ZAMBIA CBNRM FORUM REPORT ON CONFERENCE OF PARTIES ON THE CONSERVATION OF BIOLOGICAL
The eleventh meeting of the Conference of the Parties (COP 11) to the Convention on Biological
Diversity (CBD) was held from 8-19 October 2012, in Hyderabad, India. Approximately 6,000 delegates
representing parties and other governments, UN agencies, intergovernmental, non-governmental,
indigenous and local community organizations, academia and the private sector participated in the
The Zambia Government with the leadership of the Ministry of Lands, Natural resources management
and Environmental protection Minister Honourable Wylber Simuusa was represented by Ministry of
Commerce, Ministry of Chiefs affairs, Zambia Environmental management Agency, Zambia CBNRM
Forum, Zambia Alliance of women, Youth Environment Network (YEN) Zambia, a member of parliament
representing the parliamentary committee on Environment, Zambia National Broadcasting Cooperation,
Lusaka City council and Ministry of Justice.
The Three Civil Society Organisations namely Zambia CBNRM Forum, Zambia Alliance of Women and
Youth Environment Network (YEN) Zambia received support from Civil Society Environment fund as part
of the National delegation as requested by government for support.
B. ORGANISATION OF THE CONFERENCE AND AGENDA
The conference had several plenary discussions; two working groups that met periodically and various
side meetings of professionals on different topics related to Biodiversity conservation. The Conference
of the Parties also included a high-level ministerial segment organized by the host country in
consultation with the Secretariat and the Bureau. The high-level segment took place from 17 to 19
October 2012 at the Hyderabad International Convention Centre.
The agenda of the main discussions in two plenary sessions included the following:
1. The status of Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable
Sharing of Benefits Arising from their Utilization and related developments.
The Nagoya Protocol was opened for signature in February 2011and it was envisaged that it
would have come into force but only five countries had signed and ratified it at the time of the
preparatory meeting. For the protocol to come into force it had to be ratified by at least 50
2. Implementation of the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020 and progress towards the Aichi
3. Financial resources and financial mechanism.
GEF provided financial resources for a period of five years following certain thematic areas
4. Article 8(j) and related provisions that focused on in-situ conservation and traditional
5. Biodiversity and climate change and related issues
6. Biodiversity and development
C. DISCUSSIONS AND KEY AGREEMENTS
C.1. STATUS OF THE NAGOYA PROTOCOL
The conference of Parties (COP) called upon all parties to expedite their internal processes leading to
ratification of the Nagoya Protocol. The COP invited parties and others to submit information on model
contractual clauses, codes of conduct, guidelines and best practices and/or standards, to be made
available through the access benefit sharing (ABS) clearing-house.
C.2. IMPLEMENTATION OF THE STRATEGIC PLAN FOR BIODIVERSITY AND PROGRESS TOWARDS THE
The COP called all parties to share information on, inter alia, results from the monitoring of progress
towards the Aichi targets. On scientific and technical cooperation and technology transfer, the COP
requests the Secretariat to, inter alia: develop a coherent, consistent and coordinated approach to
technical and scientific cooperation; identify how it can facilitate implementation of the Convention by
acting as a convener to build partnerships and capacity and collaborate with regional centers of
excellence in biodiversity to support implementing the Strategic Plan and achieving the Aichi targets in
C.3. MONITORING IMPLEMENTATION, INCLUDING INDICATORS:
The COP requested the Secretariat to, inter alia:
Develop practical information on the indicators;
Further develop the global indicators to ensure that each Aichi target can be monitored by at
least one global indicator by 2014; Propose a limited number of simple, easily applicable and cost-effective indicators;
Promote harmonization of global indicators and their use between the CBD, other conventions,
regional agreements and processes and promote further collaboration;
Provide information about the indicator framework to assist the process to establish sustainable
Further develop and maintain the online database on indicators for the Strategic Plan; and
Develop an explanatory practical toolkit on each of the Aichi targets.
C.4. FINANCIAL RESOURCES AND FINANCIAL MECHANISM
The African Group called for doubling resources by 2015 and increasing international financial flows to
developing countries by 20% annually up to 2020. Norway underscored the need to combine efforts on
resource mobilization, track biodiversity funding, and create enabling conditions.
