Aug 09

Пункт повестки дня 9.3 Методы геоинженерии по управлению климатом.

Download PDF File

Спасибо Господин Председатель,

Я выступаю от имени Международного форума коренных народов по биоразнообразию.

Мы приветствуем документ SBSTTA/18/13, подготовленный Секретариатом.

IIFB, хотел бы отметить, что практики геоинженерии только разрабатываются и рассматривая перспективу возможного применения геоинженерного управления климатом в будущем,  мы должны, с очень большой осторожно говорить об их использование, потому что не знаем, какой результат в итоге получим. Стороны должны учитывать не только возможный положительный эффект, от искусственно воздействия и манипулирования процессами Матери Земли, но и все возможные отрицательные последствия такового вмешательства.

Это так же отражается в выводах документов UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/16/INF/28 и решение COP XI/20 – о том, что не существует единого геоинженерного подхода, отвечающего сегодня основным критериям эффективности, безопасности и финансовой приемлемости, и что подходы могут оказываться сложными в реализации или в управлении.

Коренные народы и местные общины хотели бы напомнить: прежде всего, необходимо бороться с антропогенными причинами изменения климата,  параллельно с этим восстановления экосистемы и биоразнообразие.

Использование методов геоинженерии  возможно поможет уменьшить количество атмосферных парниковых газов, но   они не решают основную проблему – удаление ключевых причины антропогенного влияния на  изменения климата, и их последствий –  катастрофическое уменьшение биоразнообразия, изменения ледяного покрова,  подкисление океанов.  Коренные народы и местные общины, на себе ощущают эти последствия, что крайне губительно сказывается на сохранение и устойчивом управление биоразнообразием, а так же приводит к утрате традиционных знаний и практик их применения.

Многие публикации говорят о том, что любое использование геоинженерии, в той или иной степени связаны с негативными последствиями, или от его использования или от прекращения его использования в будущем. Применение геоинженерии на локальном уровне, может привести к негативным изменениям на региональном. Нужно быть крайне осторожными в этом вопросе, ведь до сих пор, не поддается прогнозированию окончательный результат влияния тех или иных методом геоинженерии.

Спасибо господин Председатель.

Aug 09

SBSTTA 18- Agenda Item 9.3 Climate-related geoengineering

Download PDF File

Thank you Mr. Chairman,

I am speaking on behalf of the International Indigenous Forum on Biodiversity.

We welcome the document SBSTTA/18/13, prepared by the Secretariat.

IIFB,  would like to note that practices of geoengineering in under development and considering the prospect of a possible applications of climate-related geoengineering in the future, we must be cautious to talk about using them, because we don’t know, what the result eventually obtain. Parties should consider not only the possible positive effect from artificially manipulating processes and the impact of Mother Earth, but also all the possible negative consequences of such intervention.

This also reflected in the conclusions documents UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/16/INF/28 and decision  XI/20 – that there is no single geoengineering approach that currently meets basic criteria for effectiveness, safety and affordability, and that approaches may prove difficult to deploy or govern.

Indigenous peoples and local communities would like to remind:  first of all, we need to deal with anthropogenic causes of climate change, in parallel to restore the ecosystem and biodiversity.

Use of of climate-related geoengineering maybe help reduce the amount of atmospheric greenhouse gases, but they don’t decide the basic problem – removing the key reasons anthropogenic influence on climate change and its consequences – a catastrophic decrease in biodiversity, changes in ice cover, ocean acidification. Indigenous peoples and local communities feeling these effects on itself, which is extremely perniciously affects on the conservation and sustainable management of biodiversity, as well as leading to a loss of traditional knowledge and practices of their application.

Many publications said that any use of geoengineering to some extent related to the negative effects of its use or from stopping its use in the future. The use of geoengineering on a local level, can lead to negative changes at the regional level.

We must adhere to the precautionary principle on this issue, because until now, not to forecast the final result of the influence of various method of geoengineering.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Aug 09

SBSTTA 18- Agenda Item 4.4. Systematic review on the impacts of ocean acidification

Download PDF File

Thank you Mr. Chair. This statement is given on behalf of the International Indigenous Forum on Biodiversity.

