Speech at The Trondheim Biodiversity Conference

4/22/2020 Speech at the Trondheim Biodiversity Conference
Are you sure you want to print? Save the planet. Opt not to
print.
United Nations Environment Programme

Search...
Search
()
https://www.unenvironment.org/news-and-stories/speech/speech-trondheim-biodiversity-conference 1/16
Home (/) / News and

02 JUL 2019Stories (/news-and-stories)
| SPEECH (/RESOURCES? / Speech
F%5B0%5D=CATEGORY%3A454&F%5B1%5D=TYPE%3A408) |
ECOSYSTEMS AND BIODIVERSITY (/EXPLORE-TOPICS/ECOSYSTEMS)
Speech at the Trondheim

Biodiversity Conference
Distinguished guests, partners, colleagues and friends.
It is an honour to speak to you today about the post-2020

biodiversity framework for the Convention on Biological
Diversity. If we get our strategy right in the lead up to the
Conference of Parties, we will pave a new and more
positive future that will allow nature, people and the planet
to thrive together for generations.
I congratulate the Government of Norway, the Norwegian

Ministry of Climate and Environment and the Norwegian
Environment Agency for hosting us here in Trondheim.
In 2010, the world came together to take stock of progress

made to arrest biodiversity loss. Unfortunately, it was clear
that there was not much good news to report. In
response, a new set of Biodiversity Targets — the Aichi
Targets — were established giving us 10 years to make
progress on reducing biodiversity loss.
As we fast approach the end of this decade, all indications

are that we have not met most of the targets we set for
ourselves.
Nevertheless in what often feels like an avalanche of bad

news on the environment, the good news is that the future
is entirely in our hands. And so, there is no more important
a moment for us to be speaking about nature and
biodiversity. Because what we do or don’t do in the next 10
years will determine the fate of our planet. This is not a
small matter. In fact, we have never been in a more
important and critical moment for the human species. And
there is more good news. The state of our planet is in the
public consciousness more than ever before. People
everywhere are realizing that a crisis in the natural world is
a crisis for humanity.
I just attended the preparatory meeting for the Secretary-

General’s Climate Action Summit in Abu Dhabi. In the
meeting, emphasis was of course placed on the urgent
task of decarbonizing our economies. But — for the first
time — deep emphasis was also placed on Nature-Based
Solutions. Investing in nature’s infrastructure — the coral
reefs, the mangroves, the forests, the wetlands — provide
a key ingredient for planetary security, for biodiversity, for
the struggle against desertification and land degradation,
and of course in the struggle against climate change.
But on the biodiversity side, we are not doing as well as

we set out to do. So, when our friends at IPBES tell us that
unless we take drastic action, we are set to lose one
million out of the nearly eight million species on earth, we
must understand that we are in a crisis. We are in an

emergency. As Greta Thunberg says, we should act as if
our house is on fire, because it is.
I get that it is hard for an international negotiations process

to act with urgency and determined haste. But that is
indeed the task before us. Urgency. Haste. Proactive and
clear actions. A transparent process. A public holding to
account.
So, in this speech, allow me to reflect on the post-2020

framework and the road ahead as I see it.
At this time, I come to you with eight basic messages.
One, the current 20 Aichi targets, while a proud step

forward in 2010, have proven inadequate, unmeasurable,
non “add-upable”. Further, they were agreed without
baselines, without measurable indicators and without the
actual buy-in of the sectors that largely cause the
biodiversity loss. So we must learn the lessons from this
and improve the post-2020 framework.
Two, the percentage of target for protection has worked,

but it is not enough. We need a much greater level of
ambition. The one more immediately measurable Aichi
target — target 11 — that calls for 10 percent of marine
and 17 percent of terrestrial space being protected has
provided a clear path for accountability and “add-up-
ability”. Some real progress has been made, and I
congratulate the countries that have made major efforts to
stretch, to reach, and in a good number of cases to
exceed this goal. We are not there yet, but we are making
headway and with an effort, we can reach this goal by
2020. But, ladies and gentlemen, it is not enough.
Three, the percentage of our planet protected is an

important goal, but an inadequate overall measure of our
success in biodiversity protection. Don’t get me wrong. We
absolutely need to establish an ambitious percentage for
our protected marine and terrestrial areas. And at this
time, there are calls for protecting half of the earth, and
these calls are important. We absolutely should stretch —
in the post 2020 framework— beyond the 10 and 17
percent. We should reach a new deal for nature and we
should work towards 50 by 50.
But I say that we need to plan to protect the entire planet.