Developing countries stressed that establishment of targets is the main outstanding item since COP 10
and many expressed “extreme disappointment,” underscoring a lack of political will. They proposed a
target of doubling biodiversity financial resource flows from developed to developing countries by 2015,
noting it stems from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) Creditors
Reporting System and the Rio markers, which established a robust baseline. They also argued that
reporting and assessment-related targets should not be a precondition for the target on financial flows.
Algeria, on behalf of G-77/China and Mexico, stressed that developing countries engaged in good faith
and made significant commitments in Nagoya with the expectation that financial resources would be
forthcoming. They underscored that, unless COP 11 address the issue of targets for the Resource
Mobilization Strategy, the gains of Nagoya will be negated and the momentum towards realizing the
Aichi targets lost.
Final Decision: The decision included sections on target setting, review of implementation of the
Strategy for Resource Mobilization, and a roadmap.
The COP urged parties to consider all possible sources and means that can help to meet the level of
resources needed. The COP decided on an overall substantial increase of total biodiversity-related
funding for the implementation of the Strategic Plan from a variety of sources, and resolved to achieve
the following preliminary targets:
• double total biodiversity-related international financial resource flows to developing countries
by 2015 and at least maintaining this level until 2020;
• endeavor for 100% but achieve at least 75% of parties having included biodiversity in their
national priorities or development plans by 2015;
• endeavor for 100%, but achieve at least 75% of parties provided with adequate financial
resources having reported domestic biodiversity expenditures and funding needs, gaps and
priorities by 2015; and
• endeavor for 100%, but achieve at least 75% provided with adequate financial resources,
having prepared national financial plans for biodiversity by 2015, and 30% of those parties
having assessed biodiversity values.
C.5. GUIDANCE TO THE FINANCIAL MECHANISM:
The African Group recommended that the Global Environment Fund (GEF) allocate funds dedicated to
Access and benefit sharing (ABS) and the Nagoya Protocol in a separate window under during GEF-6.
The COP adopted the four-year outcome-oriented framework of programme priorities for the period
2014-2018 that included:
1. Expedite the provision of financial support, based on a flexible and national demand-driven
2. Avoid additional and lengthy processes and use existing NBSAPs as the basis for GEF-6 priorities;
3. Clarify the concept and application of co-financing for biodiversity projects;
4. Apply co-financing arrangements in ways that do not create unnecessary barriers and costs for
recipient countries; and
5. Invite developed country parties and others to increase their financial contributions to GEF-6.
6. It also requests the Secretariat to make the report of the fourth review of the effectiveness of
the financial mechanism available to parties.
7. On the needs assessment for GEF-6, the COP took note of the range of estimated funding needs
and urges the GEF to consider all aspects of the expert team’s needs assessment report on the
levels of funding for biodiversity. It also requests the Secretariat and invites the GEF to identify
the Aichi targets benefiting the most from synergies with other GEF focal areas.
The COP recommended that the GEF make funds available for activities to support ABS and the early
entry into force and implementation of the Nagoya Protocol.
The COP also called upon the GEF, donors, parties and others to consider providing technical support
and financial resources for work on indicators on Traditional Knowledge (TK) and customary sustainable
The African Group and Pacific Islands called for guidelines on developing legislation to respect, protect
and promote sustainable customary use and TK.
The COP requested secretariat to organize one meeting of the Article 8(j) Working Group prior to COP
12 with the in-depth dialogue to be held on: “connecting TK systems and science.
The COP also requested GEF and invited other donors to support: development of community plans and
protocols by Indigenous Local communities (ILC); documentation, mapping and registry of their
indigenous and community conserved areas (ICCAs) by ILCs; and preparation and implementation of
their community conservation plans.
On participatory mechanisms for ILCs in the Convention’s work, the decision addresses: capacity
building; CEPA; development of communication, mechanisms and tools; participation including through
the Voluntary Fund for the Participation of ILC representatives; other initiatives; and local communities. On capacity building, the COP requests the Secretariat to continue convening regional and subregional
capacity-building workshops on the Guidelines on Biodiversity and Tourism Development; and explore
facilitation of joint capacity-building workshops with other multilateral environmental agreements
(MEAs) to promote sustainable use of biodiversity.
On local communities capacity to access conservation Funds, the COP took note with appreciation of the
report of the Expert Group Meeting of Local Communities Representatives and requested Secretariat to
take practical steps to ensure that local communities’ representatives have equitable access to the
Voluntary Fund for the participation of Indigenous Local Community conservation efforts and
representatives in Convention meetings.
