-grammes to participate in theGlobal Taxonomy Initiative whichtake into account as appropriate,elements of the Suggestions forAction contained in the annex todecision IV/1 D;

(iv) Promotion of awareness of theGlobal Taxonomy Initiative in therelevant activities of the GlobalEnvironment Facility, such asthe Country Dialogue Workshops,and facilitation capacity-buildingin taxonomy, including in itsCapacity Development Initiative;

(v) National and regional taxonomiccapacity-building, as a basis forimplementing the programme ofwork for the Global TaxonomyInitiative, with particular attentionto funding country-driven pilotprojects identified under theGlobal Taxonomy Initiative, tak-ing into consideration the specialneeds of least developed countriesand small island developing States;

(vi) Assistance in the implementation ofthe Global Taxonomy Initiative, andintegration of taxonomic capacity-building activities into thematic andcross-cutting programmes, includingsupporting activities and projects,such as, where appropriate, stand-alone capacity-building projects;

(vii) Implementation of the plannedactivities contained in the pro-gramme of work on the GlobalTaxonomy Initiative, includingtaxonomic needs assessments,

projects with a taxonomic focus orclearly identified taxonomic com-ponents, and regional activities ontaxonomic capacity developmentand access to technology; and

(viii) Projects which help to establishand operationalize their nationalfocal points for the GlobalTaxonomy Initiative and capacity-building activities such as, interalia, taxonomic training relatedto specific taxa and informationtechnologies.

It is expected that GEF support to taxonomywill be centered on the above priority areasidentified by the Conference of the Parties,but the extent to which the GEF will be ableto implement the guidance depends on avariety of factors, including project propo-nents, project-hosting countries, projectmanagers at both country offices and head-quarters of Implementing/Executing Agenciesand of course the GEF Secretariat andCouncil.

In principle, all project proposals forGEF funding must be initiated or driven bythe project hosting countries. This hasbecome all the more apparent under theResource Allocation Framework that wasadopted by the GEF Council in September2005. During the fourth replenishmentperiod of the GEF, eligible countries areallocated ex ante individually or as a groupwith certain amount of resources, and areexpected to reallocate this funding amongnationally prioritized biodiversity projects.

GEF project proposals are first consideredby relevant project managers of country/regional offices or biodiversity desks of anImplementing Agency/Executing Agency,and subsequently submitted for further reviewat the Headquarters of the ImplementingAgency/Executing Agency as well as by the

74


GEF Secretariat. The GEF Chief ExecutiveOfficer can normally approve enabling activ-ity project proposals and medium-sized pro-ject proposals requesting less than US$1million. Project proposals requiring morethan US$1 million must be included in awork program for approval by the GEFCouncil, and individual project briefs mustbe finally endorsed by the GEF ChiefExecutive Officer. Implementing Agenciescan approve funds for project preparation inthe amount of US$25,000.

Project proposals for GEF funding areconsidered mainly through three windows -enabling activity, operational programs, andshort-term response measures, based on theGEF operational strategy. A Small GrantsProgramme has evolved into a standingglobal project whose resources have beenreplenished on a regular basis, and a specialsimplified procedure aiming at fasterapproval has also been developed formedium-sized projects.

Enabling activity (EA) – Grants forenabling activities were initially designed tohelp countries to prepare national strategiesand action plans, and to assess needs, iden-tify priorities and build consensus on partic-ular issues, and are now also used to supportcapacity-building activities. Since 1997, theGEF has issued several guidelines forenabling activities including expeditedapproval procedures, and the need foraddressing taxonomy has been included inthese guidelines. For instance, the ‘RevisedGuidelines for Additional Funding ofBiodiversity Enabling Activities (ExpeditedProcedures)’123 provided for assessingcapacity-building needs and definingcountry-specific priorities for initial assess-ment and monitoring programs, including

taxonomy. The new round of enabling activ-ity is guided by the ‘Operational Guidelinesfor Expedited Funding of National SelfAssessments of Capacity Building Needs’124.The funding ceiling for enabling activityunder expedited procedures for individualcountries has been raised several times, andcurrently stands at US$450,000 for nationalstrategy and action plan, clearing housemechanism, and capacity-related activitiesof all subject areas of the Convention. TheGEF has approved over 300 enabling activ-ity projects for biodiversity, and only alimited number of countries have utilizedthis funding window to address nationalcapacity needs of taxonomy and the GlobalTaxonomy Initiative.

Medium-sized projects (MSPs) –Medium-sized project proposals, limited toa maximum of US$1 million, may be sub-mitted on a rolling basis throughout theyear, and may be approved by the GEFChief Executive Officer. Preparation guide-lines and templates125 have been suggestedby the GEF Secretariat for easy use by pro-ponents when submitting new proposals.MSPs are required to satisfy the require-ments of a GEF operational program orshort-term response measure together with astrategic priority. Several species-basedconservation projects have been financed asmedium-sized projects, but taxonomy-oriented activities in general do not featureprominently in this window of funding.

Full projects (FPs) – Full project propos-als are normally included in a work programcoordinated by the GEF Secretariat forapproval of the GEF Council at a meeting orintersessionally. Most full projects also useproject development facility (PDF) funds tocover project preparatory expenses. GEF

123 http://www.gefweb.org/Documents/enabling_activity_projects/enabling_activity_projects.html124 Ibid125 http://www.gefweb.org/Documents/Medium-Sized_Project_Proposals/MSP_Guidelines/msp_guidelines.html

75


accepts full project proposals based on therequirements of its operational programs, andthe GEF operational programs126 have beendeveloped on arid and semi-arid zoneecosystems (OP1), coastal, marine, andfreshwater ecosystems (OP2), forest ecosys-tems (OP3), mountain ecosystems (OP4),conservation and sustainable use of biologi-cal diversity important to agriculture (OP13),integrated ecosystem management (OP12),and sustainable land management (OP15).These operational programs do not makespecific reference to the Global TaxonomyInitiative, but allow for identification activi-ties and monitoring components.

Short-term response measures – thismodality of funding considers proposedactivities that are not an integral part of anoperational program, such as those with afocus on threatened or endangered speciesor ecosystems, actions to reduce immediatethreats to migratory species, and programsto facilitate implementation of unforeseenopportunities for national action and inter-national cooperation to reduce specific risksof biodiversity loss. Proposals approvedunder short-term response measures includethe popular taxonomy project entitled as“Inventory, Evaluation and Monitoring ofBotanical Diversity in Southern Africa: ARegional Capacity and Institution BuildingNetwork” (SABONET).

Small Grants Programme (SGP) – thisglobal project can offer individual grants ofup to US$50,000 to non-governmental orga-nizations (NGOs) and community-basedorganizations (CBOs). Coordinated byUNDP, participating countries have theirown national coordinator and national steer-ing committee to review and approve pro-ject proposals under the Small Grants

Programme127. The Programme has increas-ingly applied the requirements of the GEFoperational programs to guide its opera-tions, and a number of projects financedunder the Programme involve taxonomicfield work.

5.1.3 Other multilateral sources

Multilateral institutions, including theUnited Nations system entities and regionalcooperation organizations, may make con-tributions to implementation of the GlobalTaxonomy Initiative activities. The UnitedNations Environment Programme (UNEP)and the Food and Agriculture Organisationof the United Nations (FAO) have occasion-ally been involved in several global andregional taxonomic projects. The WorldBank sponsored the Global InvasiveSpecies Programme through the BankNetherlands Partnership Programme and theDevelopment Grant Facility.

Governing bodies of multilateral institu-tions have a general preference for develop-ment-oriented projects, in particular thoserelated to the Millennium DevelopmentGoals, and thus convincing utilitarian evi-dence needs to be built for further taxonomicinitiatives. The United Nations DevelopmentProgramme and regional development bankscan also be tapped for purposes of the GlobalTaxonomy Initiative.

5.1.4 Bilateral sources

According to pledges made by donor coun-tries, official development assistance isexpected to increase significantly in the com-ing years, and thus offers opportunities forincreasing financial support to taxonomy andthe Global Taxonomy Initiative activities.

126 http://www.gefweb.org/Operational_Policies/Operational_Programs/operational_programs.html127 http://sgp.undp.org/

76


Many donor governments are already activein taxonomy-related projects and activities.

Switzerland through the Swiss Agencyfor Development and Cooperation has con-tributed to the BioNET–International Fundsince 1996.

The Darwin Initiative128 is a bilateralprogramme that seeks to make UK expertiseavailable to biodiversity-rich developingcountries. Its focus is supporting implemen-tation of the CBD, and in the process hassupported a number of projects that are verymuch aligned with the GTI. It has supportedmore than 400 projects covering a widerange of subjects related to the conservationand sustainable use of biodiversity in over80 countries around the world. More than50 of these projects have had a major taxo-nomic focus, aligned with the GTI.

The Belgian Development Corporationand the Royal Belgian Institute of NaturalSciences have carried out a number of GTI-related projects129. The focus of this supportfrom Belgium is for institutions or individu-als from developing countries in need oftaxonomic and curatorial training. Suchtraining should invariably have a clearlyidentified output in terms of increased taxo-nomic and/or curatorial capacity for thedeveloping country or its region.

In Sweden, the International Foundationfor Science (IFS) carries out the mission tobuild the scientific capacity of developingcountries in sciences related to the sustain-able management of biological and waterresources. Since 1974, the Foundation hasprovided support to more than 3500grantees in some 100 developing countriesin Africa, Asia and the Pacific, and LatinAmerica and the Caribbean.

These four countries are examples butthere are many others who also support

taxonomic projects. Bilateral assistance oftenseeks to promote scientific and technicallinkages between target countries and donorcountries, and thus the extent to which bilat-eral assistance can support taxonomic activi-ties very much depends upon efforts ofpartner scientific organizations or institutionsof donor countries. Successfully financedtaxonomic projects normally involve initia-tives of taxonomic personnel and institutionsin a developed country and effective involve-ment of taxonomic personnel and institutionsin a developing country and strong endorse-ment of the latter’s government.

5.1.5 Nongovernmental sources

There are a variety of funding sources out-side the governmental sector, such as rev-enues generated by taxonomic institutionsand conservation organizations, grant-making foundations and corporate charities.Major taxonomic institutions are often in aposition to attract financial flows fromdonor governments, businesses and individ-uals, and may channel portion of such flowsto their partner institutions in the develop-ing world. For instance, the MissouriBotanic Gardens supported the develop-ment and testing of taxonomic tools andcontributed towards red listing initiatives.The Royal Botanic Gardens KEW has beena long-term partner in botanical researchand conservation to many botanical institu-tions worldwide.

Conservation organizations, particularlyinitiated in major donor countries and with aworldwide network, have emerged as a sig-nificant and stable source of global support tobiodiversity activities in the developingnations. In 2004, five major internationalconservation organizations attracted US$773

128 http://www.darwin.gov.uk/129 http://bch-cbd.naturalsciences.be/belgium/cooperation/aa-temp/gti/call.htm

77


million from individuals, US$96 millionfrom corporations and US$270 million fromfoundations. These organizations haveproven to be not only an effective tool fortapping dispersed private donations from thedeveloped countries, but they also contributeto sensitization of biodiversity concerns andgalvanization of political support for biodi-versity action in both developing countriesand developed countries. Unlike develop-ment agencies with ever changing priorities,many of these organizations have soleagenda on biodiversity and related areas, andalso have professional tendency towards newdiscovery and fundamental research.

Private grant-making foundations areanother source of funding for taxonomicactivities. The Rufford Maurice LaingFoundation, the Moore Family Foundation;the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation; theMAVA Foundation for Nature Conservation(MAVA Stiftung für Naturschutz) are majordonors for the IUCN Red List Programme.The MacArthur Foundation sponsored theAfrican Biodiversity Training Program - a collaborative project between the FieldMuseum of Natural History Chicago andMakerere University to train graduate studentsstudying birds, amphibians, small mammalsand fungi. The Alfred P. Sloan Foundationsupported the creation of the Consortium forthe Barcode of Life (CBOL) which is hostedby the Smithsonian Institution’s NationalMuseum of Natural History.

5.1.6 Special fund for the GTIunder BioNET-Internationaland other organizations

The COP, at its eighth meeting in 2006,invited BioNET-International and other rel-evant organizations, in consultation with theCoordination Mechanism for the GTI, to set

up a special fund for the GTI, and to reportto COP-9 on progress. Within one week ofCOP-8 there was already one inquiry from acountry about how to make use of the fund.The modalities of the operation of the fundare expected to be established soon, and it ishoped that donors will contribute gener-ously to the fund. Donors that already sup-port GTI-related activities may use the fundas a means to channel some of their support.

5.2 Examples of GTI projects

This section provides some examples oftaxonomic projects financed by varioussources of funding, including throughnational, multilateral and non-governmentalsources. The projects may not have beenexplicitly conceptualized under the GlobalTaxonomy Initiative, but they do make clearcontributions to the implementation ofthe activities envisaged by the GlobalTaxonomy Initiative.

5.2.1 National Project – Partnershipsfor Enhancing Expertise inTaxonomy (US)

The US National Science Foundation (NSF)has established a special competition,Partnerships for Enhancing Expertise inTaxonomy (PEET)130, to support competi-tively reviewed research projects that targetgroups of poorly known organisms. Projectsfinanced by the program must train new tax-onomists and must translate current exper-tise into electronic databases and otherproducts with broad accessibility to thescientific community. Many U.S. academicinstitutions and non-academic not-for-profitorganizations including academic institu-tions, botanical gardens, freshwater and

130 http://www.nsf.gov/funding/pgm_summ.jsp?pims_id=5451&org=BIO&from=fund

78


marine institutes, and natural history muse-ums, have been involved in the partnershipsprogram, and collaborating scientists in for-eign countries can be accommodatedthrough consultant mechanisms adminis-tered by the submitting U.S. organization.Some eighty taxonomic projects have beensince 1994 financed by this program in theamount of over US$46 million.

Application for this program follows thegeneral guidelines contained in the NSFGrant Proposal Guide (GPG). Project pro-posals (maximum 15 pages) generally needto address five themes: taxonomic focus,methods of study, training, conceptualissues and dissemination of results. There isno co-financing requirement for proposalsunder this program.

5.2.2 GEF Project – The IndonesianBiodiversity Collection Project

The Indonesian Biodiversity CollectionProject received a $7 million grant over sixyears from the GEF through the WorldBank131. The aim of the project was tostrengthen institutional capacity of theResearch and Development Center forBiology in Indonesia. The project had fourcomponents:

• Project Management and Coordination(staffing, management, institutionaland sustainability issues);

• Systematic Collections and Research(storage, restoration, stabilization, andorganization);

• Collections Information SystemsManagement (operation of theIndonesian Biodiversity InformationSystem and development of ITskills); and

• Scientific Collaboration and Services(interns from Indonesian universities,mentors for specialist assistance incertain taxa, degree-and non-degreetraining, and publications).

In the Bogor Zoology Museum all speci-mens have been rehabilitated, moved andre-housed in a new 8,000 m², two-storey,purpose-built museum, donated by theGovernment of Japan. The new collectionhalls have state-of-the-art environmentalcontrol systems, with air conditioning sys-tem, dehumidifiers, hygroscopic wall pan-els, and all-new storage systems such asmetal cabinets, drawers, unit trays andcompactors. In the Bogor Herbarium nearly200,000 specimens have so far beenremounted on acid-free archival materialsand re-stored in insect-proof metal cabinets.Air-conditioned rooms are provided forbiosystematic studies. Type specimens aresegregated and housed in a separate air-conditioned room. Nearly 1000 full-size,insect-proof metal cabinets have replacedthe old metal boxes. The use of toxic chem-icals for preservation has been stopped andreplaced with drying and freezing technol-ogy in both institutes.

Eighteen staff members, including tennew recruits, are pursuing higher degrees (5PhDs and 13 masters) in taxonomy. In bothinstitutes all collection managers have beentrained in collection management in leadinginstitutes abroad. Specialists from around theworld are coming to Bogor as ‘mentors’ tohelp organize parts of the collection and toshare their experience with staff. Internsfrom university herbaria across Indonesiahave been hosted in the Herbarium andMuseum for 3-6 months to expand the

131 http://www-wds.worldbank.org/servlet/WDS_IBank_Servlet?pcont=details&eid=000009265_3961219143409

79


benefits and experience gained beyond thecentral facilities. This has stimulated interestin, and attention to, the roles of collections inbiodiversity conservation and establishedfirm relationships among national specialists.

The specimen-based Indonesian Bio-diversity Information System has beendeveloped. It consists of two databases(plants and animals), containing about240,000 plant and 80,000 animal specimenrecords respectively. The project has alsofacilitated a publication program, mainly ofIndonesian-language field-guides to pro-mote biodiversity awareness. Nineteen titleshave been produced.

5.2.3 GEF Project – SABONET(the Southern African BotanyDiversity Network)

The Southern African Botanical DiversityNetwork (SABONET) is a capacity-build-ing network of southern African herbariaand botanic gardens, with the objective ofdeveloping local botanical expertise. Theten countries participating in SABONETwere Angola, Botswana, Lesotho, Malawi,Mozambique, Namibia, South Africa,Swaziland, Zambia, and Zimbabwe.SABONET’s aims were to develop a strongcore of professional botanists, taxonomists,horticulturists, and plant diversity special-ists within the ten countries of southernAfrica, competent to inventory, monitor,evaluate and conserve the botanical diver-sity of the region in the face of specificdevelopment challenges, and to respond tothe technical and scientific needs of theConvention on Biological Diversity.

Although SABONET was not set up as aGTI project and, indeed, antedates the GTI,it meets a number of GTI objectives and canbe used as a model. SABONET was a GEFProject implemented by the UNDP. South

Africa’s National Botanical Institute (NBI)was the Executing Agency, responsible forthe overall management and administrationof the project. In addition to the GEF/UNDPfunding, the project was co-funded by theUSAID/IUCN ROSA through the NETCAB(Regional Networking and CapacityBuilding Initiative) Programme. SABONETran from 1996 to 2005.

Southern Africa, as defined within theproject, has a flora of over 30,000 species offlowering plants and ferns, including thewhole of one of the world’s six floristickingdoms (the Cape Floristic Region,known locally as ‘fynbos’). The region alsoincludes seventeen centres of plant diversityas identified by the IUCN/WWF:

• Arid and semi-arid ecosystems (withroughly half of the world’s knownsucculents);

• Coastal, marine and freshwaterecosystems (including several RAM-SAR and World Heritage Sites);

• Forest ecosystems (most of which areunder some form of threat); and

• Mountain ecosystems.

Despite this great botanical diversity, thecountries of the region are poorly equippedin both infrastructure and human resourcesto inventory, monitor, and evaluate this her-itage. Over the last few decades, support forthe national herbaria and botanic gardens ofsouthern Africa has been intermittent andsub-critical. In addition, many plant speciesare threatened with extinction, mainlythrough agricultural, mining, industrial, andurban activities. The 1997 IUCN Red Listof Threatened Plants listed 2,652 plantspecies as threatened in the ten countries ofsouthern Africa.

The outputs of SABONET included aproject newsletter, occasional report series,

80


trained southern African plant taxonomists,horticulturists and plant diversity special-ists, electronic information systems on theregion’s plant diversity (including maps andrelational databases), regional human andinfrastructural inventories, regional andnational plant checklists and Red Data lists,and a Regional Botanic Gardens Conserva-tion Strategy.

Additional information on SABONETcan be found on the internet132.

5.2.4 GEF Project – Botanicaland Zoological Taxonomic Networksin Eastern Africa (BOZONET):Linking Conservation to Taxonomy

This UNDP project will support the coun-tries of East Africa (Ethiopia, Kenya,Tanzania, and Uganda) to remove barriersto the flow of relevant taxonomic informa-tion, from networked centres of expertise,to the range of end-users of such informa-tion, and to assist those end-users in theuse of this information for the sustainableconservation of biodiversity, throughinventory, description, monitoring, anddissemination.

5.2.5 GEF Project – BiodiversityResources Development Projectfor Costa Rica

The Biodiversity Resources DevelopmentProject for Costa Rica133 was funded by theGEF through the World Bank and ran from1998 to 2005. Its objective was to demon-strate that increased knowledge and informa-tion about particular species enhance theirvalue and increase the marketability of biodi-versity services, by enhancing the knowledge

of Costa Rica’s species, testing methodolo-gies for undertaking a cost effectiveinventory, and maximizing the value of thosespecies and the social return to the invest-ment in knowledge through conservation andsustainable use. The project’s four compo-nents were:

• Develop a framework for undertakinga biodiversity inventory of prioritysub-groups within four major taxo-nomic groups at selected sites withinfive conservation areas;

• Undertake collection and cataloguingactivities related to the inventory;

• Develop and test potential applicationsbased on the inventory; and

• Strengthen the institutional capacity atthe National Biodiversity Institute(INBio).

The project built on work previously carriedout by INBio134. The taxonomic groupsincluded in this project are Hymenoptera,Coleoptera, Diptera, and fungi. These fourgroups were chosen because, together, theycover a wide spectrum of species richnessand a broad range of niches and habitats.They also cover a range of collecting andcataloguing logistical challenges and repre-sent a range of prior taxonomic knowledgeand difficulty. Species from each group arerepresented at the national and internationallevel, and can provide experience relevantto other countries. These four taxonomicgroups are expected to generate a largenumber of potential applications and poten-tial uses.

Five conservation areas were chosen assites for collection activities, selected

132 http://www.sabonet.org.za/index.htm133 http://www-wds.worldbank.org/servlet/WDS_IBank_Servlet?pcont=details&eid=000009265_3980312102353134 http://www.inbio.ac.cr/en/default.html

81


because of their high coverage of CostaRican biodiversity, significant endemism,and outstanding biological importance forCosta Rica and Meso-America, as well astheir human, financial, and infrastructureresources.

Training of parataxonomists was under-taken by international specialists and CostaRican scientists. The project is notable forthe close collaboration between staff ofnorthern institutes and local personnel.

5.2.6 Bilateral – Exampleprojects supported by theUK Darwin Initiative

The project “Taxonomic capacity-buildingin support of biodiversity conservation inThailand”135, funded through the UKDarwin Initiative, aimed to establish capac-ity in Thailand for developing and maintain-ing national reference collections andidentification facilities for insects in supportof biodiversity conservation and research inThailand. The outputs included keystoneinsect reference collections, expandable tax-onomic database, expandable interactivewebsite facility, application of remote sens-ing and GIS techniques, training of Thaimuseum staff and partners.

The project “Taxonomic training for aneglected biodiversity hotspot within LaoPDR”136 aimed at providing training intropical botanical taxonomy to staff in keyinstitutes in Lao PDR, and to establish thefoundation for National Species Databaseand Threatened Plant List. The outputsincluded: multilingual botanical dictionary,National Species Database, ThreatenedPlant List, plant checklist, incorporation ofcollections into herbaria, and scientificpapers.

5.2.7 Bilateral – Example projectssupported by the Belgian DevelopmentCorporation and the Royal BelgianInstitute of Natural Sciences

The projects funded in 2004, the first yearof the seed money availability, were:

• Herpetological Species Richness andCommunity Structure on the KaieteurNational Park Tepui (Guyana)

• Biodiversity assessment at three pro-tected areas in northwest Cambodia

• Training Program for the Study ofBiodiversity and Management ofRodents and Shrews in Eastern Congo(Kisangani)

5.2.8 Regional EuropeanUnion Initiatives

At European level there are several projectsthat focus on elements of the GTI. One ofthese is the European Distributed Institute ofTaxonomy (EDIT137), which is a networksponsored by the European Commissionwhich aims at starting to overcome the taxo-nomic impediment through collaboration andjoint work programmes, including capacity-building. It has a budget of almost 12 millioneuros for the five year period 2006-2011. Asecond is the European Network forBiodiversity Information (ENBI138), whichfocuses on information-sharing.

5.2.9 Non-governmental – Investingin Nature: an eco-partnership betweenthe HSBC Group, WWF, BotanicGardens Conservation Internationaland Earthwatch

In 2002, the HSBC Group established, ineco-partnership with WWF, Botanical

135 http://www.darwin.gov.uk/projects/details/13003.html136 http://www.darwin.gov.uk/projects/details/13007.html137 http://www.e-taxonomy.eu/index.php138 http://www.enbi.info/forums/enbi/index.php

82


Gardens Conservation International (BGCI)and Earthwatch, the Investing in Natureprogramme139 with US$50 million to fundconservation projects around the world overfive years. Through BGCI, a US$11.6 mil-lion donation from the programme will funda living gene bank in botanic gardensaround the world to protect 20,000 endan-gered plan species. It also helps BGCI raisepublic awareness of the value of plantsthrough its 500 member gardens in 111countries, revitalizing conservation in 16major gardens in Argentina, Brazil, India,Indonesia, and the Middle East, and fundingeducation programmes in Canada, China,Japan, the UK and the US.

5.3 Mobilizing funding

Obtaining funds to support GTI activities ischallenging. The whole purpose of the GTIis to remove the taxonomic impediment toimplementation of the CBD by providingthe taxonomic information and skillsrequired in a timely manner. In this context,it is critical that proposals for GTI-relatedactivities show the linkages between thoseactivities and achievement of the objectivesof the CBD. The introduction and rationaleof the GTI programme of work is a usefulstarting point in making those linkages.

Linking projects to identified needs andpriorities – An important first step in attract-ing funding is clarifying needs and priorities.Assessment of taxonomic needs and capaci-ties is the first objective of the programme ofwork for the GTI. Funding should generallybe allocated primarily to activities that areparticularly critical at national or regionallevel. This usually means a focus on theneeds of particular users. At the same time,

however, there is a need for investment inbasic alpha taxonomy, revisionary work andcataloguing in the long-term, because thetaxonomic impediment is partly attributableto the unavailability of names for a vastmajority of species. Donor agencies willneed to be made aware that in some cases thetaxonomic work that is more directly alignedwith their priorities rests on basic taxonomicstudies that have not been undertaken. Assuch, these form a necessary part of theprocess of implementation and should beconsidered eligible for funding. In any case,it is absolutely essential that potential donorsare convinced of a need, and how that needrelates to achievement of the CBD’s objec-tives, otherwise the likelihood of success inmobilizing funding will be lower.

Understanding existing funding –Another key to mobilizing funding is under-standing what other projects and initiativeshave been or will be funded. This allowsproposals to be developed that build onexisting or past work in a complementarymanner without unnecessary duplication.Governments will need to have a goodunderstanding of past and current projects atnational level in order to conduct theirnational taxonomic needs assessments.External resources may also be available,including the reports of the GEF and UKDarwin Initiative on their contributions tofunding the GTI. In addition, governmentsrecently requested the secretariats of theConvention and the GEF to conduct a jointanalysis of funded projects related to theGTI – this analysis should be completed inthe near future and will be made availablethrough the GTI Portal.

Understanding how to prepare fundingproposals – Taxonomic fund-raisinginvolves expertise in both taxonomy and in

139 http://www.hsbc.com/hsbc/csr/community/investing-in-nature

83


fund-raising. In cases where taxonomistsand other biodiversity-specialists are respon-sible for developing projects, they may findfund-raising to be a challenge. Fortunately,there are some mechanisms available fordeveloping fund-raising skills. For example,the COP has recently proposed a projectdevelopment seminar, focussing on identi-fied country-level needs, to promote formu-lation of country-driven projects, exploringdevelopment of new projects or enhance-ment of existing projects140. This seminar isintended primarily for countries that havealready identified their needs or have sub-mitted proposals for GTI-related projects.Some countries are currently assessing taxo-nomic needs (see section 3.2.1), and theseminar will likely be convened once thoseassessments are completed.

There are many different sources offunding for biodiversity activities includingthe GTI. Multilateral, regional and bilateralfinancial and development agencies have

been the main sources of international assis-tance. Governments, non-governmentalorganisations, the private sector andresearch institutions are all active in financ-ing, or mobilizing finance for, conservationand sustainable use of biological diversity.In spite of this diversity of sources, there aresome commonalities between them whichshould be recognized in any effort to mobi-lize funding (see Text-box 5-1). Generalsteps in developing an application for fund-ing are highlighted in text box 5-2.

Awareness-raising – Funding decisionsare partly political, requiring a balanceamong competing national and global prior-ities. Consequently, the taxonomic share ofavailable finances will depend in part on theability of the taxonomic community to raiseawareness about taxonomic needs and tolobby governments to factor taxonomy intobudget allocation decisions. All stakehold-ers should therefore take a long-term inter-est in awareness-raising.

140 decision VIII/3, paragraph 15

In considering applications to a funding body to implement the GTI, the following issuesshould be considered:

• Alignment with remit of funding body. All funding bodies, whether national, bilateralor multinational, have their individual remit, limiting what and who they are able tofund. Within this remit they will have priorities. Both the priorities and the remit mayor may not be closely aligned to the GTI, and any application for funding must fit thefunding body criteria and priorities as well as those of the GTI to be successful.

• Clarity on purpose of project in terms of donor priorities.• Explicit linkage to CBD implementation. Taxonomy is unlikely to be supported for its

own sake by many donors in the development and implementation sector (funders inmore academic sectors may take a different view). However, taxonomy in support ofidentified needs stands a better chance to be funded (e.g. conservation, sustainableuse, quarantine, indicators of environmental damage). Many donors will require an

Box 5-1 Common requirements of funding bodies that may support the GlobalTaxonomy Initiative

explicit and demonstrable link between the taxonomic work being proposed and theoutcome, in terms of CBD implementation.

• Linkage to national and regional priorities:− National biodiversity strategy and action plan;− Capacity Development Initiative;− Country Dialogue Workshops;− National programmes.

• Consistency with International Conventions.• Clarity of linkage between activities and outputs (i.e. if we do these activities we will

get these outputs, and therefore achieve the desired product).• Financial sustainability:

− “A GEF project must be cost-effective, replicable and include an incentive-baseddesign to ensure financial sustainability after the conclusion of GEF support.”

− Financial sustainability can be demonstrated through, for example:a. Direct financial commitment from the government;b. Indirect commitment through allocation;c. Stakeholder contribution;d. Trust funds;e. Long-term co-funding.

• Technical sustainability:− Data collection and monitoring techniques need to be realistic and within the

country’s and institution’s long-term capacity;− Data collection needs to be replicable and standardized (both nationally and regionally);− Technical training needs to be applied, maintained and captured within the relevant

agencies. Continuity of human resources is critical. Absence of staff for trainingand long-term maintenance should not jeopardize project goals;

− Technical objectives and relevance needs frequent review by a technically-qualifiedgroup.

• Socio-political sustainability:− Include all political parties/stakeholders in project design (political cycles rarely

conform to project lifetimes);− Identify Focal Points / contacts and discuss aims at an early stage;− Plan for continuous sensitisation and awareness within the project (this helps

address changes in political parties, policy amendments and staff movements);− Review the social status and perceptions of the domestic population as it relates to

project objectives – the better to realign and improve;− Identify the needs of decision-makers and politicians and try to embrace within

project concepts to ensure commitment and sustainability.

84



1. Become familiar with national policies of the country or countries concerned, includ-ing the NBSAPs and the outcomes of any taxonomic needs assessments.

2. Become familiar with the COP decisions on the GTI, and those relevant to any the-matic areas or other cross-cutting issues of the Convention to which the proposedproject is relevant.

3. Ensure that the project meets needs identified within national policies, or is consis-tent with them, and is consistent with the CBD Articles and relevant decisions.

4. Consider possible donors, multilateral (e.g. GEF (through UNDP, UNEP, WorldBank), or the European Union), bilateral (e g. USAID, CIDA, GTZ, DFID, DANIDA,SIDA) or partnership (e.g. the UK Darwin Initiative, the USA’s NSF). There may alsobe possibilities through the Development Banks and other UN agencies such as theFAO. It is important to remember that for projects with a stated global benefit(Medium Sized and Full Projects, of <$1,000,000 and >$1,000,000 respectively) theGEF only provides co-financing, not the full amount.

5. Especially if considering a multilateral or bilateral donor make contact with:a. The National GTI Focal Point(s), if appointedb. The National CBD Focal Pointc. The National or regional representative of the donor body (this may be at the

appropriate embassy or consulate if a bilateral arrangement is being considered)In the case of the GEF:

d. The local representative of the appropriate GEF implementing agency (UNEP /UNDP / World Bank).

e. The National GEF Operational Focal Point, who will have to endorse the project.And discuss the proposed project with them to establish its suitability and develop theinitial funding proposal.

Box 5-2 Steps in developing a project application for funding

85

86


6.1 Taxonomic tools and informationsources

There are a number of tools available toassist taxonomists and others to meet taxo-nomic needs under the Convention. Whilean exhaustive list cannot be given here,some of the more important and useful toolsare reviewed, many of which are availableon the internet.

6.1.1 Nomenclature references

Stability of scientific nomenclature is impor-tant141. Taxonomists, editors and reviewersneed to be aware of the provisions of the var-ious Codes of Nomenclature. These codescan be acquired as hard copy or through theinternet.

Zoology. The International Code ofZoological Nomenclature (InternationalComission on Zoological Nomenclature,1999, ISBN 0 85301 006 4) is available on theinternet142 or from the Secretariat of the ICZN,c/o The Natural History Museum - CromwellRoad - London SW7 5BD – UK. In addition,Thompson BIOSIS maintains a nomenclaturalglossary for zoology on the internet143.

Botany. The International Code ofBotanical Nomenclature (currently the ‘StLoius Code’, to replace the earlier ‘TokyoCode’) is available on line144. The printed andonly currently official version of the Code hasbeen published as ‘International Code ofBotanical Nomenclature (St Louis Code)’.Regnum Vegetabile 138. Koeltz ScientificBooks, Königstein. ISBN 3-904144-22-7.

Bacteriology. The International Code ofNomenclature of Bacteria (1990 Revision)has been published by the American Societyfor Microbiology, Washington DC. (Lapage,et al. (eds), 1992). The ‘List of bacterialnames with standing in nomenclature’includes, alphabetically and chronologically,the nomenclature of bacteria and the nomen-clatural changes as cited in the Approved Listsof Bacterial Names or validly published inthe International Journal of SystematicBacteriology or in the International Journalof Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiologyis available on line145.

Virology. The International Code ofVirus Classification and Nomenclature isavailable on line146 and in Regenmortelet al. (2000). The International Committeeon Taxonomy of Viruses web site147 hosts orlinks to a vast amount of information onvirus taxonomy, and is a vital resource.