Because our “working landscapes”, our agricultural fields,
our cities and our constructed infrastructure, must be part
of the solution. We need to facilitate and encourage
biodiversity positive agriculture, biodiversity rich cities,
construction and infrastructure that integrates nature. This
will not only be good for biodiversity, it will also be good for
human welfare, for our health and for resilience in a
climate changing world.
Four, the quality of what we protect is important because

percentages are insufficient, if the quality of what the
percentages cover is poor. The ability to measure progress
is essential. There are many ways to measure progress,
and not just by counting. The quality of what we achieve is
as important as the quantity. I am pleased to see this great
gathering of people that has the collective knowledge to
develop these robust measures. Because our protected

areas need to be such that they overlap with key
biodiversity areas, that hold our planets most diverse, and
most important species and ecosystems. So quality
matters greatly.
Five, the solutions to biodiversity loss lie outside the

environmental ministries and movements. So our
engagement with these sectors that have a huge footprint
on biodiversity is critical. We cannot continue to talk to
ourselves and wonder why we are not reversing
biodiversity loss. We know that biodiversity loss, terrestrial
species loss are largely caused by land use changes,
largely because of agriculture, by overexploitation, by
fragmentation as well as by invasive species. So, if land
use changes that are largely agriculture based are the
cause, we have to ask whether we got the buy-in of the
agriculture sector. Fragmentation is a major driver of loss,
but in most countries, the Aichi targets were agreed at the
Environment Ministry level, with little or no buy in from
agriculture, infrastructure, public works, municipal
planning, etc. So, in a way, we should not be surprised
that these targets are not being achieved.
But we, in the biodiversity sector, cannot afford to make

agriculture and infrastructure the “enemy”. The real
challenge is to work with these sectors so that they can
become biodiversity positive and enhancing.
THAT, ladies and gentlemen is the challenge before us.

And it is entirely possible. Shift agricultural subsidies to
biodiversity positive production and tighten regulatory
frameworks to enable big agriculture to be part of the

solution. Regulate for labeling that describes biodiversity
positive products. Inform consumers so that they can vote
with their kroners, euros, dollars and pounds.
So, the post-2020 framework must have a much broader

base of buy-in than just environment. Failing which, we will
not change gear and our destruction of biodiversity will
continue unabated.
Six, we need a paradigm shift to science-based targets.

Engage with ministries of finance, with regulators, engage
with national accounts, engage with infrastructure,
agriculture and business so that these sectors can drive
the solution.
But this will require a different approach. We need

science-based targets for various sectors so that business,
agriculture and infrastructure can measure their
performance on a biodiversity scale of impact. Science-
based targets for palm oil, soy, wheat, cattle,
infrastructure, cities and municipalities. Targets that are
ambitious, measurable, feasible and contain the quality of
protection that we need.
Seven, so what solutions do we have:
1. Our economic model has systematically under-

valued and over-exploited ecosystems.
IPBES tells us the economic value of terrestrial nature’s

contribution to people in the Americas is $ 24.3 trillion
dollars, equal to the region’s gross domestic product. but
that two-thirds of these are in decline. So what is the

solution?
When our economic models and national accounts

acknowledge the planetary boundaries, we can factor
biodiversity into well-being and sustainability. This will
drive us away from over-fishing and unsustainable land
use, to market-based solutions that contribute to
biodiversity conservation.
2. Agriculture is working against nature, and itself,

accounting for 70 percent of tropical deforestation and
one-quarter of greenhouse gas emissions. So what is
the solution?
By transforming our agri-food system, we can produce,

distribute, consume and dispose of food in ways that
optimize resource use, minimize greenhouse gas
emissions, avoid harmful chemicals and arrest biodiversity
loss. This requires political will; a private sector that adopts
sustainable commodity supply chains; and consumers that
see the value in diverse diets with higher plant-based
content and reduced meat consumption.
3. Our current competition with wildlife and wild