IIFB are concerned about the rate of change and the poorly understood linkages between ocean acidification and the direct and indirect effects on marine life, as well as the possible implications for human societies.

For example, Inuit in the Arctic are concerned about the impacts on the health and wellbeing of communities through their traditional diet, due to the possible remobilization of heavy metals and other pollutants that bio-magnify and bio-accumulate in food webs.

Some of the key findings from the Arctic Ocean Acidification assessment from 2013 states that the Arctic Ocean is especially vulnerable to ocean acidification, and that ecosystem changes associated with ocean acidification may affect the livelihoods of Arctic peoples.

The main recommendations of this report were to ask the global society to reduce emissions of carbon dioxide as a matter or urgency. It also called for enhanced research and monitoring efforts, and urged for implementation of adaptation strategies tailored to local and societal needs.

IIFB acknowledge that carbon dioxide emission is the single-most contributing factor to ocean acidification. IIFB calls for urgent action to reduce the emissions of carbon dioxide through this and other international and national instruments, and increased research efforts to address knowledge gaps on ocean acidification and its impacts on ecosystems.

Thank you.

Aug 09

SBSTTA 18- Agenda Item 4.2. Addressing impacts of underwater noise on marine and coastal biodiversity

Download PDF File

Thank you Mr. Chair. This statement is given on behalf of the International Indigenous Forum on Biodiversity.

IIFB welcomes the documents made available to this meeting, including the progress report on addressing impacts of underwater noise (UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/18/5), and the full report of the expert workshop on underwater noise and its impacts on marine and coastal biodiversity (UNEP/CBD/MCB/EM/2014/1/2), held in London earlier this year.

The increasing underwater sound pollution is one of many stressors that are impacting the biodiversity in marine and coastal areas, for which Indigenous and local communities are relying on for their ecosystem services as well as for spiritual and cultural connections.

Increasing underwater sound pollution from shipping, fishing and seismic surveys is impacting the soundscape of marine species, with the potential to affect not only individuals but also whole populations and ecosystems.

Especially marine mammals are sensitive to noise. In the Arctic, Inuit have observed changing behaviour of whales, causing displacement and deviations from common migration routes, sometimes causing drowning when groups of whales get trapped under sea ice in unfamiliar surroundings. However, impacts of sound pollution apply to many other marine species in all regions.

IIFB are concerned about the significant knowledge gaps on the species level, major sound sources, trends and impacts of underwater noise, and impacts on population and ecological level, and especially on the cumulative and synergistic impacts of multiple sources of noise and other stressors. IIFB recognize the challenge in addressing those knowledge gaps, and acknowledge the contribution that indigenous and local knowledge might provide in filling some of those gaps.

IIFB welcome the work that has begun on developing a consistent terminology and developing guidance for measures to mitigate the effects of underwater noise. This is a helpful starting point to work towards further progress on the Aichi Targets, especially 11 and 12. However, there are still lots of work to be done on developing more concrete measures to minimize underwater sound pollution in the guidance and toolkit materials.

IIFB call for integrating means of community involvement in these materials, as well as ensuring proper training for relevant participants on the implementation of measures to minimize underwater sound and its impacts on marine and coastal biodiversity.

Thank you.

Aug 09

SBSTTA 18- Agenda Item 4.1. Ecologically or biologically significant marine areas

Download PDF File

Thank you Mr. Chair, this statement is given on behalf of the International Indigenous Forum on Biodiversity.

IIFB welcomes the documents made available for this meeting, in particular the report from the Arctic Workshop (UNEP/CBD/EBSA/WS/2014/1/5) hosted by Finland in March this year. We congratulate the parties with the enormous amount of work put into the identification of EBSAs over the last three years.

IIFB would like to emphasize the critical role marine biodiversity plays to the health and well-being of indigenous and local communities. It is a close link between healthy marine ecosystems and resilient coastal communities.

We also recognize that the application of the EBSA criteria is a scientific and technical exercise, and the identification of EBSAs and the selection of conservation and management measures is a matter for States and competent intergovernmental organizations. The Arctic Workshop revealed, however, a challenge with the existing practice in the process of describing transboundary areas that meet EBSA criteria, where the lack of coordination can undermine the provision of important information as well as the added value that indigenous and local communities (ILCs) can contribute.