6.1.2 Other taxonomic toolsThere are a number of tools for analysis andcompiling specialist databases that are avail-able for use by those studying and analysingbiodiversity from the taxonomic perspec-tive. The list given below is by no meansexhaustive, and only serves to exemplifywhat is available. There is no uniformity inthe descriptions of the packages, since theseare based on information provided on theweb sites explaining or promoting the prod-ucts. The ‘Phylogeny Programs’ web site148

lists additional phylogenetic analysis pro-grammes, and also provides links to servers

6. INFORMATION SOURCES AND USEFUL CONTACTS

141 see decision IV/1.D in annex 8 to this Guide142 http://www.iczn.org/iczn/index.jsp143 http://www.biosis.org/support/glossary/144 http://www.bgbm.fu-berlin.de/iapt/nomenclature/code/SaintLouis/0000St.Luistitle.htm145 http://www.bacterio.cict.fr/index.html146 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/ICTV/rules.html147 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/ICTV/148 http://evolution.genetics.washington.edu/phylip/software.html

87


providing phylogenetic analyses on linewithout charge.

ArcView149 is a desktop geographic infor-mation system. With ArcView one can createintelligent, dynamic maps using data fromvirtually any source and across most popularcomputing platforms. ArcView provides thetools to allow one to work with maps, data-base tables, charts, and graphics simultane-ously. One can also use multimedia links toadd pictures, sound, and video to maps.

Biótica©150 is designed to handle curator-ial, nomenclatural, geographical, biblio-graphical and ecological data. Its purpose isto assist the capture and updating of suchdata.

BioLink151 is designed for those workingwith taxon- and specimen-based informa-tion, particularly taxonomists, ecologists,collection managers and biogeographers. Itis suitable for use by individual researchers,large collection-holding institutions, orglobal collaborations. The programme man-ages taxon-based information such asnomenclature, distribution, classification,ecology, morphology, illustrations, multi-media and literature. Specimen-based infor-mation includes collection sites, collectorsand collection dates, museum storage loca-tions, loans and accession and cataloguenumbers. BioLink also records informationon ecological characteristics, traps and bulksamples.

Biota 2152 manages specimen-based biodi-versity and collections data for ecologists,biodiversity inventories, and collections man-agers. It can manage images and literaturecitation records linked to species, specimen,

collection and locality records. It alsoincludes a Web server offering query-basedaccess to data and images.

The DELTA153 format (DEscriptionLanguage for TAxonomy) is a flexiblemethod for encoding taxonomic descriptionsfor computer processing. It has been adoptedby the International Taxonomic DatabasesWorking Group (TDWG) as a standard fordata exchange. DELTA-format data can beused to produce natural-language descrip-tions, interactive or conventional keys,cladistic or phenetic classifications, andinformation-retrieval systems.

DiGIR154 is a protocol and a set of toolsfor linking a community of independentdatabases into a single, searchable “virtual”collection. The DiGIR protocol was devel-oped by the University of KansasBiodiversity Research Center Informaticsgroup in collaboration with the Museum ofVertebrate Zoology at UC Berkeley and theCalifornia Academy of Sciences. DiGIR iscurrently a public open source project withan international team of contributors, includ-ing Centro de Referência em InformaçãoAmbiental (CRIA), Brazil. It, along withBioCASE, is used to link many of the dataproviders to GBIF.

GARP155 (Genetic Algorithm for Rule-set Production) is an algorithm that deter-mines characteristics of a species nativehabitat based on environmental dataobserved at known collection points. AGARP analysis looks for similarities in theenvironmental profiles of the collectionlocations and forms conclusions about therange of the species based on factors such as

149 http://www.esri.com/software/arcview/150 http://www.conabio.gob.mx/informacion/biotica_ingles/doctos/acerca_biotica.html151 http://www.biolink.csiro.au/index.html152 http://viceroy.eeb.uconn.edu/biota153 http://biodiversity.uno.edu/delta/154 http://www.specifysoftware.org/Informatics/informaticsdigir/155 http://www.specifysoftware.org/Informatics/informaticsdesktopgarp/

88


temperature, precipitation, elevation, andsoil type.

ITIS Taxonomic Workbench156 - TheITIS Taxonomic Workbench is a Windows-based software tool used for editing andmanipulating taxonomic data for submis-sion into the ITIS online system. It coversnames relationships, references, and distrib-utional data.

KE EMu157 provides collections man-agement facilities for museums, art gal-leries, herbaria and botanic gardens. KEEMu is a feature rich museum managementsystem designed to provide comprehensivemanagement and access to very large anddiverse collections. Unlike other museumsoftware, KE EMu integrates an extensiblemulti-discipline catalogue with interpreta-tive information and multimedia resources.Natural history support includes taxonomicdefinitions, specimen identification, typestatus, field trips and a gazetteer. KE EMusupports multi-discipline querying withautomatic adjustment of display based onthe object’s type. EMu supports all museummanagement functions, including acces-sioning, deaccessioning, program and exhi-bition development and general eventmanagement, loans and external move-ments, internal locations and internal move-ment histories, conservation and conditionchecks, insurance, indemnity, valuation. Allmanagement modules conform to the‘SPECTRUM’ standard for museum docu-mentation. EMu allows association of spec-imen data, names, images, documentationand other information. It is used by manymajor museums. Supporting a range of

industry standards, including DiGIR,Darwin Core, XML and Dublin Core, KEEMu is used by the world’s largest naturalhistory museums.

Linnaeus II158 facilitates biodiversity doc-umentation and species identification. It isdevised for systematists and biodiversityresearchers. It supports the creation of taxo-nomic databases, the construction of easy-to-use identification keys, and allows the displayand comparison of distribution patterns.

LUCID159 is a set of programmes thatcan be used for creating and editing identi-fication keys. It also handles with imagesand taxonomic descriptions.

MacClade160 provides theory and toolsfor the graphic and interactive analysis ofmolecular and morphological data, phy-logeny, and character evolution. Theprogram includes many tools for data manip-ulation, including molecular sequence align-ment. MacClade reconstructs and displayscharacter evolution on the phylogenetic tree,and, as the user manipulates the tree onscreen, the program gives feedback via treegraphics, statistics, and charts. Systematistsand other evolutionary biologists can use itsflexible tools to analyze phylogeny and char-acter evolution, and its ease of use allowsbeginning students to grasp phylogeneticprinciples in an interactive environment.

Mantis161 is a biological database man-ager that can store taxonomic and specimendata, images and sounds. It includes manage-ment tools for citations, specimen loans, andaddresses. It can generate publication-ready“Material examined” lists and publication-ready “Specimen measurements” tables. It

156 http://www.itis.usda.gov/twb.html157 http://www.kesoftware.com/emu/158 http://www.eti.uva.nl/Products/Linnaeus.html159 http://www.lucidcentral.com/160 http://www.sinauer.com/detail.php?id=4707161 http://140.247.119.145/Mantis/

89


can store information about parasites, hostplants etc. and includes label design tools.

MEKA162 is a programme to enable rapididentification of biological specimens. Theuser picks character states present in speci-mens from a list of possibilities. As the char-acter states are scored by user selection,MEKA eliminates taxa that no longer matchthe list of scored character states. Windowsdisplay different aspects of the underlyingdatabase. As the identification progresses thewindows are updated automatically. An indexscreen makes it easy to find and score partic-ular classes of character states. MEKA allowsthe user to perform identifications by scoringcharacter states in any order, making itpossible to identify fragmentary Specimens.

Mesquite163 is software for evolutionarybiology, designed to help biologists analyzecomparative data about organisms. Its empha-sis is on phylogenetic analysis, but some of itsmodules concern population genetics, whileothers do non-phylogenetic multivariateanalysis. Because it is modular, the analysesavailable depend on the modules installed.Analyses include, reconstruction of ancestralstates (parsimony, likelihood), tests of processof character evolution, including correlation,Simulation of character evolution (categori-cal, DNA, continuous), parametric bootstrap-ping (integration with programs such asPAUP and NONA), morphometrics (PCA,CVA, geometric morphometrics), and coales-cence (simulations, other calculations), treecomparisons and simulations (tree similarity,Markov speciation models).

NONA164 is a Windows commandline/text program used to search for most

parsimonious trees, calculate consensustrees, etc. It is extremely fast, in generalMUCH faster than competing software.Winclada165 is written to utilize NONAeither directly as a search engine for phylo-genetic analysis, or the two programs maybe used separately.

PAUP166 (‘Phylogenetic Analysis UsingParsimony’) is a widely-used program usedfor cladistic analysis based on the input of acharacter matrix. It can analyse both mor-phological and molecular data, and includesparsimony, distance matrix, invariants, andmaximum likelihood methods as well asmany indices and statistical tests.

Platypus167 - Platypus is a relationaldatabase program developed by the ABRSFauna Online project that is used to auto-matically compile and generate the webfiles for the Australian Faunal Directory. Itmanages taxonomic, geographic, ecologi-cal, host-taxon, palaeontological, biblio-graphic and graphic information, as well asbotanical names and specimen collectiondata Data compiled in Platypus can readilybe made available to GBIF. The expectedusers are taxonomists, collection managers,ecologists; and compilers of checklists, cat-alogues, bibliographies, graphics and biodi-versity information.

Specify168 is a research application, adatabase, and network interface for biologi-cal collections information. It managesspecimen data such as descriptions of col-lecting locations, participants and determi-nation histories as well as information aboutcollections transactions such as loans,exchanges, accessions and gifts. It is

162 http://www.mip.berkeley.edu/meka/163 http://mesquiteproject.org/mesquite/mesquite.html164 http://www.cladistics.com/about_nona.htm165 http://www.cladistics.com/166 http://paup.csit.fsu.edu/167 http://www.deh.gov.au/biodiversity/abrs/online-resources/software/platypus/index.html168 htttp://www.specifysoftware.org/Specify

90


designed to facilitate accurate, consistentand efficient data entry. For example, a useronly has to enter information about a loca-tion once and that description then appliesto all events and specimens that reference it.Similarly, information about a person onlyhas to be entered once, and that person canthen be associated with specimens as a col-lector, donor, determiner, borrower or loanprovider. Specify can serve XML-structuredspecimen records using the DiGIR protocol,now used for many collections.

TreeBASE169 is a relational database ofphylogenetic information hosted by theUniversity at Buffalo. TreeBASE stores phylo-genetic trees and the data matrices used to gen-erate them from published research papers.TreeBASE accepts all types of phylogeneticdata (e.g., trees of species, trees of populations,trees of genes) representing all biotic taxa.

6.2 Key partners

There are an increasing number of nationaland international initiatives with objectivessupporting or congruent with those of theGTI. Annex 7 provides contact informationfor some of the key bodies and organiza-tions that contribute to the GTI. This sectionprovides details on two key institutions thatplay leading roles in the implementation ofthe GTI programme of work, namelyBioNET-INTERNATIONAL (with a focuson capacity-building) and the GlobalBiodiversity Information Facility (with afocus on information-sharing). There is alsoa short explanation about the CBD’s clear-ing-house mechanism.

BioNET-INTERNATIONAL170, theGlobal Network for Taxonomy, is a global

initiative for capacity-building in taxonomyin developing countries. It is comprised ofsub-regional LOOPs (Locally Organised andOperated Partnerships) of developingcountry institutions, supported by a consortium of developed country institutions,and managed by the BioNET-INTERNA-TIONAL Technical Secretariat. Its purpose isto enable developing countries to achieverealistic self-reliance in taxonomy to supportregional and national programmes for eradi-cation of poverty, via sustainable use ofnatural resources and agricultural develop-ment, and conservation of biodiversity(including implementation of the Conventionon Biological Diversity). BioNET-INTER-NATIONAL and its LOOPs have been activein developing and implementing the GTI.Building on past collaboration, the BioNETand CBD Secretariats have agreed tostrengthen cooperation at the LOOP andglobal levels, with efforts particularlyfocussed on the 2010 biodiversity target.Areas identified for joint work include tax-onomy-related aspects of the clearing-housemechanism, biosafety, technology transferand, via the Global Taxonomy Initiative,other areas of the Convention. EstablishedLOOPs exist in the Caribbean (CARINET),Northern, East, West and southern Africa(NAFRINET, EAFRINET, WAFRINETand SAFRINET respectively), South EastAsia (ASEANET), East Asia (EASIANET),the Andean Countries (ANDINONET), theSouth Pacific (PACINET) and Europe(EuroLOOP). Proposed LOOPs awaitinggovernment endorsements are South Asia(SACNET), North Eurasia (NEURA-SIANET) the South America Southern Cone(LATINET), Mesoamerica (MESOAMER-INET).

169 http://www.treebase.org/treebase/170 http://www.bionet-intl.org/

91


The Global Biodiversity InformationFacility (GBIF)171 The mission of GBIF is tomake the world’s primary data on biodiver-sity freely and universally available via theInternet. The GBIF vision is that it will con-tribute to economic growth, ecological sus-tainability, social outcomes and scientificresearch by increasing the utility, availabilityand completeness of primary scientific bio-diversity information available on theInternet. GBIF works cooperatively withand in support of several other internationalorganizations concerned with biodiversity.These include (but are not limited to) theCHM and the GTI of the CBD , and regionalbiodiversity information networks, such asthe European Network for BiodiversityInformation (ENBI)172, which may also pro-vide tools and training. Functionally, GBIFencourages, coordinates and supports thedevelopment of worldwide capacity toaccess the vast amount of biodiversity dataheld in natural history museum collections,libraries and databanks. Near term GBIFdevelopments will focus on species andspecimen- and observation-level data.Technically, GBIF is evolving to be an inter-operable network of biodiversity databasesand information technology tools using webservices and Grid technologies. In the nearterm, GBIF will provide a global metadataregistry of the available biodiversity datawith open interfaces. Anyone can then use itto construct thematic portals and specialisedsearch facilities. Building on the contents ofthis registry, GBIF will provide its own cen-tral portal that enables simultaneous queriesagainst biodiversity databases held by dis-tributed, worldwide sources. In the longterm, molecular, genetic, ecological and

ecosystem level databases can be linked tothe system. These will facilitate and enabledata mining of unprecedented utility and sci-entific merit. As its work programs progress,GBIF will enable users to navigate and putto use the world’s vast quantities of biodi-versity information. This information is vitalto generating economic, environmental,social and scientific benefits from the sus-tainable use, conservation and study of bio-diversity resources.

The clearing-house mechanism (CHM)173

of the Convention on Biological Diversityseeks to support the Convention’s thematicand cross-cutting programmes of work bypromoting cooperation in six key areas: toolsfor decision-making, training and capacity-building, research, funding, technologytransfer, and the repatriation of information.Its aims are to: promote and facilitate techni-cal and scientific cooperation, within andbetween countries; develop a global mecha-nism for exchanging and integrating infor-mation on biodiversity and; develop thenecessary human and technological network.The clearing-house mechanism is coordi-nated by the Executive Secretary and over-seen and guided by an Informal AdvisoryCommittee (IAC) set up by the Parties to theConvention. In addition, a network ofNational Focal Points for the mechanismaddresses matters relating to technical andscientific cooperation. The GTI portal is thepart of the CHM dedicated to the GTI.

6.3 Further information

Further information on the GTI is availablethrough the GTI Portal. In addition, the

171 http://www.gbif.org 172 http://www.enbi.info/forums/enbi/index.php173 http://www.biodiv.org/chm/default.aspx

92


annexes to this Guide are also intended toprovide additional information. Annex 1 is alist of acronyms used in this guide and, incases of organizations, associated web links.A list of references and other publicationsfor further reading is compiled in Annex 2 tothis Guide. Annex 3 lists documents specificto taxonomy and the GTI which have beenproduced under the auspices of the CBD.Annex 4 summarizes excerpts from COPdecisions which are not specific to the GTIbut which cross-reference the GTI in the

context of other work programmes. Annex 5contains the strategy for taxonomic capac-ity-building developed at the Third GlobalTaxonomy Workshop, held in Pretoria in2002, and a workshop in Paris, held in 2003.Annex 6 gives a sample questionnaire thatcan be adapted for use in national taxonomicneeds assessments. Annex 7 provides con-tact information for key partners and organi-zations. Annexes 8 through 13 containdecisions on the GTI from the third to theeighth meetings of the COP.


93

ANN

EX 1

.

AC

RO

NY

MS

USE

D IN

TE

XT

AB

RS

AH

TEG

AN

DIN

ON

ET

ASE

AN

ET

Bio

CA

SE

Aus

tralia

nB

iolo

gica

lR

esou

rces

Stu

dy

Ad-

Hoc

Tec

hnic

alEx

pert

Gro

up

Bio

logi

cal

Col

lect

ions

Acc

ess

Serv

ice

for E

urop

e

The

AB

RS

is a

Pro

gram

with

in P

arks

Aus

tralia

Div

isio

n of

the

Dep

artm

ent o

fth

e En

viro

nmen

t and

Her

itage

. Its

aim

isto

pro

vide

, thr

ough

stra

tegi

c pa

rtner

ship

s,th

e un

derly

ing

taxo

nom

ic k

now

ledg

ene

cess

ary

for t

he c

onse

rvat

ion

and

sust

aina

ble

use

of A

ustra

lia’s

bio

dive

rsity

.

Gro

up o

f exp

erts

set

up

by th

e C

BD

toad

vise

on

any

parti

cula

r iss

ue. M

embe

rsar

e dr

awn

from

the

CB

D R

oste

r of

Expe

rts

ATe

chni

cal C

oope

ratio

n N

etw

ork

tosu

ppor

t cap

acity

bui

ldin

g in

Tax

onom

yfo

r the

Cou

ntrie

s of

the

And

ean

Com

mun

ity (B

oliv

ia, C

olom

bia,

Ecu

ador

,Pe

ru a

nd V

enez

uela

)

ATe

chni

cal C

oope

ratio

n N

etw

ork

tosu

ppor

t cap

acity

bui

ldin

g in

Tax

onom

yfo

r the

Cou

ntrie

s of

the

ASE

AN

regi

on.

Bio

CA

SEw

ill e

stab

lish

a w

eb-b

ased

info

rmat

ion

serv

ice

prov

idin

g re

sear

cher

sw

ith u

nifie

d ac

cess

to b

iolo

gica

lco

llect

ions

in E

urop

e w

hile

leav

ing

cont

rol o

f the

info

rmat

ion

with

the

colle

ctio

n ho

lder

s. Th

e ai

m is

to e

nhan

ce

http

://w

ww

.deh

.gov

.au/

biod

iver

sity

/abr

s/

http

://w

ww

.bio

net-i

ntl.o

rg/a

ndin

onet

/

http

://w

ww

.bio

case

.org

/

AC

RO

NY

M /

NA

ME

OF

TE

RM

INST

ITU

TIO

ND

ESC

RIP

TIO

NU

RL

IFA

PPR

OPR

IAT

E

94


BO

ZON

ET

CA

BI

CB

D

Bot

anic

al a

ndZo

olog

ical

Taxo

nom

icN

etw

orks

inEa

ster

n A

fric

a

CA

B In

tern

atio

nal

Con

vent

ion

onB

iolo

gica

lD

iver

sity

the

over

-all

valu

e of

bio

logi

cal c

olle

ctio

nsas

an

esse

ntia

l, bu

t pre

sent

ly fr

agm

ente

dan

d un

der-e

xplo

ited

Euro

pean

rese

arch

infr

astru

ctur

e fo

r env

ironm

enta

l sci

ence

s,sy

stem

atic

s, an

d lif

e sc

ienc

es in

gen

eral

,by

mea

ns o

f im

plem

entin

g a

sust

aina

ble

and

expa

ndab

le in

form

atio

n se

rvic

e,w

hich

pro

vide

s re

sear

cher

s w

ith u

nifie

dac

cess

to a

ll Eu

rope

an c

olle

ctio

ns, w

hile

leav

ing

the

cont

rol o

ver t

he in

form

atio

nsu

pply

in th

e ha

nds

of th

e in

form

atio

npr

ovid

ers.

Bio

CA

SE, a

long

with

DiG

IR,

are

used

by

GB

IF to

link

man

y of

its

data

prov

ider

s.

See

text

CA

B In

tern

atio

nal i

s a

not-f

or-p

rofit

orga

nisa

tion.

Its

purp

ose

is th

e ge

nera

tion,

diss

emin

atio

n an

d us

e of

kno

wle

dge

inth

e ap

plie

d bi

osci

ence

s to

enh

ance

deve

lopm

ent,

hum

an w

elfa

re a

nd th

een

viro

nmen

t.

http

://w

ww

.cab

i.org

/

http

://w

ww

.bio

div.

org

AC

RO

NY

M /

NA

ME

OF

TE

RM

INST

ITU

TIO

ND

ESC

RIP

TIO

NU

RL

IFA

PPR

OPR

IAT

E

95


CC

C

CC

D

CET

AF

CoM

L

CIT

ES

CM

S

CO

NA

BIO

Cor

al C

ay C

onse

rvat

ion

Uni

ted

Nat

ions

Con

vent

ion

to C

omba

tD

eser

tific

atio

n

Con

sorti

um o

fEu

rope

an T

axon

omic

Faci

litie

s

Cen

sus

of M

arin

e Li

fe

Con

vent

ion

onIn

tern

atio

nal T

rade

in E

ndan

gere

d Sp

ecie

sof

Wild

Flo

ra a

ndFa

una.

Uni

ted

Nat

ions

Con

vent

ion

onM

igra

tory

Spe

cies

Nat

iona

l Com

mis

sion

for t

heK

now

ledg

ean

d U

se o

f the

Bio

dive

rsity

It is

a n

ot-f

or-p

rofit

org

anis

atio

n at

the

“cut

ting

edge

of e

coto

uris

m”.

It s

ends

team

s of

vol

unte

ers

to s

urve

y so

me

of th

ew

orld

’s m

ost e

ndan

gere

d co

ral r

eefs

and

tropi

cal f

ores

ts. I

ts m

issi

on is

to p

rote

ctth

ese

cruc

ial e

nviro

nmen

ts b

y w

orki

ngcl

osel

y w

ith th

e lo

cal c

omm

uniti

es w

hode

pend

on

them

for f

ood

and

livel

ihoo

d.

See

text

AM

exic

an In

ter-M

inis

teria

l Com

mis

sion

mai

nly

dedi

cate

d to

: con

form

and

kee

pup

date

d th

e N

atio

nal S

yste

m o

fB

iodi

vers

ity In

form

atio

n (S

NIB

); su

ppor

tpr

ojec

ts a

nd s

tudi

es fo

cuse

d on

the

know

ledg

e an

d su

stai

nabl

e us

e of

http

://w

ww

.cor

alca

y.or

g/in

dex.

php

http

://w

ww

.unc

cd.in

t/mai

n.ph

p

http

://w

ww

.cet

af.o

rg/

http

://w

ww

.com

l.org

/com

l.htm

http

://w

ww

.cite

s.org

/

http

://w

ww

.wcm

c.or

g.uk

/cm

s/

http

://w

ww

.con

abio

.gob

.mx/

AC

RO

NY

M /

NA

ME

OF

TE

RM

INST

ITU

TIO

ND

ESC

RIP

TIO

NU

RL

IFA

PPR

OPR

IAT

E

96


CO

P

CSD

ENH

SIN

ENB

I

Con

fere

nce

of th

ePa

rties

UN

Com

mis

sion

on S

usta

inab

leD

evel

opm

ent

Euro

pean

Nat

ural

His

tory

Spe

cim

enIn

form

atio

nN

etw

ork

Euro

pean

Net

wor

kfo

r Bio

dive

rsity

Info

rmat

ion

biod

iver

sity

; adv

ise

gove

rnm

enta

lin

stitu

tions

and

oth

er s

ecto

rs;

unde

rtake

spe

cial

pro

ject

s; s

hare

the

know

ledg

e of

bio

logi

cal

dive

rsity

; fol

low

up

ofin

tern

atio

nal a

gree

men

tsre

late

d to

bio

dive

rsity

;an

d pr

ovid

e se

rvic

esto

the

publ

ic.

The

CO

Pis

the

gove

rnin

g bo

dy o

f the

Con

vent

ion

on B

iolo

gica

l Div

ersi

ty, a

ndad

vanc

es im

plem

enta

tion

of th

eC

onve

ntio

n th

roug

h th

e de

cisi

ons

it ta

kes

at it

s pe

riodi

c m

eetin

gs. S

ome

othe

r UN

Con

vern

tions

als

o ha

ve a

CO

P.

For u

sing

, mon

itorin

g an

d un

ders

tand

ing

the

wor

ld’s

bio

dive

rsity

it is

nec

essa

ry to

utili

ze th

e ex

istin

g bi

odiv

ersi

tyin

form

atio

n to

its

full

pote

ntia

l. Pr

imar

ybi

odiv

ersi

ty d

ata

will

ther

efor

e ha

ve to

be

digi

tised

and

mad

e ac

cess

ible

thro

ugh

anin

tegr

ated

sha

red

info

rmat

ion

http

://w

ww

.un.

org/

esa/

sust

dev/

http

://w

ww.

nhm

.ac.

uk/sc

ienc

e/rc

o/en

hsin

/

http

://w

ww.

enbi

.info

/foru

ms/e

nbi/i

ndex

.php

AC

RO

NY

M /

NA

ME

OF

TE

RM

INST

ITU

TIO

ND

ESC

RIP

TIO

NU

RL

IFA

PPR

OPR

IAT

E

97


ETI

FAO

GB

IF

GEF

GIS

IN

Expe

rt C

ente

r for

Taxo

nom

icId

entif

icat

ion

Food

and

Agr

icul

ture

Org

aniz

atio

n of

the

Uni

ted

Nat

ions

Glo

bal B

iodi

vers

ityIn

form

atio

nFa

cilit

y

Glo

bal

Envi

ronm

ent

Faci

lity

Glo

bal I

nvas

ive

Spec

ies

Info

rmat

ion

Net

wor

k

infr

astru

ctur

e. T

he m

ajor

obj

ectiv

e of

ENB

I is

to e

stab

lish

a st

rong

Eur

opea

nne

twor

k fo

r thi

s pu

rpos

e.

The

ETI i

s a

non-

gove

rnm

enta

lor

gani

zatio

n in

ope

ratio

nal r

elat

ions

with

UN

ESC

O. I

t sta

ted

mis

sion

is to

dev

elop

and

prod

uce

scie

ntifi

c an

d ed

ucat

iona

lco

mpu

ter-a

ided

info

rmat

ion

syst

ems,

toim

prov

e th

e ge

nera

l acc

ess

to a

ndpr

omot

e th

e br

oad

use

of ta

xono

mic

and

biod

iver

sity

kno

wle

dge

wor

ldw

ide.

Itm

aint

ains

on

its w

eb s

ite a

list

of

taxo

nom

ists

with

a g

loba

l bas

is.

See

sect

ion

6

Fina

ncia

l mec

hani

sm fo

r the

Con

vent

ion

on B

iolo

gica

l Div

ersi

ty. S

ee te

xt fo

r mor

ede

tails

.

http

://w

ww

.eti.

uva.

nl/

http

://w

ww

.fao.

org/

http

://w

ww

.gbi

f.org

http

://w

ww

.gef

web

.org

/

http

://in

vasiv

espe

cies

.nbi

i.gov

/as/g

isin.

htm

(mov

ing

to: h

ttp://

ww

w.g

isin

etw

ork.

org)

AC

RO

NY

M /

NA

ME

OF

TE

RM

INST

ITU

TIO

ND

ESC

RIP

TIO

NU

RL

IFA

PPR

OPR

IAT

E

98


GIS

P

GM

BA

GSP

C

GTI

IAS

ICIM

OD

IOC

Glo

bal I

nvas

ive

Spec

ies

Prog

ram

me.

Glo

bal M

ount

ain

Bio

dive

rsity

Ass

essm

ent

Glo

bal S

trate

gy fo

rPl

ant C

onse

rvat

ion

Glo

bal T

axon

omy

Initi

ativ

e

Inva

sive

Alie

nSp

ecie

s

Inte

rnat

iona

l Cen

trefo

r Int

egra

ted

Mou

ntai

nD

evel

opm

ent

Inte

rgov

ernm

enta

lO

cean

ogra

phic

Com

mis

sion

(UN

ESC

O)

See

text

for d

etai

ls

CB

D s

trate

gy li

nked

to th

e G

TI –

see

text

IOC

pro

vide

s m

embe

r sta

tes

of th

e U

nite

dN

atio

ns w

ith a

n es

sent

ial m

echa

nism

for

glob

al c

o-op

erat

ion

in th

e st

udy

of th

eoc

ean.

The

IOC

ass

ists

gov

ernm

ents

toad

dres

s th

eir i

ndiv

idua

l and

col

lect

ive

ocea

n an

d co

asta

l pro

blem

s th

roug

h th

esh

arin

g of

kno

wle

dge,

info

rmat

ion

and

tech

nolo

gy a

nd th

roug

h th

e co

ordi

natio

nof

nat

iona

l pro

gram

s.

http

://w

ww

.uni

bas.c

h/gm

ba/

http

://w

ww

.bio

div.

org/

prog

ram

mes

/cr

oss-

cutti

ng/p

lant

/def

ault.

asp

http

://w

ww

.icim

od.o

rg/

http

://io

c.un

esco

.org

/iocw

eb/in

dex.

php

AC

RO

NY

M /

NA

ME

OF

TE

RM

INST

ITU

TIO

ND

ESC

RIP

TIO

NU

RL

IFA

PPR

OPR

IAT

E

99


IOS

IPI

IPN

I

ITIS

The

Inte

rnat

iona

lO

cean

ogra

phic

Com

mis

sion

of

UN

ESC

O

Inte

rnat

iona

lIn

itiat

ive

for t

heC

onse

rvat

ion

and

Sust

aina

ble

Use

of

Polli

nato

rs

Inte

rnat

iona

l Pla

ntN

ames

Inde

x

Inte

grat

edTa

xono

mic

Info

rmat

ion

Syst

em

Prog

ram

me

set u

p w

ithin

the

Agr

icul

tura

lB

iodi

vers

ity th

emat

ic A

rea

of th

e C

BD

The

Inte

rnat

iona

l Pla

nt N

ames

Inde

x(I

PNI)

is a

dat

abas

e of

the

nam

es a

ndas

soci

ated

bas

ic b

iblio

grap

hica

l det

ails

of

all s

eed

plan

ts. I

ts g

oal i

s to

elim

inat

e th

ene

ed fo

r rep

eate

d re

fere

nce

to p

rimar

yso

urce

s fo

r bas

ic b

iblio

grap

hic

info

rmat

ion

abou

t pla

nt n

ames

. The

dat

aar

e fr

eely

ava

ilabl

e an

d ar

e gr

adua

llybe

ing

stan

dard

ized

and

che

cked

. IPN

Iw

ill b

e a

dyna

mic

reso

urce

, dep

endi

ng o

ndi

rect

con

tribu

tions

by

all m

embe

rs o

f the

bota

nica

l com

mun

ity.

Aso

urce

of t

axon

omic

info

rmat

ion

for

som

e gr

oups

of p

lant

s, an

imal

s, an

dm

icro

bes

of N

orth

Am

eric

a an

d th

ew

orld

. ITI

S is

a p

artn

ersh

ip o

f U.S

.,C

anad

ian,

and

Mex

ican

age

ncie

s; o

ther

orga

niza

tions

; and

taxo

nom

ic s

peci

alis

ts.

ITIS

is a

lso

a pa

rtner

of S

peci

es 2

000

and

the

GB

IF.

http

://w

ww

.bio

div.

org/

prog

ram

mes

/are

as/

agro

/pol

linat

ors.a

sp

http

://w

ww

.ipni

.org

/inde

x.ht

ml

http

://w

ww

.itis

.usd

a.go

v/in

dex.

htm

l.

AC

RO

NY

M /

NA

ME

OF

TE

RM

INST

ITU

TIO

ND

ESC

RIP

TIO

NU

RL

IFA

PPR

OPR

IAT

E

100


LOO

P

MEA

NH

M

Loca

lly O

wne

d an

dO

pera

ted

Partn

ersh

ip o

fB

ioN

ET-

INTE

RN

ATIO

NA

L

The

Mill

enni

umEc

osys

tem

Ass

essm

ent

The

Nat

ural

His

tory

Mus

eum

,Lo

ndon

Reg

iona

l Tec

hnic

al C

oope

ratio

nN

etw

orks

in T

axon

omy

set u

p as

par

t of

Bio

NET

-IN

TER

NAT

ION

AL

The

Mill

enni

um E

cosy

stem

Ass

essm

ent

(MA

) is a

n in

tern

atio

nal w

ork

prog

ram

desig

ned

to m

eet t

he n

eeds

of d

ecisi

onm

aker

s and

the

publ

ic fo

r sci

entif

icin

form

atio

n co

ncer

ning

the

cons

eque

nces

of e

cosy

stem

cha

nge

for h

uman

wel

l-bei

ngan

d op

tions

for r

espo

ndin

g to

thos

ech

ange

s. Th

e M

Aw

as la

unch

ed b

y U

.N.

Secr

etar

y-G

ener

al K

ofi A

nnan

in Ju

ne 2

001

and

it w

ill h

elp

to m

eet a

sses

smen

t nee

dsof

the

Conv

entio

n on

Bio

logi

cal D

iver

sity,

Conv

entio

n to

Com

bat D

eser

tific

atio

n, th

eRa

msa

r Con

vent

ion

on W

etla

nds,

and

the

Conv

entio

n on

Mig

rato

ry S

peci

es, a

s wel

las

nee

ds o

f oth

er u

sers

in th

e pr

ivat

e se

ctor

and

civi

l soc

iety

. If t

he M

Apr

oves

to b

eus

eful

to it

s sta

keho

lder

s, it

is an

ticip

ated

that

an

asse

ssm

ent p

roce

ss m

odel

ed o

n th

eM

Aw

ill b

e re

peat

ed e

very

5–1

0 ye

ars a

ndth

at e

cosy

stem

ass

essm

ents

will

be

regu

larly

con

duct

ed a

t nat

iona

l or s

ub-

natio

nal s

cale

s.

