Agenda and Documentation · Agenda and Documentation . Issued on 5 April 2012 . World Conservation...

Agenda and Documentation Issued on 5 April 2012 World Conservation Congress, Jeju, Republic of Korea 6–15 September 2012

IUCN WORLD CONSERVATION CONGRESS 2012

6–15 September 2012, Jeju, Republic of Korea

Table of Contents

WCC-2012-1.3/1 Draft Agenda & Timetable 1 WCC-2012-1.1/1 Draft Terms of Reference for the Credentials Committee 8 WCC-2012-1.4 Amendments to the Rules of Procedure on Quorum Requirement 9 WCC-2012-1.5 Draft Terms of Reference for Congress Committees 12 WCC-2012-1.5/1 Resolutions Committee 13 WCC-2012-1.5/2 Finance and Audit Committee 14 WCC-2012-1.5/3 Governance Committee 15 WCC-2012-1.5/4 Programme Committee 16 WCC-2012-1.5/5 Congress Steering Committee 17 WCC-2012-8.2 Reports from the Chairs of the IUCN Commissions for 2009-12 18 WCC-2012-8.2/1 Species Survival Commission (SSC) 19 WCC-2012-8.3 Proposed Mandates for IUCN Commissions for 2013-16 34

WCC-2012-8.3/1 Commission on Ecosystem Management (CEM) 35 WCC-2012-8.3/2 Commission on Education and Communication (CEC) 37 WCC-2012-8.3/3 Commission on Environmental, Economic and Social Policy (CEESP) 39 WCC-2012-8.3/4 Species Survival Commission (SSC) 41 WCC-2012-8.3/5 World Commission on Environmental Law (CEL) 43 WCC-2012-8.3/6 World Commission on Protected Areas (WCPA) 46 WCC-2012-8.4/1 Election of the IUCN President 48 WCC-2012-8.4/2 Election of the IUCN Treasurer 54 WCC-2012-8.4/3 Election of the IUCN Regional Councillors 57 WCC-2012-8.4/4 Election of the Chairs of IUCN Commissions 93 WCC-2012-9.1/1 Finances of IUCN in the intersessional period 2009–2012 113

WCC-2012-9.1/1 Annex 1 Financial Statements for 2008 114 WCC-2012-9.1/1 Annex 2 Financial Statements for 2009 134 WCC-2012-9.1/1 Annex 3 Financial Statements for 2010 158 WCC-2012-9.2 IUCN Programme and Financial Plan 2013–2016 183

WCC-2012-9.2/1 IUCN Programme 2013–2016 184 WCC-2012-9.2/2 IUCN Financial Plan 2013–2016 211 WCC-2012-9.3 Appointment of External Auditors 230

WCC-2012-9.4.1 Amendments to the IUCN Statutes: proposals from Council

WCC-2012-9.4.1/1 Review of procedures and deadlines 231 WCC-2012-9.4.1/2 Enhancing the effectiveness of Council 232 WCC-2012-9.4.1/3 Membership of Steering Committees of Commissions 234 WCC-2012-9.4.1/4 Length of term of Council members 236 WCC-2012-9.4.1/5 Working together as a Union to deliver IUCN’s One Programme 238 WCC-2012-9.4.1/6 Membership admission criteria 245 WCC-2012-9.4.1/7 Including local and regional governmental authorities in the Union 247 WCC-2012-9.4.1/8 Statutory regions 252 WCC-2012-9.4.1/9 Authority of the Members’ Assembly to modify the IUCN mission and nature of IUCN membership 261



Draft Agenda

of the World Conservation Congress

(5 April 2012)

Pre-Congress – 5 September 2012

08:30– 18:00

14:00– 18:00

Commission meetings 79th meeting of the IUCN Council

Day 1 – 6 September 2012

09:00– 15:30 Commission meetings

16:00–17:30 Opening Ceremony of the World Conservation Congress

18:30–21:00 Host Country Reception

Conservation Forum


08:30– 10:30 Conservation Forum Opening

11:00–

16:30 Forum events on “Nature-based solutions to climate change”

17:00–18:30 World Leaders’ Dialogue on “Nature+ climate: Can nature save us?”

19:00–21:00 Forum (continued)/Regional Member meetings/Contact groups/Social events

1

Congress Document WCC-2012-1

Conservation Forum and Members’ Assembly


08:00– 10:30

1st Sitting of the Members’ Assembly

1.1 Adoption of the Terms of Reference and Appointment of the Credentials Committee

1.2 First Report of the Credentials Committee (the Committee will further report as required)

1.3 Adoption of the Agenda

1.4 Adoption of amendments to the Rules of Procedure of the World Conservation Congress

1.5 Adoption of the Terms of Reference and appointment of the Resolutions, Finance and Audit, Governance, and Programme Committees of Congress

1.6 Draft IUCN Programme 2013–2016 with a particular focus on “Deploying nature-based solutions to global challenges: climate change”:

1.6.1 Report of the IUCN Director General on the results of the IUCN Programme 2009–2012 in this area

1.6.2 Presentation of results of the Conservation Forum of 7 September 2012 on “Nature-based solutions to climate change”

1.6.3 Presentation of the Draft IUCN Programme 2013–2016 in this area

1.6.4 Discussion

1.7 First Report of the Resolutions Committee:

• List of motions tabled and information on the motions process including the procedure for submission of new motions (Rule 52)

• Status of the motions related to the Programme Area “Deploying nature-based solutions to global challenges: climate change” listing the motions which are ready for adoption or those which are referred to contact groups before they can be submitted for adoption

1.8 Discussion and adoption of Resolutions and Recommendations related to the Programme Area “Deploying nature-based solutions to global challenges: climate change”

1.9 Elections:

1.9.1 Information by the Election Officer about the election procedures

1.9.2 Election candidate presentations (candidates for Regional Councillor)

11:00– 16:30 Forum events on “Nature-based solutions to food security”

17:00–18:30 World Leaders’ Dialogue on “Nature+ food: Can we feed the world sustainably?”



08:30– 10:30

2nd Sitting of the Members’ Assembly

2.1 Draft IUCN Programme 2013–2016 with a particular focus on “Deploying nature-based solutions to global challenges: food security” :


2.1.2 Presentation of results of the Conservation Forum of 8 September 2012 on “Nature-based solutions to food security”

2


2.1.4 Discussion

2.1.5 Report of the Resolutions Committee with the status of the motions related to the Programme Area “Deploying nature-based solutions to global challenges: food security” listing the motions which are ready for adoption or those which are referred to contact groups before they can be submitted for adoption

2.1.6 Discussion and adoption of Resolutions and Recommendations

2.2 Election candidate presentations (candidates for Regional Councillor)

11:00– 16:30 Forum events on “Nature-based solutions to social and economic development”

17:00–18:30 World Leaders’ Dialogue on “Nature+ development: Green economy: Myth or reality?”



08:30– 10:30

3rd Sitting of the Members’ Assembly

3.1 Draft IUCN Programme 2013–2016 with a particular focus on “Deploying nature-based solutions to global challenges: social and economic development” :

3.1.1 Report of the IUCN Director General on the results of the IUCN Programme 2009–2012 related to this area

3.1.2 Presentation of results of the Conservation Forum of 9 September 2012 on “Nature-based solutions to social and economic development”


3.1.4 Discussion

3.1.5 Report of the Resolutions Committee with the status of the motions related to the Programme Area “Deploying nature-based solutions to global challenges: social and economic development” listing the motions which are ready for adoption or those which are referred to contact groups before they can be submitted for adoption



11:00– 16:30 Forum events on ‘‘Effective and equitable governance of nature’s use”

17:00–18:30 World Leaders’ Dialogue on “Nature+ people&governance: Can conservation tackle poverty?”

19:00–21:00 Forum (continued)/Regional Members’ meetings/Contact groups/Social events


08:30– 10:30

4th Sitting of the Members’ Assembly

4.1 Draft IUCN Programme 2013–2016 with a particular focus on ‘‘Effective and equitable governance of nature’s use” :

3

4.1.1 Report of the IUCN Director General on the results of the IUCN Programme 2009–2012 related to this area

4.1.2 Presentation of results of the Conservation Forum of 10 September 2012 on ‘‘Effective and equitable governance of nature’s use”


4.1.4 Discussion

4.1.5 Report of the Resolutions Committee with the status of the motions related to the Programme Area ‘‘Effective and equitable governance of nature’s use” listing the motions which are ready for adoption or those which are referred to contact groups before they can be submitted for adoption



11:00– 16:30 Forum events on “Valuing and conserving nature”

17:00–18:30 World Leaders’ Dialogue on “Nature+: Saving nature, why bother?”

19:00– 20:00


5.1 Presentation of John C. Philips Memorial and Harold Jefferson Coolidge Medals, Honorary Membership and Commission Awards

20:30–22:30 Regional Member Meetings/Contact groups/Social events


08:30– 10:30


6.1 Draft IUCN Programme 2013–2016 with a particular focus on “Valuing and conserving nature”:


6.1.2 Presentation of results of the Conservation Forum of 11 September 2012 on “Valuing and conserving nature”


6.1.4 Discussion

6.1.5 Report of the Resolutions Committee with the status of the motions related to the Programme Area “Valuing and conserving nature” listing the motions which are ready for adoption or those which are referred to contact groups before they can be submitted for adoption



11:00–13:00


7.1 Report of the Director General on the activities of IUCN in the period 2009–2012

7.2 Report of the President and the Council

7.3 Election candidate presentations (all remaining candidates)

14:30– 19:00


8.1 Election candidate presentations (all remaining candidates)

4

8.2 Reports of the IUCN Commission Chairs for the period 2009–2012

8.3 Adoption of the mandates of the IUCN Commissions for 2013–2016

8.3.1 Presentation of Council’s proposals

8.3.2 Report from the Programme Committee on the proposed Commission mandates including, where applicable, motions affecting them

8.4 Election of President, Treasurer, Regional Councillors and Commission Chairs (electronically)

8.5 Reports by recognized Regional Committees

8.6 Report from the Election Officer with the results of the elections

19:30–21:30 Contact groups/Social events


ALL DAY DELEGATE EXCURSION DAY


08:30– 13:00


9.1 Finances of IUCN in the Intersessional Period 2009–2012

9.1.1 Report by the Director General and the Treasurer on the finances of IUCN in the Intersessional Period 2009–2012, including the Audited Financial Statements for the years 2008 to 2011

9.1.2 Report of the Finance and Audit Committee on the Audited Financial Statements for the years 2008 to 2011

9.1.3 Approval of the Audited Financial Statements for the years 2008 to 2011

9.2 IUCN Programme and Financial Plan 2013–2016

9.2.1 Presentation by the Director General of the Draft IUCN Programme and Financial Plan 2013–2016

9.2.2 Reports of the Programme Committee and the Finance and Audit Committee on the Draft IUCN Programme and Financial Plan 2013–2016 including, where applicable, motions affecting the Draft IUCN Programme and Financial Plan

9.2.3 Adoption of the IUCN Programme and Financial Plan 2013–2016

9.3 Appointment of the external auditors

9.4 Amendments to the IUCN Statutes

9.4.1 Presentation of Council’s proposals

9.4.2 Presentation of proposals from IUCN Members

9.4.3 Report of the Governance Committee on the proposals to amend the Statutes

9.4.4 Adoption of amendments to the Statutes

9.5 Report of the Governance Committee on governance matters other than amendments to the Statutes

9.6 Discussion and adoption of Resolutions and Recommendations (continued)

14:30– 18:30



5


08:30– 13:00



11.2 Report of the Credentials Committee

14:30– 15:30

16:00– 18:00

Closing

12th Sitting of the Members’ Assembly: Closing Ceremony, including

Message from the President Elect

Closure of the World Conservation Congress by the outgoing President

80th meeting of the IUCN Council

6

Agenda Overview 2012 World Conservation Congress (Jeju, Republic of Korea, September 2012)

Forum Members’ Assembly World Leaders Dialogue

Wed 5th Thu 6th Fri 7th Sat 8th Sun 9th Mon 10th Tue 11th Wed 12th Thu 13th Fri 14th Sat 15th

Mor

ning

Com

mis

sion

mee

tings

and

Cou

ncil

mee

ting

Com

mis

sion

mee

tings

8:30

– 1

6:30

Fo

rum

on

“N

atur

e-ba

sed

solu

tions

to c

limat

e ch

ange

”

8:00-10:30 1st Sitting:

“Nature-based solutions to

climate change”

8:30-10:30 2nd Sitting:

“Nature-based solutions to

food security”

8:30-10:30 3rd Sitting:

“Nature-based solutions to social

and economic development”

8:30-10:30 4th Sitting: “Effective

and equitable governance of nature’s

use”

8:30-10:30 6th Sitting:

“Valuing and conserving

nature”

Excu

rsio

ns

8:30-13:00 9th Sitting:

Finances of IUCN 2009–2012

Programme and Financial Plan

2013-2016 Appointment of

External Auditors Amendments to

the IUCN Statutes Report of the Governance Committee

8:30-13:00 11th Sitting:

Discussion and

adoption of Resolutions and

Recommendations

Report of the Credentials Committee

11:0

0 –

16:3

0

Foru

m o

n “N

atur

e-ba

sed

solu

tions

to fo

od

secu

rity”

11:0

0 –

16:3

0

Foru

m o

n “N

atur

e-ba

sed

solu

tions

to s

ocia

l and

ec

onom

ic d

evel

opm

ent”

11:0

0 –

16:3

0

Foru

m o

n ‘‘E

ffect

ive an

d eq

uita

ble g

over

nanc

e of

natu

re’s

use”

11:0

0 –

16:3

0

Foru

m o

n “V

alui

ng a

nd c

onse

rvin

g na

ture

”

11:00-13:00 7th Sitting:

Reports of the President/

Council and the Director General

Afte

rnoo

n

14:30-19:00 8th Sitting:

Commission reports and mandates

Presentation and election of candidates for

President, Treasurer,

Commission Chairs and Regional

Councillors

14:30-19:00 10th Sitting:

Discussion and adoption of

Resolutions and Recommendations

14:30-15:30 12th Sitting:

Closing

16:00-17:30

Opening of the WCC

17:00 – 18:30 WLD

Nature+ Climate

17:00 – 18:30 WLD

Nature+ food

17:00 – 18:30 WLD

Nature+ development

17:00 – 18:30 WLD

Nature+ People &

governance

17:00–18:30 WLD

Nature+

Even

ing Host Country

Reception

Forum (Ctd) Member mtgs Contact grps




19:00-20:00 5th Sitting:

Medals and Awards

Contact grps

7

Credentials Committee of the 2012 World Conservation Congress

Draft Terms of Reference

The Credentials Committee shall be appointed by the Congress on the proposal of the President, in accordance with Rule 21 of the Rules of Procedure of the World Conservation Congress. The Terms of Reference of the Committee shall be: • to approve the “Guidelines for delegates and observers attending the World Conservation

Congress” prepared by the Secretariat;

• to supervise the accreditation process of Members and Observers in accordance with Rule 5 to 12, and 66 of the Rules of Procedure of the World Conservation Congress;

• to certify to the Congress that only Members whose dues are paid entirely up to and including

2011 are able to exercise their rights in connection with elections, voting and motions, in accordance with Article 13 (a) of the IUCN Statutes;

• to refer to the Congress the name of those Members who are two years (2010 and 2011) or more

in arrears in the payment of their dues and whose remaining rights may be rescinded on such terms as the Congress may determine, in accordance with Article 13 (a) of the IUCN Statutes;

• to inform Congress daily of the total number of votes to be exercised by each category of voting Members present at the Congress, in accordance with Article 34 of the IUCN Statutes;

• to act as focal point for issues of the IUCN membership constituency; and • to coordinate as necessary with the Steering Committee, the Finance & Audit Committee, the

Election Officer and the Governance Committee of Congress.

8

Congress Document WCC-2012-1.1/1



Proposed amendment to the Rules of Procedure of the World Conservation Congress: introducing a quorum requirement

Origin: IUCN Council Action Requested: The World Conservation Congress is invited to: 1. ADOPT, at the first sitting of the Members’ Assembly, the draft motion concerning a

‘Proposed amendment to the Rules of Procedure of the World Conservation Congress: introducing a quorum requirement’ for immediate application during the 2012 Congress; and

2. ADOPT a consequential amendment to the IUCN Statutes. DRAFT MOTION The IUCN World Conservation Congress, Adopts the following amendment to the Rules of Procedure of the World Conservation Congress and decides that it becomes effective immediately:

Amend the Rules of Procedure of the World Conservation Congress (annexed to the IUCN Statutes) by inserting a new Rule 65bis as follows: (existing text, if any, to be removed in strike through; proposed new text in blue italics)

Quorum requirement Any decision of the World Conservation Congress resulting in a Resolution or Recommendation shall require a quorum of one third of the total votes of the accredited Members for that session in each Category A and B. The quorum shall be verified at the beginning of any sitting during the Congress in which a motion is voted upon or at any time during sittings as the Chair deems appropriate or upon point of order of any Member. In the absence of a quorum at any given sitting, the deliberations shall continue provided that any decision that resulted in a Resolution or Recommendation at that sitting without a quorum shall be subject to ratification through mail ballot within a period of 45 days after the distribution of the decisions of the World Congress. The conduct of the mail ballot is subject to Article 96 of the Statutes. In the absence of the required majority vote in the ballot, there shall not be any further vote and the decision taken by the Congress shall be null and void.

Adopts the following amendment to the IUCN Statutes:

Amend Article 36 of the IUCN Statutes as follows: (existing text to be removed in strike through; proposed new text in blue italics)

Any decision of the World Congress, other than those resulting in a Resolution or Recommendation as set forth in Rule 65bis, taken in circumstances where: (a) fewer than half of the total votes in either Category A or B were represented at that

session of the World Congress, or (b) the matter was not on the agenda distributed to Members before the World Congress, shall be subject to confirmation by mail ballot if, not later than ninety days after the distribution of the decisions of the World Congress, so requested by a minimum of forty Members eligible to vote from at least three Regions. Pending such confirmation the decision of the World Congress shall be suspended.

9

Congress Document WCC-2012-1.4

EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM Council proposes to introduce a quorum requirement with the purpose of ensuring that the motions are approved in the presence of a higher number of Members than at previous Congresses, resulting in increased legitimacy, representativeness and ownership of the adopted Resolutions and Recommendations. The 2008 Congress External Evaluation reflected the concerns raised by IUCN Members in relation to the legitimacy, representativeness and ownership of the decisions taken by the Members’ Assembly,’[…] low rates of participation and high levels of abstentions in the voting processes point to some emerging concerns regarding the democratic health of the Union.’ Although 780 Members of the total IUCN membership of 1,108 were present in Barcelona, only 594 IUCN Members had the right to vote: 128 Members in Cat. A holding all together 210 votes, and 466 Members in Cat. B holding all together 659 votes. Attendance at sittings of the Members’ Assembly has not been systematically recorded in the past. However, based on calculations with data available from the 2008 Congress, it is estimated that an average of 282 Members (i.e. less than half of 594) actually participated in the voting process (voting for or against, or abstention), a figure which includes the Members who had given a proxy to Members attending the Members’ Assembly. The average number of votes cast (i.e. votes for and against, without counting the abstentions) was 76 for Cat. A and 226 for Cat. B. It means that the vast majority of Resolutions were approved by just over half the IUCN Members present during the 2008 Congress, a figure which represents an even smaller fraction of the total membership of IUCN. There is no detailed analysis available why the participation rate in the decision process in Barcelona or previous Congresses was so low. The Review therefore recommended that ‘Council should refine the motions process to ensure improved ownership and engagement’. From a number of options to improve the motions process studied by the Governance Committee of Council, and based on advice from the Resolutions Working Group of Council, Council opted for the introduction of a quorum requirement to be approved by the 2012 Congress for immediate application during that Congress. A quorum is a requirement for a minimum number of Members to be present in order to take valid decisions. It may also be expressed in terms of the voting power of the Members present, i.e. the number of votes they hold. At present, neither the IUCN Statutes nor the Rules of Procedures contain a quorum requirement. The Members’ Assembly may therefore take valid decisions with only very few Members taking part in the vote. Council is proposing a relatively low requirement – one third of the total votes of the accredited Members in each Category A and B – as a modest introduction of a quorum requirement, which could be increased in the future if Members find the quorum mechanism to be effective. Putting the bar higher could entail the risk of Members blocking the decision process at Congress. If the proposed quorum requirement would have been applied in 2008 in Barcelona, based on the incomplete data available, it is estimated that the quorum would not have been met for one motion in Cat. A and for 21 motions in Cat. B. If the quorum requirement in 2008 in Barcelona would have been half of the total votes of the accredited Members in each Category A and B, then it would not have been met for 73 motions in Cat. A and no motion could have been validly adopted by Cat. B. The quorum requirement is intended as an incentive to participate in the voting process. During the 2012 Congress, additional measures will be taken to support this objective including clearly informing Members of how to exercise their voting rights, and information to delegates on the time of voting. In addition, the new structure of the Congress will allow more time for presentation and discussion of the

10

http://cmsdata.iucn.org/downloads/wcc_evaluation_final_report_16cs.pdf

Draft IUCN Programme and motions on Programme and policy, enabling delegates to understand the issues on which they are invited to vote. The quorum requirement will be measured electronically at the beginning or at any time during a sitting by asking the delegates to insert their voting cards in the electronic equipment provided on the tables of the Members’ Assembly. Beginning with the 2012 Congress, the attendance rates at Congress will henceforth be recorded systematically. The proposed quorum requirement only applies to those decisions of Congress adopting Resolutions or Recommendations. They will not apply to matters essential for the continuity of the organization including adoption of the IUCN Programme, the Financial Plan, or the election of members of Council. All decisions of the Members’ Assembly remain subject to the ex post facto review of Congress decisions provided in Article 36 of the Statutes. To avoid that motions pertaining to Resolutions and Recommendations be subject to the quorum requirement during Congress AND to the ex post facto review of Article 36 of the IUCN Statutes, it is proposed that Article 36 be amended precisely to apply ONLY to decisions OTHER than motions pertaining to Resolutions and Recommendations. For information: Article 96 of the IUCN Statutes provides the following regarding mail ballots: “Decisions by mail ballot shall be governed, mutatis mutandis, by the provisions on voting at the World Conservation Congress and the Council.” These provisions on voting at the Congress are stated in Articles 30 to 35 of the IUCN Statutes1.

1 Articles 30 to 35 of the IUCN Statutes: 30. Only Members in Categories A and B shall have the right to vote. 31. Unless provided otherwise in these Statutes, decisions of the World Congress shall be taken by a simple

majority of votes cast in each Category. 32. Abstentions shall not be counted as votes cast. 33. Multiple choice elections shall be as prescribed in the Rules of Procedure. 34. Governmental Members shall have voting rights as follows:

(a) each State Member shall have three votes, one of which shall be exercised collectively by the Government Agency Members, if any, of that State;

(b) Government Agency Members of IUCN within a State which is not a State Member of IUCN shall collectively have one vote;

(c) where one or more member States of a political and/or economic integration organization, and that organization itself are Members of IUCN, the organization and its member States shall decide on the mode of exercising their voting rights which shall not in total exceed those of the State Members of IUCN belonging to that organization.

35. Non-governmental Members shall have voting rights as follows: (a) National non-governmental organizations shall each have one vote; (b) International non-governmental organizations shall each have two votes.

11



Terms of Reference and membership of the Committees of Congress

Action Requested: The World Conservation Congress is invited to APPROVE the Terms of Reference of the Committees of Congress proposed by Council and the membership of the Committees of Congress on the proposal of the President of IUCN. 1. In accordance with the Rules of Procedure of the World Conservation Congress (WCC), the

Congress shall establish Committees as it considers necessary for the conduct of its business, and shall determine their terms of reference.

2. Draft Terms of Reference have been prepared by Council for the following Congress Committees:

a. Credentials Committee (Congress Document WCC-2012-1.1/1) b. Resolutions Committee (Congress Document WCC-2012-1.5/1) c. Finance and Audit Committee (Congress Document WCC-2012-1.5/2) d. Governance Committee (Congress Document WCC-2012-1.5/3) e. Programme Committee (Congress Document WCC-2012-1.5/4) f. Steering Committee (Congress Document WCC-2012-1.5/5)

3. The composition of the Steering Committee of Congress is defined in Rule 15 of the Rules of Procedure of the WCC and does not require a decision of Congress.

4. The IUCN President will table a proposal for the membership of all other Committees of Congress

during the 1st Sitting of the Members’ Assembly, under Agenda Item 1.1 for the Credentials Committee and under Agenda Item 1.5 for the other Committees.

12


Resolutions Committee of Congress


The Resolutions Committee (RC) manages the motions process at the Congress. More specifically, the RC is responsible for:

1. Managing motions submitted before the opening of the Congress. This includes:

a. receive proposed amendments to motions, and decide whether an amendment is in order and ensure the process described in Rules 59 to 62 is duly followed;

b. present appeals Members made to the Steering Committee of Congress for this committee

to review decisions made by the Resolutions Working Group, as per Rule 55; c. organize and manage contact groups and consider the resulting report before presenting the

text to the plenary as per Rule 56; and d. keep track of motions, including those which have an impact on the programme.

2. Managing motions submitted during Congress. This includes:

a. receive motions submitted during Congress within the deadline set by the Steering Committee;

b. verify whether submitted motions meet the statutory requirements and circulate them to

delegates in accordance to Rules 53 and 54; c. decide which motions will be put to vote at the Congress and which will first be discussed in

ad hoc contact groups; d. receive proposed amendments to motions, and decide whether an amendment is in order

and ensure the process described in Rules 59 to 62 is duly followed; e. forward through the Programme Committee any motion or part of a motion affecting the draft

Programme or proposed mandate of a Commission to the sessions of the World Congress that consider the Programme and mandates of the Commissions. The sponsors of these motions shall be informed of this action; and

f. propose that amendments should be debated or voted upon together. They may propose

that the text together with the proposed amendments be referred to a contact group (see Rule 62).

The Resolutions Committee will be elected by the Congress and reports to the Steering Committee. It shall include the members of the Resolutions Working Group appointed by the Council, as per Rule 20.

13


Finance and Audit Committee of Congress


The Finance and Audit Committee shall be appointed by the Congress on the proposal of the President, in accordance with Rule13 of the Rules of Procedure of the World Conservation Congress. The Terms of Reference of the Committee shall be: (a) to examine the audited annual accounts and management letters issued by the external auditors

for the years 2008, 2009, 2010 and 2011, together with the cover paper on the Finances of IUCN for the period 2008 to 2011, and the estimates for 2012, prepared jointly by the Treasurer and the Director General;

(b) to examine the Financial Plan for the period 2013–2016 and any matters related to membership

dues; (c) to consider the reports of the Council and of its Finance and Audit Committee; (d) to evaluate the recommendation made by the Council regarding the appointment of the external

auditors; (e) to consider any other matters of finance or financial and operational procedures referred to the

Committee by the plenary session or by the Steering Committee; (f) to advise the Congress on the outcome of these considerations, and to propose action as

appropriate; (g) to comment on the implications of the resolutions submitted to Congress for decision in relation to

the Financial Plan approved by Council; and (h) in preparing its report, the Committee will coordinate with the Programme Committee, the

Credentials Committee and the Resolutions Committee.

14


Governance Committee of Congress


The Governance Committee shall be appointed by the Congress on the proposal of the President, in accordance with Rule 13 of the Rules of Procedure of the World Conservation Congress. Under the Rules of Procedure of the World Conservation Congress, the Governance Committee shall: (a) Assist the Resolutions Committee of Congress with the implementation of Rule 56 of the Rules of

Procedure with specific reference to governance related motions; Rule 56 states that: “The Resolutions Committee may refer a motion to a committee or ad hoc

contact group of delegates, for its review and advice or decide that it be debated and voted upon directly by the World Congress. The Chair may also propose that a motion under discussion in the World Congress be referred to a contact group. The reports of such contact groups shall ordinarily be considered by the Resolutions Committee prior to their presentation to the World Congress. The debate in the World Congress shall take place on the text resulting from this process.”

(b) Advise, consult with and facilitate discussion among IUCN Members, representatives of IUCN

Commissions, and representatives of IUCN National and Regional Committees participating in the WCC on the objectives and content for proposed governance reforms as set out in the Report of the IUCN Council on Governance Reforms and Proposed Amendments to the Statutes and Rules of Procedure.

(c) Assist Congress by taking note of comments from the Membership on governance reform

proposals coming from the floor or raised in Congress workshops. (d) Consult with Members or groups of Members who wish to discuss governance matters which they

have been unable to address in Plenary, and facilitate contact groups on motions related to governance as may be scheduled by the Resolutions Committee.

(e) As appropriate, propose specific adjustments to the proposed governance reforms based on the

discussions with Members and the governance contact groups. (f) In preparing its report, the Committee will coordinate with the Resolutions Committee and the

Credentials Committee.

15


Programme Committee of Congress


The Programme Committee shall be appointed by the Congress on the proposal of the President, in accordance with Rule 13 of the Rules of Procedure of the World Conservation Congress. Under the Rules of Procedure of the World Conservation Congress, the Programme Committee shall: (a) assist the Resolutions Committee of Congress with the implementation of Rule 51 of the Rules of

Procedure, which states that: “Discussion of the draft Programme or proposed mandate of a Commission shall take into

consideration any motion or part of a motion affecting these documents, and all such motions shall be dealt with as proposed amendments to the Programme or mandate. All such motions shall be remitted by the Resolutions Working Group or the Resolutions Committee to the session of the World Congress that considers the Programme and mandates of the Commissions. The sponsors of these motions shall be advised of this action.”

(b) assist Congress by taking note of comments from the Membership on the Programme of the

Union, as expressed from the floor; (c) consult with Members or groups of Members who wish to discuss programmatic matters which

they have been unable to address in Plenary; (d) if necessary, propose specific adjustments to the draft Programme for 2013–2016 or the

mandates of any Commission; (e) if necessary, prepare recommendations for adoption by the Congress; and (f) in preparing its report, the Committee will coordinate with the Congress Resolutions Committee

and the Finance and Audit Committee.

16


Congress Steering Committee


1. The Steering Committee of the World Conservation Congress shall be appointed by the Congress on the proposal of the President, in accordance with Rule 13 of the Rules of Procedure of the World Conservation Congress.

2. The Steering Committee shall comprise the members of the Preparatory Committee appointed by

the Council to make preparations for the World Congress together with the President, the Vice Presidents and the Director General and shall be charged with the general duty of forwarding the business of the World Congress.

3. All matters concerning the organization of the World Congress shall be referred to the Steering

Committee. 4. Specific duties of the Steering Committee are as detailed in the Rules of Procedure of the

Congress (Rules 37, 44, 47, 53, 55 and 86). 5. The Steering Committee shall meet as necessary during Congress and invite concerned

individuals as appropriate to join its meetings.

17




Reports of the IUCN Commission Chairs for the period 2009–2012

Action Requested: The World Conservation Congress is invited to CONSIDER the reports of the Chairs of the IUCN Commissions for the period 2009–2012. 1. Attached herewith is the intersessional report from the Chair of the Species Survival Commission

(SSC). 2. The intersessional reports from the Chairs of the other IUCN Commissions will be distributed to

IUCN Members with the Congress mailing in the beginning of July 2012.

18


Species Survival Commission (SSC) Report 2009–2012

Chair: Dr Simon N. Stuart

Introduction I must start with a very large thank you to Conservation International (CI), the Environment Agency Abu Dhabi (EAD), the MAVA Foundation, the Al Ain Zoo, the UNEP World Conservation Monitoring Centre (UNEP-WCMC), the World Association of Zoos and Aquariums, Chester Zoo, Bristol Zoo, and the Zoological Society of London (ZSL) for providing such generous financial assistance for my office during the 2009–2012 quadrennium. This has enabled me to be a full-time SSC Chair, and to have a small, highly effective staff team in my office. I should also say at the outset that the SSC works to the same strategic plan and programme as the Global Species Programme (GSP) in the IUCN Secretariat; the activities of the SSC and GSP are intentionally intertwined and mutually supportive, and so no effort is made to separate them in this report. A major highlight of the quadrennium was the signing of the SSC’s first ever dedicated framework agreement. This was with the EAD for 2011 to 2013, and this most generous funding allows us to move ahead with some important strategic priorities that were previously unfunded. SSC Mandate, Strategic Plan and Priorities During the 2009–2012 intersessional period the SSC, with support from the Global Species Programme, focused on implementing its 2009–2012 Species Strategic Plan. This report discusses our accomplishments for the period 2009–2012, in line with the Commission Mandate approved at the World Conservation Congress (WCC) in Barcelona, Spain. 1. Commission Mandate

In the intersessional period of 2009–2012, the Species Survival Commission (SSC) will continue to play a leading role in enabling IUCN to be the world’s most authoritative voice on behalf of global biodiversity conservation and the sustainability of natural resource use. In particular, the SSC and its worldwide network are uniquely placed to allow IUCN to fulfil two essential functions for the global community, namely:

• to inform the world about the status and trends of global biodiversity, thus providing measures for the health of our one and only biosphere, and

• to monitor, evaluate and report on the effectiveness of the combined global conservation actions to mitigate current and emerging threats to biodiversity.

2. SSC Vision

A world that values and conserves present levels of biodiversity.

3. SSC Goal

The extinction crisis and massive loss of biodiversity are universally adopted as a shared

responsibility and addressed by concerted actions throughout the world. 4. SSC Objectives

For the intersessional period 2009–2012 the SSC, working in collaboration with members, other IUCN Commissions and the IUCN Secretariat, will pursue the following key objectives in helping to deliver IUCN’s “One Programme” commitment:

a) Status of Biodiversity

19


Observing and monitoring species with the aspiration to remain the leading global organization monitoring the status and trends of the world’s biodiversity and informing the world and its decision makers about its full range of values.

b) Pressures on Biodiversity Analysing the impact of threats to biodiversity with the aspiration to be a leading authority in

the analysis of factors responsible for the decline of species and their relative impacts.

c) Response to Biodiversity Loss Facilitating and undertaking action with the aspiration to deliver solutions for halting

biodiversity decline by convening, advising, facilitating and supporting key players in their efforts to mitigate the pressures on biodiversity and to reduce the rate of species decline

5. Priorities and achievements for the 2009–2012 intersessional period

The specific working priorities of the SSC are derived from and focused on the ten IUCN Global Results and grouped into 22 Key Species Results each of which has a number of measurable targets to be attained by the end of 2012. These Key Species Results are listed below (in italics), with the 2009–2012 achievements (not in italics). As always, what I have left out of this report is much more than what I have included. In addition, given the way that we often work ‘behind the scenes’, for instance in some policy fora, it is not always possible or desirable to claim attribution, so again it is necessary to downplay what has been achieved. There have, of course, been a very large number of important activities carried out among the SSC Specialist Groups and Sub-Committees, and in the IUCN GSP – far more than there is space to report on here. As a result, a fuller and much longer report on the activities of all of the components of the SSC is being prepared. a) Policy and Governance in regions and globally (public sector): Species information contributed to

influence policy and governance systems with regard to the sustainable management of natural resources and the management of invasive species. As is widely known, biodiversity loss and species extinctions are continuing at unprecedented rates, and urgent action is needed to ensure the resilience of nature and to avoid catastrophic tipping points. Recovering from such dramatic changes in biodiversity will be costly. As a result, the SSC and GSP (the IUCN delegation was headed by the Director, GSP) were heavily engaged in the negotiations for the new strategic plan of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). I participated in all of the long series of meetings leading up to the 10th Conference of the Parties (COP10) of the CBD in Nagoya, Japan, in October 2010, at which the strategic plan, including the 20 Aichi Biodiversity Targets was adopted. Most notably, the SSC was closely involved in the drafting of the ambitious Aichi Target 12 of the CBD SP: By 2020 the extinction of known threatened species has been prevented and their conservation status, particularly of those most in decline, has been improved and sustained. However, I also participated in the negotiations on several other Aichi Targets that are very important for species, notably Targets 1, 5, 6, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15, 17 and 19. It is hard to over-emphasize the importance of the achievement in Nagoya; the CBD SP provides a roadmap for biodiversity conservation for the next decades, with clear commitments to conserve biodiversity from almost all of the world’s governments. It has been followed up by the other biodiversity-related conventions and several UN organizations ‘mapping’ (an exercise carried out by IUCN) their remits to the Aichi targets. The second important species-related achievement from Nagoya was the updated Global Strategy on Plant Conservation (GSPC), and the SSC was also heavily engaged in the negotiations that led to its adoption. We have to work in support of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES), working closely with TRAFFIC. We participated actively in all of the important CITES meetings, including COP14 (in Doha, Qatar, March 2010), and all meetings of the Standing, Animals and Plants Committees this year. SSC Specialist Groups engaged on a number of issues in relation to CITES, including on seahorses, sharks, chameleons, crocodilians, tortoises and turtles, galliforms, tigers, elephants and rhinos, with specific attention given to Crowned Cranes from East Africa, Bottle-nosed Dolphins in the Solomon Islands, the Humphead Wrasse in East and Southeast Asia. Prior to COP14, IUCN and TRAFFIC published the Analyses of Proposals to Amend the CITES Appendices, which is the key document in terms of providing the best science to the governments to guide them in their decisions on listing proposals. This is the ninth time that we have produced the Analyses. Since COP14, at the request of the Council of IUCN, I have been

20

conducting a review of IUCN engagement in CITES. As part of this, Council has already reaffirmed CITES as a priority for the institution and a more thorough exercise to agree full CITES engagement strategy is nearing completion. Meanwhile, I have continued to participate in several CITES processes, including: technical support for the workshop on Asian snakes (April 2011), a detailed report on the application of the CITES Listing Criteria, and several meetings relating to our collaboration with the CITES Secretariat on the MIKE (Monitoring Illegal Killing of Elephants) project (including trying to secure funding to extend MIKE to its next phase of implementation). The SSC also participated in COP10 of the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS) in Bergen, Norway, November 2011. IUCN and the SSC had a high-profile at this meeting, with important inputs from a number of SSC Specialist Groups, and the Wildlife Health Specialist Group (WHSG) was named in an important decision on disease in migratory species. On the issue of “health”, three UN organizations, WHO, FAO and OIE have been collaborating on a One Health Initiative. However, because these organizations do not encompass wildlife and ecosystem health, IUCN is now bringing in this aspect through the WHSG. This now enables us to operate at a more strategic level on wildlife health than ever before, and this is helped by funding that has allowed for the recruitment of a small staff team for the first time. We have contributed to the work of the Ramsar Convention through the work our GSP Freshwater Biodiversity Assessment Unit. This has covered the value of wetlands to livelihoods (see below) and discussions on the selection of sites of importance for freshwater biodiversity (KBAs see also below). We have participated in the annual meetings of the International Whaling Commission (IWC) Scientific Committee, and in 2010 I prepared an IUCN policy statement raising concerns that the attempts to bridge the divide in the IWC were not taking sufficient notice of sound science. The SSC also provided important inputs into the formal IUCN position on the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES). I also played a prominent role in the Eye on Earth Summit (EoE), along with other IUCN staff, in Abu Dhabi in December 2011. In both the IPBES and EoE negotiations I have emphasized the importance of ensuring that global biodiversity monitoring systems build on existing programmes (notably the IUCN knowledge products), and do not wastefully compete with ongoing initiatives.

b) Policy at national level: Species-based information provided to IUCN members, IUCN Regional and Country Offices and partner organizations to influence national policy making. Throughout the 2009–2012 quadrennium, the SSC has made interventions to address some crucially important species conservation issues at the national level. A request to the government of the Seychelles asking them to extend a planned nature reserve so that it includes the foraging areas of the Critically Endangered Seychelles Free-tailed Bat was successful. I also contacted governments in the following countries: Ukraine to draw attention to illegal mass poisoning of geese; Zimbabwe to urge actions to address a serious escalation in rhino poaching; Costa Rica on marine turtle conservation; Argentina concerning draft legislation (eventually withdrawn) that could have had a serious impact on wild populations of Guanaco and Vicuña; India concerning threats to Gangetic River Dolphins if proposed dams on the Brahmaputra River go ahead; New Zealand to oppose (successfully) re-scheduling of land to allow mining on the Corromandel Peninsula, the main site for the Critically Endangered Archey’s Frog; Indonesia concerning plans to clear the Bukit Tigapuluh forest landscape in Sumatra, with likely severe impacts on large mammals and other species; Chile to express concern about cliff diving in the vicinity of an important seabird colony on Easter Island; and Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia concerning major infrastructure threats to Mavrovo National Park, which is the last source population on the Eurasian Lynx in the Balkans. I have also had important contacts with the government of China concerning proposals to place a barrage at the outlet of Poyang Lake, where 98% of the world’s Siberian Cranes spend the winter. The government delayed the project pending further studies, and IUCN (in partnership with Wetlands International) submitted a very thorough report on the issue to the Prime Minister; we are currently awaiting the government’s decision. I also expressed serious concern to China about proposals to build a dam in the Yangtze National Native Fish Reserve, which could block the migratory routes of Critically Endangered migratory fish species.

21

We contacted the government of the Republic of Korea concerning the reclamation of tidal mudflats at Song Do and in other locations, contrary to a commitment that the government made to Ramsar COP10. The reclamation of these mudflats has been linked to serious declines in wetland birds along the East Asian flyway (including the Spoon-billed Sandpiper which is heading rapidly towards extinction). We are now carrying out an independent study, engaging government agencies and other stakeholders from all parts of the region, of the issue to inform the IUCN World Conservation Congress when it discusses this issue in Jeju in September 2012. Other important national-level initiatives have included a major collaboration with Brazil on red listing, including a high-level Colóquio a Proteção de Espécies Ameaçadas de Extinção held in October 2011. In South Africa I took part in the launch of a ground-breaking publication: Ensuring a Future for South Africa’s Frogs – a Strategy for Conservation Research. This is a model for other countries to follow.

c) Red List Assessments globally: Conservation status, trends and distribution of selected taxonomic groups assessed at the global level. We signed the new Red List Partnership Agreement on 21 June 2010. The Red List Partners are those organizations that have committed resources (financial and in-kind) to support the IUCN Red List, in particular the various biodiversity assessment projects that feed data into the Red List. The Partners are BirdLife International, Botanic Gardens Conservation International, Conservation International (CI), Department of Animal and Human Biology at the University of Rome “La Sapienza”, NatureServe, Royal Botanic Gardens Kew (RBGK), Texas A&M University, Wildscreen and Zoological Society of London (ZSL). The expansion of the Partnership is extremely good news for the SSC, and a vote of confidence in the Red List. With the new partnership, we have re-established the SSC Red List Committee (RLC), which provides strategic oversight for the Red List, and which is currently preparing a new draft strategy for the Red List for 2012 to 2020. The Red list was updated nine times during the 2009–2012 quadrennium, four of these being during the International Year of Biodiversity in 2010. As of early 2012, the Red List comprised 61,914 species, of which 865 are Extinct or Extinct in the Wild, 3,879 Critically Endangered, 5,689 Endangered, and 10,002 Vulnerable, and 9,709 are Data Deficient. The findings of this work are too extensive to summarize fairly here. Unfortunately, there have been many more deteriorations in the Red List status of various species than improvements. Deteriorations have been noted, for example in several species of turtles, molluscs and amphibians (amphibians remain one of the most threatened groups with an estimated 41% at risk). However, there have been some improvements in status due to conservation, and the downlisting of the Arabian Oryx from Endangered to Vulnerable in 2011 is especially noteworthy given that the species was Extinct in the Wild less than 40 years ago. Two species of plant also improved in status, one from Corsica, the other from Sicily. New Caledonia’s endemic reptiles were assessed for the first time and a shocking 67% were found to be threatened, especially by ongoing habitat loss and fragmentation as the nickel mining industry continues to expand, but also by the effects of invasive alien species. Many newly discovered species are proving to be threatened, for example the Siau Island Tarsier, described in 2010 from Indonesia and classified as Critically Endangered. A major event in 2010 was the publication of a short paper by senior SSC authors in the Policy Forum section of Science Magazine entitled “The Barometer of Life”. This paper calls for a major investment in broadening the taxonomic base of the IUCN Red List so that it can truly fulfil its enormous potential as the Barometer of Life on earth. Our estimate of the true cost of establishing the Barometer of Life is US$60 million, including the costs of the information systems, training, and support to national listing processes, and I am now working to identify donors for this ambitious sum, working in close partnership especially with Conservation International and NatureServe.

d) Red List Assessments at national and regional scales: Conservation status, trends and distribution of species assessed, correctly applying the IUCN Regional Categories and Criteria. The Red List Index has been adopted by the United Nations as one of the indicators for the 2015 Millennium Development Goal 7 on environmental sustainability. As a result, all countries of the world are now being asked to develop their own national red lists in order to measure trends in the status of their species. In order to support this rapidly growing need, the SSC National Red Listing Working Group, in collaboration with ZSL, convened a meeting in London in September 2009. It was

22

agreed that the SSC and GSP need to establish a proactive training initiative to help countries develop and enhance their national red listing programmes, and to develop improved means of incorporating data from national red lists into the global IUCN Red List. This work has started with the training programme being generously supported by the MAVA Foundation. Another very important new development was the launch of a joint SSC-ZSL website on which information on national red lists from around the world can be found – see http://www.nationalredlist.org/site.aspx. The update of the IUCN Red List in November 2011 focused on the results of the European Red List assessments funded by the European Commission. The results reveal that in Europe at least: 44% of all freshwater molluscs; 37% of all freshwater fish; 23% of all amphibians; 20% of selected terrestrial molluscs; 19% of all reptiles; 15% of all dragonflies; 11 % of a selection of saproxylic beetles; 9% of all butterflies; and 467 of the 1805 vascular plant species assessed are threatened.

e) The neglected taxa: Prominence of hitherto under-represented marine, freshwater, plants and invertebrate species conservation issues increased in the global conservation community. Fungi must be the most neglected of all the neglected taxonomic groups in the conservation world. However, during this quadrennium fungal conservation in the SSC has had a boost, and we now have five specialist groups: Chytrids, Zygomycetes, Downy Mildews and Slime Moulds; Cup Fungi, Truffles and Allies; Lichens; Mushrooms, Brackets and Puffballs; and Rusts and Smuts. A historic first SSC Fungal Conservation Meeting took place in Whitby, UK, in October 2009 to plan the activities of the new SSC fungi network. Despite this, fungi remain hardly represented on the IUCN Red List, and there is much work still to be done. We have seen a large increase in the number of well-documented plant Red List assessments over the quadrennium, including endemic species from South Africa, the Caucasus, the Eastern Arc in East Africa, and New Caledonia. The Cactus and Succulent Specialist Group is making very good headway with their Global Cactus Assessment. The Cycad Specialist Group completed its second assessment of every cycad species. We also completed the first ever Red List assessments of every species of sea-grass and mangrove, and are well on the way to completing the second assessment of every species of conifer. Work is also underway to complete the magnolia assessments and include them into the Red List. A major activity has been the Sampled Red List Index (SRLI) project, the plant component of which is being implemented by the RBGK. Huge progress has been made on this during the quadrennium, with representative samples being assessed of all the major plant groups. Preliminary results have already been published by RBGK, and these will shortly be included on the IUCN Red List – for the first time giving us an overall picture of the status of the plant kingdom. A number of important and exciting new marine assessments have been completed, including on sea-snakes, lobsters, and commercial sea-cucumbers. Work is ongoing on the cone shells and the squids, cuttlefishes, octopuses and nautiloids. Most of the attention, however, has been on the marine fishes, several groups of which (including all the sharks, rays and skates, groupers, wrasses, tunas, billfishes, angelfishes, butterflyfishes, parrotfishes, croakers, surgeonfishes, and hagfishes and some of the blennioids, and seabreams) have now been completed. Some of the fish assessments have been conducted on a regional basis, with the Mediterranean and Eastern Tropical Pacific so far completed, and work is ongoing in the Gulf of Mexico. In 2011 an important paper was published in Science on the tuna and billfish assessment showing that the level of threat of these is strongly correlated with generation length and market price. A particularly major achievement took place in September 2010 with the completion of the Red List assessment of African freshwater species. This was the culmination of five years of work, led by the GSP Freshwater Biodiversity Unit (FBU), working with several SSC Specialist Groups. During this project, 5,167 African freshwater species were assessed by 200 scientists. These included all known African freshwater fish, molluscs, crabs, dragonflies and damselflies, and selected families of aquatic plants. Many of the species included are of great economic importance, and even the loss of a single species could have a dramatic impact on human livelihoods. For example, in Lake Malawi, a group of fish, known as ‘chambo’ by locals, forms an extremely important source of food. Of these, Oreochromis karongae, an Endangered species, has been hugely overfished, with an estimated 70% reduction in the population over the past ten years. In Lake Victoria, a decline in water quality and the introduction of the Nile Perch (Lates

23

http://www.nationalredlist.org/site.aspx

niloticus) have caused a reduction in many native species over the past thirty years, threatening traditional fisheries. This IUCN Red List assessment studied 191 fish species in Lake Victoria and found that 45% are threatened or thought to be extinct. Around the great lakes of Africa, fish provide the main source of protein and livelihoods for many of the continent’s poorest people. The livelihoods of an estimated 7.5 million people in sub-Saharan Africa depend on inland fisheries. These new data in the Red List will be invaluable in helping to safeguard these fisheries, freshwater supplies and the many other associated resources. Priority areas of highly threatened and range-restricted African freshwater species can now be identified. For example, in the waters of the crater-lake Barombi Mbo in Cameroon, 11 species of fish are highly threatened and live a precarious existence as deforestation increases the risk of lake ‘burping’, where large levels of carbon dioxide are released from deep within the lake suffocating the fish. Without management intervention these species, some of which are important food sources, may be lost forever. Fish are clearly important to people, both as a source of food and income. But other freshwater species such as molluscs, dragonflies, crabs and aquatic plants also play vital roles in maintaining functioning wetlands and these should not be ignored. In the rapids of the lower reaches of the Congo River 11 species of mollusc, found only within a 100km stretch of water, are highly threatened due to upstream pollution. Molluscs such as these provide important functions including water filtration. The results of the African freshwater assessments are published and analysed in an outstanding IUCN publication, The Diversity of Life in Freshwaters: Underwater, Under Threat, in 2011. The freshwater assessments have now expanded into Asia, in part due to a very successful fundraising collaboration between Conservation International and the FBU. Other important freshwater assessments were completed during the quadrennium: crayfishes (over 500 species); sturgeon (for which a shocking 85% of species are threatened, and 63% are Critically Endangered (some possibly already Extinct)); and several groups from the Eastern Himalayas: dragonflies, molluscs and freshwater fishes. In general this work is also impressively highlighting the links between species and people, an often neglected consideration. The zoological side of the SRLI project is run by ZSL, and among others they have completed assessments of random samples of 1,500 dragonfly species and 1,500 reptile species. ZSL is also working on SRLI samples of butterflies, and has also driven some comprehensive assessments of various invertebrate groups. ZSL convened the Foundations of Biodiversity conference in February 2010, focusing attention on all neglected groups of animals, fungi and plants.

f) Population level monitoring: Trends and distribution of selected species assessed at population level. Several SSC Specialist Groups have continued the important work of monitoring trends of populations of species. The longest running and most sophisticated of these is the African Elephant Database (AED), run by the African Elephant Specialist Group. Plans have been completed to expand this into the African and Asian Elephant Database in collaboration with the Asian Elephant Specialist Group. Both rhino specialist groups have continued to keep a close watch on rhino population numbers, and the African Rhino Specialist Group updated the population numbers for Black and White Rhinos at its meeting in South Africa in March 2011. The Crocodile Specialist Group, in collaboration with UNEP-WCMC, developed a new database of African crocodile population surveys. Most of the specialist groups dealing with large animals are doing population monitoring at least at some level, and the possibility of building this into a more formal process within the SSC is being considered.