spaces is having a devastating impact on wildlife
populations which have declined on average, by 60
percent since 1970. So what is the solution?
From government to the boardroom, our focus must be on

integrated land and water use planning. We need to link
the private sector, governments and local communities in
conservation-compatible investments that deliver

sustainable economic and ecological benefits to countries,
people and the environment.
4. We cannot afford to lock-in trillions of dollars in

infrastructure investments that destroy the
foundations of nature. So what is the solution?
We have a real opportunity to do things differently when

we consider the massive ongoing and anticipated growth
in infrastructure. Investments in nature’s infrastructure as
the first choice of infrastructure for resilience, coupled with
smart design of buildings, resilient cities and infrastructure,
can reduce emissions and resource use, and reduce
impacts on biodiversity.
5. Land degradation drives poverty, biodiversity loss

and reduces resilience to climate change. So what
is the solution?
Landscape restoration will bring obvious climate,

biodiversity and livelihood benefits. Here we are greatly
helped by the UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration, The
Bonn Challenge and the commitments to restore at least
350 million hectares of degraded landscapes by 2030.
And our structures need to be geared towards subsidies
and incentives that reward restoration and sustainable
resource use.
Eight, we need an Anders Celsius for biodiversity. A bit of

a dream really, but entirely doable. And I know my
colleagues in IUCN are working on this. I doubt that
Anders Celsius when he sat in Sweden in the 1700s and

designed the Celsius scale; when he thought about water
freezing being 0 and water boiling being 100, — at that
time, he did not imagine that his scale would be used to
measure climate change. And that the 1.5 degree heating
would be cast as a ceiling and a goal.
So I call out to the scientific community, to be the Anders

Celsius for biodiversity. To innovate and come up with a
scale that provides us with an “Apex target”, our 1.5
degrees. Now such a scale may not “walk in to the
negotiations”, but to me that does not really matter.
Because eventually it will. And it will walk in to the public
conscience. It will walk in to the voting booth. Into the
boardrooms, in to investors choices and into finance and
banking. If we had a scale — say a composite scale that
combined species diversity, genetic diversity and
ecosystem diversity — and if someone plotted our global
performance as well as countries’ performance on this
scale; if someone assessed their performance and
watched that we were — as a planet — operating within
the safe operating space for biodiversity. If all of this
happened, I am sure that someone would quickly come up
with a “gap report”, which would measure our performance
and thereby shine a light on those countries and sectors
that need to stretch; as well as on those countries who
were “importing the biodiversity crisis” due to their
importation of biodiversity negative products, such as
unsustainable meat farmed on tropical forest land or
unsustainable palm oil products. So this is my challenge to
the science community: Define the scale; set the measure;
simplify your message and you will allow the public to

follow and understand, to vote and to lobby for biodiversity
conservation.
Excellencies, ladies and gentlemen
In 2020, world leaders will meet in China to agree on a

new set of commitments to conserve nature, reset the
relationship between people and planet, and achieve the
sustainable development goals.
The UN Secretary-General has reminded us that we

cannot negotiate with nature, but we can negotiate on
behalf of nature. This is what we are doing with the post-
2020 biodiversity framework for the Convention on
Biological Diversity.
There are no shortcuts to positive biodiversity outcomes.

Political will, synergy across sectors, targets and
agreements and supporting national capacities will be
critical ingredients of our success.
And when we reduce the biodiversity footprint of critical

sectors, we will demonstrate how backing nature is a
powerful solution to the climate challenge.
We will conserve biodiversity and ensure the sustainability

of the planet.
We will ensure sustainable, green livelihoods for people

and reduce poverty.
We will address climate change.
We will meet the Sustainable Development Goals.
We must get the framework right and then focus on

delivering towards our common vision of living in harmony
with nature.
Only by doing so can we ensure a future for nature, and

for all the benefits it brings to people everywhere. And
then we really will have a new deal for nature.
Thank you.
By Inger Andersen, Executive Director of the UN

Environment Programme
TOPICS
Ecosystems and biodiversity (/explore-topics/ecosystems)

/ Climate change (/explore-topics/climate-change)
Biodiversity (/resources?f%5B0%5D=tags%3A79)
Governance & Leadership