Glo

bally

-sig

nific

ant c

olle

ctio

ns, l

ibra

ryan

d so

urce

of t

axon

omic

exp

ertis

e.

http

://w

ww

.mill

enni

umas

sess

men

t.org

/en

/inde

x.as

px

http

://w

ww

.nhm

.ac.

uk

AC

RO

NY

M /

NA

ME

OF

TE

RM

INST

ITU

TIO

ND

ESC

RIP

TIO

NU

RL

IFA

PPR

OPR

IAT

E

101


NSB

AP

ICIP

E

ICTV

IPPC

ITIS

IUC

N

Nat

iona

lB

iodi

vers

ity a

ndA

ctio

n Pl

an

Inte

rnat

iona

lC

ente

r for

Inse

ctPh

ysio

logy

and

Ecol

ogy

The

Inte

rnat

iona

lC

omm

ittee

on

taxo

nom

y of

Viru

ses

Inte

rnat

iona

l Pla

ntPr

otec

tion

Con

vent

ion

Inte

rnat

iona

lTa

xono

mic

info

rmat

ion

Syst

em

The

Wor

ldC

onse

rvat

ion

Uni

on

ICIP

E’s

man

date

is to

con

duct

rese

arch

,tra

in, a

nd d

evel

op m

etho

ds fo

r man

agin

gpe

sts

and

dise

ase

vect

ors

inen

viro

nmen

tally

frie

ndly

way

s an

den

hanc

e th

e us

eful

effe

cts

of a

rthro

pods

.Th

is m

anda

te is

refle

cted

in th

e op

erat

ive

4-H

par

adig

m, o

f im

prov

ing

hum

an,

anim

al, p

lant

and

env

ironm

enta

l hea

lth.

See

text

The

IPPC

is a

n in

tern

atio

nal t

reat

y to

secu

re a

ctio

n to

pre

vent

the

spre

ad a

ndin

trodu

ctio

n of

pes

ts o

f pla

nts

and

plan

tpr

oduc

ts, a

nd to

pro

mot

e ap

prop

riate

mea

sure

s fo

r the

ir co

ntro

l. It

is g

over

ned

by th

e In

terim

Com

mis

sion

on

Phyt

osan

itary

Mea

sure

s (I

CPM

)

See

text

Has

mem

bers

from

som

e 14

0 co

untri

esin

clud

e 77

Sta

tes,

114

gove

rnm

ent

agen

cies

, and

800

-plu

s N

GO

s. M

ore

than

http

://w

ww

.icip

e.or

g/

http

://w

ww

.ncb

i.nlm

.nih

.gov

/ICTV

/

http

s://w

ww

.ippc

.int/I

PP/E

n/de

faul

t.jsp

http

://w

ww

.itis

.usd

a.go

v/

http

://w

ww

.iucn

.org

/

AC

RO

NY

M /

NA

ME

OF

TE

RM

INST

ITU

TIO

ND

ESC

RIP

TIO

NU

RL

IFA

PPR

OPR

IAT

E

102


OA

SIS

PoW

RB

GK

SAB

ON

ET

SAC

NET

Oce

anic

seam

ount

s: a

nin

tegr

ated

stu

dy

Prog

ram

me

ofW

ork

(gen

eral

ly, i

nth

e G

uide

, of t

heG

TI)

Roy

al B

otan

icG

arde

ns, K

ew

The

Sout

h A

fric

anB

otan

ical

Net

wor

k

Sout

hern

Asi

anne

twor

k fo

rta

xono

mic

capa

city

-bui

ldin

g

10,0

00 in

tern

atio

nally

-rec

ogni

sed

scie

ntis

ts a

nd e

xper

ts fr

om m

ore

than

180

coun

tries

vol

unte

er th

eir s

ervi

ces

to it

s si

xgl

obal

com

mis

sion

s. Its

100

0 st

aff

mem

bers

in o

ffice

s ar

ound

the

wor

ld a

rew

orki

ng o

n so

me

500

proj

ects

. For

mor

eth

an 5

0 ye

ars

this

‘Gre

en W

eb’o

fpa

rtner

ship

s ha

s ge

nera

ted

envi

ronm

enta

lco

nven

tions

, glo

bal s

tand

ards

, sci

entif

ickn

owle

dge

and

inno

vativ

e le

ader

ship

.

See

text

SAC

NET

is a

regi

onal

loop

of B

ioN

ET-

INTE

RN

ATIO

NA

L. It

will

func

tion

asth

e no

de fo

r exc

hang

e of

info

rmat

ion

and

expe

rtise

in T

axon

omy

in th

e re

gion

;or

gani

se c

apac

ity b

uild

ing

activ

ities

;lia

ise

with

oth

er s

uch

Net

wor

ks g

loba

llyan

d su

ppor

t im

plem

enta

tion

of th

e w

ork

http

://w

ww

.rrz.

uni-h

ambu

rg.d

e/O

ASI

S/Pa

ges/

page

1.ht

ml

http

://w

ww

.rbgk

ew.o

rg.u

k/

http

://w

ww

.bio

dive

rsity

asia

.org

/sac

net/

AC

RO

NY

M /

NA

ME

OF

TE

RM

INST

ITU

TIO

ND

ESC

RIP

TIO

NU

RL

IFA

PPR

OPR

IAT

E

103


SBST

TA

SCB

D

SI SPP

Subs

idia

ry B

ody

on S

cien

tific

,Te

chni

cal a

ndTe

chno

logi

cal

Adv

ice

Secr

etar

iat o

f the

Con

vent

ion

onB

iolo

gica

lD

iver

sity

Smith

soni

anIn

stitu

tion

Spec

ies

Plan

taru

mPr

ojec

t

prog

ram

me

of th

e C

onve

ntio

n on

Bio

logi

cal D

iver

sity

thro

ugh

the

Glo

bal

Taxo

nom

y In

itiat

ive

(GTI

) in

Sout

h A

sia.

Its fu

nctio

ns in

clud

e: p

rovi

ding

asse

ssm

ents

of t

he s

tatu

s of

bio

logi

cal

dive

rsity

; ass

essm

ents

of t

he ty

pes

ofm

easu

res

take

n in

acc

orda

nce

with

the

prov

isio

ns o

f the

Con

vent

ion;

and

resp

ondi

ng to

que

stio

ns th

at th

e C

OP

may

put t

o th

e bo

dy. H

ow S

BST

TAca

rrie

s ou

tits

wor

k is

des

crib

ed in

its

mod

usop

eran

di,w

hich

can

be

foun

d in

Ann

ex 1

of d

ecis

ion

IV/1

6 (a

s am

ende

d by

deci

sion

V/2

0).

Glo

bally

-sig

nific

ant c

olle

ctio

ns, l

ibra

ryan

d so

urce

of t

axon

omic

exp

ertis

e.

Alo

ng te

rm p

roje

ct a

imin

g to

reco

rdes

sent

ial t

axon

omic

info

rmat

ion

onva

scul

ar p

lant

s on

a w

orld

bas

is. I

t may

be li

kene

d to

a W

orld

Flo

ra. I

t is

expe

cted

that

it w

ill in

clud

e ac

cept

ed n

ames

and

syno

nym

s w

ith p

lace

s of

pub

licat

ion

and

type

s, sh

ort d

escr

iptio

ns o

f all

taxa

from

fam

ily to

infr

aspe

cific

rank

, key

s,di

strib

utio

ns, r

efer

ence

s to

lite

ratu

re

http

://w

ww

.si.e

du/

AC

RO

NY

M /

NA

ME

OF

TE

RM

INST

ITU

TIO

ND

ESC

RIP

TIO

NU

RL

IFA

PPR

OPR

IAT

E

104


SP20

00

uBio

UN

DP

UN

EP

UN

ESC

O

WFC

C

Spec

ies

2000

Uni

vers

alB

iolo

gica

l Ind

exer

and

Org

aniz

er

Uni

ted

Nat

ions

Dev

elop

men

tPr

ogra

mm

e

Uni

ted

Nat

ions

Envi

ronm

ent

Prog

ram

me

Uni

ted

Nat

ions

Educ

atio

nal,

Scie

ntifi

c an

dC

ultu

ral

Org

anis

atio

n

Wor

ld F

eder

atio

nof

Cul

ture

Col

lect

ions

com

men

ts, e

tc. I

t will

be

linke

d to

the

Glo

bal P

lant

Che

cklis

t.

See

text

uBio

is a

n in

itiat

ive

with

in th

e sc

ienc

elib

rary

com

mun

ity to

join

inte

rnat

iona

lef

forts

to c

reat

e an

d ut

ilize

aco

mpr

ehen

sive

and

col

labo

rativ

e ca

talo

gof

nam

es o

f all

livin

g (a

nd o

nce-

livin

g)or

gani

sms.

The

Taxo

nom

ic N

ame

Serv

er(T

NS)

cat

alog

s na

mes

and

cla

ssifi

catio

nsto

ena

ble

tool

s th

at c

an h

elp

user

s fin

din

form

atio

n on

livi

ng th

ings

usi

ng a

ny o

fth

e na

mes

that

may

be

rela

ted

to a

nor

gani

sm.

Act

s as

an

impl

emen

ting

agen

cy fo

rth

e G

EF.

Act

s as

an

impl

emen

ting

agen

cy fo

rth

e G

EF.

The

WFC

C is

a M

ultid

isci

plin

ary

Com

mis

sion

of t

he In

tern

atio

nal U

nion

of

Bio

logi

cal S

cien

ces

(IU

BS)

and

a

http

://w

ww

.sp20

00.o

rg/

http

://w

ww

.ubi

o.or

g/

http

://w

ww.

unes

co.o

rg/sc

ienc

e/in

dex.

shtm

l

http

://w

ww

.wfc

c.in

fo/

AC

RO

NY

M /

NA

ME

OF

TE

RM

INST

ITU

TIO

ND

ESC

RIP

TIO

NU

RL

IFA

PPR

OPR

IAT

E

105


WSS

D

WW

F

Wor

ld S

umm

it on

Sust

aina

ble

Dev

elop

men

t

Wor

ld W

ide

Fund

for N

atur

e

Fede

ratio

n w

ithin

the

Inte

rnat

iona

l Uni

onof

Mic

robi

olog

ical

Soc

ietie

s (I

UM

S). T

heW

FCC

is c

once

rned

with

the

colle

ctio

n,au

then

ticat

ion,

mai

nten

ance

and

dist

ribut

ion

of c

ultu

res

of m

icro

orga

nism

san

d cu

lture

d ce

lls. I

ts a

im is

to p

rom

ote

and

supp

ort t

he e

stab

lishm

ent o

f cul

ture

colle

ctio

ns a

nd re

late

d se

rvic

es, t

opr

ovid

e lia

ison

and

set

up

an in

form

atio

nne

twor

k be

twee

n th

e co

llect

ions

and

thei

rus

ers,

to o

rgan

ise

wor

ksho

ps a

ndco

nfer

ence

s, pu

blic

atio

ns a

nd n

ewsl

ette

rsan

d w

ork

to e

nsur

e th

e lo

ng te

rmpe

rpet

uatio

n of

impo

rtant

col

lect

ions

.

1992

Sum

mit

in J

ohan

nesb

urg

WW

F is

a g

loba

l org

aniz

atio

n ac

ting

loca

lly th

roug

h a

netw

ork

of fa

mily

offic

es. A

ll th

ese

offic

es d

o al

l the

y ca

nto

hal

t the

acc

eler

atin

g de

stru

ctio

n of

our

natu

ral w

orld

.

http

://w

ww

.joha

nnes

burg

sum

mit.

org/

http

://w

ww

.pan

da.o

rg/

AC

RO

NY

M /

NA

ME

OF

TE

RM

INST

ITU

TIO

ND

ESC

RIP

TIO

NU

RL

IFA

PPR

OPR

IAT

E

106


Andelman, S.J. & Fagan, W.F., 2000,Umbrellas and flagships: Efficient conser-vation surrogates or expensive mistakes?Proceedings of the National Academy ofSciences, 97(11), 5954–5959

Anon, 1998, The Darwin Declaration,Environment Australia, Canberra. ISBN:0 642 21413 1. Available in printed formfrom: Australian Biological ResourcesStudy, Environment Australia, Departmentof the Environment, GPO Box 636,Canberra, ACT 2601, Australia, and atthe URLs: http://www.biodiv.org/cross-cutting/taxonomy/darwin-declaration.aspand http://www.anbg.gov.au/abrs/flora/webpubl/darwinw.htm

Anon, 1998b, The Global Taxonomy Initiative:Shortening the Distance between Discoveryand Delivery, Environment Australia,Canberra. ISBN: 0 642 56803 0. Availablein printed form from: Australian BiologicalResources Study, Environment Australia,Department of the Environment, GPO Box636, Canberra, ACT 2601, Australia, and atthe URLs: http://www.biodiv.org/cross-cut-ting/taxonomy/short-dist.asp and http://www.anbg.gov.au /abrs / f lora /webpubl/london.htm

Anon, 1998c, The Global TaxonomyInitiative: Using Systematic Inventoriesto meet Country and Regional Needs,DIVERSITAS, Systematics Agenda2000, New York. Available in printedform from the American Museum ofNatural History, Central Park West at 79th

St., New York, NT 10024, USA, andat the URL: http://www.biodiv.org/doc/meetings/sbstta/sbstta-04/informa-tion/sbstta-04-inf-07-en.pdf

Anon, 1999, Implementing the GTI:Recommendations from DIVERSITASelement 3, including an assessment ofpresent knowledge of key species groups.Available at the URL: http://wwwbio-div.org/doc/ref/gti-diversitas.pdf

Anon, 1999a, Report of the STAP brainstorm-ing on the use of taxonomic information.Key outcomes and suggestions. GEF/C.14/Inf.13. www.gefweb.org/COUNCIL/GEF_C14/gef_c14_inf13.doc

Anon, 2000, Mechanisms for managementof the GTI, with a consideration on inclu-sion of traditional and indigenous knowl-edge perspectives on current taxonomicsystems. Available at the URL: http://www.biodiv.org/doc/meetings/sbstta/sbstta-05/information/sbstta-05-inf-gti-en.pdf

Blackmore, S., 2002, Biodiversity update –progress in taxonomy. Science 298, 365.

Canhos, V.P., Souza, S., Giovanni, R. &Canhos, D.A.L., 2004, Global biodiver-sity informatics: setting the scene fora “new world’ of ecological modeling.Biodiversity Informatics, 1, 1-13. [http://jbi.nhm.ku.edu/ - accessed 1/12/2004]

Caro, T.M. & O’Doherty, G., 1999, On theuse of surrogate species in conservationbiology. Conservation Biology, 13(4),805-814.

ANNEX 2.

REFERENCES AND FURTHER READING

(n.b., see also many CBD documents listed in annex 3, and other documents referenced infootnotes throughout the text of this guide)

107


Chavan, V. & Krishnan, S., 2003, Naturalhistory collections: a call for nationalinformation infrastructure. CurrentScience, 84(1), 34-42.

Cresswell, I & Bridgewater, P., 2000, TheGlobal Taxonomy Initiative – Quovadis? Biology International, 38, 12-16.

Evans, G., Lum, K.Y. & Muroch, L., 2002,Needs assessment in taxonomy andbiosystematics for plant pathogeneticorganisms in countries of South East Asia.Unpublished report to AusAID, 67 pp.

Golding, J.S. & Timberlake, 2004, Howtaxonomists can bridge the gap betweentaxonomy and conservation science.Conservation Biology, 17, 1177-1178.

Groombridge, B. (Ed.), 1992, GlobalBiodiversity. Status of the Earth’s livingresources. Chapman and Hall, London,585pp.

Hopkins, G.W. & Freckleton, R.P., 2002.Declines in the numbers of amateur andprofessional taxonomists: implicationsfor conservation. Animal Conservation,5, 245-249.

Iguchi, K., K. Matsuura, K. McNyset, A. T.Peterson, R. Scachetti-Pereira, K. A.Powers, D. A. Vieglais, E. O. Wiley, & T.Yodo. 2004. Predicting invasions ofNorth American basses in Japan usingnative range data and a genetic algo-rithm. Transactions of the AmericanFisheries Society, 133:845-854.

King, N. & Lyal, C.H.C., 2003, Meeting thegaps in protected area management –overcoming the taxonomic impediment.Paper presented to the Vth World ParksCongress, Durban.

Klopper, R.R., Smith, G.F. & Chikuni, A.C.(Eds), 2001, The Global TaxonomyInitiative: documenting the biodiversityof Africa / L’Initiative TaxonomiqueMondiale: documenter la biodiversité enAfrique. Proceedings of a workshop held

at the Kirstenbosch National BotanicalGarden, Cape Town, South Africa, 27February to 1 March 2001. Strelitzia, 12,202 (English) + 204 (French) pages.

Klopper, R.R., Smith, G.F. & Chikuni, A.C.,2002, The Global Taxonomy Initiative inAfrica. Taxon 51, 159-165.

Kottelat, M., 2001, Freshwater fishes ofNorthern Vietnam. A preliminary check-list of fishes known or expected to occurin northern Vietnam with commentson systematics and nomenclature. TheWorld Bank. http://lnweb18.worlbank.org/ESSD/envext.nsf/48ByDocName/ToolsFreshwaterFishesofNorthernVietnam2001 (URL accessed 27.Nov.2004)

Lapage, S.P. et al. (Eds), 1992.International Code of Nomenclature ofBacteria (1990 Revision). Bacteri-ological Code. American Society forMicrobiology, Washington DC.

Lyal, C.H.C., 2001, The Global TaxonomyInitiative. NSC Alliance News, 29(6), 4, 10.

Lyal, C.H.C., 2004, Strategy and symbioses:Building capacity for the GTI in Asia. pp80-88 in Shimura, J., Ed., BuildingCapacity in Biodiversity InformationSharing 2003, NIES, Japan, 254pp.

Lyal, C.H.C., 2004a, The GTI Programme ofWork. pp 1-7 in Shimura, J., Ed., BuildingCapacity in Biodiversity InformationSharing 2003, NIES, Japan, 254pp.

Lyal, C.H.C. & Weitzman, A.L., 2004,Taxonomy: Exploring the Impediment,Science, 305, 1106.

Lindenmayer, D.B., Manning, A.D., Smith,P.L., Possingham, H.P., Fischer, J.,Oliver, I & McCarthy, M.A., 2002, Thefocal-species approach and landscaperestoration: a critique. ConservationBiology, 16(2), 338-345.

Lowry, P.P. & Smith, P.P., 2003, Closing thegulf between botanists and conservation-ists. Conservation Biology, 17, 1175-1176.

108


Navarro S., A.G., Peterson, A.T. & Gordillo-Martinez, A., 2003, Museums workingtogether: The atlas of the birds of Mexico.Bulletin of the British Ornithologists’Club, 123A:207-225

McNeely, J.A., 2002, The role of taxonomyin conserving biodiversity. Journal forNature Conservation, 10, 145-153.

McNeely, J.A., Mooney, H.A., Neville, L.E.,Schei, P. & Waage, J.K., (Eds), 2001, AGlobal Strategy on Invasive AlienSpecies. IUCN Gland, Switzerland, andCambridge, U.K., in collaboration withthe Global Invasive Species Programme.X + 50pp.

MEA (Millenium Ecosystem Assessment).2005. Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Biodiversity Synthesis. WorldResources Institute, Washington, D.C.

Novotny, V., Basset, Y., Bremer, B., Cizek,L., Drozd, P., Miller, S. & Weiblen, G.,2002, Low host specificity of herbivo-rous insects in a tropical forest. Nature,416, 841-844.

Naumann, I.D. & Jisoh, M. Md., 2002,Needs assessment in taxonomy of arthro-pod pests of plants in countries of SouthEast Asia: biosystematics, collection andinformation management. Unpublishedreport to AusAID, 118 pp.

Petersen, F.T., Meier, R. & Larsen, M. N.,2003, Testing species richness estimationmethods using museum label data on theDanish Asilidae. Biodiversity andConservation, 12: 687-701.

Pfeiffer, J. & Uril, Y., 2003, The role ofindigenous parataxonomists in botanicalinventory: from Herbarium Amboinenseto Herbarium Floresense. Telopea 10(1),61-72.

Raxworthy, C.J., Martinez-Meyer, E.,Horning, N., Nussbaum, R.A., Schneider,G.E., Ortega-Huerta, M.A. & Peterson,A.T., 2003, Predicting distributions of

known and unknown reptile species inMadagascar. Nature, 462, 837-841.

M.H.V. van Regenmortel, C.M. Fauquet,D.H.L. Bishop, E.B. Carstens, M.K. Estes,S.M. Lemon, J. Maniloff, M.A. Mayo, D.J.McGeoch, C.R. Pringle, & R.B. Wickner(2000). Virus Taxonomy: The Classificationand Nomenclature of Viruses. The SeventhReport of the International Committee onTaxonomy of Viruses. Virus Taxonomy,VIIth report of the ICTV. Academic Press,SanDiego, 1167pp.

Ruiz, M. & Pooma, R., 2000, Going Home.A manual on the repatriation of infor-mation from ex-situ conservation andresearch institutions to countries oforigin. Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew.pp 28.

Samper, C., 2004, Taxonomy and environ-mental policy. Philosophical transac-tions of the Royal Society. BiologicalSciences. 359(1444), 721-728.

SCBD, 2001, Global Biodiversity Outlook.Montreal, 282pp.

SCBD, 2002, Scientific And TechnicalCooperation And The Clearing-HouseMechanism. Report of the JointConvention on Biological Diversity/Global Invasive Species ProgrammeInformal Meeting on Formats, Protocolsand Standards for Improved Exchangeof Biodiversity-related Information.Note by the Executive Secretary. UNEP\CBD/COP/6/INF/18. URL: http://www.biodiv.org/doc/meetings/cop/cop-06/information/cop-06-inf-18-en.doc

Shimura, J., (Ed.), 2003, Global TaxonomyInitiative in Asia. Report and Proceedingsof the 1st GTI Regional Workshop in Asia.Putrajaya, Malaysia, September 2002.NIES, Japan, 314 pp.

Shimura, J. (Ed), 2004, Building capacity inbiodiversity information sharing, 2003.NIES, Japan. 254 pp.

109


Smith, T., 2004, [response to Golding &Timberlake], Conservation Biology, 18,7-8.

Smith, P.P., Lowry, P.P., Timberlake, J. &Golding, J.S., 2004, The work of taxon-omy [letter in response], ConservationBiology, 18, 8-9.

Steenkamp, Y. & Smith, G.F., 2002,Addressing the needs of the users of botan-ical information. South African BotanicalDiversity Network Report 15: 52pp.

Suarez, A.V. & Tsutsui, N.D., 2004, Thevalue of museum collections for researchand society. BioScience, 54 (1): 66-74.

Vousden, D. & Okamura, B., 2003,GloBallast Project Independent Mid

Term Evaluation (MTE): Final Report,31 March 2003. IMO London.

Wemmer, C., Rudran, R., Dallmeier, F. &Wilson, D.E., 1993, Training develop-ing-country nationals is the critical ingre-dient to conserving global diversity.BioScience, 43, 762-767.

Wilson, K., Shimura, J., Lyal, C.H.C. &Cresswell, I. (Eds.), 2003, BuildingCapacity: Bangladesh to Bali andBeyond. Report of First Global TaxonomyInitiative Workshop in Asia. 75pp NIES,Japan.

Yahner, R.H., 2004, The work of taxonomy,Conservation Biology, 18, 6-7.

110


Documents submitted to SBSTTA

UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/2/5 Practical approaches for capacity-buildingfor taxonomy. http://www.biodiv.org/doc/meetings/sbstta/sbstta-02/official/sbstta-02-05-en.pdf

UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/3/Inf.32/GEF Workshop: Removing the taxonomicimpediment. http://www.biodiv.org/doc/meetings/sbstta/sbstta-03/information/sbstta-03-inf-32-en.pdf

UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/4/6/ Further advancement of the GlobalTaxonomy Initiative.http://www.biodiv.org/doc/meetings/sbstta/sbstta-04/official/sbstta-04-06-en.pdf

UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/4/6/CORR.1 Further advancement of the GlobalTaxonomy Initiative. (corrigendum)http://www.biodiv.org/doc/meetings/sbstta/sbstta-04/official/sbstta-04-06-corr1-en.pd

UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/4/INF/1The Global Taxonomy Initiative:Shortening the Distance BetweenDiscovery and Delivery. Report of ameeting held at Linnean Society, London,UK on September 10-11 1998 http://www.biodiv.org/doc/meetings/sbstta/sbstta-04/information/sbstta-04-inf-01-en.pdf

UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/4/INF/6The Global Taxonomy Initiative:recommendations from DIVERSITASElement 3, including an assessment ofpresent knowledge of key species groupshttp://www.biodiv.org/doc/meetings/sbstta/sbstta-04/information/sbstta-04-inf-06-en.pdf

UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/4/INF/7The Global Taxonomy Initiative: UsingSystematic Inventories to Meet Countryand Regional Needs. http://www.biodiv.org/doc/meetings/sbstta/sbstta-04/information/sbstta-04-inf-07-en.pdf

UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/5/4Item 3.3 of the Provisional Agenda Reviewof the Global Taxonomy Initiative.http://www.biodiv.org/doc/meetings/sbstta/sbstta-05/official/sbstta-05-04-en.pdf

SBSTTA/5 inf GTI. Mechanisms for management of the GTI,with a consideration of traditional andindigenous knowledge perspectived oncurrent taxonomic systems. Report of ameeting held 20 December 1999 atUNESCO, Paris. http://www.biodiv.org/doc/meetings/sbstta/sbstta-05/information/sbstta-05-inf-gti-en.pdf

UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/6/10The Global Taxonomy Initiative. Draftwork programme.http://www.biodiv.org/doc/meetings/sbstta/sbstta-06/official/sbstta-06-10-en.pdf

ANNEX 3.

CONVENTION DOCUMENTS SPECIFICALLY ON TAXONOMYAND THE GLOBAL TAXONOMY INITIATIVE

This annex lists documents prepared for SBSTTA, recommendations of SBSTTA, documentsprepared for COP, COP decisions, and other documents.

111


UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/6/INF/4Global Taxonomy Initiative. Progressreport on the Global Taxonomy Initiativehttp://www.biodiv.org/doc/meetings/sbstta/sbstta-06/information/sbstta-06-inf-04-en.pdf

UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/6/INF/4/ADD1Global Taxonomy Initiative. Progressreport on the Global Taxonomy InitiativeRegional Meeting of Scientists in CentralAmerica, Costa Rica, 6-9 February 2001http://www.biodiv.org/doc/meetings/sbstta/sbstta-06/information/sbstta-06-inf-04-add1-en.pdf

UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/8/3Progress in the implementation of theprogrammes of work on cross-cuttingissues [includes a component on the GTI]http://www.biodiv.org/doc/meetings/sbstta/sbstta-08/official/sbstta-08-03-en.pdf

UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/9/3Progress in the implementation of the workon cross-cutting issues [includes acomponent on the GTI] http://www.biodiv.org/doc/meetings/sbstta/sbstta-09/official/sbstta-09-03-en.pdf

UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/9/INF/16Global Taxonomy Initiative: Progress andimplementation of the programme of workhttp://www.biodiv.org/doc/meetings/sbstta/sbstta-09/information/sbstta-09-inf-16-en.pdf

UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/9/INF/17Preliminary report of first GlobalTaxonomy Initiative workshop in Asiahttp://www.biodiv.org/doc/meetings/sbstta/sbstta-09/information/sbstta-09-inf-17-en.pdf

UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/9/INF/30Draft guide to the Global TaxonomyInitiative. http://www.biodiv.org/doc/meetings/sbstta/sbstta-09/information/sbstta-09-inf-30-en.pdf

UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/10/3Progress report on the implementation ofthe programmes of work on relevant cross-cutting issues [includes a component onthe GTI] http://www.biodiv.org/doc/meetings/sbstta/sbstta-10/official/sbstta-10-03-en.pdf

UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/10/16The Global Taxonomy Initiative:Development of the process and theguidelines for the in-depth review of theprogramme of work http://www.biodiv.org/doc/meetings/sbstta/sbstta-10/official/sbstta-10-16-en.pdf

UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/10/17Outline of the Global Taxonomy Initiativeguide. http://www.biodiv.org/doc/meetings/sbstta/sbstta-10/official/sbstta-10-17-en.pdf

UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/11/5In-depth review of the implementation ofthe programme of work for the GlobalTaxonomy Initiative. http://www.biodiv.org/doc/meetings/sbstta/sbstta-11/official/sbstta-11-05-en.pdf

UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/11/5/Add.1In-depth Review of the Implementation ofthe Programme of Work for the GlobalTaxonomy Initiative: Elements of PlannedActivities for the New Programmes ofWork http://www.biodiv.org/doc/meetings/sbstta/sbstta-11/official/sbstta-11-05-add1-en.pdf

Recommendations of SBSTTA

SBSTTA Recommendation II/2: Practical approaches for capacity-buildingfor taxonomy. (This was endorsed by COPIII/10, and thus forms part of thatdecision.) http://www.biodiv.org/recommendations/?m=SBSTTA-02&id=6993&lg=0

112


SBSTTA Recommendation IV/2. Further advancement of a GlobalTaxonomy Initiative. http://www.biodiv.org/recommendations/?m=SBSTTA-04&id=7012&lg=0

SBSTTA Reccomendation V/3. Review of the Global Taxonomy Initiative.http://www.biodiv.org/recommendations/?m=SBSTTA-05&id=7020&lg=0

SBSTTA Reccomendation VI/6 The Global Taxonomy Initiative;programme of work. http://www.biodiv.org/recommendations/?m=SBSTTA-06&id=7037&lg=0

SBSTTA Recommendation IX/3. Global Taxonomy Initiative.http://www.biodiv.org/recommendations/?m=SBSTTA-09&id=7459&lg=0

SBSTTA Recommendation X/12Global Taxonomy Initiative: developmentof the process and the guidelines for the in-depth review of the programme of workand outline of the Global TaxonomyInitiative guide. http://www.biodiv.org/recommendations/default.aspx?m=SBSTTA-10&id=10693&lg=0

SBSTTA Recommendation XI/2In-depth review of the implementation ofthe programme of work for the GlobalTaxonomy Initiative. http://www.biodiv.org/recommendations/default.aspx?m=SBSTTA-11&id=10960&lg=0.

Documents submitted to COP

UNEP/CBD/COP/4/INF/28The Darwin Declaration. Submission bythe Government of Australia http://www.biodiv.org/doc/meetings/cop/cop-04/information/cop-04-inf-28-en.pdf

UNEP/CBD/COP/6/INF/23The Global Taxonomy Initiative. Report onprogress and status http://www.biodiv.org/doc/meetings/cop/cop-06/information/cop-06-inf-23-en.pdf

UNEP/CBD/COP/8/17/ADD1Elaboration of Relative Roles of the CHMin Dealing with Taxonomic DatabasesIncluding: The Inter-AmericanBiodiversity Information Network,BioNET, the Global BiodiversityInformation Facility, Species 2000, theIntegrated Taxonomic InformationSystem and Natureserve. http://www.biodiv.org/doc/meetings/cop/cop-08/official/cop-08-17-add1-en.pdf

UNEP/CBD/COP/8/INF/46Outcomes and Recommendations of theMeeting on “Biodiversity – themegascience in focus”.http://www.biodiv.org/doc/meetings/cop/cop-08/information/cop-08-inf-46-en.pdf

COP decisions

COP decision IV/1: Report and recommendations of the thirdmeeting of the Subsidiary Body on Scientific,Technical and Technological Advice, andinstructions by the Conference of the Partiesto the Subsidiary Body on Scientific,Technical and Technological Advice. D.Global Taxonomy Initiative. http://www.biodiv.org/decisions/default.aspx?m=COP-04&id=7124&lg=0

COP decision V/9:Global Taxonomy Initiative:Implementation and further advance for theSuggestions for Action. http://www.biodiv.org/decisions/default.aspx?m=COP-05&id=7151&lg=0

113


COP decision VI/8:Global Taxonomy Initiative.http://www.biodiv.org/decisions/default.aspx?m=COP-06&id=7182&lg=0

COP decision VII/9:Global Taxonomy Initiative.http://www.biodiv.org/decisions/default.aspx?m=COP-07&id=7746&lg=0

COP decision VIII/3:Global Taxonomy Initiative: in-depthreview of the implementation of theprogramme of work for the GlobalTaxonomy Initiative.http://www.biodiv.org/decisions/default.aspx?m=COP-08&id=11015&lg=0

Reports of the GTI CoordinationMechanism

Reports of the meetings of the GTICoordination Mechanism are availablethrough the GTI Portal.

Other documents

UNEP/CBD/WG-ABS/1/INF/2Access and benefit-sharing and the GlobalTaxonomy Initiative. Document submittedto First meeting of the Ad-Hoc Open-endedWorking Group on Access and Benefit-Sharing (Bonn, Germany, 22 - 26 October2001) http://www.biodiv.org/doc/meetings/abs/abswg-01/information/abswg-01-inf-02-en.pdf

Annex (programme of work)Priority action 3.2. Compile detailed inventories of island species, assesstheir conservation status, including the main threat criteria, and develop thetaxonomic expertise necessary to facilitate this.Supporting action 3.2.4: Undertake taxonomic studies or revisions ofimportant island taxa, including marine, freshwater and terrestrial species. Supporting action 3.2.11: Provide taxonomic training and prepare guides toenable researchers to identify poorly known biological groups, coral speciesand other associated island species.

Noting the importance of supporting work on taxonomic, ecological andsocioeconomic issues for the restoration of forest ecosystems andconservation and sustainable use of forest biological diversity

Decision on the framework for monitoring implementation of theachievement of the 2010 target and integration of targets into the thematicprogrammes of work:22. Emphasizes the need for taxonomic studies in forest biodiversity, takinginto account the relevant activities in the programme of work for the GlobalTaxonomy Initiative


ANNEX 4.

KEY ELEMENTS OF COP DECISIONS RELEVANT TO THE GTI

The text below is simply extracted from the decisions cited, and in each case refers to the GTI.The relevant decisions should be consulted to ensure that the text is seen in full context.Moreover, there are many other aspects of the decisions which will depend on the involvementof the GTI for implementation, although this is not made explicit. Text from supportingdocuments (SBSTTA documentation, information documents etc) is generally not includedhere, although it provides a very valuable additional source of information and more detail onwhere taxonomic information is required.