g) Analysis of threats to biodiversity: Impacts of major drivers of biodiversity loss analysed and utilized to develop solutions, especially in relation to emerging issues. In 2009 we published Wildlife in a Changing World, a beautifully produced analysis of the 2008 Red List. This is the most recent, comprehensive global analysis to emerge from the Red List, and it covers all of the major biomes and threatening processes. I have done some more specific work on particular drivers of biodiversity loss, as indicated in the following paragraphs. The SSC Marine Conservation Sub-Committee (MCSC) has laid the groundwork for a proposed SSC bycatch initiative. Review papers have been prepared on bycatch of both marine and freshwater fishes, and of marine invertebrates, all showing that this is a very serious, growing, and largely unregulated threat. It is hoped that the bycatch initiative can be fully launched in the next quadrennium. The MCSC, together with our new Coral Specialist Group, has also focused on the disturbing evidence that the future of coral reefs is bleak unless atmospheric carbon dioxide levels can be reduced to below 350 parts per million (ppm). Given that the current level is approaching

24

400 ppm and rising, and that the international negotiators at this time seem unable to agree on measures that would stabilize the level even at 450 ppm, it is clear that we are heading to a catastrophe which could wipe out an entire marine ecosystem, with untold impacts in terms of species extinctions, and serious loss of human livelihoods. The practical response to this threat is proving elusive, but the SSC will continue to collaborate with others to explore options for increasing the resilience of corals, at least in local situations, in order to buy more time in the hope that the international negotiations will deliver much-needed results. The Invasive Species Specialist Group (ISSG) has continued to be very active, working with the Invasive Species Initiative in the GSP. The ISSG is currently working with the Red List Unit (RLU) in the GSP to redevelop the Global Invasive Species Database, with a particular view to integrating it more closely with the IUCN Red List, and to make it more useful in facilitating early warning and rapid response actions in relation to invasives. The ISSG has also maintained the Aliens list serve (allowing enquirers to seek solutions from experts on invasive species problems that they face), published Aliens newsletter, and featured an Invasive Species of the Week on its website. In 2011 the SSC established a joint task force with the IUCN Commission on Ecosystem Management (CEM) on systemic pesticides. These systemic pesticides have been implicated in the decline of a number of groups of invertebrates, including pollinators such as honey bees. A number of environmental groups have called for neonicotinoid pesticides to be banned, but these calls have been strongly contested by the industry. The SSC and CEM are therefore reviewing the scientific evidence in depth with a view to determining the true environmental impacts of systemic pesticides.

h) Biodiversity Indicators: Status and trend of biodiversity, and effectiveness of conservation actions, monitored over time through selected species indices and indicators. During the IYB the world had to examine its progress against the CBD’s 2010 Biodiversity Target to reduce the rate of biodiversity loss. The SSC participated fully in this process (through our involvement in the 2010 Biodiversity Indicators Partnership), in particular through the Red List Index (RLI). The results of all the official indicators of the CBD Target, including the RLI, were published in 2010 in the 3rd Global Biodiversity Outlook (GBO-3), and summarised in an important paper published in Science entitled “Global Biodiversity: Indicators of Recent Declines”. The results showed that the rate of biodiversity loss is not slowing, while the pressures on biodiversity are growing rapidly. But most worrying of all, the rate of increase in responses to these pressures has slowed since 2002 when the Target was set. In other words, the gap between the pressures and the responses is widening, and the only possible result of this is acceleration in biodiversity loss and species extinctions, with growing risks to human wellbeing – unless of course the new CBD Strategic Plan is implemented with urgency. GBO-3 also showed the importance of IUCN knowledge products, and the IUCN Red List in particular, for the development of indicators to measure status and trends in biodiversity. The most meaningful indicator of the benefits of biodiversity to people, for instance, the ‘food and medicine indicator’, is based on The IUCN Red List. During CBD COP10, a major paper was published in Science, “The Impact of Conservation on the Status of the World’s Vertebrates”. The SSC and GSP led on this paper, which had 175 authors. The headline message of the paper was that, although the status of biodiversity continues to deteriorate, focused conservation efforts do work and have a measurable effect on the RLI globally. Conservation now needs to be scaled up! We are working on developing improved methods for measuring the impact of conservation on species, and hope to publish these in the next quadrennium.

i) Species Conservation Strategies, Action Plans and Tools: Conservation action for species improved through application of IUCN species specific conservation strategies and action plans and other relevant tools. In the last quadrennium, the SSC Species Conservation Planning Task Force produced a very important set of guidelines, Strategic Planning for Species Conservation, outlining a new SSC approach to conservation planning for species. In this quadrennium I established a new SSC Species Conservation Planning Sub-Committee (SCPSC) to promote the adoption and implementation of the guidelines through the SSC Specialist Groups. The work of the SCPSC is being generously supported by the EAD and the Al Ain Zoo. The SSC has now adopted a new process through which we will endorse species conservation plans, and I now

25

expect to see a number of new SSC-endorsed conservation plans appearing in coming years. Two have already appeared, on the Critically Endangered Golden Mantella, a frog known from a single site in Madagascar, and on the Ethiopian Wolf. In both cases these plans were developed with the local communities and, critically, endorsed by the government. The SCPSC is now starting a programme for mentoring SSC Specialist Groups in species conservation planning, and supporting the Sawfish Action Plan of the Shark Specialist Group, the Asian Wild Buffalo Action Plan of the Asian Wild Cattle Specialist Group, the Brown Howler Monkey Action Plan of the Conservation Breeding (CBSG) and Primate Specialist Groups, and the Djibouti Biodiversity Action Plan (involving the IUCN Eastern and Southern African Regional Office and the Antelope and Equid Specialist Groups). The partnership between the SCPSC and CBSG is very important when it comes to pushing ahead species conservation planning in the SSC, and CBSG is working with a number of components of the SSC to assist in this regard. Linked in some ways to the species conservation planning process is a new initiative in the SSC to develop guidance for species-level priority setting, and the inaugural workshop for this process took place in Caracas in September 2011. The Re-introduction Specialist Group remained very active advising and guiding re-introduction projects worldwide. Notably, the second and third editions of the excellent series, Global Re-introduction Perspectives, were published in 2010 and 2012 respectively. This second issue contained 72 case-studies and the third issue had 50 case-studies. These include re-introduction projects for invertebrates, fish, amphibians, reptiles, birds, mammals and plants. The joint work of Re-introduction and Invasive Species Specialist Groups to revise the IUCN Re-introduction Guidelines and Policy Statement on the Translocation of Living Organisms has been a major activity this quadrennium and it is hoped that this work will be completed for the end of 2012. This work has been generously funded by Al Ain Zoo. The new Re-introduction Guidelines will, among others things, develop IUCN policy on options to address climate change, including difficult topics such as assisted colonization. I have continued to address the amphibian extinction crisis, and in the response to Resolution 4.017 (Stopping the Amphibian Crisis) from the IUCN WCC in Barcelona in 2008, an Amphibian Mini-Summit was convened in London in August 2009. Following this meeting we formed a new inter-institutional Amphibian Survival Alliance (ASA), and six institutions and one individual formed the founding group and provided the necessary core funding. I am extremely grateful to all of them. As a result we fundraised for and then appointed the ASA Director and the Chief Scientist in 2011. The priorities for the ASA are the conservation of key sites for amphibians (very many of these fall outside protected areas), and fostering research on threatening processes, especially on the management of the devastating fungal disease, chytridiomycosis. In 2011 we harmonised the SSC’s three initiatives on amphibians: ASA; Amphibian Ark (AArk); and the Amphibian Specialist Group (ASG). AArk has become the ex situ programme of the ASA, and the ASA is now the “host institution” of the ASG. The staff working for ASA, AArk and ASG are now members of a single team. These changes bring about much needed coherence in global amphibian conservation, and as a result of this, a unified approach to fundraising and work planning is now been developed. As a result of the work of ASA, AArk and ASG, twelve national and regional amphibian action plans have been or being developed, 55 threatened species protected in situ (including 22,000 ha of new protected areas), conservation needs have been assessed for 2,435 amphibian species, and ex-situ programmes have been established for 100 threatened species. Another major conservation crisis concerns the rapid declines of large animals in Asia, especially Southeast Asia. This includes most species of large mammals, turtles, and freshwater fishes such as the Mekong Giant Catfish and Chinese Paddlefish; many of these species could go extinct unless action is taken very soon. In collaboration with the Secretariat and various IUCN Members, the SSC is launching a new initiative to address the crisis called Action Asia. There is an especially urgent need for increased law enforcement on the ground in the places where the most threatened species occur. We have started an important collaboration with the European Association of Zoos and Aquariums (EAZA), which invited us to join a major fundraising campaign for Action Asia, starting in September 2011 and running to 2013 to raise funds from the European zoo-going public for the conservation of severely threatened large animals in Southeast Asia. We have had a major focus on the Sumatran and Javan Rhinos, two of the most seriously threatened large mammals on earth. Both of these species now appear to be extinct on the Asia

26

mainland, or almost so, and so their future depends mainly on the conservation of the last few populations in Indonesia. The SSC Asian Rhino Specialist Group, working with the Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS), Taman Safari Indonesia, International Rhino Foundation, Indonesian Rhino Foundation, WWF and the IUCN Asia Regional Office, prepared a statement on these two species which was adopted by the SSC Steering Committee at its meeting in Indonesia in July 2011. On the basis of this statement, I was able to meet with Vice-President Dr Boediono in October 2011 in Jakarta. The Vice President was very receptive to the six urgent recommendations I gave him, and we are anxiously waiting to hear whether or not these proposals will be formally adopted by the government. The SSC has also been involved in many other initiatives in Asia, including advising on the conservation of the Critically Endangered Delacour’s Langur in Vietnam, and on the planned re-introduction of the Cheetah to India. I also participated in the Global Tiger Initiative (GTI), which reached its culmination in November 2010 with the Global Tiger Forum in St Petersburg. This was the first time that five heads of government have come together to agree plans to conserve a single species. The Russian Prime Minister, Vladimir Putin, convened the meeting, which was also attended by the Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao. Significant momentum in tiger conservation was achieved at the meeting, and IUCN will have particular roles to play in future.

j) Area-based conservation planning: Biodiversity conservation action improved through the application of refined area-based conservation planning standards. A joint SSC-WCPA Task Force on Biodiversity and Protected Areas was formed during the quadrennium. Two initial activities have been given to the task force. The first is to carry out a study looking at how well protected areas conserve biodiversity, and what the relationship is between this and the IUCN management categories for protected areas. The second is to develop new criteria for identifying and designating sites of importance for biodiversity, and to run an expert review and consultation process within IUCN to reach consensus on these criteria. Criteria have already been formulated for identifying Key Biodiversity Areas (KBAs), and these will now be subject to extensive review with the aim of reaching global agreement on a new system (the final name might change from KBAs). Through the generosity of the MAVA Foundation, we have appointed a new member of staff to support the Task Force in its work on developing the “KBA” criteria. The task force has appointed leaders for the following working groups: Criteria and Thresholds; Delineation; Documentation, Validation and Endorsement; Application; and Ecosystems. Other working groups might yet be formed. The consultation process started with a workshop in Auckland in December 2011 at the Society for Conservation Biology’s Annual Meeting. The next step will be an over-arching workshop during 2012 to complete the process design and to ensure buy-in from all the major communities that we need to have behind the new IUCN standard for “KBAs”, already recognized as needing to develop into an IUCN flagship knowledge product.

k) Species Information Service: A state-of-the-art Species Information Service in place, for managing and disseminating species information and incorporating general biodiversity, sustainable use, economic and livelihood issues. The Species Information Service (SIS) is the underlying software for the IUCN Red List. A major advance took place in January 2012 when SIS version 2 was launched, with a dedicated back-end database ensuring data integrity and stability. The SIS now has 3,000 users worldwide. The SSC, GSP and Red List Partners have 800 active accounts between them. This gives an idea of the scientific network that lies behind the Red List. Many further advances to the SIS are under development, including incorporating more data relating to human livelihoods. Another important advance is the new Red List map browser, released in December 2011, designed to facilitate the exploration and visualization of species distribution ranges, and to overlay them with other datasets such as protected areas. The significant advances in our software have been possible due to generous support from the MAVA Foundation and others. We have also taken concrete steps to integrate The IUCN Red List with the joint UNEP-WCMC World Database on Protected Areas. Closely related to the improvements in the SIS, the SSC Standards and Petitions Sub-Committee (SPSC) and Red List Technical Working Group (RLTWG) have continued to work through a range of issues relating to the Red List, the data standards and definitions, the documentation requirements, and the implications of all of this for the underlying software – the SIS. Among the outputs of this work are the Guidelines for Using the IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria, which have been updated annually by the SPSC, the most recent version being 9.0 dated September 2011. The RLTWG, working with the GSP, has been leading a very important SSC-wide

27

consultation process on revising the documentation standards for the Red List. The aim is to have broad consensus on the revised standards, ready to come into force at the beginning of the next IUCN quadrennium. The RLTWG also worked on proposing changes to the Red List peer review system, and reviewing the rules for re-assessing species. The development of the software is taking into account the future IUCN Red List of Threatened Ecosystems (RLE) to ensure that it will be fully integrated with the existing species Red List. The RLE is being led by the CEM, with the support of the SSC, and with funding from the MAVA Foundation and the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation.

l) Biodiversity and climate change: Biodiversity considerations introduced into emerging global or regional policies in the energy production sector. Due to lack of resources, the SSC has not been able to prioritize work on this Key Species Result. The results of our analyses of the impacts of climate change on species (see (n) below) are, however, an essential basis for incorporating biodiversity considerations into policies in the energy production sector.

m) Biodiversity conservation and carbon off-set schemes: Carbon offset and carbon credit trading schemes used to enhance biodiversity conservation, especially for plants and other carbon fixing species. Due to lack of resources, the SSC has not been able to prioritize work on this Key Species Result. The results of our analyses of the impacts of climate change on species (see (n) below) are, however, an essential basis for incorporating biodiversity considerations into carbon offset and carbon trading schemes.

n) Response of species to climate change: Impacts of climate change on species and the response of species to climate change documented, analysed and taken into account in public and private sector adaptation policies and practices at global and regional levels. We have continued our work to develop a traits-based approach to assessing species’ vulnerability to climate change, having tested the approach on birds, amphibians and corals. I expect the final details of this to be published in a peer-reviewed journal before the end of 2012 in a paper entitled “Climate change susceptibility of the world’s birds, amphibians and corals”. This will become a new approach to assessing the impacts of climate change on species, in addition to climate-envelope modelling which is already widely used. Meanwhile, we are already pioneering our new methodology with economically valuable species in the Albertine Rift region of central Africa with a view to gaining insights on how climate change might impact the livelihoods of populations dependent on wild species. This work has been funded by the MacArthur Foundation. In response to IUCN Resolution 4.016 (Development of climate change guidelines for IUCN Red List assessments) from the WCC in Barcelona in 2008, the SPSC completed interim climate change guidelines from the Red List in early 2010. The SPSC is working on more detailed, definitive guidelines, this requires some detailed modelling and is proceeding more slowly than I would like because of limited funding. In 2011 I established a new SSC Climate Change Task Force (CCTF), and this will guide our future work on climate change, working solely with the Climate Change Unit in the GSP. I am very grateful to WCS for their support of the CCTF.

o) Biodiversity and energy production: Biodiversity considerations introduced into emerging global or regional policies in the energy production sector (especially biofuels). Due to lack of resources, the SSC has not been able to prioritize work on this Key Species Result. We did, however, nominate experts to sit on the Independent Advisory Panel on the “Remediation and Rehabilitation of Biodiversity and Habitats of Oil Spill Sites in the Niger Delta” and participated in the IUCN-Shell Biofuels Workshop held in Switzerland in 2011. Additionally we make Red List data available to help guide the work of the energy production sector (see (u) below). Our other link to this work comes from the development of conservation planning tools such as the KBA standard to inform decision making regarding where, for instance, to develop oil palm plantations in a way that minimizes the destruction of biodiversity.

p) Biodiversity and development strategies: Biodiversity and livelihoods considerations fully reflected in development strategies and policies (such as the Precautionary Principles, aid agency policies, National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans and Poverty Reduction Strategies). Due to lack

28

of resources, the SSC has not been able to prioritize work on this Key Species Result. However, work on a number of other Key Species Results is relevant here, for example (b) above and (s) below.

q) Vulnerability to natural hazards: Regional and national environmental management strategies to reduce vulnerability to natural hazards influenced by sound analyses of the relationship between species and human livelihoods. Due to lack of resources, the SSC has not so far been able to prioritize work on this Key Species Result.

r) Human wildlife interaction: Livelihoods of people and species conservation enhanced through improved human-wildlife interactions. Work on this area was called for in Resolution 4.039 (Cross-Commission Collaboration on Sustainable Use of Biological Resources) from the WCC in Barcelona in October 2008. In October 2009 I convened a meeting with the Chair of the IUCN Commission on Environmental, Economic and Social Policy (CEESP) to plan our future work on sustainable use and human-wildlife interactions. At this meeting it was decided that we could not advance major new initiatives on both topics simultaneously, and so we prioritized sustainable use, on which we already had more capacity. I expect a great focus on human-wildlife interactions in the 2013–2016 quadrennium. However, a number of SSC Specialist Groups have continued to work in this area as part of their regular business.

s) Species values for ecosystem goods and services: Species-related ecosystem goods and services evaluated and analysed. In the coming year I expect to devote greater efforts to examining the links between species and human well-being. In the race between conservation and development it is very clear that we need to identify and raise awareness of the importance of species to people’s livelihoods and to national economies. In an effort to assist this process for wetlands we have developed “An Integrated Wetland Assessment Toolkit” which provides a methodology and case studies to determine the full value of a wetland in terms of its biodiversity, economic value, and importance to peoples’ livelihoods, thus filling an important methodological gap. You can find the report at: www.iucn.org/species/IWAToolkit.

t) Biodiversity and food production: Biodiversity considerations introduced into emerging policies in the food production sector (agriculture, fisheries, and aquaculture). Due to lack of resources, the SSC has not so far been able to prioritize work on this Key Species Result. However, the SSC Marine Conservation Sub-Committee (MCSC) is in the process of developing new programmes of work, one on engagement with Regional Fisheries Management Organizations (RFMOs), and one on bycatch, and these will be relevant to the fisheries and aquaculture sectors. A number of SSC Specialist Groups, including the Shark, Grouper and Wrasse, and Tuna and Billfish Specialist Groups, continue to engage to fisheries policy issues to help ensure sustainability, and eliminate threats from bycatch. Also, the SSC-CEM Task Force on Systemic Pesticides (see (g) above) will probably engage with the agriculture sector in the 2013–2016 quadrennium. We also have an active SSC Crop Wild Relatives Specialist Group carrying out work that is critical to the future of food security, and this we be a growing priority for IUCN in the next quadrennium.

u) Species information for private sector: Species information contributed to reduce the negative impacts and strengthen the benefits of offsets in industries and, where relevant, their products on biodiversity, and to the development of biodiversity strategies in the private sector. In June 2010, IUCN formally joined the Integrated Biodiversity Assessment Tool (IBAT) Partnership, together with BirdLife International, CI and UNEP-WCMC. IBAT brings the IUCN Red List, the World Database on Protected Areas, Important Bird Areas, and Key Biodiversity Areas into a single online tool. The specific website “IBAT for Business” supports the private sector, development banks and others in making sound decisions that take full regard of the available conservation-related data. I have done a lot of work to put IBAT on a secure financial footing through subscriptions from corporations, and this is progressing well. I am also very grateful to the MacArthur Foundation for providing much-valued bridging funds to support IBAT for 2011–2012 while adequate subscription income becomes available. In addition to the IBAT Partnership, I have also worked directly with a number of businesses on the provision of species information to support their decision making.

v) Use of wild living resources: Sustainable harvest and trade of wild living resources are promoted and adopted through cooperation with relevant parts of the private and public sector. As

29

mentioned in (r) above, in response to Resolution 4.039 I convened, together with the Chair of CEESP, a workshop in October 2009 to plan our future work on sustainable use. At this meeting it was agreed that the SSC’s existing Sustainable Use Specialist Group (SUSG) would form the basis for a SSC/CEESP group (the final name of which will be agreed in 2012). I have devoted significant energies to securing core funding for the new “SUSG”, and I am most grateful to EAD for their generous support which has allowed us to proceed with a recruitment process for the new Chair, who was appointed in December 2011. Already, I am very excited to see our sustainable use activities picking up speed, and to see this happen as a CEESP/SSC collaboration. The SSC of course remains very active on sustainable use issues through a number of its Specialist Groups, such as the South American Camelid and Crocodile SGs. One particular initiative with which I have been involved is being led by Rich Harris of the Caprinae SG on conservation hunting in China, in close collaboration with the Chinese State Forestry Administration. From this a number of new initiatives are expected to flow, including a more in-depth collaboration with China in improving conservation hunting, and a new process to develop new SSC guidelines on trophy hunting for conservation. The Plant Conservation Sub-Committee (PCSC) has been prioritizing species groups of high economic value for Red List assessments (including timber trees, medicinal plants and crop wild relatives).

Governance 6. The SSC has continued to enjoy strong governance as follows:

a) Participation on Council by the SSC Chair. Simon Stuart attended all Council meetings in the

2009–2012 intersessional period and served on the Programme and Policy Committee, and the Climate Change and IPBES Working Groups. My performance as Chair was appraised by the President (as per Regulation 78.c). As part of my duties I undertook a strategic analysis of the evolution of IUCN’s budget since 2000 in order to gain insights as to the types of information that the Council requires in order to discharge its oversight responsibilities with regard to the budget, specifically to ensure that investments are made to deliver the highest priority results in the IUCN Programme. I also developed a paper for the May 2011 Council meeting to start the process for preparing the World Species Congress in 2015 (as per Resolution 4.019 (World Species Congress)). This paper was accepted by Council, and the Director General has since written to all IUCN State Members inviting expressions of interest in hosting the Congress.

b) SSC Steering Committee. The regionally balanced Steering Committee consisted of 21

global leaders in the species conservation community, with seven institutional observers from major conservation organizations. The SSC Steering Committee met five times during the quadrennium: Switzerland (June 2009), Venezuela (January 2010), Switzerland (December 2010), Indonesia (July 2011), and Abu Dhabi (February 2012). In addition to its regular work of governing the Commission, the Steering Committee conducted a performance appraisal of the SSC Chair in 2011, and also led the process to receive nominations from SSC members for the position of SSC Chair in the 2013–2016 IUCN quadrennium. The SSC Deputy Chair has handled these activities with great discretion and professionalism.

c) SSC Sub-Committees. The SSC has operated seven sub-committees to address major

areas of work that are too large to be managed by the Steering Committee on its own. The Freshwater, Invertebrate, Marine and Plant Conservation Sub-Committees have each met three times. They represent the interests of their respective components of the SSC Network, help to prioritize their work and improve their strategic engagement with the SSC and other parts of IUCN. The Species Conservation Planning Sub-Committee is assisting the SSC Specialist Groups to move beyond Red Listing to plan for species conservation (see (i) above). The Red List Committee oversees the strategic development of the IUCN Red List, and the Standards and Petitions Sub-Committee acts as the independent “supreme court” over the Red List, handling petitions against listing, and maintaining the Red List Guidelines.

d) Specialist Groups, Red List Authorities and Task Forces. The SSC currently has 105

Specialist Groups (SGs). Most of these have a taxonomic focus, but five are disciplinary:

30

Conservation Breeding; Invasive Species; Reintroductions; Sustainable Use; and Wildlife Health. There are 17 Stand-alone Red List Authorities (RLAs), and a further 71 RLAs within SGs. The SSC also has three Task Forces: one on Biodiversity and Protected Areas shared with WCPA; one on Systemic Pesticides (shared with CEM); and one on Climate Change (CCTF). I established 15 new groups during the quadrennium: Anolid Lizards; Aquatic Plants; Australasian Marsupials and Monotremes; Boas and Pythons; Brazil Plants; Bumblebees; Bustards; Butterflies; Carnivorous Plants; Grasshoppers; New World Marsupials; Pangolins; Small Mammals; Vipers; and Vultures. During the quadrennium we had leadership transitions in 12 groups: African Rhinos; Arabian Plants; Bison; Conservation Breeding; Dragonflies; Flamingos; Marine Invertebrates RLA; Otters; Peccaries; Pelicans; Polar Bears; and Tortoises and Freshwater Turtles. In the case of the Flamingo and Otter Specialist Groups, the transitions were sadly necessitated by the deaths of the incumbent chairs. In early 2011 I signed a new agreement with Wetlands International (WI) governing the 13 SGs shared between the SSC and WI, and broadening the collaboration more generally between the two organizations. The great mass of work carried out by the SSC is done by the SGs, RLAs and TFs – too much to be reported on here. The number of SSC members is constantly changing, but at the end of 2011 it stood at around 8,000.

e) Second SSC Chairs’ Meeting. Thanks to the extraordinary generosity of the EAD and the

Mohamed bin Zayed Species Conservation Fund (MBZ), the second ever SSC Chairs’ meeting was held in Abu Dhabi on 23–27 February 2012. About 260 SSC leaders took part, including all SG and TF Chairs and Stand-alone RLA Focal Points, all SSC Steering Committee and Sub-committee members, many GSP staff, senior managers from IUCN headquarters, all IUCN regional offices, all Red List Partners, and representatives of all of the other IUCN Commissions. This was an unprecedented opportunity to plan for the 2013–2016 quadrennium and for the World Species Congress, as well as forging new alliances within the SSC, and between the SSC and other parts of IUCN. Specifically, this meeting was an opportunity to:

• To allow the SSC leaders to get to know each other better and to develop new

collaborations • To develop partnerships with IUCN Commissions, Programmes, Regional Offices,

Members and partners • To learn about new products and tools • To complete plans for SSC’s work in 2013–2016 • To develop major new global and regional initiatives • To plan for the 2015 World Species Congress • To consult on developing policies, guidelines and standards • To thank the SSC Chairs for all their hard work A variety of different sessions were held, including: • Plenary sessions dealing with major topics of broad interest • Workshops (for example on global and regional initiatives, international conventions,

new tools and training, etc.) • Working Group to plan for the World Species Congress in 2015 • Networking (market-place sessions with IUCN regions, SSC sub-committees, SSC

disciplinary Specialist Groups and other Commissions) • Consultations (to develop new IUCN and SSC policies and guidelines) • Informal networking and mixers

The formal report of this extremely important meeting will be circulated prior to the World

Conservation Congress in Korea. f) SSC Awards. SSC’s highest honour, the Peter Scott Award for Conservation Merit, was

given to five people during the quadrennium: Raoul du Toit for this pioneering work on the conservation of both rhinos in Zimbabwe; the late Sue Mainka for her work on conserving the Giant Panda, leading the IUCN Species Programme, and encouraging conservationists in Asia; Martin Brooks for his long and effective service as Chair of the African Rhino Specialist Group; Anders Rhodin for his leadership of the Tortoise and Freshwater Turtle Specialist

31

Group; and Luigi Boitani for his dedicated service to SSC in numerous roles over a forty-year period. I established the new George Rabb Award for Conservation Innovation, generously funded by former SSC Chair George Rabb himself. The first two recipients are Bob Lacy and Resit Akçakaya for their ground-breaking work on population viability assessment, and the handling of uncertainty in making consistent Red List assessments. The Harry Messel Award for Conservation Leadership was given to six people: Viola Clausnitzer; Richard Emslie; Sonja Fordham; Dave Garshelis; Barbara Goettsch; and Alexine Keuroghlian. The SSC Chairs Citation of Excellence was given to 14 people/groups: the Freshwater Biodiversity Unit in the GSP; Frédéric Launay; Gabriela Lichtenstein; Patricia Moehlman; Sanjay Molur; Caroline Pollock; Randy Reeves; the Sampled Red List Index for Plants Project at the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew; Jane Smart; Andrew Smith; Pritpal Singh Soorae; Jean-Christophe Vié; Grahame Webb; and Doreen Zivkovic.

g) Recognizing SSC Members. In addition to the awards mentioned above, the Steering

Committee felt that we are not recognizing long-serving, hard-working SSC members appropriately. Accordingly, I decided to re-establish the SSC Roll of Honour, which includes a very limited number of people who have made extraordinary leadership contributions to the Commission. The Roll previously included HRH Prince Bernhard, Lieut. Col. C.L. Boyle, Richard Fitter, Maisie Fitter, Kai Curry-Lindahl, Boonsong Lekagul, Ian Grimwood, Grenville Lucas, and Alexey Yablokov. The new members of the Roll of Honour agreed by Steering Committee are: Sir Peter Scott; George Rabb; Ralph Daly; Lee Talbot; and Hal Coolidge. I am also establishing a new category of SSC Distinguished Service Members (DSM), and we are currently going through a very large task to identify all those who have served the SSC in important roles over the last 30 years, in order to identify DSM candidates. I hope to make these DSM appointments before the end of the quadrennium.

Communications 7. We have enjoyed some very successful publicity during the quadrennium. Almost all of our Red

List update launches have been accompanied by significant media coverage. This was especially the case during CBD COP10 when a Red List launch took place simultaneously with the release of our Science paper “The Impact of Conservation on the Status of the World’s Vertebrates” (see (h) above). We also gained important public profile with a number of other media releases, for example when we ran a story in February 2011 provided by the SSC Lagomorph Specialist Group to mark the start of the Chinese Year of the Rabbit. Our most prominent contribution to raising the profile of the IYB was Species of the Day, implemented with the support of UNEP and Wildscreen. We had a different species account for every day of 2010, each with text, a photograph and a map. Species of the Day was placed on the IUCN Red List website, and generated enormous interest among the public, with over 600 other websites and blogs linked to it, and over 4,000 followers on Twitter. From 2011 onwards we have continued these popular species accounts on a weekly basis, called Amazing Species. We also developed a partnership with HarperCollins publishers to produce a beautiful book, based on almost all of the 2010 Species of the Day profiles. The book, Species on the Edge of Survival, appeared in bookshops in September 2011. The IUCN Red List website continues to enjoy a very high visitor rate, which has been climbing to about 15,000 unique visitors per day, with occasional peaks of nearly 30,000. This is probably IUCN’s most visible window to the outside world, the visitor rate to the Red List website being much higher than to the main IUCN website itself. With the generous support of Rolex, we are now developing a popular interface for the Red List website. We have undertaken a major upgrade and improvement of the species pages on the IUCN website, and this went live in February 2012, with greatly improved presentation and navigation.

Finances and Fundraising 8. The SSC Commission Operations Fund (COF) is insufficient for the governance needs of the

Commission and the Office of the SSC Chair. The SSC COF has decreased from CHF 297,000 to 268,000 per annum over this intersessional period due to the overall decrease in core funding available to IUCN. Likewise, the core funds allocated to the GSP do not cover even the core functions of maintaining the Red List standards, producing the annual Red List, or providing the

32

necessary support to the Commission, and have decreased from over CHF 1,000,000 per annum to less than CHF 800,000 per annum. External donor funds for the programmatic contribution of the SSC must therefore be raised from external sources. I have been successful in increasing significantly the project funding available to the SSC and GSP. As mentioned in the Introduction, the highlight of the quadrennium was the signing of a new framework agreement between the SSC and the EAD which provides extremely generous and much-needed funding support for key aspects of our work, notably the SUSG, Red List training, Red List assessments in the West Asian region, developing links between the Red List and the GISD, assistance to Specialist Groups in Species Conservation Planning, developing criteria for “KBAs”, developing Action Asia, and completing the Red List assessments of cacti, conifers and magnolias. The other major highlight was the establishment of the Save Our Species (SOS) Fund, supported to the tune of US$10 million by the Global Environment Facility (GEF) and the World Bank, with the first matching funding so far raised from Nokia and the French Government. The SOS Secretariat has been established in the GSP, and an SSC SOS Working Group is advising the SOS Donor Council on funding priorities and is screening funding applications. The first public call for SOS proposals was issued in July 2011 for conservation projects on amphibians, threatened large animals in Asia and Africa, and Critically Endangered birds. Over 400 proposals were received, of which 23 were eventually funded. I have also had extremely generous financial support from numerous other supporters, including the MAVA Foundation, CI, the European Commission, the New Hampshire Charitable Foundation, the US State Department, the MacArthur Foundation, the Government of France, Rolex and numerous others, as well as the support to the SSC Chairs’ Office (see Introduction), and the essential in-kind support from the Red List Partners.

Acknowledgements 9. It is impossible to thank by name here all of the many people and institutions who have made it

possible for the SSC and GSP to function so well this quadrennium. We have had enormous support from many quarters, and I am most grateful for all of it, especially the thousands of SSC members who give their time free of charge, and our many wonderful donors. However, I close by thanking the EAD’s Director General, Ms Razan Khalifa Al-Mubarak for her extraordinarily generous support of the SSC. I would also like to name Jon Paul Rodríguez, Frédéric Launay, Russ Mittermeier, George Rabb, Jane Smart and Jean-Christophe Vié as outstanding colleagues. I thank all of the GSP staff, too numerous to mention, and the excellent staff in the SSC Chair’s Office: Mike Hoffmann (Senior Scientific Officer); Rachel Roberts (Executive Assistant); Jeremy Harris (Development Director); Katharine Holmes (intern); and Jennifer Luedtke (intern).

33



Proposed Mandates for IUCN Commissions for the period 2013–16 Action Requested: The World Conservation Congress is requested to APPROVE the Mandates for the IUCN Commissions for the period 2013–2016 proposed by the IUCN Council. Background 1. According to Article 74 of the IUCN Statutes, the “World Congress shall establish Commissions

and determine their mandates, which shall be within the IUCN Programme. The Council may propose to the World Congress the creation, abolition, or subdivision of a Commission, or amendment of a Commission’s mandate. [...]”. IUCN Regulation 69 provides that “the mandate of each Commission, including name, mission and terms of reference, shall be established by the World Congress”.

2. In addition, IUCN Regulation 70 states that “[...] Any proposals by an IUCN Member concerning

the mission and terms of reference for any Commission shall be communicated to the Members of IUCN at least one hundred and twenty days prior to the ordinary session of the World Congress concerned” – which is 9 May 2012.

3. The draft mandates for the six IUCN Commissions have been approved by Council on the

recommendation of the Commission Chairs and establish clear linkages with the Draft IUCN Programme 2013–16. Council concurred with the recommendation of the Commission Chairs to propose a simplified structure for the mandates focusing on vision, mission, objectives and strategic approach, and Programme priorities, in order to give the newly elected Chairs some room to develop their own Commission strategies as to how to structure and organize the work of their Commission.

34


Commission on Ecosystem Management (CEM)

Draft Mandate 2013–2016

1. Mission To provide expert guidance on integrated approaches to the management of natural and modified ecosystems, in order to promote effective biodiversity conservation and sustainable development. Consequent to the adoption of the “One IUCN Programme” concept, CEM will work closely with the Regional and Global Thematic Programmes at project, country, regional and global levels. Synergies with other Commissions will be a strong component of the CEM strategy. CEM will also work with other partners of IUCN in order to achieve its Mission in line with the overall mission of the Union. 2. Vision Healthy, resilient ecosystems that conserve nature and sustain life. 3. Goal Ecosystem approaches to natural resource management mainstreamed worldwide. 4. Objective To promote the adoption of, and provide guidance for, ecosystem approaches to the management of landscapes and seascapes and build resilience of socio-ecological systems to address global changes. 5. Priorities and expected results The Commission on Ecosystem Management has developed detailed plans for the next intersessional period. CEM will focus on working with the other components of IUCN (Members, other Commissions, Secretariat) to carry out the 2013–2016 Programme, notably through the following priorities: 1. Red List of Ecosystems (RLE). This new development of the 2008–2012 intersessional

programme has raised much enthusiasm among scientists and high expectations among policy makers. It is expected that the methodology will be submitted to Council for approval early in the next intersessional programme (2013) after which the work for a full coverage of the status of the earth ecosystems applying this methodology may start. Our vision is to create the first Red List of Ecosystems of the World prior to 2020, and so contribute to the CBD’s Aichi Biodiversity Target 5 of being able to assess whether “the rate of loss of all natural habitats, including forests, [has been] at least halved and where feasible brought close to zero, and degradation and fragmentation [has been] significantly reduced.”

2. Resilience of Ecosystems and of the communities that depend on their services. The Commission

on Ecosystem Management/Ecosystem Management Programme (EMP) have developed a number of successful initiatives such as Ecosystem Based Adaptation (EBA) to Climate Change, and Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) where IUCN has acquired a leading position. This work needs to be consolidated and developed further. Thematic groups on ecosystem services and on ecosystem restoration will have to play an important role to support the work in resilience. For example, the work of the Fisheries Expert Group provides an innovative view on fisheries, promoting a more balanced harvest across the food-chain to promote more sustainable fisheries and a higher resilience of the fish-stocks.

3. Specific Ecosystems and Biomes oriented activities. CEM will support the activities of EMP in

islands and drylands. CEM will continue to pay attention to the management of specific ecosystems such as steppes, Mediterranean ecosystems, wetlands, etc.

35


4. Emerging issues. Towards the end of the 2008–2012 programme, the need to address the conservation and sustainable management of oases have been identified, as well as the potential impact of seabed mining on island ecosystems. More attention needs to be paid to the aspects of ecosystem management and the private sector, as well as on urban ecosystems.

The table summarises the contribution of each of these products to the proposed intersessional IUCN Programme 2013–2016: CEM/EMP product/theme

Valuing and conserving Nature

Governing Nature’s use and sharing its benefits equitably

Deploying nature-based solutions to global challenges

Red List of Ecosystems +++ Resilience of Ecosystems + +++

Specific Ecosystems oriented actions + ++ ++

Emerging Issues + + +

6. Structure and organization of the Commission (a) Chair, Deputy Chair and Steering Committee The Commission is led by the Chair, who is elected by IUCN Members at Congress. The Chair is

supported by a Deputy Chair and Steering Committee, appointed by the Council on recommendation of the Chair.

The Steering Committee provides leadership and guides the development and implementation of

CEM’s work. The Steering Committee also works to facilitate the establishment of CEM’s thematic groups, identify and initiate fundraising opportunities, strengthen partnerships and promote membership. CEM holds two Steering Committee meetings every year, and where possible does so in conjunction with a related workshop.

(b) Regional Chairs and Theme Leaders Regional Chairs are appointed to achieve a geographical representation that is closely related to

the IUCN Programmatic Regions (which do not necessarily match the IUCN Statutory Regions), as well gender, ethnic and expertise diversity. Regional Chairs liaise with Commission and IUCN members in their region, and with the Regional Secretariat focal points. Regional Chairs provide leadership and guide the development and implementation of CEM’s work within their region. They also promote establishment of regionally-based specialist groups, facilitate membership growth and foster initiatives for training and capacity building in the region.

Theme Leaders direct efforts by interested Commission members for each of the thematic

groups. Thematic groups can be organized around specific ecosystems (e.g. oasis) and instruments and aspects of ecosystem management (e.g. ecosystem restoration).

(c) Members CEM will continue to strengthen its membership to make it more representative in professional,

geographic and gender terms. Members will be encouraged to form thematic groups and task forces to implement the CEM programme and address emerging issues. CEM will promote collaborative work with strategically chosen partners.

(d) HQ and Regional focal points CEM and EMP will operate jointly as two sides of the same coin with the Chair of CEM and the

Head of the Ecosystem Management Programme ensuring the integration of the EMP/CEM programme with other programmes of the Union and with IUCN’s Regional Offices.

36

Commission on Education and Communication

Draft Mandate 2013–2016 Vision A global community that loves and values nature. Mission We enable the global community to effectively communicate and use knowledge to create positive conservation change. Objectives The IUCN Commission on Education and Communication will contribute practical communication, education, capacity development and knowledge management expertise to the IUCN Programme 2013–2016 of (i) valuing and conserving nature; (ii) effective and equitable governance of nature’s use; and (iii) deploying nature-based solutions to global challenges; with the specific objectives listed below:

1. Strategic Plan for Biodiversity Aichi Target 1: Lead IUCN’s work on Aichi Target 1 of the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD)

2. IUCN Capacity Development: Operationalize IUCN’s capacity development to deliver the IUCN Programme

3. Nature-based Solutions to Global Challenges: Promote nature-based solutions within and beyond the conservation community

4. CEC Network Development: Develop a globally active CEC network to support programme implementation

The IUCN Commission on Education and Communication (CEC) has an important role to play in leveraging IUCN’s knowledge and capacities so that these can be clearly communicated and used to achieve IUCN’s programmatic objectives in the 2013–2016 Programme. This will be realized through the CEC working in close collaboration with the IUCN constituency and strategic partners that can help affect change. The CEC will lead IUCN’s work on Aichi Target 1 of the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011–2020 and the Aichi Targets which states: “By 2020, at the latest, people are aware of the values of biodiversity and the steps they can take to conserve and use it sustainably”. This will be undertaken in close collaboration with the CBD Secretariat and other key stakeholders. The CEC will support the operationalization of IUCN’s capacity development work by applying the diverse skill sets of CEC members including curriculum development, knowledge management, e-learning training development, facilitation, multi-stakeholder forum coordination and creative outreach approaches to deliver the IUCN Programme worldwide. The CEC has an important role to play to promote nature-based solutions within and beyond the conservation community so that people are aware of global environmental and developmental challenges, change behaviours and take positive action to address these challenges. CEC will ensure these nature-based solutions are communicated in ways appropriate for the target audiences. The CEC will continue to develop a globally active CEC network of volunteers to support programme implementation, enabling CEC members to offer advice, become directly involved in generating conservation action on the ground and creating opportunities to act as multipliers and enablers of conservation change sought in the IUCN Programme. The network will be supported by the IUCN Secretariat. CEC will demonstrate practical knowledge management approaches, along with social networking and outreach beyond IUCN’s traditional constituencies, such as youth.

37


The CEC will be led by the Chair of the Commission, supported by a Steering Committee and establish an operational structure to realize this mandate. They will be supported by a team from the IUCN secretariat.

38

Commission on Environmental, Economic and Social Policy (CEESP)


1. Vision • A world where equity is at the root of a dynamic harmony between peoples and nature, as well as

among peoples. • A world of diversity, productivity and integrity of natural systems. • A world in which production and consumption patterns are sustainable. • A world where cultural diversity is intertwined with biological diversity and together generate

abundant and sustainable livelihoods opportunities. 2. Mission To contribute to the IUCN Mission by providing insights and expertise and promoting policies and action to harmonize the conservation of nature with the crucial socioeconomic and cultural concerns of human communities—such as livelihoods, human rights and responsibilities, human development, security, equity, and the fair and effective governance and equitable sharing of natural resources. 3. Objectives and strategic approaches CEESP undertakes its Mission primarily through engaging its Members’ policy and field-based expertise to: A. Identify, analyse and learn from policies and practices at the interface between conservation of

nature and the crucial socioeconomic and cultural concerns of human communities, with particular attention to indigenous peoples and local communities.

B. Advance innovative applied research and provide timely responses to environmental and social

crises identified by CEESP members, IUCN Members, Secretariat, Commissions and partners in the field—such as poor or ineffective governance of natural resources, food insecurity, loss of bio-cultural diversity and climate change.

C. Foster a holistic approach to nature conservation across IUCN, embracing complexities and

promoting dialogue and collaborative learning based on cultural and social values and on knowledge and experience from diverse regions, communities, genders and ages.

D. Influence the values, policies and practices of public, private and civil society institutions and

organizations regarding the conservation of nature, the promotion of bio-cultural diversity and the sustainable and equitable use of natural resources and to promote, demonstrate, articulate and link effective and equitable field-based and policy solutions in these areas.

E. Enhance the capacity of IUCN and contribute to implementing the IUCN Programme by

collaborating with the IUCN Secretariat, Commissions and IUCN Members bridging the experience and skills of experts and scientists from diverse cultures.

4. Programme priorities CEESP’s work is focused on the following programme priorities, incorporating the diverse perspectives and experiences of the CEESP membership: 1. Development and promotion of a conservation ethic that supports diverse knowledge systems

and values, delivers rights-based and equitable conservation with improved governance of natural resources and tangible livelihoods benefits, and links biological diversity with the cultural

39


dimensions of nature conservation with a focus on the rights of indigenous peoples and local communities.

2. Increased use of rights-based approaches to natural resource management and governance that

promotes social and cultural equity, indigenous peoples' self-determination, community governance, sustainable livelihoods and human security.

3. Nature-based solutions to global challenges—such as climate change, conversion of forests and

farmland to monocrops, including biofuels projects, food insecurity, poverty, inequitable economic and social development—that are underpinned by economic policies that reinforce sustainability, social equity and environmental integrity.

4. Enhanced capacity of civil society, governments and the private sector to ensure corporate social

and environmental accountability and reduce the negative impact of industries on climate, bio-cultural diversity and food security.

In addition to its own membership, CEESP has formal arrangements with three other IUCN Commissions to deliver jointly aspects of the above priorities relevant to those Commissions, namely the World Commission on Protected Areas (WCPA), the Species Survival Commission (SSC), and the Commission on Environmental Law (CEL). 5. Structure and organization Membership. The Commission has a diversified membership in terms of disciplines, cultures, languages, geographical regions, age and gender, which brings diverse perspectives and experiences to bear in debating, analysing and promoting the issues of concern to its vision and Mission. Membership includes some of the world’s foremost conservation and sustainable development practitioners, natural and social scientists, and traditional community leaders. Experts from major conservation and development organizations and young professionals with proven capacities in sustainable development at the community, national and international levels also provide valuable insights into the work of the Commission. Membership is voluntary and by invitation or through application with the support of two existing Commission members. The broad scope of the Commission requires the extension and strengthening of capacity through increased membership, strategic partnerships, active fundraising and network mobilization.

40

Species Survival Commission


1. Mission In the intersessional period of 2013–2016, the Species Survival Commission (SSC) will continue to play a leading role in enabling IUCN to be the world’s most authoritative voice on behalf of global biodiversity conservation and the sustainability of natural resource use. In particular, SSC and its worldwide network are uniquely placed to enable IUCN to influence, encourage and assist societies throughout the world to conserve the integrity of biodiversity, and to ensure that the use of species is both equitable and sustainable, through the provision of knowledge on biodiversity status and trends, undertaking analyses of threats and facilitating action on the ground. 2. Vision The work of SSC has amended its Vision to: A just world that values and conserves nature through positive action to reduce the loss of diversity of life on earth 3. Goal The overriding Goal of the Commission is: The species extinction crisis and massive loss of biodiversity are universally adopted as a shared responsibility and addressed by all sectors of society taking positive conservation action and avoiding negative impacts worldwide. 4. Objectives For the intersessional period 2013–2016 SSC, working in collaboration with Members, National and Regional Committees, other Commissions and the Secretariat, will pursue the following key objectives in helping to deliver IUCN’s “One Programme” commitment: 1. Assessing and monitoring biodiversity To assess and monitor biodiversity and inform the world about the status and trends of

biodiversity, especially at the species level, thus providing measures for the health of our one and only biosphere.

2. Analysing the threats to biodiversity To analyse and communicate the threats to biodiversity and disseminate information on

appropriate global conservation actions. 3. Facilitating and undertaking conservation action To facilitate and undertake action to deliver biodiversity-based solutions for halting biodiversity

decline and catalyse measures to manage biodiversity sustainably and prevent species’ extinctions both in terms of policy change and action on the ground.

4. Convening expertise for biodiversity conservation To provide a forum for gathering and integrating the knowledge and experience of the world’s

leading experts on species science and management, and promoting the active involvement of subsequent generations of species conservationists.

5. Priorities The specific working priorities of SSC are derived from and focused on the three IUCN Programme Areas:

41


• Programme Area 1: Valuing and conserving nature – the conservation status of species and

ecosystems is improved and their values and benefit to society are recognized • Programme Area 2: Governing nature’s use and sharing its benefits equitably – effective, just and

equitable conservation yields tangible benefits to both wild species and human livelihoods • Programme Area 3: Deploying nature-based solutions to global challenges – global development

challenges (climate, food, economy) are addressed in ways that benefit species and enhance the capacity of biodiversity to contribute to solutions to these challenges

Under these three headings the SSC has developed a set of Key Species Results with measurable targets to be attained by the end of 2016. 6. Structure and organization Based on the By-Laws for the Commission (approved by SSC Steering Committee), the SSC will be structured as follows: (a) Chair and Steering Committee: The Commission administration will be carried out by the Chair

and Deputy Chair with a Steering Committee providing the necessary skills and geographical knowledge to fulfil the Commission Mandate. Each Steering Committee member will be responsible for providing advice to the Chair and Deputy Chair and direction to a portion of the expert volunteer network. The Steering Committee will assist and advise the Chair in formulating policy and setting both strategic and operational directions.

(b) Further standing or temporary Sub-Committees will be formed under the direction of the Chair

and the Steering Committee to oversee areas of special focus or concern, and to advance particular areas of work deemed to be of high priority.

(c) Specialist Groups, Red List Authorities, Task Forces and Working Groups: SSC will

maintain a network of experts volunteering their time through the Commission’s Specialist Groups, Red List Authorities, and Working Groups. Dedicated, time-bound Task Forces will be formed to address key emergent issues. All of the groupings will be organized to provide broad coverage of taxonomic groups of animals and plants, as well as of important threats to biodiversity conservation and key tools to mitigate these threats.

(d) Partners and affiliated institutions: SSC will use strategic alliances and partnerships with key

institutions engaged in relevant activity to deliver key portions of its intersessional programme contribution and its long-term Strategic Plan.

(e) Roll of Honour and Distinguished Service Members: SSC will appoint individuals who have

given long and dedicated service to the Commission to its Roll of Honour, and as Distinguished Service Members.

42

World Commission on Environmental Law (WCEL)

Draft Mandate 2013–2016 1. Mission The mission of the World Commission on Environmental Law (WCEL) is to assure the integrity and conserve the diversity of Nature through the promotion of ethical, legal and institutional concepts and instruments that advance environmental, social, cultural and economic sustainability (hereafter “sustainability”) and to strengthen the capacity of governments, the judiciary, prosecutors, and other stakeholders as they develop and implement environmental law. 2. Vision WCEL’s vision is to ensure that environmental law contributes universally to enabling a just society that values and conserves Nature, affirming the rule of law, and to providing vital environmental stewardship systems for all levels of governance, including communities, as they work toward ecological sustainability. 3. Goal WCEL’s goal is to influence, encourage and assist societies throughout the world to employ environmental law for restoring, conserving and sustaining Nature, and assuring that uses of natural resources are equitable and ecologically sustainable, through: a) Advancing national, regional and international legal and administrative instruments that are

grounded in environmental ethics and further ecological sustainability; b) Conducting research to strengthen environmental law and undertaking capacity building to enable

governments and stakeholders to actively participate in the international governance debate; c) Cooperating for the implementation of coordinated laws through institutions that respect the rule

of law, and to ensure effective compliance and enforcement; and d) Providing a central world forum for integration of environmental law into all aspects of

governance, and for extending professional and expert networks dedicated to the legal foundations of ecological sustainability.