IIFB welcomes the work on developing training materials and further capacity building on the use of traditional knowledge in relation to EBSAs as called for in paragraph 19 of the COP decision XI/17 and we want to thank the Secretariat for the facilitation of a dialogue Forum among different expertise, both scientists and Indigenous and Local Communities here last Sunday. In further development of this material, close cooperation with Indigenous and Local communities should be ensured and an expert workshop to finalize the training package should be called for.

IIFB would remind everybody that the support for training, capacity-building and other activities related to EBSAs for indigenous and local communities (ILCs) should apply to Indigenous Peoples in all regions, not only in developing countries.

Paragraph 25 of the same decision XI/17, noted that that socially and culturally significant marine areas may require enhanced conservation and management measures, and that criteria for the identification of areas relevant to the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity in need of such enhanced measures due to their social, cultural and other significance may need to be developed, with appropriate scientific and technical rationales.

The lack of adopted social and cultural criteria presents a limitation to considering the human dimension of ecosystems, in accordance with the guidance of the Conference of the Parties on the ecosystem approach. It also limits the consideration of the implications for biodiversity related to cultural and spiritual practices and traditional management systems. Reciprocally, it also limits consideration of the impacts on cultural and spiritual practices by other uses of biodiversity and institutional management systems. Establishing a linkage between culture and biodiversity is important, given that healthy and productive marine and terrestrial ecosystems are the foundation of indigenous cultures, traditions and identities.

IIFB calls for increased efforts by the CBD to develop recommendations on how to implement paragraph 25 in decision XI/17 and we propose a new bullet point number 9 in the Suggested Recommendations in document UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/18/4. The new bullet point would read as follows:

“Recall Paragraph 25 in COP decision XI/17 and request the Executive Secretary to take steps towards the development of criteria for identifying socially and culturally significant marine areas, and ensure full and effective participation by Indigenous and local Communities in the process.” End of proposal.

Finally, it is important to relate the work on traditional knowledge and Social and cultural criteria related with EBSA with other processes in CBD, such as Article 8(j) on Traditional Knowledge and related provisions as well as Article 10 (c) on Customary sustainable Use.   Thank you.

Aug 09

Пункт повестки дня 3.2 Обзор осуществления Глобальной стратегии сохранения растений на 2011-2020 годы.

Download PDF File

Спасибо Господин Председатель,

Я выступаю от имени Международного форума коренных народов по биоразнообразию.

Мы приветствуем документ SBSTTA/18/3, подготовленный Секретариатом и выражаем благодарность за проделанную работу.

Не смотря на то, что в данном документе не однократно упоминается важность участия коренных народов и местных общин в сохранение генетического разнообразия растений – включая важность применения традиционных знаний по Целевым Задачам 9 и 13 –  данные высказывания не нашли отражения в проекте представленных рекомендаций.

IIFB хотел бы отметить особую роль коренных народов и местных общин в сохранение растительного мира, посредствам применения традиционных практик устойчивого управления ресурсами.

Во многих регионах, сохранение растительного биоразнообразия напрямую зависит от коренных народов и местных общин, во многом от женщин, чьи традиционные знания и практики, можно назвать экспертными.

Поэтому нам грустно узнавать, что ботаническое образование и профессиональная подготовка приходят в упадок, а программы университетов в области ботаники постепенно ликвидируются, что делает невозможным в полной мере выполнить Целевую задачу 15 Глобальной стратегии сохранения растений.

IIFB призываем Стороны к  сотрудничеству с коренными народами и местными общинами по этому вопросу, и хотели бы отметить необходимость привлечения коренных народов и местных общин как одного из партнеров по сохранению растений.

Мы призываем Стороны конвенции, для исполнения Целей Конвенции и отдельных программ и стратегий, восстановить на национальном уровне ботаническое образование  и подготовку новых кадров, и выделять финансовую поддержку для участия в данных программах представителей от коренных народов и местных общин.

Так, же мы хотели бы выразить благодарность Эквадору, который предложил добавить в пункт 5 рекомендации, « и коренных народов и местных общин».

Спасибо господин Председатель.

Older posts «