VIII/1

V/4

VIII/15

COPDecision Text

Island biological diversity

Forest biological diversity

114

115


V/3

VI/3

Section I. Coral reefs6. Urges Parties, other Governments and relevant bodies to implementresponse measures to the phenomenon of coral bleaching by:(e) Supporting capacity-building measures, including training of and careeropportunities for marine taxonomists, ecologists and members of otherrelevant disciplines, particularly at the national level;Annex – Priority areas for action on coral bleachingA. Information-gathering:Issue: Our ability to adequately project, and thus mitigate, the impacts ofglobal warming on coral-reef ecosystems and the human communities whichdepend upon coral-reef services is limited by the paucity of information on:(a) The taxonomic, genetic, physiological, spatial, and temporal factorsgoverning the response of corals, zooxanthellae, the coral-zooxanthellaesystem, and other coral-reef-associated species to increases in sea-surfacetemperature;Response:(b) Implement and coordinate baseline assessments, long-term monitoring, andrapid response teams to measure the biological and meteorological variablesrelevant to coral bleaching, mortality and recovery, as well as the socio-eco-nomic parameters associated with coral-reef services. To this end, support andexpand the Global Coral Reef Monitoring Network and regional networks, anddata-repository and dissemination systems including Reef Base - the GlobalCoral Reef Database. Also, the current combined Sida-SAREC and World Bankprogramme on coral-reef degradation in the Indian Ocean, as a response to the1998 coral-bleaching event, could be used as an example;B Capacity-buildingIssue: There is a substantial lack of trained personnel to investigate the causesand consequences of coral bleaching events. Response: Support the training of and career opportunities for marinetaxonomists, ecologists, and members of other relevant disciplines,particularly at the national and regional level.

The Conference of the Parties:3. Invites the Executive Secretary to continue developing furtherthe work plan on physical degradation and destruction of coralreefs as contained in annex I to recommendation VI/2 of the

COPDecision Text

Marine and coastal biological diversity

116


VII/5

VIII/21

Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical andTechnological Advice;Annex II to SBSTTA recommendation VI/2 – Specific work plan on coralbleaching, activity 2(f):Support the training of and career opportunities for marine taxonomists,ecologists, and members of other relevant disciplines, particularly at thenational and regional level.

Annex I – Elaborated programme of work, operational objective 2.1,suggested activities:(j) To promote, in collaboration with the Global Taxonomy Initiative, thestrengthening of taxonomic expertise at regional and national levels.Appendix 1 to annex I – Specific work plan on coral bleaching, section 3 oncapacity-building:(b) Support the training of and career opportunities for relevant marinetaxonomists, ecologists and members of other relevant disciplines, particularlyat the national and regional level.Appendix 5 to annex I - Research and monitoring priorities associated withProgramme Element 4 on Mariculture: (c) (i) Support for basic global-scale taxonomic studies, possibly inconjunction with the Global Taxonomy Initiative (GTI);(f) (iii) Update of taxonomic databases including genetic diversity at the intra-specific level.

Conservation and sustainable use of deep seabed genetic resources beyond thelimits of national jurisdiction:9. Emphasizes the urgent need, especially in developing countries, to buildcapacities relating to deep seabed biodiversity, including taxonomic capacity;to promote scientific and technical cooperation and technology transfer; andto exchange information regarding activities undertaken within the deepseabed beyond the limits of national jurisdiction.

Biological diversity of dry and sub-humid lands

4. Requests the Executive Secretary, in consultation with Parties, to developtargets for the implementation of the programme of work, taking into accountespecially national action programmes to combat desertification, the GlobalStrategy for Plant Conservation, the Global Taxonomy Initiative, the Strategic

COPDecision Text

VII/4

Plan of the Convention, as well as the Plan of Implementation of the WorldSummit on Sustainable Development, for consideration by the SubsidiaryBody on Scientific, Technical and Technological Advice. Such a processcould follow the approach taken in the development of the Global Strategy forPlant Conservation (decision VI/9, annex) and be in line with decision VII/8,on monitoring and indicators;

Decision on the framework for monitoring implementation of the achievement ofthe 2010 target and integration of targets into the thematic programmes of work: 17. Emphasizes the need for taxonomic studies in the implementation of theprogramme of work on the biological diversity of dry and sub-humid lands,taking into account the relevant activities in the programme of work for theGlobal Taxonomy Initiative;

Biological diversity of inland waters

3. Emphasizes the importance of review and elaboration of the programme ofwork on biological diversity of inland water ecosystems, as outlined in theprogress report of the Executive Secretary on thematic programmes of work,and of the implementation of activity 11 of the programme of work on theGlobal Taxonomy Initiative;

17. Encourages Parties, other Governments and relevant organizations toimprove national, regional and global data on inland water ecosystem goodsand services, their uses and related socio-economic variables; on species andall taxonomic levels; on basic hydrological aspects and water supply; and onthe threats to which inland water ecosystems are subjected;19. Recognizes the usefulness of these guidelines to create baseline orreference data sets for inland water ecosystems of different types and toaddress the serious gaps that exist in knowledge of taxonomy, distribution,and conservation status of freshwater species;

Annex – Programme of WorkActivities of the Parties3.1.1. Encourage, and where possible support, applied research to gain animproved understanding of the status, trends, taxonomy and uses of biologicaldiversity in inland water ecosystems, including transboundary systems whereapplicable.3.1.3. In line with the Global Taxonomy Initiative (GTI) encourage studiesaimed at improving the understanding of the taxonomy of the biologicaldiversity of inland water ecosystems.

117


VIII/15

VI/2

VII/4

VII/4

COPDecision Text

3.1.4. Support efforts to achieve international consistency and interoperabilityof taxonomic nomenclature, databases and metadata standards, as well asdata-sharing policies.Supporting activities of the Executive Secretary3.1.7. As part of the agreed programme of work for the GTI, support andassist, in collaboration with suitable partners, the development of the series ofregional guides to the taxonomy of freshwater fish and invertebrates(including adult terrestrial forms where appropriate) as an input to ecosystemmonitoring for river and lake health (as specified by decision of theConference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity).Activities of the Parties3.2.3. (b) (ii) The taxonomy of the group should be reasonably wellunderstood;3.2.3. (c) In view of the great economic importance of some groups (e.g.inland water fish species and aquatic macro-invertebrates), and of the largegaps in taxonomic knowledge for many species, capacity-building intaxonomy should focus on inland water biodiversity of economic as well asecological importance.

Agricultural biological diversity

‘II. International Initiative for the Conservation and Sustainable Use ofPollinators’The Conference of the Parties15. Decides to establish an International Initiative for the Conservation andSustainable Use of Pollinators as a cross-cutting initiative within theprogramme of work on agricultural biodiversity to promote coordinated actionworldwide to:(b) Address the lack of taxonomic information on pollinators;

Annex – Programme of work on agricultural biodiversity, section A: 3. The proposed elements of the programme of work have been developedbearing in mind the need:(c) To ensure harmony with the other relevant programmes of work under theConvention on Biological Diversity, including those relating to forestbiological diversity, inland water biological diversity, marine and coastalbiological diversity, and dry and subhumid lands, as well as with cross-cuttingissues such as access and benefit-sharing, sustainable use, indicators, alienspecies, the Global Taxonomy Initiative, and issues related to Article 8 (j);

118


V/5

V/5

COPDecision Text

Annex II – Plan of action for the International Initiative for the Conservationand Sustainable use of Pollinators: 6. The aim of the International Initiative for the Conservation and SustainableUse of Pollinators is to promote coordinated action worldwide to:(b) Address the lack of taxonomic information on pollinators;7. The Initiative is to be implemented as a cross-cutting initiative within theprogramme of work on agricultural biodiversity, with appropriate links toother thematic programmes of work, particularly those on forest biologicaldiversity and the biodiversity of dry and sub-humid lands, and with relevantcross-cutting issues, particularly the Global Taxonomy Initiative and work oninvasive alien species. The Initiative provides an opportunity to apply theecosystem approach.

Section III. Elements of the Plan. Element 1. Assessment.Rationale: In addition to the “taxonomic impediment” (see element 3), thereis also a global “taxonomic deficit,” that is, the unacceptably high numbersof bee genera for which identification keys are not availableActivities:1.3 Assess the state of scientific and indigenous knowledge on pollinatorconservation, in order to identify gaps in knowledge and opportunities forapplication of knowledge; including:(a) Taxonomic knowledge1.4 Promote the development of identification keys for bee genera

Element 3. Capacity-building. Rationale: One major area which needs addressing is the capacity of countriesto address the taxonomic impediment, which derives from serious shortfalls ininvestment in training, research and collections management. It seriously limitsour capability to assess and monitor pollinator decline globally, in order toconserve pollinator diversity and to manage it sustainably. The global taxonomicimpediment is costly, especially when expressed in terms of those researchinitiatives in pollination and conservation ecology which are wholly dependenton access to sound bee taxonomy and are rendered wholly non-viable in itsabsence. There is also a global taxonomic deficit, that is, the unacceptably highnumbers of bee genera for which identification keys are not available.Activities3.4. Build taxonomic capacity to carry out inventories of the pollinatordiversity and distribution in order to optimise their management, through,

119


VI/5

COPDecision Text

inter alia, the training of taxonomists and parataxonomists of bees and otherpollinators.Ways and means:The taxonomic elements would also be promoted through the GlobalTaxonomy Initiative.

Element 4. Mainstreaming. Activities:4.3. Strengthen national institutions to support taxonomy of bees and otherpollinators, through, inter alia:(a) Assessing national taxonomic needs (this would contributeto activity 1.3);(b) Maintaining continuity of taxonomic and reference collections of bees andother pollinators;(c) Recognition of centres of excellence in bee taxonomy and establishment ofcentres of excellence as appropriate;(d) Repatriation of data through capacity-building and benefit-sharing.Ways and meansThe taxonomic elements would also be promoted through the GlobalTaxonomy Initiative.Timing of expected outputsProgressively increased capacity at national level for taxonomy, informationmanagement, assessment and communication.Consideration of pollinators and related dimensions of agriculturalbiodiversity incorporated into national biodiversity and/or agricultural sectorplans in 50 countries by 2010.

B. International Initiative for the Conservation and Sustainable use of SoilBiodiversity, Annex on the Framework for Action2. The Initiative is to be implemented as a cross-cutting initiative withinthe programme of work on agricultural biodiversity, through thecoordination, and with the technical and policy support of FAO, withappropriate links to other thematic programmes of work of the Convention,particularly those on the biodiversity of dry and sub-humid lands, mountainand forest biological diversity, and with relevant cross-cutting issues,particularly the Global Taxonomy Initiative and work on technologytransfer and cooperation.

120


VIII/23

COPDecision Text

Mountain biological diversity

10. Requests the Executive Secretary: (f) With the assistance of the GlobalTaxonomy Initiative Co-ordination Mechanism to develop and incorporateactivities and targets appropriate to mountain ecosystems within the GTIprogramme of work for consideration at SBSTTA-11, taking into account theCOP-7 decision on targets.

Programme of work:Action 1.5.3. Develop, validate and implement sustainable use practices forplants, animals and microorganisms at the genetic, species, population,community and ecosystem levels.Goal 3.1. To develop work on identification, monitoring and assessment ofmountain biological diversityAction 3.1.2. Conduct mountain surveys in priority areas, for conservationand sustainable use of mountain biological diversity. These surveys shouldconsider inventories at genetic, species and ecosystem levels.Action 3.1.3. Apply, whenever appropriate, the programmes of work of theglobal initiatives such as the Global Taxonomy Initiative, MillenniumEcosystem Assessment and the Global Invasive Species Programme.

Access and benefit-sharing

Section A, Annex – Bonn guidelines on access to genetic resources and fairand equitable sharing of the benefits arising out of their utilization.11. The objectives of the Guidelines are the following:(l) Taxonomic research, as specified in the Global Taxonomy Initiative, shouldnot be prevented, and providers should facilitate acquisition of material forsystematic use and users should make available all information associatedwith the specimens thus obtained.16. Recognizing that Parties and stakeholders may be both users andproviders, the following balanced list of roles and responsibilities provideskey elements to be acted upon:(b) In the implementation of mutually agreed terms, users should:(viii) When supplying genetic resources to third parties, honour any termsand conditions regarding the acquired material. They should provide thisthird party with relevant data on their acquisition, including prior informedconsent and conditions of use and record and maintain data on their supplyto third parties. Special terms and conditions should be established under

121


VII/27

VI/24

COPDecision Text

mutually agreed terms to facilitate taxonomic research fornon-commercial purposes;34. Prior informed consent should be based on the specific uses for whichconsent has been granted. While prior informed consent may be grantedinitially for specific use(s), any change of use including transfer to thirdparties may require a new application for prior informed consent. Permitteduses should be clearly stipulated and further prior informed consent forchanges or unforeseen uses should be required. Specific needs of taxonomicand systematic research as specified by the Global Taxonomy Initiative shouldbe taken into consideration.36. An application for access could require the following information to beprovided, in order for the competent authority to determine whether or notaccess to a genetic resource should be granted. This list is indicative andshould be adapted to national circumstances:(f) Accurate information regarding intended use (e.g.: taxonomy, collection,research, commercialization);42. The following principles or basic requirements could be considered for thedevelopment of mutually agreed terms:(e) Different uses may include, inter alia, taxonomy, collection, research,commercialization;44. The following provides an indicative list of typical mutually agreed terms:(f) Whether the genetic resources can be transferred to third parties andconditions to be imposed in such cases, e.g. whether or not to pass geneticresources to third parties without ensuring that the third parties enter intosimilar agreements except for taxonomic and systematic research that is notrelated to commercialization;Appendix II: Monetary and non- monetary benefits2. Non-monetary benefits may include, but not be limited to:(k) Access to scientific information relevant to conservation and sustainable useof biological diversity, including biological inventories and taxonomic studies;

Section B. Other approaches, including the development of an actionplan for capacity-building – Annex: Draft elements for an Action Plan forcapacity-building for access to genetic resources and benefit-sharing3. The following key areas, which require capacity-building initiatives, shouldbe considered in a flexible and transparent manner, based on a demand-drivenapproach, taking into account the different situations, needs, capabilities and

122


VI/24

COPDecision Text

stages of development of each country and should avoid duplication of effortsbetween various capacity building initiatives:(b) Assessment, inventory and monitoring of biological resources, andtraditional knowledge including taxonomic capacity, within the context of theGlobal Taxonomy Initiative;5. The following mechanisms could be used for the implementation ofcapacity-building measures for access to genetic resources andbenefit-sharing: (l) The Global Taxonomy Initiative;

F. Needs for capacity-building identified by countries to implement the BonnGuidelines – Annex: Action plan on capacity-building for access to geneticresources and benefit-sharing:5. Capacities should be strengthened at the systemic, institutional andindividual levels in the following key areas:(b) Assessment, inventory and monitoring of genetic resources, and traditionalknowledge including taxonomic capacity, inter alia, within the context of theGlobal Taxonomy Initiative, and of in situ and ex situ conservation activities;(c) The capacity of indigenous and local communities to assess, inventory andmonitor genetic resources and related traditional knowledge, with theirapproval and consent, using the Global Taxonomy Initiative and otherrelevant initiatives;9. Actions at the regional and subregional levels and at the internationallevels:(h) The Global Taxonomy Initiative;

Section A, Annex. Potential elements for inclusion in the international regimeon ABS: Environmentally sound research utilizing genetic resources and associatedtraditional knowledge is promoted, and commercial and non-commercialscientific research, including taxonomic research, are distinguished.

Alien species that threaten ecosystems, habitats or species

The Conference of the Parties14. Requests the Executive Secretary to collaborate with the Global InvasiveSpecies Programme, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the UnitedNations, the International Maritime Organization, the World HealthOrganization and other relevant organizations, and other relevant

123


VII/19

VIII/4

V/8

COPDecision Text

internationally and regionally binding and nonbonding instruments to assistthe Parties to the Convention in:(g) Assessing priorities for taxonomic work;

Annex II – Outline for case-studies on alien speciesTo the extent possible, case-studies should be short and succinct summaries ofexperience on alien species at the country and regional levels. A case-studyshould focus on the prevention of introduction, control, and eradication ofalien species that threaten ecosystems, habitats or species. Case-studies should include the following sections (a summary of the informa-tion may be provided under each heading, and a more detailed paper may beattached; if the information were not available, this should be indicated in theappropriate section):1. Description of the problem(c) Description of the alien species concerned: biology of the alien species(the scientific name of species should be indicated if possible) and ecology ofthe invasion(s) (type of and potential or actual impacts on biological diversityand ecosystem(s) invaded or threatened, and stakeholders involved)(e) Assessment and monitoring activities conducted and methods applied,including difficulties encountered (e.g. uncertainties due to missing taxonomicknowledge)

24. Urges Parties, Governments and relevant organizations, at the appropriatelevel, with the support of relevant international organizations to promote andcarry out, as appropriate, research and assessments on:(h) Priorities for taxonomic work through, inter alia, the Global TaxonomyInitiative;

Annex: Guiding principle 5: Research and monitoringIn order to develop an adequate knowledge base to address the problem, it isimportant that States undertake research on and monitoring of invasive alienspecies, as appropriate. These efforts should attempt to include a baselinetaxonomic study of biodiversity. In addition to these data, monitoring is thekey to early detection of new invasive alien species. Monitoring shouldinclude both targeted and general surveys, and benefit from the involvementof other sectors, including local communities. Research on an invasive alienspecies should include a thorough identification of the invasive species andshould document: (a) the history and ecology of invasion (origin, pathwaysand time-period); (b) the biological characteristics of the invasive alien

124


VI/23

COPDecision Text

species; and (c) the associated impacts at the ecosystem, species and geneticlevel and also social and economic impacts, and how they change over time.

Guiding principle 8: Exchange of information1. States should assist in the development of an inventory and synthesis ofrelevant databases, including taxonomic and specimen databases, and thedevelopment of information systems and an interoperable distributed networkof databases for compilation and dissemination of information on alienspecies for use in the context of any prevention, introduction, monitoring andmitigation activities. This information should include incident lists, potentialthreats to neighbouring countries, information on taxonomy, ecology andgenetics of invasive alien species and on control methods, wheneveravailable. The wide dissemination of this information, as well as national,regional and international guidelines, procedures and recommendations suchas those being compiled by the Global Invasive Species Programme shouldalso be facilitated through, inter alia, the clearing-house mechanism of theConvention on Biological Diversity.

50. Emphasizes the need for taxonomic studies to deal with invasive alienspecies, and encourages implementation of the planned activity on invasivealien species within the programme of work of the Global Taxonomy Initiative

Article 8(j) and related provisions

Annex – Programme of work on the implementation of Article 8 (j) andrelated provisions of the Convention on Biological DiversityTask 13. The Ad Hoc Working Group to develop a set of guiding principlesand standards to strengthen the use of traditional knowledge and other formsof knowledge for the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity,taking into account the role that traditional knowledge can play with respectto the ecosystem approach, in situ conservation, taxonomy, biodiversitymonitoring and environmental impact assessments in all biodiversity sectors.

Identification, monitoring and assessment

The Conference of the PartiesReaffirming the central importance of the implementation of Article 7 inensuring that the objectives of the Convention are met,Stressing the fundamental role of taxonomy in identifying the components ofbiological diversity,

125


VIII/27

V/16

III/10

COPDecision Text

Recognizing the lack of taxonomic capacity in many countries,Recognizing also the necessity of capacity-building to enable Parties to carryout identification, monitoring and assessment within the remit of theConvention, Noting the review of methodologies for assessment of biological diversitycontained in annex I of document UNEP/CBD/COP/3/13 and the discussionof indicators contained in annex II of that document,1. Urges Parties to identify indicators of biological diversity and to developinnovative methods of implementing Article 7 as a high priority, in particularcommending the value of rapid biological diversity assessment approaches asan efficient and cost-effective way of assessing biological diversity andidentifying priorities for action, and recognizing also the role of remotesensing as a useful tool for monitoring;2. Endorses the recommendation II/1 of the Subsidiary Body on Scientific,Technical and Technological Advice concerning indicators, monitoring andassessment of biological diversity;3. Endorses the recommendation II/2 of the Subsidiary Body on Scientific,Technical and Technological Advice concerning capacity-building fortaxonomy; 8. Recommends to Parties that they explore ways to make taxonomicinformation housed in collections world-wide readily available, in particularto countries of origin;10. Requests the institutional structure of the interim financial mechanism ofthe Convention to provide financial resources to developing countries in orderto address the need for capacity-building, including taxonomy, to enable themto develop and carry out an initial assessment for designing, implementingand monitoring programmes in accordance with Article 7, taking into accountthe special need of small island States.

Annex: SBSTTA Recommendation II/1:4. It was noted that improvement of taxonomic knowledge was fundamental tothe development of indicators and assessments.

Annex: SBSTTA Recommendation II/2:Agenda item 3.4: Practical approaches for capacity-building for taxonomy[the text is reproduced in full in a separate annex to this Guide)]

126


COPDecision Text

Annex: Guidelines for incorporating biodiversity-related issues intoenvironmental impact assessment legislation and/or process and in strategicenvironmental assessment36. Any activity aimed at the incorporation of biodiversity considerations intonational environmental impact assessment systems should be accompanied byappropriate capacity development activities. Expertise in taxonomy,conservation biology, ecology, and traditional knowledge is required as wellas local expertise in methodologies, techniques and procedures.Environmental impact assessments should involve ecologists with extensiveknowledge on the relevant ecosystem(s) in the assessment team.

Protected areas

Annex - Programme of Work on Protected Areas4. The present programme of work on protected areas featuresgoals and activities that are specific to protected areas. Someelements of existing programmes of work on forests, inland waters,dry and subhumid lands, coastal and marine and mountain biologicaldiversity as well as the Global Strategy for Plant Conservation and theGlobal Taxonomy Initiative also apply to protected areas. The goalsand activities contained in these existing programmes of work should alsobe applied and implemented, as and whenever appropriate for theirrespective protected areas. Other relevant guidelines developedunder cross-cutting issues of the CBD should also be taken intoaccount when implementing the programme of work.Suggested activities of the Parties4.4.3. Encourage studies to improve the knowledge of the distribution, statusand trends of biological diversity.

7. Recognizes the importance of linkages to avoid overlap withrelevant activities in thematic programmes of work (such as theprogrammes of work on forest, inland water, dry and sub-humid lands,marine and coastal, and mountain biodiversity) and under othercross-cutting issues (such as Global Strategy for PlantConservation and Global Taxonomy Initiative) where theseprogrammes of work contribute to the implementation of theprogramme of work on protected areas;

127


VI/7

VII/28

VIII/24

COPDecision Text

Global Strategy for Plant Conservation

Annex: Global Strategy for Plant Conservation5. Within the ultimate and long-term objective, a number of sub-objectivescan be identified as follows:(a) Understanding and documenting plant diversity:(iv) Promote research on the genetic diversity, systematics, taxonomy, ecologyand conservation biology of plants and plant communities, and associatedhabitats and ecosystems, and on social, cultural and economic factors thatimpact biodiversity, so that plant diversity, both in the wild and in the contextof human activities, can be well understood and utilized to supportconservation action;14. The Strategy is not intended to be a “programme of work” analogous toexisting thematic and cross-cutting programmes of work under the Convention.It does not, therefore, contain detailed activities, expected outputs, etc. Rather,the Strategy provides a framework by means of setting outcome-orientatedtargets (these differ from the “process” targets used so far under theConvention). It is envisaged that the activities necessary to reach those targetscould be developed within this framework. In many cases, activities arealready under way, or envisaged in existing initiatives. These include:(c) Relevant activities under the programmes of work of the Convention onBiological Diversity, including those relating to agricultural biodiversity,forest biological diversity, inland water biological diversity, marine andcoastal biological diversity, and dry and sub-humid lands, as well as activitiesinvolving cross-cutting issues such as access and benefit-sharing, sustainableuse, indicators, alien species, the Global Taxonomy Initiative, and issuesrelated to Article 8(j).

Guidance to the financial mechanism

The Conference of the Parties,2. Decides to provide the following additional guidance to the GlobalEnvironment Facility in the provision of financial resources in conformitywith decisions I/2 and II/6 of the first and second meetings of theConference of the Parties. In this regard, the Global Environment Facilityshall provide financial resources to developing countries for country-driven activities and programmes, consistent with national priorities andobjectives, recognizing that economic and social development and povertyeradication are the first and overriding priorities of developing countries:

128


VI/9

III/5

COPDecision Text

b) For capacity-building, including taxonomy, to enable developing countriesto develop and carry out an initial assessment for designing, implementingand monitoring programmes in accordance with Article 7, taking into accountthe special need of small island States (Note: The Conference of the Partiesendorsed recommendation II/2 of the Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technicaland Technological Advice, concerning capacity-building for taxonomy);

The Conference of the Parties:9. Stresses the urgent need for adequate financial resources to implement aGlobal Taxonomy Initiative and requests the institutional structure of thefinancial mechanism of the Convention to provide financial resources,particularly to assist in implementing, through country-driven activities withinthe context of the operational programmes of the Global Environment Facility,the Suggestions for Action annexed to the present decision.

The Global Environment Facility should:4. In accordance with decision IV/7 and with Article 7 of the Convention andalso within the context of implementing national biological diversity strategiesand plans, provide adequate and timely financial support to Parties forprojects and capacity-building activities for implementing the programme ofwork of forest biological diversity at the national, regional and subregionallevels and the use of the clearinghouse mechanism to include activities thatcontribute to halting and addressing deforestation, basic assessments andmonitoring of forest biological diversity, including taxonomic studies andinventories, focusing on forest species, other important components of forestbiological diversity and ecosystems under threat;

The Conference of the Parties: 6. Urges eligible Parties and consortia of eligible Parties to seek resources forabove priority actions through the financial mechanism, and requests thefinancial mechanism to continue promoting awareness of the GlobalTaxonomy Initiative in its outreach activities, such as the CapacityDevelopment Initiative and the Country Dialogue Workshops, and toinvestigate ways both within and outside its operational programme structureto facilitate capacity-building in taxonomy, and the implementation of theshort-term activities referred to in the annex to the present decision.

The Conference of the Parties,2. Decides to provide the following additional guidance to the GlobalEnvironment Facility in the provision of financial resources, in conformity with

129


IV/1.D

IV/13

V/9

V/13

COPDecision Text

decisions I/1, II/6, III/5 and IV/13 of the Conference of the Parties. In thisregard, the Global Environment Facility shall provide financial resources todeveloping country Parties for country-driven activities and programmes,consistent with national priorities and objectives, recognizing that economic andsocial development and poverty eradication are the first and overriding prioritiesof developing countries. The Global Environment Facility, as the institutionalstructure operating the financial mechanism, should provide support:k) To continue promoting awareness of the Global Taxonomy Initiative in therelevant activities of the Global Environment Facility, such as the CountryDialogue Workshops, and to facilitate capacity-building in taxonomy,including in its Capacity Development Initiative;

10. The Global Environment Facility as the institutional structure operatingthe financial mechanism should provide financial resources:(f) For national and regional taxonomic capacity-building, as a basis forimplementing the programme of work for the Global Taxonomy Initiative, withparticular attention to funding country-driven pilot projects identified underthe Global Taxonomy Initiative, taking into consideration the special needs ofleast developed countries and small island developing States;7. Invites Parties, other Governments, regional and international organizations totake full account of the importance of taxonomic capacities in achieving the goalsof the Convention, to support taxonomic activities to attain the 2010 target, and toprovide all necessary support to national, and where appropriate regional,taxonomic centres of research and expertise; and urges the Parties, otherGovernments and the Global Environment Facility, in accordance with itsmandate, and other relevant funding organizations to provide adequate and timelysupport to developing countries to assist in the implementation of the GlobalTaxonomy Initiative, and for integrating taxonomic capacity-building activitiesinto thematic and cross-cutting programmes, including supporting activities andprojects, such as, where appropriate, stand-alone capacity-building projects;

Paragraphs 24 to 26 are copies of paragraphs 12 to 14 of decision VIII/3 onthe GTI which is reproduced in different annex to this guide.

Other references to GTI

Global Initiative on Communication, Education and Public Awareness, annexI on the short-list of priority activities, under Priority activity 3: Develop messages to overcome these gaps and to provide information on thefollowing, inter alia… The relevance of taxonomy for nature conservationsupporting sustainable development.

130


V/13

VI/17

VII/20

VIII/15

VIII/6

COPDecision Text

Framework for monitoring implementation of the achievement of the 2010target and integration of targets into the thematic programmes of work: 12. Emphasizes the need for capacity-building, access to and transfer oftechnology in accordance inter alia with Article 16.2 of the Convention andadequate financial resources, especially for developing countries, particularlythe least developed and small island developing States amongst them, andcountries with economies in transition, in order to enable them to developknowledge, including taxonomic knowledge, to gain access to relevantinformation on their biodiversity, and to better implement activities to achieveand monitor progress towards the goals and targets;

Scientific and technical cooperation and the clearing-house mechanism6. Requests the Executive Secretary to use the clearing-house mechanism, incollaboration with the informal advisory committee, to continue to strengthencollaboration with international partners and organizations for review at theeighth meeting of the Conference of the Parties and to report on thatcollaboration, including an elaboration of the relative roles of the clearing-house mechanism and information facilities dealing in particular withtaxonomic databases including, IABIN (Inter-American BiodiversityInformation Network) hubs, BioNet LOOPs (Locally Owned and OperatedPartnerships), NatureServe CDCs (Centres for Data Conservation), nodes ofthe Global Biodiversity Information Facility and Species 2000 and theIntegrated Taxonomic Information System’s Catalogue of Life;[note: this report was made to COP 8 in document UNEP/CBD/COP/8/17/Add.1]

Clearing-house mechanism to promote and facilitate technical and scientificcooperationThe Conference of the Parties,Noting also:(a) The crucial part played by technical and scientific cooperation on allaspects of biological diversity, including taxonomy and transfer of technology,in ensuring the capacity of the clearing-house mechanism to play animportant role in the implementation of the Convention;

Cooperation with other bodiesThe Conference of the Parties,7. Requests the Executive Secretary to take the study into consideration and,in collaboration with the Secretariat of the Convention on Migratory Species,to develop a proposal on how migratory species could be integrated into the

131


VIII/15

VII/23

III/4

V/21

COPDecision Text

132


work programme of the Convention on Biological Diversity, and the role theConvention on Migratory Species could play in the implementation of theConvention on Biological Diversity with regard to, inter alia, the ecosystemapproach, the Global Taxonomy Initiative, indicators, assessments andmonitoring, protected areas, public education and awareness, and sustainableuse, including tourism;

COPDecision Text

133

ANN

EX 5

.

OU

TL

INE

ST

RAT

EG

YFO

R T

AX

ON

OM

IC C

APA

CIT

Y-B

UIL

DIN

G

This

tabl

e ar

ose

from

the

Third

Glo

bal T

axon

omy

Wor

ksho

p, h

eld

in P

reto

ria in

200

2, a

nd a

wor

ksho

p in

Par

is, h

eld

in 2

003.

Itw

as su

bmitt

ed to

SB

STTA

9 as

par

t of a

n in

form

atio

n do

cum

ent17

4A

sam

ple

of p

artn

er c

omm

itmen

ts17

5to

a st

rate

gy fo

r del

iver

ing

taxo

nom

ic c

apac

ity a

nd p

rodu

cts

need

ed b

y us

ers

incl

udin

g th

ose

in th

e fo

llow

ing

sect

ors:

agr

icul

ture

; for

estry

; env

ironm

ent

man

ager

s; c

onse

rvat

ioni

sts;

pol

icy

and

deci

sion

mak

ers;

ind

igen

ous

and

loca

l co

mm

uniti

es;

priv

ate

sect

or (

natio

nal

and

mul

tinat

iona

l); p

ublic

ly-o

wne

d co

mpa

nies

; ec

otou

rism

; bi

osec

urity

; bi

osaf

ety;

acc

ess

and

bene

fit-s

harin

g; b

ioin

dica

tors

;bi

otec

hnol

ogy

and

heal

th is

sues

(inc

ludi

ng e

mer

ging

dis

ease

s). M

any

of th

e pa

rtner

s lis

ted

will

be

taki

ng a

ctio

n at

som

e le

vel i

nm

ost i

f not

all

area

s; a

lthou

gh o

nly

the

larg

est c

ompo

nent

s of

thei

r und

erta

king

are

list

ed


133

1.E

nd-u

ser

focu

s:M

eet s

take

-ho

lder

nee

ds.

1.G

BIF

, GIS

P, IC

IPE,

NH

M,

UN

ESC

O, W

FCC

2.−

3.G

BIF

, IU

CN

4.C

CC

, GB

IF, G

ISP,

ICIP

E,IP

PC, I

TIS,

IUC

N, R

BG

K,

SP20

00, U

NES

CO

5.B

ioN

ETLO

OPs

6.G

BIF

, ITI

S, N

HM

, RB

GK

,SP

2000

7.G

BIF

, RB

GK

8.C

CC

, EN

BI,

NH

M, R

BG

K9.

AB

RS,

GB

IF, G

ISP,

ICIP

E,IT

IS, R

BG

K, S

PP, S

P200

010

.A

BR

S, G

ISP,

SPP

, UN

ESC

O,

WFC

C11

.G

BIF

, GIS

P, IU

CN

1.C

arry

out

nee

ds a

sses

smen

ts, i

nclu

ding

iden

tifyi

ng fu

llra

nge

of s

take

hold

ers

and

user

s;

2.In

corp

orat

e m

arke

t res

earc

h te

chni

ques

in a

sses

sing

sta

ke-

hold

er n

eeds

, inc

ludi

ng m

etho

ds o

f ens

urin

g st

akeh

olde

rta

ke-u

p of

taxo

nom

ic p

rodu

cts;

3.Es

tabl

ish

disc

ussi

on fo

ra;

4.Fo

rm p

artn

ersh

ips

with

use

rs;

5.Es

tabl

ish

regi

onal

coo

rdin

atio

n;6.

Impr

ove

stab

ilisa

tion

of n

ames

and

dev

elop

con

cord

ance

sbe

twee

n di

ffere

nt c

lass

ifica

tions

;7.

Incr

ease

the

rate

at w

hich

spe

cim

ens

are

iden

tifie

d an

dne

w s

peci

es d

escr

ibed

;8.

Shar

ing

of b

iodi

vers

ity d

ata

with

dev

elop

ing

coun

try e

nd-

user

s;9.

Mak

e ta

xono

mic

pro

duct

s m

ore

rele

vant

to n

on-ta

xono

mic

issu

es;

10.

Ass

ist w

ith d

eliv

ery

of p

rodu

cts;

11.