4. Objectives WCEL will pursue its objectives in concert with the integrated programme of activities adopted by the World Conservation Congress in the Union’s Programme 2013–2016, and in cooperation with the Members and components of the Union, through the Commission members, Specialist Groups, partnerships with other expert environmental law organizations, relevant international entities, law schools, associations of judges and environmental prosecutors, and judicial institutes, in order to: a) Promote ethical and innovative legal concepts, legislation, and other legal instruments that

conserve Nature and natural resources to achieve sustainability;

b) Build knowledge and apply scientific, technical and other capacity in all regions to enable governments to draft, enact and enforce environmental law in an effective manner;

c) Work closely with the Secretariats of all Conventions that protect and conserve the environment; d) Educate governmental officials, including judges and public prosecutors, and stakeholders at all

levels on applying law and policy, improving access to information and justice, and facilitating public participation in environmental decision making to ensure that natural resources are managed equitably and sustainably;

43


e) Engage members and partners to create robust knowledge networks; and

f) Collaborate with other components of the Union, especially the Environmental Law Centre (ELC),

the Academy of Environmental Law, Commissions and Members, and partner institutions, including the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), the International Network for Environmental Compliance and Enforcement (INECE) and UNITAR, to provide education, information and knowledge on law and governance necessary to achieve ecological sustainability.

5. Priorities WCEL will implement its Objectives through programme priorities that further the “three global results” of IUCN’s Programme 2013–2016.1 WCEL’s Objectives will be implemented in an integrated way through its membership, its network of collaborating centres of environmental law, the Environmental Law Centre (ELC), the Academy of Environmental Law, the Union’s Regional and National Committees and Offices, and other professional partnerships, through bi-annual work plans. WCEL will address the following priorities, contingent on the availability of financial resources and through the voluntary contributions of expertise by its members, in order to: a) Strengthen WCEL Specialist Groups – WCEL will enhance the effectiveness of its Specialist

Groups with particular emphasis (a) on priority legal thematic areas, including biodiversity loss; climate change, energy and biofuels; coastal and marine degradation; desertification and natural resource management; ecosystem protection; soil degradation; freshwater and wetlands; mining; and (b) on cross-cutting themes such as environmental ethics, indigenous peoples, protected areas, Arctic and Antarctic polar governance, compliance and enforcement of environmental laws, the judiciary, and national and international financial institutions, and to respond to requests made by the World Conservation Congress;

b) Promote the IUCN Academy of Environmental Law – WCEL will promote the Academy as the

world’s leading network of academic institutions, universities and professors engaged in the research and teaching of environmental law;

c) Collaborate with Centres of Environmental Law – WCEL will continue to recognize, promote and

collaborate with Centres, Institutes of Environmental Law and other partners in building coordinated information, research, learning and capacity-building programmes on the legal aspects of biodiversity;

d) Knowledge and technical assistance – WCEL will collaborate with all components of the Union, especially its Members, Regional Offices, the Environmental Law Centre, the Academy of Environmental Law, and other partners, including UNEP, Convention Secretariats and INECE, to develop international agreements and national legislation, and implementation programmes, particularly in less-developed countries and regions affected by armed conflicts;

e) Promote ‘good governance’ and the rule of law – WCEL will work with Union Members, UN institutions, governments and other stakeholders to encourage and promote ‘good governance’ and institutions to respect the rule of law, including through making effective use of the Union’s UN observer status;

f) Support the Judiciary – WCEL will continue to work with the judiciary and relevant institutions, both international and national, to build their capacity to provide access to justice, to effectively adjudicate environmental issues, and to apply and enforce environmental law, through cooperation with judicial institutes and associations of judges and the use of information

1 “(a) Credible and trusted knowledge for valuing and conserving biodiversity leads to better policy and action on the ground; b) Improved governance arrangements over natural resource management strengthen rights and deliver equitable conservation with tangible livelihoods benefits; c) Healthy and restored ecosystems make cost-effective contributions to meeting global challenges of climate change, food security and social and economic development”.

44

databanks, including ECOLEX, the Judicial Environmental Portal and INFORMEA, and the study of the environmental jurisprudence;

g) Promote programmatic synergies among MEAs – WCEL will work with the Secretariats of

multilateral environmental agreements in support of more coherent implementation, especially at the national level, governments and stakeholders, and with other conventions, agreements and processes to identify and promote synergies among them and the Union’s Mission and Programme;

h) Strengthen the legal foundations of Conventions – WCEL will study means to most effectively

enhance the implementation and elaboration of the biodiversity-related agreements, and strengthening of their national focal points and national implementation laws; and

i) Study and advance the conceptual development of Environmental Law – WCEL will research the

application of new or emerging international and national legal and governance instruments and principles, including the Draft Covenant on Environment and Development, the Earth Charter, the principle of non-regression and the principle of resilience.

6. Expected Results WCEL’s Mission, Objectives and Priorities will contribute to achieving the Union’s 2013–2016 Programme, especially in respect to its “three global results”. WCEL expects that by 2016, it will have measurably contributed to: a) The integration of environmental law knowledge with the scientific and policy expertise of the

other Commissions; b) Enhanced collaboration with the Secretariats of multilateral environmental agreements in support

of strengthened implementation; c) The development and dissemination of environmental law expertise and networks worldwide; d) The development of knowledge and expertise of environmental courts and tribunals; e) The annual colloquia of the IUCN Academy of Environmental Law; and f) Mainstreaming the Union’s effective use of environmental law in its Programme.

45

World Commission on Protected Areas (WCPA)


Vision Protected Areas are an essential mechanism to ensure the ecological functioning of our planet. Mission To promote an ecologically representative, effectively managed and equitably governed global system of marine and terrestrial protected areas as an integral part of the IUCN Mission. Objectives The objectives of the IUCN World Commission on Protected Areas for 2013–16 are to:

1. Enhance the capacity to effectively manage protected area systems to achieve the Aichi Targets for halting biodiversity loss, in particular through meeting Target 11.

2. Mainstream protected areas as natural solutions to global challenges, such as climate change, land degradation, food security, health and well-being.

3. Foster equitable governance of protected area systems. 4. Make the case for sustainable financing of protected area systems. 5. Communicate and advocate the value of protected area systems.

WCPA recognizes that to achieve the full potential of protected areas, and to meet the goals of the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity, and particularly Target 11, the capacity for protected area management must be upgraded. Accordingly, WCPA will work with the Global Programme Areas Programme (GPAP) and other partners to build institutional capacity and practitioners’ skills to enhance protected area system design, management and governance, to conduct biodiversity monitoring, and to implement sound business planning. Good practice guidance will be generated, knowledge disseminated and competence built. WCPA will work towards mainstreaming protected areas as “natural solutions” in addressing climate change, land degradation, food security, health and well-being. WCPA will continue to work with the Rio Conventions to position protected areas as a fundamental contribution in the objective of all three conventions. WCPA will promote the full range of governance types for protected areas; increased participation of indigenous peoples and local communities; and promote the values of protected areas to human well-being and livelihoods. WCPA will work with national partners in the design and completion of systems of ecologically representative and well-connected protected areas and their effective management, in line with country commitments to the Aichi Target 11. Working with partners and communication experts (such as the IUCN Commission on Education and Communication) WCPA will advocate the value of well managed systems of protected areas with the purpose of building awareness and the enhancement of the level of investment in protected areas, expansion and management effectiveness. WCPA will continue to develop a globally active WCPA network of expert volunteers to support programme implementation. WCPA will be led by the Commission Chair, supported by a Steering Committee and an operational structure including Task Forces and Specialist Groups that will contribute to the realization of this mandate. They will be supported by the GPAP from the IUCN Secretariat and work with Regional Offices and IUCN Members to realize IUCN’s “One Programme” Charter.

46




Election of IUCN President

Action Requested: The World Conservation Congress is requested to: (a) NOTE that Council has nominated Mr Anders Wijkman, Sweden, and Mr Zhang

Xinsheng, China, as candidates for election as the next President of IUCN; (b) ELECT one of these two candidates to the Presidency of IUCN.

Background 1. Article 27 of the IUCN Statutes provides that “The President, the Treasurer and the Chairs of the

Commissions shall be elected by the World Conservation Congress on the nomination of the Council. Nominations for the President may also be made by forty members eligible to vote from at least three Regions, within the period prescribed in the Regulations.”

2. Regulation 32 further specifies “not more than two nominations for President and for Treasurer

shall be made by the Council after considering the proposals made by Members in Categories A and B. Nominations for President may also be made directly by Members as provided for in the Statutes, provided that such nomination is received by the Director General not less than sixty days prior to the opening of the session of the World Congress.”

3. In May 2011, the Council appointed a Nominations Committee to assist in the selection process

for the President, Treasurer and Commission Chairs, under the leadership of IUCN Vice President, Mr Javed Jabbar. Detailed terms of reference for the position of President, as revised and updated by the Council Nominations Committee and approved by Council, were circulated to Members in August 2011.

4. In accordance with the procedures set out in the Regulations to the IUCN Statutes, the Director

General wrote to Members of IUCN in Categories A and B on 12 August 2011 inviting their suggestions for persons the Council might nominate to the World Conservation Congress for the position of President of IUCN. In her letter, the Director General indicated that the current President, Dr Ashok Khosla, although eligible under the Statutes to stand for re-election, had informed the Council of his decision not to seek a second term as President.

5. The Council at its 78th Meeting on 12–15 February 2012, decided to nominate the following

candidates for election as IUCN President (in alphabetical order):

- Mr Anders Wijkman, Sweden - Mr Zhang Xinsheng, China

Each candidate has declared his willingness to serve if elected. 6. Biographical information on both candidates is attached for consideration by the World

Conservation Congress.

48

Congress Document WCC- 2012-8.4/1

CURRICULUM VITAE ANDERS WIJKMAN

Personal Name: Anders Wijkman Date of Birth: 30 September 1944 Nationality Swedish Citizen Education BA, Political Science and Economics, Stockholm University 1967 Current position Senior Advisor, Stockholm Environment Institute (SEI) and Department of Energy Systems, Linköping University Professional background Member of the Swedish Parliament 1971–78 Secretary General, Swedish Red Cross 1979–88 Secretary General, Swedish Society for Nature Conservation 1989–91 Director General, Swedish Agency for Research Cooperation with Developing Countries 1992–94 Assistant Secretary General of the United Nations and Policy Director, UNDP 1995–97 Ambassador, Swedish Foreign Ministry 1998 Member of the European Parliament 1999–2009 Senior Advisor, SEI and Linköping University 2010– Chair Swedish Government Task Force on a Review of Public Procurement 2011– Experience and past involvement with IUCN As Secretary General of the Swedish Society for Nature Conservation I was representing one of

IUCN’s many members. As Policy Director of UNDP, I had close collaboration with IUCN. IUCN’s Regional Offices were

important partners in many UNDP programmes. During my years as a Member of the European Parliament I had regular interaction with the Brussels

Office of IUCN and hosted many meetings with IUCN representatives. As an active member of the Environment Committee I did my best to support conservation issues and programmes like LIFE.

Offices and membership of governing bodies Vice President, the Club of Rome 2007– Board Member of Stockholm Resilience Center 2007– Board Member of the International Environment Institute in Lund 2010– Board Member of the Tällberg Foundation 2003– Board Member of the World Resources Forum Association 2012– Member of the Advisory Council of the European Climate Foundation 2008– Member of the Swedish Royal Academy of Sciences 1989– Member of the Swedish Royal Academy of Agriculture and Forestry 1993– Member of the World Academy of Arts and Sciences 1998– Other activities Author of several books on disaster prevention, sustainable development, HIV/AIDS and Resource

efficiency In August 2012 a new book will be launched “Bankrupting Nature” – co-authored with Professor Johan

Rockström, SEI, published by Earthscan From 2001 to 2009 Chairman of the Board of Globe EU, a network of parliamentarians in favour of

49

strong and proactive environment, conservation and climate policies Awards Technology Doctor, h c, Linköping University 2011 Honorary Member of the Swedish Society for Nature Conservation 2008 Vision for the future priorities and development of the Union The world is at a crossroad. Our world faces many challenges – like the economic and financial crises, increasing gaps in terms of income and wealth, rising unemployment – not least among young people – growing food and water insecurity, climate change and ecosystem decline. From a conservation perspective the challenges include increasing species´ extinction and biodiversity loss. The way society addresses these problems is far from sufficient. Instead of recognizing the interdependencies, most of the problems are dealt with in a piecemeal manner. Most troubling is the failure to recognize that our welfare and prosperity ultimately depends on healthy ecosystems and biodiversity and a stable climate. Today we have ample evidence that our progress as the dominant species has come at a high price. Unsustainable patterns of production and consumption as well as population growth constitute a serious threat to the resilience of the planet to support human activity. The problems we face can only be met by reconnecting human development and global sustainability – leaving behind the false dichotomy that puts them at opposing ends. To me, IUCN represents a huge potential to help lay the foundation for a more sustainable and equitable development path. Underpinned by science, and supported by a rich and diverse membership, IUCN already plays an important role in the worldwide efforts for sustainability. IUCN´s many programmes on the ground, focused on biodiversity conservation and nature-based solutions, inspire people all over the world and demonstrate the multiple benefits of conservation. If elected as President, I would like to give particular emphasis to policy issues such as: • Strengthening and expanding the work on Knowledge Products – like Biodiversity Hotspot Areas,

the Red List of both Threatened Species and Ecosystems, the development of a Natural Resources Governance Framework and the implementation of TEEB (The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity).

• Strengthening and expanding the impact at field level related to biodiversity and ecosystem

protection as well as nature-based solutions. A main challenge will be to align development and poverty reduction strategies with biodiversity protection and the protection and regeneration of ecosystem functions.

• Helping close the science-policy gap. In spite of the many environment agreements, overall

developments in terms of biodiversity conservation and ecosystem protection are negative. IUCN must strengthen its policy role, not least in the follow up to Nagoya.

• Looking for synergies with the Rio Conventions. The more or less vertical approach to most

environment problems is ineffective and a missed opportunity. Of particular importance will be to recognize the importance of biodiversity and ecosystem protection with regard to climate change.

• Strengthened support to all the Multilateral Environment Agreements. Support to the MEAs is one

of IUCN’s historical tasks that has to be maintained as a key priority. • Exploring and making more visible, the biodiversity aspects of the Green Economy. Efforts are

being made by governments as well as international organizations and scientific institutions to “green” the economy. IUCN has a crucial role to play in helping define how to take nature into account, not least biodiversity and ecosystem functions.

With regard to organization and funding – where my knowledge for obvious reasons is limited

today – I would give priority to issues such as:

50

• Strengthening the strategic insight among the IUCN membership about long-term trends and

issues in society that will be of importance to the efforts to protect biodiversity and ecosystems. • Building preparedness for change and transition, both with regard to challenges in the

organizational, political and financial environments. • Strengthening the financial situation by diversification of the funding base. • Helping develop a Business Model that will help IUCN produce Global Public Goods, an area of

increased importance and funding opportunities. • Strengthening networking and partnering with other organizations.

51

CURRICULUM VITAE ZHANG XINSHENG

Personal Name: Zhang Xinsheng Date of Birth: 8 November 1948 Nationality: Citizen of China Education Mr Zhang received a Master in Design Studies with distinction at the Graduate School of Design, Harvard University. He also completed the Advanced Management Program at the Harvard Business School, and was later HBS’s Visiting Research Fellow. He was among the first groups of visiting scholars sent by the Chinese Government to the United States in 1980. He also graduated from the China Military Institute of Technology, and Zhejiang University, China. Current position Mr Zhang is Co-founder and Executive Chairman of Eco-Forum Global, an independent organization founded in 2009 committed to building consensus among all stakeholders for development of a green and sustainable future. Today’s challenges have led him to devote himself to environmental protection and sustainable development. He is also President of the China Education Association for International Exchange, Vice President of the International University Sports Federation, a board member of the International Institute for Education Planning, UNESCO, and Member of the 11th Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference. Professional background Mr Zhang was Chairperson of the Executive Board of UNESCO (2005–2007) and was Chairperson of UNESCO’s World Heritage Committee (2003–2004). Mr Zhang has held key positions in China’s central, provincial and municipal governments. As the Vice Minister of Education in China (2000–2009), he was in charge of educational policy, regulations, and international cooperation. He promoted the Education for Sustainable Development in China leading to the integration of ESD into the curricula of Chinese schools. He also contributed to the creation of the Confucius Institute Programme. He was elected for two consecutive tenures from 1989 to 1997 as Mayor of Suzhou Municipality. During this period, the government of Suzhou was one of the first to take economic, social, environmental and cultural factors into account. Under his leadership, Suzhou became the fourth largest city in terms of GDP and a role model of sustainable development in China. It attracted foreign direct investment, which helped preserve the historical city and environment and balance urban-rural concerns and needs. From 1986 to 1989, he was Vice Chairman of the China National Tourism Administration. From 1978, Mr Zhang was Co-founder and Executive Managing Director of Nanjing Jinling Corporation. His career in industry started in the Nanjing Panda Radio Factory. Experience and past involvement with IUCN UNESCO cooperates closely with IUCN and in particular its World Heritage Committee, to which IUCN provides expert advice on natural heritage. As Chairperson of the Executive Board of UNESCO (2005–2007) and earlier as Chairperson of the World Heritage Committee (2003–2004), Mr Zhang has had the opportunity to work with many IUCN experts and consultants on conservation issues.

52

Offices and membership of governing bodies In addition to the positions mentioned above, Mr Zhang was the first person from China to be invited to join the Harvard Business School Board of Directors of Associates. He was also Chairperson of the Board of Directors for Sino-Singapore SIP Development Consortium. During his stewardship of the Executive Board of UNESCO, Mr Zhang was well-respected and known for his leadership ability and his ability to create an inclusive consensus. The Tribute to Chairperson of the Executive Board written by the General Conference 34th Session reads: “The General Conference [commends Mr Zhang’s] intellectual and human qualities which enabled him to build consensus through extensive consultations.” Former Director-General of UNESCO Matsuura’s letter to China’s top leaders praises “Mr Zhang’s steadfast quest for harmony and consensus, which has enabled Board Members to reach agreement on many complex issues…the Board has taken 226 decisions…Every one of them was adopted by consensus… [This] great achievement…was largely due to the wise handling of the debates of the Executive Board by Mr Zhang.” Other activities He was a member of the China Council for International Cooperation on Environment and Development and Vice President of the Chinese Olympic Committee. He was also elected as Deputy to the 7th and 8th National People’s Congress of China. Awards Mr Zhang has been awarded Doctorates honoris causa by universities in the United States, Russia, Australia, Hong Kong and Japan. Vision for the future priorities and development of the Union It is critical for a new IUCN leader to be a good listener to the members of the Union, with deep understanding of the issues that are of significance, without pre-set judgment or bias. IUCN leaders must build up consensus, preserving past traditions and success while changing to meet new challenges. Thus, the Council should provide substantial support and leadership to the Director General, the Secretariat, and all the Commissions. Specifically, in respect to the priorities and development, IUCN needs to prepare itself for the future: 1. by anticipating future developments and challenges in the post-Rio+20 period covering the entire

range of environmental development issues and in particular future international, regional and national action in support of nature conservation and biodiversity;

2. by contributing to the review of relevant MDGs, the eventual articulation of sustainable

development goals (SDGs) and the relevant parts of the post-2015 agenda, which will be strategic and policy-guiding factors for all countries and the entire international community;

3. by remaining relevant, and indeed visionary in its ideas and initiatives and by mobilizing decision-

makers, the scientific community and relevant NGOs to act in support of the objectives and targets set for the Organization;

4. by exercising global leadership and inspiration in addressing the future challenges related to the

state of the world’s environment and societal needs; 5. by designing and implementing strategies and flagship programmes as well as forging

partnerships across all priorities identified by the Council; and 6. by reviewing and adapting its governance mechanism and practices to ensure that IUCN will be a

model international organization driven by excellence, effectiveness, transparency, accountability and visibility.

53



Election of IUCN Treasurer

Action Requested: The World Conservation Congress is requested to ELECT the Treasurer for IUCN. Background 1. In accordance with the provisions of Regulation 30 to the IUCN Statutes, the Director General wrote

to Members on 12 August 2011 inviting them to submit nominations for the Treasurer of IUCN. 2. At its 76th Meeting In May 2011, the Council appointed a Nominations Committee to assist in the

selection process for the President, Treasurer and Commission Chairs, under the leadership of IUCN Vice President, Mr Javed Jabbar. The Committee revised and updated the Terms of Reference for the Treasurer of IUCN which were approved by Council and sent out to Members by the Director General in her letter of 12 August 2011.

3. The Council, at its 78th Meeting on 12–15 February 2012, approved the following recommendation

of the Council Nominations Committee for the position of IUCN Treasurer:

- Mr Patrick de Heney, Switzerland/United Kingdom The candidate has declared his willingness to serve if elected. 4. Biographical information on Mr de Heney is attached for consideration by the World Conservation

Congress.

54


CURRICULUM VITAE PATRICK STEPHEN DE HENEY

Personal Name: Patrick Stephen de Heney Date of Birth: 20 September 1960 Nationalities: Swiss and British Education IMD (International Institute for Management Development): Program for Executive Development (PED,

2005) University of Geneva: Licence ès Sciences Commerciales et Industrielles (1983) Gymnase du Belvédère: Maturité Fédérale (1979) Current position Managing Partner and co-owner, ValleyRoad Capital SA (a Swiss based Private Equity and Corporate Finance advisory firm, specializing in services to family businesses and entrepreneurs) Professional background All-round Finance professional, with extensive experience in Mergers and Acquisitions, Corporate Finance, Investment, Financial Management and Controlling and Banking regulatory matters Past employment: • Lombard Odier & Cie, Private Bankers: Group Financial Controller (1999–2004), then Group

Chief Financial Officer (2005–2010). Head of Finance of the Swiss Bank and for the Group, covering 18 operating companies in 15

countries. Responsible for financial planning, accounting, Management Information Systems, regulatory reporting, credit and counterparty risk, treasury, Asset-Liability Management and collateral management.

• The Orior Group: Chief Financial Officer (and Deputy General Manager of Orior Food SA) (1991–

1999). Led the Finance team and provided financial and strategic advice on the review and subsequent

redeployment of the Group’s portfolio of activities out of Tobacco and into Specialty Foods. Managed relationships with the Swiss Stock Exchange, banks, financial analysts and press.

• Pargesa Holding SA: Financial Analyst and assistant to the Finance Director (1986–1991). Monitored the firm’s investments in the European and US Banking industry and participated with

the CFO in all capital raising projects (equity and bond capital markets). • Strategic Planning Associates (1983–1986): Research Analyst. Provided business and quantitative analysis in the context of strategic advisory mandates

(banking, insurance, oil and gas services, consumer products). Experience and past involvement with IUCN None Offices and membership of governing bodies Former or current Board Member of various Swiss and foreign companies in the Banking, Asset

Management, Brokerage, Captive Reinsurance, Food, Catering, Watch Components and Metal Cutting industries

Former Chairman of the Audit Committee of a French Asset Manager and Broker Dealer (2005–2010)

55

Chairman of the Board of Trustees of a UK Pension Fund (2005–2012) Former Member of the Swiss Banking Association’s Committee on Finance and Regulation (2004–

2010) Other activities Jazz piano playing; skiing; jogging Awards Most Valuable Participant Award, IMD (Program for Executive Development) Future priorities for the Treasury function and development of the Union In light of the ambitious financial goals underlying IUCN’s proposed 2013–2016 Programme on the one hand, and of the consequences of the still unresolved international financial crisis on the other, the Treasurer’s priorities should in my view be focused on supporting the Council and the Secretariat in the following areas: • Fund raising: help tap new sources of funding from corporate and philanthropic contributors;

support the Secretariat in securing longer term funding from existing and new ODA sources; explore, propose and help implement innovative funding initiatives.

• Efficient allocation of resources: monitor and provide advice on the deployment of capital in the context of the profit centre based approach embedded in IUCN’s proposed new business model, with a particular focus on cost management and effective cost recovery, financial risk management, optimal utilization of assets, development of relevant indicators and metrics centred on value-for-money delivered by the business lines.

• Reporting: require timely and effective financial management reporting processes and tools, with a view to enabling early identification and escalation of potential problems and risks; provide high-level support and oversight for the roll-out of the necessary tools (ERP, HRMS,…) and verify that the delivery capabilities thereof are aligned with IUCN’s mission and business model.

• Visibility: assist in promoting IUCN’s vision, mission and values, with a view to increasing “brand” awareness with a wider circle of decision makers and key stakeholders.

Ultimately, success in the above areas will be reflected by the extent to which the Union’s financial reserves will have been replenished and further expanded in order to ensure the continuity of the organization into the 2017–2020 Programme and beyond.

56




Election of IUCN Regional Councillors

Action Requested: The World Conservation Congress is requested to:

a) TAKE NOTE of the Report of the Election Officer for the World Conservation Congress (Annex 1); and

b) ELECT Regional Councillors (up to three for each Region) from among the candidates

listed in the attachment to the Report of the Election Officer. Background 1. In accordance with Articles 28 and 39 of the Statutes and Regulations 36 to 40, the Director

General wrote to Members of IUCN in Categories A and B on 12 August 2011, inviting nominations for candidates from their Region for election as Councillors.

2. The Regions defined in the Statutes are:

(a) Africa (b) Meso and South America (c) North America and the Caribbean (d) South and East Asia (e) West Asia (f) Oceania (g) East Europe, North and Central Asia (h) West Europe

and the list of States belonging to each of the eight Regions is annexed thereto.

3. The 76th Meeting of the IUCN Council (23–25 May 2011) appointed Prof. Dr. Michael Bothe, member of IUCN’s Commission on Environmental Law, who is not a candidate for election, as Election Officer for the World Conservation Congress, Jeju, Republic of Korea, 2012.

4. The Report of the Election Officer is attached at Annex 1. 5. Annex 2 to this paper has been prepared by the Secretariat in accordance with instructions given

by the Election Officer on the basis of his report. It lists, in alphabetical order, the candidates nominated for each Region and contains brief background information on each candidate.

6. The background information for each candidate is presented according to the headings laid out

on the nomination form, namely current employment and/or position/title; experience in fields of concern to IUCN; and particular qualifications to be a Regional Councillor.

7. Regional Councillors elected by the World Conservation Congress will serve for the term

extending from the close of the World Conservation Congress in Jeju until the close of the next ordinary session of the Congress.

8. The election of Regional Councillors will be conducted in accordance with the Rules of Procedure

of the World Conservation Congress.

57

Annex 1 to Congress Document WCC-2012-8.4/3

Election of IUCN Regional Councillors

Report to the 2012 World Conservation Congress by the Election Officer

1. In accordance with Regulation 28(b) to the IUCN Statutes, the 76th Meeting of the IUCN Council

(May 2011) appointed me as Election Officer for the 2012 World Conservation Congress. In accordance with Regulation 37, by a communiqué dated 12 August 2011, the Director-General invited all Members in Categories A and B to submit candidates for election as Regional Councillors. In accordance with Regulation 38, the Council determined 16 January, noon GMT/UTC to be the deadline of these nominations. Two reminders were sent subsequently on 12 October and 2 December 2012. On the recommendation of the Election Officer, the Council, by a decision dated 13 January 2012, extended the deadline to 31 January, noon GMT/UTC. By 31 January 2012 at noon, the names of 41 candidates were submitted.

2. I have reviewed the files of the Secretariat containing relevant information for each nominated

candidate and assessed the validity of the nominations which have been submitted. The ballot list will be prepared accordingly.

3. Not all nominations could be considered as valid. A number of errors have recurred, namely the

following:

a. nomination by entities which are not Members or not Members in Categories A or B; b. nomination by Members which do not belong to the Region of the candidate they propose; c. nomination by Members which have not paid their dues for 2011; d. nomination received after the deadline; e. irregularity in the transmission of relevant documents.

Irregularities in transmission have been duly remedied, so that no nomination was rejected on

that basis. 4. In accordance with IUCN Regulation 38, “nominations for candidates from a Region for election

as Regional Councillors shall be made by five Members eligible to vote or ten per cent of all such Members in that Region, whichever is lower”. As is shown from the list below, candidates in each Region needed five valid nominations in order to be put on the ballot list.

5. The candidates who did not receive the required number of five valid nominations were notified

and given the opportunity to object to the proposed decision not to put them on the ballot list. No candidate availed him/herself of that opportunity.

6. On the basis of the procedure described above, candidates will appear on the ballot list as shown

in Attachment 1.

IUCN Regions

Number of Members eligible to vote

Number of nominations required

per candidate (a) Africa 129 5 (b) Meso and South America 130 5 (c) N. America and the Caribbean 110 5 (d) South and East Asia 132 5 (e) West Asia 52 5 (f) Oceania 45 5 (g) E. Europe, N. and Central Asia 49 5 (h) West Europe 267 5

58

Attachment 1 Nominations for Regional Councillors

Regions are as prescribed in Article 16 of the Statutes. Candidates are listed in alphabetical order of surnames within their Regions, starting at the letter “U” chosen at random (in accordance with Regulation 40). The figures in brackets after the name of each candidate indicate the number of nominations received for the candidate. (a) Africa Mafa Chipeta, Malawi (7) Mamadou Diallo, Senegal (8) Brahim Haddane, Morocco (8) Eriyo Jesca Osuna, Uganda (6) (b) Meso and South America Jenny Gruenberger, Bolivia (5) Miguel Pellerano, Argentina (5) Ramón Pérez Gil Salcido, Mexico (14) (c) North America and the Caribbean1 George Greene, Canada (6) Scott Hajost, USA (8) John Robinson, USA (8) Caroline Seagle, USA (6) Spencer Thomas, Grenada (7) (d) South and East Asia2 Mahfuz Ullah, Bangladesh (6) Antonio Claparols, Philippines (7) Arzu Rana Deuba, Nepal (9) Meena Gupta, India (9) Shinichi Kitajima, Japan (5) Keping Ma, China (8) Dongwon Shin, Republic of Korea (7) Youngbae Suh, Republic of Korea (7) (e) West Asia Malik Amin Aslam Khan, Pakistan (8) Samira Omar Asem, Kuwait (11) Mohammad Shahbaz, Jordan (11) (f) Oceania Andrew Bignell, New Zealand (7) 1 Only one candidate from the USA can be elected. 2 Only one candidate from the Republic of Korea can be elected

59

Brendan Mackey, Australia (6) Anna Elizabeth Tiraa, Cook Islands (8) (g) East Europe, North and Central Asia3 Amirkhan Amirkhanov, Russia (5) Michael Hošek, Czech Republic (5) Tamás Marghescu, Hungary (8) Tamar Pataridze, Georgia(11) Miklós Persányi, Hungary (6) (h) West Europe4 Marina von Weissenberg, Finland (6) Roger Crofts, United Kingdom (7) Hans de Iongh, Netherlands (5) Jonathan Hughes, United Kingdom (21) Nilufer Oral, Turkey (6) Despina Symons Pirovolidou, Greece (5)

3 Only one candidate from Hungary can be elected. 4 Only one candidate from the United Kingdom can be elected.

60


Background Information on Candidates for Election as Regional Councillors

CANDIDATES FOR ELECTION AS REGIONAL COUNCILLORS – AFRICA CHIPETA, Mafa (Malawi) Current employment and/or position/title: Current engagements: • Currently working as a forestry and food security consultant as well as speaker in various natural

resources and food security fora (after retirement from the United Nations). He is the permanent panellist and participant in Coalition for Dialogue on Africa (CoDA) supported by the African Union (AU), Economic Commission on Africa (ECA) and the African Development Bank (AfDB). He is on an assignment by the International Water Management Institute (IWMI) in Colombo, Sri Lanka to draft the Regional Agricultural Policy for the Southern Africa Development Community (SADC), in Botswana. He is also developing an FAO pilot project for the adoption of Results-Based Management in Africa focusing on the FAO Regional Sub-Office for Central Africa in Gabon and FAO Regional Office for Africa in Ghana.

Experience in fields of concern to IUCN: Mafa was the Deputy Director General for CIFOR – Centre for International Forestry Research. Was UN System Task Manager for UNCED focussing on forestry issues during the UNCSD process which led to the Statement of Principles on Forests and to the launch of the Intergovernmental Panel on Forests that has now become the UN Forum on Forests. He led FAO Outlook studies on forests including a baseline global review and the first FAO Asia-Pacific Forestry Outlook Study. He was one of the high level panellists at the 2011 IUCN Regional Conservation Forum in Johannesburg, South Africa where he also delivered a key presentation on Forest, Food, Fuel, and Land Acquisition Nexus in Africa and the Role of forest ecosystems in the Comprehensive Africa’s Agriculture Development Programme. He also moderated the Knowledge Stream on Food Security in a Changing Climate and was a panellist during the Climate Change Conference of the Parties (COP) 17 in Durban, South Africa at the IUCN hosted side event on Nature Based Adaptation Policy in Africa. He is the author of a number of publications and papers including co-author of the book The private sector speaks: investing in sustainable forest management. He has served on the Editorial Advisory Board of the International Forestry Review published by the Commonwealth Forestry Association. He worked in Malawi within the private sector as the Manager of Blantyre Sawmills and later in the public service as Government Forestry Officer and Government Senior Forestry Officer. Particular qualifications to be a Regional Councillor: • Respected authority and professional on forestry and food security issues: Expert and speaker on

forest conservation, poverty alleviation, improved livelihood and development including participation, inclusion and rights of interest groups, such as indigenous peoples. Global leadership on policy issues in forestry, agriculture, rural development, and food security. Senior level involvement as Deputy Head of CIFOR (Centre for International Forestry Research – a global leader in forestry knowledge, policy analysis and advocacy).

• Great familiarity with international and policy processes: Was part of the UNFF (United Nations

Forum of Forests) process from the start and was the author of the UN Secretary-General’s document that led to the adoption of the Statement of Principles on Forests and the UN-IPF (now UNFF). He was Representative to the AU (African Union) and UNECA (United Nations Economic Commission on Africa), steering policy and strategy processes in Africa on food security and natural resources management.

61

• Experience in working at continental level and with Africa’s intergovernmental bodies: Chief, Policy Co-ordinating Service, and the first FAO Focal Point for NEPAD (New Partnership for Africa’s Development) where he steered the NEPAD-CAADP. (Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Programme – Africa’s reference strategic framework for this sector). He served as FAO Representative to the AU, UNECA; Ethiopia and Uganda. He was also FAO Sub-regional Coordinator for Eastern Africa.

• Work exposure in other regions of the world: He was at the UN-FAO in Rome, Italy and served in senior positions in forestry and food security policy including as Global Director of FAO Policy Assistance (leading a largely decentralized team of policy professionals in Africa, Asia-Pacific, Europe, Americas and Caribbean, and selected countries); Worked in China as a Member, Task Force of the China ICED (International Committee on Environment and Development).

DIALLO, Mamadou (Senegal) Current employment and position/title: Secretary General of the Association Sénégalaise des Amis de la Nature [Senegalese Friends of Nature Association], Chair of the Regional Committee of IUCN Members in Central and West Africa (CREMACO), Deputy in the Assemblée Nationale du Sénégal [National Assembly of Senegal] and Mayor of the Commune of Kidira, President of the Commission Biodiversité et Aires Protégées de Réseau des Parlementaires en Environnement au Sénégal [Biodiversity and Protected Areas Commission of the Network of Environmental Parliamentary Members in Senegal] (REPES). Experience in fields of concern to IUCN: Mamadou Diallo is a lawyer, specializing in International Environmental Law, and has acquired a great deal of experience in the field of natural resources and environmental management as well as the promotion of ecotourism in Senegal. He is a member and Secretary General of ASAN, an NGO in Senegal, which has been a member of IUCN since 1996 and is the oldest environmental protection association in Senegal. Mr Diallo was Chair of the Senegal National Committee of IUCN Members from 1996 to 2012 and member of the IUCN Commission on Education and Communication. From 1998 to 2006 Mr Diallo was Chair of the Regional Committee of IUCN Members in West Africa (CMAO). Since June 2010 he has been Chair of the Regional Committee of IUCN Members in Central and West Africa (CREMACO). It was under his presidency that all these committees were recognized by the IUCN Council. Within these different positions and functions, he has endeavoured to continue to help promote IUCN as well as to accomplish its mission in this region. In a similar vein, since January 2004, he has also been the Coordinator of the Maison des Amis de la Nature Alioune Mbor Diagne [Alioune Mbor Diagne House of Friends of Nature] Project of Senegal in Petit Mbao, Dakar, where he is developing the concept of ecotourism in relation with the International Friends of Nature Association. Particular qualifications to be a Regional Councillor: Mr Mamadou Diallo has very detailed knowledge of IUCN and its missions as well as those of its Regional Councillors. He is a very open man, always ready to listen to people and committed to environmental issues and IUCN. His leadership has been recognized by IUCN members both in Senegal and in the rest of West and Central Africa. A skilled strategist, he has been successful in collaborating harmoniously with all the members of the IUCN Secretariat in West Africa, notably the Heads of Mission in the national offices, as well as with the various Regional Directors of BRAO and PACO, this being of great benefit to IUCN and its members.

62

As a local and national elected representative (Deputy Mayor), and official representative of IUCN Members in Central and West Africa, and bearing in mind his experience in the CMAO and the CREMACO, Mr Diallo has all the qualities required for the position of Regional Councillor. HADDANE, Brahim (Morocco) Current employment and position/title: Director of the Jardins Botaniques de Bouknadel Rabat Salé [Botanical Gardens of Bouknadel Rabat-Salé] in Morocco Chargé de mission [Project Leader], Fondation Mohammed VI pour la Protection de l’Environnement [Mohammed VI Foundation for Environmental Protection] Experience in fields of concern to IUCN: Mr Haddane is a senior executive who has worked for over 30 years in the Forestry Department in the field of nature conservation in general and wildlife conservation in particular. He is an expert in managing groups of animals both in captivity and in protected areas (reintroduction, transfer, monitoring, etc.). He has much experience working with groups, being an active member of several national and regional environmental associations, which aim to conserve nature, raise the awareness of local populations to the sustainable use of natural resources, and to provide young people with environmental education through direct or indirect interventions via the media (TV, radio and the press). He participates in scientific wildlife research programmes and field research. His areas of interest include nature conservation, the promotion of the green economy and recycling. Convinced of IUCN’s role in nature conservation, he was one of the first members of IUCN’s Commissions in the subregion (SSC, WCPA, CEC) able to develop IUCN’s presence in the countries within this region and, thanks to the work carried out by the team that was formed in 1982, to expand its base by increasing the number of members. Particular qualifications to be a Regional Councillor: Since he is very familiar with IUCN’s structures and has a great deal of experience in the field of nature conservation, Mr Haddane is ideally qualified to carry out the task of Regional Councillor for a second term (2012–2016). He is active and ready to respond to the demands of his mission as Regional Councillor and serve members in his region within the limitations of resources available. Deeply involved in the process of implementing the three United Nations environmental protection conventions – CBD, CCD and CCC – in addition to other older conventions such as CITES and CMS, he participates in group debates on the promotion of these conventions’ principles and the fulfilment of their objectives related to nature conservation, the reduction of biodiversity loss and the sustainable use of natural resources for human welfare and the fight against poverty and destitution. Capable of communicating well with the media and liaising regularly with members, he fulfilled his mission satisfactorily during the first term, due in particular to the fact that he is fluent in IUCN’s three official languages, as well as in Arabic, his mother tongue. OSUNA, Eriyo Jesca (Hon.) (Uganda) Current employment and/or position/title: Chief Executive Director; AMANI Investments (Radio Amani Ltd – Adjumani; Amani Consultants (U) Ltd – Kampala)

63

Experience in fields of concern to IUCN: Hon Jesca Eriyo was a Minister of State for Environment-Uganda 2006 to 2011, where she coordinated the environment programme of the country which is in line with the IUCN programmes. As Minister she used her position to profile the Union’s structure that would support the country in achieving its mandate on the environment. She regularly requested information from the Secretariat and supported the Secretariat to respond to key emerging issues. She was the representative of an active state member who always drew on the convening power of IUCN to bring Civil Society and NGOs to discuss critical issues in the country such as Bujagali power dam/Mabira and the meetings would come up with amicable solutions to communicate to the public. She also provided entry points for IUCN in high level policy agendas, such as the Policy Committee on Environment, influencing better budgets for environment, worked with Members and Civil Society Organizations to promote the conservation agenda. She was also a woman Member of Parliament 2001–2011, served on the Sessional Committee on Finance, Planning and Economic Development and during this time she worked hard to ensure that environment is recognized as a key sector that needed funding to promote sustainable development She holds a MA in Development Studies. Particular qualifications to be a Regional Councillor: Minister of State for Environment-Uganda 2006 to 2011; has been exposed to various high level policy processes that will be useful to capitalize on including her networks. She ably represented Uganda in various international fora such as: • WSSD 2002 • The International HIV/AIDS Conference in Bangkok 2004; Ministerial Consultations in preparation

for the UNFCCC COP12 (United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, Conference of the Parties 12) and the Kyoto Protocol COP/MOP 2 (2nd Conference or Meeting of the Parties) which took place in Nairobi in November 2007; the 12th United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, the Conference of the Parties and Kyoto Protocol COP/MOP 2, Nairobi, November 2007.

• Active Member of the Network of Women Ministers and Leaders for the Environment (Under

UNEP-United Nations Environment Programme) 2007 to date. • Council of Ministers’ meetings for East African Community in Kigali, Kampala, Nairobi and

Arusha. Having been the representative of the State Member of IUCN in Uganda and participated in the IUCN Congress 2008 Barcelona, several Regional IUCN Meetings, Nairobi, she understands the objectives, and processes of the Regional Councillor.

64

CANDIDATES FOR ELECTION AS REGIONAL COUNCILLORS – MESO AND SOUTH AMERICA GRUENBERGER, Jenny (Bolivia) Current employment and position/title: Executive Director of LIDEMA Experience in fields of concern to IUCN: The institutional representations taken on by Jenny Gruenberger – in several cases also acting as a national or regional representative – have strengthened her capacity to relate to various public and private stakeholders in different countries across the globe. She has been involved in the following organizations: • Climate Action Network LA • Observatorio de la Sostenibilidad: Red Latinoamericana [Sustainability Observatory: Latin

American Network] • Red Internacional de ONGs contra la Desertificación– RIOD [International NGO Network on

Desertification] • UNEP Civil Society Platform, within the framework of which she has represented Latin America

and the Caribbean on two occasions, before the UNEP meetings of Ministers of the Environment (2007 and 2009)

• Alianza Boliviana de la Sociedad Civil para el Desarrollo Sostenible [Bolivian Civil Society Alliance for Sustainable Development]

In a personal capacity, she is also a member of: • IUCN Commission on Education and Communication (since 1996) • Panel Internacional de Ambiente y Energía en la Amazonía [International Panel on the

Environment and Energy in Amazonia] Particular qualifications to be a Regional Councillor: • She has worked with the Union for over 15 years, as a member of the CEC, Coordinator of the

IUCN Bolivian Committee, Chair of the South America Regional Committee of IUCN Members, and has an overall perspective of its members, its expectations, capacities and potential.

• She has participated in 4 World Conservation Congresses and several IUCN processes. • Having dedicated over 20 years to the formulation of proposals for sustainable development, she

has been able to study a large number of aspects and topics related to the latter in depth. • The Liga de Defensa del Medio Ambiente [Environmental Defence League], guarantees that it is

prepared to dedicate as much time as required to carry out the functions that the position of Councillor involves, and its experience with networks serves as an endorsement of its capacity to deal with different types of membership.

Jenny Gruenberger’s mother tongue is Spanish and she has a Certificate in Advanced English obtained after studying at the British Council, as well as another diploma in higher studies from the Preparatory Courses for University Studies in Switzerland at the University of Fribourg (Switzerland). She is thus able to communicate in all three of IUCN’s official languages. PELLERANO, Miguel (Argentina) Current employment and position/title: IUCN Regional Councillor for Meso and South America Secretary of the Board of Fundación Humedales [Wetlands Foundation]

65

Chair of the International Board of Directors of the Fundación Futuro Latinoamericano [Latin American Future Foundation] (FFLA)

Experience in fields of concern to IUCN: With a noteworthy background in the field of the protection of the environment and natural resources at both international and regional levels, Miguel Pellerano has held various positions, including the following: • Director, Fundación Vida Silvestre Argentina [Argentina Wildlife Foundation] (FVSA). • Director, Programa para Hispano Sudamérica de la World Wildlife Fund –WWF [WWF Spanish-

speaking South America Programme] • Executive Director, Fundación Poder Ciudadano [Citizen Power Foundation] (Argentina) • Regional Director for South America, International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN)

Quito, Ecuador • Assistant Secretary for the Environment and Sustainable Development for the Argentine Republic • Chairman of the International Board of Directors of the Fundación Futuro Latinoamericano [Latin

American Future Foundation] (FFLA) • Secretary of the Board of Fundación Humedales [Wetlands Foundation] Particular qualifications to be a Regional Councillor: Several years spent working for the Union, in different areas, most recently as Regional Councillor for Meso and South America, demonstrate that he is a suitable candidate, skilled and devoted to the Union, its members, objectives and goals. His proposed second term as a Regional Councillor has received the support of the regional members, in the hope that his achievements and contribution to the Union will continue along the path taken during his first term. PÉREZ GIL SALCIDO, Ramón (Mexico) Current employment and position/title: Chair of the Mexico Committee of IUCN Members President of FAUNAM & PG7 Consultores Experience in fields of concern to IUCN: Within IUCN (International Union for Conservation of Nature) he was a member of the Steering Committee and the Executive Committee of the Species Survival Commission (SSC) for over three terms, and is still an active member (since 1989) to date of the Sustainable Use Specialist Group (SUSG); as well as being a member of the IUCN World Commission on Protected Areas (WCPA). He was also a member of its Regional Committee; a member of what was formerly known as the Consejo Asesor de la Oficina Regional para Mesoamérica (ORMA) [Advisory Council for the Regional Office for Mesoamerica], a member of the team that carried out the IUCN External Review (Technical Audit) (1994–1996) and coordinated for ORMA the formulation of the first Mesoamerican Programme for IUCN. In addition, he coordinated the Proyecto “Monitoreo y Evaluación Fase II” para la ORMA-UICN [“Phase II Monitoring and Review” Project for ORMA-IUCN] (1999) (direct predecessor of today’s GRUDESCO) and was responsible for the organization of the IV Encuentro de Miembros Mesoamericanos de la UICN [4th Meeting of Mesoamerican Members of IUCN] (Tepoztlán,1996). He was nominated Delegado Especial de la UICN para México [IUCN Special Delegate for Mexico]; was the co-founder in 1992 of the Mexico Committee of IUCN Members; and coordinated the secretariat of the latter from its foundation, currently serving as its Chair. Particular qualifications to be a Regional Councillor: He is very familiar with IUCN and its operations, has interacted with its three pillars, and has strengthened the work of the Secretariat in the region by negotiating directly with the Presidency and Directorate General of IUCN the change of ORCA to ORMA, carrying out an external review of IUCN’s

66

work and contributing in other ways to the Secretariat in both Meso and North America. He has participated in two Commissions: at a global level for over three terms within the governing bodies of the IUCN Species Survival Commission and at a regional level for one term in the IUCN World Commission on Protected Areas at a regional level. As well as participating in working groups associated with these specific tasks, he has also worked actively with the members, being co-founder of the Mesoamerican Committee, ORMA’s representative in charge of integrating the first Mesoamerican programme through interaction with all the members in the region, and in the case of Mexico co-founder of the Mexican Committee he chairs today. He has worked with all sectors – with indigenous and rural communities and with the business sector – in addition to national and foreign foundations active in the field of conservation both in Mexico and the region. He maintains good relations with everyone and is recognized for his experience and his performance.

