Implementation of MEAs The 2001 UNEP report, entitled International Environmental Governance: Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs)9
, I
which is derived from information submitted by twenty MEA Secretariats, provides a comprehensive analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of existing MEAs and puts forward recommendations and options for improving international environmental governance.
The existence of a comprehensive strategy, including objectives, priorities, specific activities, timetables, identification of partners, involvement of stakeholders, and budgets for implementation of an MEA, are often critical factors that bear on the effectiveness of an MEA.
II
The best approach for enhancing international environmental governance may be to focus on coordination among MEAs on substantial grounds and aim at “gradual improvements based on an analysis of needs and global benefits, rather than on new mechanisms that may not be practical to operationalize in the short term”9, para. 142&149
.
In order to increase the effectiveness of the implementation of existing MEAs, some cross-cutting priorities relevant to many MEAs include9, p.12–13
:
• strengthening the capacities of parties or member states to meet their obligations or responsibilities under MEAs;
• enhancing membership of governments; • public education and awareness; • strengthened scientific basis for decision-making; • strengthened international partnerships; • mobilizing additional resources for implementing their respective MEAs;
• provision of financial assistance to Parties or member states related to transfer of technologies;
• the development and use of indicators; • compliance and monitoring of implementation of the convention; and,
• enhanced participation of civil society. 28 PROTECTING ARCTIC BIODIVERSITY
There is need for closer cooperation between the core environmental conventions particularly for those MEAs within the cluster of biodiversity-related conventions. More work and greater attention needs to be directed at the harmonization of national reporting among MEAs11,12
.
Steps are being made in this direction. There are cooperative activities and joint programmes of work in areas of common interest amongst biodiversity-related MEAs – e.g., on migratory species (between the CBD and CMS, and between CMS and Ramsar) and on protected areas (between the CBD, WHC, Ramsar, and CMS). CBD and UNFCCC are cooperating through the Joint Liaison Group of the Rio Conventions, while CBD, CITES, CMS, Ramsar and WHC cooperate through the Biodiversity Liaison Group.
There is an increasing global effort to integrate biodiversity measures with climate change considerations. In 2009 the CBD Conference of the Parties (COP) Decision IX/1613
urged
parties to enhance integration of climate change considerations into their implementation efforts in relation to biodiversity. Also in 2009, the G8 Environment Ministers agreed in the Carta di Siracusa on Biodiversity to put in place measures “for climate change adaptation of natural and managed ecosystems, since spontaneous adaptation is not expected to be sufficient to reduce the impacts on biodiversity at all levels, or on vulnerable ecosystems, for long-term human well-being”14
. A European
Commission (EC) White Paper includes actions to address biodiversity loss and climate change in an integrated manner (see 15
), and many organizations and agencies, such as the European Environment Agency, are working on biodiversity and climate change indicators.
One example of efforts towards synergies between MEAs is the TEMATEA Project on Issues-Based Modules (www.
tematea.org), which is a tool developed for streamlining the implementation of a number of biodiversity-related conventions and to promote coherence and synergies between MEAs at both the national and international level.
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100