Incl

ude

feed

back

on

prod

ucts

from

use

rs a

nd ‘l

esso

nsle

arne

d’in

pro

ject

s.

174 U

NEP

/CB

D/S

BST

TA/9

/INF/

1617

5 ht

tp://

ww

w.b

ione

t-int

l.org

/3gt

w/p

aris

/com

mitm

ents

.htm

Stra

tegy

ele

men

tA

ctio

ns id

entif

ied

by P

artn

ers

at th

e w

orks

hops

Part

ners

com

mitt

ed to

dat

e

134


2.Po

litic

alpa

rtne

rshi

p:G

ener

ate

effe

ctiv

epo

litic

al a

ndm

ulti-

sect

oral

com

mitm

ent t

ofu

lfil n

atio

nal

and

inte

rnat

iona

lob

ligat

ions

3.G

loba

lpa

rtne

rshi

p:En

hanc

eco

llabo

ratio

n,co

oper

atio

n an

dpa

rtner

ship

s,bu

ildin

g to

glob

al s

cale

s.

1.B

ioN

ETLO

OPs

2.A

BR

S, C

CC

, GB

IF, G

ISP,

IUC

N, S

PP, U

NES

CO

3.U

NES

CO

4.IP

PC5.

AB

RS,

CC

C, G

BIF

, GIS

P,IC

IPE,

IUC

N, R

BG

K6.

AB

RS,

GB

IF, G

ISP,

ICIP

E,IU

CN

, NH

M, R

BG

K, S

PP,

SP20

00, U

NES

CO

, WFC

C7.

AB

RS,

CC

C, G

BIF

, GIS

P,IC

IPE,

IUC

N, R

BG

K,

UN

ESC

O8.

GB

IF9.

CC

C, G

BIF

, NH

M, U

NES

CO

1.G

BIF

, NH

M2.

AB

RS,

CC

C, G

BIF

, IU

CN

,N

HM

, SPP

, UN

ESC

O3.

GB

IF, I

UC

N, R

GB

K, W

FCC

4.C

ETA

F, G

BIF

, IU

CN

, NH

M,

SPP,

UN

ESC

O5.

UN

ESC

O, W

FCC

6.G

ISP,

IPPC

,7.

Bio

NET

LOO

Ps

1.Es

tabl

ish

regi

onal

coo

rdin

atio

n;2.

Wor

k w

ith C

BD

and

oth

er c

onve

ntio

ns a

nd re

late

d U

Nbo

dies

; 3.

Parti

cipa

te in

glo

bal i

nitia

tive

on b

iodi

vers

ity c

omm

unic

a-tio

n, e

duca

tion

and

publ

ic a

war

enes

s (C

EPA

);4.

Rai

se a

war

enes

s th

roug

h In

terim

Com

mis

sion

on

Phyt

osan

itary

Mea

sure

s re

gard

ing

need

for s

uppo

rt to

tax-

onom

y;5.

Parti

cipa

te in

bod

ies

repo

rting

to g

over

nmen

t on

biod

iver

sity

issu

es;

6.R

aise

pro

file

of ta

xono

my

with

key

sec

tors

of s

ocie

ty,

incl

udin

g po

licy

and

deci

sion

-mak

ers

and

cham

pion

taxo

nom

y na

tiona

lly a

nd re

gion

ally

; 7.

Enga

ge d

ecis

ion

mak

ers;

8.

Con

duct

med

ia c

ampa

igns

; 9.

Dev

elop

edu

catio

n pr

ogra

mm

es.

1.Im

prov

e ef

fect

iven

ess

of N

atio

nal F

ocal

Poi

nts;

2.D

rive

pro-

activ

ity o

f gro

ups,

netw

orks

and

soc

ietie

s in

link

-in

g to

geth

er;

3.Pr

omot

e ac

cess

and

ben

efit-

shar

ing

for

incl

usiv

enes

s of

all;

4.

Stre

ngth

en n

etw

orki

ng b

etw

een

inst

itute

s, in

divi

dual

s an

dco

untri

es;

5.In

crea

se c

olla

bora

tion

with

Bio

NET

-IN

TER

NAT

ION

AL

LOO

Ps;

6.B

uild

on

the

colla

bora

tion

of C

BD

and

IPPC

; 7.

Esta

blis

h re

gion

al c

oord

inat

ion.

Stra

tegy

ele

men

tA

ctio

ns id

entif

ied

by P

artn

ers

at th

e w

orks

hops

Part

ners

com

mitt

ed to

dat

e

135


4.Aw

aren

ess

and

actio

n:Im

prov

e ac

cess

to a

nd a

naly

sis

of p

olic

y-le

vel

info

rmat

ion

with

in th

eta

xono

mic

com

mun

ity.

5.C

apac

ity-

build

ing:

Bui

ld h

uman

and

infr

astru

c-tu

ral c

apac

ity to

mee

t sus

tain

able

deve

lopm

ent

need

s.

1.A

BR

S, G

ISP,

IUC

N, W

FCC

2.IU

CN

, WFC

C3.

AB

RS,

GIS

P, N

HM

, IU

CN

,R

BG

K, W

FCC

4.G

ISP,

IUC

N, W

FCC

5.G

ISP,

IUC

N, W

FCC

6.IU

CN

7.A

BR

S, G

ISP,

IPPC

8.IP

PC9.

Bio

NET

LOO

Ps10

.B

ioN

ETLO

OPs

1.C

CC

, GB

IF, G

ISP,

IUC

N,

RB

GK

, UN

ESC

O2.

AB

RS,

CA

BI,

GB

IF, G

ISP,

IUC

N, N

HM

, SPP

, UN

ESC

O,

WFC

C3.

GB

IF, G

ISP,

UN

ESC

O4.

GB

IF, G

ISP,

RB

GK

5.G

BIF

, GIS

P6.

UN

ESC

O7.

AB

RS,

UN

ESC

O8.

IPPC

1.D

evel

op a

nd s

usta

in a

war

enes

s of

dev

elop

men

t pro

-gr

amm

e pr

oces

ses

and

obje

ctiv

es;

2.D

evel

op a

nd s

usta

in a

war

enes

s of

NB

SAPs

;3.

Dev

elop

and

sus

tain

aw

aren

ess

of re

leva

nt C

onve

ntio

nC

OP

deci

sion

s, in

clud

ing

on th

emat

ic a

reas

,cr

oss-

cutti

ng is

sues

as

wel

l as

the

GTI

; 4.

Dev

elop

and

sus

tain

aw

aren

ess

of d

onor

pol

icy

back

grou

nds;

5.A

naly

ze in

form

atio

n ob

tain

ed to

rela

te ta

xono

mic

out

put

to d

evel

opm

ent o

bjec

tives

; 6.

Con

tribu

te to

har

mon

isin

g th

e fo

rmat

of n

atio

nal r

epor

tsun

der v

ario

us c

onve

ntio

ns;

7.Pr

omot

e su

ppor

t to

taxo

nom

y as

it re

late

s to

phy

tosa

nita

ryis

sues

of N

atio

nal P

lant

Pro

tect

ion

Org

anis

atio

ns(N

PPO

s);

8.Li

ase

thro

ugh

Inte

rnat

iona

l Phy

tosa

nita

ry P

orta

l(in

futu

re);

9.B

uild

aw

aren

ess

of ta

xono

mic

net

wor

ks a

mon

g R

egio

nal

Plan

t Pro

tect

ion

orga

nisa

tions

;10

.Es

tabl

ish

regi

onal

coo

rdin

atio

n

1.D

evel

op lo

ng-te

rm s

trate

gy fo

r sus

tain

ing

capa

city

2.

Dev

elop

cap

acity

with

in c

urre

nt s

truct

ures

and

pro

cess

es;

3.Id

entif

y an

d in

clud

e ne

w e

lem

ents

, stru

ctur

es a

ndpr

oces

ses;

4.

Impr

ove

acce

ss to

new

info

rmat

ion

tech

nolo

gies

5.

Acc

ess

and

mob

ilise

reso

urce

s 6.

Ass

ist i

n de

velo

pmen

t of c

urric

ula

in te

rtiar

y in

stitu

tions

7.Pu

rsue

cur

rent

act

iviti

es in

rela

tion

to tr

aini

ng in

taxo

nom

y an

d pa

rata

xono

my

8.H

elp

asse

ss ta

xono

mic

nee

ds a

sses

smen

ts fo

r NPP

Os

usin

g “P

hyto

sani

tary

Cap

acity

Eva

luat

ion”

Stra

tegy

ele

men

tA

ctio

ns id

entif

ied

by P

artn

ers

at th

e w

orks

hops

Part

ners

com

mitt

ed to

dat

e

136


6.Sc

ienc

e:

Sust

aina

bly

mai

ntai

n an

den

hanc

eta

xono

mic

scie

nce

skill

san

d kn

owle

dge

base

to e

nabl

ere

spon

sive

ness

to e

mer

ging

need

s.

7.Ta

xono

mic

info

rmat

ion:

Im

prov

e ac

cess

to a

nd e

xcha

nge

of ta

xono

mic

info

rmat

ion

and

prod

ucts

.[T

his

is o

ne o

fG

BIF’

s m

ajor

goal

s]

9.C

AB

I, U

nive

rsity

of

Am

ster

dam

, Nat

iona

lH

erba

rium

(Net

herla

nds)

, 10

.C

AB

I, IC

IPE,

WFC

C11

.B

ioN

ETLO

OPs

1.A

BR

S, C

CC

, GB

IF, N

HM

,R

BG

K, U

NES

CO

, WFC

C2.

IUC

N, N

HM

, RB

GK

,U

NES

CO

, WFC

C3.

CC

C, G

BIF

, GIS

P, N

HM

,U

NES

CO

, WFC

C4.

GB

IF, G

ISP,

IUC

N, R

BG

K,

WFC

C5.

AB

RS,

GB

IF, I

CIP

E, R

BG

K,

SPP,

SP2

000

6.G

BIF

, RB

GK

7.B

ioN

ETLO

OPs

1.A

BR

S, G

BIF

, SPP

, UN

ESC

O2.

AB

RS,

CC

C, F

auna

Eur

opea

,G

BIF

, NH

M, R

BG

K, S

I3.

AB

RS,

Eur

opea

n C

atal

ogue

of N

ames

, GB

IF, I

TIS,

IUC

N-S

IS, N

HM

, NSF

,R

BG

K, S

P200

04.

AB

RS,

EN

BI,

GB

IF, I

TIS,

IUC

N, N

HM

, RB

GK

, WFC

C5.

ENB

I, ET

I, G

BIF

, ITI

S,IU

CN

, NH

M, R

BG

K,

SP20

00, W

FCC

9.Su

ppor

t adv

ance

d tra

inin

g in

taxo

nom

y, c

urat

ion

and

othe

r rel

evan

t dis

cipl

ines

10.

Esta

blis

h R

egio

nal B

iodi

vers

ity C

entre

s ba

sed

on e

xist

ing

infr

astru

ctur

e11

.Es

tabl

ish

regi

onal

coo

rdin

atio

n

1.Su

ppor

t and

stre

ngth

en e

xist

ing

colle

ctio

ns, i

nstit

utio

nsan

d ne

twor

ks;

2.G

ener

ate

inte

rest

in ta

xono

my

as a

sci

ence

and

enc

oura

gepe

ople

to jo

in d

isci

plin

e; fi

nd m

echa

nism

s an

d in

cent

ives

for e

mpl

oyin

g ta

xono

mis

ts;

3.D

evel

op a

nd im

prov

e tra

inin

g pr

ogra

mm

es a

nd c

urric

ula;

4.

Dev

elop

mec

hani

sms

for l

inki

ng ta

xono

mis

ts to

end

use

rs;

5.C

ompl

ete

the

Cat

alog

ue o

f Life

; 6.

Ado

pt n

ew te

chno

logi

es a

nd te

chni

ques

; 7.

Esta

blis

h re

gion

al c

oord

inat

ion.

1.D

ecre

ase

publ

icat

ion

time

for t

axon

omic

wor

ks;

2.Im

prov

e ac

cess

ibili

ty o

f pub

licat

ions

; 3.

Dev

elop

and

link

dat

abas

es o

f tax

onom

ic in

form

atio

n;

4.Im

prov

e ac

cess

to s

peci

men

s an

d da

ta;

5.Ex

ploi

t app

ropr

iate

info

rmat

ion

tech

nolo

gy;

6.Im

prov

e ac

cess

and

com

mun

icat

ion

amon

g ex

perts

; 7.

Impr

ove

trans

fer a

nd in

terp

reta

tion

of ta

xono

mic

pro

duct

sfr

om p

rovi

ders

to u

sers

; 8.

Esta

blis

h re

gion

al c

oord

inat

ion.

Stra

tegy

ele

men

tA

ctio

ns id

entif

ied

by P

artn

ers

at th

e w

orks

hops

Part

ners

com

mitt

ed to

dat

e

137


8.Ti

mel

ines

s:A

ccel

erat

e th

efu

ll ta

xono

mic

cycl

e: d

isco

very

,de

scrip

tion,

dete

rmin

atio

nan

ddi

ssem

inat

ion.

9.R

esou

rcin

g:A

cces

s an

dm

obili

sere

sour

ces

(ens

ure

reso

urce

s ar

eav

aila

ble

for

prod

uctio

n of

appr

opria

tepr

oduc

t)

6.ET

I, G

BIF

, GIS

P, IU

CN

,SP

2000

, WFC

C7.

CC

C, E

TI, G

BIF

, GIS

P, IT

IS,

RB

GK

, SP2

000,

UN

ESC

O,

WFC

C8.

Bio

NET

LOO

Ps

1.ET

I, G

BIF

, NH

M, R

BG

K,

WFC

C2.

AB

RS,

ETI

, GB

IF, N

HM

, SPP

,W

FCC

3.A

BR

S, U

NES

CO

, WFC

C4.

Bio

NET

LOO

Ps

1.C

CC

2.C

CC

, GIS

P, N

HM

3.-

4.N

HM

5.A

BR

S, G

BIF

, GIS

P, N

HM

,R

BG

K, S

PP,

WFC

C6.

GIS

P, U

NES

CO

, WFC

C7.

Bio

NET

LOO

Ps

1.Im

prov

e an

d de

velo

p ne

w to

ols

and

tech

nolo

gies

inta

xono

mic

rese

arch

; 2.

Impr

ove

resp

onse

tim

es -

prov

ide

quic

ker a

nd m

ore

accu

rate

iden

tific

atio

n an

d de

scrip

tion;

3.

Exam

ine

new

app

roac

hes

to c

ompo

nent

s of

the

taxo

nom

iccy

cle

and

the

cycl

e in

tota

l;4.

Esta

blis

h re

gion

al c

oord

inat

ion.

1.Id

entif

y ne

w re

sour

ces

via

new

are

as o

f app

licat

ion

(e.g

. tra

de; e

xpan

d ec

otou

rism

pro

duct

s to

new

gro

ups)

;2.

Enha

nce

skill

s/in

stitu

tiona

l cap

acity

in w

ritin

g/m

anag

ing

succ

essf

ul p

ropo

sals

;3.

Impr

ove

com

mun

icat

ion

skill

s;4.

Impr

ove

med

ia re

latio

n sk

ills;

5.D

evel

op c

o-fu

ndin

g pa

rtner

ship

s ba

sed

on e

nd-u

ser n

eeds

;6.

Ass

ist w

ith w

orks

hops

aim

ed a

t dev

elop

ing

proj

ect

prop

osal

s fo

r fun

ding

;7.

Esta

blis

h re

gion

al s

uppo

rt an

d co

ordi

natio

n.

Stra

tegy

ele

men

tA

ctio

ns id

entif

ied

by P

artn

ers

at th

e w

orks

hops

Part

ners

com

mitt

ed to

dat

e

ANNEX 6.

SAMPLE QUESTIONNAIRE FOR A TAXONOMIC NEEDS ASSESSMENT

This questionnaire is based on that developedfor the UK taxonomic needs assessment ofconservation bodies, and may not be fullyappropriate for other purposes. However, itdoes give some ideas which could be used.

IMPORTANT

The personal details you provide are pro-tected by the provisions of the DataProtection Act. Under the terms of thislegislation the Board of Trustees of theNHM, our data controller, is responsiblefor processing this information fairly andlawfully.How will my information be used?Some of the information on taxonomicneeds that is collected will be made avail-able publicly in the form of a report thatmay be published on the World Wide Web.This will include the names of the organisa-tions consulted and key needs identified byparticular groups of organisations.

This information will only be madeavailable with your explicit permission, allother information will be kept private andonly used for statistical purposes.

Please tick this box if you are happy forthe information outlined above to bemade available

You may withhold permission for any ofyour details to be published via the internetat any time.

By submitting the form enclosed you con-sent to the Museum collecting and process-ing the data you provide within the terms ofthe Data Protection Act and using that dataonly for the purposes outlined above.

You have a right to access or amendthese data at any time by contacting the GTIfocal point at the Natural History Museum.

N.B. This component was incorporatedinto the UK needs assessment in order tocomply with UK and EU law.

138


139


Part 1 – About your organisation

Details of Organisation

Name and Address oforganisation

Homepage (URL)

Name of person who has filled in questionnaire

Name

Position in organisation

Phone/Fax

Email

Is your organisation (please tick one or several)

A statutory agency A private company

A government department A research institution

A national non-governmental organisation An amateur society

A regional non-governmental organisation A university or other educational body

An environmental management body A small business

Other (please specify);

Please Provide a brief statement of the role and interests of your organisation

140


Please indicate the Ecosystem(s) to which your activities relate. Write ‘1’for most and ‘2’for some.

Agricultural biodiversity Forest biodiversity

Dry and sub-humid lands biodiversity Inland waters biodiversity

Marine and coastal biodiversity Island biodiversity

Mountain biodiversity

More detailed term (one-4 words only)

Please indicate the CBD Cross-Cutting Issue to which your activities relate. Write ‘1’ for most and ‘2’ for some.

Access to genetic resources and Invasive alien speciesbenefit-sharing

Traditional knowledge, innovations, Biodiversity and tourismand practices

Climate change and biodiversity Economics, trade and incentive measures

2010 biodiversity target Global Taxonomy Initiative

Ecosystem approach Global Strategy for Plant Conservation

Impact assessment Indicators

Liability and redress Protected areas

Public education and awareness Sustainable use of biodiversity

Technology transfer and cooperation

141


With which of the following groups of species is the work of your organisation most concerned (please tick one or several and if appropriate specify species)

Terrestrial Species

Birds

Insects and spiders

Mammals

Microorganisms

Plants (Cryptogamic)

Plants (Vascular)

Reptiles and amphibians

Invasive alien species

Marine Species

Birds

Fish

Invertebrates

Mammals

Microorganisms

Plants


Freshwater

Fish

Invertebrates

Micro-organisms

Plants


Other (please specify);

142


Which of the following activities is your organisation involved in: (please tick one or several)

Identification, assessment Conservationand monitoring

Legal and policy Capacity-building

Developing reference collections Assessment of phylogenetic diversity

Molecular assessment methods Producing identification aids/tools

Developing ecological indicators Indicator species taxonomy

Compiling biodiversity inventories Environmental impact assessment

Climate change monitoring Developing rapid assessment techniques

Environmental monitoring Environmental research

Environmental consulting Analysing species distribution

Managing protected areas Selecting/designating protected areas

Habitat restoration Species reintroductions

Identifying wild relatives Natural resources exploitation

Disease control Ecotourism

Basic taxonomic training Professional/accredited training

Publishing educational materials Providing information to informGovernment

Enforcing Government policy CITES

Legislation and species protection

Other (please specify)

143


1. T

axon

omic

info

rmat

ion

and

serv

ices

you

use,

or w

ould

use

if th

ey w

ere

avai

labl

e

Spec

ies

Lis

ts

•Li

sts

of s

cien

tific

nam

es o

f ani

mal

s/pl

ants

•Li

sts

of c

omm

on n

ames

of a

nim

als/

plan

ts

•In

form

atio

n on

nam

e ch

ange

s

•Li

sts

of in

vasi

ve a

lien

spec

ies

•Li

sts

of p

rote

cted

ani

mal

s/pl

ants

•Li

sts

of s

peci

es in

oth

er c

ount

ries

(e.g

. nei

ghbo

urs,

sour

ces

of p

ests

)

•O

ther

(ple

ase

spec

ify)

6. A

dditi

onal

Com

men

ts4.

Sou

rce

2. Importance

3. Available (y/n)

5.Sustainable (y/n/?)

Part

2 –

Abo

ut y

our

orga

nisa

tion’

s us

e of

taxo

nom

ic in

form

atio

n

Plea

se re

ad th

roug

h th

e fo

llow

ing

list o

f inf

orm

atio

n an

d se

rvic

es. P

leas

e id

entif

y w

hich

of t

hese

serv

ices

are

mos

t im

porta

nt fo

rth

e w

ork

of y

our o

rgan

isat

ion

and

in c

olum

n 2

rank

them

acc

ordi

ng to

impo

rtanc

e fr

om 1

(ver

y im

porta

nt) t

o 5

(uni

mpo

rtant

). In

colu

mn

3 st

ate

whe

ther

the

reso

urce

s ar

e av

aila

ble

or u

nava

ilabl

e. In

col

umn

4 pl

ease

iden

tify

the

sour

ce o

f the

reso

urce

s (e

.g.

in-c

ount

ry p

rofe

ssio

nals

, am

ateu

rs, l

ocal

lib

rary

), an

d in

col

umn

5 in

dica

te w

heth

er t

he s

ourc

e is

in

your

vie

w s

usta

inab

le.

Col

umn

6 is

for y

our c

omm

ents

.

144


1. T

axon

omic

info

rmat

ion

and

serv

ices

you

use,

or w

ould

use

if th

ey w

ere

avai

labl

e

Iden

tific

atio

n To

ols

•Fi

eld

guid

es (p

aper

)

•Id

entif

icat

ion

keys

(pap

er)

•Id

entif

icat

ion

tool

s (C

D-R

OM

)

•Id

entif

icat

ion

tool

s (w

eb b

ased

)

•Im

ages

/Pho

togr

aphs

of a

nim

als/

plan

ts

•Sp

ecia

lised

iden

tific

atio

nse

rvic

es (t

axon

omic

)

•Fo

rmal

(tax

onom

ic) p

lant

/ani

mal

desc

riptio

ns

•A

cces

s to

spe

cim

ens

of a

nim

als/

plan

ts

•O

ther

(ple

ase

spec

ify)

6. A

dditi

onal

Com

men

ts4.

Sou

rce

2. Importance

3. Available (y/n)


145


1. T

axon

omic

info

rmat

ion

and

serv

ices

you

use,

or w

ould

use

if th

ey w

ere

avai

labl

e

Ecl

ogic

al I

nfor

mat

ion

(rel

evan

t dat

a ca

n so

met

imes

be

obta

ined

from

taxo

nom

ic in

stitu

tions

, alth

ough

this

is g

ener

ally

not

the

prim

ary

sour

ce o

f inf

orm

atio

n)

•H

abita

t req

uire

men

ts o

f ani

mal

s/pl

ants

•Ph

enol

ogic

al in

form

atio

n

•In

form

atio

n on

the

cons

erva

tion

stat

us o

f spe

cies

•In

form

atio

n on

ani

mal

/pla

nt in

tera

ctio

ns

•O

ther

(ple

ase

spec

ify)

Spec

ies

Dis

trib

utio

nal I

nfor

mat

ion

•Po

int d

ata

from

spe

cim

ens

(via

the

web

)

•Po

int d

ata

from

spe

cim

ens

(oth

er s

ourc

e)

•In

form

atio

n on

loca

l spe

cies

dis

tribu

tions

•In

form

atio

n on

nat

iona

l spe

cies

dist

ribut

ions

6. A

dditi

onal

Com

men

ts4.

Sou

rce

2. Importance

3. Available (y/n)


146


1. T

axon

omic

info

rmat

ion

and

serv

ices

you

use,

or w

ould

use

if th

ey w

ere

avai

labl

e

•In

form

atio

n on

regi

onal

spe

cies

dist

ribut

ions

•D

istri

butio

n m

aps

•G

IS d

ata

•O

ther

(ple

ase

spec

ify)

Edu

catio

nal I

nfor

mat

ion

•Pu

blic

edu

catio

n m

ater

ials

•In

form

atio

n on

lite

ratu

re

•Tr

aini

ng c

ours

es/m

ater

ials

•Sp

ecim

ens

for s

tude

nt e

xam

inat

ion

•O

ther

(ple

ase

spec

ify)

6. A

dditi

onal

Com

men

ts4.

Sou

rce

2. Importance

3. Available (y/n)


147


Please use the following page to provide more detailed information on the taxonomicinformation or services you require for biodiversity conservation which are currentlyunavailable (e.g. specific species/areas, or other types of information not included in theabove list)

Many thanks for your time


148

BioNET-INTERNATIONALThe Global Network for TaxonomyTechnical Secretariat, Bakeham Lane, Egham, Surrey, TW20 9TY, United Kingdom. Telephone: + 44 (0) 1491 829036/7/8 Facsimile: + 44 (0) 1491 829082 E-mail: [email protected]. URL: http://www.bionet-intl.org/

BioNET Regional Networks (LOOPs –Locally Organized and OperatedPartnerships):

ANDINONET (Andean countries)http://www.andinonet.org.ve

CARINET (Caribbean)http://carinet.ecoport.org

EAFRINET (East Africa)http://eafrinet.ecoport.org

NAFRINET (North Africa)[email protected]

SAFRINET (Southern Africa)http://safrinet.ecoport.org

ASEANET (South-east Asia)http://aseanet.org

EASIANET (East Asia) http://www.easianet.nies.go.jp/hk

EuroLOOP (Europe)[email protected]

PACINET (South Pacific)[email protected]

WAFRINET (West Africa)[email protected]

LATINET (South America SouthernCone)[email protected]

MesoAmeriNET (Mesoamerica) [email protected]

NEURASIANET (North Eurasia)[email protected]; [email protected]

SACNET (South Asia)http://www.biodiversityasia.org/sacnet

CABI Publishing: North American officeCAB International10 East 40th Street Suite 3203 New York, NY10016USATel: +1 212 481 7018 Toll Free: +1 800 528 4841 Fax: +1 212 686 7993E-mail: [email protected]

CABI Publishing: European officeCAB International,Wallingford, Oxfordshire,OX10 8DEUKTel: +44 1491 832111Fax: +44 1491 829292E-mail: [email protected]

ANNEX 7.

USEFUL CONTACT ADDRESSES

(n.b., internet links for these and many other relevant organizations are provided throughoutthe text of this guide)

Clearing-House Mechanism, Secretariat of the Convention on BiologicalDiversity, 413 Saint-Jacques, Suite 800, Montréal, Québec, Canada H2Y 1N9,Telephone: +1 514 288 2220, Fax: +1 514 288 6588, E-mail: [email protected] URL:http://www.biodiv.org/chm/default.aspx

EDIT – European Distributed Instituteof Taxonomy. http://www.e-taxonomy.eu/index.php

Food and Agriculture Organization ofthe United NationsViale delle Terme di Caracalla00100 Rome, ItalyTelephone: (+39) 06 57051Cable address: FOODAGRI ROMETelex: 625852/610181 FAO IFax: (+39) 06 570 53152Email: [email protected]

Global Biodiversity Information FacilityGBIF Secretariat,Universitetsparken 15,DK-2100 Copenhagen, DenmarkTel: +45 35 32 14 70Fax: +45 35 32 14 80E-mail: [email protected]: www.gbif.org

Global Environment Facility 1818 H Street, NW, Washington, D.C., 20433, USA. Tel: (+1) 202-473-0508. Fax: (+1) 202-522-3240.

URL: http://www.gefweb.org

Global Invasive Species ProgrammeClaremont 7735,Cape Town,South AfricaTelephone: +27 21 799 8800Fax: + 27 21 797 1561URL: http://www.gisp.org

IUCN – The World Conservation UnionRue Mauverney 28Gland 1196SwitzerlandPhone: +41 (22) 999-0000 Fax: +41 (22) [email protected]

The Ramsar Convention on WetlandsRue Mauverney 28CH-1196 GlandSwitzerlandTel: 41 22 999 0170Fax: 41 22 999 [email protected]

Royal Botanic Gardens, KewRichmond, Surrey TW9 3ABUKTel: 44 (0)20 8332 5000Fax: 44 (0)20 8332 5197http://www.rbgkew.org.uk/

Smithsonian InstitutionNational Museum of Natural History10th Street and Constitution Ave. NWWashington, D.C. 20560Tel: [email protected]

Species 2000School of Plant Sciences,The University of ReadingReading, RG6 6ASUnited Kingdom


149

150


tel: +44 (0)118 931 6466fax: +44 (0)118 975 3676 e-mail: [email protected]: www.sp2000.org

United Nations DevelopmentProgrammeGlobal Environment Facility Unit (UNDP-GEF) 304 East 45th Street 9th Floor NewYork, NY 10017 U.S.A. URL: http://www.undp.org/gef/.

United Nations Educational, Scientificand Cultural Organization (UNESCO)UNESCO – MAB,Division of Ecological Sciences 1, rueMiollis Paris 75732 Cedex 15 France Tel:+33 1 45 68 40 67 Fax: +33 1 45 68 58 04E-MAIL: [email protected]

United Nations EnvironmentProgramme United Nations Avenue, GigiriPO Box 30552, 00100Nairobi, KenyaTel: (254-20) 621234Fax: (254-20) 624489/90URL: http://www.unep.org

UNEP – World Conservation MonitoringCentre219 Huntingdon RoadCambridge CB3 0DL, UKTel: +44 (0)1223 277314Fax: +44 (0)1223 277136email: [email protected]

The World Bank Global Environment Division, 1818 H Street, NW, Washington, DC, USA. Tel. (+1) 202-473-1816. Fax: (+1) 202-522-3256. URL: http://www.worldbank.org

151


The SBSTTA,Recalling paragraph 7 of decision II/8,which requested the second meeting of theSBSTTA to address the issue of the lack oftaxonomists that are required for Parties toimplement the Convention and to advise theConference of the Parties at its third meet-ing on ways and means to overcome thisproblem, taking into account existing stud-ies and ongoing initiatives while adoptingmore practical direction of taxonomy linkedto bio-prospecting and ecological researchon conservation and sustainable use of bio-logical diversity and its components;

Recognizing that biological collectionsare the basis of taxonomy and are alsosources of genetic resources;

Having examined the note by theSecretariat (UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/2/5) andfinding an extraordinary level of agreementthat enhanced taxonomic capacity is a sine quanon for the implementation of the Convention;

Recommends that the Conference of theParties consider the following:

1. There is a scarcity of taxonomists,taxonomic collections, and institutional facil-ities, and there is a need to take measures toalleviate this situation worldwide, to facili-tate and assist countries in implementing theConvention on Biological Diversity. In par-ticular, national institutions and regional andsubregional networks should be establishedor strengthened and linkages enhanced withtaxonomic institutions in developing anddeveloped countries. In strengthening thetaxonomic base, consideration must be given

to the information needs for bio-prospecting,habitat conservation, sustainable agricultureand the sustainable utilization of biologicalresources.

2. Capacity-building for taxonomyshould be linked to the effective implemen-tation of the Convention on BiologicalDiversity, particularly the national identifi-cation of areas of high diversity to threat-ened taxa, taxa that are or may be of valueto humanity, and those with potential use asbiological indicators for conservation andsustainable use of biological diversity.

3. Development of guidelines and pro-gramme priorities for funding, includingfor the financial mechanism under theConvention, should take account of the spe-cific needs for capacity-building in taxon-omy to serve areas such as bio-prospecting,habitat conservation and the sustainable useof biological diversity. Such support shouldrecognize the need for adequate, long-termhousing of collections and records and long-term research.

4. For new taxonomists to be recruited,there is a need to provide employmentopportunities. It is urgent that Parties takethis need into consideration and integrate itinto the programme of capacity-building.

5. Where appropriate, national taxo-nomic needs assessment and action plansshould be developed by setting nationalpriorities, mobilizing available institutionalresources, and identifying available funds.Countries could benefit from regional andsubregional collaboration.

ANNEX 8.

COP DECISION III/10 ENDORSING SBSTTA RECOMMENDATION II/2 ONPRACTICAL APPROACHES FOR CAPACITY-BUILDING FOR TAXONOMY

152


6. The importance of establishingregional and subregional training pro-grammes was recognized. Attention shouldalso be given to the training of specialists,parataxonomists, and technicians in thisfield. The field of taxonomy must be inte-grated with training activitie such as biologi-cal monitoring and assessments. Maximumuse should be made of existing institutionsand those organizations active in these fields.

7. There is an urgent need to make theinformation on existing taxonomic knowl-edge, including information about the taxain worldwide collections, available to coun-tries of origin.

8. Taxonomic information to assistcapacity-building in taxonomy should beincluded within the clearing-house mecha-nism. The taxonomic work embodied in exist-ing archives and inventories, field guides andpublications needs to be updated and readilyaccessible through worldwide services and theduplication of work already conducted shouldbe avoided. The dissemination of informationshould further the objectives of theConvention and be linked to user needs. Thissharing of information will require greaterinternational collaboration. It should also berecognized that traditional taxonomic systemsoffer a valuable perspective on biologicaldiversity and should be considered part of thetotal taxonomic knowledge base at national,regional and subregional levels.

9. Since taxonomy generally involvesthe use of biological collections, those

concerned should consider the adoption ofmutually agreed upon material transferagreements or equivalent instruments inaccordance with the provisions of theConvention on Biological Diversity forexchange of biological specimens and infor-mation relating to them.

10. The Conference of the Partiesshould consider instructing the GlobalEnvironment Facility to support a GlobalTaxonomy Initiative, providing the neces-sary funds for the following actions relatedto capacity-building in taxonomy:

(a) developing national, regional andsubregional training programmes;

(b) strengthening reference collectionsin countries or origin including,where appropriate, the exchange ofparatypes on mutually agreed uponterms;

(c) making information housed in col-lections worldwide and the taxon-omy based on them available tothe countries of origin;

(d) producing and distributing regionaltaxonomic guides;

(e) strengthening infrastructure forbiological collections in countriesof origin, and the transfer of mod-ern technologies for taxonomicresearch and capacity-building;and

(f) disseminating taxonomic infor-mation worldwide, inter alia, bythe clearing-house mechanism.