67

CANDIDATES FOR ELECTION AS REGIONAL COUNCILLORS – NORTH AMERICA AND THE CARIBBEAN GREENE, George (Canada) Current employment and position/title: Chair, Stratos Inc. Strategies to sustainability Experience in fields of concern to IUCN: George Greene has long experience with international institutions and domestic NGOs, government and business involved in environment and nature conservation. He was a member of the GEF Council, and lead negotiator for the Convention to Combat Desertification, and the Bonn Guidelines for Access to Genetic Resources and Benefit Sharing. He has evaluated the performance of the Biodiversity Portfolio of the GEF for the CBD COP, and reviewed the functioning and structure of the CBD Secretariat in support of implementation of the decisions of the COP. He led the drafting of the sustainable development policy base for the Canadian International Development Agency, was Director Environment at CIDA and Jakarta-based project manager for the Environmental Management Development in Indonesia capacity building project for 3 years. Domestically he has been an active member, Board member and advisor to the Canadian Environmental Network, the Alberta Wilderness Association, Sierra Club of Canada and the SCC Foundation, and the International Institute for Sustainable Development. He has worked with the natural resource sectors to put in place programmes to improve their environmental and social performance. Particular qualifications to be a Regional Councillor: George Greene has been active in IUCN since 1984, serving in many capacities including member of the Commission on Environmental Planning , Chair of the Resolutions Committee at the Buenos Aires General Assembly, Assistant Director General from 1995–1999, Chair of the Canadian Committee for IUCN from 2004–2008, and member of the Council from 2009–the present. George works actively to support and represent the Canadian and North American and Caribbean Members of IUCN including through regular reporting on the work of Council and active participation in National Committee meetings and regional foruMs His particular contribution is in governance of the Union, having a deep understanding of how IUCN works and of the functioning of boards. He is Chair of the Council Governance Committee, member of the Finance and Audit Committee, and has served as member of the Congress Governance Committee. Key governance improvements he has championed include improving the effectiveness of Council, strengthening the role of National and Regional Committees and integration of the Commissions and IUCN Members into the IUCN Programme through the One Programme Charter and supporting implementation measures. HAJOST, Scott A. (USA) Current employment and position/title: Forest Carbon, Markets and Communities (FCMC) Program Chief of Party (COP) Experience in fields of concern to IUCN:

68

I am an international lawyer by training and am well versed in all aspects of conservation and environment, marine and terrestrial as well as related social and development issues. I have worked on every area of the IUCN Programme and in all relevant international institutions including the UN, the World Bank and the GEF, as well as the full range of international environmental agreements including the CBD, the UNFCC and marine instruments. I am familiar with conservation science. I also have a variety of experiences on non-profit boards, including being Treasurer of IUCN-US and other advisory capacities. I am currently Treasurer and Board Executive Committee Member of ASOC; Board Member of the TARA Foundation for Marine Research, Board Member of Solar Household Energy (SHE), Senior Advisor to GLISPA, Advisory Board Member of CIEL. Affiliate, Natural Heritage Institute. I have worked on policy issues at all levels; have significant private sector engagement experience and have worked across the globe. I have worked as a senior government official, an NGO in an international organization, a consultant and now a manager of a large development cooperation conservation programme. I have worked on major conferences relating to environment and development starting with Rio and including the WSSD and the 2005 Millennium Summit. I have considerable experience working on trade and the environment. I have additionally worked extensively on linking on the ground activities to international policy. I also have considerable experience in working in conservation coalitions and partnerships. Particular qualifications to be a Regional Councillor: I have had substantial experience working with IUCN since early in my career. I have been part of an IUCN Member organization, a Commission member, a senior staff member and am an IUCN-US Board Member. I am a long standing member of CEL, a member of CEM serving as Senior Counsel and Policy Coordinator and on the Executive Committee of CEM North America/Caribbean, am a member of WCPA, including WCPA Marine and the WCPA High SeasTask Force, am a CEC member, helped coordinate the IUCN Inter-Commission Gulf of Mexico Working Group. I am a former Executive Director of the IUCN USA Multilateral Office, and IUCN-US and served on the central senior management of IUCN. During my time at IUCN, I regularly attended IUCN Council Meetings and attended all IUCN Congresses since the Montreal Congress. I helped secure IUCN UNGA Permanent Observer Status and helped set up and manage IUCN’s UN Mission. I have substantial experience in fundraising, finance, management and constituency engagement. In this regard I helped develop the first IUCN Membership Strategy. I also helped develop the original IUCN Private Sector Strategy and played a significant role in initiating IUCN’s work on climate change. I helped manage original partnership agreements of IUCN with the World Bank, UNDP and the GEF. I assisted In the launch of the Mangroves for the Future initiative with President Clinton when he was Secretary General Special Envoy for the Asian tsunami response. I know all aspects of the structure of IUCN including programmes and regions and how the Council operates and should relate to Members. ROBINSON, John Gwilym (USA) Current employment and position/title: Chief Conservation Officer, and Executive Vice President, Conservation and Science, Joan L. Tweedy Chair in Conservation Strategy Wildlife Conservation Society Experience in fields of concern to IUCN: John Robinson has been active in the conservation of biodiversity and ecosystem services for much of his professional career, and has overseen the programmes of the Wildlife Conservation Society in North America, Latin America and the Caribbean, Asia and Africa and the Marine realm since 1990. He represents WCS in international and national forums, and directly supervises a core administrative and managerial staff of 100 people in New York, and programmes in 64 countries. He is accountable for raising programme funds from individual donors, government agencies, foundations and corporations. With a Ph.D. in Zoology, he joined the Smithsonian Institution, then the

69

University of Florida where he established a graduate programme to train students from tropical countries. In over 200 books, book chapters and journal publications, he has written extensively on the impact of subsistence and commercial hunting, the sustainable use of natural resources, and has explored the relationships among conservation research, practice and policy. In 2003, Dr Robinson was inducted into the Royal Order of the Golden Ark by HRH Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands, in recognition of lifetime achievement and service to conservation. Particular qualifications to be a Regional Councillor: John Robinson has a long history of involvement with IUCN, endorses the mission and understands the opportunities and constraints of IUCN’s organizational structure and capabilities. He has been active in the SSC, originally joining as a member of the Primate Specialist Group in 1985, and serving on the Steering Committee (1991–2000, 2003–2010). He represented IUCN on the TRAFFIC Board (1998–2009). He chaired the Sustainable Use Advisory Group (1994–1997), a special IUCN task force, and participated in the Sustainable Use Specialist Group (1992–2009) as member of the Executive Committee and Vice Chair. Throughout this period, he has attended IUCN Congresses and worked closely with IUCN delegates at conferences of the CBD and CITES. Through his WCS position, he has worked closely with IUCN Members, both governmental and non-governmental, throughout the world. In addition, John Robinson has extensive board experience, serving among others with the Christensen Fund (2001–2011, the last year as Chair), Foundations of Success (from 2001 as Chair), the Tropical Forest Foundation (from 2000, now on Executive Committee), the World Parks Endowment (1994–2004). He has served on the Board of Governors of the Society for Conservation Biology, and as its President (2005–2007). SEAGLE, Caroline (USA) Current employment and position/title: PhD Candidate, Joint Appoint VU University Amsterdam (Department of Social and Cultural Anthropology) and McGill University (Department of Anthropology) Experience in fields of concern to IUCN: My research has critically examined the political, socioeconomic and cultural factors gauging land access shifts and environmental change in Madagascar. I am experienced in the fields of corporate engagement in sustainability and biodiversity conservation, local uses of biological diversity and the theorization of land as heritage. Having carried out extensive empirical research in Madagascar, I am particularly concerned with the rights-based approaches to conservation and local realities of both mining and protected area implementation, as well as the equitability of global conservation and climate mitigation schemes such as REDD+ and biodiversity offsetting. Building on progress that has already been made, I am committed to better understanding the sometimes tense relationship between global discourses of sustainable development and conservation policy and local conceptions of sustainability, livelihoods and heritage. I have field experience working for small NGOs engaged in conservation and development, and special insight into the complexities of inter-cultural communication involved. I am strongly committed to finding innovative ways in which to bridge academic research and development practice, and engaging youth in fostering awareness of conservation and local communities.

70

Particular qualifications to be a Regional Councillor: Having studied in both the US and Canada, I am keenly aware of pressing environmental issues facing the North American region, particularly in relation to climate change, Canadian mining abroad, American Indian communities, and environmental justice. I have been involved in youth movements surrounding the Kyoto protocol, human rights, gender issues, and the rights of American Indian groups. Relating my current PhD research to real-world applications, my goal is to engage with and better inform policy debates, user groups and the public/private sector of the Canadian mining industry’s activities abroad in relation to nature conservation, environmental chance and local land rights. Being a young scholar, I hope to act as a youth councillor as it is my conviction that North American youth play a crucial role in shaping development thought and practice; I aim to network with youth groups so as to provide a meaningful way for youth voices to be heard in wider IUCN policy debates. SPENCER Thomas (Grenada) Current employment and position/title: Energy Economist appointed by Government of Grenada as Ambassador and Special Envoy for Multilateral Environmental Agreements, 2008 to present Experience in fields of concern to IUCN: • Member of the CBD SBSTTA Bureau 2006–2010 • Chairman of CBD SBSTTA Bureau 2008–2010 • Vice President of CBD Bureau 2010–2012 • Regional Councillor and Co-Chair of FAC 2008–2012 • Member of Glispa Steering Committee 2008–2011 • Deputy Lead Negotiator for AOSIS in UNFCCC 2007–2011 • Member of Preparatory Steering Committee for IPBES 2008–2010 • Member of the Expert Group on Island Biodiversity • Member of UNEP/WCMC Committee on Biodiversity Indicators Partnership 2006–2010 Particular qualifications to be a Regional Councillor: • Co-Chair of the Finance and Audit Committee • Member of the Governance Committee • Member of the Task Force on IPBES • Secretary of National NGO – Grenada Community Development Agency • Former Director of Finance – Grenada • Consultant – Environment and Socioeconomics

71

CANDIDATES FOR ELECTION AS REGIONAL COUNCILLORS – SOUTH AND EAST ASIA ULLAH, Mahfuz (Bangladesh) Current employment and position/title: Secretary General, Centre for Sustainable Development (CFSD), Bangladesh Experience in fields of concern to IUCN: This would be, if elected, Mr Mahfuz Ullah’s second term as one of the Regional Councillors from South and East Asia. When a number of Councillors are retiring and the President is not running for the second time, there should be some people to carry forward the experiences and knowledge to share with new Councillors. If elected his understanding would help the Council in ensuring continuity of knowledge. As an incumbent Councillor Mr Mahfuz Ullah served well as a member of the Bureau, Constituency Committee, Governance Committee and Private Sector Task Force. He also contributed his expertise as a member of the Resolution Working Group. As a Councillor, Mr Mahfuz Ullah developed a good rapport with his other colleagues in the Council and the Secretariat Staff in the Headquarters. As we know, he is also a familiar face and name in his own region and in other regions of IUCN. Particular qualifications to be a Regional Councillor: Mr Mahfuz Ullah, one of the leading environmental activists, trainer, and media personality of Bangladesh, is the current Secretary General of the Centre for Sustainable Development (CFSD), an independent think-tank. CFSD is a Member of IUCN and is the focal point for the Earth Charter in Bangladesh. He is the immediate past Chair of the IUCN National Committee, Bangladesh and under his leadership the National Committee was approved by the Council of IUCN. Because of long association with IUCN, Mr Mahfuz Ullah has been exposed to and has a proper understanding about the mission, objectives, different programmes and activities of IUCN at national, regional and global level. He holds a Masters Degree in Physics and Journalism and Mass Communication and has attended a number of professional courses abroad. He has worked as a Language Expert in China and served as the Press Officer at the Bangladesh Mission in Calcutta. He was also an adjunct teacher for some time in the Department of Journalism and Mass Communication, Dhaka University. He is credited for pioneering environmental reporting in the print media of Bangladesh. Mr Mahfuz Ullah has authored a number of books and reports on environment and politics, the most important of which include: Communication and Human Rights (et al), Intellectual Property Rights and Bangladesh, Environmental Politics in Bangladesh, Genetically Modified Organisms and Bangladesh, Environment Outlook (et.al), Changing Weather, Changing Climate (et.al), Biodiversity, A Manual for Communicators (et.al). Some of these books are often cited globally by academics and researchers. His other activities and memberships include: Visiting Trainer, Bangladesh Environmental Lawyers Association (BELA), and Bangladesh Centre for Development Journalism & Communication, Life Membership of Bangla Academy and Permanent Membership of the National Press Club. He is also one of the Advisors of the Bangladesh China People’s Friendship Association (BCPFA). He also heads another non-government organization called Nijera Shikhi in Bangladesh as Chair of the Governing Board. He has a close understanding with most of the leading political parties of Bangladesh representing different shades of opinion.

72

CLAPAROLS, ANTONIO M. (Philippines) Current employment and position/title: 1973 to present President and CEO 2004 to present President Imperial Express Service Corporation 1977 to present President Ecological Society of the Philippines Experience in fields of concern to IUCN: • President of an IUCN Member organization (Ecological Society of the Philippines became an

IUCN Member in 1979) • Member of the Philippine Delegation to Rio Earth Summit • Elected IUCN Councillor in 1996 in Montreal • Re-elected IUCN Councillor in Amman, Jordan • Member of the Philippine Delegation to the WSSD in Johannesburg • Member of the IUCN Bureau, 1998 • Chairman of the Appointed Councillors Committee • Member of the Search Committee for the DG 2001 Particular qualifications to be a Regional Councillor: Antonio Claparols is the President of the Ecological Society of the Philippines, an active IUCN Member since 1979. He is very qualified in the position as a Regional Councillor as evidenced by his work and passion to protect and conserve the environment. He has participated in several international conferences on the environment (see above) and he has been elected twice as an IUCN Councillor and has been a member of the IUCN Bureau in 1998. The IUCN Members will benefit a lot if he will be given a chance to be re-elected as Regional Councillor because of his experiences in environmental conservation here in the Philippines, a mega-diverse country. DEUBA, Arzu Rana (Nepal) Current employment and position/title: Parliament and Constituent Assembly of Nepal, Member of Parliament of Nepal and Member of Parliamentary Committee on Natural Resources Experience in fields of concern to IUCN: Dr Rana-Deuba has been active in the field of environment as an activist and social scientist since the early 1990s when she worked for IUCN. In the current first term as IUCN Regional Councillor, Dr Rana-Deuba serves as Chair of the Gender and Biodiversity Task Force (GBTF) of the IUCN Council as well as member of the Steering Committee of the Commission on Environmental, Economic and Social Policy (CEESP) and Co-chair of the Theme on Environment, Conflict and Security (TECS). She also serves on the Bureau of the IUCN Council. She represented IUCN as keynote speaker at the IUCN-PATA Asia Pacific Conference in 2009 and also as Keynote Speaker on the Himalayas at a Mountain Conference organized in Munich, Germany by ICIMOD and its partners in 2010. Within Nepal, Dr Rana-Deuba has been pursuing the demarcation of a large tract of land as natural reserve. As a member of the Parliamentary Committee on Natural Resources, she has been active in providing directives to the Government of Nepal in keeping with its national and international commitments for nature conservation. On the international front, she has used her expertise in the field of gender and social issues to interface with environmental issues. Dr Rana-Deuba has become an active member of the Global Gender and Climate Alliance (GGCA) to campaign for mainstreaming gender issues within the UNFCCC.

73

Particular qualifications to be a Regional Councillor: As a current Regional Councillor of South and East Asia, she hopes to be able to represent Members effectively with her long experience and expertise in the area of social sciences and her commitment to IUCN’s cause. She has been committed and has tried to further the commitments all of us made at the WCC in Barcelona. These are very challenging times for the issues we all hold close to our heart but the small steps we all take together are sure to make a difference in the longer journey. IUCN is poised to take global leadership in a number of these issue areas and the composition of the IUCN Council as always will remain a vital element in that success. In this context she may serve IUCN more effectively from the learning of the first term. She can also offer her candidacy as a woman representative to the Council as there is need to make women’s voices heard more equitably at the decision-making level. Despite her engagement in Nepal as a Member of Parliament, she has devoted her time and energies to IUCN as per IUCN’s rules and requirements of IUCN Councillors. She would be able to serve IUCN’s purpose even more effectively. GUPTA, Meena (India) Current employment and position/title: Retired civil servant of the Government of India. Currently works in an honorary capacity in several non-governmental organizations active in the areas of environment, health, public administration. Experience in fields of concern to IUCN: Ms Gupta has been involved with policy formulation and guidance on matters relating to the environment, forests, and indigenous people, at a very senior level in the Government of India (Permanent Secretary in the Ministries of Environment and Forests, and Tribal Affairs), for several years, up to her retirement in 2008. She has been particularly closely involved with matters relating to environmental impact assessment, forestry, bio-diversity, livelihoods and wildlife. She has chaired the National Committee of IUCN in India during the time she was Permanent Secretary in the Ministry of Environment and Forests. She has been closely involved with the preparation of a landmark legislation relating to livelihood rights of forest dwellers, particularly tribal people in India. Since her retirement, Ms Gupta has worked as a part time adviser to IUCN in India and is currently on the advisory committee of an important IUCN project on trans-boundary water dialogues, operational in Bangladesh and India. She also serves as a Board member of two grassroots non-governmental organizations in India working with people and forests in the Nilgiris (Tamilnadu) and Orissa. Particular qualifications to be a Regional Councillor: With her knowledge of governance issues and awareness of how policy is framed by governments, Ms Gupta will be able to support IUCN in its efforts to influence and impact country and regional policies. Her experience in working on environment matters, as well as livelihood issues, both within and outside the government provide her with an insight which will prove useful in interacting with and understanding the view points of IUCN’s government and non-government Members. Her administrative expertise will prove useful in introducing improvements in the functioning of IUCN.

74

KITAJIMA, Shinichl (Japan) Current employment and position/title: Advisor, Mitsui Sumitomo Insurance Co., Ltd. Experience in fields of concern to IUCN: Mr Shinlchi Kitajima has 40 years of distinguished career in the Japanese Foreign Service which should be useful to the fulfilment of IUCN’s mission. From 2008 to 2011, he served as Japan’s Ambassador to the International organizations in Geneva including IUCN. He represented Japan at many international organizations (WTO, WHO, ILO, WIPO, UNCTAD, ICRC, etc.) there, and is familiar with the workings of these organizations as well as their best practices. He was the Chair of the Council of IOM (International Organization for Migration) from 2009 to 2010 and the Chair of the Humanitarian Liaison Group from 2008 to 2009. From 2005 to 2008, he was Japan’s Ambassador to the OECD in Paris. He discussed best practices in various areas of economic and social activities always with the importance of sustainable development in mind. From 2002 to 2005, he was Deputy Vice Minister for Foreign Affairs in charge of administration. He is familiar with the working and management of large organizations. From 2001 to 2002, he was Director General of the Economic Affairs Bureau in the Foreign Ministry. Particular qualifications to be a Regional Councillor: Throughout his long career in the Japanese Foreign Service, Mr Kitajima had close contacts and liaison with his counterparts in the Region, especially when he served in the Economic Affairs Bureau, the Economic Cooperation Bureau, and the Foreign Policy Bureau. When he was Director of the Aid Policy Division of the Economic Cooperation Bureau in the mid 90’s, he used to visit many countries in the Region discussing Japanese economic and technical cooperation with them and came to share the same values and expectations for the goal of sustainable development. He served in the Japanese Embassy in Singapore In the early 80’s. When he was the Deputy Vice Minister in Tokyo, an Ambassador to the OECD, and Ambassador in Geneva, he was actively involved with the budgetary and structural reforms of various large organizations and he hopes that through such experience he can make a positive contribution to the work of IUCN. MA, Keping (China) Current employment and position/title: Professor of Ecology for the Institute of Botany, Chinese Academy of Sciences Experience in fields of concern to IUCN: Prof. Dr. Ma Keping is a Professor of Biodiversity and its Conservation and has published more than 190 peer reviewed papers and edited 10 related books. Prof. Ma is one of the Chinese scientists who initiated biodiversity research in China. As Secretary General for both the Biodiversity Committee of the Chinese Academy of Sciences and the Chinese National Committee of Diversitas, Prof Ma has organized 9 national symposia on biodiversity conservation and sustainable use together with the State Environmental Protection Administration (SEPA), State Forestry Administration (SFA), Ministry of Agriculture, Ministry of Education, WWF, TNC since 1994. He is also a member of the Executive Committee of IMOSEB (International Mechanism of Scientific

75

Expertise on Biodiversity), he co-chaired the Asian consultation meeting, among other activities and made an important contribution to the development of a new mechanism. As a Scientific Advisor to the Chinese Delegation, Prof. Ma attended most of the meetings of Conference of Parties (COP) to the Convention in Biological Diversity and its related extra-COPs and working group meetings on thematic issues. Prof. Dr. Ma Keping is a prominent scientist on biodiversity and its conservation. He has gained tens of projects on biodiversity and its conservation from Chinese government agencies and international organizations. Particular qualifications to be a Regional Councillor: Owing to his great contribution to nature conservation, Prof. Ma was appointed as the IUCN Regional Councillor for South and East Asia in 2008 and made a lot of efforts involved in the Union’s activities, including setting up the IUCN Working Group in China, promoting the development of IUCN group members in China, developing the Asian Plant Conservation Report 2010 formally published in 2011 and chairing sessions of the 5th Regional Conservation Forum of Asia in 2011. Prof. Ma participated in evaluations on national parks end landscapes in China and gave lectures and conservation advice to related managers. He also accompanied the evaluation experts from IUCN and related organizations to visit Dujiangyan World Heritage Site, Northwest Yunnan World Heritage Site, Giant Panda habitat site of Sichuan, Wudalianchi volcanic sites of Heilongjiang, China. We are confident that Prof Ma will make a difference for the performance of IUCN in Asia if he is approved as a Regional Councillor. SHIN, Dongwon (Republic of Korea) Current employment and position/title: Executive Director (2010 ~ present) Korea National Park Service, Republic of Korea Experience in fields of concern to IUCN: Dr Dongwon Shin has been committed to nature conservation activities for about 30 years. • Leading KNPS to have an agreement with IUCN for strengthening management capacity of

protected areas through the 2012 World Conservation Congress (WCC) and initiating three project-contributions to IUCN including a publication of IUCN Best Practice Guidelines on urban issues.

• Proposing to host the 2012 World Protected Areas Leadership Forum (WPALF) (May) and initiating the first CEOs of National Parks Forum at the Jeju WCC.

• Leading in preparing the 2012 WCC workshops, events, and motion development for Korea and initiating the Korea Conservation Community Campaign for support of the 2012 WCC.

• Organized 12th Meeting of the East Asian Biosphere Reserve Network and Forum on UNESCO ESD (Education for Sustainable Development) especially for spreading awareness of ESD in Protected Areas.

• Involved in supporting protected area management of Mongolia, Indonesia, Costa Rica and Ecuador.

• Member of Korean National Committee of UNESCO MAB, Member of the Korea PA Forum, Member of the ESD Committee, Korean Commission of UNESCO (2010 – present).

• Served as a Senior Programme Officer (P5) of UNEP (Geneva, Paris) (2002–2005, 1996–1998) launching “UNEP Network of Institutions for Sustainable Development (NISD)”.

• OECD environmental negotiator as a Director of the Overseas Division Korean Ministry of Environment (1999–2002).

Particular qualifications to be a Regional Councillor: Academic background: Ph.D in Sustainability Policy, Erasmus University, NetherlandS / MSc in Urban Planning (ecological economics), Graduate School of Environmental Studies, Seoul National University, Korea (SNU) / BS in Social Studies, SNU

76

• He worked as Adjunct Professor at the Department of Natural Resources Sciences, McGill University (Canada) and developing an EIA course, regional sustainability projects with CIDA on a global base especially in Asia and Africa.

• He has been serving as Director-General for the Regional Environmental Agency of Korean Ministry of Environment: Head of Seoul Metropolitan Air Quality Management Agency, Head of Wonju Regional Environment Administration Agency (2006–2009), where comprehensive regional projects were implemented: ecosystem conservation projects, eco-tourism projects, EIA, etc.

• As the Director for Overseas Cooperation Division, Ministry of Environment, he established international networks such as the World Bank-Korea Knowledge Partnership Program (2001~2007), Tripartite Environment Ministers Meeting for China, Japan, and Korea (TEMM).

• He was invited by the US Department of State in accordance with the International Visitor Program (IVP), working for the Korea Environmental Research Institute (1984–1986).

SUH, Youngbae (Republic of Korea) Current employment and position/title: Professor, Natural Products Research Institute, Seoul National University Experience in fields of concern to IUCN: Prof. Youngbae Suh has a long history of association with IUCN. Since the Korea National Committee for IUCN was officially recognized in 1998, he has been involved in IUCN programmes at various levels. From 2009 to the present, he has been serving as the Chair of the Asia Regional Committee, which was officially approved at the 77th Council in November 2011. As the Chair of the Regional Committee, he had the Asia Regional Conservation Forum held successfully September 27–30, 2011 in Incheon, Korea. From 2008 to the present, he has also served as the President of the Korea National Committee. In this term, Korea was successful in becoming the host of the IUCN World Conservation Congress. From 2004 to 2008, he served as the secretary of the Korea National Committee for IUCN. In this post, he was practically in charge of re-establishing strong IUCN programmes in Korea. Since 2004, the membership in Korea has grown from 4 Members to 26, and 5 more applications were submitted for approval in February 2012. To this end, Korea will have one of the largest IUCN bodies in the region. Currently, he also serves on the Congress Preparatory Committee for the 2012 World Conservation Congress. Particular qualifications to be a Regional Councillor: Prof. Youngbae Suh has proved his strong commitment and excellent efficiency in developing and promoting the missions and work of the Union throughout his long career with IUCN. During his chairmanship of the Asia Regional Committee, he has been building close relationships and sharing good understandings with secretariats as well as Members in the region. The 2011 Asia Regional Conservation Forum was the largest and most successful RCF ever in IUCN history. He has made huge efforts to host the 2012 World Conservation Congress in Korea, and his contribution continues to the successful WCC. Korea has become a strong partner to IUCN with a great potential. He has played a key role to promote IUCN programmes in Korea. His connections to the various levels of Member organizations in the country should be essential to build the successful partnership between Korea and the Union in coming years. Since 1993, as a plant taxonomist as well

77

as a professor in Seoul National University, he has been involved in various projects related to the subject of conservation. He is ready to share his knowledge, experience and commitment, which he has earned in his academic field, in the country and in the region, to promote the work of the Union.

78

CANDIDATES FOR ELECTION AS REGIONAL COUNCILLORS – WEST ASIA AMIN ASLAM KHAN, Malik (Pakistan) Current employment and/or position/title: • Senior Climate Policy Advisor to UNDP (Pakistan) • Member of Advisory Group on Climate Change (Government of Pakistan) • Executive Director of ENVORK (A Research and Development Organization) • Consultancy/Advisory work on Climate Change and Environmental policy formulation in various

countries including Turkey, East Timor, Malawi and Uzbekistan. Experience in fields of concern to IUCN: Malik Amin Aslam, over the past 15 years, has accumulated a very rich and diverse experience as a policy researcher as well as political policy practitioner in the environmental field. He has a unique exposure to the environmental conservation issues as he has served as the Minister of State for Environment in Pakistan (2004–2007) and as a Member of Parliament and Member of the Standing Committee of Environment (2002–2007). During this time he was the architect of a number of national environmental policies including the CDM strategy, the National Environmental Policy and the National Forest Policy. Moreover, he represented and led the Pakistan Delegation at various forums including acting as the Chairman of the G77/China Negotiating Group. Also, as the Special Envoy on Environment for the Prime Minister, he was involved in the UN “delivering as one” reform process.

In addition, as a policy researcher, Malik Amin Aslam has been active in the climate change policy making arena and has recently worked as a climate change/carbon market advisor to various countries including Turkey, Uzbekistan, East Timor and Malawi. During the years he has been closely associated in partnering with IUCN in a number of environmental conservation issues as an environmental advocate and campaigner as well as political policy practitioner. This includes varied work such as providing input on the climate policy focus of IUCN, facilitating the rescue of a snow leopard in the Himalayan region as well as fostering a campaign to revive the mangroves of Pakistan. Particular qualifications to be a Regional Councillor: Malik Amin Aslam has strong educational qualifications (M.Sc in Environmental Management from Oxford University and MBA in Development Finance from McGill University) coupled with a very rich exposure to environmental conservation and policy management issues at the local, national as well as international levels. His solid theoretical grounding of environmental issues is well balanced with a practical experience of managing these multi-dimensional issues at the national as well as global levels and the associated complexity of working them through intricate multilateral processes. Moreover, his political roots ensure a sensitized and deep understanding of the local dynamics of environmental issues, particularly climate change. This unique marriage of global environmental exposure and strong grass roots political experience that Malik Amin Aslam possesses will provide him a strong base to add value to the committed conservation work undertaken by IUCN. Finally, he has been already actively engaged with the IUCN’s work and is well attuned to the working format of this organization at the Pakistan as well as the global level which will further allow him to effectively contribute to the organization. OMAR ASEM, Samira (Kuwait) Current employment and position/title:

Principal Research Scientist, Division Director/Food Resources and Marine Sciences Division, Kuwait Institute for Scientific Research (KISR). Program Director, Management and Supervision of Kuwait Environmental Remediation Program.

79

Experience in fields of concern to IUCN: • Coordinator and Chairperson of the Scientific Committee for the IUCN 2011 Regional

Conservation Forum (RCF) Climate Change and Biodiversity. Kuwait, 2–5 May 2011 • Chairperson of the Scientific Committee for the International Conference on Impact of Climate

Change on Agriculture and Biodiversity in the Arab Region, Kuwait, 30/11/2010 to 2/12/2010. • Chairperson of the IUCN National Committee of Kuwait, 2008–2011 • Regional Vice Chair for West Asia (IUCN). April 2009 • External Reviewer to IUCN as a representative of KISR key Member of IUCN, 2007 • IUCN National Coordinator in the State of Kuwait since 2004 • Regional IUCN representative and Chairperson of Kuwait Institute for Scientific Research

delegate to the IUCN 3rd World Conservation Congress, Bangkok, Thailand, 17–25/11/2004 • Consultant to IUCN in the International Technical Review Committee for Oil Production and

Mining Protected Areas. Montréal, Canada. May 3–5, 2002 • Member of the Species Survival Commission (SSC), (IUCN) since 1999 • Observer to the IUCN Congress Meeting. Montreal, Canada 13–23 October 1996 • Member in the World Commission on Protected Areas (WCPA), (IUCN) since 1994 Particular qualifications to be a Regional Councillor: Dr Samira Omar Asem has more than 37 years experience in management and leadership in R&D at the Kuwait Institute for Scientific Research (KISR) related to biodiversity conservation agriculture and environment. Dr Omar attained her Ph.D in Wild Land Resource Sciences from the University of California, Berkeley in 1990, M.Sc in Range Management from the University of California, Berkeley, and B.Sc in Botany and Chemistry from Kuwait University. During her career as Director for the “Food Resources and Marine Sciences Division” at KISR she has been responsible for six programmes namely: Aridland Agriculture Production; Biodiversity for Terrestrial Ecosystem; Food and Nutrition Production; Ecosystem Based Management for Marine; Aquaculture; and Biotechnology. Dr Omar is the Technical Program Director of the Kuwait Environmental Remediation Program awarded by the United Nations Compensation Commission (UNCC). She is responsible for supervising the implementation of the programme at the government level to ensure proper and transparent implementation of the programme according to the UNCC decisions. Dr Omar has national, regional and international recognitions and has been affiliated to many local and international organizations. She published 30 refereed journal papers; 101 books, proceedings and 103 technical reports. Dr Omar participated in 102 local, regional and international conferences, and provided consultations to local, regional and international organizations. Dr Omar Asem has been the representative of an active member of IUCN and provided support to the IUCN Programme at the local and regional levels. SHAHBAZ, Mohammad (Jordan) Current employment and/or position/title: Advisor, National Center for Research and Development, Higher Council for Science and Technology, Jordan Experience in fields of concern to IUCN: • MSc in chemical engineering, industrial waste water treatment, 1982 • Chief of Water Protection Division, Jordan Department of the Environment, 1983 • Assistant Director, Environment Sector, Higher Council for Science and Technology,1989 • Director, Badia Research and Development Program, BRDP, 1995 • President, Badia Research and Development Centre, BRDC, 2005 • Member, Jordan Environment Society, 1987 • Member. Jordanian Society for the Combating of Desertification and Badia Development • Member, IUCN National Committee, 1997 • Chair, IUCN National Committee, 2001–2009 • Certificate of Appreciation: Global Environmental Facility, 2001

80

• Advisor and National Team Leader to the Cabinet of Ministers of the Government of Jordan, Environmental Gulf War Compensations, National Task Force, 1997–2005

• Member of team, “Science and Technology Policy and Strategy in The Environment Sector”. Formulation and Plan Execution, Policy Analysis, 1993

• Jordan National Strategy and Action Plan To Combat Desertification, 2006, co-author, UNDP (Drylands Development Center) – Ministry of Environment, Jordan

• IUCN Councillor, 2008–2012 • Member of Steering Committee CEESP, 2011 Particular qualifications to be a Regional Councillor:

Presently Mr Shahbaz is a member of the Council representing West Asia, contributing in the Steering Committee of CEESP, in addition to being a member of the Constituency Committee and the Private Sector Task Force reporting to the Council.

Mr Shahbaz is the Chair of the IUCN Regional Committee, with many regional initiatives and contributions, lately engaged in the success of the West Asia Regional Conservation Forum. For many years he served as a member of the National Selection Committee for the Global Environmental Facility/World Bank, 1998 up till now, providing assistance and guidance to many national NGOs in the expansion of the green funds provided by GEF. Supervision and Foreword writing for a recent book “Badia: the Living Desert”, 2011, describing the Badia (Desert) environment and its various living components.

81

CANDIDATES FOR ELECTION AS REGIONAL COUNCILLORS – OCEANIA BIGNELL, Andrew (New Zealand) Current employment and/or position/title: Manager International, Department of Conservation, Wellington, New Zealand Experience in fields of concern to IUCN: My career has focussed on natural resources management, particularly National Park and other terrestrial and marine protected areas management. I have undertaken roles in research, planning and governance of protected areas, with particular focus on New Zealand and the Pacific. I have been a senior member of the Department of Conservation for many years and have had active engagement in departmental governance and the whole of Government activity. Currently I am responsible for the Department’s engagement in international activities with responsibility for strategic relationships. I am a member of the CBD COP Bureau.

Within the Pacific I have participated in the work of inter-governmental organizations, the Pacific Islands Roundtable for Nature Conservation (an NGO/Government alliance) and participated in the formation and work of the IUCN Oceania Regional Committee. I am a member of the WCPA and Chair of the New Zealand Committee of IUCN Members. Particular qualifications to be a Regional Councillor: As a senior manager in the Department of Conservation I am closely acquainted with the roles of governance, leadership and management of a large organization. These skills have also been developed in the international arena. Within the IUCN family I have been active in Oceania and New Zealand, especially in the work of the National Committee.

Experience in multilateral environmental agreements, especially the CBD, has led to a deep understanding of the interconnectedness of these agreements and the role that IUCN plays in the development, evolution and implementation of the agreements.

As a long standing member of the New Zealand Committee of IUCN Members, combined with Pacific experience, the importance of the role of representing and reporting to Members and Commission members is well understood.

MACKEY, Brendan (Australia) Current employment and/or position/title: Professor and Director Griffith Climate Change Response Program Griffith University, Australia Experience in fields of concern to IUCN: I have internationally recognized expertise in the fields of conservation science, particularly in relation to ecosystems, connectivity conservation, forest management, and biodiversity-climate change interactions. I have been a member of expert groups which have written reports for the Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity (Technical Reports 41 and 43). I have participated in various UN international conferences and CoPs for climate change and sustainable development processes. I have considerable experience in the formulation of science and evidence-based conservation policy.

82

Particular qualifications to be a Regional Councillor: I currently serve on the IUCN Council as a Regional Councillor for Oceania. As a member of Council, I am Co-Chair of the Policy and Programme Committee, and a member of the Governance Committee, the Private Sector Task Force, the Rio+20 Task Force, and the Climate Change Core Group. I am also a member of the Commission on Environmental Law, the World Commission on Protected Areas, and the Commission on Environmental, Economic and Social Policy. I serve ex officio as a Regional Councillor on the Executive Committee of the Australian Committee for IUCN. I work on matters of conservation and environmental protection with governments at all levels, the private sector, and NGOs. TIRAA, Anna Elizabeth (Cook Islands) Current employment and/or position/title: Director of Climate Change, Cook Islands Government Experience in fields of concern to IUCN: Anna Tiraa is a committed conservationist with more than 20 years working for the benefit of the Pacific Islands environment. Anna has undertaken environmental related work for Government, National and international NGOs, communities, private sector, inter-governmental regional organizations and the UN. Work experience includes project design, implementation, negotiation, monitoring, review and evaluation. Individual work assignments have been in the Cook Islands, Samoa, Fiji, Solomon Islands, Vanuatu, New Caledonia, Tuvalu and Tokelau. She has been a major contributor to bringing back a critically endangered endemic Rarotongan bird from the brink of extinction. As Biodiversity Officer for the Secretariat for the Pacific Regional Environment Program (SPREP), she has contributed to the biodiversity conservation efforts of more than 20 Pacific Island countries and territories. This experience has given her a sound knowledge of processes across a broad spectrum of groups contributing to conservation initiatives in the Oceania region, and allowed her to establish a valuable network of environmental policy makers and practitioners in the Oceania region. Particular qualifications to be a Regional Councillor: Anna’s educational qualifications include a BSc in Environmental Studies from the University of the South Pacific, Fiji (1994), and an MSc in Natural Resources Management from the Asian Institute of Technology, Thailand, (2011), for which she was awarded a UNEP scholarship. Her research project was on the topic of biodiversity and climate change in the Cook Islands. Anna is presently a member of the IUCN Commission on Ecosystem Management (CEM) and Deputy Regional Vice Chair for Oceania, World Commission on Protected Areas (WCPA). She is an Executive Committee member of the IUCN Transboundary Specialist Group (Oceania Representative). She is also an Executive founding member of Tapororporo’anga Ipukarea Society (a Cook Islands Environmental NGO formed in 1996, also an IUCN Member) and was a Global Councillor for BirdLife International Council from 2004–2006.

83

CANDIDATES FOR ELECTION AS REGIONAL COUNCILLORS – EAST EUROPE, NORTH AND CENTRAL ASIA AMIRKHANOV, Amirkhan (Russian Federation) Current employment and/or position/title: Deputy Head, Federal Service for Supervision of Natural Resource Usage of the Russian Federation. Experience in fields of concern to IUCN: Dr Amirkhan Amirkhanov started his nature conservation activities in 1978 as a Scientific Director in the North-Ossetian State Nature Reserve. In 1992 he joined the Ministry of Ecology and Natural Resources of the Russian Federation. From 1993 till 2000 he occupied the position of Deputy Minister and Deputy Chairman of the Russian State Environmental Administration, and then worked as Deputy Director, Director and Acting Director of the Department of the State Environmental Policy in the Ministry of Natural Resources of the Russian Federation. In 2010 he was appointed Deputy Head of the Federal Service for Supervision of Natural Resource Usage. Dr Amirkhanov is one of the most respected and authoritative experts in nature conservation. For many years of fruitful labour Dr Amirkhanov was granted a title of Honoured Environmentalist of the Russian Federation (by Decree of the President of the Russian Federation in 2003), he is honoured with the Medal “850 Anniversary of Moscow”, honoured with diplomas of IUCN, International Union for Conservation of Nature, Russian Ecological Union, All-Russia Society for Nature Conservation and other international and non-governmental organizations, as well as the ones of the State Committee for Ecology of Russia and the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment of the Russian Federation. Particular qualifications to be a Regional Councillor: Dr Amirkhan Amirkhanov is well-known in the IUCN family and familiar with IUCN’s activities. In 1993, when he was a Deputy Minister, he took part in negotiations with IUCN for increasing IUCN activities in the region. During the period 1994 till 2011 he was triply elected as IUCN Regional Councillor. In this position he contributed a lot to promoting IUCN’s mission in the region, supporting the work of IUCN Members and Commissions and engaging with IUCN on topical issues in Russia (International Tiger Forum 2010, the Sochi 2014 Olympic Winter Games). In 1998 Dr Amirkhanov took an active part in establishing the Russian National Committee for IUCN (and served as its Chair). Dr Amirkhanov has extensive international experiences in the nature conservation policy and management scene. Since 1994 Dr Amirkhanov took an active part and provided contributions to nearly all major IUCN fora, including World Conservation Congresses and regional IUCN Members meetings (the Meeting of European IUCN Councillors and Chairs of IUCN National Committees in Europe, 2010, Nizhne-Svirskiy State Natural Reserve Leningrad Oblast, the Russian Federation). Dr Amirkhanov is actively involved in bilateral nature conservation activities and dealing with various international organizations (European Council, Arctic Council, UNDP, UNESCO, World Bank). HOŠEK, Michael (Czech Republic) Current employment and/or position/title: Deputy Director - Head of Division of Nature and Landscape Documentation Experience in fields of concern to IUCN: At European level, Michael is a representative of the Czech Republic as a Member State of the European Union in nature conservation (Nature Directors Meeting, Coordination Group for Biodiversity and Nature, Habitats Committee). Because the Nature Conservation Agency is a member of the European Topic Centre on Biodiversity, Michael coordinates participation in this consortium and he is

84

http://www.multitran.ru/c/m.exe?t=4077838_1_2

http://www.multitran.ru/c/m.exe?t=4077838_1_2

also involved in selected scientific tasks within the framework of this activity. Since 2011, Michael has been leading the Czech section of the EUROPARC Federation as an elected president. At national level, Michael is responsible for the creation of the Natura 2000 network at scientific and technical level as well as for the monitoring and evaluation of status of habitats and species under Directive 92/43/EHS (monitoring under Art. 11, reporting under Art. 17). Doing this, he also leads development and maintenance of the content of the Nature Conservancy Information System (including physical and electronic documentation of the national nature conservation). Michael is also responsible for t h e CITES Scientific Authority Office and for coordination of all scientific programmes within the Nature Conservation Agency including international projects. He also participates in developing strategies in nature conservation in cooperation with the Ministry of the Environment. Particular qualifications to be a Regional Councillor: Michael graduated as a Bachelor at Czech University of Life Sciences in Prague and completed his Master of Science studies in Applied Ecology at the University of Jan Evangelista Purkyne. In the period 2004–2005 he was a leader of the Regional Office of the Nature Conservation Agency in two regions - Kralovehradecky and Pardubicky coordinating all aspects of activities in nature conservation as a S tate body (administration and management of State property in specially protected areas, nature conservation subsidies, preparation of regional strategies). Since 2005 he has been active at European level as an expert. He has been leading research projects focused on nature conservation at national level and also some international project activities (e.g. project ‘Integration of Nature and Biodiversity and Land Use Data’ awarded by the European Commission). In general, Michael has a good knowledge about biodiversity issues at a practical level in the field and he is also experienced in international negotiations at the EU, Europe as well as global levels (due to representation of the Czech Republic within the multilateral agreements in the field of biodiversity conservation) and as an expert in analyzing national legislation in light of the EU Nature Directives requirements, also teaching and lecturing various target groups. MARGHESCU, Tamás (Hungary) Current employment and/or position/title: Director General of the International Council for Game and Wildlife Conservation (CIC) Experience in fields of concern to IUCN:

• trained as forestry engineer (Masters in Forestry Science from the Albert-Ludwigs-University

Freiburg, Germany; • 8 years (1988–1995) with the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) in

different positions, working on forestry, conservation, rural and regional development programmes mainly in South-East Asia and Europe;

• 6 years (1995–2002) Government Adviser to the Ministry of Environment (Nature Conservation

Authority) of Hungary; • 8 years (2002–2009) IUCN Regional Director for Pan Europe and Permanent Representative to

the European Union, “putting IUCN on the map of Europe”; member of the IUCN Executive Management Group (2006–2008), representing the interests of all regions of IUCN, founder of Countdown 2010 (http://www. countdown2010. net/), organizer of Sailing to Barcelona (2008 WCC); and

• Since 2010, with the International Council for Game and Wildlife Conservation (CIC), an IUCN

Member, present position: CEO, Director General.

85

Particular qualifications to be a Regional Councillor: Tamás Marghescu is a well-known and respected personality in the field of international forestry; nature conservation and sustainable development. He values IUCN as a crucial institution to lead the battle of nature conservation. He knows IUCN from the inside and has an enormous international network of contacts ail over the world, which he understands to use for the purposes of conservation. He is able to develop visions and make them become true. He has a track record of a leader being able to also be a member of a team. He is transparent and honest, creative and constructive and ‘not thinking out of the box’. His political experience from being lUCN’s Permanent Representative to the European Union for almost 8 years, would be an invaluable asset in the Council of IUCN. His ability to convene people, to be credible to different stakeholders in conservation and to mobilize financial resources for conservation could be of immense use to the Council of IUCN. He is a member of WCPA and of the European IUCN Sustainable Use Specialist Group, emphasizing that sustainable use is a strong pillar of conservation. PATARIDZE, Tamar (Georgia) Current employment and/or position/title: Deputy Head of the Agency of Protected Areas of Georgia under the Ministry of Environment Protection of Georgia Experience in fields of concern to IUCN: Tamar Pataridze serves as a Deputy Head of the Agency of Protected Areas of Georgia for almost one year. The protected areas system of Georgia is developed and managed according to the categories and principles of IUCN. Therefore Tamar’s daily work is directly connected with the main fields of concern of IUCN, such as biodiversity protection, improving socio-economic conditions of local people, climate change adaptation and mitigation etc. She is the person who knows the problems from inside, is well aware of the priorities and processes undergoing in the country and region, has intensive communication with her colleagues from other countries and can perfectly fulfil the task of effective communication and coordination between Georgia, other countries from the region and IUCN. Particular qualifications to be a Regional Councillor: Tamar Pataridze • has seven years of working experience in the field of environment; • is experienced in non-governmental as well as governmental sectors; • has technical understanding of environmental issues and holds a professional degree in the field; • has the knowledge and understanding of issues of biodiversity protection and protected areas in

the country as well as in the region; and • has effective communication skills and speaks perfect English. PERSÁNYI, Miklós (Hungary) Current employment and/or position/title: Director General of Budapest Zoo and Botanical Garden, Hungary Experience in fields of concern to IUCN: Veteran chief executive of government and public institutions with a high level of administration experience and organizational skills, twenty years of practice in day-to-day running and long-term leadership of large conservation oriented organizations. A strong track record in organizational strategy and development, including results-based management and strategic planning. Creative and product oriented manager with intersectoral, interdisciplinary and lateral thinking.

86

Extensive experience and knowledge of the conservation, as well as the environmental and sustainable development agenda, environmental policy experience on local, national and international organizational levels, including employment in government and one of the major IFIs. High level advisory, consultancy and training experience in zoo and conservation management on four continents, personal experience gained by visiting more than 500 national parks, protected areas, conservation centres, zoos, aquaria, botanical gardens. Highly developed diplomatic and public policy skills, good capacities in maintaining relations with clients, partners and stakeholders, first-rate training, communication and presentation abilities and a wide range of products developed for environmental awareness raising. Extensive network and travel experience on five continents including all countries of transition economies of Europe and Asia and countries in Asia, Latin America and Africa and also in the USA. Particular qualifications to be a Regional Councillor: Education • M.Sc. Biology, M.A. Communication, ELTE University of Sciences, Budapest • M.P.S. Environmental Engineering, Gödöllö University of Agriculture • Ph.D. Political Science specializing in environmentalism and environmental policy • Professional Development in Natural Resource Management, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA • Languages: professional Hungarian and English, basic conversational level Russian and German Work Profile • 1994–2003 and since 2007 Director General, Budapest Zoo and Botanical Garden • 2003–2007, Minister for the Environment and Water of Hungary • 1991–1994, Senior Environmental Specialist for the European Bank for Reconstruction and

Development, London U.K • 1986–1990, Public Administration Officer, director of departments in environmental agencies of

the Hungarian Government (policy analysis, awareness raising, education) • 1983–1986, Researcher on environmentalism and environmental policy • Before 1983, Teacher of biology in high school, organizer of youth and environmental civil actions

87

CANDIDATES FOR ELECTION AS REGIONAL COUNCILLORS – WEST EUROPE CROFTS, Roger (United Kingdom) Current employment and/or position/title: Independent environmental management advisor, author, broadcaster and lecturer. Chair The Sibthorp Trust (IUCN Member). WCPA Emeritus. CEM member. Member of following IUCN Member organizations: Plantlife International, IEEM, Scottish Environment LINK, EUROPARC Federation. Chair Galloway & Southern Ayrshire Biosphere Reserve Partnership Board. Member Board Crichton Carbon Centre. Project Director Watson Bird Centre and Celebration. Chair Royal Society of Edinburgh Land Use Strategy Group. Visiting Professor of Geography and Environment, University of Aberdeen. www.rogercrofts.net Experience in fields of concern to IUCN: Environmental management: temperate mid-latitudes. Contributed to/written 7 books on earth heritage, nature conservation and environmental management. Led development of 25 year strategy for Scotland Natural Heritage Futures; strategy for plant conservation in UK with Plantlife; and soil conservation in Iceland with Soil Conservation Service. Protected areas: led implementation of EU Natura 2000 programme for Scotland 1992–2002; Chaired Durban Accord Working Group for Vth World Parks Congress 2003 and chaired 5 year review meeting in 2008; advice on establishment of national parks in Scotland, Denmark, protected areas development in Iceland, protected areas management in Sweden, Bulgaria and Lithuania. Sustainable development: as senior civil servant in UK Government responsible for rural development and natural environment, first sustainable development strategy for Scotland (1989) and first statutory duty on sustainability (1991); independent strategic reviews in Scotland of energy (2006) and future of the land and communities (2009) for Royal Society of Edinburgh. In depth knowledge of land use policy and practice, the EU Common Agricultural Policy, EU rural development and environmental policies. Particular qualifications to be a Regional Councillor: IUCN knowledge and experience: CEO statutory lead for IUCN in UK 1992–2002; Chair UK National Committee 1999–2002, WCPA Regional Vice-Chair for Europe and member WCPA Global Steering Committee 2000–2008; attended last 4 World Conservation Congresses. Participated in global and regional programme development. Undertook review of WCPA and IUCN Protected Areas Programme in 1998. Regular contact with IUCN Member bodies in Western and Central Europe. Engagement in organizations at highest executive and board levels responsible for culture, leadership, strategic direction, performance management, and financial control. CEO government agency Scottish Natural Heritage 1992–2002 (850 staff, £50m budget). Board Director: National Trust for Scotland 2004–2009 (450 staff and £30m budget), Scottish Agricultural College 2002–2010 (800 staff, £40m budget), Crichton Carbon Centre 2009–, and Fieldfare 2005–. Board Director, Deputy Chair and Chair Plantlife International 2001–2010 (30 staff, budget £2m), Chair The Sibthorp Trust (formerly IUCN UK). Environmental recognition: Commander of the British Empire, Hon DSc, Fellowships of 4 learned societies, Icelandic Soil Conservation Medal and Emeritus of WCPA. DE IONGH, Hans (Netherlands) Current employment and/or position/title: Associate Professor at the Institute of Environmental Sciences of Leiden University and Guest Professor at the University of Antwerp

88

http://www.rogercrofts.net/

Experience in fields of concern to IUCN: Hans de Iongh has been a member of the Board of the Netherlands Committee for IUCN since 1987, Chair of the Committee (1990–2000), and Vice Chair (2000–2003). In October 2008 he became Regional Councillor for West Europe and he served in this position until 2012. Since 2003, he has been a member of the Supervisory Board of IUCN NL and Biodiversity Advisor to the daily board. Mr de Iongh is an active member of the IUCN Species Survival Commission, especially the Sustainable Use Specialist Group, the Sirenia Specialist Group and the Cat Specialist Group. He is also a member of the African Lion Working Group (affiliated with the Cat Specialist Group), and he has contributed to the Ecosystem Management Group for several years. Hans de Iongh was involved in the preparation of National and Regional Conservation Action Plans for the African Lion and for the dugong in Indonesia and South East Asia. Particular qualifications to be a Regional Councillor: Hans de Iongh has been Chair of the Netherlands Committee for IUCN during 1990 until 2000, Co-Chair during 2000–2003 and served as a Regional Councillor for West Europe during 2008–2012. He has a broad experience with international biodiversity policy and practice. He participated as delegation member in the COP of the CBD, CITES and Ramsar during consecutive years. He is a member of the Netherlands CITES Commission, Chair of the Van Tienhoven Foundation and member of an Advisory Group to the Ministry of LNV on Red Lists in the Netherlands. He has been active in the development of harmonization of Red Lists in Europe and contributed to and initiated several National Conservation Strategies for threatened species and Red Listing in Europe. Hans de Iongh has long standing experience with IUCN and the IUCN network. HUGHES, Jonathan (United Kingdom) Current employment and/or position/title: Jonathan is Director of Conservation with the Scottish Wildlife Trust, one of 47 UK Wildlife Trusts which together form one of the largest non-governmental conservation organizations in Europe. Jonathan’s role is to lead a department of c80 staff delivering major conservation projects, education programmes, nature reserve management and campaigns. Jonathan also plays a lead role in developing strategy and monitoring the performance of the organization. Experience in fields of concern to IUCN: In 2009, Jonathan co-founded the IUCN National Committee of the UK Peatland Programme, a three year £500,000 project which has successfully raised the profile of peatland conservation with decision-makers and mobilized restoration projects on the ground. The programme has successfully promoted the importance of these carbon-rich wetlands at global level within both the Convention on Biological Diversity and the UNFCCC In addition to his wetland conservation interests, Jonathan is a former advisor to the Forestry Commission England on native woodlands and would bring in-depth knowledge of forest management and governance to the IUCN Council. Jonathan also has specialist knowledge on urban sustainability issues from an urban design as well as an ecological perspective. In this capacity he was recently appointed by government ministers to the board of the government agency Architecture and Design Scotland. Jonathan is author of several scientific papers, policy reports, parliamentary briefings and press articles and regularly appears on radio and television. His most recent policy outputs are on subjects

89

very relevant to the IUCN global programme, including work on ecosystem-based conservation, marine renewables and nature-based solutions to climate change (available on the CEM website). Jonathan remains a dedicated and experienced field botanist, ornithologist and entomologist and gets out into the field whenever possible. Particular qualifications to be a Regional Councillor: Jonathan has a proven track record of ensuring governance processes and structures achieve cohesion and collaboration within a complex membership organization as a Board member of Scottish Environment Link, an umbrella body of over 30 environmental organizations. He is also an active member of the IUCN National Committee of the UK and the Commission on Ecosystem Management. In addition, Jonathan brings experience of working with a range of organizations and EU institutions through his role as European Affairs Representative for Scottish Environment Link (an IUCN Member). One of Jonathan’s key skills is in bridging the gap between science, policy, and practice and translating ideas into real conservation action. He has a history of building partnerships outside the conservation world to mainstream biodiversity into other sectors, particularly construction and development industries. Jonathan’s other key strength is his exceptional strategic planning skills developed over 20 years working largely at senior level in the third sector, the civil service and local government. During this time, Jonathan has developed into a politically astute environmental communicator with extensive networks of influential government, parliamentary and media contacts. Jonathan is passionate about the mission of IUCN from local to global level. He would bring a freshness, dynamism and an unwavering commitment to representing the interests of IUCN Members on Council. ORAL, Nilufer (Turkey) Current employment and/or position/title: Istanbul Bilgi University Law School – Law School Faculty Member Experience in fields of concern to IUCN: Nilufer Oral has extensive experience in the areas of marine environmental protection, shipping and climate change. She has served as co-chair of the Specialist Group on Oceans, Coasts and Coral Reefs of the IUCN Commission on Environmental Law since 2005. She has been actively involved in the work of the IUCN Mediterranean Centre and Global Oceans Programme for improved governance of the Mediterranean Sea beyond national jurisdiction. She has also worked in close collaboration with the Black Sea Commission for the Protection of the Black Sea Against Pollution and with the Mediterranean Action Programme. Professor Oral has also been involved with the work of IUCN on the protection of the high seas. In Turkey, she has worked closely with the Turkish Scientific and Technological Research Council on projects related to protection of the marine environment. In addition, Professor Oral is the legal advisor and a negotiator for Turkey at the UNFCCC meetings for climate change. She has also worked as an international legal expert on a UNDP-UNEP project for developing Turkey’s legislation on adaptation to climate change. Particular qualifications to be a Regional Councillor: Nifufer Oral is actively involved in many environmental international and regional organizations. She is the first member from Turkey of the IUCN Commission on Environmental Law and has actively promoted the work of the Commission in Turkey and regionally. She has hosted several IUCN meetings in Turkey since her membership in 2004. In addition, she serves as a member of the International Oceans Institute (IOI) headquartered in Malta which actively promotes through capacity

90

building activities, protection of the coastal and marine environment in regions around the world including the Black Sea and Caspian region. Professor Oral has demonstrated a strong commitment to conservation issues and is respected for her active engagement by her colleagues nationally and internationally. Professor Oral is fluent in Turkish, English and French. SYMONS PIROVOLIDOU, Despina (Greece) Current employment and/or position/title: Director of the European Bureau for Conservation and Development (EBCD) Experience in fields of concern to IUCN: The nominee has been Director of EBCD, an active Member of IUCN for 22 years.

