» Articles » PMID: 32218608

Mainstreaming Biodiversity: A Review of National Strategies

Overview
Journal Biol Conserv
Date 2020 Mar 29
PMID 32218608
Citations 6
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Biodiversity is suffering dramatic declines across the globe, threatening the ability of ecosystems to provide the services on which humanity depends. Mainstreaming biodiversity into the plans, strategies and policies of different economic sectors is key to reversing these declines. The importance of this mainstreaming is recognized by the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and its Aichi targets. Individual countries can implement the goals of the CBD through their National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs), which aim to, inter alia, support the mainstreaming of biodiversity into the policies of key economic sectors, such as agriculture, forestry and fisheries. This paper investigates the performance of countries at incorporating biodiversity mainstreaming into their post-2010 NBSAPs. We conduct a large-scale review of 144 NBSAPs against five criteria and calculate a national-level indicator for comparing levels of mainstreaming among countries. Our results show that developing countries, particularly those in Africa, have higher scores, indicating that they have a higher awareness of the importance of biodiversity mainstreaming. Developing nations were also more likely to involve a greater range of stakeholders in the NBSAP development process, whilst developed nations were less likely to give specific details about the monetary contributions of biodiversity to their economies. Overall, our findings suggest that biodiversity mainstreaming remains a challenge across much of the world, but that progress in some areas can provide direction and momentum in the future.

Citing Articles

Ambitions in national plans do not yet match bold international protection and restoration commitments.

Bell-James J, Watson J Nat Ecol Evol. 2025; 9(3):417-424.

PMID: 39962303 DOI: 10.1038/s41559-025-02636-4.


National commitments to Aichi Targets and their implications for monitoring the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework.

Maney C, Guaras D, Harrison J, Guizar-Coutino A, Harfoot M, Hill S NPJ Biodivers. 2024; 3(1):6.

PMID: 39242842 PMC: 11332214. DOI: 10.1038/s44185-024-00039-5.


Colombian biodiversity is governed by a rich and diverse policy mix.

Echeverri A, Furumo P, Moss S, Figot Kuthy A, Garcia Aguirre D, Mandle L Nat Ecol Evol. 2023; 7(3):382-392.

PMID: 36747078 DOI: 10.1038/s41559-023-01983-4.


Biodiversity and infrastructure interact to drive tourism to and within Costa Rica.

Echeverri A, Smith J, MacArthur-Waltz D, Lauck K, Anderson C, Monge Vargas R Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2022; 119(11):e2107662119.

PMID: 35245152 PMC: 8931240. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2107662119.


Five Steps to Inject Transformative Change into the Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework.

Grumbine R, Xu J Bioscience. 2021; 71(6):637-646.

PMID: 34084096 PMC: 8169310. DOI: 10.1093/biosci/biab013.


References
1.
Cardinale B, Duffy J, Gonzalez A, Hooper D, Perrings C, Venail P . Biodiversity loss and its impact on humanity. Nature. 2012; 486(7401):59-67. DOI: 10.1038/nature11148. View

2.
Foley J, DeFries R, Asner G, Barford C, Bonan G, Carpenter S . Global consequences of land use. Science. 2005; 309(5734):570-4. DOI: 10.1126/science.1111772. View

3.
Spash C, Aslaksen I . Re-establishing an ecological discourse in the policy debate over how to value ecosystems and biodiversity. J Environ Manage. 2015; 159:245-253. DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2015.04.049. View

4.
Diaz S, Pascual U, Stenseke M, Martin-Lopez B, Watson R, Molnar Z . Assessing nature's contributions to people. Science. 2018; 359(6373):270-272. DOI: 10.1126/science.aap8826. View

5.
Tittensor D, Walpole M, Hill S, Boyce D, Britten G, Burgess N . A mid-term analysis of progress toward international biodiversity targets. Science. 2014; 346(6206):241-4. DOI: 10.1126/science.1257484. View