Report and recommendations of the thirdmeeting of the Subsidiary Body on Scientific,Technical and Technological Advice, andinstructions by the Conference of the Partiesto the Subsidiary Body on Scientific,Technical and Technological Advice

D. Global Taxonomy InitiativeNote: paragraphs 1 and 3 have been retiredby the COP.

The Conference of the Parties,Noting decision III/10, supporting a

Global Taxonomy Initiative, and the activi-ties being supported by the financial mech-anism on taxonomy,

Recognizing the need for taxonomicinput in many activities aimed at the conser-vation and sustainable use of biologicaldiversity and the lack of taxonomic capacityin a majority of countries,

Recalling that paragraph 3 of decisionIII/10, in which the Conference of theParties endorsed the recommendation II/2of the Subsidiary Body on Scientific,Technical and Technological Advice con-cerning capacity-building for taxonomythrough a Global Taxonomy Initiative,

Taking into account the urgency for theavailability of taxonomic information tocountries of origin, and the need of devel-oping countries to develop national collec-tions and human and institutional capacitiesin taxonomy,

1. Acknowledges the work alreadyunder way by the financial mechanismin response to decision III/10 of theConference of the Parties, and requests theGlobal Environment Facility to report on

these experiences at the fifth meeting of theConference of the Parties;

2. Stresses the urgent need for the fur-ther implementation of recommendationII/2 of the Subsidiary Body on Scientific,Technical and Technological Advice con-cerning capacity-building in all fields oftaxonomy to assist in the implementation ofthe Convention, through the incorporationof targeted actions in its workplan, includ-ing promoting regional activities to setregional agendas;

3. Endorses, as initial advice, theSuggestions for Action in the annex to thepresent decision to develop and implement aGlobal Taxonomy Initiative, and requeststhe Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technicaland Technological Advice to examine andprovide advice on the further advancementof a Global Taxonomy Initiative;

4. Recognizes that the implementationof a Global Taxonomy Initiative shouldoccur on the basis of country-driven pro-jects at the national, regional and subre-gional levels;

5. Invites the United NationsEnvironment Programme to assist in theglobal implementation of a Global TaxonomyInitiative, as offered by the ExecutiveDirector in his address to the Conference ofthe Parties at its fourth meeting;

6. Encourages Governments to makeavailable appropriate resources to enhancethe availability of taxonomic information;

7. Encourages Governments todevelop bilateral and multilateral trainingand employment opportunities for taxono-mists, particularly for those dealing withpoorly known organisms;


153

ANNEX 9.

COP DECISION IV/1

154


8. Stresses the need to consider indige-nous and traditional knowledge as an impor-tant existing information source that shouldbe taken into account, and made availablethrough appropriate mechanisms;

9. Stresses the urgent need for adequatefinancial resources to implement a GlobalTaxonomy Initiative and requests the insti-tutional structure of the financial mecha-nism of the Convention to provide financialresources, particularly to assist in imple-menting, through country-driven activitieswithin the context of the operational pro-grammes of the Global EnvironmentFacility, the Suggestions for Action annexedto the present decision.

Annex

SUGGESTIONS FOR ACTION

1. The Executive Secretary should, as amatter of urgency, seek means outside ofcore funding of the Convention, to appoint aProgramme Officer with appropriate opera-tional resources to have responsibility forthe further development of a GlobalTaxonomy Initiative, through the networkof existing global, regional and national rel-evant institutions and organizations. Theofficer should especially coordinate actionsto meet the need, recognized by the meet-ing, for each country to conduct a nationaltaxonomic needs assessment, and to link tonational reporting under the Convention onBiological Diversity and immediately coor-dinate a global directory of taxonomicexpertise and biological collections. Thisinformation resource should be made avail-able in both electronic and paper form.

2. Parties and authorities responsible formuseums and herbaria should invest, on along-term basis, in the development ofappropriate infrastructure for their nationalcollections. As part of that investment,

donors, both bilateral and multilateral, intheir commitment to the conservation andsustainable use of biological diversity incountries where they provide investmentsupport, should support infrastructuralneeds of collection-holding institutions.

3. Parties and international donorsshould encourage partnerships betweeninstitutions in developed and developingcountries so as to promote scientific collab-oration and infrastructure rationalization.Such collaboration should include thedevelopment of national, subregional,regional and global training initiatives.Taxonomic institutions in each nation, bothindividually and regionally, should developnational priorities in taxonomic training,infrastructure, new technology, capacity-building and market needs.

4. Parties and authorities should adoptinternationally agreed levels of collectionhousing (climate control, fire protection sys-tems, pest control, acceptable levels of work-place health and safety) that ensure protectionof collections and the well-being of all peopleworking on and accessing collections.

5. Parties and international donorsshould provide training programmes at dif-ferent educational levels, relevant to theneeds of individual countries, includingvocational, technical and academic training.Parties should also recognize that ongoingemployment for trainees is part of an effec-tive training scheme.

6. Parties and authorities should utilizeinformation systems to maximum effect intaxonomic institutions. In developing prior-ity-setting criteria for information products,taxonomic institutions should consider theneeds of the wide range of users of thatinformation, including biological diversitymanagers. In particular, taxonomic informa-tion, literature and checklists should be putinto electronic form.

155


7. Parties to the Convention onBiological Diversity should report on mea-sures adopted to strengthen national capacityin taxonomy, to designate national referencecentres, and to make information housed incollections available to countries of origin.

8. Institutions, supported by Partiesand international donors, should coordinatetheir efforts to establish and maintain effec-tive mechanisms for the stable naming ofbiological taxa.

9. Governments members of theOrganization for Economic Cooperationand Development (OECD) should endorseand support the recommendations from theOECD Megascience Forum’s BiodiversityInformatics Subgroup, regarding the devel-opment of a Global Biodiversity InformaticsFacility (GBIF) to allow people in all coun-tries to share biological diversity informa-tion and to provide access to criticalauthority files.

Implementing the actions

10. The Executive Secretary shouldensure that the clearing-house mechanism (incollaboration with the OECD MegascienceForum’s Biodiversity Informatics SubgroupInitiative) develop protocols and strategiesfor coordinating access to and distribution oftaxonomic information contained in collec-tions. In addition, the clearing-house mecha-nism, through its national focal points,should establish and update directories oftaxonomists and their research and identifi-cation expertise.

11. In addition, Parties should:(a) Ensure that institutions responsi-

ble for biological diversity inven-tories and taxonomic activities arefinancially and administrativelystable, so as to have potential forcontinued and growing trainingand employment opportunities;

(b) Assist institutions to establishconsortia to conduct regionalprojects;

(c) Select or use centres of exper-tise at different geographicallevels, capable of offering train-ing programmes individually orin combination, where suchcentres include universities,museums, herbaria, botanicaland zoological gardens,research institutes and interna-tional or regional organizations;

(d) Give special attention to interna-tional funding of fellowships forspecialist training abroad or forattracting international expertsto national or regional courses.Appropriate areas for fundingshould include conventional acad-emic courses, expeditions, collab-orative research projects,secondments, institutional partner-ships, regional flora and fauna,internships and tutorial guidance;

(e) Provide programmes for re-train-ing of qualified professionalsmoving into taxonomy-relatedfields;

(f) Adapt training methods to theparticular technical or academicbackgrounds and experience ofcandidates. Content of coursesshould respond to external userdemands and modern needs, tak-ing into account cost-effective-ness in their delivery;

(g) Ensure training programmesaddress gaps in knowledge andthe need for specialists in giventaxonomic groups, and offer acomprehensive view of biological-diversity issues, including new sci-entific/technological approaches

156


to taxonomy (e.g. molecularbiology/informatics);

(h) Provide business managementtraining, of the nature commonlyoffered to private-sector execu-tives, for managers of biological-diversity institutions, as part ofother efforts to strengthen thoseorganizations;

(i) Develop and maintain a register ofpractising taxonomists, areas ofexpertise and description of col-lections through electronic and

other means, which should beavailable on the Internet;

(j) Hold workshops to determinenational taxonomic priorities, inthe context of national biological-diversity studies and action plans.Once national priorities have beenidentified, support developmentof regional taxonomic priorities,including plans to database collec-tions using mutually agreed soft-ware, quality control and core-datarequirements.

The Conference of the Parties, 1. Establishes a Global Taxonomy

Initiative Coordination Mechanism to assistthe Executive Secretary to facilitate interna-tional cooperation and coordinate activitiesunder the Global Taxonomy Initiative inaccordance with the terms of reference con-tained in the annex to this decision;

2. Urges Parties, Governments and rel-evant organizations to undertake the follow-ing priority activities to further the GlobalTaxonomy Initiative:

(a) The identification of national andregional priority taxonomic infor-mation requirements;

(b) Assessments of national taxonomiccapacity to identify and, wherepossible, quantify national andregional-level taxonomic impedi-ments and needs, including theidentification of taxonomic tools,facilities and services required at alllevels, and mechanisms to estab-lish, support and maintain suchtools, facilities and services;

(c) Establishment or consolidation ofregional and national taxonomicreference centres;

(d) The building of taxonomic capac-ity, in particular in developingcountries, including through part-nerships between national, regionaland international taxonomic refer-ence centres, and through informa-tion networks;

(e) Communication to the ExecutiveSecretary and Global TaxonomyInitiative Coordination Mechanism,by 31 December 2001, of suitableprogrammes, projects and initia-tives for consideration as pilot pro-jects under the Global TaxonomyInitiative;

3. Requests that the Executive Secretary,with the assistance of the Global TaxonomyInitiative Coordination Mechanism:

(a) Draft as a component of the strate-gic plan for the Convention onBiological Diversity a work pro-gramme for the Global TaxonomyInitiative defining timetables,goals, products and pilot projects,emphasizing its role in underpin-ning conservation, sustainable useand equitable sharing of benefits,for consideration by the SubsidiaryBody on Scientific, Technical andTechnological Advice;

(b) Initiate short-term activities,including regional meetings ofscientists, managers and policymakers to prioritize the mosturgent global taxonomic needsand facilitate the formulation ofspecific regional and national pro-jects to meet the needs identified,and to report thereon to theConference of the Parties at itssixth meeting;

(c) Synthesize the findings of previ-ous meetings of experts on the


157

ANNEX 10.

COP DECISION V/9: GLOBAL TAXONOMY INITIATIVE:IMPLEMENTATION AND FURTHER ADVANCE OF THE SUGGESTIONS FOR

ACTION

158


Global Taxonomy Initiative (ascontained in the note by theExecutive Secretary on the reviewof the Global Taxonomy Initiative(UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/5/4)), rele-vant sections of national reportssubmitted to the Conference of theParties and recommendations ofthe Subsidiary Body on Scientific,Technical and TechnologicalAdvice on the Global TaxonomyInitiative, as advice for the pro-posed regional meetings;

(d) Use the Global TaxonomyInitiative as a forum to promotethe importance of taxonomy andtaxonomic tools in the implemen-tation of the Convention;

4. Requests all Parties andGovernments to designate a national GlobalTaxonomy Initiative focal point by 31December 2000, linked to other nationalfocal points, and participate in the develop-ment of regional networks to facilitate infor-mation-sharing for the Global TaxonomyInitiative;

5. Invites all interested internationaland regional conventions, initiatives andprogrammes to indicate their support for theGlobal Taxonomy Initiative and its Coordi-nation Mechanism, through the ExecutiveSecretary, and in so doing to specify theirparticular areas of interest and any supportfor the implementation of the Global Tax-onomy Initiative that could be forthcoming;

6. Urges eligible Parties and consortiaof eligible Parties to seek resources for theabove priority actions through the financialmechanism, and requests the financialmechanism to continue promoting aware-ness of the Global Taxonomy Initiative inits outreach activities, such as the CapacityDevelopment Initiative and the CountryDialogue Workshops, and to investigate

ways both within and outside its opera-tional programme structure to facilitatecapacity-building in taxonomy, and theimplementation of the short-term activitiesreferred to in the annex to the presentdecision.

ANNEX: TERMS OF REFERENCE FORTHE COORDINATIONMECHANISM OF THE GLOBALTAXONOMY INITIATIVE

MandateBuilding on the guidance contained in rec-

ommendation V/3 of the Subsidiary Body onScientific, Technical and TechnologicalAdvice, the Coordination Mechanism shallassist the Executive Secretary to facilitateinternational cooperation and to coordinateactivities on matters pertaining to the imple-mentation and development of the GlobalTaxonomy Initiative (GTI). The ExecutiveSecretary in carrying out this mandate willwork closely with the clearing-house mecha-nism and report on progress of the GlobalTaxonomy Initiative to every other meetingof the Subsidiary Body on Scientific,Technical and Technological Advice, and, asappropriate, to the Conference of the Parties.The first meeting of the CoordinationMechanism shall take place no later than 30November 2000. Meetings of the coordina-tion mechanism can only take place with ade-quate representation from all regions, andsubject to available resources.

Specific short-term activities to be under-taken prior to the sixth meeting of theConference of the Parties

The Executive Secretary with the assis-tance of the Coordination Mechanism shall:

(a) Develop a work programme for theGlobal Taxonomy Initiative, consistent withthe Convention strategic plan, for considera-

159


tion by the Subsidiary Body on Scientific,Technical and Technological Advice;

(b) Convene regional meetings of scien-tists, managers and policy makers to priori-tize the most urgent global taxonomic needsfor consideration by the Subsidiary Body onScientific, Technical and Technological Advicein finalizing the Global Taxonomy Initiativework programme;

(c) Establish mechanisms to use theGlobal Taxonomy Initiative as a forum topromote the importance of taxonomy andtaxonomic tools in the implementation ofthe Convention’s programmes of work.

MembershipThe Executive Secretary, in consultation

with the Bureau of the Subsidiary Body on

Scientific, Technical and TechnologicalAdvice shall at the earliest opportunity select10 members of the Coordination Mechanism,with due regard to geographical balance toallow two representatives from each region,on a rotational basis. The Executive Secretaryshall invite a limited number of leadingrelevant organizations such as the UnitedNations Environment Programme, the UnitedNations Educational, Scientific and CulturalOrganization, the Food and AgricultureOrganization of the United Nations, the Inter-national Council of Scientific Unions, theGlobal Biodiversity Information Facility, theGlobal Environment Facility, and BioNET-INTERNATIONAL to participate in the workof the Coordination Mechanism.

160


The Conference of the Parties,

Understanding taxonomy to be a priority inimplementing the Convention on BiologicalDiversity,

Noting that some groups of organismsprovide particular taxonomic difficulties innational and regional monitoring andassessment work, particularly organisms atthe micro level,

Recognizing the need for a programme ofwork at the national, regional and globallevels, and the particular value of regionalactivities,

1. Endorses the programme of workfor the Global Taxonomy Initiative, asannexed to the present decision, and the fur-ther submission and elaboration of potentialpilot projects, including those listed in theprogress report by the Executive Secretaryon the Global Taxonomy Initiative and thereport on progress and status of the GlobalTaxonomy Initiative;

2. Urges Parties, Governments, inter-national and regional organizations, andother relevant organizations to promote,and, as appropriate, carry out, the pro-gramme of work;

3. Recognizing the value of supportingand building on existing national, regional,subregional and global initiatives, partner-ships and institutions, invites the ExecutiveSecretary to encourage the involvementof such entities to support Parties,Governments and relevant organizations incarrying out the programme of work, andrecommends the continuation of the regionalworkshops on the Global TaxonomyInitiative to facilitate this process;

4. Emphasizes the need to coordinateactivities with other existing initiatives,such as the Global Biodiversity InformationFacility and the clearing-house mechanismof the Convention on Biological Diversity;

5. Requests the Executive Secretary tocomplete the guide to the Global TaxonomyInitiative, and provide information and clar-ification to Parties and Governments con-cerning the Global Taxonomy Initiative, inparticular on the process for developingprojects aimed at implementing the pro-gramme of work, including existing guid-ance from the financial mechanism;

6. Requests all Parties and otherGovernments to:

a. Designate a National Focal Pointfor the Global Taxonomy Initiative,linked to other National FocalPoints, as requested in decisionV/9, paragraph 4;

b. Provide updated information,through the clearing-house mech-anism, about legal requirementsfor exchange of biological speci-mens and about current legislationand rules for access and benefit-sharing in terms of the needs ofthe Global Taxonomy Initiative;

c. Initiate the setting up of nationaland regional networks to aid theParties in their taxonomic needs inimplementing the Convention onBiological Diversity;

7. Considers capacity development atthe national and regional levels as a drivingforce in implementing the programme of work;

8. Decides that the post of GlobalTaxonomy Initiative Programme Officer

ANNEX 11.

COP DECISION VI/8: GLOBAL TAXONOMY INITIATIVE

161


within the Secretariat of the Convention onBiological Diversity be made permanent,with funding from the core budget of theConvention, and that adequate operationalfunds be provided to enable the occupant ofthe post to carry out her or his duties.

Annex PROGRAMME OF WORK FOR THEGLOBAL TAXONOMY INTIATIVE

Contents

I. INTRODUCTION II. PROGRAMME OF WORK A. Overall objectives

1. What has the Conference of theParties asked the GTI to be?

2. What should the GTI achieve? 3. Operational objectives

B. Taxonomic needs assessments at thenational, regional and global levels

1. Operational objective 1 - Assesstaxonomic needs and capacities at national,regional and global levels for the implemen-tation of the Convention C. Targeted actions

2. Operational objective 2 - Providefocus to help build and maintain the systemsand infrastructure needed to obtain, collateand curate the biological specimens that arethe basis for taxonomic knowledge.

3. Operational objective 3 - Facilitatean improved and effective infrastructure/sys-tem for access to taxonomic information;with priority on ensuring countries of origingain access to information concerning ele-ments of their biodiversity.

4. Operational objective 4 - Within themajor thematic work programmes of theConvention include key taxonomic objec-tives to generate information neededfor decision-making in conservation and

sustainable use of biological diversity andits components.

5. Operational objective 5 - Within thework on cross-cutting issues of the Conven-tion include key taxonomic objectives togenerate information needed for decision-making in conservation and sustainable useof biological diversity and its components.

III. MONITORING ANDASSESSMENT OF THE GTI

I. INTRODUCTION1. Broadly understood, taxonomy is

the classification of life, though it is mostoften focused on describing species, theirgenetic variability, and their relationships toone another. For the purposes of theConvention taxonomy is taken in its broad-est sense and is inclusive of systematics andbiosystematics at the genetic, species andecosystem levels.

2. The Global Taxonomy Initiative(GTI) covers the taxonomic work requiredto support the implementation of theConvention at all three levels of biodiver-sity (genetic, species and ecosystem), and isconcerned with all organisms, i.e. plants,animals and micro-organisms.

3. The GTI has been established underthe Convention on Biological Diversity tounderpin decision-making in conservationof biological diversity, sustainable use of itscomponents and equitable sharing of thebenefits derived from the utilization ofgenetic resources, by addressing:

a. The lack of taxonomic informationon the identity of components ofbiological diversity in many partsof the world; and

b. The need to build capacity for tax-onomic activity in all regions, butespecially developing countries,including reference materials,

162


databases, and taxonomic exper-tise relevant to the objectivesof the Convention on BiologicalDiversity.

4. In its decision V/9, adopted at itsfifth meeting, the Conference of the Partiesrequested the Executive Secretary to draft asa component of the Strategic Plan for theConvention on Biological Diversity a pro-gramme of work for the GTI defining timeta-bles, goals, products and pilot projects.

5. The Conference of the Parties estab-lished the GTI specifically to support its workprogrammes in the thematic areas (marine andcoastal biological diversity, agricultural biodi-versity, dry and sub-humid land biologicaldiversity, inland water biological diversity,forest biological diversity and mountain bio-logical diversity), and in the cross-cuttingissues (invasive alien species, access and ben-efit-sharing, scientific assessments, indicators,traditional knowledge) under the Convention.

6. Section II contains a programme ofwork for the GTI. It presents successively(i) the overall objectives of the programmeof work, (ii) activities addressing taxonomicneeds assessments at the global, regionaland national levels, and (iii) targeted actionswithin the broader work programmes of theConvention on Biological Diversity.

II. PROGRAMME OF WORK A. Overall objectives

1. What has the Conference of the Partiesasked the GTI to be?

1. In its decision III/10, on identifica-tion, monitoring and assessment, theConference of the Parties established the needfor specific action under the Convention incapacity-building in taxonomy, through itsendorsement of SBSTTA recommendationII/2.

2. In decision IV/1 D, the Conferenceof the Parties endorsed, as initial advice, a

set of Suggestions for Action to develop andimplement a Global Taxonomy Initiative.The Conference of the Parties stressed theurgent need for the further implementationof recommendation II/2 of the SubsidiaryBody on Scientific, Technical and Techno-logical Advice concerning capacity-buildingin all fields of taxonomy to assist in theimplementation of the Convention, throughthe incorporation of targeted actions in itswork plan, including promoting regionalactivities to set regional agendas.

3. In decision V/9, the Conference ofthe Parties adopted a range of activities forthe GTI, including the preparation of a pro-gramme of work for the GTI definingtimetables, goals, products and pilot pro-jects. The format adopted has taken intoaccount that provided in decision V/20, onthe operations of the Convention, whichspecifies the following parameters:

a. Planned activities; b. The expected products; c. The timing of each of these activi-

ties and products; d. The actors carrying out these

activities and cooperation with rel-evant organizations;

e. The mechanisms used to realizeand/or support the goals and activ-ities, or to generate the expectedproducts; and

f. Financial, human-resource andother capacity requirements.

4. Also in decision V/9, theConference of the Parties urged that“pilot projects” for the GTI be submitted tothe Executive Secretary and the GTICoordination Mechanism by Parties,Governments and relevant organizations by31 December 2001.

2. What should the GTI achieve?5. The GTI should seek to provide

the key information required for the

163


implementation of the Convention onBiological Diversity, particularly Article 7, onidentification and monitoring, throughincreasing the fundamental biological dataessential to underpin the conservation, sustain-able use and equitable sharing of the benefitsfrom the utilization of biological diversity.That is, to address the problems of insufficientknowledge of all components of biologicaldiversity (including their classification,description, value and function) and lack oftaxonomic capacity, to overcome what hasbeen termed “the taxonomic impediment”.

6. In formulating the programme ofwork to achieve this end, the GTI shouldprovide the global platform to help acceler-ate current taxonomic efforts in areas iden-tified as high priority by countries andregional groupings of countries.

7. The GTI programme of work hasbeen designed to focus on supplying theneeded taxonomic information to supportthe major work areas of the Convention, andthe need to support capacity-building toensure the ability of countries to undertakethe priority taxonomic work required toimplement the Convention.

8. This programme of work isintended to fulfil the following functions:

a. To contribute to the implementationof the Convention’s Strategic Plan(in preparation).

b. To set operational objectives withclear expected outputs and waysand means through which toachieve the set objectives;

c. To provide the rationale for thechoice of the operational targets,with indications of opportunitiesfor further elaboration of the pro-gramme of work; and

d. To serve as a guide to all biodiver-sity stakeholders on specific objec-tives to which they can contribute

individually or collectively, at thelocal, national or international level.

3. Operational objectives 9. In considering the following five

operational objectives, it will be necessaryto address capacity-building specificallywith regard to human resources, systemsand infrastructure needs in taxonomy, atthe local, national, regional and globallevels. It has been recognized that, foroperational objectives 4 and 5, further set-ting of priorities might be required forintegration within the work plans of theConvention:

Operational objective 1: Assess taxo-nomic needs and capacities at national,regional and global levels for the imple-mentation of the Convention. Operational objective 2: Provide focusto help build and maintain the humanresources, systems and infrastructureneeded to obtain, collate and curate thebiological specimens that are the basisfor taxonomic knowledge. Operational objective 3: Facilitate animproved and effective infrastructure/system for access to taxonomic informa-tion; with priority on ensuring that coun-tries of origin gain access to informationconcerning elements of their biodiversity. Operational objective 4: Within themajor thematic work programmes of theConvention include key taxonomic objec-tives to generate information needed fordecision-making in conservation andsustainable use of biological diversityand its components. Operational objective 5: Within the workon cross-cutting issues of the Convention,include key taxonomic objectives to gener-ate information needed for decision-making in conservation and sustainable useof biological diversity and its components.

164


10. Diagram 1 summarizes the ratio-nale and linkages between the above opera-tional objectives.

11. It is important to note that theplanned activities described in sections B andC below are designed to be mutually rein-

forcing in achieving the overall objective ofthe GTI, and outputs from one objective willhelp facilitate greater achievement of theother activities. Particular stress may beplaced upon the necessity outlined in plannedactivity 3 for capacity development at

Awareness of CBD issues

Taxonomic needs assessments (Operational objective 1)

Taxonomic information needed for decisionmaking through its thermatic programmesof work and work on cross-cutting issues(Operational objectives 4 and 5)

Overall objective:Implement the Convention on Biological Diversity

Development or strengthening ofhuman capacity to generateinformation (Operational objectives2 and 3)

Development or strengthening ofInfrastructure and systems / mechanisms:

• for generating taxonomic information Operational objective 2)• for accessing taxonomic information Operational objective 3)

Incentives andpolitical will

Financialresources

Diagram 1. Rationale and linkages between the five operational objectives of the programmeof work

165


national, regional and global levels, withemphasis on facilitating and fostering bothSouth-South and South-North partnershipsand information exchange. Bilateral, multi-national and regional cooperation andnetworking will be of importance in imple-menting the programme of work.

B. Taxonomic needs assessments at thenational, regional and global levels

1. Operational objective 1 - Assess taxo-nomic needs and capacities at national,regional and global levels for the imple-mentation of the Convention 1.1. Planned activity 1: Country-based tax-onomic needs assessments and identifica-tion of prioritiesi. Rationale

In its decision IV/1 D, the Conference ofthe Parties recognized the need for eachcountry to conduct a national taxonomicneeds assessment. Furthermore, in decisionV/9, the Conference of the Parties urgedParties, Governments and relevant organiza-tions to undertake as a priority activity,assessments of national taxonomic capacityto identify and, where possible, quantifynational and regional-level taxonomic imped-iments and needs. Assessments should beundertaken within the framework of under-taking the necessary planning to produce orupdate national biodiversity strategies andaction plans under the Convention. To thisend, the needs assessments will be required toclearly articulate how the lack of taxonomicinformation and/or capacity is an impedimentto the implementation of national biodiversitystrategies and action plans.

The Global Environment Facility (GEF)has been requested to support developingcountries in undertaking the necessaryneeds assessments upon which to baseaction. (Decision III/5 provides additional

guidance to the GEF to provide financialresources to developing countries forcountry-driven activities and programmes,targeting capacity-building, including tax-onomy, to enable developing countries todevelop and carry out an initial assessmentfor designing, implementing and monitor-ing programmes. Decision V/9 urges eligi-ble Parties and consortia of eligible Partiesto seek resources for the agreed priorityactions, including needs assessments,through the financial mechanism.) ii. Outputs

Each country would provide throughtheir national biodiversity strategies andaction plans, as well as through nationalreports to the Conference of the Parties, areport on their taxonomic capacity and pri-ority needs, which would then be dissemi-nated through the Convention’s clearing-house mechanism. iii. Timing

In its decision V/9, the Conference of theParties urged Parties, Governments and rel-evant organizations to undertake this prior-ity activity and, while not setting a specifictimeframe, requested Parties to report ontheir actions to the Conference of the Partiesat its sixth meeting (April 2002). As this is afundamental part of the process of clearlyidentifying solutions to current lack ofcapacity it is very important for all countriesto complete their needs assessment as soonas possible. Full or preliminary needsassessments should have been reported tothe Executive Secretary by December 2001for report to the Conference of the Parties atits sixth meeting, and final assessments byDecember 2002. iv. Actors

National Governments, with the support ofnational and international organizations andinstitutions as needed, would take primarycarriage of this activity. The Executive

166


Secretary would compile completed assess-ments into an information paper for the sev-enth meeting of the Conference of the Parties. v. Mechanisms

The GEF was requested to provide fundsfor countries to undertake their needs assess-ments as part of a broader biodiversity infor-mation requirements process. An approachfor the development of a standardizedframework and instruments will facilitatecompilation and comparison of informationfor baseline assessments and ongoing moni-toring. As initial advice, a list of issues to beaddressed has been developed by DIVERSI-TAS, and was provided to SBSTTA at itsfourth meeting176. vi. Financial, human resources and othercapacity requirements

National Governments will be requiredto fund this activity, potentially with addi-tional support from donors. vii. Pilot projects

The development of guidelines for thepreparation of country-based taxonomicneeds assessments, with specific advice onthe integration within the overall implemen-tation of national biodiversity strategies andaction plans, is proposed as a pilot project tobe undertaken by a relevant internationalorganization or consortium of organiza-tions. 1.2. Planned activity 2: Regional taxonomicneeds assessments and identification ofpriorities i. Rationale

Ideally, country-level needs assessmentsprovide the core input into the developmentof an assessment of regional capacity, thegaps in capacity across the region, andfinally the setting of priority actions to fillthe gaps. In many regions of the world itwill be advantageous to pool resources and

to act cooperatively in building taxonomiccapacity to support conservation and deci-sion-making. Regional activities in taxon-omy have been supported by theConference of the Parties in decisionsIII/10, IV/1 D and V/9, which all identifyregional level activities as a major activityfor the GTI. Decision III/10 endorsed rec-ommendation II/2 of the SBSTTA, whichsought to prioritize strengthening ofregional and subregional networks for tax-onomy, regional collaboration and regionaland subregional training programmes.Decision IV/1 D stressed the urgent need forthe further implementation of recommenda-tion II/2 of the SBSTTA concerning capac-ity-building in all fields of taxonomy toassist in the implementation of theConvention, through the incorporation oftargeted actions in its work plan, includingpromoting regional activities to set regionalagendas. Decision V/9 also called for theidentification of national and regional prior-ity taxonomic information requirements.Furthermore, decision V/9 called for short-term activities, including regional meetingsof scientists, managers and policy-makers toprioritize the most urgent global taxonomicneeds and facilitate the formulation of spe-cific regional and national projects to meetthe needs identified. ii. Outputs

Combined with best available informa-tion on national taxonomic needs (if possiblenational taxonomic needs assessments),regionally agreed plans of action, that pro-vide identified priorities, will provide a clearfocus for activities under the GTI. Todevelop such plans of action regional work-shops will be held, under the general guid-ance of the Executive Secretary and the GTICoordination Mechanism. The challenge of

176 UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/4/INF/7

167


the workshops will be to blend academicadvice and perspective with country needs tofulfil its obligations under the Convention. iii. Timing

Two regional workshops, one in Africaand one in Central America, have takenplace in 2001. Planning for a workshop inAsia, which will be held in 2002, has begun.Other meetings, including in SouthAmerica, North America, Europe and a sec-ond one in Africa, are being discussed.

Ideally the GTI should endeavour to holdall regional workshops by the end of 2003,preferably by December 2003 as input todiscussions at the seventh meeting of theConference of the Parties. iv. Actors

National governments, taxonomic insti-tutions and global, regional and bilateralfunding agencies are the main actors in thedevelopment of regional taxonomic needsassessments and priorities. v. Mechanisms

Existing or proposed regional biodiversityprojects, as well as national biodiversitystrategies and action plans, will provide a keymechanism for identification of the mosturgent taxonomic information requirementsat the regional level. The development ofregional taxonomic needs assessments andpriorities is best facilitated through regionalworkshops supported by prior research intocountry level capacity, compiled into regionalsyntheses. Active regional networks of taxon-omists would be best placed to facilitate thecompilation of national needs assessmentsinto cohesive regional syntheses. vi. Financial, human resources and othercapacity requirements

The Government of Sweden, through theSwedish International Development Coop-eration Agency (SIDA), has funded tworegional workshops in 2001. Japan hasagreed to partially fund the Asian workshop,

but no sources of funding have been agreedat this stage for additional workshops. vii. Pilot projects

Existing or proposed activities (or ele-ments of activities) in some regions could beconsidered as pilot studies in the preparationof regional based taxonomic needs assess-ments, such as SABONET and SAFRINETin southern Africa, and BOZONET inEastern Africa. However these existingactivities need to be broadened to include alltaxa, as well as input from the full range ofbiodiversity stakeholders needing taxonomicinformation. It is intended that the outputsfrom each regional workshop will be sharedwith all future workshops in order to facili-tate clear and unambiguous, readily achiev-able pilot projects. 1.3. Planned activity 3: Global taxonomicneeds assessmenti. Rationale

Given the nature of taxonomic activity,and the lack of knowledge of key groups oforganisms with global distributions of impor-tance to humankind and biodiversity con-cerns, a global dimension is critical. It iswidely recognized that generally there isvery little data available on global diversityand distribution patterns, and where it doesexist it is usually in non-standardized formatsthat may restrict its usefulness. Agreed globalcooperation to finalize taxonomic work onglobally important groups should involveboth developed and developing countries,and will provide a major input into develop-ment of capacity-building initiatives. Theglobal taxonomic needs assessment canresult from a compilation of the regional tax-onomic needs assessments, with activity toprovide some agreed priority actions that canbe undertaken at the global level. ii. Outputs

A concise global plan of action using theoutputs from the regional workshops, with the

168


advice and support of international organiza-tions and the GTI Coordination Mechanism. iii. Timing

Progress towards production of a draftglobal plan of action on priority groups forstudy was reported to the ExecutiveSecretary by December 2001, as input todiscussions at the sixth meeting of theConference of the Parties. A draft planshould be finalized by December 2002. iv. Actors

National Governments, taxonomic insti-tutions and global, regional and bilateralfunding agencies are the main actors in thedevelopment of global taxonomic needsassessments and priorities. At the globallevel organisations such as, but not limitedto, FAO, IUCN, UNEP-WCMC, UNESCO,the Ecosystem Conservation Group (ECG),and programmes such as BioNET-INTER-NATIONAL, DIVERSITAS, the GlobalBiodiversity Information Facility (GBIF),Species 2000, and Systematics Agenda2000 International among others, will alsohave key roles to play. v. Mechanisms

A workshop focusing on global level tax-onomic priorities should be organized,perhaps through the Ecosystem ConservationGroup and GBIF. The taxonomic require-ments of the Millennium EcosystemAssessment should be a significant focus ofsetting global priorities. Such a workshopcould be held in a developing country tohighlight their special needs. vi. Financial, human resources and othercapacity requirements

Funding should be sought for this activ-ity from Parties and key intergovernmentaland non-governmental science based insti-tutions interested in this activity. vii. Pilot projects

Some pilot projects already exist thataddress some elements of this activity, such

as ECOPORT, Species 2000, and the devel-oping GBIF projects.