The candidate has played a key role in several IUCN initiatives including the establishment of the IUCN Regional Office for Europe, the IUCN European Sustainable Use Specialist Group, the creation of the IUCN Global Marine Programme (GMP) and the creation of the Fisheries Expert Group of the IUCN/CEM of which the candidate is the coordinator. Regarding the IUCN SUSG, EBCD continues to provide the Secretariat and the candidate continues to be member of the Executive Committee.

Working closely with the EU Institutions for over 20 years, the candidate has gained deep knowledge of EU policies and procedures and has established an extensive network of valuable contacts in Brussels which she can bring to the IUCN family. All this combined with her deep knowledge of the IUCN and its functioning (having followed actively developments within IUCN for over 22 years) the candidate can make a considerable contribution to the Council and assist Members in furthering their objectives and working closer with the EU. Particular qualifications to be a Regional Councillor: The nominee has a deep knowledge and experience in conservation issues and knows well and believes in IUCN (representative of an active member of IUCN since 1989). She has considerable experience in fundraising given that she has been responsible for all the fundraising of EBCD since its establishment. She has an important network of contacts in the EU institutions and a deep knowledge of the EU policies and procedures. Furthermore, she has good contacts in many European countries both governments and NGOs and speaks fluently and communicates in four languages. Finally she has the institutional support of EBCD to help her carry out the tasks of a Regional Councillor. VON WEISSENBERG, Marina (Finland) Current employment and/or position/title: Counsellor at the Ministry of the Environment, Finland Experience in fields of concern to IUCN: IUCN Councillor for West-Europe 2008–2011 and willing to serve IUCN for the second term. The chair of IPBES Task Force in the IUCN Council and member of the Governance Committee, Programme and Policy Committee as well as the Constituency Committee. Halting the biodiversity loss globally is my vision. IUCN plays a key role in this thanks to the broad scientific background. In the field of conservation, nature protection and sustainable use of natural resources, IUCN and its network of scientists and knowledge holders are paramount.

91

Political scientist by profession, I am working with international nature protection issues at the Ministry of the Environment, Finland I have been serving as the secretary as well as Chair of the IUCN National Committee of Finland for many years which has given me the opportunity to learn to know the broad field of IUCN membership not only in Europe but also in Africa, Asia and South America. I am the National Focal Point for the Convention on Biological Diversity in Finland. l’m interested in science-policy interfaces and in how to strengthen synergies between different biodiversity related agreements among other things. Gender and indigenous issues are near my heart as well as outdoor activities, jogging, sports, skiing, photography and protected areas on this Earth. Particular qualifications to be a Regional Councillor: • At the moment Regional Councillor and therefore the continuation is important to use her

expertise to the fullest. • Excellent networking skills, active and outspoken personality. Professionally focused, pragmatic

and has language skills. Biodiversity strategies and action plans and mainstreaming of biodiversity into all levels of society are some of her favourite topics. Nature protection and species conservation are important to her. Furthermore, she has a good sense of humour.

• Knows IUCN and its Commissions after more than 15 years of involvement.

92



Election of the Chairs of IUCN Commissions

Action Requested: The World Conservation Congress is requested to ELECT the Chairs of IUCN Commissions.

Background 1. Paragraph 34 of the Regulations to the IUCN Statutes provides as follows: “Nominations for election to the office of Chair of each Commission shall be made to each ordinary

session of the World Congress by the Council after considering proposals made by Members in Categories A and B, and by the members of that Commission. The nominations shall take into account the need to ensure that the holders of these offices are of the highest professional calibre and, as a whole, come from a diverse range of Regions.”

2. The Director General wrote to IUCN Members on 12 August 2011 inviting Members to submit

proposals for the nomination of Chairs of the Commissions. 3. Commission members were also invited on the same date to send in their proposals. 4. At its 76th Meeting in May 2011, the Council appointed a Nominations Committee chaired by IUCN

Vice President, Mr Javed Jabbar, to assist it in the task of submitting nominations to the World Conservation Congress. The Nominations Committee revised and updated the Terms of Reference for Commission Chairs which were subsequently approved by Council and circulated to IUCN Members.

5. The Council also set the deadline for receipt of proposals for Commission Chairs (as well as

President, Treasurer and Regional Councillors) at 16 January 2012. This deadline was subsequently extended to 31 January 2012 by decision of Council in consultation with the Election Officer and the Chair of the Nominations Committee.

6. Proposals were solicited on the basis of the existing terms of reference of the Commissions. 7. At its 78th Meeting on 12–15 February 2012, the Council decided to nominate the following

individuals as candidates for election as Chairs of IUCN Commissions by the World Conservation Congress:

Commission on Ecosystem Management Piet Wit, The Netherlands Commission on Education and Communication Nancy Colleton, USA Juliana Zeidler, Germany Commission on Environmental, Economic and Social Policy Aroha Te Pareake Mead, New Zealand Commission on Environmental Law Antonio Herman Benjamin, Brazil Species Survival Commission

93


Simon Stuart, United Kingdom

World Commission on Protected Areas Ernesto Enkerlin Hoeflich, Mexico Kathy MacKinnon, United Kingdom Jeffrey McNeely, USA

8. Short biographical notes on the candidates mentioned above are given in Annex 1, arranged in alphabetical order for each Commission.

94

Biographical Information on Candidates proposed as Chairs of IUCN’s Commissions

COMMISSION ON ECOSYSTEM MANAGEMENT (CEM) Piet Wit, The Netherlands Personal Name: WIT, Pieter Date of Birth: 27 December 1946 Nationality: Netherlands Education 1971: University of Agriculture, Wageningen, The Netherlands. M.Sc. (cum laude) Specialization: Range ecology Current position Director/owner Syzygy, consultancies on integrated conservation and rural development Professional background Piet Wit’s first assignment after graduation was to act as the Head of the Forest Herbarium Ibadan (Nigeria). His career brought him to over 50 countries, with focus on West Africa, Europe and Central Asia. Highlights in this career were his work at the Garoua Wildlife School in Cameroon (training staff from francophone Africa), DELFT HYDRAULICS (integrated water management projects), IPC Groene Ruimte (vocational training for water, land and forest management), the Hustai National Park Project in Mongolia (Reintroduction of the Przewalski Horse), in Uruzgan, Afghanistan (application of the ecosystem approach to the development of agriculture) and more recently with Chimpanzee conservation in South-East Guinea Bissau. Piet Wit has shown to be able to bridge the gap between theory and practice, between policy makers and field managers, linking human and natural sciences across such different sectors as the military and the conservation community. Piet Wit is fluent in English, French and German, his mother tongue is Dutch. Relevant experience and past involvement with IUCN: Piet Wit came across IUCN for the first time in 1972. When he was advising on the reorganization of FHI-Nigeria (the Forest Herbarium Ibadan, Nigeria’s national herbarium), an IUCN publication on management of Herbaria proved to be most useful for the purpose. Since the early 1990s Piet Wit collaborated more actively with IUCN: • Member of Steering Committee of CEM since the World Conservation Congress in Montreal,

serving as Deputy Chair under Hillary Masundire, Chair of CEM since 2008. • Member of the Board of the Netherlands Committee of IUCN during 12 years • Numerous identification, formulation, backstopping and evaluation missions for IUCN-executed

projects, a/o the Waza-Logone project (Cameroon), the West-African Wetland Programme, the Coastal and Marine Zone Programme in West Africa, the Okavango Delta Management Plan (Botswana), the Uganda Wetland project, Rufiji Delta and Floodplain (Tanzania), etc.

95


Regarding Piet Wit’s experience in Ecosystem Management in general, the following can be highlighted: • Integrated water management projects in The Netherlands, Bangladesh, Indonesia, Egypt and

Kenya • Forest certification missions in Gabon and in Cameroon • Integrated coastal zone management in India, The Netherlands • Integrated rural development projects in Burkina Faso, Niger, Chad, Mauritania • Training and managing of training institutes in Senegal, Cameroon, The Netherlands • Integrated conservation and development projects in Mongolia (Przewalski Horse), Guinea

Bissau (Chimpanzees), Mauritania (Guelb-Er-Richatt), Cameroon (Sudan zone), Zambia (Kafue Flats), China (Middle-Yangtze wetlands), Tibet (Qomolangma Nature Preserve)

• Policy making, national/provincial action plans in Mauretania, Chad, Mongolia, Senegal, Afghanistan

Piet Wit is Member of the board of Hustai National Park Trust (Mongolia) and of the Foundation for Reserves of Przewalski’s Horse (The Netherlands), both IUCN members. He is Secretary of the Directive Council of Daridibó in Guinea Bissau, and advisor to the board of the Chimbo Foundation, a new IUCN-member from The Netherlands. Future priorities of the Commission CEM should continue the road it has taken during the actual intersessional period, which a/o means: • Further development of the Red List of Ecosystems under the inspirational leadership of Jon Paul

Rodriguez • Consolidating the agenda-setting work on Ecosystem Based Adaptation to Climate Change, and

of Karen Sudmeier on Disaster Risk Reduction • Facilitating influential networks on ecosystem management like the work of the Fisheries Expert

Group • Strengthening CEM’s work on ecosystem services and ecosystem-and community resilience • Addressing ecosystem management issues in societal sectors such as mining, food-production,

the military, financial facilitators, and guiding the policy makers and decision takers of such sectors to better integration of ecosystem management considerations in their respective fields

• Further development of ecosystem management instruments like ecosystem restoration and realization of ecosystem connectivity, management of nutrient flows and agricultural inputs (e.g. systemic insecticides)

• Housing expert groups on specific ecosystems: steppes, Mediterranean ecosystems, mountains, islands, etc

• Emerging and innovative issues, e.g. like during the actual intersessional period, the work done on the Mexican Gulf Oil Spill, the Oasis Expert Group and the Libyan Conference on Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Development

Institutional support Syzygy will provide office space and limited secretarial support.

96

COMMISSION ON EDUCATION AND COMMUNICATION (CEC) Nancy Colleton, USA Personal Name: Nancy Colleton Date of birth: 3 June 1959 Nationality: United States of America (USA) Education B.A., Communications, Hood College, Frederick, Maryland, U.S.A., 1984 Current Position President and Founder, Institute for Global Environmental Strategies (IGES) Professional Background There is no such thing as an average day for Nancy Colleton. Given the depth and breadth of issues she encounters through her work, her day might begin with advocating for satellite data to monitor global forest cover, then move to educating a policy maker or business leader on the importance of climate information, then write an editorial arguing for improved programs to better understand our changing oceans and coasts, and, by day’s end, select the winners of a children’s environmental art contest. As the President and Founder of the Arlington, Virginia-based non-profit, Institute for Global Environmental Strategies (IGES), Ms Colleton is a proven leader and facilitator of Earth observations and environment-related information activities. Her experience is extremely broad and includes promoting public-private partnerships, building knowledge and support for measuring and monitoring the Earth, facilitating international cooperation, promoting Earth science and environmental education, fundraising and marketing, and outreach and strategic communications to numerous audiences. She writes and speaks extensively on the need for improved environmental information and it’s economic opportunities. She is one of the pioneers to promote the concept of Earth observations data and information as “environmental intelligence” and works to educate leaders on the fragility and importance of our current environmental information supply chain. Ms Colleton began her career as a writer tasked with developing a report to the U.S. Congress on remote sensing capabilities. Although she didn’t have a science background, she quickly realized the value of strong communication skills—both as a writer who could explain scientific topics and as someone with strong verbal skills who could convene people with very different interests to move toward a common goal. After nearly twenty-five years of professional experience, Ms Colleton has realized numerous accomplishments such as successfully managing and operating the Institute since its inception in 1994. This has involved much creativity and innovative thinking, developing a broad and diverse global network of professional colleagues and contacts, engaging and working with donors to secure more than $40 million in contracts and grants, and working with senior government, business, and NGO representatives on broad environmental issues. She founded and serves as the Executive Director of the Alliance for Earth Observations, an organization of more than 20 private sector companies, universities and non-profit organizations dedicated to promoting the use of Earth observations for societal and economic benefit. She has successfully organized and implemented high-profile events such as the Forum on Earth Observations series and the 2003 Earth Observation Summit, which led to the establishment of the Global Earth Observing System of Systems (GEOSS).

97

In the area of education, Ms Colleton has been instrumental in establishing numerous programs—The Thacher Research Contest, the IGES Children’s Art Contest, the IGES Earth Day Photo Contest, and the Earth System Science Education Alliance (ESSEA), which provides online courses for teachers. Most recently, Ms Colleton has been working to broadly communicate and consider implementation strategies for new ocean policy and programs Ms Colleton is also conducting research and outreach efforts to better understand potential impacts of climate change on various business sectors and the role of the private sector in providing long-term forecasting information. Ms Colleton’s affiliations include:

• Co-Chair, Environmental Information Services Working Group (EISWG), NOAA Science Advisory Board, U.S. Department of Commerce;

• Lead, Environmental Information Specialty Group, IUCN/CEC; • Member (former), Strategic Directions for the Geographical Sciences in the Next Decade,

National Research Council; • Advisor, Skybox Imaging; • Board Member, GeoEye Foundation; • Member, Editorial Advisory Board, Imaging Notes; • Contributor, Outreach Working Group, Global Environmental Outlook 4, UNEP; • Member, International Program Committee, American Astronautical Society (AAS); • Member, International Activities Committee, American Institute for Aeronautics & Astronautics

(AIAA); • Member, Steering Committee, Commission on Weather and Climate of the American

Meteorological Society; and • Member, Women in Aerospace.

IUCN experience and involvement Ms Colleton has been an active member of the IUCN’s Commission on Education and Communication (CEC), its Steering Committee, and leads the Environmental Information Specialty Group. In addition to participating in numerous planning meetings and teleconferences, Ms Colleton has also participated in CEC efforts to engage with military experts to better understand the nexus of climate change and its impact on national security. Colleton has helped to raise the visibility of the IUCN/CEC and its members in various U.S.-based activities such as the Forum on Earth Observations series. Priorities of the Commission Ms Colleton feels strongly that the work of the CEC is fundamental to the success of the entire organization—whether it be raising the visibility of the IUCN with its donors or providing a foundation by which its work is recognized and applied globally to protect biodiversity, understand and respond to climate change, promote human well-being, and grow the green economy. These are all areas in which Ms Colleton has experience and looks forward to leveraging for the IUCN. She hopes to pursue three priorities around the key themes of integration and innovation:

1. Strengthen CEC engagement and connection with the other IUCN Commissions; 2. Leverage communication and education technology to elevate CEC’s work and raise IUCN’s

visibility with donors and the larger conservation community; and 3. Strengthen CEC’s global and talented expert membership to ensure that the CEC mandate

going forward is achieved. These priorities are consistent with the CEC Mandate for 2013–2016: To create a “global community that loves and values nature” by enabling the global community to effectively communicate and use knowledge to create positive conservation change.”

98

Institutional Support As the President of the Institute for Global Environmental Strategies, Ms Colleton is pleased to enable use of IGES facilities and resources where appropriate. The IGES office is located at 1600 Wilson Blvd., Suite 600, Arlington, Virginia. Juliane Zeidler, Germany Personal Name: Juliane Zeidler Date of Birth: 13 December 1969 Nationality: German, Permanent Resident of Namibia She is the mother of a young daughter, Zafari Nelao. Education She graduated from high school in Koenigstein, Germany and obtained an MSc (Diplom) in Biology from the J.W. Goethe University, Frankfurt a.M., Germany in February 1995 and an MSc in Resource Conservation Biology at the University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa in June 1997. She was awarded her PhD in Ecology and Natural Resource Management by the University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa in June 2000. Current position Presently she is the Director and Senior Consultant of Integrated Environmental Consultants of Namibia, www.iecn-namibia.com. She is the founding trustee of the associated Natuye – Institute for the Environment Trust, as well as of two educational trusts in Namibia, focusing on early childhood development and vocational training for youth. Professional background Dr Zeidler is co-founder of IECN and Namibia-based Natuye. Her work is guided by her conviction that progress in environmental and developmental work can only be achieved through overcoming capacity bottlenecks at implementation levels. She has been working in the fields of environment and development for more than 20 years and is well-known in Namibia and internationally for her expertise in biodiversity research, climate change adaptation work, especially at the community level, natural resources management, community development, environmental politics and sustainable development. In the past decade she has established her interest in development communication, change management and learning – realising in her own daily work in Africa that many environmental management, conservation and developmental challenges need to be addressed in a context that will lead to lasting changes and impacts on the ground. From 1991 to 1998, she was based at the Gobabeb Training and Research Centre in the central Namib Desert and served as research assistant and coordinator of the Desert Ecological Research Unit. Between 1998 and 2002 she coordinated the implementation of the research, outreach and capacity building components of Namibia’s National Programme to Combat Desertification for the Desert Research Foundation of Namibia and carried out support work for the National Biodiversity Programme of the Ministry of Environment and Tourism in Namibia. From 2002–2004 she was the programme officer for Dry and Sub-humid Lands at the Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), of UNEP, based in Montréal, Canada. In this capacity, she provided and coordinated scientific advice to the ongoing negotiation process of this and other work programmes of the Convention. With IECN, Dr Zeidler is involved in the preparation and implementation of a range of projects relating to climate change adaptation, biodiversity conservation and sustainable land management, focused on developing, implementing and evaluating projects e.g. for the Global Environment Facility (GEF) in Africa, primarily for UNDP, FAO and UNEP. Over the past years she has worked on major

99

http://www.iecn-namibia.com/

assignments in many countries in Africa including Angola, Cape Verde, Comoros, Benin, Eritrea, Liberia, Madagascar, Malawi, Mozambique, and Rwanda. In Namibia she is the coordinator of the Capacity Building Technical Task Force on Sustainable Land Management, and with her IECN team is involved in the implementation of various biodiversity conservation, land management and climate change adaptation projects with strong community outreach, training and education elements. Dr Zeidler is involved in high-level policy processes in Namibia and internationally e.g. facilitating the development of the Ten Year Strategy of the UNCCD, contributing to the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment as co-author, and recently writing a chapter for the World Development Report 4. Experience and past involvement with IUCN Through her professional activities in the African region and official contacts with the IUCN Regional Office over the years, Dr Zeidler is thoroughly familiar with IUCN. As Drylands Officer at the CBD Secretariat she worked closely with the IUCN Drylands Programme and the Commission on Ecosystem Management. Dr. Zeidler has been a member of the Commission on Education and Communication (CEC) since 2006, and her knowledge of the organization was enhanced by her appointment as CEC Regional Chair for Eastern and Southern Africa, which allowed her to interact more intensively with the Secretariat, IUCN members and Commissions. In the past year she has co-authored a chapter on communicating policy for a publication of the IUCN’s Eastern and Southern African Regional Office, conducted CEPA training sessions with African biodiversity Focal Points, served as focal point for the CEC edition of the IUCN’s ArborVitae newsletter, and conducted outreach activities with the CEC regional constituency, amongst others. Through her work in the Secretariat for the Convention of Biological Diversity and her long-standing work as a consultant for the environmental conventions, UNDP and other international organizations and NGOs, she has gained valuable insights and experience in the international arena and international environmental governance. Priorities of CEC in the future The CEC has recently undergone participatory and consultative strategic planning for 2013 to 2016. It is important to ensure good alignment with the strategic priorities of the overall IUCN and CEC to understand the Commission’s support function. A personal objective for Dr Zeidler is to facilitate that excellent best practices and lessons learnt from practical work, especially in developing countries, find their way into higher tier policy processes through strategic communications, outreach and engagement that CEC can help foster. CEC must strive towards building an environmentally aware world population, contributing to facilitating practical sustainable development actions. The audiences of the ‘not-yet-convinced’ sustainability actor must be a focus to achieve change, and the ‘believer’ must obtain new tools through CEC to assist better outreach and impact. Institutional support From an institutional point of view, the IECN and Natuye Board have agreed to allow Dr Zeidler to use the existing IECN resources and staff for institutional support of the office of CEC Chair. In addition, the board has agreed that she can commit 25% of her time to the CEC functions, including necessary travel. The office has a professional set up and excellent telecommunication access.

100

COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL, ECONOMIC & SOCIAL POLICY (CEESP) Aroha Te Pareake Mead, New Zealand Personal Name: Aroha Te Pareake Mead Date of birth: 1 September 1955 Nationality: New Zealander of Maori descent from the tribes of Ngati Awa, Ngati Porou,

Tuhoe, Tuhourangi and Ngati Tuwharetoa Education Educated in New Zealand, Canada and the United States. Masters in International Relations from

Victoria University of Wellington (1997) Current position Chair, IUCN Commission on Environmental, Economic and Social Policy Senior Lecturer, Maori Business, Victoria Management School, Victoria University of Wellington, New

Zealand Professional background Aroha has been involved in indigenous cultural and intellectual property and environmental issues for over 30 years at tribal, national, Pacific regional and international levels. Aroha previously worked as the National Policy Director for Te Tau Ihu o Ngā Wānanga – the National Secretariat for the three Māori/tribal universities: Te Whare Wānanga o Awanuiārangi, Te Wānanga o Aotearoa and Te Wānanga o Raukawa, and before that she held managerial positions in Te Puni Kōkiri, the Ministry of Māori Development. She led the organization of the conference that developed the 1993 Mataatua Declaration on Cultural and Intellectual Property Rights of Indigenous Peoples; the 1994 Roundtable of Indigenous Peoples and Self-Determination; and the 6th International Conference of Ethnobiologists as well as numerous, national, regional and international conferences on traditional knowledge, cultural and intellectual property rights, biodiversity and genetic resources. The most recent conference she led was Sharing Power: A New Vision for Development held in Whakatane, New Zealand, January 2011. A multi-disciplinary conference that explored de-centralisation in the governance and management of bio-cultural resources; enabling indigenous peoples and local communities to have greater rights and responsibilities in governance and management of the landscapes and ecosystems they live in and near; and looked at alternatives to the current capital based economic model that has created social and economic inequities and large scale environmental damage. Aroha has published widely on Maori and indigenous issues, particularly on traditional knowledge, indigenous values and conservation, cultural and intellectual property policy. A full list of Aroha’s publications, appointments and research interests can be located at: http://www.victoria.ac.nz/vms/about/staff/aroha-mead Experience and past involvement with IUCN I was appointed by the IUCN Council to be an appointed Councillor with special responsibilities for indigenous issues 2000–2004. I was re-appointed in the same role after the WCC-Bangkok to the IUCN Council for a second term 2004–2008. During my terms as an IUCN Councillor 2000–2004, 2004–2008 I served in a number of capacities including; Gender and Biodiversity Task Force (foundation member), Focal Point for Extractive Industries (2004–2008), Council Motions Committee (2004) and Co-Chair of WCC Resolutions Committee (2008).

101

http://www.victoria.ac.nz/vms/about/staff/aroha-mead

In 2008, I was elected as Chair of CEESP at the WCC in Barcelona. I continued to be an active member of Council (Private Sector Taskforce, Gender and Biodiversity Task Force, Programme and Policy Committee and the Congress Preparatory Committee). I have also served as Chair of the six IUCN Commission Chairs. It has been both an honour and a privilege to serve as Chair of CEESP over the past four years and I look forward to continue working with the diversely skilled membership of CEESP for the next four years. Future Priorities of the Commission The issues CEESP promotes and advocates for are more critical than they have ever been. The vision statement of CEESP enables me to remain focussed on what we are striving to achieve.

• A world of diversity, productivity and integrity of natural systems • A world in which production and consumption patterns are sustainable. • A world where cultural diversity is intertwined with biological diversity and together generate

abundant and sustainable livelihoods opportunities. The world is facing challenges at multiple levels, environmental degradation, depletion of natural resources, increased threats to peace and security, economic collapse and the continued erosion of human rights of individuals and communities, particularly indigenous communities. Governments of the world are poised to make decisions now to prioritize resource extraction and privatization over resource protection and many of these decisions will be difficult to reverse. How CEESP positions our advice and actions in such a complex landscape requires a strategic approach, to work collaboratively with others, to develop and maintain a reputation of providing credible expert advice and to continue with what has always been a core strength of CEESP, to work directly inside and alongside communities so our advice is well grounded. The priorities of the Commission are articulated in the new mandate 2013–2016 and implementing these will be the priority for the next four years. 1. Development and promotion of a conservation ethic that supports diverse knowledge systems

and values, delivers rights-based and equitable conservation with improved governance of natural resources and tangible livelihoods benefits, and links biological diversity with the cultural dimensions of nature conservation with a focus on the rights of indigenous peoples and local communities.

2. Increased use of rights-based approaches to natural resources management and governance

that promotes social and cultural equity, indigenous people´s self-determination, community governance, sustainable livelihoods and human security.

3. Nature-based solutions to global challenges — such as climate change, conversion of forests and

farmland to monocrops, including biofuels projects, food insecurity, poverty, inequitable economic and social development — are underpinned by economic policies that reinforce sustainability, social equity and environmental integrity.

4. Enhanced capacity of civil society, governments and the private sector to ensure corporate social

and environmental accountability and reduce the negative impact of industries on climate, bio-cultural diversity and food security.

The major challenge will be to implement these in tangible ways. Institutional support When I was nominated as a candidate for CEESP Chair at the WCC-Barcelona in 2008, I negotiated with my employer (Victoria University of Wellington) to load all my teaching commitments into one trimester (July-October) in exchange for their full support of my voluntary role as Chair of CEESP. This arrangement has enabled me to fully meet my paid work obligations as an active academic and researcher, as well as my voluntary work and travel on behalf of CEESP. My employer has agreed to extend this agreement for another four years if re-elected as Chair of CEESP in Jeju.

102

COMMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL LAW (CEL) Antonio Herman Benjamin, Brazil Personal Name: Antonio Herman Benjamin Date of Birth: 13 November 1957 Nationality: Brazilian Education Bachelor in Law, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro Law School (Brazil) LLM Master in Law, University of Illinois College of Law (United States) Current position Deputy-Chair, Commission on Environmental Law Justice, High Court of Brazil (STJ) Professor, Catholic University of Brasilia School of Law Visiting Professor of Comparative Environmental Law, University of Texas School of Law at Austin Emeritus Editor in Chief, Brazilian Environmental Law Review Co-Chair, INECE – International Network for Environmental Compliance and Enforcement Co-Chair, UNEP Advisory Committee of the Rio+20 Conference of Chief Justices & Attorneys General Member, President Dilma Rousseff’s Rio+20 National Committee Professional background Public Prosecutor in the State of São Paulo (1982-2006), former Chair of the Environmental Protection Division of the Office of the Attorney General of the State of São Paulo. Founder of the Brazilian Environmental Law Review and Law for a Green Planet Institute (an IUCN Member). Former President of the Brazilian Fulbright Alumni Association. General-Rapporteur of the Legal Experts Committee that drafted the Brazilian 1998 Crimes against the Environment Act. One of the drafters of the Brazilian Forest Code. Member of the Legal Experts Committee of the United Nations on Crimes against the Environment. Author, co-author and editor of over 30 books and articles published both in Brazil and abroad. Experience and past involvement with IUCN Associated with the Commission on Environmental Law for over 15 years. A member of its Steering Committee for the past 8 years, its Deputy-Chair for 4 years. Future priorities for the Commission Since its establishment, the Commission on Environmental Law − CEL (originally, in 1963, Commission on Legislation, later, in 1970, Commission on Environmental Policy, Law and Administration – CEPLA) has played a crucial role in advancing worldwide the drafting and implementation of both international and domestic environmental law. In the next four years, CEL should work in close cooperation with the other Commissions along the lines and priorities of the 2013-2016 Programme. It should implement its mandate in coordination with the activities of the Secretariat of the Union and its Regional Offices. Emphasis should be given to strengthening the implementation of Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs) related to the conservation of Nature, especially the Biodiversity Convention. Areas of particular interest for inter-commission work are the legal frameworks of the Red List of Species, the Red List of Ecosystems, indigenous peoples, protected areas, biodiversity offsets, payment for ecosystem services, among others. CEL, in conjunction with UNEP and INECE, should launch the Judicial Environmental Portal. Besides, it should support ECOLEX, a legal databank that, in the field of Environmental Law, is one of the most comprehensive in the world. Capacity building initiatives should be specifically designed for

103

judges, public prosecutors, environmental agencies, and law professors, in coordination with the IUCN Academy of Environmental Law and the Bonn Environmental Law Centre. Specialist Groups, the heart of the global reach of CEL, should be closely linked to the Programme of the Union and MEAs, and share their expertise with the other Commissions. Institutional support The office of IUCN in Brazil has indicated that it will provide office space and give logistical support to the work of the Commission on Environmental Law.

104

SPECIES SURVIVAL COMMISSION (SSC) Simon Stuart, United Kingdom Personal Name: Simon Nicolas Stuart Nationality: British Date of Birth: 14 July 1956 Education Simon has undergraduate and doctoral degrees from the University of Cambridge, specializing in conservation biology. His doctoral fieldwork was on forest birds in Tanzania, and several conservation initiatives resulted of his research. Current positions Chair, IUCN Species Survival Commission (SSC) Visiting Professor, Department of Biology and Biochemistry, University of Bath Senior Biodiversity Advisor, Conservation International Senior Biodiversity Advisor, United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) World Conservation

Monitoring Centre Conservation Fellow, Al Ain Zoo Conservation Fellow, Zoological Society of London Professional background In 1983 Simon joined the International Council for Bird Preservation (now BirdLife International), working on the African Bird Red Data Book, and starting ICBP’s programme in Cameroon (including fieldwork in 1983 and 1984). He joined the IUCN Secretariat in 1986. Simon was a member of the TRAFFIC Committee from 1992 to 2000, and was a trustee of A Rocha International – Christians in Conservation (2001–2009) and of Wildscreen (since 2009). He publishes widely, including 67 papers in peer-reviewed journals (plus two currently under review), and 12 books. Experience and past involvement with IUCN Simon has held the following IUCN staff positions: Species Programme Officer (1986–1990) Head, IUCN Species Programme (1991–2000) Acting Director General (2000–2001) Head, Biodiversity Assessment Unit (2001–2006) Senior Species Scientist (2006–2008) In 2008, Simon left the IUCN Secretariat after 22 years, and was elected as Chair of the Species Survival Commission in the same year. He is responsible for the strategic leadership of the SSC, including overseeing the implementation of the IUCN Species Strategic Plan, fostering collaboration between SSC and other partners both inside and outside IUCN, and helping to secure the funding needed for the SSC’s work. Future priorities for the Commission Since 2000, the SSC has transformed biodiversity assessments through the IUCN Red List. The number of species included on the list has risen from around 18,000 to almost 62,000 in 2012. More importantly, the amount of data on each species has increased massively, with distribution maps now available for over 30,000 species. The Red List shows we are not succeeding in the global challenge to ensure the survival of species. There are, of course, some impressive successes, but these are the

105

exceptions. Extinction rates are rising, most species are decreasing, and the potential for species to provide sustainable benefits to human communities are being eroded. However, as a result of the SSC’s species assessments, we have a much more specific understanding of how to target conservation actions more effectively. Our data provide specific guidance in terms of precise places to conserve, threats to combat, species to prioritize, and policies to pursue. Unlike the situation 12 years ago, we now know what needs to be done to halt the downward slide in species. The top priority for the SSC is, therefore, to work with a much broader set of partners than ever before to communicate the conservation needs, design effective programmes, build the political will, and increase the financial and human resources needed for conservation. We had an important success in 2010 at Nagoya when the world’s governments committed to the following Aichi Target 12: By 2020 the extinction of known threatened species has been prevented and their conservation status, particularly of those most in decline, has been improved and sustained. This is the strongest commitment yet made globally to combat the extinction crisis. My plan is to use the proposed IUCN World Species Congress (WSC) in 2015 to keep the focus on the species level of biodiversity, and to assess progress in the achievement of the Aichi Targets, most of which include a “species” component. In addition to this over-arching priority, I also plan to address the following concerns: • The SSC’s species assessment work needs to be put on to a sustainable footing financially, and

the IUCN Red List needs to become more broadly representative of the world’s biomes and species (including marine, freshwater and dryland species, and fungi, invertebrates and plants). This is our Barometer of Life initiative.

• We shall continue to build our work on sustainable use, invasive species, climate change, species conservation planning, the identification of sites of significance for biodiversity, and on the importance of species in supporting human livelihoods and ecosystem services.

• We shall continue to focus on pressing challenges, including: the amphibian crisis; large animals of Asia and West and Central Africa; coral reefs; bycatch; fisheries; systemic pesticides; and others.

• The SSC will continue to develop new structures at regional and national levels, in partnership with IUCN Offices and Members, to advance the species conservation agenda.

The SSC is able to cover so many important and strategic topics because of its network of over 150 Specialist Groups, Red List Authorities, Task Forces, Working Groups and Sub-Committees, which together comprise over 8,000 of the world’s leading experts in almost every country of the world. I plan to continue to build this network in the 2013–2016 quadrennium. Institutional support A number of donors and partner organizations have generously supported Simon and his staff during the 2009–2012 quadrennium, including Conservation International, Environment Agency Abu Dhabi, Al Ain Zoo, MAVA Foundation, UNEP World Conservation Monitoring Centre, World Association of Zoos and Aquariums, Chester Zoo, Bristol Zoo and Zoological Society of London. Discussions are underway with these organizations about continued support during the 2013–2016 quadrennium, and some additional organizations have indicated their willingness to become supporters (Wildlife Conservation Society, European Association of Zoos and Aquariums and some others under discussion). The UNEP World Conservation Monitoring Centre is generously providing employment arrangements for the SSC Chair and his staff.

106

WORLD COMMISSION ON PROTECTED AREAS (WCPA) Ernesto Enkerlin-Hoeflich, Mexico Personal Name: Ernesto C. Enkerlin-Hoeflich Date of Birth: 14 December 1958 Nationality: Mexican Education Bachelor of Engineering (B.E. 1980, major in Agronomy, minors in Animal Science and Ecology) Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.1995, Wildlife and Fisheries Sciences)

Current position Professor and Dean for Sustainability, Monterrey Tech, Mexico

Professional background http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernesto_Enkerlin. Prominent Mexican conservationist, environmentalist and researcher, specialized in parrots‘ ecology, environmental policy, sustainability and biodiversity stewardship. His efforts at the National Commission on Protected Areas of Mexico (CONANP), which he presided from 2001 to 2010, were distinguished with the 2005 Sultan Qaboos Prize for Environmental Preservation by UNESCO and one of the 2009 Distinguished Service Awards by the Society for Conservation Biology. The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) awarded Enkerlin one of the 2008 Packard Awards and the Kenton Miller Award for Innovation in Protected Areas Conservation in 2009. He has also worked as a research professor at the Center for Environmental Quality (ITESM) and as an adjunct research scientist for the Center for Environmental Research and Conservation of the Earth Institute at Columbia University, in the United States. As a conservationist, Dr. Enkerlin has worked for several NGOs and co-founded Amigos de la Naturaleza and Pronatura Noreste before joining the National Commission on Protected Areas by presidential appointment. During his tenure, Mexico increased its protected area coverage by almost 50% adding over 8 million hectares in different protected area categories. CONANP incorporated 26 new sites to the World Network of Biosphere Reserves and received recognition for over 125 wetlands of international importance under the Ramsar Convention. Additionally, Mexico incorporated Islands and Protected Areas of the Sea of Cortez (2005) and Monarch Butterfly Sanctuaries (2009) as natural sites under the World Heritage Convention. Experience and past involvement with IUCN Member of WCPA since 1996, participant in the 2003 World Parks Congress and member of the drafting team of the Durban Accord and inputs of IUCN into the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) resolutions and actions on protected areas. Participant, as part of the Mexican delegation, in several official meetings leading to the adoption of the CBD Plan of Work on Protected Areas (POWPA). Hosted the World Protected Areas Leadership Forum in 2006. Participant in IUCN convened workshops on POWPA and in WCC2004 and WCC2008. Participant in the workshop to revise and clarify the definition and categories of protected areas. Chairperson of the sessions to up-date the POWPA during COP9 in Bonn (105 bracketed text items were successfully negotiated). Biodiversity TAG (Technical Advisory Group) of GEF. Participated in advice on augmenting the financial portfolio to protected areas in the recent replenishment. Deputy Chair WCPA (Nov. 2010–). Future priorities of the Commission

107

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernesto_Enkerlin

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexico

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parrot

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecology

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protected_areas_of_Mexico

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sultan_Qaboos_Prize_for_Environmental_Preservation

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UNESCO

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Society_for_Conservation_Biology

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Union_for_the_Conservation_of_Nature

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Union_for_the_Conservation_of_Nature

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth_Institute

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth_Institute

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Columbia_University

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NGO

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Network_of_Biosphere_Reserves

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wetland

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramsar_Convention

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Heritage_Convention

• Building on past success and innovating we need to do more, faster, better and larger. WCPA must reaffirm its role assisting members/governments in achieving just that.

• Protected areas continue to be the most cost effective, efficient and reliable tool for biodiversity conservation yet they are not by themselves sufficient to stem biodiversity loss. The message needs to be heard loud, clear and with convening power.

• Protected areas have also positioned themselves as providers of other ecosystem services and are a significant component and contributor to other societal values.

• Indigenous and rural communities need additional empowerment and incentives as frontline conservationists and we need more efforts to advance a variety of governance types.

• Protected area managers and staff should continue to be at the centre of our efforts. • We need a “Green List” to show that we can have fantastic protected areas in every single

region of the world. Get out the good news to every person in the world and bring out the pride, forget the doom and gloom.

• There is a need to continue and strengthen the good work done for protected areas by WCPA, Global Protected Areas Program (GPAP) and other areas within IUCN. Arrangement of the Secretariat is ideally suited to increase cooperation and synergies amongst the Commissions.

• The ONE Union approach and our Business Plan will also present new opportunities. Our renovated WCPA mandate to be approved in WCC 2012 will be of course a significant part of our road map.

• Very welcome secondments have been negotiated and generously provided by Canada, Colombia and the US. These should of course be continued or expanded but actual staff to increase the capabilities of the committed staff of GPAP in collaboration with other areas of IUCN are direly needed.

• Fundraising will be instrumental and the convening and actual capabilities of the future chair will be crucial.

• Efforts to be closer to members and to diversify in several aspects and repopulate our membership have to be expanded.

• The future Chair should have the ability to identify good opportunities to better serve the membership and to empower them to in turn serve conservation globally in their countries and regions.

• Wilderness is the most threatened of all. While the quantitative expansion of protected areas needs to continue and be promoted in a variety of categories a special and urgent effort needs to go to wilderness before it is too late.

• The 2014 World Parks Congress (WPC) represents a tremendous opportunity to move the conservation agenda another leap forward. We need to tap on all support from IUCN, our hosts and supporters such that the GPAP is not overburdened and can continue delivering on the conservation agenda while participating to insure the success of the WPC.

• The threat of climate change to biodiversity has come much faster and in a different form. Globally resources are being massively redirected from conservation to mitigation and adaptation. Schemes like REDD++ or our own “Natural Solutions” are a response but much more needs to be done such that this unfortunate dichotomy is resolved in ways that it addresses both and on the ground and in national policies.

• Quoting Sylvia Earle: “No blue, no green”. It is imperative to advance marine conservation both near shore in national waters and be a strong participant in an international regime for conservation beyond national jurisdiction. WCPA/IUCN is ideally suited for that.

Institutional support Institutional support will not be a limiting factor. Additionally, funding would be available to support the Chair position in case elected. Kathy MacKinnon, United Kingdom Personal: Name: Kathy MacKinnon Date of birth: 28 February 1948 Nationality: British

108

Education: 1966–1972 Oxford University, UK, Lady Margaret Hall 1969 Awarded B.A. (Hons) in Zoology 1976 D. Phil., Oxford 1976 M.A.,Oxford Current position Since retiring from the World Bank in 2010, I have worked part-time as a freelance consultant but much of my time is dedicated to voluntary work for IUCN/WCPA where I serve as Vice Chair to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and Vice-Chair on Climate Change. I am a Board Member for Botanic Gardens Conservation International and a member of the Supervisory Council of Wetlands International and also serve on the editorial boards of two conservation journals Oryx and Biodiversity Conservation. I am a visiting scholar at the Conservation Science Group of Cambridge University, UK. Professional background I have worked on conservation issues, protected area planning and management, for over forty years, especially in developing countries including 10 years living and working in Indonesia. My experience ranges from implementing management and research in protected areas, to system planning, developing sustainable finance mechanisms and mainstreaming biodiversity in development projects. I have been able to engage with conservation challenges from a variety of perspectives: implementing NGO programmes, as a government advisor, through university teaching and working for a major donor. From 1994 to 2010, I worked as Lead Biodiversity Specialist in the Environment Department of the World Bank, supporting Bank and GEF-funded biodiversity projects globally, including protected area and natural resource management projects in Africa, Asia, Central and Latin America, Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union. This involved working with a variety of stakeholders including government agencies and NGOs, local communities, indigenous peoples and the private sector as well as a range of different governance and management arrangements. More recently I have been involved in efforts to integrate biodiversity and conservation into mainstream development and climate change programmes, including collaboration with WCPA on the Natural Solutions series which emphasizes the socio-economic benefits of protected areas and their role in helping communities cope with climate change. I have authored several books and numerous scientific articles on conservation topics, including species conservation (primates, tigers, squirrels), protected area planning and management and ecosystem-based approaches to climate change. In 2007 I was awarded the Distinguished Service Award, Society of Conservation Biology Experience and past involvement with IUCN I have had long‐term involvement with IUCN programmes and Commissions (WCPA and SSC) since the 1980s and co-authored key IUCN publications such as Managing Protected Areas in the Tropics, and IUCN Review of the Protected Area Systems in the Indo‐Malayan and Afrotropical RealMs While at the World Bank, I worked with IUCN on a range of issues, including forest programmes and REDD, as well as development of several IUCN‐implemented projects on marine protected areas, local language field guides, the Global Invasive Species Programme and the Save Our Species programme. Key products included several WCPA Best Practice Guidelines as well as the Arguments for Protection series and Natural Solutions: Protected Areas helping people cope with climate change. Currently I serve as a Vice-Chair of WCPA, working closely with the Global Protected Areas Programme and leading the WCPA Climate Change Task Force. I am also a member of the joint WCPA-SSC Task Forces on Biodiversity and Protected Areas and Managing Invasive Alien Species in Protected Areas. On behalf of WCPA, I participated in IUCN delegations to the Convention on Biological Diversity and other Rio Conventions as well as planning meetings for the new IUCN quadrennial programme and protected area initiatives.

109

Future priorities of the Commission A main priority of the WCPA will be to help national stakeholders to implement the strategic programme of the CBD, especially target 11 which emphasizes ecological coverage, governance and connectivity as well as other Aichi targets relevant to more effective management of protected areas. This will be achieved by: • Strengthening and expanding the WCPA network for better geographical representation to

provide more support to protected area managers at the field level, whether staff of government agencies or local communities as these practitioners are at the front line of biodiversity conservation. This would be achieved through preparation of good practice guidelines, including translation into local languages, and dissemination through national and regional trainings and the World Parks Congress in 2014.

• Strengthened partnership and collaboration with the Global Protected Areas Programme to

deliver capacity building under the BIOPAMA (Biodiversity and Protected Areas Management) project in Africa, Caribbean and Pacific and development of more joint projects to strengthen local capacity and share good practice.

• Expanding collaboration with other IUCN programmes e.g. Drylands and Forests. and

Commissions, especially SSC and Ecosystem Management, to address new and critical management issues e.g. climate change; management of invasive alien species and ensure that protected area issues are better incorporated into land- and seascape management.

• Creating awareness among policymakers and the general public of the multiple values of

protected areas and their relevance to critical environmental challenges so as to promote mainstreaming of protected areas into climate change strategies and sectoral development programmes e.g. water, energy, agriculture etc.

• Establishing task forces on key topics and collaborating closely with the CBD Secretariat and

donors such as GEF, UNDP and USAID to ensure recognition of protected areas as critical components of sustainable development and adoption of good management practice.

Institutional support Although I have no official affiliation with either organization, both Birdlife International and UNEP-World Conservation Monitoring Centre in Cambridge, U.K., have generously offered space for meetings, office support and IT needs. Jeffrey McNeely, USA Personal Name: Jeffrey A. McNeely Date of birth: 30 May 1944 Nationality; US citizen Education Bachelor of Arts, University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) Current position A.D. White Professor at Large, Cornell University Member, UNEP International Resource Panel Member, Scientific and Technical Council, International Risk Governance Council Chair, IUCN-SSC Red List Committee Chair, Policy Committee, Society for Conservation Biology

110

Professional background Jeff McNeely began working internationally in 1968, as a Peace Corps Volunteer building school water systems in Thailand. In 1970, he started working with Dr. Boonsong Lekagul and co-authored Mammals of Thailand. While working with Dr. Boonsong, he also prepared an FAO report on wildlife in the Lower Mekong Basin, which included a systems plan for protected areas for the region. He spent 2 years doing research in eastern Nepal, in an area that later became Makalu-Barun Conservation Area. He moved to Indonesia in 1977 to manage the first IUCN–WWF Country Programme, working closely with the Indonesian Government and FAO to design and establish a national system of protected areas, During this time, he managed 35 projects. Jeff joined the IUCN Secretariat Headquarters in 1980 as Executive Officer of CNPPA (now WCPA). He started the Commission newsletter and managed the establishment of the Protected Areas Data Unit (PADU), now the World Database on Protected Areas. He organized regional Commission meetings in Cameroon, Peru, Zimbabwe, and Scotland and led the secretariat team that organized the 1982 3rd World Parks Congress, in Bali. He co-edited with Kenton Miller National Parks, Conservation, and Development: The Role of Protected Areas in Sustaining Society, published by Smithsonian Institution Press and widely credited as a critical contribution to defining the modern role of protected areas. He was responsible for IUCN’s relations with UNESCO, including both biosphere reserves and World Heritage; wrote the first indicative list of natural sites worthy of consideration for the World Heritage List in 1982, and co-edited the Proceedings of the First World Conference on Biosphere Reserves (held in Minsk in 1983). Jeff left CNPPA to become IUCN Programme Director in 1984 and later Deputy Director General. During this time, he established IUCN programmes on Marine Conservation, Forests, and Wetlands. He later started and directed IUCN’s Biodiversity Programme and helped draft the Convention on Biological Diversity and establish and manage the Global Biodiversity Forum, as well as publishing numerous books on biodiversity. In 1990, he was appointed Secretary General of the 4th World Congress on Protected Areas (Caracas, Venezuela) and was responsible for organizing the programme, fundraising, and managing the Congress. 13 books resulted from the Congress. He edited the proceedings (Parks for Life), Partnerships for Conservation (which showcased the many other sectors with an interest in protected areas) and Protecting Nature: Regional Reviews of Protected Areas (with Jerry Harrison and Paul Dingwall). For the 5th World Parks Congress in Durban, he prepared a presentation for the opening plenary on Scenarios for the Future of Protected Areas. Jeff served as Chief Scientist of IUCN until retirement in July 2009, and as Senior Science Advisor until March 2012. He has recently worked with the Government of Tanzania on World Heritage issues and the Government of Japan, also on World Heritage issues as well as protected areas and natural hazards and advising on the content of the Asia Parks Congress. He has worked on protected areas for the World Bank, the Asian Development Bank, and numerous bilateral agencies/NGOs in over 80 countries. His publications comprise over 40 books (including co-editor of Sacred Natural Sites in 2010) and 500 scientific and popular papers on various aspects of conservation. Experience and past involvement with IUCN Jeff started working for an IUCN Member in 1970 (Association for Conservation of Wildlife in Thailand, run by a Vice President of IUCN). He was invited to be a member of SSC in 1971 and of CNPPA in 1978. He managed IUCN’s first country programme (Indonesia) from 1977 to 1980 and was a member of the IUCN Secretariat from 1980 to 2009. Future priorities of the Commission WCPA remains the world leader in protected areas but still faces many challenges. The 6th World Parks Congress, planned for 2014, will be a major opportunity to address issues such as management effectiveness (and how to measure it), the ethics of protected areas, responding to external threats such as climate change, conflicts over land use, invasive alien species, poaching, sustainable financing, urban issues related to protected areas, working with local and indigenous peoples in and around protected areas, and collaborating with the other five Commissions on protected area issues, particularly SSC and CEESP. Contributing to international conventions and programmes (especially

111

the Aichi targets of 17% land and 10% of marine habitats protected) will also offer ways to improve the contributions of protected areas to the evolving cultures of the 21st Century. Close collaboration is foreseen with the IUCN Secretariat, especially the Protected Areas Programme. Institutional support Jeff McNeely is currently retired, so can devote considerable time to the position and would be able to establish a Secretariat anywhere in the world. He has discussed funding with potential donors, with the intention of establishing a secretariat with a professional officer, an executive assistant, and support for at least one intern (building on the SSC model). He will be preparing project concepts in the coming months for discussion with potential donors if elected to the position.

112




Finances of IUCN in the Intersessional Period 2009–12

Action Requested: The World Conservation Congress is invited to APPROVE the audited Financial Statements for the years 2008 to 2011.