The COP urged parties and encouraged other governments and relevant organizations to make
concerted efforts to achieve Aichi Targets 14 (ecosystems and essential services safeguarded) and 15
(ecosystems restored and resilience enhanced) and to contribute to achievement of other targets
through activities that support ecosystem restoration.
BIODIVERSITY AND CLIMATE CHANGE
The COP requested the Secretariat to compile information from parties on initiatives and experiences
regarding Climate Change and Biodiversity Durban outcome on long-term cooperative action and
regarding CBD contribution to the UNFCC Convention objectives and submit a progress report prior to
COP 12; and develop advice on REDD+ issues, taking into full account the relevant UNFCCC decisions.
The definitions and understanding of ongoing work in other fora, including the IPCC, that climate-related
geo-engineering may include, inter alia, deliberate intervention in the planetary environment of a
nature and scale intended to counteract anthropogenic climate change and/or its impacts, with a
footnote that excludes CCS at source from fossil fuels when it captures carbon dioxide before it is
released into the atmosphere, and also forest-related activities.
The COP noted the lack of science-based, global, transparent and effective control and regulatory
mechanisms for climate-related geo-engineering, the need for a precautionary approach, and that such
mechanisms may be most necessary for those geo-engineering activities that have a potential to cause
significant adverse transboundary effects,
The COP also requested the Secretariat, at the appropriate time, to prepare, provide for peer review and
submit for consideration by a future meeting of SBSTTA: an update on the potential impacts of geo-
engineering techniques on biodiversity and on the regulatory framework of climate-related geo-
engineering relevant to CBD, drawing upon scientific relevant reports such as the IPCC Fifth Assessment
Report; and an overview of parties’ and other stakeholders’ views on the potential impacts of geo-
engineering on biodiversity and associated social, economic and cultural impacts.
The COP advised parties to work on activities of protected areas that improve inter-agency and
intersectoral coordination, especially for mainstreaming protected areas and biodiversity and
integrating protected areas into wider land- and seascapes;
The COP also advised strengthening recognition of and support for community-based approaches to
conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity; give due attention to the conservation of wild relatives
of cultivated crops and wild edible plants in protected areas and in ICCAs, in accordance with CBD and
BIOFUELS AND BIODIVERSITY
The COP acknowledged that bio fuel technologies may aggravate drivers of biodiversity loss and also bio
fuel’s potential positive contribution to mitigating climate change.
The COP Encouraged continued initiatives to develop and apply tools and approaches to promote
positive and minimize or avoid negative impacts that affect socioeconomic conditions.
The COP took note of gaps in scientific knowledge, relevant tools and approaches, and of uncertainties
and difficulties measuring and addressing indirect impacts OF Bio fuels.
The COP invited parties to evaluate incentive measures that may drive bio fuel expansion in the context
of the CBD’s cross-cutting issue on incentive measures.
The COP urged parties to monitor the development of the rapidly developing technology and apply the
precautionary approach; and requested the Secretariat to continue compiling information on gaps in
standards and methodologies and compile information on definitions of relevant key terms.
HIGH LEVEL SEGMENT
Held from 16-19 October 2012, the high-level segment heard statements from ministers and high-level
representatives, and held panel discussions on: implementation of the Strategic Plan; biodiversity for
livelihoods and poverty reduction; marine and coastal biodiversity; and implementation of the Nagoya
Protocol on ABS.
The Minister of Lands, Environmental protection and Natural resources management Honourable
Wylber Simuusa of Zambia gave his speech on 17
October 2012 where he announced progress made
by Zambia to ratification of the Nagoya Protocol and announced the new government committeemen
to conservation efforts by doubling Budgets in 2013 Fiscal year to his ministry. The Minister further
alluded to the Government collaboration with Mining companies in restoration of degraded areas
through tree planning programmes.
Zambia delegates participated in a number of side events during the conference. The noted events
1. Indigenous people event organised by Asian Pacific Indigenous people association by the
Zambia CBNRM Forum,
2. Global Youth Biodiversity Network a Youth constituency of the CBD Secretariat
3. Caucus of women.
The Indigenous people forum provided an opportunity for the Zambia CBNRM Forum to make a brief
presentation on the progress on article 8(J). A presentation on stocktaking of CBNRM works in Zambia
was done and capacity building effort in communities through monitoring system of indigenous
resources and change. The 30 manuals on the Management oriented monitoring system developed by
WWF were shared to the participants during the forum session.