1.4. Planned activity 4: Public aware-ness and educationi. Rationale

The need to raise awareness and to educateon the importance of taxonomy to underpinthe Convention is critical to the success of theGlobal Taxonomy Initiative, and, within theprogramme of work, it is necessary to identifyand target those groups who would benefitfrom increased awareness and education. Thiswill include those working in and associatedwith work in areas of high biodiversity. Indeveloping a public awareness and educationpackage it will be necessary to balance theneeds for formal education against the needfor wider public awareness-raising. Thisactivity will best be developed in conjunctionwith the activity under way following deci-sion V/17 on education and public awareness,being carried out jointly by the Secretariat ofthe Convention on Biological Diversity andUNESCO. This joint activity will provide thefocus for public awareness and education ontaxonomy within the Convention through thedevelopment of a specific module on taxon-omy. The module would test out techniques todevelop regionally appropriate public aware-ness tools to help remove the taxonomicimpediment, which would be refined in thelater stages of the education and publicawareness activity under the Convention, andshould focus on educational materials fortraining to facilitate implementation of theConvention. ii. Outputs

A package of materials and activitiesaimed at broadening public understanding ofthe importance of taxonomy in achieving theobjectives of the Convention. Examplescould include a brochure on the GTI,enhancement of Web pages, tutorials for edu-cation managers, popular scientific films, etc.

169


A special focus on using the public aware-ness activity to acquire new levels of taxo-nomic information, through, inter alia,public involvement in parataxonomic activ-ity, should form part of these initiatives. iii. Timing

Activities will be planned in 2002, andfurther developed as appropriate. iv. Actors

At the global level this activity could bejointly executed by the ConventionSecretariat and UNESCO, but with primecarriage for this project by regional networksin conjunction with key taxonomic institu-tions that already have considerable experi-ence in public-awareness programmes, andhave indicated a willingness to participate inGTI activities. v. Mechanisms

Toolkits addressing particular taxonomicissues will be developed by the leadagencies for trial in selected regions ofdeveloping and developed countries. A keymechanism will involve participatoryactivity by local communities to strengthenthe training and awareness raising forparataxonomists. vi. Financial, human resources and othercapacity requirements

This work element will be undertakenunder the Global Initiative on BiodiversityEducation and Public Awareness being elab-orated by the Convention Secretariat andUNESCO, as called for in decision V/17 ofthe fifth meeting of the Conference of theParties vii. Pilot projects

Pilot projects should be developed withinthe joint public-awareness activity of theConvention Secretariat and UNESCO. Therecent activities of Systematics Agenda2000 International and BioNET-INTERNA-TIONAL in this area could also beexpanded into pilot projects under the GTI.

C. Targeted actions 2. Operational objective 2 - Provide focusto help build and maintain the systems andinfrastructure needed to obtain, collateand curate the biological specimens thatare the basis for taxonomic knowledge. 2.1 Planned activity 5: Global and regionalcapacity-building to support access to andgeneration of taxonomic informationi. Rationale

A significant impediment to greatlyincreasing the world’s taxonomic base for theimplementation of the Convention, andindeed more effectively utilizing the currenttaxonomic knowledge, lies in the limitedcapacity in many nations, and the decreasingtaxonomic capacity world-wide. A key objec-tive of the GTI should thus be to address theglobal and regional capacity-building needs,particularly of developing countries. Thereare two main areas of concern that need to beaddressed simultaneously:

a. Human capacity-building; and b. Infrastructure capacity-building.

Human capacity-building requires majorincreases in training programmes for taxono-mists and parataxonomists throughout theworld, for it is now well established that the“taxasphere”, the world’s global taxonomicexpertise, is currently shrinking just at thetime when we need it to advance our knowl-edge base rapidly. In addition to training, newemployment opportunities should be created.

Maintaining and improving the existingtaxonomic infrastructure can be achievedonly through adequate funding, and newstrategies are required to make optimal use ofour past investments, while minimizing thecosts and maximizing the benefits of futureinvestments. In its decisions IV/1 D and V/9,the Conference of the Parties has urged coun-tries to establish or consolidate regional andnational taxonomic reference centres. Thereis a need to explore globally how the best

170


possible outcomes for improving taxonomiccapacity can be achieved. The GTI shouldaddress at the global and regional levels thecoordination of collections infrastructurewithin countries and regions leading toimprovements of long-term infrastructureregionally. Furthermore, such strategic plan-ning should therefore encourage the creationor strengthening of national and regional tax-onomic reference centres. ii. Outputs

Increased human and institutional taxo-nomic capacity directed at meeting theneeds of implementing the Convention. iii. Timing

Activities need to begin immediately andbe included in all work elements throughoutthe programme of work, with priority incovering the major upcoming work areas ofthe Convention in a timely manner, such thatincreases in capacity are achieved prior tothe major element of work being undertaken. iv. Actors

All Governments, international andnational funding agencies, biosystematicinstitutions and taxonomic organizationshave a role to play. Expert institutions indeveloped and developing countries andtheir professional staff with expertise in tax-onomic groups around the world have muchto offer in terms of capacity-building.Within planned activities 1 and 2 above, thedevelopment of national and regional taxo-nomic priorities, detailed regional prioritiesfor capacity-building, both human and insti-tutional, should be addressed. v. Mechanisms

In its decision III/10, the Conference ofthe Parties endorsed SBSTTA recommenda-tion II/2, concerning capacity-building fortaxonomy, in which the GEF was requestedto provide funds for training programmes,strengthening reference collections, makinginformation housed in collections available

to countries of origin, producing and dis-tributing taxonomic guides, strengtheninginfrastructure and disseminating taxonomicinformation through, inter alia, the clear-ing-house mechanism. vi. Financial, human resources and othercapacity requirements

The financial and human resourcesrequirements of this activity are substantial.Funding needs may extend beyond possiblecontributions from individual Parties.However, through national and regional pri-ority-setting, it will be possible to take astaged approach to undertaking the workrequired. vii. Pilot projects

Consortia of major institutions shouldparticipate in the development of pilot pro-jects to identify priority activities includingcapacity-building and development of infor-mation, through facilitating regional confer-ences to document existing holdings and bydesignating lead agencies in a collegiateprocess to maximize taxonomic effort acrossall groups.

SABONET and BioNET-INTERNA-TIONAL are two existing examples of pro-jects that could be considered pilots of aregional and global approach respectively,that could be strengthened to providegreater capacity-building activities. TheSmithsonian Institution has submitted apotential pilot project on neo-tropical mothsthat could also be considered for regionalcapacity-building. 2.2. Planned activity 6: Strengthening ofexisting networks for regional cooperationin taxonomyi. Rationale

To facilitate the development of coopera-tive programmes that increase taxonomiccapacity in developing countries throughfostering North-South and South-South col-laboration.

171


Taxonomic capacity in terms of bothhuman and institutional capacity varieswidely between countries and regions.Although many developed countries haverelatively comprehensive reference collec-tions and a number of experts, no singlecountry has a complete taxonomic inventoryof national biodiversity, nor experts in allrelevant taxonomic groups. In many cases,developing countries have very little or nophysical reference collections of local biodi-versity, nor trained personnel. Much of theexisting reference material from developingcountries resides in the expert institutions ofthe developed world, as do the experts inparticular taxonomic groups. However, evenin developed countries taxonomy has beenunder-resourced for many years, leading to ageneral decline in infrastructure, and adearth of younger professionals.

In order to facilitate taxonomic capacity-building to underpin the Convention onBiological Diversity, cooperative pro-grammes need to be established and/orstrengthened between the countries with theexpertise and reference materials and thosewithout. A number of regional networks thatfacilitate cooperation between countriesin building taxonomic capacity in certaintaxonomic groups currently exist, e.g.,SABONET, a cooperative network between10 countries in southern Africa focused onflowering plants. The most comprehensivenetwork currently in existence is that fosteredby BioNET-INTERNATIONAL, the GlobalNetwork for Taxonomy. This initiative cur-rently has seven extant subregional networkscovering some 120 countries, with anotherfour under development, and a further fiveplanned. It is envisaged that these 16 net-works will provide a global coverage of col-laborative North-South and South-Southnetworks for taxonomic capacity-building.The Global Network for Taxonomy is a

donor-funded programme and the rate ofnetwork establishment is dependent on ade-quate continued funding. In establishing sub-regional cooperative networks, BioNET-INTERNATIONAL works through officialgovernmental endorsement and comprehen-sive needs assessment activities to establishregional and national priorities. ii. Outputs

A global network, ideally comprised ofincreasingly self-sufficient subregional net-works, that covers all taxa. While the actualcapacity-building initiatives should have afinite project-based life, ideally the net-works themselves would remain in perpetu-ity once established and underpinned bymember country Governments. iii. Timing

Given that the lack of taxonomic capacityis a severe impediment to the abilities ofcountries to meet their obligations under theConvention on Biological Diversity, and thatmost taxonomic capacity can readily beshared and utilized across institutional andnational boundaries, it follows that buildingof taxonomic capacity can best be facilitatedby subregional cooperative networks andglobal partnerships. Therefore plans forstrengthening and/or building of regionalnetworks should at least be in place byDecember 2002, particularly ensuring thatexisting relevant networks become fullyoperational across the full spectrum of taxo-nomic groups. Strategies should be inplace to complete the global coverage byDecember 2002. In addition, over the nextfive years, taxonomic institutions shouldlook for opportunities to build capacity-development partnerships, particularlybetween institutions in developed and devel-oping countries. iv. Actors

Existing regional and subregional net-works, with assistance from organizations

172


such as BioNet-INTERNATIONAL andUNESCO, and with regional and extra-regional partner organizations and net-works, could be utilized to build a morecomplete coverage. These networks shouldplay the role of implementing mechanisms,such that the GTI has access to, and interac-tion with all relevant taxonomic institutionswithin a subregion.

To facilitate this development the expertinstitutions of the developed world thathouse the relevant subregional taxonomicreference materials and information, and theprofessional staff with expertise in taxo-nomic groups from these subregions, shouldbe actively involved. v. Mechanisms

An agreed strategy on strengthening andbuilding networks to ensure global coverageboth geographically and by taxon group is ahuge undertaking. Different countries andregions have different levels of capacity, anddifferent taxonomic needs and priorities.Existing subregional networks can serve asimplementing mechanisms for improvingtaxonomic capacity in developing countries.These existing networks need to be broad-ened in scope, and the establishment of theremaining networks currently under devel-opment or in the planning stages needs to beundertaken as soon as possible. This willrequire completion of needs assessments andpriority setting for each network, wherethese do not exist or need updating and/orexpansion. Regional taxonomic referencecentres that house network reference materi-als and host the network’s Information andCommunications System provide a usefulmechanism to prevent duplication of infra-structure, but they require sound means ofcommunication to provide all countriesinvolved with equal access to the informa-tion. As part of this, improved access by tax-onomists of all Parties to the taxonomic

reference material itself, particularly typespecimens and material presently held out-side countries of origin, is important indeveloping work within the GTI. vi. Financial, human resources and othercapacity requirements

Funding will be required to support thework programmes of the individual net-works, but the countries themselves need toendorse the operations and specifically thehuman resource and institutional costs ofmaintaining, operating and developing suchcollaborative networks. These costs willdepend on the status of each country’scapacity and the scope of the workprogrammes. Such collaborative networkscan be cost-saving mechanisms in certaintaxonomic groups/areas because of the‘economies of scale’ produced by the shar-ing of taxonomic capacity, and reduce theneed for each country to attempt to build theneeded capacity individually.

Ideally the networks should have a dedi-cated full-time secretariat, but depending onneeds, they can be operated on a part-timebasis by staff already employed within rele-vant institutions.

Capacity-building in taxonomy necessar-ily includes the infrastructure capacity tohouse reference material, together with allof the reference material and equipment toenable identifications. vii. Pilot projects

Three pilot projects can be proposed. Thefirst pilot project could work with one of theexisting BioNET-INTERNATIONAL net-works and evaluate the current structure,mechanisms and operations of the networkto assess its ability to expand to fully meetthe objectives of the GTI in underpinningthe Convention on Biological Diversity.Currently, many of the existing BioNET-INTERNATIONAL networks are focusedon micro-organisms and invertebrates, often

173


with an agricultural orientation, and as suchwould need to be expanded to include alltaxon groups and relevant institutions. Thesecond pilot project could be undertaken inpartnership with BioNET-INTERNA-TIONAL in the establishment of new net-works designed to meet the requirements ofthe Convention. The third project is cur-rently under formulation under the nameBOZONET and is an eastern African taxo-nomic capacity-building project for botanyand zoology.

3. Operational objective 3 -Facilitate animproved and effective infrastructure/system for access to taxonomic informa-tion; with priority on ensuring that coun-tries of origin gain access to informationconcerning elements of their biodiversity 3.1. Planned activity 7: Develop a coordi-nated global taxonomy information systemi. Rationale

Existing taxonomic information is widelyscattered and not centrally available. Thisactivity will firstly identify the current statusof major taxonomic information systems inparticular their major foci, and plan a coor-dinated approach to the development of aglobal taxonomic information infrastructure,as the major element of the GTI under theConvention’s clearing-house mechanism. ii. Outputs

An agreed strategy to develop informa-tion services that optimizes access to taxo-nomic information systems world-wide, inappropriate formats. This strategy wouldalso include common standards forexchange of data and consideration of intel-lectual property rights. iii. Timing

Work took place in 2001 and informationwas provided as an input to discussions bythe sixth meeting of the Conference of theParties; the activity will be further developed

within a five-year framework and reportsprovided to SBSTTA as appropriate. iv. Actors

Actors will include ECOPORT, GBIF,Species 2000, the Integrated TaxonomicInformation System (ITIS), Tree of Life,NABIN, ISIS, BIN21, BCIS, BioNET-INTERNATIONAL, as well as large-scalebiosystematics research institutions andother stakeholders of taxonomic informa-tion, in collaboration with the clearing-housemechanism of the Convention on BiologicalDiversity. v. Mechanisms

Assessment of the objectives of each sys-tem, and their prospective target audience,as a means to evaluate the fulfilment of theneeds of Parties in accessing taxonomicinformation required under the Conventionon Biological Diversity. The existingInternational Plant Names Index (IPNI) andthe Global Plant Checklist (IOPI) amongothers could provide useful models fordeveloping a global strategy. vi. Financial, human resources and othercapacity requirements

Sources of funding need to be identified. vii. Pilot projects

As a precursor to developing pilot pro-jects it is proposed to hold a workshop thatbrings together stakeholders of all the exist-ing global and major regional biodiversityinformation systems to identify overlaps,synergies, and gaps in order to develop acoordinated global strategy for harmonizingthe existing systems.

Several pilot projects are already underway including SABONET and SpeciesAnalyst, and several potential projects havebeen put forward in recent international tax-onomic meetings, and submitted to the GTIas potential pilot projects, such as GLOBIS,a butterfly information system for theworld, and the World Termite Database.

174


4. Operational objective 4 - Within themajor thematic work programmes of theConvention include key taxonomic objec-tives to generate information needed fordecision-making in conservation and sus-tainable use of biological diversity and itscomponents

It is recognized that taxonomy is funda-mental to the thematic areas of theConvention on Biological Diversity throughdiscovery, identification, and documentationof biological diversity. Because there areinadequate global taxonomic resources tomeet all demands, it is important to indicatetaxonomic priorities within each of the the-matic areas of the Convention on BiologicalDiversity. Such priorities should recognizeindigenous knowledge systems whereappropriate permission has been obtained.Within existing thematic work programmes,workshops should be conducted in appropri-ate regions, involving taxonomic experts toidentify key taxa for inventory and monitor-ing programmes. Sufficient flexibilityshould be maintained in order to respond topossible future modifications of priorities. 4.1. Planned activity 8: Forest biologicaldiversityi. Rationale

In the annex to decision IV/7, on forestbiological diversity, containing the workprogramme on forest biological diversity,under programme element 3 on criteria andindicators for forest biological diversity, thefollowing activity is identified: Taxonomicstudies and inventories at the national level,which provide for a basic assessment of for-est biological diversity. ii. Outputs

An increased knowledge of the speciescomposition of forests, through nationaltaxonomic studies and inventories. Usingthis increased knowledge base facilitatesselection of criteria and indicators for forest

biological diversity and may guide in theselection of sites to be protected and in thevaluation of resources. iii. Timing

As this activity is carried out at thenational level there will be variable timetablesglobally. The second round of national reportsfor the implementation of the Convention wasdue in May 2001 and provided an opportunityfor countries to report on taxonomic studiesand inventories carried out at the nationallevel that provide for a basic assessment offorest biological diversity. iv. Actors

National governments and institutionswill have the main responsibility, withpossible advice from a collaborative partner-ship of forest members on methodologies forthe development of appropriate criteria andindicators. The active involvement of inter-national organizations such as the Center forInternational Forestry Research (CIFOR),the International Centre for Research inAgroforestry (ICRAF), and the UnitedNations Forum on Forests (UNFF) will pro-vide useful links between existing initiatives. v. Mechanisms

In decision IV/7, the Conference of theParties agreed that countries would reviewspecific indicators of forest biologicaldiversity derived by the major internationalprocesses related to sustainable forest man-agement. Depending on the selection of thecriteria and indicators chosen, additionaltaxonomic studies and inventories will thenbe required. vi. Financial, human resources and othercapacity requirements

These requirements will be country-dependent, and resource requirements andsources will vary. vii. Pilot projects

To facilitate the implementation of oneelement of the programme of work on forest

175


biological diversity, a pilot project is pro-posed in the selection of indicators forbelow-ground diversity in forests in each ofthe three forest biomes: tropical, temperate,boreal. While there is a need to continuedeveloping knowledge in many componentsof forest ecosystems, the least known, andhighest priority, is the below-ground biologi-cal diversity. It is understood that it plays amajor role in contributing to the developmentand the health of the above-ground biologicaldiversity by, for instance, processing nutri-ents or minerals that are then made availableto, and assimilated by, plant biodiversity. 4.2. Planned activity 9: Marine and coastalbiological diversityi. Rationale

Two major elements of taxonomic workwithin marine and coastal ecosystems can beconsidered as high priority for achieving theConvention’s objectives in marine andcoastal systems, namely ballast water organ-isms, and key organisms for monitoring thehealth of mangrove systems through theirinvertebrate fauna. The ballast water organ-isms sub-element will require, inter alia, afocus on pelagic juvenile stages of benthicorganisms. The second element focuses onmangroves, which are among the world’smost rapidly changing systems. Within themarine and coastal biodiversity programmeof work there is a need to develop taxonomicsupport for baseline monitoring of inverte-brate fauna in mangrove systems. ii. Outputs

Identification aids for quarantine andother officials to identify and monitor theintroduction of novel marine organisms.

Taxonomic guides to key invertebrateorganisms in mangrove systems to aid man-agement of the continuum from natural todisturbed mangrove ecosystems. Taxonomicdata will also assist in selecting sites forprotected areas and for resource valuation.

iii. Timing Within the timeframe of the GloBallast

programme, produce basic guides for theidentification of major organism groupsfound in ballast water at major sources.

Within the next three years, develop tax-onomic guides to the identification of man-grove invertebrate fauna that can be used asindicators of habitat change. iv. Actors

The International Maritime Organization(IMO) should take the lead role in the taxo-nomic work in ballast water, under theirGloBallast work programme, which wouldthen be integrated with the activities fore-seen under the invasive alien species workof the Convention on Biological Diversity,and the GTI programme of work.

International conventions, in particularthe Ramsar Convention on Wetlands ofInternational Importance especially asWaterfowl Habitat, and taxonomic institu-tions with expertise in coastal invertebratesshould play a key role in conjunction withnational institutions from Parties with sig-nificant extent of mangrove ecosystemsunder threat, in the implementation of thenecessary taxonomic work. v. Mechanisms

The IMO GloBallast work programmecould include a taxonomic component for theidentification of marine pelagic taxa, includ-ing those with adult benthic forms, whichwill form a key element of the GTI in themarine environment. The InternationalSociety for Mangrove Ecology (ISME) couldfacilitate the development of the work ele-ment on mangrove invertebrate fauna,including training workshops of key person-nel from taxonomic institutions in tropicalareas. Three workshops, one in Africa, one inthe neotropics and one in Asia have been sug-gested and are in preparation for 2001 withsupport from UNESCO. The International

176


Coral Reef Initiative (ICRI) and its networkcan assist with regard to coral reefs. vi. Financial, human resources and othercapacity requirements

The IMO GloBallast programme couldprovide the appropriate resources for a pilotproject involving six developing countries.

Funding support is required for the threecapacity-building workshops as well asappropriate infrastructure support for themangrove invertebrate taxonomy and pro-duction of guides and ICRI work. vii. Pilot projects

The GloBallast programme is a pilot pro-ject under the IMO, with direct relevance tothe invasive alien species and GTI pro-grammes of work.

A pilot project focused in south-eastAsia on mangrove invertebrates, particu-larly involving Malaysia, Indonesia andPhilippines, could be developed in conjunc-tion with the International Center for LivingAquatic Resources Management (ICLARM)and ISME. 4.3 Planned activity 10: Dry and sub-humidlands biodiversityi. Rationale

Decision V/23 on consideration ofoptions for conservation and sustainable useof biological diversity in dryland,Mediterranean, arid, semi-arid, grasslandand savannah ecosystems establishes a pro-gramme of work, including, inter alia,assessment of the status and trends, identifi-cation of specific areas within dry and sub-humid lands of particular value forbiological diversity and/or under particularthreat, and the further development of indi-cators. Under each of these activities tar-geted actions on furthering the knowledgebase on the organisms that maintain the cru-cial soil crust should be developed atnational and regional levels, as well asthe need for greater knowledge of the

micro-organisms in nutrient cycling, andincreased taxonomic information of pestsand diseases.

Correct identification of indicator taxa,such as crust-forming lichens, often requiresspecial identification aids and techniques,and the development of such tools is neces-sary for increasing the capacity of rangelandmanagers to understand their function inmaintaining dryland ecosystems. In manyparts of the world, there is a need to increasetaxonomic capacity to identify the lichens,and to then develop identification tools. It isimportant that such identification tools bedesigned in such a way that they can be usedby rangeland managers to help in identifica-tion of key organisms. ii. Outputs

Enhanced understanding among agricul-tural and rangeland managers of lichens askey indicators warning of the advance ofsoil degradation. This will usually take theform of loss of particular species from thesystem. Taxonomic work will need to developeasy-to-use identikits for key soil lichens,algae, soil invertebrates, pest insects andother herbivores, and other taxa that will bethe harbingers of change. iii. Timing

By the seventh meeting of theConference of the Parties, have developedidentification aids in consultation withappropriate national taxonomy and manage-ment agencies. iv. Actors

The Convention to Combat Desertification(CCD) and other environmental conventionsand their relevant collaborators, internationalagencies (including International AgricultureResearch Centres (IARCs)), rangeland man-agers and national Governments. v. Mechanisms

Cooperation with the CCD and other keyplayers among international organizations

177


vi. Financial, human resources and othercapacity requirements

To facilitate global and regional coopera-tion and synergy in this work, a projectwhich could attract funding from the IARCs,in conjunction with FAO, can be proposed. vii. Pilot projects

A pilot project could be developedamong CCD, FAO and UNEP to assess dif-ferent biological and biochemical indicatorsof land degradation. This project wouldrequire input from a range of taxonomicexperts, including algologists and lichenol-ogists. Input would also be required fromsoil scientists, who can link abiotic informa-tion with the taxonomic informationobtained. Results can be distilled to a simpleidentikit system that will allow local man-agers to identify key species and determinethe health of their arid/semi-arid system. 4.4 Planned activity 11: Inland waters bio-logical diversityi. Rationale

As in all other major ecosystems the cur-rent status of taxonomic knowledge ininland waters is varied both geographically,and according to the major taxon groups.For the purposes of the GTI targeted activi-ties in rapidly increasing worldwide knowl-edge of freshwater fish and invertebrates areproposed as high priority. ii. Outputs

A series of regional guides to freshwaterfish and invertebrates (including adult ter-restrial forms where appropriate) as an inputto ecosystem monitoring for river and lakehealth. iii. Timing

Produce field-usable regional guideswithin two years for both professional andpublic use. iv. Actors

National agencies and taxonomic institu-tions, especially museums, should play a

principal role in the implementation of thisactivity. International support and coordina-tion could be provided through the UNESCOkey science activity “Water and Ecosystems”.Parataxonomists, in the form of interestedmembers of the public and school students ina number of countries, have been using thetechnique to monitor aquatic health. This is anarea that could be built upon, and maybe alsolinked to planned activity 11. v. Mechanisms

Changes in the species compositions andabundance of macro-invertebrates in fresh-water systems are now being studied world-wide as part of approaches to monitoring ofecosystem health. A number of key potentialpartners are possible for this activity,including from developed and developingcountry perspectives. The Scientific andTechnical Review Panel of the RamsarConvention on Wetlands of InternationalImportance especially as Waterfowl Habitatshould also be involved in this project toprovide specialist expertise, and a focus onthe concept of using taxonomy to helpunderstand ecological change. vi. Financial, human resources and othercapacity requirements

There is opportunity to build on existingprojects here, or assist regional collabora-tion between existing projects, which wouldcontribute to the implementation of the GTIwhile simultaneously improving monitoringof ecosystem health. 4.5 Planned activity 12: Agricultural bio-logical diversityi. Rationale

Within the programme of work on agri-cultural biological diversity, several areasrequire taxonomic capacity in order todeliver fully on their objectives. The needfor taxonomy ranges from classical taxon-omy of the species living in agriculturalecosystems, to the taxonomy of wild

178


relatives of agriculturally important species,to access to existing taxonomic informationincluding basic knowledge on the functionalrelationships between organisms oftenrecorded by taxonomists.

The value of training and knowledge-sharing among researchers, extension work-ers, farmers and indigenous peoples ishighlighted in decision V/5 of the Conferenceof the Parties to the Convention onBiological Diversity. Within the agriculturalbiodiversity work programme specific tax-onomy-related activities are envisaged inthe following subject areas: pollinators; soiland other below-ground biodiversity, tosupport agricultural production systems,especially in nutrient cycling; and naturalenemies of pests and diseases.

As the agricultural biological diversitywork programme develops, significant tax-onomic activities will need to be integratedwithin the proposals for work. ii. Outputs

Outputs would include: easy-to-use keysto families, genera and species of pollinators;automated identification systems for pollina-tors; development of standard methods foridentification of soil biodiversity to differenttaxonomic levels; increased knowledge ofsoil biodiversity to aid in the identification ofindicators of the “health” of below-groundbiological diversity; and taxonomic trainingfor farmers and ecosystem managers. iii. Timing

Within the agricultural biodiversity workprogramme the taxonomy related activitiesare part of the timeframe for the develop-ment of the overall activity. Current time-frames are as follows:

a. Pollinators - In order to initiatethe process of implementation ofthe International Initiative for theConservation and Sustainable Useof Pollinators a planning meeting

took place at the FAO in late2000. A plan of action wasadopted at the sixth meeting ofthe Conference of the Parties;

b. Soil biota - Ongoing efforts byGovernments and relevant organi-zations will develop projects withappropriate timing;

c. Pest and disease regulation organ-isms - Proposals for activitiesmay be developed by countriesand relevant organizations asdetermined in the programme ofwork on agrobiodiversity.

iv. Actors FAO has been invited by the Conference

of the Parties in decision V/5 to lead theInternational Pollinators Initiative (IPI), andwill prepare a proposal for the developmentof the IPI for the seventh meeting ofSBSTTA.

Parties should make contributions on soilbiota and organisms involved in pest anddisease regulation. In addition, the tropicalsoil biology and fertility (TSBF) pro-gramme hosted by UNESCO in Nairobi isthe proposed implementing agency for afull-sized GEF project, which includesmajor taxonomic components for assessingbelow-ground biodiversity. Also, the GlobalIntegrated Pest Management (IPM) Facility,based in Rome, which is a programme co-sponsored by FAO, UNEP, UNDP and theWorld Bank, may contribute as an organisa-tion involved in pest and disease regulation. v. Mechanisms

The International Pollinators Initiative(IPI) will contain a major taxonomic com-ponent, and the project is currently underdevelopment.

A major taxonomic element needs to bebuilt into all current and proposed projectsdealing with the sustainable use or conser-vation of agricultural and non-agricultural

179


lands, if we are to advance our knowledgebase on the functional aspects of maintain-ing ecosystem processes.

As concerns organisms involved in pestand disease regulation, a scoping exerciseshould be undertaken to determine wherethe limitations exist in terms of taxonomicinformation, from basic alpha-taxonomy ofpests and natural enemies, to how the infor-mation is presented and distributed. Thiswork can be carried out by farmers’ net-works and research institutions, includingthe IARC system. vi. Financial, human resources and othercapacity requirements

All three elements require resources tobe identified within existing and new pro-jects, as well as additional resources to bemade available to increase technical capac-ity in most countries of the world. vii. Pilot projects

A major UNEP project entitled“Conservation and sustainable managementof below-ground biodiversity” in seven coun-tries is currently under assessment by UNEP.A Canadian report “Soil biodiversity: issuesfor Canadian agriculture” is being preparedand may be a suitable pilot. A pilot project ontermites submitted by the SmithsonianInstitution could also be considered. 4.6 Planned activity 13: Mountain biologi-cal diversity

Development of this activity will beundertaken following discussion of this the-matic work area at the seventh meeting ofthe Conference of the Parties. The GTICoordination Mechanism could play animportant role in proactively defining taxo-nomic needs related to this planned the-matic activity.

5. Operational objective 5 - Within thework on cross-cutting issues of theConvention include key taxonomic

objectives to generate informationneeded for decision-making in conserva-tion and sustainable use of biologicaldiversity and its components. 5.1. Planned activity 14: Access and bene-fit-sharingi. Rationale

The Conference of the Parties, in its deci-sion V/26, identified “Assessment andinventory of biological resources as well asinformation management” as key capacity-building needs with respect to access andbenefit-sharing arrangements. Indeed, theinventory of biological resources could pro-vide useful information in view of the elab-oration of measures regarding access togenetic resources and the equitable sharingof benefits arising from their exploitation.In order to carry out this inventory,increased capacity is often needed at thecountry level. The primary goal of the GTIis to assist countries in carrying out thisinventory in a timely and efficient manner.A major element in increasing capacity toproperly inventory and access biologicalresource information is effective informa-tion management. Therefore a key elementof the GTI must be the development ofappropriate information-technology tools toallow access to existing data, as well as toprovide efficient entry of new informationgenerated from any increased knowledge.

The more each country can develop itscapacity to properly inventory, collect, clas-sify, and then commercialize its biologicalresources, the greater will be the return ofbenefits to that country. These four elements(inventory, collection, classification, com-mercialization) can be seen as a hierarchy ofincreasing capacity. The GTI will concen-trate on developing capacity in the collectionand classification of biodiversity. The GTIshould include projects designed to developcapacity in collecting and maintaining

180


biological collections, as well as the properclassification and knowledge of the biologi-cal resources. Taxonomic information, inparticular at the genetic level, will be criticalin tracing the origin of resources and livingmodified organisms (LMOs).

Increasing access by countries of originto existing information on biologicalresources held elsewhere has also beenhighlighted as a major element of theGlobal Taxonomy Initiative. In decisionV/26, the Conference of the Parties urgedcountries to adopt measures that are sup-portive of efforts to facilitate access togenetic resources for scientific, commercialand other uses, and associated knowledge,innovations and practices of indigenous andlocal communities embodying traditionallifestyles relevant to the conservation andsustainable use of biological diversity.

The first step in facilitating access is pro-vision of information, and the Parties haveagreed in decision IV/1 D to a series ofactions that would increase access to infor-mation world-wide. Operational objective 3of the present programme of work sets out aplan to begin to address this issue. ii. Outputs

Interactive catalogues of material avail-able, linked to taxonomic collections inherbaria and museums. Taxonomic support,including at the molecular level, to provideclear identification of specimens in the exsitu collections, especially in developingcountries, is needed.

A series of country-driven projects couldbe carried out, combining the development ofbasic taxonomic capacity and an improvedinformation base on biological resources.

These would assist in developing betterlinkages between existing initiatives thatprovide information electronically ongenetic resources, as well as new projects toimprove the access to, and range of, publicly

available taxonomic information. In turn, abasis for the commercialization of compo-nents of that biological diversity would beprovided. iii. Timing

Progress in global networking betweencountries and taxonomic institutions hold-ing significant ex situ collections should beaccelerated within a five-year timeframe.

Development of pilot projects shouldoccur as soon as possible. iv. Actors

National (and international) culture col-lections, including microbial collections. TheIARC system, especially the ConsultativeGroup on International Agricultural Research(CGIAR), should be involved to select pri-orities for needed taxonomic effort.

Taxonomic institutions in many countriescontain significant holdings of ex situ materi-als from other countries, and in particularfrom developing countries. Botanical gar-dens hold both dead and live material thatmay be of considerable interest to the countryof origin of that material, and may alsodevelop new or improved conservation tech-niques that could aid countries of origin intheir conservation and sustainable useefforts.

The FAO Commission on GeneticResources for Food and Agriculture couldplay a key partnership role.

The Global Biodiversity InformationFacility (GBIF) may be usefully involved inthis activity. v. Mechanisms

One of the first most important measuresany country can take to encourage the sus-tainable use of its resources and ensureproper sharing of benefits derived fromtheir exploitation is through developingknowledge regarding their own biodiversity,and in particular full cataloguing of itsdiversity. Through acknowledging the

181


importance of developing taxonomiccapacity and adopting a series of suggestedactions and priority activities (in its deci-sions IV/1 D and V/9), the Conference ofthe Parties has clearly indicated to Parties,Governments and relevant organizations themajor work that needs to be undertaken tobuild taxonomic capacity within countries.

The basic mechanism for undertakingthese actions and activities is throughcountry-driven projects at the national,regional and subregional levels, which are tobe implemented with the assistance of devel-oped and developing country institutionsthat house ex situ collections (i.e. herbaria,botanical gardens, museums and zoos), andthe financial mechanism. These country-dri-ven projects need to be developed to showclearly how the development of basic taxo-nomic capacity leads to an improved knowl-edge base and understanding of thebiological resources held by the country,which can then be used to attract the neces-sary investment in the full range of commer-cial uses of components of that biologicaldiversity.