1. In accordance with Articles 20 (c) and (d) and 88 (d) of the IUCN Statutes, the Director General

submits to Congress for approval the audited Financial Statements of IUCN. 2. Hereafter follow the audited Financial Statements for the years 2008, 2009 and 2010 approved by

Council, together with the external auditors’ report. The original English versions of the Financial Statements and the external auditors’ reports have been posted on the IUCN website: http://www.iucn.org/about/union/annual_reports_and_finances/

3. The Financial Statements will actually be annexed to the Report on the finances of IUCN in the

period 2009–12 which the IUCN Director General will submit together with the IUCN Treasurer for the consideration of Congress. This report will be completed in June 2012 once the Bureau of Council will have approved the audited Financial Statements for the year 2011. The report together with the audited Financial Statements for the year 2011 will be distributed to IUCN Members in the mailing of Congress documents to be made by 8 July 2012.

113

http://www.iucn.org/about/union/annual_reports_and_finances/

Congress Document WCC-2012-9.1/1-Annex 1

___________________________________________________________________

IUCN International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources Gland (Switzerland) Consolidated Financial Statements for the year ended December 31, 2008 and Auditors’ Report

___________________________________________________________________

114


___________________________________________________________________

IUCN International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources Gland (Switzerland) Consolidated Financial Statements for the year ended December 31, 2009 and Auditors’ Report

___________________________________________________________________

134


___________________________________________________________________

IUCN International Union for the

Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources Gland (Switzerland) Consolidated Financial Statements for the

year ended December 31, 2010

and Auditors’ Report

___________________________________________________________________

158



IUCN Programme 2013–16 and Financial Plan 2013–16

Action Requested: The World Conservation Congress is invited to APPROVE the IUCN Programme 2013–16 and the Financial Plan 2013–16 proposed by the Director General and endorsed by the IUCN Council. 1. In accordance with Articles 20 (e) and 88 (e) of the IUCN Statutes, the Director General submits

to Congress the Draft IUCN Programme and Financial Plan for the period 2013–16. Both the IUCN Programme and the Financial Plan have been endorsed by the IUCN Council.

2. The first draft of the IUCN Programme 2013–16 was prepared by the Secretariat in close

cooperation with the Programme and Policy Committee of Council (PPC) and sent to Members in IUCN’s three official languages in May 2011. At that time the Draft IUCN Programme was also posted on IUCN’s website, and Members were invited to provide inputs by October 2011.

3. From May to October 2011 eleven Regional Conservation Forums were held, and attended by a

total of 567 of IUCN’s Members. One of the principal agenda items of these Forums was a discussion of the Draft IUCN Programme. The feedback from these Forums and from the web-based consultations was considered and incorporated in the second Draft IUCN Programme which was reviewed by Council in November 2011.

4. The third and final draft was approved by Council in February 2012 following a number of

improvements and refinements. 5. Besides the IUCN Programme 2013–16 to be adopted by Congress, IUCN will also be guided by

an IUCN Operational Plan 2013–16 which was approved by Council in March 2012. A tool primarily for the managers and staff of the Secretariat and the Chairs and Steering Committees of the IUCN Commissions, the Operational Plan defines how IUCN will operate and be organized to implement the IUCN Programme. It identifies the human, financial and institutional resources required to support delivery of Programme results and the operations of the Union.

6. Implementing a new ambitious IUCN Programme in the period 2013–16 will require mobilizing

sufficient funds in an environment of financial decline for long-term efforts such as biodiversity conservation and sustainable development. Based on the IUCN Programme and the Operational Plan 2013–16, the Financial Plan 2013–16 describes the financial targets and fundraising strategy for the 2013–16 period. It was approved by Council in March 2012. The Operational and Financial Plans 2013–16 are built upon a new business model for IUCN, which was approved by Council in February 2012. The business model identifies IUCN deliveries and fundraising opportunities under four business lines: 1) Providing knowledge products; 2) Delivering results on the ground; 3) Strengthening policy and governance; and 4) Engaging and leveraging the Union.

183


The IUCN Programme 2013–16 Draft, March 2012

Contents

Summary ................................................................................................................................................. 2

Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 3

The Niche and Programme Purpose of IUCN .......................................................................................... 4

The IUCN Programme Framework .......................................................................................................... 5

Global Programme Results ..................................................................................................................... 6

Programme Area: Valuing and conserving nature .................................................................................. 9

Programme Area: Effective and equitable governance of nature’s use ............................................... 13

Programme Area: Deploying nature-based solutions to global challenges in climate, food, development ......................................................................................................................................... 17

Programme Priorities ............................................................................................................................ 21

Implementing the IUCN Programme 2013–16 ..................................................................................... 22

Annex 1: Nature-based solutions .......................................................................................................... 25

Annex 2: Programme priorities in need of further development ......................................................... 27

184


Summary The IUCN Programme 2013–16 is driven by two features of life today: Global production and consumption patterns are destroying our life support system – nature – at persistent and dangerously high rates. And people, communities, governments and private actors are under-utilizing the potential power of nature and the solutions it can provide to global challenges in fields such as climate change, food security, social and economic development. IUCN terms these nature-based solutions. Well into the UN Decade of Biodiversity and the implementation of the CBD Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011–2020, the IUCN Programme 2013–16 aims to mobilize communities working for biodiversity conservation, sustainable development and poverty reduction in common efforts to halt biodiversity loss and apply nature-based solutions to conserve biodiversity, enhance resilience, strengthen equity, reduce poverty and so improve the wellbeing of people on this planet. The Programme builds upon IUCN’s niche as the world’s authority on biodiversity conservation, nature-based solutions and related environmental governance. It has three Programme Areas: 1. Valuing and Conserving Nature enhances IUCN’s heartland work on biodiversity conservation,

emphasizing both tangible and intangible values of nature. 2. Effective and Equitable Governance of Nature’s Use consolidates IUCN’s work on people-nature

relations, rights and responsibilities, and the political economy of nature. 3. Deploying Nature-based Solutions to Global Challenges in Climate, Food and Development

expands IUCN’s work on nature’s contribution to tackling problems of sustainable development, particularly in climate change, food security and social and economic development.

The Programme is implemented through the combined force of the Secretariat (1,000 staff in global thematic programmes and nine regional programmes) working together with six IUCN Commissions, with more than 11,000 members who provide critical knowledge for Programme implementation. Under the One Programme Charter adopted by Council in May 2011, the 1,200 State, government and NGO Members of IUCN contribute where there is alignment with the IUCN Programme. The Programme relies on impact indicators for biodiversity, people and nature, and nature and development. This is IUCN’s raison-d’être. Building on tight knowledge-policy-action links, the Programme promises to deliver three global results that are also adapted and applied by the IUCN regional programmes and Commissions: 1. Credible and trusted knowledge for valuing and conserving biodiversity leads to better policy and

action on the ground. 2. Improved governance arrangements over natural resource management strengthen rights and

deliver equitable conservation with tangible livelihoods benefits. 3. Healthy and restored ecosystems make cost-effective contributions to meeting global challenges

of climate change, food security and social and economic development. To raise resources for Programme implementation and more effective partnerships, IUCN is renewing its business model. Members support IUCN as a Union through subscriptions and donor framework funding. IUCN depends on official development assistance for three fourths of its overall budget. The Programme is supported by a new business model, aimed at enhancing flagship knowledge products, generating large-scale aid- or Member-funded programmes, and exploiting new sources of funding for policy influence and environmental governance beyond aid.

185

Introduction The IUCN Statutes call for the Union to “pursue its objectives through an integrated programme of activities, formulated, coordinated and implemented by the Members and components of IUCN”, and specify that this Programme is to be adopted by the World Conservation Congress. In further specifying the roles of the components of IUCN, the Statutes state that the Commissions are established by the Congress based on “mandates within the IUCN Programme”, and the Secretariat is given the “responsibility of implementing the policy and the programme of IUCN”. This document presents the draft IUCN Programme 2013–16 (March 2012), as endorsed by Council in February 2012, following extensive consultations with the Members and components of IUCN during 2011.1 This draft is presented to Members of IUCN for approval at the World Conservation Congress in Jeju, Korea in September 2012. A just world that values and conserves nature. This is IUCN’s Vision. Nature is our life support system. The diversity of life and nature must be conserved for its own sake and also for development to be sustainable. This requires fundamental change in all dimensions of life and society, including politics and economics, far beyond IUCN’s mandate and capacities. IUCN advances nature-based solutions to halt the destruction of biodiversity2 and to sustain development for all, especially the poorest people and communities who depend directly on nature for their livelihoods. A just world must guarantee equitable rights of access to biodiversity and nature’s benefits across generations, gender, and economic, social and geopolitical lines. This vision echoes the principles and values embodied in IUCN Resolutions on the Earth Charter and on the Intergenerational Partnership for Sustainability. The values of biodiversity are both tangible and intangible. Biodiversity is a central component of many belief systems, contributing to cultural heritage, religious, emotional and aesthetic values. Biodiversity has existence value and bequest value. IUCN recognizes the ethical dimension of nature conservation. While some biodiversity values are reflected in economic decision making (e.g. crops and fibre), many non market values remain essentially invisible from an economic perspective. IUCN’s mission is “To influence, encourage and assist societies throughout the world to conserve the integrity and diversity of nature and to ensure that any use of natural resources is equitable and ecologically sustainable.” The world needs IUCN’s leadership to address the growing crisis in biodiversity loss and to show how nature can provide solutions to the world’s most pressing issues – and how environmental governance can be improved for biodiversity conservation. IUCN is the leading provider of biodiversity knowledge, tools and standards used to influence policy, undertake conservation planning and guide action on the ground. As a Union, IUCN is well placed to bring together the key actors at all levels.

1 Consultations have been both on-line and face-to-face in the meetings of IUCN Council in May and November 2011 and at eleven Regional Conservation Fora: Asia: 27–30 September 2011, Incheon, Republic of Korea; Canada: 19–20 September 2011, Ottawa, Canada; Eastern and Southern Africa: 20–22 September 2011, Johannesburg, South Africa; Europe: 6–9 September 2011, Bonn, Germany; Mesoamérica/Caribbean: 5–7 October 2011, Santo Domingo, República Dominicana; North Africa: 5–7 October 2011, Rabat, Morocco; Oceania: 23–25 August, Brisbane, Australia; South America: 13–15 June, Lima, Peru; United States:, 21 September, Washington DC, USA; West and Central Africa: 5–8 July, 2011, Brazzaville, Republic of the Congo; West Asia: 2–5 May 2011, Kuwait. 2 The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) defines biodiversity as follows: “Biological diversity (‘biodiversity’) means the variability among living organisms from all sources including, inter alia, terrestrial, marine, and other aquatic ecosystems, and the ecological complexes of which they are part; this includes diversity within species, between species and of ecosystems”. In this document IUCN equates biodiversity with nature.

186

The IUCN Programme 2013–16 reflects the One Programme Charter, adopted by IUCN’s Council in May 2011. The Programme aims to be relevant and mobilizing for all IUCN’s components, while recognizing that Members also have their own initiatives and activities that cannot be covered solely by the IUCN Programme. This is specified in the Charter: “This Charter calls upon the Secretariat, Commissions, and National and Regional Committees to work together to develop and implement the IUCN Programme collaboratively. It invites Members, where their priorities and capacities align with the Programme, to participate in its implementation.” For the 2013–16 period, IUCN will continue to take active part in international environmental governance and processes, including the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011–2020 and the Protocol on Access and Benefit Sharing (ABS), adopted by the UN Convention on Biological Diversity in 2010; the UN Decade for Biodiversity; the launch of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform for Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES); efforts to meet the 2015 target for achieving the Millennium Development Goals, and negotiations under various international conventions and fora, including the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, the UN Convention to Combat Desertification, the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands, the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES), the Convention on Migratory Species (CMS), the World Heritage Convention (WHC) and the UN Forum on Forests (UNFF). The Niche and Programme Purpose of IUCN IUCN is the world’s authority on conserving nature and natural resources for people’s livelihoods, setting standards, fostering policies and bringing together a diverse membership of States, government agencies and civil society for nature-based solutions to global challenges and environmental governance, aimed at sustainable development and biodiversity conservation on the ground. During 2013–16, IUCN aims to integrate the work of communities engaged in biodiversity conservation, nature-based solutions and sustainable development. Each element of the Programme purpose bridges the biodiversity, sustainability and development communities and addresses nature’s benefits to people’s livelihoods. During 2013–16, IUCN will: • Expand efforts to halt the loss of biodiversity and link-up with efforts for poverty reduction and

sustainable development • Develop and promote nature-based solutions to global, regional and local development

challenges, providing tangible livelihood benefits and conserving biodiversity • Support and influence the implementation of the CBD Strategic Plan and use the Plan to advance

development goals that apply nature-based solutions to enhance people’s livelihoods IUCN’s unique features enable the Union to bring together its diverse membership of States, government agencies and civil society in common efforts for a strategy for sustainable development. With a mandate on nature and people, IUCN produces and disseminates science-based, applied knowledge on biodiversity and its conservation, drawn from its 1,200 Members, its six thematic Commissions, with more than 11,000 Commission members, and the Secretariat, with 1,000 staff. The knowledge -> policy -> action link, achieved jointly through the Union, makes IUCN the world’s authority on biodiversity conservation, nature-based solutions and related policy development and environmental governance. Four features summarize how IUCN works as a Union: 1. IUCN generates and disseminates credible and trusted knowledge on conservation and

sustainable development 2. IUCN convenes and builds partnerships for action across governments and civil society

187

3. IUCN bridges local, regional and global policy and action 4. IUCN develops standards, influences practices and builds capacity for conservation and

sustainable development. Taken together, these features make IUCN distinct from others in the conservation, environment and sustainable development arena and enable the Union, its Members and components, to deliver a common Programme. Many organizations share the focus on knowledge-based policy making, standard-setting and action on the ground, but none with a membership and a science-foundation as robust and diversified as that of IUCN. The IUCN Programme Framework IUCN’s Programme builds on the Vision, a just world that values and conserves nature, and has been organized into three Programme Areas (see Figure 1, below).3 The two Programme Areas Valuing and conserving nature and Effective and equitable governance of nature’s use represent the heartland of IUCN’s work. These are essential for biodiversity conservation and for influencing the economic, social and political processes that determine biodiversity loss, ecosystem management, nature-based livelihoods, and rights and responsibilities for nature. Under Valuing and conserving nature, IUCN will develop and use its world-class knowledge on biodiversity, and its associated tools and planning standards, to influence policy and action on the ground. Under Effective and equitable governance of nature’s use, IUCN will consolidate its experience from working with people and institutions, addressing how public and private decisions on nature and ecosystems affect biodiversity and livelihoods. This will lead to a set of principles, standards and tools for nature-related rights, responsibilities, governance and equity.

Figure 1: IUCN’s Programme framework 2013–16

3 The 1st draft Programme (May 2011) contained five Programme Areas. In response to advice and comments received, the distinction between core and thematic Programme Areas was dropped, and the three thematic Programme Areas were consolidated into one (“Deploying Nature-based Solutions to Global Challenges in Climate, Food, Economy”), which emphasizes IUCN’s specialization within nature-based solutions. The substance is retained, and the Programme framework has been made simpler. Subsequently, between the 2nd and 3rd drafts, “economy” was changed to economic and social development, or development in brief.

188

The third Programme Area – Deploying nature-based solutions to global challenges in climate, food and development – concerns the application of IUCN’s knowledge to sustainable development, empowerment and poverty reduction. Resilient nature is fundamental to societal and economic resilience. The Programme focuses on nature based-solutions as IUCN’s particular strength, not because nature provides the only solutions, but because this specialization allows IUCN, in partnerships with others, to address a wide range of global development challenges. Nature-based solutions offer multiple benefits simultaneously and therefore efficiently. This Programme Area focuses initially on nature-based solutions to climate change (including disaster risk reduction), food security, and economic and social development, but will over the course of the four-year Programme explore opportunities to broaden this approach to sectors such as health and access to energy. Figure 1 shows IUCN’s integrated work on nature, from the deep knowledge of biodiversity, through equitable governance of nature’s use, to the practical solutions for people and nature, and again to valuing and conserving nature. The knowledge -> policy -> action link is found within each of the three Programme Areas. Through their Regional Programmes 2013–16, IUCN’s nine Regions will adapt and apply the Programme framework in accordance with the region-specific needs and work environments as well as the views expressed by Members and component representatives at the Regional Consultation Fora undertaken in 2011. The Programme framework shows both continuity and change relative to the 2009–12 Programme. The continuity is the focus on nature conservation and natural resources – IUCN is not a broad environment and development organization. The change vis-à-vis the current Programme consists of: • More emphasis on valuing nature in the first Programme Area, addressing direct financial,

broader economic and other intangible values. • Compiling and profiling IUCN’s work on decision making, management and governance of

nature’s use and natural resources in a central Programme Area. • Consolidating IUCN’s work on nature-based solutions to global challenges, allowing IUCN to offer

standards and methodologies for nature-based approaches eventually in many sectors. Global Programme Results IUCN achieves its results through influence on policies and institutions at all levels. With its extensive network of regional and national offices and Members and Commission members all over the world, IUCN is, in effect, also a field-based organization. Impact on the ground in the form of biodiversity conservation and use of nature-based solutions, to the benefit of people and nature, is the ultimate rationale of IUCN. This is seen in Figure 2. IUCN delivers outputs under its control and aims at results that also depend on many other factors, and which impact on biodiversity conservation and people-nature relations.

Policy- and action-relevant knowledge and expertise

Positive change in policIes and institutions

Change in natural resource management, land-use practices etc.

Change in status of species, ecosystems and people-nature relations

Output Result Impact

Figure 2: A simplified results chain for IUCN

189

Ultimately, the IUCN Programme aims to secure the use of the terrestrial and marine areas of this planet in a way which conserves nature and sustains people’s livelihoods. This requires a network of connected protected areas, covering the most important areas for biodiversity, and integrated into healthy and resilient landscapes and seascapes. Even when IUCN influence goes via policies and institutions, the impact of IUCN operations has a geographical dimension: species and their habitats, protected areas, key biodiversity areas, ecosystems, sustainably managed biomes, people’s dependence on natural resources, and nature-based solutions to climate change, food security, etc. This enables a common focus in impact monitoring across IUCN programmes: IUCN outputs and results shall contribute to improved and sustainable interaction of nature and people in protected areas and healthy landscapes and seascapes. This is shown in Figure 3.

Figure 3: IUCN’s intended impacts and global results Table 1 summarizes the impact, the common impact indicators, the global results and the results indicators of the three Programme Areas. Some of the indicators need refinement and development, e.g. those based on the IUCN Red List of Ecosystems, which is not yet in operation. The outputs and results of the IUCN Secretariat’s global thematic and regional programmes must contribute to the three global results shown. The results indicators will be developed to assist these programmes in monitoring and reporting on their results.

IUCN’s Impact

IUCN’s Programme Areas and Global Results

Biodiversity

The conservation status of species and

ecosystems is improved

VALUING AND CONSERVING NATURE

Credible and trusted knowledge for valuing

and conserving biodiversity leads to

better policy and action on the ground

EFFECTIVE AND EQUITABLE

GOVERNANCE OF NATURE’S USE

Improved governance arrangements over

natural resources deliver rights-based and

equitable conservation with tangible livelihoods

benefits

DEPLOYING NATURE BASED SOLUTIONS TO GLOBAL CHALLENGES

IN CLIMATE, FOOD, DEVELOPMENT

Healthy and restored ecosystems make cost-effective contributions to

meeting global challenges of climate change, food security

and economic and social development

People

Effective, just, gender-responsive and equitable

conservation yields tangible livelihoods

benefits

Nature and Development

Global challenges (climate, food,

development) are addresed through the use of nature based solutions

190

Table 1: Intended impact, global results and results indicators, and common impact indicators Impact Global results and results indicators Common impact

indicators The proportion of the most important areas for biodiversity effectively managed for the conservation of species, ecosystems and genetic diversity Increased contribution from sustainably managed natural resources to household members Trends in benefits that people derive from selected ecosystem services (e.g. gender-differentiated changes in security of water access and food)

Valuing and conserving nature The conservation status of species and ecosystems is improved

Credible and trusted knowledge for valuing and conserving biodiversity leads to better policy and action on the ground Indicators: 1. Extent, representativeness and connectivity of effectively

managed protected areas 2. Proportion of identified key biodiversity areas within and

outside protected areas 3. Number of exports of data from the IUCN Red List 4. Extent to which IUCN advice and positions are followed in

CBD, CITES and WHC

Effective and equitable governance of nature’s use Effective, just, gender-responsive and equitable conservation yields tangible livelihoods benefits

Improved governance arrangements over natural resources deliver rights-based and equitable conservation with tangible livelihoods benefits Indicators: 1. Enhancement of institutional and governance arrangements

based on a new IUCN natural resource governance framework

2. Extent of protected areas managed in accordance with the IUCN’s natural resource governance framework

3. Area (in ha.) of agriculture, fisheries and forestry managed according to IUCN’s natural resource governance framework

4. Extent of high seas administered in accordance with the ecosystem approach and IUCN’s natural resource governance framework

Deploying nature-based solutions to global challenges in climate, food, development Global challenges (climate, food, development) are addressed through the use of nature based solutions

Healthy and restored ecosystems make cost-effective contributions to meeting global challenges of climate change, food security and economic and social development Indicators: 1. Extent of incorporation of nature-based solutions in policies

on climate change, food security and economic and social development at international, national and corporate levels

2. Extent (in ha.) of resilient and diverse landscapes sustainably managed, protected or restored for food, climate change or economic benefit

3. Number of governments and public/private companies that have incorporated biodiversity values into planning and/or accounting systems

191

To the extent possible, the impact indicators will be measured once every four years to show how IUCN’s influence is contributing to changes on the ground, without claiming direct attribution. The impact indicators are common to IUCN’s three Programme Areas and can also be used by IUCN Members, components4, partners and Multilateral Environmental Agreements. They will be the basis for measuring change across all IUCN programmes and projects: • The proportion of the most important areas for biodiversity effectively managed for the

conservation of species, ecosystem functions and genetic diversity: This impact indicator is based on two data sets – Key Biodiversity Areas and the World Database on Protected Areas. The impact is measured through The IUCN Red List Index which can demonstrate genuine changes in conservation status of sets of species as a result of conservation action. It can also be disaggregated to show trends in regions, ecosystems, habitats, and taxonomic groups. It is already adopted as one of two biodiversity indicators for the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). The IUCN Red List of Ecosystems, once developed, will be able to be used to develop an index to measure the risk of losing critical ecosystem functionality, to show changes in ecosystem status over time.

• Increased contribution from sustainably managed natural resources to household members: This is a proxy indicator that measures changes in gender-differentiated benefits and services flowing from ecosystems and management of natural resources. The indicator serves as a means of showing how conditions are improving when rights are secure for specific populations (rural and coastal populations are suggested) and also as a signal that nature based solutions are delivering economic solutions.

• Trends in benefits that people derive from selected ecosystem services (e.g. gender-differentiated changes in security of water access and food): This is an indicator that serves as a proxy for measuring benefits from nature-based solutions to climate change and food security. Water access and food security can serve as an indication of changes due to climate change adaptation.

The global results and the proposed results indicators of Table 1 are discussed in the relevant Programme Area sections below. Programme Area: Valuing and conserving nature Biological diversity (‘biodiversity’) underpins ecosystem functioning and the provision of ecosystem services, and is essential for human well-being. Its elements – ecosystems, genes and species – and the processes that maintain them interact in ways, some as yet unknown, to sustain the life support systems of this planet. Amongst others, biodiversity provides food security, human health, clean air and water; contributes directly to local livelihoods and economic development; and is essential to achieve the Millennium Development Goals, including poverty reduction and gender equity. Yet, despite the fundamental importance of biodiversity for life on this planet, it continues to be lost. There are overwhelming indications of continuing decline in biodiversity.5 The target set by the world’s governments in 2002 to halt the loss of biodiversity by 2010 was not met, either internationally or nationally in any part of the world.

4 The IUCN Statutes (Article 15) describe the components of IUCN as: (a) the World Conservation Congress; (b) the Council; (c) the National and Regional Committees and Regional Fora of Members; (d) the Commissions; and (e) the Secretariat. 5 Multiple assessments have clearly documented the major challenges for biodiversity and conservation, including the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species and the Global Biodiversity Outlook 3. For example see Butchart, S.H.M., et al. 2010. Global biodiversity: indicators of recent declines. Science 328: 1164-1168.03-1509.

192

There is also mounting evidence that conservation works. Targeted conservation action can result in conservation success, when compared with that anticipated without such efforts. Successful interventions, sometimes through the enactment of law and policy, include species recovery programmes, establishment of protected areas, restoration of ecosystems, control of invasive species, re-introduction programmes, ex situ conservation measures and effective management programmes, all of which IUCN addresses through this Programme Area. Conservation successes resulting from action are described and quantified by IUCN in Hoffmann et al, 2010.6 This is a classic example of how data from the IUCN Red List can feed into on-the-ground conservation action to deliver tangible and successful results. Nevertheless, the current level of action is outweighed by the magnitude of threat, and conservation responses need to be substantially scaled up to combat the extinction crisis. In other words, IUCN, and indeed the global conservation community, needs to do a lot more of what works. This Programme Area seeks to address the direct pressures on biodiversity and to ensure that its use is sustainable in order to safeguard ecosystems, species and genetic diversity. IUCN aims to address these pressures through work to reduce the rate of loss of natural habitats (the biggest driver of biodiversity loss) principally through facilitating the establishment and effective management of protected areas of all categories and governance types, and ensuring that such areas protect the most important areas for biodiversity. A further significant driver of biodiversity loss, invasive alien species, poses a major threat to biodiversity and ecosystems services, with consequent impacts on people’s livelihoods. IUCN will continue to address this serious challenge through the provision of information on the management of pathways for their introduction, and guidelines on their control. It also incorporates work to have the values of nature reflected in policy and markets as well as national accounting and planning systems, which builds on The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB) study. Justification Valuing and conserving nature is the heartland and at the core of IUCN’s work with strong mandates from two main sources. Members have passed a wealth of Resolutions over the past four World Conservation Congresses, mandating IUCN to address the issues of valuing biodiversity (addressing the full range of diversity of concepts and values of nature), threatened species, and protected areas including World Heritage sites, and ensuring that the use of natural resources is sustainable. A step change is now needed in ambition, urgency, investment and action to conserve biodiversity. In October 2010, the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity meeting in Japan adopted a new Strategic Plan for Biodiversity to galvanize action for biodiversity conservation. The vision of The Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011–2020 and the Aichi Targets is a world of “Living in harmony with nature” where “By 2050, biodiversity is valued, conserved, restored and wisely used, maintaining ecosystem services, sustaining a healthy planet and delivering benefits essential for all people.” The United Nations General Assembly declared a UN Decade for Biodiversity for the same period. The IUCN Programme 2013–16 supports the implementation of the Strategic Plan and has been built to show, monitor and report on exactly where IUCN will contribute to the achievement of the twenty Aichi targets. This Programme Area makes a direct contribution to many of the targets of The Strategic Plan. In particular IUCN contributes to the achievement of the targets under Strategic Goals B and C.

6 Hoffmann, M., et al. 2010. The impact of conservation on the status of the world’s vertebrates. Science 330: 1503-1509; see also Vié, J.-C., Hilton-Taylor, C. and Stuart, S.N. (eds.) 2009. Wildlife in a Changing World. An Analysis of the 2008 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species™. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland.

193

Goal B: Reduce the direct pressures on biodiversity and promote sustainable use: • Target 5: Habitat loss reduced • Target 9: Invasive alien species combated Goal C: Improve the status of biodiversity by safeguarding ecosystems, species and genetic diversity: • Target 11: Protected areas increased • Target 12: Extinction prevented • Target 13: Genetic diversity maintained IUCN’s work on valuation – and its entire Programme, including the work of the Commission on Education and Communication (CEC) – will contribute to three additional targets: • Target 1: Public awareness increased • Target 2: Values of biodiversity recognized • Target 20: Financial resources increased Approach and results The Programme Area is based on the simple premise that better knowledge about biodiversity, the threats it faces and the conservation measures that can be taken, will help drive action. By combining world-class knowledge, standards and tools with a mobilized network of Members and partners, real change in policies and action on the ground to conserve biodiversity is possible. IUCN has a long history of creating and providing credible and trusted knowledge on biodiversity, notably through the expertise and support of the Species Survival Commission (SSC) and the World Commission on Protected Areas (WCPA). IUCN will continue its leading role in providing such cutting edge science-based knowledge and analysis based on the further development of our flagship knowledge products. More focus will be given to exploring the generation of knowledge that directly leads to policy influence and conservation action on the ground. A key priority is to expand the taxonomic coverage of the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species by assessing plants, invertebrates and fungi to make it truly representative of biodiversity as a whole. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Ecosystems will, when developed, provide information on the elimination risk of ecosystems and complement the information provided by the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. In particular it offers the opportunity to firmly embed conservation in land use planning and national development. It will help make the linkages between ecosystem and human well being, provide a means of assessing and rewarding good ecosystem performance such as through payments for ecosystem services, as well as make strong links to land use planning. All IUCN’s related knowledge products will be strengthened, which will require ongoing investment, for use in effective conservation planning, especially through working to make better conceptual and operational linkages between them. Harmonization of standards for criteria, data collection and management systems will help facilitate such linkages – to leverage IUCN knowledge products for protection of the world’s most important sites for biodiversity (KBAs; see Figure 4). Figure 4 brings forward the critical importance of global coverage of these biodiversity datasets. More specifically, work to complete a conservation standard (utilizing criteria derived from the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species and the IUCN Red List of Ecosystems), to identify the most important sites for biodiversity on land and in the sea (key biodiversity areas) will be finalized and comprehensively applied. This will bring together approaches to identify Important Bird Areas, Important Plant Areas, and in the marine realm, Ecologically and Biologically Significant Areas (EBSAs). The approach will complement species conservation guidelines and strategies developed to

194

conserve wide ranging species, such as large predators or migratory species that have ranges extending beyond KBA sites. Once identified, IUCN will seek to ensure the protection of these sites.

Figure 4: Valuing and conserving nature: Developing standards for criteria, data collection and systems and leveraging IUCN knowledge products to protect the world’s most important sites for

biodiversity (KBAs). Nature is valuable and nature is priceless: in addition to promoting the economic values of biodiversity (see also below on nature-based solutions), IUCN will continue to promote the cultural and other intangible values of nature. As the TEEB study demonstrated, it will be more expensive to continue with business as usual than to deal with the consequences of further degradation in biodiversity. IUCN will promote the incorporation of biodiversity values into development strategies and planning processes as well as into private sector and government accounting systems. This will make biodiversity a factor in the development agendas of countries and help give biodiversity greater visibility to policy makers. Knowledge must be used. IUCN will leverage its knowledge, standards and tools for policy influence and to support action on the ground, particularly action undertaken by IUCN Members. IUCN has a long history of working with the biodiversity related conventions, and in fact was responsible for drafting many of them. In its engagement with the Convention on Biological Diversity, the World Heritage Convention and the Convention on the International Trade of Endangered Species, IUCN has unparalleled expertise and is specifically and consistently requested by governments to assist in numerous ways in relation to their operation and implementation. IUCN will continue to support these and other conventions such as the Ramsar Convention. The biodiversity related conventions have agreed to adopt The Strategic Plan for Biodiversity as their own framework for action, which increases the potential for synergy. IUCN will capitalize on such synergy and focus in particular on work to support implementation of the Aichi targets, promoting the use of IUCN knowledge to measure progress towards the achievement of these targets.

195

GLOBAL RESULT for “Valuing and Conserving Nature”: Credible and trusted knowledge for valuing and conserving biodiversity leads to better policy and action on the ground IUCN will continue to create credible and trusted knowledge on biodiversity. This will be based on the further development of IUCN’s knowledge products with an increasing focus on providing knowledge that leads to policy influence and action on the ground. Building better links between these products will facilitate an increased focus on effective conservation planning, notably through work to complete and apply a conservation standard to identify the most important sites for biodiversity on land and in the sea (key biodiversity areas) to complement conservation planning that targets specific species. IUCN will leverage its knowledge for policy influence and to support action on the ground, especially though implementation of the biodiversity-related conventions and the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity. The intended impact and impact indicators are presented in Table 1 above. In relation to the IUCN Red List Index, which can demonstrate genuine changes in conservation status of sets of species as a result of conservation action, it should be noted that the extinction crisis is so severe, and resources so limited, that examples of improved status are few and far between. Four results indicators are proposed for this Programme Area, based on IUCN’s own knowledge products: 1. Extent, representativeness and connectivity of effectively managed protected areas. This is

measured through the IUCN/UNEP/WCMC World Database on Protected Areas (WDPA). 2. Proportion of identified Key Biodiversity Areas within and outside protected areas. This is

measured through the overlap of Protected Areas with identified Key Biodiversity Area data sets. 3. Number of exports of data from downloads of the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species; number

of mentions of The IUCN Red List in scientific literature. Downloads of information for a stated purpose are being tracked.

4. Extent to which IUCN advice and positions are followed in CBD, CITES, Ramsar and WHC. This measurement needs to be developed.

Programme Area: Effective and equitable governance of nature’s use People everywhere depend directly or indirectly on biodiversity for their well-being. Nature is a precondition for growth and prosperity of human societies. There is growing evidence that the direct economic value of this support is enormous though not well recognized. Recent studies suggest that natural resources regularly and directly contribute 25% – 30% of many rural and coastal peoples’ household income in low and middle income countries. However, historically the State has tended to retain authority over natural resources excluding or heavily regulating local control. The direct consequence of this is that nature’s benefits are not equitably shared and, in many situations, natural resources are poorly managed. Governance over natural resources is a problem of the State, or other powerful influences, expropriating too much control over resources. In some areas, with the so-called global commons, notably the high seas, there is the opposite challenge that there is little if any control over the management of these resources. Natural resource governance is shaped by the norms, institutions and processes that determine how power and responsibilities over the resource are exercised, how decisions are taken, and how citizens – men and women – participate in the management of natural resources. The quality of

196

these decision-making processes is one of the singular most important determinants as to the contribution ecosystems make to human well-being and the long-term prospects for successful biodiversity conservation. Sharing power, responsibility and benefits in natural resource management, as well as strengthening governance arrangements, including legal entitlements, to make decisions more transparent, inclusive and equitable, are good for both people and biodiversity. This is the basis of a just world that is capable of valuing and conserving nature. This Programme Area will contribute to recognizing and respecting the rights of people who live close to and rely on nature and also help governments, communities and the private sector put in place credible and robust measures to improve natural resource governance – both policy making and implementation. IUCN will bring together strands of established rights and governance work under a new framework that will help add more coherency and consistency of approach to this complex issue. IUCN will work with its Members, components and partners systematically to strengthen conservation and natural resource governance, including helping to facilitate fair resolution of contentious issues and ultimately, improve the flow of nature’s benefits to natural resource dependent peoples. Justification Many IUCN activities already address governance, rights, equity, entitlements and gender as cross-cutting themes. There is a growing realization within the Union that there remains a need for greater consistency, focus and coherence on this issue across the Secretariat and Commissions. The Union’s work in this area – how decisions about conservation and natural resource use are made and implemented and how the costs and benefits need to be shared – must be a constant and prominent feature of its Programme. This approach is supported by a strong mandate from Members. In addition to the Union’s Vision and Mission, there are over 100 IUCN Congress resolutions that deal directly with and unambiguously link conservation science and practice with social justice and equity. The work of the Commission on Environmental Law (CEL) is central to this area. There are also mandates from beyond IUCN to address these issues. IUCN’s work will help deliver the CBD Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011–2020 and implement the recently adopted Protocol on Access and Benefit Sharing, which has as its objective the fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from the utilization of natural resources, thereby contributing to the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity. Several international mechanisms such as the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples are pushing governments to improve social equity for marginalized groups – including recognition of rights with respect to natural resources. This Programme Area makes a direct contribution to many of the targets of the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity, particularly Strategic Goal D to enhance the benefits to all from biodiversity and ecosystems and Strategic Goal E to enhance implementation through participatory planning, knowledge management and capacity building, specifically: • Target 14: Ecosystems are restored and safeguarded • Target 16: Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of

Benefits Arising from their Utilization is in force • Target 18: Traditional knowledge respected and reflected in implementation of the Convention Furthermore, by developing tools and approaches that foster better natural resource governance this Programme Area will help establish the pre-conditions necessary for the achievement of Target 11 (Protected areas), particularly with respect to recognizing and advancing Community Conserved Areas and conservation areas within Indigenous People’s Territories, as well as Targets 6 and 7 (sustainable management of marine and terrestrial natural resources).

197

Approach and results IUCN has linked conservation and sustainable development for many years. IUCN’s work will create a robust set of principles, standards and tools, consolidating what already exists, and convening and empowering stakeholders to design solutions that influence policy, governance and action. Central to this will be the development of a framework for the robust and independent assessment of the status of natural resource governance. This knowledge product will draw on the broad range of social science embodied in the Commission on Environmental Economic and Social Policy (CEESP) and the Commission on Environmental Management (CEM) with the ultimate aim of being the “go-to” resource and standard on natural resource governance in a similar way that The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species is the definitive authority on the conservation status of species. The formulation of criteria for the natural resource governance framework should include consideration of the rule of law, rights and equity, and the principle of non-regression as indicators of the quality of decision making and the distribution of benefits. The framework will not lead to “categories” like in the Red Lists and will not be judgmental with a scoring framework. More explicitly than the IUCN Red Lists, the framework should encourage and guide people, including decision makers on how to make natural resource governance more effective and equitable. The framework will seek to link up with existing frameworks, such as the Natural Resource Charter and possible outcomes from the Rio+20 Conference related to access to information. Achieving this will involve consolidating previous experience, systematically learning from activities across IUCN and mobilizing the Union and its partners – many of whom come from the most vulnerable segments of society – to develop, test and refine these new flagship tools. Conservation must effectively incorporate equity, rights and responsibilities in policy, governance and action at all levels. IUCN will demonstrate how these issues are linked, show-casing the best solutions available in order to change policy and deliver tangible benefits to people and communities. IUCN will produce a state of the art knowledge product that will periodically assess the direct contribution of well governed natural resources to people’s livelihoods, particularly in rural and coastal areas. • Metrics will be systematically incorporated in all relevant IUCN project interventions to ascertain

natural resource contribution to rural and coastal income, using a modified toolkit that IUCN has already tested and deployed. These data will be differentiated by gender and other social groupings as well as the institutional arrangements under which natural resources are governed.

• IUCN will build and maintain a central authoritative database (similar to that for the IUCN World Database on Protected Areas) that acts as a global repository for information on natural resource dependency and which draws on the work of the IUCN Commissions, Members, Secretariat, other components and partners.

• IUCN will conduct a periodic (every 2–4 years) meta-analysis using existing literature in an attempt to document global numbers of natural resource dependant people and the general governance arrangements over the resources they rely on.

• Drawing on the various datasets, IUCN aims to produce a flagship knowledge product that attempts to quantify global and regional total values for the contribution of natural resources to the household income of rural and coastal communities and track changes over time. A recent analysis of this sort estimated that the total direct contribution to rural households from forests alone exceed an annual figure of 130 billion USD / per year.

Figure 5 shows, firstly, how the database on Human Dependency on Nature will link up with IUCN’s biodiversity databases, and secondly how the Natural Resource Governance Framework aims to assist decision makers at all levels to manage and govern the use of nature. The five datasets shall provide the best possible knowledge base for effective and equitable governance of nature’s use.

198

IUCN Red List of Threatened Species: measures extinction

risk

IUCN Red List of Ecosystems:

measures elimination risk

Human Dependency on Nature:

values nature’s direct contribution to people’s

livelihoods

World Database on Protected Areas

(WDPA): sites with protected

status

Key Biodiversity Areas (KBAs):

sites of biodiversity importance requiring conservation action

Natural Resource Governance Framework: a set of criteria around rights, equity and benefits issues

Figure 5: A Natural Resource Governance Framework aimed at improved governance of the

world’s key biodiversity sites and of human dependency on nature GLOBAL RESULT for “Effective and Equitable Governance of Nature’s Use” Improved governance arrangements over natural resources deliver rights-based and equitable conservation with tangible livelihoods benefits IUCN will consolidate its long-standing interventions around the theme of rights, equity and governance into this new Programme Area. It will develop a new natural resource governance framework and associated knowledge products. IUCN will support its Members, governments, private sector partners and natural resource stewards and managers to apply this tool as a means of identifying opportunities to strengthen on-the-ground natural resource governance. Through its own initiatives and those of its partners, IUCN will track the degree to which these changes lead to tangible improvements in people’s livelihoods as well as in biodiversity conservation. IUCN will leverage this growing body of knowledge to contribute to the delivery of the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity and to promote concrete nature-based solutions in post-2015 international development goals. The intended impact and impact indicators are presented in Table 1 above. Four result indicators are proposed for this Programme Area: 1. Enhancement of institutional and governance arrangements based on a new IUCN natural

resource governance framework 2. Extent of protected areas managed in accordance with IUCN’s natural resource governance

framework 3. Area (in ha.) of agriculture, fisheries and forestry managed according to IUCN’s natural resource

governance framework 4. Extent of high seas administered in accordance with the Ecosystem-based Approach (see next

Programme Area) and IUCN’s natural resource governance framework

199

IUCN will invest in systematically collecting and collating evidence on the extent and role of biodiversity and natural resources in the lives of rural and coastal communities, and how different institutional and political arrangements influence the flow of benefits and to whom. IUCN will use the 2013–16 Programme period to develop, test and apply this framework methodology with the intention that it will be used to independently assess status and trends in natural resource governance. Programme Area: Deploying nature-based solutions to global challenges in climate, food, development These are turbulent times for the world’s decision makers. Financial and economic crises and uncertainties reduce the attention and resources allocated to long-term systemic challenges, including poverty, biodiversity loss and global warming. The slow progress in climate negotiations means that many options for early action are being foreclosed, with the certainty that future strategies to avoid dangerous climate change will be more demanding and more expensive. The resilience of the earth’s life support system is threatened by increased consumer demand, fossil fuel consumption and the ethical obligation of providing – soon – nine billion people the opportunity of a decent life. Previous approaches to restrain or even arrest such pressures have only had limited results. As IUCN is not a broad-based environmental organization it often lacks the capacity and expertise to address many of these threats effectively and directly. For example, IUCN is not well placed to deal with issues such as energy efficiency, population & demographics, industrial pollution and waste management. IUCN’s expertise lies squarely in the field of conservation of nature and the management of natural resources. Where IUCN has a real, perhaps unique, advantage is in the application of its knowledge, standards and practices on nature and natural resource management as solutions to issues of broader global relevance. None of the major 21st century challenges of global warming, food security, and economic and social development can be resolved through nature-based solutions alone, but all of these issues depend to some degree on the health and functionality of the earth’s ecosystems. The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment and The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB) study clearly demonstrate the significant values that biodiversity and ecosystem services make to national and global economies. Healthy, diverse and well managed ecosystems lay the foundation for practical, nature-based solutions to global problems, and IUCN has the skills, insights and expertise to help mobilize these options in a cost effective and sustainable manner. Apart from providing effective solutions to major global challenges, nature-based solutions also deliver clear biodiversity benefits in terms of diverse, well-managed and functioning ecosystems. They must be cost efficient relative to other solutions. As nature-based solutions are designed to reach beyond the conservation community they need to be easily and compellingly communicated as well as being measurable, verifiable and replicable. Finally they must be designed and implemented in such a way as to respect and reinforce communities’ rights over natural resources. Annex 1 provides a description of the principles behind nature-based solutions.

200

Justification Do nature-based solutions really contribute to biodiversity conservation? Is helping others to solve problems that lie outside the immediate concern of biodiversity conservation for its own sake consistent with IUCN’s vision and mission? The answer is an emphatic “yes” in three respects: • Deploying nature-based solutions is good for biodiversity conservation in that it leverages

support, commitment and resources from other sectors. These non-conservation sectors may consider improved ecosystem functionality, more habitat for species and greater genetic diversity as co-benefits but they still constitute tangible conservation gains.

• IUCN’s mission directs the Union to “ensure that any use of natural resources is equitable and ecologically sustainable”. One of most effective ways to achieve this is the promotion of options that other sectors will embrace and whose success is commensurate with the health and integrity of natural systems.

• While food security, climate change and economic and social development may lie outside the immediate and daily challenges of conserving and managing nature and natural resources, they have major impacts on the status and trends of ecosystems, species and genetic resources over the longer term. For example, poorly managed fish stocks have negative consequences for both people and nature. Nature-based solutions offer the conservation community a pro-active choice to contribute to mitigating these global problems while at the same time alleviating long-term pressures on the natural resource base.

Halting the loss and degradation of natural systems and promoting their restoration have the potential to contribute over one third of the total mitigation of climate change that science says is required by 2030. Functional and resilient ecosystems are proven to reduce the impacts of extreme climatic events on the most vulnerable. As mentioned above, recent evidence shows that natural resources regularly account for 25% – 30% of rural and coastal people’s direct income and hence are critical for food security. The figure for forests resources alone amounts to a previously unaccounted for USD 130 billion each year, which is clearly an under-estimation when one takes into account that over 1 billion people rely on fish as their primary source of protein. Industries based on minerals and natural resources contribute significant shares of GNP in many countries and often generate over 50% of foreign exchange earnings. Poor countries cannot forego these opportunities of social and economic development, yet the extractive industry has a poor track record in terms of environmental stewardship and fair compensation and revenue sharing with affected, natural resource dependent communities. Industry environmental practices need to undergo a transformational step change rather than incremental adjustments. IUCN’s business and biodiversity programme engages businesses that are willing to undertake such change. IUCN Members have passed 16 resolutions related to climate change, over 40 resolutions on food security and several resolutions on better integration of conservation in economics. Given that nature-based solutions reach out into other sectors – mobilizing new champions and new resources for biodiversity – they can provide an effective mechanism to support the implementation of the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity, particularly Strategic Goal A to mainstream biodiversity across government and society, Strategic Goal B to reduce direct pressures and promote sustainable use and Strategic Goal D to enhance the benefits to all from biodiversity and ecosystems, specifically: • Target 2: Values of biodiversity recognized • Target 5: Habitat loss reduced • Target 6: Towards sustainable management of fisheries • Target 7: Sustainable management (agriculture, aquaculture and forestry) • Target 14: Ecosystems are restored and protected

201

• Target 15: By 2020, ecosystem resilience enhanced Nature-based solutions should also contribute to Strategic Goal E to enhance implementation through participatory planning, knowledge management and capacity building, notably: • Target 19: Knowledge and technologies improved and shared • Target 20: Financial resources increased Approach and results IUCN’s starting point for nature-based solutions is its knowledge, capacity and experience of managing ecosystems. IUCN Commissions and Secretariat have established competency in the functioning and biophysical limits of natural systems; how these functions can be valued; how to facilitate equitable agreements among stakeholder groups on the optimal mix of ecosystem services; how the benefits should be shared; how to identify durable institutional arrangements to manage the resources; how to adapt management strategies to the unexpected, and how to improve the resilience of the ecosystem and the livelihoods of the people who depend on it. IUCN has a broad suite of tools to support the implementation of nature-based solutions, including FLOW which is a methodology to facilitate equitable water sharing arrangements; CRiSTAL (Community-Based Risk Screening Tool – Adaptation and Livelihoods) which is a toolkit to help establish climate change adaptation strategies based on local conditions, strengths and needs; Net Positive Impact Validation Protocol which is a framework to help large footprint companies implement and verify strategies to transform their environmental impact; and economic valuation of natural capital. As a complement to these tools IUCN is in the process of developing the IUCN Red List of Ecosystems – a global standard for the assessment of ecosystem status with important direct applications to both land use and national development planning. On climate change, IUCN advances two principal nature-based solutions – Ecosystem-based mitigation (including REDD+) and Ecosystem-based Adaptation – aimed to influence specific sectoral policies and to demonstrate their effectiveness on the ground. IUCN will continue to generate knowledge on the impacts of climate change on biodiversity and develop solutions that properly address the rights of vulnerable groups including indigenous peoples. IUCN will build new alliances with the food security community to incorporate the largely overlooked contribution of natural ecosystems into existing national and international food security strategies. Specifically IUCN will: • Promote and disseminate science-based knowledge and lessons on the role and extent to which

biodiversity conservation, ecosystem management and wild harvested products underpin food security

• Advocate for increased equity in the use of natural resources and ecosystem services between smallholder farming and fishing systems and industrial large-scale food production, with a particular focus on the importance of safeguarding the integrity of local food systems

• Promote gender equality to guarantee that women and men can have access to, participate in and benefit equally from food security initiatives

• Identify opportunities to pilot ecosystems-based approaches in conjunction with established food security strategies, enhancing the stability of production and utilization

• Advocate for the recognition of the role of biodiversity conservation, ecosystems and nature-based solutions to complement the existing food security strategies undertaken by mainstream development organizations

202

Finally on economic and social development, IUCN will build on the recent work of TEEB, which demonstrates the unrecognized values that biodiversity makes to national and global economies. In particular, IUCN will work with governments, the private sector and civil society to identify opportunities to transform the practices of key economic sectors that negatively impact natural systems and the livelihoods of people who depend on them. Specifically, IUCN will: • Generate sector-specific knowledge on the role and value of “natural capital” and support

governments and businesses to find ways to incorporate the maintenance (or enhancement) of these values in their operational plans and accounting systems

• Generate knowledge on opportunities that ecosystem-based interventions can contribute to national economic development and/or recovery programmes.7

• Design and support the implementation of strategies, standards and protocols that encourage businesses to commit, pursue and verify a “no net loss” or a “net positive impact” commitment with respect to how their activities interface with the natural resource base and the livelihoods of people who depend on it

While focusing on these three areas, nature-based solutions are found also in other sectors, such as access to energy and health. Work on these will be expanded as soon as IUCN has clarified and pushed the nature-based approach and has achieved capacity and resources to move further. GLOBAL RESULT for “Deploying Nature-based Solutions to Global Challenges in Climate, Food, Development” Healthy and restored ecosystems make cost-effective contributions to meeting global challenges of climate change, food security and economic and social development IUCN will build on the successful experience that the Union, its Members, components and many of its partners have had in recent years in advancing nature-based solutions to climate change. As it builds a case for how good conservation and natural resource management can make tangible and cost effective solutions to global challenges, IUCN will endeavour to limit its interventions to its area of core expertise – the conservation of nature and the management of natural resources for people and nature. IUCN will work with partners to generate and package new and existing knowledge in a compelling way to decision makers and form new and innovative partnerships to test, pilot and upscale nature-based solutions on the ground. IUCN will invest in global analytical work to identify trends in how nature-based solutions are gaining acceptance and being deployed. The intended impact and impact indicators are presented in Table 1 above. Three results indicators are proposed for this Programme Area: 1. Extent of incorporation of nature-based solutions in policies on climate change, food security

and economic and social development at international, national and corporate levels. IUCN will track the degree to which nature-based solutions are being explicitly referenced in national and international climate change, food security and economic policies, and whether such policies provide sufficient safeguards for natural resource dependant peoples, notably communities, Indigenous Peoples and women.

2. Extent (in ha.) of landscape sustainably managed, protected or restored for food, climate change or economic benefit (and biodiversity). IUCN will work with partners such as the FAO and the World Bank, combining their data sets with IUCN’s own – including the Red List of Ecosystems –

7 For example, preliminary analysis around Aichi Target 15 (ecosystem restoration) indicates that the restoration of 150 million hectares of forest and agroforestry landscapes could generate somewhere in the vicinity of USD 85 billion per year.