Committee of Permanent Representatives
Deputy Executive Director
Environment Assembly - UNEA
Executive Director
Senior Management Team
Funding & Partners

Overview
Engagement - Civil Society
Engagement - Faith for Earth
Engagement - Member States
Engagement - Private Sector
Environment Fund
Global Environment Facility
Green Climate Fund
Structure
Communication
Corporate Services
Economy
Ecosystems
Governance Affairs
Law
Policy and Programme
Science
Key Documents
Annual Report 2018

Emissions Gap Report
Frontiers
Global Environment Outlook (GEO) 6
Invest in a Healthy Planet
Mid-term Strategy
Programme of Work
Resources
Knowledge Repository
Open Data Portal
World Environment Situation Room
Regional Presence
Africa
Asia and the Pacific
Europe
Latin America and the Caribbean
North America
West Asia
Work with us
Current Opportunities
Campaigns
Beat Pollution
Breathe Life
Clean Seas
Glowing Glowing Gone
Solve Different
UN Decade of Ecosystem Restoration
UN75
Wild for Life
World Environment Day
Awards
Champions of the Earth
Young Champions of the Earth
Voices
Goodwill Ambassadors
Patrons
Media
Media Centre
News & Stories
© United Nations Environment

Programme Terms of Use
Did you know?

Freshwater makes up only 2
per cent of all water.

Speech at The Trondheim Biodiversity Conference

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Speech at The Trondheim Biodiversity Conference

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

4/22/2020 Speech at the Trondheim Biodiversity Conference

United Nations Environment Programme

Home (/) / News and

Speech at the Trondheim

Distinguished guests, partners, colleagues and friends.

It is an honour to speak to you today about the post-2020

I congratulate the Government of Norway, the Norwegian

In 2010, the world came together to take stock of progress

As we fast approach the end of this decade, all indications

Nevertheless in what often feels like an avalanche of bad

I just attended the preparatory meeting for the Secretary-

But on the biodiversity side, we are not doing as well as

must understand that we are in a crisis. We are in an

I get that it is hard for an international negotiations process

So, in this speech, allow me to reflect on the post-2020

At this time, I come to you with eight basic messages.

One, the current 20 Aichi targets, while a proud step

Two, the percentage of target for protection has worked,

Three, the percentage of our planet protected is an

But I say that we need to plan to protect the entire planet.

Four, the quality of what we protect is important because

develop these robust measures. Because our protected

Five, the solutions to biodiversity loss lie outside the

But we, in the biodiversity sector, cannot afford to make

THAT, ladies and gentlemen is the challenge before us.

frameworks to enable big agriculture to be part of the

So, the post-2020 framework must have a much broader

Six, we need a paradigm shift to science-based targets.

But this will require a different approach. We need

Seven, so what solutions do we have:

1. Our economic model has systematically under-

IPBES tells us the economic value of terrestrial nature’s

that two-thirds of these are in decline. So what is the

When our economic models and national accounts

2. Agriculture is working against nature, and itself,

By transforming our agri-food system, we can produce,

3. Our current competition with wildlife and wild

From government to the boardroom, our focus must be on

conservation-compatible investments that deliver

4. We cannot afford to lock-in trillions of dollars in

We have a real opportunity to do things differently when

5. Land degradation drives poverty, biodiversity loss

Landscape restoration will bring obvious climate,

Eight, we need an Anders Celsius for biodiversity. A bit of

Anders Celsius when he sat in Sweden in the 1700s and

So I call out to the scientific community, to be the Anders

simplify your message and you will allow the public to

Excellencies, ladies and gentlemen

In 2020, world leaders will meet in China to agree on a

The UN Secretary-General has reminded us that we

There are no shortcuts to positive biodiversity outcomes.

And when we reduce the biodiversity footprint of critical

We will conserve biodiversity and ensure the sustainability

We will ensure sustainable, green livelihoods for people

We will address climate change.

We will meet the Sustainable Development Goals.

We must get the framework right and then focus on

Only by doing so can we ensure a future for nature, and

By Inger Andersen, Executive Director of the UN

Ecosystems and biodiversity (/explore-topics/ecosystems)

Governance & Leadership

Funding & Partners

Annual Report 2018