Achieving tangible results in the shortterm will require the promotion of a series ofprojects that have existing support fromwithin both developing and developed worldinstitutions and that clearly lead to a conser-vation or sustainable use outcome. A majoraction plan should be developed with FAO,IARCs (especially CGIAR) and BioNET-INTERNATIONAL as the key intergovern-mental organizations and non-governmentalorganizations, among others. vi. Financial, human resources and othercapacity requirements

Capacity-building of taxonomic institu-tions is a costly and ongoing matter, andstrategic input to help conservation and

sustainable use efforts significantly must bebased on those areas where useful outcomescan be demonstrated in the short to mediumterm. It is to be hoped that demonstratingbenefit may then lead to further investmentin infrastructure support and development.

New resources are needed to initiateactivities, although existing resources withinkey organizations may be able to be mobi-lized for the development of an action plan. 5.2 Planned activity 15: Invasive alienspecies

Development of this activity will beundertaken based on priorities identifiedthrough GISP phase I, the review of thestatus of invasive alien species and of ongo-ing measures addressing invasive alienspecies under way within the Convention onBiological Diversity, and the contents of thedecisions taken by the sixth meeting of theConference of the Parties to the Conventionon Biological Diversity regarding invasivealien species177. 5.3 Planned activity 16: Support in imple-mentation of Article 8(j)i. Rationale

The Conference of the Parties hasacknowledged that traditional biodiversity-related knowledge (TBRK) has the potentialto inform the activities of the Convention onBiological Diversity. Before it can do so,indigenous and local communities requireprotection of their intellectual property inany collaborative efforts aimed at meshingtraditional knowledge and science. Giventhat the GTI has the potential to make tradi-tional biodiversity-related knowledge moreaccessible to a wide range of users, dueregard must be given to the concerns raisedby indigenous and local communitiesregarding the right to preserve, protect andmanage traditional biodiversity-related

177 See decision VI/23

182


knowledge, particularly traditional taxo-nomic knowledge.

In its decision V/16, the Conference ofthe Parties endorsed a programme of work toimplement Article 8(j) based on a number ofprinciples, including full and effective partic-ipation of indigenous and local communities,the valuing of traditional knowledge,acknowledgment of spiritual and cultural val-ues and the requirement for prior informedconsent from traditional knowledge holders.

Paragraph 17 of that decision requests theParties to support the development of regis-ters of traditional knowledge, innovationsand practices of indigenous and local com-munities through participatory programmesand consultations with indigenous and localcommunities, taking into account strength-ening legislation, customary practices andtraditional systems of resources manage-ment, such as the protection of traditionalknowledge against unauthorized use.

A number of tasks in the programme ofwork for the implementation of Article 8(j)have a direct bearing on the proposed activ-ities of the GTI, in particular tasks 1, 2 and7 in phase 1 and tasks 6, 10, 13, and 16 inphase 2 (decision V/16).

Traditional knowledge systems includetaxonomic information, which if used incombination with Linnaean taxonomiescould support the GTI. Access to and use oftraditional knowledge must have the priorinformed consent of the holders of thatknowledge and be based on mutually agreedterms. When this has occurred, comparisonof indigenous taxonomies and Linnaean tax-onomies in different regions could be madeto provide general principles to assist in theconservation and sustainable use of elementsof biodiversity in different ecosystems. ii. Outputs

Regional and subregional guides basedon ethical research practices and developed

with full and effective participation ofindigenous and local communities. Theseguides could highlight the similarities anddifferences between the two taxonomiesand may be in the form of catalogues andspecies lists, or be more targeted resourcematerial that provides interpretation infor-mation for a wide variety of environmentalmanagers, in particular protected area andconservation managers. iii. Timing

Preparation of guides to be completed aspart of implementation activities underArticle 8(j). iv. Actors

National and subnational governments,indigenous and local groups, indigenousresearch centres and indigenous non-govern-mental organizations should take the lead inthis work element. Potentially the GBIFcould play a lead role in providing a globalrole in information distribution. Some inter-national and national institutions alreadyhold significant information and have activeprograms in compiling indigenous and localtaxonomies. These institutions, with the fulland effective participation of indigenous andlocal communities, should be encouragedthrough additional “catalytic” funding toensure that their research practices are basedon agreement between parties and the prin-ciple of prior informed assent. v. Mechanisms

The Convention on Biological Diversity,UNESCO, the International Social ScienceCouncil (ISSC) and the InternationalCouncil of Scientific Unions (ICSU) offerthe appropriate platform to develop with thefull and effective participation of indige-nous and local communities suitable plansof work leading to project development.The Ad Hoc Open-ended Working Group onArticle 8(j) should play a key role in advis-ing on the development of projects.

183


vi. Financial, human resources and othercapacity requirements

New resources are required to initiatethis activity. 5.4 Planned activity 17: Support for ecosys-tem approach and work under theConvention on Biological Diversity onassessment including impact assessments,monitoring and indicatorsi. Rationale

Under the ecosystem approach, a keyactivity will be the Millennium EcosystemAssessment. The Millennium EcosystemAssessment will require considerable scien-tific effort for the characterization ofecosystems, including better data on keyspecies that comprise ecosystems and theirrole in maintaining ecosystem processes. Inmany regions taxonomic knowledge neededto fulfil these efforts is not available, whichwill therefore require specific activities tobe undertaken (created under the GTI). TheMillennium Ecosystem Assessment seekspolicy-relevant information; the GTI is apolicy response to a recognized impedi-ment, or knowledge block, in our system ofbiodiversity understanding. The GTI seeksto facilitate gathering of the pertinentspecies information that would be used tocharacterize ecosystems, including thosethat help to illustrate the value of goods andservices flowing from ecosystems.

The Millennium Ecosystem Assessmentwill be required to report on issues such aspatterns of species and ecosystem diversity- the activities of the GTI in facilitating bet-ter knowledge of the species and their dis-tribution will help provide this information.All information fed into the MillenniumEcosystem Assessment will need appropri-ate geo-referencing - which is a key plankfor all activities envisaged under the GTI.The GTI will also be focusing on taxonomicactivity in areas of relevance to the

Convention, especially the key ecosystemthemes. Thus the products of the GTI cancomplement the Millennium EcosystemAssessment activity in thematic ecosys-tems, which in turn may illustrate the extentof removal of the taxonomic impediment -providing a positive feedback process.

The GTI also has relevance to the suiteof environmental conventions associatedwith the Convention on Biological Diversity(e.g., the Convention on the Conservation ofMigratory Species of Wild Animals, theConvention on International Trade inEndangered Species of Wild Fauna andFlora (CITES), and the Convention onDesertification), and to the Commission onSustainable Development, all of which havea direct interest in the outcomes of theMillennium Ecosystem Assessment. Thereis scope for linking envisaged work pro-grammes under the Millennium EcosystemAssessment with the key action areas underthe GTI. ii. Outputs

Production of taxonomic overviews tohelp guide the Millennium EcosystemAssessment to focus on key areas and issuesof importance. These overviews can becompiled from work under the other opera-tional objectives, but may need specialfocus for the global ecosystem context ofthe Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. iii. Timing

To be linked with the MillenniumEcosystem Assessment development andprogramme. iv. Actors

The Millennium Ecosystem Assessmentadvisory mechanisms, and the UNEP WorldConservation Monitoring Centre (WCMC)and UNESCO as key synthesizers. v. Mechanisms

The Convention’s cross-cutting issue ofassessments and the programme of work on

184


indicators of biological diversity include anumber of programme elements whereinput from the GTI would be required,including the development of a menu ofindicators in thematic areas and develop-ment of methodology sheets, guidelines andtraining for supporting the development ofnational monitoring and indicator pro-grammes. Specific input required from theGTI would be in the identification, develop-ment and testing of suitable indicators, andpriority taxonomic information required asinput to scientific assessments. vi. Financial, human resources and othercapacity requirements

The development of financial and humanresource requirements will need to beundertaken within the development of spe-cific Millennium Ecosystem Assessmentproject proposals, as well as through agreedactivities in indicator development.

5.5. Planned activity 18: Protected areas Development of this activity will be under-taken following discussion of this cross-cutting work area. The GTI CoordinationMechanism could play an important role inproactively defining taxonomic needsrelated to this planned activity for the ninthmeeting of SBSTTA, prior to the seventhmeeting of the Conference of the Parties.

The Conference of the Parties, 1. Notes the progress and commitment

being made in implementing the pro-gramme of work for the Global TaxonomyInitiative;

2. Invites Parties, other Governments,regional and international organizations totake full account of the importance of taxo-nomic capacities in achieving the goals ofthe Convention, to support taxonomic activ-ities to attain the 2010 target, and to provideall necessary support to national, and whereappropriate regional, taxonomic centres ofresearch and expertise; and urges Parties,other Governments and relevant fundingorganizations to provide adequate andtimely support to developing countries toassist in the implementation of the GlobalTaxonomy Initiative, and for integratingtaxonomic capacity-building activities intothematic and cross-cutting programmes,including supporting activities and projects,such as, where appropriate, stand alonecapacity-building projects;

3. Invites Parties to appoint NationalFocal Points for the Global TaxonomyInitiative as called for in decision V/9, andurges all Parties to ensure that those focalpoints work with their taxonomic communi-ties taking into account the programme ofwork for the Global Taxonomy Initiative;

4. Requests Parties to appropriatelyinclude and give full support to the taxo-nomic work needed to accomplish the the-matic and cross-cutting programmes ofwork and activities under the Convention;

5. Invites developed country Parties toprovide technical and financial supportfor the operations of the Coordination

Mechanism of the Global TaxonomyInitiative;

6. Requests Parties to report on thestatus of implementation of the programmeof work for the Global Taxonomy Initiativeand further invites national and interna-tional, taxonomic institutions, funding orga-nizations, financial agencies, and thefinancial mechanism of the Convention tocontribute information on their relevantactivities to the review of the GlobalTaxonomy Initiative for consideration bythe Conference of the Parties at its eighthmeeting;

7. Requests the Executive Secretary, incollaboration with the CoordinationMechanism for the Global TaxonomyInitiative to:

(a) Ensure that appropriate taxonomicexpertise with balanced regionalrepresentation is included in inter-sessional meetings and expertgroups convened by the Secretariatas appropriate;

(b) Develop the process and guide-lines for the in-depth review,including mechanisms for moni-toring progress in the implementa-tion of the programme of work forthe Global Taxonomy Initiative, tobe finalized during the tenth meet-ing of the Subsidiary Body onScientific, Technical and Techno-logical Advice for consideration atthe eleventh meeting of theSubsidiary Body; and

(c) Undertake an analysis of theexisting thematic programmes ofwork and cross-cutting issues with


185

ANNEX 12.

COP DECISION VII/9: GLOBAL TAXONOMY INITIATIVE

186


respect to taxonomic components,in order to more effectively buildtaxonomy into the work pro-grammes and to develop anunderstanding of the taxonomiccapacity necessary to accomplishthe targets of these programmes ofwork.

(d) Undertake a gap analysis of miss-ing elements of the existing pro-gramme of work for the GlobalTaxonomy Initiative in the light ofthe decisions at the sixth and sev-enth meetings of the Conferenceof the Parties, considering also theresult of the regional workshopsheld after the adoption of the pro-gramme of work.

(e) Further facilitate the synergisticcollaboration between existing

initiatives, including the clearing-house mechanism, the GlobalBiodiversity Information Facility,and regional and sub-regional tax-onomic networks in order todevelop more accessible informa-tion sources for countries on theirbiodiversity;

(f) Ensure that there are linkagesbetween Articles 15 and 8(j) of theConvention, decisions VII/19 A-Fof the Conference of the Parties,on access and benefit-sharing, andtaxonomy;

8. Welcomes the contribution offeredby the Government of Belgium through theDirectorate-General for DevelopmentCooperation for training in taxonomy andcollection management for developingcountries.

The Conference of the Parties 1. Welcomes the progress made in the

implementation of the programme of workfor the Global Taxonomy Initiative, asreported in the note by the ExecutiveSecretary (UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/11/5) onthe in-depth review of the implementationof the programme of work for the GlobalTaxonomy Initiative;

2. Notes with appreciation the contribu-tions to the Global Taxonomy Initiative madeby BioNET-INTERNATIONAL the GlobalBiodiversity Information Facility, CABIInternational, the Integrated TaxonomicInformation System (ITIS) and Species 2000and encourages these organizations and ini-tiatives to continue contributing to the imple-mentation of the Convention;

3. Notes that some Parties and otherGovernments have made significantprogress in implementing activities pur-suant to the programme of work for theGlobal Taxonomy Initiative;

4. Notes that the taxonomic impedi-ment is particularly serious in countrieswith mega-diversity;

5. Emphasizes the need to build andretain capacity to address the taxonomicimpediment, and in this context, exploreoptions to ensure the long-term sustainabilityof the necessary financial support, and invitesBioNET-INTERNATIONAL and other rele-vant organizations, in consultation with theCoordination Mechanism for the GlobalTaxonomy Initiative, to establish a specialfund for the Global Taxonomy Initiative, andto report on progress to the Conference of theParties at its ninth meeting;

6. Recalling target 1 of the GlobalStrategy for Plant Conservation (“A widelyaccessible working list of known plantspecies, as a step towards a complete worldflora”), welcomes the progress made bySpecies 2000, the Royal Botanic Gardens,Kew, and collaborating partners towards theachievement of this target;

7. Adopts as a target under operationalobjective 3 of the programme of work for theGlobal Taxonomy Initiative “A widelyaccessible checklist of known species, as astep towards a global register of plants, ani-mals, microorganisms and other organisms”,bearing in mind the urgent need for timelyprovision of scientific names of organisms tosupport implementation of work under theConvention on Biological Diversity;

8. Adopts the planned activities to sup-port implementation of the programmes ofwork on mountain biological diversity,invasive alien species, protected areas, andisland biological diversity contained in theannex to this recommendation as comple-mentary to the programme of work con-tained in the annex to decision VI/8;

9. Urges Parties and other Governmentsthat have not done so to:

a. Establish National Focal Points forthe Global Taxonomy Initiative sothat they can contribute to imple-mentation of the programme ofwork at national level;

b. Undertake or complete or update,as a matter of priority, national tax-onomic needs assessments, includ-ing related technical, technologicaland capacity needs, and establish


187

ANNEX 13.

COP DECISION VIII/3: GLOBAL TAXONOMY INITIATIVE: IN-DEPTHREVIEW OF THE IMLEMENTATION OF THE PROGRAMME OF

WORK FOR THE GLOBAL TAXONOMY INITIATIVE

188


priorities for taxonomic work thattake into account country-specificcircumstances. These assessmentsshould take into account ongoingnational biodiversity strategies andaction plans as well as regionalstrategies and initiatives underdevelopment, with particular regardto user needs and priorities;

c. Contribute, as appropriate, toregional and global taxonomicneeds assessments;

d. Contribute, where possible, to theimplementation of the plannedactivities contained in the pro-gramme of work for the GlobalTaxonomy Initiative;

e. Contribute, as appropriate, to ini-tiatives facilitating the digitizationof information on specimens ofnatural history collections, notingthe importance of accessible datato support actions under theConvention;

10. Invites Parties, other Governments,and relevant organizations and institutions to:

a. Use and support existing mecha-nisms for strengthening collabora-tion and communication amonggovernment agencies, the scientificcommunity, research institutions,universities, collection holders, theprivate sector and stakeholders inorder to improve the response to tax-onomic needs for decision-making;

b. Promote taxonomy and taxonomicproducts and related research as acornerstone for inventory andmonitoring of biological diversityin the framework of the implemen-tation of the Convention and toachieve its objectives;

c. Develop and implement strategiesto support the taxonomic research

necessary to implement theConvention;

d. Collect and disseminate informa-tion on the availability of taxo-nomic resources with a view tomaximising the use of relevantexisting resources for the effectiveimplementation of the GlobalTaxonomy Initiative;

e. Develop and implement capacity-building activities related to theGlobal Taxonomy Initiative, suchas training in the areas of identifica-tion of taxa, information exchangeand database management, takinginto account national and region-specific needs;

f. Mobilize financial and technicalresources to assist developing coun-tries, in particular least developedand small island developing States,and countries with economies intransition, including those with highlevels of biodiversity, to build andmaintain systems and significantinstitutional infrastructure in order toadequately obtain, collate and curatebiological specimens as well as tofacilitate information exchange,including repatriation of informa-tion, on their biodiversity;

g. Promote cooperation and network-ing at national, regional, subregional and global levels in supportof capacity-building activities relatedto the Global Taxonomy Initiative,in accordance with Articles 18 and15 of the Convention, by, inter alia,making information availablethrough the clearing-house mecha-nism and other means;

h. Provide, within the framework ofthe terms of reference contained indecision V/9, clear guidance to

189


National Focal Points for the GlobalTaxonomy Initiative on duties andspecific tasks to better communicateand promote the objectives of theInitiative, working in collaborationwith other stakeholders and in accor-dance with country needs;

i. Facilitate, as appropriate, the inte-gration of taxonomic informationon nationally held collections inregional and global databases andinformation systems;

11. Requests the Executive Secretary to: a. Consult with relevant organizations

and funding agencies regarding theglobal taxonomic needs assessmentcalled for in planned activity 3 ofthe programme of work for GlobalTaxonomy Initiative, in order toconsider, inter alia, the scope of theassessment, options for methodol-ogy, and potential implementingagencies, with a view to complet-ing the assessment as soon aspossible, taking into account users’needs;

b. Continue collaborating with rele-vant conventions, organizationsand institutions, and to foster syn-ergies between relevant processesand programmes, in order to makeavailable taxonomic information,expertise and relevant technologiesneeded to achieve the objectives ofthe Convention on BiologicalDiversity, noting in particular, tax-onomic priorities at national,regional and global levels;

c. Continue collaborating with exist-ing initiatives, including the GlobalBiodiversity Information Facility,the Integrated Taxonomic informa-tion System and Species 2000, todevelop the Electronic Catalogue of

Names of Known Organisms andthe Catalogue of Life;

d. Continue collaborating with exist-ing initiatives, including those ofBioNET-INTERNATIONAL, theGlobal Biodiversity InformationFacility, IUCN, and CAB Inter-national, to develop the humancapacities, tools and infrastructureneeded to support implementationof the programme of work on theGlobal Taxonomy Initiative;

e. Undertake, as part of the GlobalInitiative on Communication,Education and Public Awarenessprogramme and in collaborationwith relevant partners, activitiesdemonstrating the importance oftaxonomy for the general public,including information on prod-ucts, lessons learned, and accom-plishments of taxonomy-relatedprojects, and activities encourag-ing public participation, recogniz-ing the importance of volunteernaturalists and local and indige-nous people as a source ofexpertise;

f. Develop, in consultation with theCoordination Mechanism of theGlobal Taxonomy Initiative, otherrelevant consultative bodies, stake-holders and organizations, for eachof the planned activities of the pro-gramme of work on the GlobalTaxonomy Initiative, specific taxo-nomic, outcome oriented deliver-ables to be considered as additionsunder “(ii) Outputs” with a timelinefor possible consideration by theConference of the Parties at its ninthmeeting;

g. Report to the ninth meeting of theConference of the Parties on

190


progress made towards the targetfor the programme of work as spec-ified in paragraph 7 above;

h. Include the Global TaxonomyInitiative in the joint work planbetween the secretariats of theConvention on Biological Diver-sity and the International PlantProtection Convention, with a viewto exploring synergies in the workunder the two conventions, withparticular regard to invasive alienspecies;

i. Facilitate networking and collabo-ration among National Focal Pointsfor the Global Taxonomy Initiativethrough, inter alia, the GlobalTaxonomy Initiative portal;

j. Complete and publish the Guide tothe Global Taxonomy Initiative;

12. Requests the Global EnvironmentFacility to continue to support the imple-mentation of the planned activities con-tained in the programme of work on theGlobal Taxonomy Initiative, including taxo-nomic needs assessments, projects with ataxonomic focus or clearly identified taxo-nomic components, and regional activitieson taxonomic capacity development andaccess to technology;

13. Further requests the GlobalEnvironment Facility to provide financialresources to developing countries, in partic-ular the small island developing Statesamong them, and countries with economiesin transition, for projects which help toestablish and operationalize their nationalfocal points for the Global TaxonomyInitiative, as well as financial resources tosupport capacity-building activities such as,inter alia, taxonomic training related to spe-cific taxa and information technologies;

14. Requests the secretariats of theConvention and the Global Environment

Facility to conduct a joint analysis offunded GTI-related projects and relevantproject information contained in nationalreports, including analysis of the resourcesdirected specifically to capacity-building,with a view to extracting best practicesand sharing information and experience inpromoting financial support for theInitiative;

15. Requests the Executive Secretaryto convene, with support from relevantorganizations and donors, a project develop-ment seminar aimed primarily for thosecountries that have already identified taxo-nomic needs or that have submitted propos-als for pilot projects under the GlobalTaxonomy Initiative, to promote formula-tion of country-driven projects based onidentified taxonomic needs and to explorepotential benefits of developing new, andenhancing existing, regional or global pro-jects to address common taxonomic needsthat have already been identified.

AnnexADDITIONAL PLANNED

ACTIVITIESI. PLANNED ACTIVITY: MOUNTAIN

BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY(i) Rationale

1. The taxonomic composition ofmountain biodiversity varies with the bio-geographic region, the latitude and the alti-tude of the mountain as well as with therelief. In some cases, mountains provide anecessary seasonal resource for organismsat other times found in lowland biomes.Furthermore most groups of organisms haverepresentatives in the lowland as well as inmontane region, and so a vast range ofgroups of organisms is encountered ratherthan a few taxonomic groups. Conse-quently, montane regions are often hotspots of biodiversity, which renders their

191


full taxonomic treatment a challenge andrequires many actors and experts for differ-ent organisms.

2. As most mountain ranges extendover considerable length and area, aregional approach to mountain biodiversityis of paramount importance, and relevantinformation is available in many differentdatabases and inventories. Therefore, theGlobal Taxonomy Initiative can contributeto the mountain biodiversity programme ofwork in several ways, including collatingrelevant information and expertise. (ii) Outputs

3. An increased knowledge of thespecies composition of mountains throughnational taxonomic studies and inventories.The Global Taxonomy Initiative could aidthe programme of work on mountain bio-logical diversity through:

(a) Working lists of organisms - assem-bling working lists of organismsoccurring in montane areas includ-ing their vernacular names, withreference to altitude and relief;

(b) Working identification keys – pro-ducing identification keys inprinted and electronic form usefulfor the conservation, monitoringand sustainable use of organismsin montane areas;

(c) Dissemination of data – distribut-ing the working lists and keys aswidely as possible to increase theirusefulness;

(d) Human resources – address andsupport taxonomic experts toencourage their participation inrelevant training programmes, andsupporting the establishment oflocal reference and data collec-tions of montane biota;

(e) Hot spots and protected areas –providing relevant taxonomic

information, infrastructure andhuman resources to identify hotspots of mountain biodiversity andto establish and monitor protectedareas.

(iii) Timing 4. As current knowledge of mountain

biodiversity is still inadequate, the GlobalTaxonomy Initiative will make an ongoingeffort to develop and improve working listsand working identification keys for mon-tane organisms. Within the next three years,it will attempt to develop taxonomicguides, computerized lists of montaneorganisms, and identification keys in con-sultation with appropriate national taxon-omy and management agencies. (iv) Actors

5. The mountain biodiversity pro-gramme of work identified many relevantactors, such as Global MountainBiodiversity Assessment (GMBA) ofDIVERSITAS, Mountain Partnership,Mountain Forum, BioNET-INTERNA-TIONAL (to organize regional LOOPs),the FAO for agricultural aspects, the clear-ing house mechanism of the Conventionand the Global Biodiversity InformationFacility (GBIF), the Global EnvironmentFacility (GEF) and national funding bodiesfor financial support, the Global Strategyfor Plant Conservation (GSPC) (forplants), national organizations, nature con-servation agencies and programmesincluding relevant non-governmental orga-nizations, local communities, and manyothers.

6. The scientific community with pastand current research programmes on moun-tain biodiversity and the natural historymuseums with specimens collected overdecades hold a key role in providing theexpertise and relevant information andshould actively be included.

192


(v) Mechanisms 7. Existing mechanisms, such as the

clearing house mechanism andCoordination Mechanism of the GlobalTaxonomy Initiative, Mountain Partnership,and Mountain Forum, and GBIF could beused to coordinate and promote the efforts.` (vi) Financial, human resources and othercapacity requirements

8. Financial, human resource andcapacity building require funds to be identi-fied within existing and new projects, aswell as additional resources to be madeavailable to increase technical capacity indeveloping countries. (vii) Pilot projects

9. Pilot projects could be built on infor-mation for a number of montane regions ofthe world, such as the Alps, the Andes, theHimalayas, the Eastern Arc to produce theoutputs in short term and to evaluate theirusefulness. The Global Taxonomy Initiativecould address, inter alia, the needs of localand regional capacity building by coordinat-ing workshops in collaboration with moun-tain partnership, Mountain Forum andDIVERSITAS, focussing on mountain bio-diversity conservation and monitoring.

II. PLANNED ACTIVITY:INVASIVE ALIEN SPECIES

(i) Rationale 10. Prevention and mitigation of the

impacts of invasive alien species oftenrelies on timely access to taxonomic exper-tise, and to taxonomic resources such asidentification tools, information on speciesnames, and biological reference collections.For many pathways of introductions forinvasive alien species, effective preventionand mitigation may depend on detection andmonitoring activities that are undertaken atsubregional, regional or even global levels.

Consequently, taxonomic capacities andinformation need to be accessible to allcountries in order to support effective pre-vention and mitigation of potential impactsof invasive alien species. Better characteri-zation of species through research can bekey to prediction, early detection and moni-toring of invasions. Better baseline taxo-nomic information on biological diversity inareas that are exposed or vulnerable to keyinvasion pathways (e.g., marine ports) canfacilitate early detection of changes inspecies composition that may result frominvasive alien species. In addition, taxo-nomic expertise can be important in thedevelopment of biological control measureswhich may be considered by decision-mak-ers for addressing invasive alien species inparticular cases. (ii) Outputs

11. Outputs should comprise: (a) Databases of invasive alien

species and occurrences of inva-sions, developed and/or expanded,and made widely available;

(b) Working identification keys forknown invasive alien speciesassociated with key invasion path-ways produced and disseminated;

(c) Working lists of organisms inareas that are exposed or suscepti-ble to key invasion pathways pro-duced and utilized by localmonitoring authorities.

(iii) Timing 12. Databases further developed

and/or expanded and made widely availablewithin two years. Working identificationkeys for known invasive alien species pro-duced and disseminated within three years.Working lists of organisms in areas that areexposed or susceptible to key invasionpathways produced and utilized withinthree years.

193


(iv) Actors 13. Database development – IUCN

Species Survival Commission (SSC)Invasive Species Specialist Group, GlobalInvasive Species Information Network,clearing-house mechanism of theConvention, ITIS, IABIN, GBIF,Species 2000, BioNET-INTERNATIONAL.Identification keys – scientific community,national Governments, natural historymuseums and programmes. Working listsof organisms in areas that are exposed orsusceptible to key invasion pathways –national governments, national andregional organizations including non-gov-ernmental organizations. (v) Mechanisms

14. Coordinated efforts at the nationaland global levels by the actors identifiedabove will be an important mechanism. Inaddition, existing mechanisms, such as theclearing-house mechanism of the Conventionand the GBIF can function as informationportals. (vi) Financial and human resources andother capacity requirements

15. Financial, human-resource andcapacity building require resources to beidentified within existing and new projects,as well as additional resources to be madeavailable to increase technical capacity indeveloping countries. GEF and nationalfunding organizations would be importantsources of financial support.

III. PLANNED ACTIVITY:PROTECTED AREAS

(i) Rationale16. Taxonomic expertise and informa-

tion constitute key requirements for conser-vation planning and sustainable naturalresource management. This is especiallytrue in the case of protected areas, which are

established with the goal to conserve a sig-nificant part of natural biodiversity, but usu-ally based on limited knowledge oravailable information about the biodiversitythey actually contain. With no completespecies inventory currently available forany existing or planned larger protected areaand relevant taxonomic, distributional andbiological information about many taxawith high conservation value still missing, itwill be difficult to achieve meaningful con-servation planning. The objective of theprogramme of work on protected areas is tosupport the establishment of ecologicallyrepresentative and effectively managednational and regional systems of protectedareas. Activity 1.1.2 of the programme ofwork specifically calls for establishing pro-tected areas in any large, intact or highlyirreplaceable natural areas, as well as areassecuring the most threatened species, andactivity 1.1.5 requests that gap analyses atnational and regional levels of the represen-tativeness of the protected area system beundertaken (by 2006). The GlobalTaxonomy Initiative could play an impor-tant role particularly for the identification,establishment and management of protectedareas (decision VII/28, annex, programmeelement 1) through focusing on biodiversityinventories and gap analysis of existinginventories, and in the development of stan-dards for managing and monitoring pro-tected areas (decision VII/28, annex,programme element 4) through facilitatingassessments and comparisons of differenttaxonomic components of biodiversity cov-ered and sustained through the existing net-work of protected areas. In light of threats toprotected areas through climate change andinvasive alien species, it is important tounderstand current constraints on speciesand populations, and how these woulddetermine distribution under changing

194


conditions. Access to accurate informationon current distributions and ability to modelthese is important for appropriate manage-ment and policy development. (ii) Outputs

17. Improved and augmented biodiver-sity inventories of protected areas of allkinds, also to be expanded into monitoringefforts to record changes of species and pop-ulations over time. Taxonomic guides forkey invertebrate organisms, lower plants andmicroorganisms, economically importantand threatened species. Information on cur-rent distribution and occurrence of importantspecies in protected areas, including popula-tion trends. Identification of habitats and pri-ority setting for establishing new protectedareas, through plotting distributions ofspecies at local, national and regional levels.Mobilization and augmentation of specimenand observational-level data pertaining tospecies to allow modelling of current distri-butions and distributions under differentmodels of climate change and of other bioticand a biotic changes (e.g. land-use change,invasive species). (iii) Timing

18. The target date for activity 1.1.5,on conducting gap analysis is 2006. The tar-get date for goal 4.3 (to assess and monitorprotected area status and trends) and goal4.4 (to ensure that scientific knowledge con-tributes to the establishment and effective-ness of protected areas) of the programmeof work is 2010. Hence, outputs need to beproduced within the next four years, butefforts will need to be ongoing. (iv) Actors

19. National agencies and local author-ities concerned with protected area adminis-tration and management in concert withtaxonomic institutions, especially naturalhistory museums, biosystematics units atuniversities and other research institutions,

botanic gardens and culture collections, andthe IUCN Species Survival Commission,together with nature conservation agenciesincluding international non-governmentalorganizations such as ConservationInternational, BirdLife International, Floraand Fauna International, WWF, the WorldResources Institute (WRI), and local com-munities. Parataxonomists could also playan important role. Other actors includethe clearing-house mechanism of theConvention and GBIF (as data portals),GEF and national funding organizations forfinancial support, and BioNET-INTERNA-TIONAL (to organize regional LOOPs).Other biodiversity conventions, includingthe Ramsar Convention on Wetlands, theWorld Heritage Convention, the Conventionon Migratory Species, and the Conventionon International Trade in EndangeredSpecies of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES),and the UNESCO Man and the Biosphere(MAB) biosphere reserve programme couldalso play an important role. Direct linkagesto relevant ongoing or planned taxonomy-related, capacity building projects shouldalso be implemented, e.g., the InternationalPollinator Initiative (IPI), the Census ofMarine Life (CoML), the Botanical/Zoological Network for Eastern Africa, thePartnerships of Enhancing Expertise inTaxonomy (PEET), and the recently pro-posed European Distributed Institute forTaxonomy (EDIT). (v) Mechanisms

20. Coordinated effort at national andglobal levels by the actors identified abovewill be an important mechanism.Mobilization of extant data and their pre-sentation in an appropriate manner, with thedevelopment of the analytical tools, isrequired. The need for identification keys,inventories and primary data must be com-municated effectively to the key agencies

195


and funding bodies, with an indication ofpriority. (vi) Financial, human resources and othercapacity requirements

21. Insofar as the requirements need afocus cutting across traditional workprocesses and patterns of the data providers,funding will be required that is focussed atmeeting the identified needs. (vii) Pilot projects

22. Stimulate and undertake efforts tocarry out All-Taxon BiodiversityInventories (ATBIs) in existing or plannedprotected areas. Gap analyses of representa-tive taxa found in protected areas, in thecontext of the distribution and presence ofthose taxa at other sites nationally andregionally, demonstrating the developmentand use of such analyses in protected areaselection and management. Mobilization ofprimary occurrence data of species in a pro-tected area, provision of these data tocountry of origin, and analysis of distribu-tions using a niche modelling system.

IV. ISLAND BIOLOGICALDIVERSITY

23. As noted in SBSTTA recommenda-tion X/1, paragraph 6, islands incorporateall the thematic areas (coastal and marinebiological diversity, forest biological diver-sity, inland water biological diversity, dry

and sub humid land biological diversity,mountain biological diversity and agricul-tural al biological diversity) consideredunder the Convention. Thus, the plannedactivities already identified under opera-tional objectives 4 (on thematic programmesof work) and 5 (relating to work on crosscutting issues) in the GTI programme ofwork (decision VI/8, annex, planned activi-ties 8-18) already identified for thematic andcross-cutting programmes of work couldalso be considered to generate taxonomicinformation needed for the conservation ofisland biological diversity, sustainable use ofits components and fair and equitable shar-ing of benefits arising from its use.

24. However, recognizing the currentalarming rate of loss of island biologicaldiversity in both biodiversity ‘hot’ and‘cool’ spots; that due to their isolation,island environments are witnessing a uniqueevolution of often endemic and characteris-tic flora and fauna; that islands are micro-cosms of their continental counterparts; thatvulnerability of small islands require notonly special but urgent attention, specialsupport is needed to islands, in particularsmall islands, to implement, as a matter ofurgency, the planned activities 8 to18 of theGTI programme of work. In addition, forsmall islands in particular, regionalapproaches to meeting taxonomic needs andbuilding capacity should be emphasized.

Guide to the Global Taxonomy Initiative - Convention on Biological

Documents

Transcript of Guide to the Global Taxonomy Initiative - Convention on Biological