203

periodically to assess the extent of multi-functional landscapes that are being managed, protected or restored to deliver climate, food and economic benefits.

3. Number of governments and public/private companies that have incorporated biodiversity values into planning and/or accounting systems. In addition to an indicator of progress such a measure is a direct contribution (and a key challenge) to the achievement of Target 2 of The Strategic Plan for Biodiversity. This will be reported on by Parties to the CBD.

Programme Priorities In support of the three Programme Areas, a set of programmatic priorities has been identified. Given the financial challenges for IUCN and nature conservation in general, these are important specific areas in which IUCN will work for the delivery of the Programme 2013–16. They reflect IUCN’s core competencies, in which the Union has a demonstrated and clear leadership, in some cases spanning decades, and they are needed for effective achievement of the global results outlined above. In IUCN’s draft Business Model, the Programme priorities have been linked with four business lines as priorities for resource mobilization. The Programme priorities serve as shortcuts for effective Programme implementation and as priorities for fundraising and resource allocation. However, as priorities they are not exclusive to what IUCN does. They will receive priority in the work of programme and fundraising staff, but they will not prevent IUCN – in Commissions and in all parts of the distributed IUCN Secretariat – from pursuing other programme and funding opportunities in support of the Programme. The list of Programme priorities will be updated through annual workplanning and budgeting, in accordance with lessons learned and new priorities emerging. The Programme priorities cut across the three Programme Areas. They are presented here as they relate to the business lines of the draft Business Model: 1) Providing knowledge products; 2) Delivering results on the ground; 3) Strengthening policy and governance; and 4) Engaging and leveraging the Union. The programme priorities provide outputs and results that can be monitored and verified; have significant, demonstrated (or potential) impact; involve the full Secretariat, with Members, Commissions and/or other components, in knowledge production and programme implementation; and are attractive to existing or potential funding partners. Programme priorities must have significant ownership in IUCN and be supported by capacity in the Secretariat at top international level. Table 2 presents the proposed Programme priorities for 2013–16. Table 2: Medium-term programme priorities for IUCN under the draft business model Providing Knowledge Products

Delivering Results on the Ground

Strengthening Policy and Governance

Engaging and Leveraging the Union

• IUCN Red List of Threatened Species

• Protected areas categories & data (marine/terrestrial)

• IUCN Red List of Ecosystems

• ECOLEX & legal products

• Key Biodiversity Areas

• Natural resource governance framework

• TEEB

• Water and food security

• Forest and climate change mitigation

• Ecosystem-based climate change adaptation and disaster risk reduction

• Oceans, coastal areas and islands

• Drylands • Transforming

business impacts on biodiversity

• Policy development for global and regional conservation issues

• Capacity development: gender responsiveness, biodiversity mgmt., and ecosystem services

• Services and functions for environmental governance, e.g. Conventions, IPBES, MEAs, World Heritage.

• Governance execution, e.g. verification and certification

• Policy influence: Convening, networking, empowering

• Strengthening Members’ involvement in IUCN policy development

• Capacity-building of and services to Members, the Union’s governing bodies, Commissions and National and Regional Committees

204

The priorities are not to be equated with thematic programmes run by individual units in the Secretariat, cf. Figure 6 below. The priorities represent the knowledge products to be developed or applied, the areas and biomes where on-the-ground interventions are taking place, and the services and functions – or influence pathways – to be leveraged for improving environmental governance. The priorities under the fourth business line – Engaging and leveraging the Union – are more generic, reflecting structural characteristics of IUCN as a Union. Table 2 shows activities that are already being delivered by IUCN and have scope for further expansion, and activities that need to be developed. Most priorities are well-known within IUCN. The less well-known, emerging priorities are summarized in Annex 2. In the case of the knowledge products, these products will best complement existing ‘flagship’ products, allowing IUCN to create and provide optimal information on the status of components of biodiversity to underpin strong and robust decision making for people and nature, as captured in Figures 4 and 5 above. The list of programme priorities is long. In the preparation for the 2013–16 Programme, IUCN will substantiate the priorities by launching a few programme development initiatives within: • A programme will be launched that ensures the integration and overlay of data on species,

ecosystems, key biodiversity areas and protected areas in order to better inform the effective conservation management of land and seascapes.

• A programme will be launched that focuses on developing and applying a globally recognized standard in order to identify and then conserve the most important areas for biodiversity, including through the establishment of protected areas.

• A natural resource governance framework will be prepared based on compiling IUCN and other experiences and pilot-testing its usefulness.

• Data will be compiled and analyzed for the creation of a global database on human dependency on nature / natural resources and on nature’s contribution to people’s livelihoods.

• Programmes will be developed for developing and pilot-testing nature-based solutions that promote landscape and seascape conservation and restoration for livelihoods and sustainable development across biomes.

• Programmes focused on policy application through capacity building will be launched to help ensure the implementation of the CBD Strategic Plan for Biodiversity including the achievement of the Aichi Targets and the inclusion of nature-based solutions to climate change in the framework of ongoing UNFCCC negotiations.

• The specification of IUCN’s contribution to the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) will be finalized.

Developing these initiatives will involve the Secretariat, the Commissions, Members and other components of IUCN with related agendas and priorities. IUCN will seek partners for programme development and pilot projects under these three cross-cutting initiatives. Implementing the IUCN Programme 2013–16

The ambitious nature of the Programme 2013–16 demands a highly effective and efficient IUCN, leveraging the combined efforts of all components of IUCN, especially the Members, Commissions and Secretariat. Figure 6 presents the structure of the Union and its global presence and strengths, enabling the implementation of an ambitious Programme. The Commissions are expected to leverage their vast expertise through a focus on the implementation of the Programme. To facilitate Programme implementation and Union development, the Secretariat is being reorganized around the Programme framework, the business model and the approach to working together of the One Programme Charter. The Programme framework, with its three Programme Areas, is not a composite of the individual global thematic programmes developed to implement the

205

framework. Global thematic programmes such as the protected areas programme, the marine and polar programme, the water programme, the forest programme or the business and biodiversity programme, are organizational units through which the Programme framework is implemented. Global thematic programmes typically relate to more than one of the three Programme Areas. For example, the global marine and polar programme delivers outcomes pertaining to valuing and conserving biodiversity, governance and equity in the use of marine resources, and food security.

Figure 6: The strength of the Union for Programme implementation

Figure 7 summarizes IUCN’s policy, programme and planning framework. “The How” of the Programme is described in the separate document: IUCN Operational Plan 2013–16.

206

Figure 7: IUCN’s vision, niche, Programme 2013–16, business model, programme priorities, operational plan 2013–16 and Union development plan.

207

Annex 1: Nature-based solutions The concept of nature-based solutions initially emerged as a means of identifying conservation actions designed to contribute directly to the objectives of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). The underlying assumption was that such an approach offered unique and effective solutions to climate change, helping the conservation community reach beyond its traditional constituencies, build new alliances and broaden its messaging beyond the immediate imperatives of addressing biodiversity threats. The underlying approach is a pro-active application of the sustainable management and conservation of natural resources to major global challenges (food security, disaster risk reduction, economy). The following principles, i.e. the essential characteristics of the system, are an initial attempt to provide some guidance on what type of interventions could (or should not) be considered as a nature-based solution. 1. The intervention delivers an effective solution to a major global challenge using nature Nature-based solutions will make a significant, tangible and cost-effective contribution to a recognized problem whose main cause and impact are not immediately associated with the loss of biodiversity or the role of the conservation sector. Clarity and realism is required to specify the degree to which nature-based solutions contribute to addressing the challenge in question. It will be important to present nature-based solutions as complementary to other conventional approaches rather than suggesting that these are stand-alone alternatives. 2. The intervention provides biodiversity benefits in terms of diverse, well-managed ecosystems While nature-based solutions should not be overloaded with the expectation of delivering every conceivable conservation objective, there is a clear requirement that the existing ecosystem values are at least maintained (and preferably enhanced) and that the further loss of existing biodiversity is avoided. Nature-based solutions are predicated on the services and benefits provided by resilient, well-functioning ecosystems, and therefore that it makes sense to maintain the integrity of these systems. If that resilience is impaired then there is a risk that the quality and/or reliability of the intervention will be diminished (for example, if a carbon-sequestering forest is infested with a fire-prone, alien invasive species). 3. The intervention is cost effective relative to other solutions The real costs and benefits of nature-based solutions, both immediate and over the longer term, need to be understood and clearly articulated in ways that enable comparison with other options. Most solutions involve costly and vulnerable infrastructure investments, whereas nature-based solutions can often build resilience at less cost. As specific solutions should be capable of being replicated and widely adopted, they must be cost effective, particularly those that require a lead-in period before the actual benefits begin to flow (e.g. restoration of mangroves to minimize impacts of tidal surges). Maintaining the resilience and functioning of intact ecosystems is a short-term and cost-effective option to maintain ecosystem services, such as water provision. 4. The rationale behind the intervention can be easily and compellingly communicated The logic behind nature-based solutions must be conveyed to outside audiences in a manner that is clear, unambiguous and, above all, convincing. This will require a strong evidence base (ideally, but not necessarily, built upon IUCN knowledge products), realistic and defendable claims of the contribution that a specific nature-based solution will make to a particular challenge (i.e. honesty about its limitations) and – perhaps most critically – avoiding mixed messages as to whether a solution is being offered or an issue is simply being capitalized to advance a threats-based conservation agenda. Clarity will also be required about the necessity of implementing nature-based

208

solutions alongside other approaches – for example: a nature-based solution to food security does not dispense with the need for crop breeding, improvements in farming systems, management of market volatility, etc. 5. The intervention can be measured, verified and replicated Nature-based solutions need to be amenable to the establishment and verification of direct outcomes that can be measured (simply) in terms of the particular challenge and ancillary conservation benefits (e.g. REDD – GtCO2 sequestered or stored and hectare saved or created). It also needs to be clearly understood that complete attribution is seldom possible and that some outcomes may require several years before being fully quantified. 6. The intervention respects and reinforces communities’ rights over natural resources The prevailing conditions required to successfully implement particular nature-based solutions need to be clearly and precisely articulated – particularly with respect to local participation, rights, tenure and other institutional and governance arrangements. Implementation of nature-based solutions needs to be managed with clear understanding concerning the scope and extent of communities’ dependency on natural resources, including any significant differentiation to gender, ethnicity, social groupings etc. 7. The intervention harnesses both public and private sources of funding To achieve significant scale and financial sustainability, many nature-based solutions will be able to complement public sector investments by harnessing the capacity of business and markets. The design and implementation of nature-based solutions need to consider if and why markets understate the contribution of biodiversity and ecosystem services to human welfare, and if and how market forces can be enlisted to make nature-based solutions more attractive to investors, producers and consumers, for example through payments for ecosystem services and other incentive mechanisms.

209

Annex 2: Programme priorities in need of further development

Providing knowledge products

Key Biodiversity Areas (KBAs): Site conservation is one of the most effective means to mitigate the loss of biodiversity through degradation and destruction of habitat. KBAs are critical to identify sites of global importance for biodiversity conservation and provide a strategic approach to allocate resources and maximize conservation impact. Criteria to identify these sites are currently being consolidated, based on concepts of vulnerability and irreplaceability. KBAs complement other species based conservation planning approaches and are applicable in terrestrial, freshwater and marine biomes. KBAs will help countries meet their international commitments, in particular target 11 of the CBD strategic plan. IUCN Red List of Ecosystems: IUCN has strong experience from the Red List of Species and increased capability of geographical information systems. There is need for a stringent classification system for threatened ecosystems, covering all three components of biodiversity. Ecosystem loss can be more apparent than species loss: clean water, food, fuel. The Red List of Ecosystems will enable relatively fast assessments of the conservation status of ecosystems IUCN’s natural resource governance framework: This knowledge product emphasizes “a just world that values and conserves nature” in IUCN’s vision. It shall ensure that environmental decision making enhances to all the benefits from biodiversity and ecosystem services, with a particular focus on the poor and vulnerable, taking into account gender and the needs of indigenous and local communities. The framework will need a set of criteria around rights, equity and benefits issues. TEEB in new areas: There is an urgent need to incorporate ecosystem values into policy and national accounting system (target 2 of the CBD plan). A decision on whether to focus IUCN’s TEEB work on sectors, geographical areas or something else needs to be made. Ecosystem values must be a cornerstone of IUCN’s work on the Red List of Ecosystems and the natural resource governance framework.

Delivering results on the ground

Coastal and islands: IUCN will effect significant change in coastal and island ecosystems in i) protection and collaborative management of key areas such as mangroves, corals, estuarine systems and seagrass beds; ii) amelioration of degrading upstream pressures through “ridge to reef” approaches; iii) management and containment of threats such as alien invasive species; and iv) the restoration of lost or diminished ecosystems functions that are important for the resiliency of natural systems and local livelihoods. Drylands: IUCN will work with its Members to develop and promote on-the-ground models of effective dryland management, designed explicitly to address the major challenges facing one third of the world’s population, including food security. As drylands cover 40% of the earth’s land surface, these models will need to be replicable, potentially scalable, resilient enough to deal with frequent climatic and ecological variations and equipped to address sensitively the marginalization experienced by many dryland communities. Transforming private sector impacts: IUCN will work with the private sector to develop and implement tools, standards and mechanisms that transform the impact of business on natural systems. IUCN will help identify, test and verify robust pathways towards the achievement of “net positive impact” and “no net loss” objectives. Through a mixture of avoidance, mitigation and offsetting, a particular private sector operation can reduce the risk of negatively impacting an area’s biodiversity and biodiversity-dependant livelihoods.

Strength-ening policy and governance

Capacity development: Capacity development of its Members is part of IUCN’s mandate. As new demands and opportunities emerge in international environmental governance, such as payment for ecosystem services, stronger capacity is needed in all countries benefitting from environmental regulation. IUCN can play the role as neutral capacity-builder on behalf of the public and private funders of ecosystem services. Services and functions for environmental governance: New markets and forms of collaboration are being created, as is evidenced in the Clean Development Mechanism, REDD+ and several certification schemes. IUCN can play a role in this and in the objective verification of results in ecosystem services. As KBAs become better defined, the demand will rise for cost-effective management of selected KBAs. IUCN can play the role of capacity-builder for this, or even, with its Members, provider of KBA management. Overall, environmental governance requires policy innovation and quality assurance, for which IUCN is well suited.

210


IUCN Financial Plan 2013–16 Draft, March 2012

Contents Summary ...................................................................................................................................... 2

Programme overview .................................................................................................................. 3

Operational Plan overview .......................................................................................................... 4

Financial trends 2004–2012 ........................................................................................................ 5

Financial Plan 2013–16 ................................................................................................................ 6

Scope .................................................................................................................................................................... 6

Global budget ....................................................................................................................................................... 6

Income and expenditure ...................................................................................................................................... 9

Membership dues ................................................................................................................................................ 9

Framework income ............................................................................................................................................ 10

Restricted income .............................................................................................................................................. 10

Expenditure ........................................................................................................................................................ 11

Core expenditure ................................................................................................................................................ 11

Programme / project expenditure ..................................................................................................................... 12

Commission contributions ................................................................................................................................. 13

Balance sheet ..................................................................................................................................................... 13

Reserves ............................................................................................................................................................. 14

Monitoring.......................................................................................................................................................... 14

Financial Risks ..................................................................................................................................................... 15

Fundraising plan ........................................................................................................................ 16

Providing knowledge products ........................................................................................................................... 16

Delivering results on the ground ........................................................................................................................ 17

Strengthening policy and governance ................................................................................................................ 17

Engaging and leveraging the Union .................................................................................................................... 18

Fundraising priorities for 2012 ........................................................................................................................... 18

Conclusion ................................................................................................................................. 19

Additional assumptions ............................................................................................................. 19

211

Summary During 2013–16, IUCN will implement a new ambitious Programme, which requires mobilizing sufficient funds in an environment of financial decline for long-term efforts such as biodiversity conservation. IUCN will be guided by two documents: The IUCN Programme 2013–16, to be adopted by Congress in Jeju; and The IUCN Operational Plan 2013–16. The latter document includes the present IUCN Financial Plan 2013–16, to be approved by Congress, as required by Statute 20 e). The Financial Plan aims for a situation by 2016, where the IUCN Programme 2013–16 has been fully funded and implemented, and where the organization relies more on medium-term programme funding than on short-term project funding. Official development assistance (ODA) is forecast to remain the single largest source of revenue for IUCN, but for new types of initiatives. There will be greater reliance on ODA-funding for medium-term, targeted programmes such as landscape restoration and water and food security, often implemented simultaneously across several regions. There is also likely to be more ODA funding for innovative schemes in environmental policy and governance, such as payment for ecosystem services, certification, verification and capacity building. This is seen in the third of IUCN’s four business lines under its new business model: 1) knowledge products, 2) results on the ground, 3) policy and governance, and 4) engaging and leveraging the Union. IUCN’s total income, including membership dues, framework core contributions and restricted programme and project funding, has increased from CHF 102 million in 2004 to a projected CHF 121 million in 2012, with a high of CHF 142 million in 2008. The two most worrying trends are significant declines in framework funding during 2008–12 and the volatility of restricted funding for projects and programmes. Based on an assessment of Programme needs, IUCN capacity and fundraising opportunities, IUCN proposes a total financial plan for the 2013–16 Programme of CHF 512 million, i.e. an average of CHF 128 million per year, with annual increases in the range of 3–4%. Hence, this is a conservative Financial Plan. The break-down by IUCN Programme Area and Union functions is as follows:

• Valuing and conserving nature: CHF 120 million • Effective and equitable governance of nature’s use: CHF 90 million • Deploying nature-based solutions to global challenges: CHF 185 million • Supporting Union governance and development: CHF 35 million • Operations and Programme support (16% of total): CHF 82 million • Total CHF 512 million

The break-down by IUCN’s four business lines, which will be used to raise the necessary funds for the Programme, is as follows:

• Providing knowledge products: CHF 143 million • Delivering results on the ground: CHF 232 million • Strengthening policy and governance: CHF 95 million • Engaging and leveraging the Union: CHF 42 million • Total CHF 512 million

The total income, including contribution to reserves, by funding source is expected to be:

• Membership dues: CHF 47 million • Governments and multilateral (framework and restricted): CHF 359 million • Non-government organizations: CHF 16 million

212

• Foundations (framework and restricted): CHF 68 million • Private sector, including personal contributions: CHF 26 million • Total, including increased reserves: CHF 516 million

The Financial Plan supports the One Programme Charter. The Programme will be implemented through the combined capacity of its Members and the components1 of the Union. IUCN benefits from significant voluntary contributions from approximately 11,000 members of the six IUCN Commissions. The Financial Plan includes a rough estimate of the value of these contributions, amounting to approximately CHF 600 million during 2013–16, i.e. more than the financial projections for income and expenditure of the IUCN Secretariat. The estimates prepared by the six Commissions themselves are:

• Species Survival Commission, SSC: CHF 347 million • Commission on Environmental, Economic and Social Policy, CEESP: CHF 153 million • World Commission on Protected Areas, WCPA: CHF 70 million • Commission on Education and Communication, CEC: CHF 20 million • Commission on Ecosystem Management, CEM: CHF 15 million • Commission on Environmental Law, CEL: CHF 6 million • Total estimate CHF 611 million

The Secretariat will include Commissions, Members and their Committees in proposals to donors where they are best placed to deliver Programme results, given their skills and capacity. The main financial risks for IUCN during 2013–16 are a further decrease in framework grants and a failure to meet restricted income targets. In accordance with IUCN’s business model, the fundraising efforts will emphasize institutional and substantive partnerships with bilateral and multilateral donors on programmes delivering results on the ground, based on IUCN’s flagship knowledge products, and leading to policy influence and governance capacity building globally, regionally and nationally.

Programme overview IUCN’s Programme2 builds on the Vision of a just world that values and conserves nature. The Programme specifies results and impact indicators for biodiversity, people and nature, and nature and development. It has three Programme Areas: 1. Valuing and Conserving Nature enhances IUCN’s heartland work on biodiversity conservation,

emphasizing both tangible and intangible values of nature. The Programme Area aims to ensure that credible and trusted knowledge for valuing and conserving biodiversity leads to better policy and action on the ground.

2. Effective and Equitable Governance of Nature’s Use consolidates IUCN’s work on people-nature

relations, rights and responsibilities, and the political economy of nature. The Programme Area aims to ensure that improved governance arrangements over natural resource management strengthen rights and deliver equitable conservation with tangible livelihoods benefits.

1 The IUCN Statutes (Article 15) describe the components of IUCN as: (a) the World Conservation Congress; (b) the Council; (c) the National and Regional Committees and Regional Fora of Members; (d) the Commissions; and (e) the Secretariat. 2 IUCN Programme 2013–16, Third Draft, January 2012.

213

3. Deploying Nature-based Solutions to Global Challenges in Climate, Food and Development expands IUCN’s work on nature’s contribution to tackling problems of sustainable development, particularly in climate change, food security and social and economic development. The Programme Area aims to ensure that healthy and restored ecosystems make cost-effective contributions to meeting global challenges of climate change, food security and social and economic development.

The Programme is implemented through the combined force of the Secretariat (over 1,000 staff in global thematic programmes and nine regional programmes) working together with six IUCN Commissions, with more than 11,000 members who provide critical knowledge for Programme implementation. Under the One Programme Charter adopted by Council in May 2011, the 1,231 State, government and NGO Members of IUCN as well as the National and Regional Committees contribute where there is alignment with the IUCN Programme.

Operational Plan overview IUCN’s Operational Plan 2013–16 defines how IUCN will operate and be organized to support the implementation the IUCN Programme 2013–16. It identifies the human, financial and institutional resources required to support delivery of Programme results and the operations of the Union. The Operational Plan is a tool primarily for the managers and staff of the Secretariat and the Chairs and Steering Committees of the IUCN Commissions. The Plan describes the tasks to be executed and the resources to be mobilized, in order to achieve programmatic, financial and organizational milestones and planned outcomes for 2016. The Plan covers four elements: 1) Programme milestones, 2) the Financial Plan, 3) Union development, and 4) the Secretariat3 (see Figure 1), each of which has a set of planned outcomes for the end of the quadrennial period (2016): What are the goals to be achieved by 2016 for the Programme, its funding, the Union as a whole and the Secretariat in particular? To achieve the 2016 outcomes for each element, milestones have been defined, covering key activities and outputs and the sequence in which they should be delivered. For the Financial Plan, these are IUCN’s fundraising targets for 2013–16, as outlined below. Each planning element also specifies what the Secretariat needs to do in 2012 in order to be prepared for the start of the implementation period. Finally, the Operational Plan 2013–16 outlines an annual progress monitoring system for IUCN, to be launched in 2013.

3 Details are provided in particular for the Secretariat part of the Union’s components, as the Secretariat is ultimately responsible, under the authority of Council, to ensure that the Programme is prepared, followed and delivered (IUCN Statutes, Article 79).

214

Figure 1: The four elements of the Operational Plan 2013–16 The Operational and Financial Plans apply IUCN’s new business model as a way to organize the Secretariat and mobilize resources for the Programme. The business model proposes adaptations of IUCN operations to the change in global funding opportunities and seeks to package IUCN’s Programme priorities in ways that enable the Union to raise the necessary resources. A business model targets what people and partners value so much about an organization that they are willing to pay for it, and then structures and develops the organization accordingly. The four business lines fit with the main deliverables of IUCN: flagship knowledge products; results on the ground in biodiversity conservation and nature-based solutions; services for environmental governance and policy; and a Union with convening power and policy influence. The expected outcome of the implementation of IUCN’s business model is an organization that is financially secure due to its ability to attract core unrestricted programme funding on a multi-year basis, and is less dependent on short-term project restricted funding.

Financial trends 2004–2012 IUCN has three main funding sources: Membership dues; Framework core contributions; and Restricted funding (globally and regionally) for programmes and projects. Figure 2 shows trends in IUCN income. The most important features are the volatility of restricted income; the declining trend of framework core; and the stable contribution of Membership dues.

The Programme

The Financial Plan

The Union (Members & Components)

The Secretariat

Three Programme Areas deliver results

and impacts

Milestones for Programme Areas and business lines

Programme development

initiatives

IUCN is more reliant on medium-term programme

and framework funding

Application of four business lines of the

business model

Priorities and strategies for fundraising

The niche is consolidated via the One Programme

Charter with participation of Members & components

Tighter governance, expanded membership, joint activities involving

Members & components

Preparation of a Union development plan involving

Members & components

A competent, cost-effective Secretariat supports the

Union

Leadership; Skills; Communications;

Efficiency; Oversight

Implementation of effective organization of the

Secretariat

Planned outcome 2016

Implementation 2013–16

Preparations 2012

215

Figure 2: IUCN income trends 2004–2012 (CHF million)

Membership dues have shown a slight but steady increase over the period, increasing from CHF 10m in 2004 to CHF 11.4m in 2012, an average annual increase of 1.5%. Framework income4 declined from a high of CHF 23.7m in 2008 to an expected level of CHF 16.5m in 2012. The reduction follows the global economic recession in 2008/2009 which led to a reduction in the level of unrestricted funding provided to IUCN. The prospects of predictable framework funding from official development assistance are declining, or at least not improving, for most intergovernmental and multilateral organizations. This is critical for IUCN, whose core functions depend significantly on framework income. Restricted income is the most volatile income stream. The level reflects the attractiveness of programme initiatives to donors, IUCN’s fundraising success and IUCN’s capacity to deliver the Programme. Overall, ODA provides some 75% of total IUCN resources, while representing less than 0.1% of total ODA resources. The latter indicates that there is scope to retain and increase IUCN’s share of ODA.

Financial Plan 2013–16

Scope The Financial Plan includes the income and expenditure of the Secretariat and the estimated value of contributions from the six IUCN Commissions. There is currently no mechanism in place to estimate the programme contributions from Members and the other components of the Union, but the value of these contributions to the Union’s Programme is appreciated and known to be very significant.

Global budget The estimated global needs for IUCN’s Programme activities can be said to be in the billions. However, the Financial Plan must take into account IUCN’s capacity to deliver with quality results and must reflect reasonable and achievable fundraising targets. 4 Framework funding for IUCN is multi-year commitment from governments and private donors/partners, which is not tied to particular programmes or projects.

-

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

120.0

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 provisional

2012 Budget

CH

F m

illio

ns

Income trends 2004 - 2012

Restricted Framework Core Membership Other unrestricted

216

An assessment of fundraising potential has been done by applying the business lines to the three Programme Areas. Table 1 applies the business lines to the Programme Areas and presents fundraising targets for the 2013–16 period. These numbers are based on IUCN’s ability to maintain and/or increase its share of ODA funding. Table 1: Financial planning targets 2013–16, total and by business line (CHF million)

The difference in size between the three Programme Areas is significant. “Deploying Nature-based Solutions to Global Challenges” is the Programme area with the highest financial value and the greatest growth, as this area involves more field operations and is more directly aligned with the priorities of ODA donors. IUCN has a wealth of experience in developing and implementing programmes in water, forestry, marine, etc. and will build on its success in these areas. “Valuing and Conserving Nature” is part of IUCN’s heartland work but the overall value is smaller than the Deploying Nature-based Solutions Programme Area, as it is more knowledge intensive and a larger part of activities consists of the development and dissemination of IUCN’s flagship knowledge products, such as the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species and the World Database on Protected Areas. Similarly, “Effective and Equitable Governance of Nature’s Use” is a predominantly knowledge-based Programme Area, which is under development with new flagship knowledge products on the IUCN Red List of Ecosystems, Natural Resource Governance, and Human Dependency on Nature. Hence, it will have a lower financial value during 2013–16. In terms of the business lines, “Delivering Results on the Ground” is the largest in financial terms. This business line accounts for much of the work performed from the regional level. It is primarily funded by ODA and has a high financial value, because it involves field operations channelled through IUCN Members on the ground. “Providing Knowledge Products” is the second largest business line. It encompasses the established products of the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species and the World Database on Protected Areas and the above-mentioned new knowledge products which are still in the development phase. This business line is primarily managed from Commissions and through the global programmes primarily based out of the IUCN Secretariat Headquarters. It has a lower field element, hence an overall lower financial value.

Providing Knowledge

Products

Delivering Results on

the Ground

Strengthening Policy and

Governance

Engaging and Leveraging the Union

Total

CHF m CHF m CHF m CHF m CHF mValuing and Conserving Nature 80 10 20 10 120 Effective and Equitable Governance of Nature's Use

20 40 25 5 90

Deploying Nature-based Solutions to Global Challenges

15 140 25 5 185

Supporting Union Governance and Development

5 5 10 15 35

Operations and Programme Support 23 37 15 7 82 Total 143 232 95 42 512 Business line as a % of total 28% 45% 19% 8% 100%

217

The business line “Strengthening Policy and Governance” has a lower financial value than the previous two as it deals with the development of policy and capacity and the execution of governance of biodiversity and sustainable development. Income sources will be a mixture of ODA and public and private payment for ecosystem services provided by IUCN or its Members. Funding is expected to be received through the provision of services to Members, international organizations and private corporations. These are relatively new areas for IUCN and hence it will take time to build up this business line. The business line “Engaging and Leveraging the Union” is the smallest of the four in financial terms. It is funded primarily from Membership dues and other core funding as it is difficult to raise voluntary funds for the Union in its own right. Table 1 also includes an estimate of the costs of supporting the governance and development of the Union, as well as the costs of operations and programme support. “Supporting Union Governance and Development” represents the cost of services provided to the Membership by the Secretariat, including the Secretariat’s contributions to Commission operating costs and convening the World Conservation Congress and Council meetings. These costs are primarily funded by Membership dues. “Operations and Programme Support” includes the cost of the basic global infrastructure of the Secretariat as well as global functions such as Donor Relations, Communications, Programme Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation, Knowledge Management and Global Policy. Direct overheads related to the implementation of the Programme are included in the individual Programme Areas. The funding sources for Operations and Programme Support are primarily Membership dues and Framework income. Table 1 presents a four-year view by both Programme Area and business line. Table 2 presents the same four-year totals for each Programme Area and presents them as annual targets. Table 2: Estimate of annual expenditure by Programme Area, for Union Support, and for Operations and Programme Support (CHF million)

Total projected annual expenditure for 2013 is CHF 121m. This compares with the 2012 budget of CHF 121m and 2011 actual expenditure of CHF 120m. Annual growth of approximately 4% is predicted. This is a prudent estimate. Growth may be higher as new products are developed, and a focused approach on priority areas may result in a higher level of income. “Operations and Programme Support” is targeted at 16% throughout the period, with the actual expenditure fluctuating in line with the size of the Programme and project portfolio.

2013 2014 2015 2016 2013-16Plan Plan Plan Plan Total

CHF m CHF m CHF m CHF m CHF mValuing and Conserving Nature 29 30 30 31 120Effective and Equitable Governance of Nature's Use

22 22 23 23 90


44 45 47 49 185

Supporting Union Governance and Development

7 9 9 10 35

Operations and Programme Support 19 20 21 22 82Total 121 126 130 135 512Operations and Programme Support % 16% 16% 16% 16% 16%Annual Growth % 4% 3% 4%

218

Income and expenditure Underlying the global targets for income and expenditure are estimates of unrestricted and restricted income and expenditure, as shown in Table 3. Table 3: Restricted and unrestricted income and expenditure, 2012–16 (CHF million)

Note: The result shown for 2011 is provisional and unaudited.

Membership dues One of the ways to increase resources for the Union is to expand the Membership and their contributions as Members, see Tables 4 and 5. The projected number of Members for 2012–16 is based on the average increase achieved for the period 2009–2011, except for Government Agencies where a bigger increase is predicted. The World Conservation Congress in Jeju will consider a proposal to include Local and Regional Government Authorities as Members which, if approved, would result in a significant increase in the number of Members in this category. Table 4: Membership by number of Members

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016Actual Actual Actual Budget Plan Plan Plan PlanCHF m CHF m CHF m CHF m CHF m CHF m CHF m CHF m

Unrestricted incomeMembership dues 11 11 11 11 11 12 12 12Framework income 19 22 18 17 18 18 19 20Other unrestricted income 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4Total unrestricted income 33 36 33 32 33 34 35 36

Restricted incomeProgramme/project income 88 83 84 88 88 92 95 99Other restricted income 4 3 1 1 1 1 1 1Total restricted income 92 86 85 89 89 93 96 100

Total income 125 122 118 121 122 127 131 136

ExpenditureCore expenditure 33 38 35 32 32 33 34 35Programme/project expenditure 92 86 85 89 89 93 96 100Total expenditure 125 124 120 121 121 126 130 135

Surplus/(deficit) 0 -2 -2 0 1 1 1 1

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016Actual Actual Actual Budget Plan Plan Plan Plan

Category Number Number Number Number Number Number Number NumberStates 80 84 87 90 94 97 101 104 Government Agencies 115 117 120 124 137 150 165 182 National Non-Government Organizations 749 809 859 915 974 1,037 1,105 1,176 International Non-government Organizations 93 96 101 108 115 123 131 140 Affi l iates 30 32 38 42 44 46 49 51 Total 1,067 1,138 1,205 1,279 1,364 1,454 1,550 1,654 Growth 7% 6% 6% 7% 7% 7% 7%Growth over intersessional period 20% 21%

219

During the period 2009–2012, a 20% increase in the number of Members was achieved. However, this did not result in an increase in the value of membership dues as most of the increase in the membership occurred in the category National Non-Government Organizations which contribute a relatively small proportion of the total membership dues. In addition, there were decreases in the average level of membership dues in other categories. The expected increase in dues of 5% during the period 2013–16 takes into consideration the expected increase in the number of Members and reflects inflation adjustments to the scale of dues. Table 5: Membership dues by value (CHF million)

Framework income Framework funding is essential to IUCN’s performance as a Union and for the delivery of the IUCN Programme. Framework income is provided by IUCN’s framework partners to support the delivery of the IUCN Programme. The majority of the existing framework income comes from ODA and its use has to comply with the general regulations associated with ODA funding. A decline of 26% in the value of framework contributions occurred during the period 2009–2012, due to the loss of three government framework donors during this period, for their internal financial reasons. Each of these have assured IUCN that they continue to support IUCN’s mission and programme and hope to return as framework donors when their own economic situations improve. IUCN does not expect a return to the level of framework contributions from four years ago, but does see a potential for a reversal of the decline due to the emergence of new potential framework partners. New partners will be sought with an emphasis on securing funds from non-traditional donors. Three new partners are forecast to join between 2013 and 2016, and a partner that was not able to contribute in 2012 is expected to re-join at the beginning of 2013. The estimate for framework income assumes that all the current partners will maintain their contributions at the 2012 level. Table 6: Framework income (CHF million)

Restricted income Restricted funding is forecast to increase by 12% during 2013–16. Restricted funding makes up 95% of the funding for the three programme areas. The fundraising section below lays out the approach to raise restricted funds.


Category CHF m CHF m CHF m CHF m CHF m CHF m CHF m CHF mStates 9.5 9.3 9.4 9.4 9.5 9.6 9.6 9.7Government Agencies 1.0 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.9 0.9National Non-Government Organizations 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3International Non-government Organizations 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.9 0.9 1.0 1.0 1.1Affi l iates 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1Total 11.5 11.2 11.3 11.5 11.5 11.7 11.9 12.1Annual growth -3% 1% 2% 0% 2% 2% 2%Growth over intersessional period 0% 5%


Number of partners 9 10 9 8 10 10 11 12Value of contributions (CHF m) 22 20 18 17 18 18 19 20Annual growth -9% -10% -6% 6% 0% 6% 5%Growth over intersessional period -23% 11%

220

Table 7: Restricted funding (CHF million)

Expenditure

Core expenditure Core expenditure is aligned with the level of unrestricted income5 (also referred to as core income). Core expenditure enables the achievement of the Mission, Vision and Programme by funding the institutional capacity to meet statutory objectives and support the delivery of the Programme. Table 8: Core expenditure (CHF million)

Core income is allocated during the annual budgeting process in accordance with the Principles and Rules for the Allocation of Core Income. The following are the key areas identified for the allocation of core funds: • Strategic priorities that focus on delivery of priority Programme results, and that adhere to the

One Programme Charter by integrating the work of Members, the World Conservation Congress, Council, National and Regional Committees, Commissions and the Secretariat.

• Strategic investments in new geographic and thematic areas. • Union governance and development functions that are necessary for coordinating the delivery

of the IUCN Programme and for providing associated constituency support. • Programme delivery and support functions that are necessary for the delivery of the

Programme, including IUCN’s global policy-influencing function. • Corporate functions necessary to provide a basic level of global operational infrastructure. • Organization-wide investments such as investments in information technology that benefit

components of the Union and support Programme delivery. • Allocations to Commissions to fund operational costs and capacity building. • Statutory obligations such as the World Conservation Congress.

Planned strategic investments during 2013–16 include: • Investment in capacity to support new Programme Areas, including flagship knowledge products

on a natural resource governance framework and a global database on human dependency on nature / nature’s contribution to people’s livelihoods.

5 Unrestricted income comprises Membership dues, Framework income and other sundry unrestricted income.


Programme/project income 88 83 84 88 88 92 95 99Other restricted income 4 3 1 1 1 1 1 1Total 92 86 85 89 89 93 96 100Annual growth -7% -1% 5% 0% 4% 3% 4%Growth over intersessional period -3% 12%


Core expenditure 33 38 35 32 32 33 34 35Annual growth 15% -8% -9% 0% 3% 3% 3%Growth over intersessional period -3% 9%

221

• Development of knowledge management systems, with an emphasis on applications that will facilitate knowledge sharing and collaboration across the Union.

• Completion of the Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) and management information system. The initial rollout of the ERP system is forecast to be completed by the end of 2013. Incremental improvements and upgrades are envisaged during the period 2014–16.

Programme / project expenditure The planned level of programme/project expenditure (Table 9) follows the planned levels of restricted income (Table 7). Programme and project activity is the main means for IUCN to deliver the Programme results for the three Programme Areas. Table 9: Restricted expenditure (CHF million)

Expenditure is expected to increase by 12% during 2013–16 and is expected to be the greatest in the regions that are the biggest recipients of ODA, as ODA represents up to 75% of IUCN’s funding. Programme growth is expected to be strong in Africa, particularly in the business line “Delivering Results on the Ground”, where it is expected to account for approximately one third of IUCN’s total expenditure. Expenditure in Meso-America and South America is not expected to increase and may decrease as ODA donors reduce the level of funding to countries in these regions. Expenditure in Asia is expected to remain stable at around 15% of the global total, whereas expenditure in Oceania and West Asia is expected to show modest increases as new Programme Areas are developed. Project expenditure includes allocations to Members, Commissions and other IUCN components and partners involved in the delivery of the Programme where this is provided for in donor grants received by the Secretariat. Table 10 shows total expenditure by expenditure category. Personnel and consultancy costs represent 61% of total costs. No significant changes in staff mix or staff salary levels are foreseen. Staff whose main role is to implement projects are normally employed on short-term contracts in order to have flexibility in the cost structure and to manage the cost of downsizing in the event of a declining project portfolio. Travel and communication costs are expected to decrease from 9% to 7% over the 2013–16 period through the use of information technology and virtual meetings. Table 10: Total expenditure by expenditure category (CHF million)


Project and other restricted expenditure 92 86 85 89 89 93 96 100Annual growth -7% -1% 5% 0% 4% 3% 4%Growth over intersessional period -3% 12%


Expenditure category CHF m CHF m CHF m CHF m CHF m CHF m CHF m CHF mPersonnel and consultancy costs 76 75 73 74 74 77 80 83Travel and communications 14 12 11 11 10 10 10 10Office and general administration 6 8 8 8 8 8 8 8Other operating costs 12 14 12 11 12 12 13 13Grants to partners 17 15 16 17 17 19 19 21Total 125 124 120 121 121 126 130 135

222

Commission contributions The Financial Plan also recognizes the value of work performed by the different components of the Union, particularly by its Commissions. Table 11 shows the estimates of the planned contributions for each of the six Commissions towards the implementation of the 2013–16 Programme for the four-year period. The value of Commission work is based on the number of volunteer days expected to be provided by Commission members, using a standard value of CHF 1,000 per person per day, plus any cash contributions expected to be received directly by the Commissions. The standard value of CHF 1,000 per day includes the value of office services that may be provided by a volunteer’s employer or host organization. Table 11: Estimated value of Commission contributions towards Programme implementation 2013–16 (CHF million)

The above figures are broad estimates and should only be taken as indicative contributions since IUCN does not have a robust methodology for measuring Commission participation in the Programme. The highest level of contribution is from the SSC which is to be expected considering the high number of members of SSC and various sub groups and its contribution to the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. The total value of Commission work is estimated to be somewhat higher than the value of income / expenditure through the Secretariat. This clearly demonstrates the value of the Commissions in the delivery of the IUCN Programme.

Balance sheet Table 12 shows the projected balance sheet at the start and end of the 2013–16 period. The main variables in the balance sheet are cash and restricted project balances. The values of these items are expected to increase over the four-year period, reflecting a strengthening project portfolio. The change in fixed assets reflects depreciation of the Headquarters building, partially offset by planned renovations. The decline in the value of loans and long-term deferred income reflects scheduled repayments of the Headquarters building extension loan. The increase in reserves reflects planned surpluses of CHF 1m in each of the four years.

Valuing and Conserving Nature 6 28 2 51 290 6 383

Effective and Equitable Governance of Nature's Use

8 21 3 51 36 3 122


6 21 1 51 21 6 106

Total, 2013-16 20 70 6 153 347 15 611

Programme AreaTotal

2013-16

Commission on Education and

Communication

World Commission on

Protected Areas

Commission on Environmental

Law

Commission on Environmental, Economic and Social Policy

Species Survival

Commission

Commission on Ecosystems

Management

223

Table 12: Projected Balance Sheet (CHF million)

Reserves Table 13 below shows actual movements of reserves to 31 December 2011 and projected movements to 31 December 2016. Reserves have fallen from a level of CHF 17.6 at the start of 2009 to an expected level of CHF 13.8m at the end of 2012. During 2013–16 reserves are projected to increase by CHF 4m as a result of a budgeted surplus of CHF 1m in each year. Table 13: Reserves (CHF million)

Note: Other reserve movements represent allocations to the reserve for the World Conservation Congress and related drawdowns.

Monitoring Performance against the Financial Plan will be measured annually using the Annual Progress Monitoring Framework developed by the Secretariat and approved by Council. Key indicators in this framework that are relevant to the Financial Plan are: Meeting funding targets: • Progress on core funding from existing and new donors • Progress on funding for each business line Implementation of the One Programme Charter: • Assessment of percentage and value of work delivered with and through Members and each

component of the Union Performance by Secretariat units: • Financial performance of Secretariat units • Fundraising success by Secretariat programme units

2012 2016 2012 2016Forecast Plan Forecast PlanCHF m CHF m CHF m CHF m

Current assets Current liabilitiesCash and short term deposits 42 50 Net balances on project agreements 45 50Investments 10 10 Deferred income 2 2Other receivables 9 9 Other l iabil ities 6 6

Provisions 3 3Total current assets 61 69 Total current liabilities 56 61

Non-current assets Non-current liabilitiesFixed assets 38 36 Deferred income 22 19Intangible assets 3 2 Building loan 10 9Total non-current assets 41 38 Total non-current liabilities 32 28

Reserves 14 18

Total assets 102 107 Total liabilities and reserves 102 107

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016CHF m CHF m CHF m CHF m CHF m CHF m CHF m CHF m

Balance 1 January 17.6 19.2 16.8 13.9 13.8 15.1 16.4 17.7Surplus / deficit 0.0 -2.4 -2.4 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0Other reserve movements 1.6 0.0 -0.5 -0.1 0.3 0.3 0.3 -0.9Balance 31 December 19.2 16.8 13.9 13.8 15.1 16.4 17.7 17.8

224

Financial Risks The main financial risks inherent in the Financial Plan are: 1. Non-payment of Membership dues It is unlikely that a significant number of Members will leave IUCN during the 2013–16 period, though there is a risk of non-payment of Membership dues from existing Members, particularly from States with contracting economies. Contingency measures: An annual provision is currently included as part of the annual budget. This will be maintained. 2. Framework income targets are not met The Plan projects an increase in the number of Framework partners and assumes that current partners will be retained and do not decrease their contributions. Framework contributions are for fixed periods, ranging from one to four years. The risk is greatest when agreements are due to expire and are in the process of being renegotiated. There is also a risk that some Framework partners may decide to allocate funds along thematic and geographic lines, leading to a reduction in unrestricted funding. Contingency measures: Current framework agreements will be renegotiated well in advance of their expiry. Cost allocation and charging mechanisms will be improved so that programmes and projects bear the full cost of implementation. 3. Restricted income targets are not met The Financial Plan is based on the Programme 2013–16 and the new business model. Success on raising restricted funds will depend on demonstrating the value added of the Programme to donors and convincing them of IUCN’s ability to deliver the Programme results. Raising restricted income also depends on successful application of the new business model. This includes raising income for the third business line (Strengthening Policy and Governance) through the delivery of services – a new and untested approach for IUCN. Contingency measures: A fundraising strategy with clear priorities that leverages the new business model is being developed. In the event that income declined, it would be necessary to prioritize activities and reduce expenditure without adversely impacting the capacity to deliver priority global results. A flexible staffing approach will be adopted, and, in the event that restricted income targets are not met, staffing levels will be reduced. 4. Project/Programme implementation targets are not met It is essential that projects and programmes are delivered on time, within budget and to a high standard. Failure to do so will result in a decline in donor confidence and a reduction in restricted funding. Contingency measures: A project appraisal system has been put in place to ensure project quality at the planning stage. Monitoring of project implementation will be improved to ensure that projects “not on track” are identified and corrective action is taken. 5. Expenditure budgets are exceeded In order to adhere to the Financial Plan, tight control of expenditure is required. IUCN is a global organization with an extensive infrastructure that carries out a wide range of activities, all of which carry risk. Contingency measures: Budgetary control will be exercised through improved financial reporting and proactive decision making. The completion of the implementation of the ERP system will result in improved financial information and a more robust control environment. 6. Significant foreign exchange losses are incurred IUCN receives and spends money in multiple currencies. Foreign exchange risk is therefore an inherent operational risk. Contingency measures: A cash management and investment policy was implemented in 2011 which seeks to optimize the level of currencies held and reduce risk through the use of hedging instruments.

225

Fundraising plan The period 2009–2012 saw a decline in total income from CHF125 million in 2009 to CHF121 million projected in 2012. Historically, IUCN’s main source of funding has been official development assistance – income from bilateral and multilateral institutions. Income from bilateral institutions (governments) has been by far the largest source of funding, representing an average of 64% of annual income over the past five years, while income from multilateral institutions represented an average of 15% of annual income. Although income from foundations remained low in comparison to ODA income, the trend has been positive, representing 8% of IUCN’s annual income in recent years. Sponsorship, licensing and in-kind support from the private sector are the lowest source of funding, representing 2% of annual income. The 2013–16 Financial Plan forecasts a limited growth from CHF122 million in 2013 to CHF136 million in 2016. The new business model provides an opportunity to package IUCN’s work along four business lines. The following summarizes the business lines and the funding sources, which IUCN will actively pursue to ensure their financial viability. Providing knowledge products This business line focuses on developing and disseminating selected world class knowledge products. IUCN will strengthen the current knowledge products as well as expand to new ones. The funding of knowledge products has been mixed in terms of sources (Table 14). The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species, for example, has benefitted from a diversified funding stream, varying from foundations, international non-governmental organizations (including IUCN Members), governments, as well as a small income stream from the private sector. The World Protected Areas Categories and Data have been supported mostly by ODA, while the IUCN Red List of Ecosystems launched in 2011 is fully funded by foundations. All knowledge products have also received significant in-kind contribution from IUCN’s Commissions. Table 14: Key knowledge products and their primary funding sources

Key Deliverables Primary Funding Sources IUCN Red List of Threatened Species (RLS) Foundations, non-ODA governments,

international non-governmental organizations

IUCN Red List of Ecosystems (RLE) Foundations, ODA Key Biodiversity Areas (KBAs) ODA World Database on Protected Areas, including Green List of Protected Areas

Foundations, international non-governmental organizations, private sector, ODA

World Heritage products – State of the World Heritage Foundations, international non-governmental organizations

Natural Resource Governance Framework ODA Human Dependency on Nature Study ODA, Foundations Other current and future knowledge products, including principles and tools for delivering nature-based solutions

ODA, Foundations, Science Councils

The financial target for 2013–16 for knowledge products is CHF143 million. To reach this target, IUCN will seek to strengthen its engagement with donors already supporting IUCN’s knowledge products and will pursue an active fundraising approach to increase support from foundations, multilateral institutions and the private sector. It is expected that 60% of the income for providing knowledge products will be sourced from ODA, 15% from foundations, 5% from non-government organizations

226

(including Members), 5% from non-ODA governments, and 5% from the private sector. Funds from Membership dues (10%) will be applied across IUCN’s knowledge products. Delivering results on the ground Although IUCN’s work on the ground is funded by many income streams, the main source of funding remains ODA both from bilateral and multilateral institutions (Table 15). During 2013–16, IUCN will further enhance and demonstrate the impact of its work on the ground related to biodiversity conservation and the use of nature-based solutions, directly, or through indirect delivery channels. IUCN acknowledges that its share of overall ODA remains low. With the assumption that ODA will increase its focus on themes such as climate change and environment as well as address biodiversity as a global public good, IUCN believes there is scope to increase its share of ODA for targeted initiatives on the ground. Careful mapping of thematic and geographic priorities will be required. IUCN will focus on developing global initiatives on water and food security, forest and climate change mitigation, ecosystem-based adaptation and disaster risk reduction, oceans, coastal areas, islands and drylands, as well as working to transform business impacts on biodiversity. The financial target for this business line for 2013–16 is CHF232 million. With past income trends for IUCN’s work on the ground, coupled with continued interest from donors for results on the ground, IUCN expects that 78% of the income for this business line will come from ODA – through bilateral and multilateral channels, 15% from foundations, 5% from the private sector and 2% from Membership dues. Table 15: Key results-focused programmes and their primary funding sources

Key Deliverables Primary Funding Sources Integrated programmes delivering biodiversity conservation, including implementation of Species Conservation Action Plans

Foundations, private sector, Membership dues

Integrated programmes delivering effective and equitable governance solutions, including management of ecosystems, protected areas and World Heritage sites

ODA, foundations, Membership dues

Integrated programmes delivering nature-based solutions to climate change, food security and development in watersheds, forest landscapes, drylands and coastal and marine seascapes

ODA, Membership dues

Strengthening policy and governance This business line puts more emphasis on applying IUCN’s expertise in science, technologies and related skills to solving problems of environmental governance, offering expertise to current or potential donors and to Members at a fee or through cost-sharing. IUCN’s business model outlines four elements of environmental policy and governance with potential business opportunities: 1) Policy development; 2) Capacity building, especially of IUCN Members; 3) Services and functions for environmental governance; and 4) IUCN serving as a centre of Innovation. The financial target for this business line for 2013–16 is CHF95 million. Traditionally, IUCN has not sought to “market” its policy and governance role. IUCN will therefore need to take a new targeted approach to ensure a well-balanced funding base for this line of business. Funding is expected to come from a mix of fees paid for services from ODA – bilateral and multilateral institutions (60%), Membership dues (20%), non-governmental organizations (10%), private sector (5%), and 5% from non–ODA governments. The key deliverables will be developed in line with the application of the business model through a business development project to be launched by the Director General.

227

Engaging and leveraging the Union This business line will focus on IUCN’s ability to convene and influence policy and action on nature conservation and sustainable development. The financial target for this business line for 2013–16 is CHF42 million. IUCN’s work on engaging the Union will be resourced from a mix of Membership dues (25%), ODA government and multilateral funding (40%), foundations (25%), non-ODA governments (5%) and private philanthropy (5%). Table 16 summarizes the expected contributions from different funding streams. Modest increases in the level of funding from foundations and the private sector are expected. Table 16: Total income by funding source (CHF million )

Fundraising priorities for 2012 IUCN will need to concentrate much of its fundraising efforts on securing the renewal of eight of its nine Framework Agreements before the end of 2012. Their timing follows the four-year Programmes of IUCN. The renewal of these agreements will be crucial for the implementation and delivery of the IUCN Programme 2013–16. In addition to the renegotiations of the Framework Agreements, IUCN seeks early funding, primarily from ODA partners and foundations, for the following priorities:

• A programme will be launched that ensures the integration and overlay of data on species, ecosystems, key biodiversity areas and protected areas in order to better inform the effective conservation management of land and seascapes.

• A programme will be launched that focuses on developing and applying a globally recognized standard in order to identify and then conserve the most important areas for biodiversity, including through the establishment of protected areas.

• A natural resource governance framework will be prepared based on compiling IUCN and other experiences and pilot-testing its usefulness.

• Data will be compiled and analysed for the creation of a global database on human dependency on nature / natural resources and on nature’s contribution to people’s livelihoods.

• Programmes will be developed for developing and pilot-testing nature-based solutions that promote landscape and seascape conservation and restoration for livelihoods and sustainable development across biomes.

• Programmes focused on policy application through capacity building will be launched to help ensure the implementation of the CBD Strategic Plan for Biodiversity including the achievement of the Aichi Targets and the inclusion of nature-based solutions to climate change in the framework of on-going UNFCCC negotiations.

• The specification of IUCN’s contribution to the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) will be finalized.

2011 2012 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2013–16 2013–16 CHF m CHF m % CHF m CHF m CHF m CHF m CHF m %

Membership dues 11 11 9% 11 12 12 12 47 9% Governments and multilaterals 80 90 74% 85 88 91 95 359 70% Non-government organizations 7 7 6% 4 4 4 4 16 3% Foundations 8 9 7% 16 17 17 18 68 13% Private sector (incl. personal contributions) 3 3 2% 6 6 7 7 26 5% Other 1 1 1% - - - - - 0% Total 110 121 100% 122 127 131 136 516 100%

228

Conclusion This Financial Plan is written at a time of tremendous change in the world and a deep economic crisis in many of the countries of IUCN’s traditional donors. This is also a time, however, when IUCN’s vision of ‘a just world that values and conserves nature’ and the role of healthy ecosystems in solving the major challenges faced by humanity have never been more relevant. The Director General and the IUCN Secretariat will do their utmost to realize the goals stated in this Financial Plan and the Programme 2013–16, helped by a first-ever business model for IUCN. For the first time, the Financial Plan includes a valuation of the contributions of Commissions to the delivery of the Programme, clearly demonstrating their importance and significance in financial terms. Successful implementation of the Programme will be achieved through the combined efforts of Members and all the components of the Union working together also on resource mobilization and fundraising, in the spirit of the One Programme Charter.

Additional assumptions Currency rates The following exchange rates have been used for the translation of foreign currency amounts into CHF for the years 2012 to 2016: 1 USD = 0.85 CHF 1 EUR = 1.20 CHF 1 CAD = 0.86 CHF 1 DKK = 0.16 CHF 1 NOK = 0.16 CHF 1 SEK = 0.13 CHF Inflation No adjustment has been made for potential inflation. The rate of inflation in Switzerland in February 2012 was –0.9% (Swiss consumer price index).

229




Appointment of the External Auditors of IUCN for 2013–2016 Origin: IUCN Council Action Requested: The World Conservation Congress is invited to CONSIDER the recommendation of the IUCN Council and appoint the External Auditors of IUCN for the period 2013–2016. DRAFT MOTION The IUCN World Conservation Congress, At the recommendation of the IUCN Council, Appoints PricewaterhouseCoopers as IUCN External Auditors for the years 2013 to 2016. EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM With decision C/78/36 of its 78th meeting, Council, on the recommendation of the Finance and Audit Committee, endorsed the appointment of PricewaterhouseCoopers as IUCN external auditors for the years 2013 to 2016, and recommended their appointment to Congress. IUCN’s current auditors, Deloitte, were first appointed in the year 2000 and will have completed 12 years of service to IUCN with the audit of the 2012 financial statements. In view of the length of service of Deloitte, and in accordance with best practice, Council decided to put out to tender the external audit of IUCN’s statutory financial statements (decision C/76/14). A Selection Committee was appointed by Council which oversaw the process. The outcome of the tender process was a recommendation from the Selection Committee to Council to appoint PricewaterhouseCoopers as IUCN’s external auditors for the years 2013 to 2016. The decision was based on the technical merit of their proposal and cost competitiveness.

230

Congress Document WCC-2012-9.4.1/1



Request to the Council 2013–2016 to review the IUCN Statutes, Rules of Procedures and Regulations in view of proposing amendments to increase the efficiency of procedures and deadlines in time to apply

to the preparations of the 2016 Congress

Origin: IUCN Council Action Requested: The World Conservation Congress is invited to ADOPT the draft motion concerning ‘Request to the Council 2013–2016 to review the IUCN Statutes, Rules of Procedures and Regulations in view of proposing amendments to increase the efficiency of procedures and deadlines in time to apply to the preparations of the 2016 Congress’. DRAFT MOTION The IUCN World Conservation Congress, Considering that the current Statutes, Rules of Procedure of the World Conservation Congress and Regulations of IUCN contain multiple procedures and deadlines such as the ones related to the preparation of the World Conservation Congresses which require an update to keep pace with contemporary means of communication and the requirements of transparency enabling the IUCN membership to be more effectively engaged in the work of IUCN by electronic communication means; Requests the newly elected Council to: 1) review the procedures and deadlines of the Statutes, Rules of Procedure of the World

Conservation Congress and Regulations of IUCN; 2) propose amendments to increase their clarity, coherence and efficiency with respect to the

procedures and deadlines; and 3) submit them for approval by IUCN’s membership through an electronic ballot in time to be

effective during the preparations of the 2016 World Conservation Congress. EXPLANATORY NOTE In light of its experience during the 2009–12 quadrennium, Council considers it necessary to increase the simplicity, coherence and transparency of some of the procedures and deadlines such as the ones related to preparations of Congress, which were set at a time when Congress documents were distributed by post. Council therefore seeks the support of Members to request the newly elected Council to prepare amendments and submit these to the membership for approval by way of an electronic ballot in 2013 or 2014 so that the revised procedures and deadlines can be applied during the preparations for the 2016 Congress.

231




Proposed amendments to the IUCN Statutes and Regulations: Enhancing the effectiveness of the IUCN Council

Origin: IUCN Council Action Requested: The World Conservation Congress is invited to ADOPT the draft motion concerning ‘Proposed amendments to the IUCN Statutes and Regulations: Enhancing the effectiveness of the IUCN Council’. DRAFT MOTION The IUCN World Conservation Congress, Adopts the following amendment to the IUCN Statutes: (existing text to be removed, if any, in strike through; proposed new text in blue italics)

i) Above Article 37 of the IUCN Statutes, add the subtitle: Responsibility and Role ii) In Article 37 of the IUCN Statutes, number the existing text as paragraph (a) and insert a

new paragraph (b) as follows:

(a) Subject to the authority of the World Congress, the Council shall have responsibility for the oversight and general control of all the affairs of IUCN.

(b) The roles of the Council, with specific functions elaborated in Article 46 and other

relevant provisions of these Statutes, shall be to: i) Set strategic direction and policy guidance for the work of the Union; ii) Provide oversight and guidance on the performance of the components of the

Union as a whole and of the Director General in particular, encouraging coherence among its component parts;

iii) Fulfil its fiduciary responsibilities to the Members of the Union and render account to them on the achievement of the Union’s objectives; and

iv) Support the Director General in communicating IUCN objectives and policy, and IUCN Programme to the world community.

Adopts the following amendment to the IUCN Regulations: (existing text to be removed, if any, in strike through; proposed new text in blue italics)

Amend IUCN Regulation 48 by inserting a new paragraph (b) and renumber the subsequent paragraph as follows:

(b) Council members shall maintain an effective relationship with the Director General and,

through him/her, the Secretariat staff in view of enabling them to work to the same purpose through clarity of and respect for the authority and responsibilities of Council and the Director General, respectively, and with the highest professional and ethical standards.

EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM The IUCN Council has worked during the quadrennium 2009–2012 to strengthen its effectiveness and sharpen the focus of its work to carry out its responsibility for the oversight and general control of the affairs of IUCN as prescribed in Statutes 37. It has identified and focused on four main roles which

232

give effect to this responsibility and reflect good governance practices. It has further clarified the relationship between the Council and the Director General/Secretariat for the smooth functioning of the Union’s affairs. Council is proposing to establish its focused roles and relationships to provide clarity in the IUCN Statutes and Regulations. In addition to the overall responsibilities of Council, the Statutes specify Council’s functions in a detailed way in the 17 (seventeen) point list of Article 46. Regulation 48 further describes the “Duties of Council Members”. Council has found it useful to ensure and work to a clear understanding of the essential relationship between it and the Secretariat through the Director General. It therefore is proposing an amendment to Regulation 48 to provide this clarity. Council is of the view that the proposed amendments to Statutes 37 and Regulation 48 would enhance the understanding of Council’s role in and outside the Council, and increase its effectiveness in its role as IUCN’s highest governing body in between the sessions of the World Conservation Congress. It is proposed to insert a simple additional statement of Council’s roles in Article 37 of the Statutes, leaving unchanged the current text of Statutes Articles 37 and 46. The term ‘role’ is chosen in order not to diminish or change in any way the existing legal connotations of Council’s ‘responsibility’ (current Article 37) and ‘functions’ (Article 46). Conversely, the proposed description of the roles of Council does not add any new statutory authority which Council does not already have in the current Statutes. It is also proposed to insert into Regulation 48 a simple statement on the mutual expectations concerning the relationship between the Council and the Director General. The adoption and the implementation of these amendments do not, and are not intended to, either expand or curtail the existing statutory authorities of either Council or the Director General. They further do not require new particular actions by Members or components of the Union, nor do they entail any new financial or other resource implications.

233




Proposed amendment to the IUCN Statutes: enabling Council to review and update, as necessary, the composition of the Steering

Committees of the IUCN Commissions at the mid-term of the quadrennial period

Origin: IUCN Council Action Requested: The World Conservation Congress is invited to ADOPT the draft motion concerning a ‘Proposed amendment to the IUCN Statutes: enabling Council to review and update, as necessary, the composition of the Steering Committees of the IUCN Commissions at the mid-term of the quadrennial period’.

DRAFT MOTION The IUCN World Conservation Congress, Adopts the following amendment to the IUCN Statutes:

Amend Article 46 (l) of the IUCN Statutes as follows: (existing text to be removed, if any, in strike through; proposed new text in blue italics)

The functions of the Council shall be inter alia: […] (l) to appoint a Deputy Chair and Steering Committee of each Commission on receipt of nomination by that Commission’s Chair and to confirm or otherwise change, upon proposal of the Commission Chair, the membership of the Steering Committee before the end of the second full calendar year following Congress;

Adopts the following consequential amendment to the IUCN Regulations:

Insert a new Regulation 73bis as follows: (existing text to be removed, if any, in strike through; proposed new text in blue italics)

Before the end of the second full calendar year following Congress, the Chair of each Commission shall, in consultation with the Commission’s Steering Committee, propose to Council that it either confirm the membership of the Steering Committee or that it otherwise change it in accordance with the Chair’s proposal.

EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM Council proposes to Congress that it be mandated to confirm or otherwise change the membership of the Steering Committees of the Commissions every two years on proposal of the Commission Chair concerned in accordance with the new Regulation 73bis in order to ensure that the membership of each Commission Steering Committees remains current and meets the needs of the Commission. In practice, it would mean that following Council’s appointment of the Steering Committees after each Congress, Council would confirm or change the membership two years later, at mid-term of the quadrennial period, removing names or appointing new ones as appropriate, on the proposal of the Chair of the respective Commission.

234

Congress elects each Commission Chair, who subsequently forms a Steering Committee including a Deputy Chair as approved by Council. Article 46 (l) of the present Statutes of IUCN authorizes Council to ‘appoint a Deputy Chair and Steering Committee of each Commission on receipt of nomination by that Commission’s Chair’ – which usually happens at the first meeting of the Council following each Congress as provided in IUCN Regulation 73. In practice, Commission Chairs may propose additional Steering Committee members for appointment by Council at subsequent meetings. Further as per Article 73 of the Regulations, the Deputy Chair and Steering Committee members continue in office until Council appoints their successors. However, there is no provision in the Statutes for Council to review the membership of each Commission Steering Committee, once its members have been appointed. Council would consider it good governance practice to have the ability to confirm or modify the membership of the Steering Committees during the quadrennium between Congresses, always on the proposal of the respective Commission Chair. Following Congress approval of this amendment, Council will establish a procedure to ensure its decisions confirming the composition of the Steering Committees follow a due and transparent process.

235




Proposed amendment to the IUCN Statutes: Length of term of IUCN Council member

Origin: IUCN Council Action Requested: The World Conservation Congress is invited to ADOPT the draft motion concerning ‘Proposed amendment to the IUCN Statutes: Length of term of IUCN Council member’.

DRAFT MOTION The IUCN World Conservation Congress, Adopts the following amendment to the IUCN Statutes:

Amend IUCN Statutes 42 as follows: (addition of new text in blue italics)

Members of the Council shall not hold the same office consecutively for more than two full terms. For the purpose of this Article, the time served to fill the balance of the term of a Council member following a vacancy occurring in Council, shall not be counted.

EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM The present Statutes of IUCN provide that the term of a member of Council in any of the offices of President, Treasurer, Regional Councillor or Chairs of the Commissions, shall extend from the close of an ordinary session of the Congress at which they are elected until the close of the next ordinary session of the Congress, which is approximately four years given the periodicity of Congresses also defined by the Statutes (Article 41). The Statutes further state that members of Council shall not hold the same office consecutively for more than two full terms (Article 42). In other words, Councillors may not sit on Council in the same office (President, Treasurer, Regional Councillor, Chair of a Commission or Appointed Councillor) for more than eight years. According to the Statutes, Council may fill any vacancies for the President, Treasurer, Councillors and Chairs of Commissions that may occur, for the balance of the term concerned (Article 43). In the current Statutes, the balance of the term of a Council member filling a vacancy occurring in Council is counted for the calculation of the maximum length of the term which the Council member concerned is allowed to sit on Council. In this case the balance of the term may be very short (e.g. a couple of months). This would mean that the Council member concerned may only be elected by Congress or appointed by Council for one full term following the end of the balance of the term. The Council member concerned is not allowed to run for a second full term because this would inevitably extend her/his term beyond the maximum allowable term of Article 42. As a result, the total period in which a member of Council who accepts to fill the balance of a term following a vacancy occurring in Council would sit on Council, would be shorter than the total length of time of a Council member elected by Congress for two consecutive full terms. In addition, the current situation stands in the way of continuity should that be required for offices such as that of a Commission Chair, in case it would be beneficial to maintain leadership of a Commission

236

for at least eight years. The current situation may discourage capable candidates to accept filling a vacancy occurring in Council. Council therefore proposes to address this weakness in the current Statutes by amending Article 42 in order that the time served to fill the balance of the term of a Council member following a vacancy occurring in Council, shall not be counted for the purpose of considering the maximum allowable length of term of a member of Council. If adopted, this amendment will come into effect at the end of the 2012 Congress having an impact on the (re-)eligibility of members of Council in 2016. This proposed amendment does not address the question whether it is appropriate to maintain the current maximum length of term of a Council member. Neither does it address the question whether it is appropriate to maintain the right of members of Council to stand for election to another office in Council than the one they have held consecutively for two full terms, or to stand for election to the same or another office in Council after at least one full intersessional period has expired since they were last a member of Council.

237




Working Together as a Union to Deliver IUCN’s One Programme

Origin: IUCN Council Action Requested: The World Conservation Congress is invited to ADOPT the draft motion concerning ‘Working Together as a Union to Deliver IUCN’s One Programme’ including the proposed amendment to the IUCN Regulations.

DRAFT MOTION The IUCN World Conservation Congress, Recalling Resolution 4.001 (2008 WCC) urged Council to actively advance the One Programme approach to improve collaborative work within the Union for better coordination and integration of the constituent parts of the Union (Members, Commissions, National and Regional Committees and Secretariat) in the IUCN Programme; Further recalling Resolution 4.002 calling on the Director General to coordinate the work of the Secretariat on the IUCN Programme with IUCN’s State and NGO Members, IUCN National and Regional Committees, and IUCN’s Commissions; Recognizing the good examples of this coordinated approach during the last quadrennium; Noting the continuing challenges that need to be overcome related to funding and organizational culture;

1. Endorses the Summary Statement ‘Working Together as a Union to Deliver IUCN’s One

Programme’ and the ‘IUCN One Programme Charter’ which is attached to the Summary Statement as a guidance document; [Annex 1 hereafter]

2. Calls upon each of the constituent parts of the Union – the Council, the Commissions, the National and Regional Committees, the Secretariat, and the Members whose organizational priorities and capacities permit them to align with the IUCN Programme – to carry out their respective roles in implementing IUCN’s Programme;

3. Requests Council to work with the Director General to achieve a coordinated and coherent delivery of the IUCN Programme through proper Programme development, implementation and financing mechanisms enabling and leveraging the capacities of IUCN’s constituent parts and delivering conservation results optimally, effectively and efficiently;

4. Further requests the Council to adapt the One Programme Charter to evolving needs and circumstances, as needed;

5. Requests Council and the Director General to carry on their joint work on measuring, monitoring and reporting on implementing the One Programme Charter including development of baselines and targets for the performance indicators, and further development of incentive and accountability measures;

6. Requests the Director General to report to the Congress and to the Council on results and act ivit ies w hich demonstrate One Programme collaborat ion; and

7. Approves the following amendment to the IUCN Regulations to give clear effect to the One Program Statement and Charter, as follows:

Insert, after IUCN Regulation 2, a new provision 2bis which reads as follows: (current text, if any,

to be removed in strike through; proposed new text in blue italics): The Council, the Commissions, the National and Regional Committees, the Secretariat, and the

Members whose organizational priorities and capacities permit them to align with the IUCN

238

Programme, shall work together for coherent delivery of the IUCN Programme which enables and leverages the capacities of IUCN’s Members and statutory components and delivers conservation results optimally, effectively and efficiently.

EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM Further to the mandate it received from the World Conservation Congress in 2008 (Resolution 4.001) which ‘endorsed the general approach being recommended to improve collaborative working within the Union’ called ‘One Programme approach’, the IUCN Council formulated the requirements for achieving the One Programme approach and supported concrete initiatives to realize it. The Summary Statement: ‘Working as a Union to Deliver IUCN’s One Programme’ explains that the One Programme approach strengthens the delivery and impact of the IUCN Programme as approved by the IUCN Congress, for more effective delivery of the Programme and leveraging the respective roles, capacities and unique features of the constituent parts of the Union – our Members, Council, Commissions, National and Regional Committees and Secretariat. With its network of Governments, NGOs, scientists and experts in more than 160 countries – our Union is large and diverse. Working together as a Union enables and leverages our individual strengths and capacities, for IUCN to have greater influence and impact. The ‘One Programme Charter’ provides further guidance on the One Programme approach. It calls upon the Secretariat, Commissions, and National and Regional Committees to work together to develop and implement the IUCN Programme collaboratively. It invites Members, whose organizational priorities and capacities permit them to align with the IUCN Programme, to also participate in its implementation. The Charter describes the roles, responsibilities of all constituent parts of IUCN and the behaviours expected to optimize this collaborative approach, in terms of commitments by the Union’s Leadership, Members, National and Regional Committees, Commissions and Secretariat. It presents these in terms of the desired organizational culture, Programme development, delivery and financing, and accountability. Council is pleased to note the growing evidence of the cultural change within the Union in support of the One Programme approach through concrete initiatives such as: • the intense efforts involving all constituent parts of the Union in the development of the Draft

IUCN Programme 2013–2016 of which a first draft was sent for comments to all Members in IUCN’s three official languages in April 2011 resulting in 524 comments and the results of Regional Conservation Forums in all IUCN regions being taken into account during the drafting process;

• beginning in 2011, all the Secretariat staff having at least one performance objective in support of the One Programme approach;

• development of IUCN policy positions for international negotiations involving IUCN Secretariat, Commissions and Council members;

• joint development of the IUCN Red List by the IUCN Secretariat, Species Survival Commission and several IUCN member organizations;

• establishment of a new Allocations Policy for Core Resources with principles and rules favouring Programme and operational results that promote integrated efforts for Programme implementation and support capacity building of Members and National and Regional Committees.

The proposed Charter takes into account the comments and suggestions received from IUCN Members, National and Regional Committees and Commission members in an electronic survey in the months September–October 2010 and in the Regional Conservation Forums held from May to October 2011 to which all IUCN Members were invited. The draft motion calls upon the IUCN Council to ensure that the One Programme approach continues to be a key element of Council’s strategic direction and oversight role.

239

As Council may have to adapt these commitments over time in order to respond to evolving circumstances, it is proposed that Congress, while ‘endorsing’ the Summary Statement, ‘notes’ the One Programme Charter. Besides noting the Charter, Members and components are encouraged to implement – on a voluntary basis – the commitments described in the Charter which remain entirely within the scope of the current IUCN Statutes. Finally, considering the importance of the collaborative One Programme approach to the achievement of the Union’s mission and objectives, Council recommends that a short new provision be added to IUCN Regulation 2 to give effect to the One Programme approach in the IUCN Regulations. It should be noted that the provision applies to the components of the Union, and applies to IUCN Members only to the extent that their organizational priorities and capacities permit them to align with the IUCN Programme.

240

Appendix

Working as a Union to Deliver IUCN’s One Programme

Summary Statement We, the different parts of IUCN – government and NGO Members, Council, National and Regional Committees of Members, Commissions of experts, and the Secretariat – work together to develop, implement and advance IUCN’s Programme of work. Our unique strength lies in proactive collaboration across the different parts of the Union to achieve our mission to influence, encourage and assist societies throughout the world to conserve the integrity and diversity of nature and to ensure that any use of natural resources is equitable and ecologically sustainable. We are all working together to ultimately achieve our vision of a just world that values and conserves nature. The following principles guide the way we work together: • We deliver the Programme at the most appropriate level, using the best-placed part of the Union to deliver

national, regional or global results • We cooperate and don’t compete for roles and resources • We allocate resources to the part of the Union responsible for delivery • We communicate openly and transparently to keep each other informed of plans and activities.

The different parts of IUCN each have specific Programme roles as defined by IUCN statutes, agreements and practices. We all act in accordance with the above principles, reflecting a collaborative culture, and demonstrate accountability to the Union through agreements and reporting. IUCN Leadership Our leadership comprises the President, Council, Director General, Commission Chairs, and the Chairs of National and Regional Committees. We lead by example and demonstrate mutual cooperation. As the Council we provide direction and support for implementation of this Charter and prioritize plans and budgets that involve Commissions and Members and build capacities of National and Regional Committees. IUCN Members Our Members are national States, government agencies and non-governmental organizations. Recognizing our independence, as IUCN Members we are responsible to support and provide information on our activities that contribute to the IUCN Programme. We participate in programme development and delivery where our priorities and capacities align with the IUCN Programme. IUCN Commissions Our Commissions are six networks of volunteer conservation scientists, experts and managers, each with specialist and regional sub-groups. We broaden conservation knowledge and competence, and help drive IUCN’s work into new areas of conservation. We provide knowledge and the conservation science and management base for the IUCN Programme. We work with Members, Council and the Secretariat to provide expertise and leverage financial and human resources for Programme delivery. IUCN National and Regional Committees Our Committees are officially recognized groups of Members in countries and regions. We work in partnership with the Council, Secretariat and Commissions to develop, coordinate and implement the Programme. We work with Members and the Secretariat to leverage financial and human resources. IUCN Secretariat Our Secretariat coordinates the work of the Union. We implement the policy and Programme of IUCN as established by Congress and Council, and coordinate work with all parts of the Union to deliver the Programme. We collaborate with Council and involve Commissions and their sub-groups, Members, and National and Regional Committees in Programme development, fundraising and delivery, in line with their capacities and interests. We raise funds in a way that integrates the efforts of Members, Commissions and the Secretariat. We work with National Committees to strengthen their capacities.

241

One Programme Charter

1. The One Programme Approach The One Programme approach strengthens the delivery and impact of the IUCN Programme, more effectively leveraging the respective roles, capacities and unique features of the constituent parts of the Union – our Members, Commissions, National and Regional Committees and Secretariat.

This Charter calls upon the Secretariat, Commissions, and National and Regional Committees to work together to develop and implement the IUCN Programme collaboratively. It invites Members, where their priorities and capacities align with the Programme, to participate in its implementation.

This Charter responds to direction from Members at the Barcelona Congress for delivery of the IUCN Programme in a more coordinated way, strengthening the links between IUCN’s constituent parts. It will help us to: • Better understand our roles and responsibilities in advancing the IUCN Programme • Invite more comprehensive participation in IUCN Programme development and delivery • Leverage the strengths and resources of the constituent parts of the Union to more effectively achieve the

IUCN vision, mission and Programme • Align the Secretariat and other constituent parts of the Union to maximize Programme results • Create more efficient work and communication processes • Foster a better and more conducive working environment between different parts of the Union.

With governments, NGOs, scientists and experts – thousands of passionate and committed people in more than 160 countries – our Union is large and diverse. As individual organizations and experts, we are many. As a Union that enables and leverages our individual strengths and capacities, and works together coherently and based on mutual respect, we are truly strong and have greater influence and impact.

The IUCN Programme is approved by Members at the IUCN Congress every four years. It is our joint platform for action and policy influence for conservation, and provides our agreed themes and priorities for the four-year period. This Charter helps guide how together we can proactively and effectively deliver one integrated Programme. 2. Principles This Charter and actions to support it are guided by four key principles. • Practice subsidiarity and use the best-placed entity of the Union – the most appropriate constituent parts

of IUCN make decisions, participate in the Programme in line with their capacities, and are assigned responsibilities at the most appropriate level for specific program activities to deliver the intended national, regional or global Programme result

• Cooperate, don’t compete – the constituent parts of IUCN work together in a coordinated manner to deliver Programme results and do not compete for resources.

• Link resources to responsibility – resources are allocated to the constituent part of IUCN assigned to deliver a particular Programme activity and result.

• Be transparent and communicate – transparency and good communication is maintained on plans and activities among all constituent parts of IUCN.

3. Roles, Responsibilities and Behaviours To better deliver an integrated and effective Programme, each constituent part of IUCN – Members and their Committees, Commissions and their sub-groups, the Secretariat, and IUCN’s leadership – have roles and responsibilities to participate in the Programme as defined by IUCN Statutes, and by agreements and evolving practice across the Union.

A. Our leadership Our leadership includes the President, Council, Director-General, Commission Chairs, and the Chairs of National and Regional Committees. Our organizational culture • We lead by example and demonstrate mutual cooperation, non-competition and dedication to the effective

implementation of the Programme. • We encourage appropriate behaviours, courteous communication and respect for each other’s culture, roles and

mandates to our respective constituencies.

242

• We provide direction and support for this Charter and will review its effectiveness on an ongoing basis. Our Programme development, delivery and financing • We work together to improve and revise the IUCN Programme and business model to operate in a way that

integrates Members, Commissions and Secretariat in Programme design and delivery, and provides sufficient resources and flexibility in their use to achieve agreed Programme results.

• As Council, we prioritize in the IUCN budget and work plan activities that involve Commissions and Members, and build the capacities of National and Regional Committees.

B. Our Members Our Members are national States, government agencies and non-governmental organizations. Members can participate more fully in Programme development and delivery. Recognizing our independence, as IUCN members we have a responsibility to support, facilitate, and provide information on our activities which contribute to the IUCN Programme, where these align with our own organizational priorities and capacities. Our organizational culture • We adopt attitudes and behaviours which favour joint action with the Secretariat and the Commissions, and which

leverage the resources available to deliver the Programme. • We work with our National Committees to strengthen their role in IUCN Programme.

Our Programme development, delivery and financing • We play an active part in the process of prioritization and adoption of the Programme at the IUCN Congress,

showing where we intend to commit knowledge, expertise or resources and participate in Programme implementation.

• We strive to participate in implementation of Programme, project and policy activities, working with the Secretariat and Commissions.

Our accountability • We strive to work with the Secretariat to put in place agreements for our participation in the IUCN Programme and

report on our activities which contribute to IUCN results.

C. Our National and Regional Committees Our Committees are officially recognized groups of Members in countries and regions. We have a responsibility to work in partnership with the Secretariat and Commissions to formulate, coordinate and implement the Programme.

Our organizational culture • We adopt attitudes and behaviours to support mutual cooperation with the Secretariat and the Commissions. Our Programme development, delivery and financing • We identify and apply our expertise and resources and that of our Members which aligns with the IUCN Programme

and IUCN policies, projects and activities. We work with our Members and the Secretariat to demonstrate the return on investment for the IUCN resources that we use.

• We coordinate our fundraising activities with the Secretariat, and work with our Members to leverage additional financial and human resources to support delivery of the IUCN Programme and specific results.

Our accountability • We jointly develop with the Secretariat and our Members mechanisms and agreements for cooperation and joint

action. • We adhere to agreed accountability and transparency standards for our participation in the IUCN Programme and

report on our activities which contribute to the IUCN Programme.

D. Our Commissions Our Commissions are six networks of volunteer conservation scientists, experts and managers, each with specialist or regional sub-groups. We work ahead of the IUCN Programme in new areas of conservation and broaden conservation knowledge and competence. We provide and support knowledge, and the conservation science and management base for the Programme. We take responsibility to undertake tasks within the Programme and to work with Members and the Secretariat to provide necessary expertise. Our organizational culture • We adopt attitudes and behaviours to support mutual cooperation with the Secretariat and IUCN Members. Our Programme development, delivery and financing • We play an active part in the process of prioritization and adoption of the Programme at the IUCN Congress,

showing where we can commit knowledge, expertise, organizational capacities and resources for Programme delivery.

243

• We identify and apply our expertise and resources that align with the IUCN Programme and IUCN policies, projects and activities. We demonstrate the return on investment for the IUCN resources that we use.

• We coordinate our fundraising activities and leverage additional financial and human resources that support delivery of the IUCN Programme with the Secretariat and involved IUCN Members and keep them informed.

Our accountability • We develop jointly with the Secretariat mechanisms and agreements to enable us to play our vital role in ensuring

IUCN’s work and policy advocacy are based on robust, evidence-based scientific knowledge. • We adhere to agreed accountability and transparency standards for our participation in the Programme. • We work with the Secretariat to put in place agreements for our participation in the Programme and report on our

activities which contribute to IUCN results.

E. Our Secretariat Our Secretariat is the body that coordinates the work of the Union. We are responsible for implementation of the policy and Programme of IUCN as established by Congress and Council, and for coordinating our work with all components of the Union for effective delivery of the Programme to achieve maximum conservation results. Our organizational culture • We adopt attitudes and behaviours to support mutual cooperation and assistance across IUCN’s networks. • We involve Commissions and their specialist and working groups, IUCN Members, and National and Regional

Committees in Programme development, fundraising and delivery, in line with their capacities and interests. • We interact and collaborate across Commissions to enhance programme coordination and results • We invest in building Members’ and Commissions’ conservation knowledge and management capacities. • We help develop, strengthen and, where necessary, change the Secretariat’s competencies in enabling, facilitating,

networking and capacity building. Our Programme development, delivery and financing • We help Members and Commissions identify their priorities to enhance their participation in the design and delivery

of the Programme and fully engage them in Programme development for the Congress. • We identify interested and capable Members and Commission sub-groups, recognizing their different interests and

capacities around the world, and develop enabling mechanisms and resource sharing approaches to implement Programme activities, projects and policies.

• We work with National and Regional Committees and Members to strengthen their capacities • We develop and implement budgets and work plans to prioritize Programme activities that work with, and through,

Members and Commissions. We apply financial and human resources in favour of integrated Programme activities across the constituent parts of the Union and support the development of their capacities.

• We prioritize fundraising for Programme activities that integrate the efforts of Members, Commissions and the Secretariat. We work actively with Commissions and their sub-groups to support and coordinate fundraising activities and keep them informed of fundraising activities which directly relate to Commission work.

Our accountability • We jointly develop with the Members, National Committees and Commissions mechanisms and agreements for

cooperation and joint action. • We broker partnerships; build synergies among Members and Commissions, and with external partners; and help

mobilize resources for Programme implementation by the constituent parts of IUCN. • We provide the opportunity and resources required to ensure that the IUCN Commissions deliver the relevant

scientific base for the Programme.

4. Closing This Charter calls all of us – Members, Commissions, National and Regional Committees and the Secretariat – to contribute to and participate in the development, delivery and financing of the Programme. It calls on us to work together cooperatively, with respect for, and enabling, our respective roles and capacities to have maximum impact in achieving our conservation goals and IUCN Programme results.

244

Congress Paper WCC-2012-9.4.1/6



Proposed amendments to the IUCN Statutes concerning membership admission criteria

Origin: IUCN Council Action Requested: The World Conservation Congress is invited to ADOPT the draft motion on ‘Proposed amendments to the IUCN Statutes concerning the membership admission criteria’. DRAFT MOTION The IUCN World Conservation Congress, Adopts the following amendments to the IUCN Statutes:

Amend Article 7 of the IUCN Statutes and renumber the remaining paragraphs as follows: (existing text to be removed, if any, in strike through; proposed new text in blue italics)

Government agencies, national and international non-governmental organizations and affiliates shall become Members of IUCN when the Council has determined that: (a) the applicant shares and supports the objectives of IUCN; (b) the objectives and track record of the applicant embody to a substantial extent at least

two of the following: ii. the conservation of the integrity and diversity of nature; iii. the aim to ensure that any use of natural resources is equitable and ecologically

sustainable; iv. the dedication to influencing, encouraging and assisting societies for at least one of

the above purposes; (c) the applicant does not pursue objectives or carry out activities that conflict with the

objectives or activities of IUCN; (d) the applicant has as one of its central purposes the achievement of IUCN’s mission and

a substantial record of activity in the conservation of nature and natural resources; and (e) the applicant meets the other qualifications for membership as prescribed in the

Regulations. EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM Rationale Evaluating the suitability of an applicant with the requirements of Article 7 at present involves, to some extent, a subjective assessment. By proposing Congress to adopt the proposed amendments to Article 7 of the Statutes, Council intends to give more specific guidance to the IUCN Council as to what are the objectives and the track record that it is required to review when considering an application for admission. Council is of the view that membership of IUCN can be broadened to those that are active in conservation of nature and/or in the sustainable use of natural resources or directly related activities which demonstrate that the organization shares and supports the objectives of IUCN. This is particularly relevant in the context of the draft new IUCN Programme 2013–2016 which aims to integrate new actors engaged in biodiversity conservation, nature-based solutions and nature’s benefits to peoples’ livelihoods.

245

The amendment therefore requires Council to make sure that the government agency or NGO applying for membership meets at least two of the three criteria of paragraph (b) of Article 7 of the Statutes as revised. As a result, organizations that are not only traditional conservation organizations but organizations that focus on equitable and ecologically sustainable use – e.g. agriculture policy or sustainable agriculture institutions – could join, as well as organizations focusing on communication and education of conservation or sustainable use. The proposed amendments were presented by members of Council to the Regional Conservation Forums held from May to October 2011. Generally, Members have been supportive to broadening the membership base of IUCN in the sense described above.

246

Congress Paper WCC-2012-9.4.1/7



Proposed amendment to the IUCN Statutes: Including local and regional governmental authorities

in the structure of the Union

Origin: IUCN Council Action Requested: The World Conservation Congress is invited to CONSIDER the two options proposed by Council with regard to the inclusion of local and regional governmental authorities in the structure of the Union; and subsequently to ADOPT the draft motion concerning a ‘Proposed amendment to the IUCN Statutes: Including local and regional governmental authorities in the structure of the Union’ reflecting the option which will receive the support of the Members’ Assembly. DRAFT MOTION OPTION 1: Government agency membership at the local and regional levels of government The IUCN World Conservation Congress, Adopts the following amendment to the IUCN Statutes: Modify Article 5(b) of the IUCN Statutes as follows: (existing text, if any, to be removed in strike through; proposed new text in blue italics)

government agencies shall be organizations, institutions and, when applicable, government departments, which form part of the machinery of government in a State, including those agencies of the components of federal States or of States having an analogous structure government authorities at all levels below that of the central government of the State, including without limitation at the local and regional levels;

OPTION 2: Government membership for local or regional governments The IUCN World Conservation Congress, Adopts the following amendments to the IUCN Statutes: i) Amend Article 4(a) of the IUCN Statutes as follows: (existing text, if any, to be removed in strike

through; proposed new text in blue italics)

The Members of IUCN shall be: Category A: (a) States, and government agencies and local or regional governmental authorities;

ii) Amend Article 5 of the IUCN Statutes by inserting a new provision 5(c) and renumbering all

subsequent sections as follows: (existing text, if any, to be removed in strike through; proposed new text in blue italics)

(c) local or regional governmental authorities of a given State shall be those below the level of

the State government which the State government represents: (i) to be authorized under national law to adhere to the Statutes of IUCN; and

247

(ii) to have effective decision making authority in the field of conservation of nature and the equitable and ecologically sustainable use of natural resources;

iii) Amend Article 34 of the IUCN Statutes by inserting new provisions 34(b) and 34(d) and

renumbering the existing sections as follows: (existing text, if any, to be removed in strike through; proposed new text in blue italics)

Governmental Members shall have voting rights as follows: (a) each State Member shall have three four votes, one of which shall be exercised collectively

by the government agency Members, if any, of that State; (b) one of the four votes of a State Member in which there are also local and/or regional

governmental authority Members of IUCN, shall be exercised collectively by the local and/or regional governmental authority Members of that State;

(c) government agency Members of IUCN within a State which is not a State Member of IUCN shall collectively have one vote;

(d) local and/or regional governmental authority Members of IUCN within a State which is not a State Member of IUCN shall collectively have one vote;

[...] EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM Rationale Local and regional levels of government are playing an increasingly direct and indirect role in biodiversity conservation, as the population in many countries and regions of the world becomes increasingly urbanized. Local and regional governments and their citizens increasingly represent a relevant and important level at which effective action on biodiversity conservation is taken. They contribute financially to conservation through local expenditures and biodiversity conservation programmes, and their citizens contribute to national biodiversity programmes through taxes. Local and regional governments control natural resources directly and their citizens have a large effect on biodiversity through consumption of natural resources and demands they place on ecosystems. More broadly, environmental governance is being decentralized in many parts of the world, through the principle of “acting locally and thinking globally”. In many parts of the world local and regional government authorities are gaining increased responsibilities for biodiversity and natural resources management. The current IUCN Statutes only allow government agencies or departments at the sub-national level to be admitted as IUCN Members, in Category A, under the conditions in which they “form part of the machinery of government in a State, including those agencies of the components of federal States or of States having an analogous structure”. Agencies of sub-national governments may apply. However, the Statutes do not provide sufficient clarity that government agencies at the local and regional level can be admitted to IUCN. They also exclude local and government authorities – as a level of government – from admission to IUCN. In Resolution 4.008, the 2008 World Conservation Congress recognized ‘that regional and local authorities are critical actors in making progress on the conservation of nature in many countries’. Further, acting upon a motion submitted by IUCN Members to amend the IUCN Statutes ‘on a new membership category for local and regional government authorities’, Resolution 4.008 requested Council to ‘recommend to the 2012 World Conservation Congress a reform to the IUCN Statutes to include local and regional authorities in the structure of the Union, as appropriate.’ Council Implementation of Barcelona Resolution 4.008 – Research, Options, Consultation The IUCN Council implemented the actions required from it by Resolution 4.008 as follows. Council obtained and considered at its 73rd and 74th meetings (November 2009 and June 2010 respectively) a legal technical report from a group of experts of the Commission on Environmental Law (CEL), with the assistance of the Chair of the Commission on Environmental Law and the IUCN Legal Adviser on how local and regional authorities could be included in the structure of the Union.

248

The legal technical report from CEL was distributed to IUCN Members on 30 July 2010 together with six options developed by the Governance Committee of Council: • Creating a new membership category (with the sub-questions whether the members of this

category should be given specific membership rights such as the right to participate in Congress, to propose motions or to nominate election candidates);

• Creating a new membership category with specific criteria for admission; • Increasing the number of votes for Category A (States and Government Agencies) with the local

and regional governmental authorities of each State having one vote to be exercised collectively; • Placing LRGAs under the Affiliates Category (and giving them specific rights which would

otherwise not be granted to affiliates); • Creating an Advisory Body comprising LRGA admitted by Council on an individual basis; • A progressive approach combining one or more of the above options. At the request of Council, all IUCN Members, National and Regional Committees and Commission members were consulted on these options through an electronic survey in the months September–October 2010. The survey, which received 218 responses in total (of which 56% were from the NGO category, 12% from the government category, and 20% from members of the IUCN Commissions), showed a diversity of views from the membership: each option received support from at least half the respondents, while on average one-third of the respondents disagreed with one or more option. In April/May 2011, Council consulted with a small sample of local and regional government authorities directly through the National Committees, or through representative organizations, including the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI), itself a Member of IUCN, which offered to act as local government interface for IUCN. Given the diversity of views represented, Council undertook an additional round of consultation with the IUCN membership during the Regional Conservation Forums which were held in the period May to October 2011 and to which all IUCN Members were invited. During each Forum, a member of Council presented the following options for discussion and feedback to Council: • include ‘local and regional governmental authorities’ in Category A (States and government

agencies) where these local and regional government authorities collectively exercise one of the three [or four] State votes in accordance with that State’s constitutional structure and requirements, and with specific admission criteria for Council to review in each case;

• create a new affiliate membership Category ‘Local and regional governmental authorities’ with extended affiliate member rights, e.g. the right to propose election candidates, to speak in, and propose motions to, Congress, and the right to be consulted by their State Member with a view to the State member presenting the views and proposals of local and regional governmental authorities to Congress;

• that an existing international organization with members which are local and regional governmental authorities, serves as the local government interface for IUCN, e.g. the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI).

The feedback from IUCN Members represented a broad spectrum of views ranging from support for the full membership of local and regional governmental authorities in Category A to objection against this level of government having full membership in any Category. This diversity of Member views can in part can be explained by the diversity of legal and governance systems around the world which assign very different roles and legal competencies to local and regional governmental authorities (local and regional governments). Options As a consequence, Council decided to submit for the consideration of the 2012 World Conservation Congress, two options: • OPTION 1: to state expressly in the current Statutes that government agencies at the local and/or

regional levels of government may apply for membership in Category A as government agencies. Government agencies at the local and/or regional level, along with agencies of other sub-national

249

levels of government, may already apply for membership. Only very few such agencies have become IUCN Members so far. An amendment to Article 5 of the IUCN Statutes has the purpose of making this opportunity clear and explicit.

This option does not modify in any way the voting rights for government agencies provided in Article 34 (a) and (b) of the Statutes: all government agencies within a State, whether or not there is a State Member of IUCN, continue to exercise one vote collectively whether the Government Agencies are at the national, regional or local level.

• OPTION 2: to enable local or regional governmental authorities (governments) to apply for full

membership in Category A. For this purpose, an amendment to Article 4 of the Statutes would add the term ‘local or regional governmental authorities’ to the existing terms ‘States and government agencies’. An additional amendment to Article 5 of the IUCN Statutes would define local or regional governmental authorities as ‘those below the level of the State government which the State government represents:

1) to be authorized under national law to adhere to the Statutes of IUCN; and 2) to have effective decision-making authority in the field of conservation of nature and the

equitable and ecologically sustainable use of natural resources.’

Under Option 2, Article 5 (b) remains in effect and the State government can itself determine whether it is the local government(s) and/or local government agency which could apply to become a Member of IUCN.

Finally, this option proposes to increase the total number of votes for State Members from three

to four in order to maintain a minimum of two votes for each State Member irrespective of whether there are local and/or regional governmental authority members in that State. In order to maintain the balance of power within the government membership category, one of the four votes of a State Member remains with government agencies and the new fourth vote is assigned collectively to local and regional government authorities of the State.

Where there is no IUCN State Member, government agency members of IUCN within a State

which is not a State Member maintain one vote, and a new vote is assigned collectively to local and regional government authorities within the state.

Neither Option 1 nor Option 2 changes in any way the balance of votes between Government and NGO houses of Congress. Council offers these two options which, in its view, take maximum account of the diversity of legal and governance systems around the world which assign very different roles and legal competencies to local and regional governmental authorities. A summary of the main implications for each option compared to the current Statutes follows in Table 1 hereafter. The current IUCN Statutes do not specify how the collective vote is to be exercised. In practice, during the Congresses held so far, the Government Agencies of a State, whether a State Member or not, have consulted each other and have designated one of them to exercise their collective vote. Table 1: summary

Current Statutes Option 1 Option 2

Membership for Government Agencies at national, regional or

local level of government

YES (implied, not explicitly

stated)

YES (stated explicitly) YES

Membership for Governmental Authorities at national, regional

or local level of government NO NO YES

Number of votes for State Members

THREE (of which one to be

exercised collectively by Government Agencies, if

any)

THREE (of which one to be

exercised collectively by Government Agencies, if

any)

FOUR (of which one to be

exercised collectively by Government Agencies, if any, and another one by

250

local and regional authorities collectively, if

any) Number of votes for Government

Agency Members (whether or not there is a State

Member)

ONE (collectively)

ONE (collectively)

ONE (collectively)

Number of votes for Local and/or regional governmental

authority Members (whether or not there is a State

Member)

NONE NONE ONE (collectively)

251




Proposed Amendment to the IUCN Statutes concerning

the Statutory Regions Origin: IUCN Council Action Requested: The World Conservation Congress is requested to APPROVE the amendments to Article 16 and related provisions of the IUCN Statutes, the Rules of Procedure of the World Conservation Congress and the IUCN Regulations, as proposed by Council and hereafter attached. EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM 1. Resolution 4.007 of the 2008 World Conservation Congress requested the IUCN Council to

propose to the next Session of the World Conservation Congress an amendment of the Statutes to change IUCN’s Statutory Regions to give effect to the changes proposed in the resolution. By adopting these modifications in IUCN’s statutory regions the Congress will establish Council representation that better reflects the concentration of high biodiversity, the size of human population and the distribution of IUCN Members in the IUCN regions, whilst taking account of cultural and social ties and political realities.

2. The proposed revisions to the Statutes involve the following changes:

(a) Africa would retain the same boundaries as at present but would elect four (4) Councillors, which would increase representation by one Councillor.

(b) North America and the Caribbean would retain the same boundaries as at present and elect

three (3) Councillors. (c) Meso- and South America would retain the same boundaries as at present but would elect

four (4) Councillors, which would increase representation by one Councillor. (d) Oceania would retain the same boundaries as at present and elect three (3) Councillors. (e) Pakistan would move to South and East Asia. (f) South and East Asia would elect five (5) Councillors rather than the current three, which

would increase representation by two Councillors. (g) West Asia would elect three (3) Councillors. (h) West Europe and East Europe, North and Central Asia would be combined and elect six (6) Councillors, with sub-regions being established to retain regional diversity within the six

elected Councillors. (i) The number of co-opted members of Council would be one. (j) Overall, the present size of Council would be retained.

3. The amendments proposed by Council to the Statutes as well as the consequential amendments

to the Rules of Procedure of the World Conservation Congress and the IUCN Regulations are set out in the attached chart.

252

PROPOSALS BY THE IUCN COUNCIL TO AMEND THE STATUTES OF IUCN World Conservation Congress, September 2012 Current Provisions in the Statutes

Proposed Amendments to Current Provisions in the Statutes

Proposed Final Text of Amended Provisions

Part IV - Organization [...] 16. The Regions of IUCN shall be: (a) Africa; (b) Meso and South America; (c) North America and the Caribbean; (d) South and East Asia; (e) West Asia; (f) Oceania; (g) East Europe, North and Central Asia; and (h) West Europe

Part IV - Organization [...] 16. The Regions of IUCN shall be: (a) Africa; (b) Meso and South America; (c) North America and the Caribbean; (d) South and East Asia; (e) West Asia; (f) Oceania; (g) Europe, North and Central Asia.; and [...](h) West Europe

Part IV - Organization [...] 16. The Regions of IUCN shall be: (a) Africa; (b) Meso and South America; (c) North America and the Caribbean; (d) South and East Asia; (e) West Asia; (f) Oceania; (g) Europe, North and Central Asia. [...]

Composition 38. The members of the Council are: […] (f) up to five additional appointed Councillors, chosen by the Council on the basis of diverse qualifications, interests and skills.

Composition 38. The members of the Council are: […] (f) up to fiveone additional appointed Councillors, chosen by the Council on the basis of diverseappropriate qualifications, interests and skills.

Composition 38. The members of the Council are: […] (f) one additional appointed Councillor, chosen by the Council on the basis of appropriate qualifications, interests and skills.

39. There shall be a total of twenty-four Regional Councillors. Three Regional Councillors shall be elected from each Region.

39. There shall be a total of twenty-four eight Regional Councillors. Three Regional Councillors shall be elected from each RegionThe number of elected Councillors for each Region shall be as follows: four (4) for Africa; four (4) for Meso and South America; three (3) for North America and the Caribbean; five (5) for South and East Asia; three (3) for West Asia; three (3) for Oceania; and six (6) for Europe, North and Central Asia.

39. There shall be a total of twenty-eight Regional Councillors. The number of elected Councillors for each Region shall be as follows: four (4) for Africa; four (4) for Meso and South America; three (3) for North America and the Caribbean; five (5) for South and East Asia; three (3) for West Asia; three (3) for Oceania; and six (6) for Europe, North and Central Asia.

253

Current Provisions in the Statutes

Proposed Amendments to Current Provisions in the Statutes


41. The terms of office of the President, Treasurer, Regional Councillors and Chairs of Commissions shall extend from the close of the ordinary session of the World Congress at which they are elected, until the close of the next ordinary session of the World Congress. The appointed Councillors shall serve for the remainder of the term for which the other Councillors are elected.

41. The terms of office of the President, Treasurer, Regional Councillors and Chairs of Commissions shall extend from the close of the ordinary session of the World Congress at which they are elected, until the close of the next ordinary session of the World Congress. The appointed Councillors shall serve for the remainder of the term for which the other Councillors are elected.

41. The terms of office of the President, Treasurer, Regional Councillors and Chairs of Commissions shall extend from the close of the ordinary session of the World Congress at which they are elected, until the close of the next ordinary session of the World Congress. The appointed Councillor shall serve for the remainder of the term for which the other Councillors are elected.

Functions 46. The functions of the Council shall be inter alia: (m) to select the appointed Councillors;

Functions 46. The functions of the Council shall be inter alia: (m) to select the appointed Councillors;

Functions 46. The functions of the Council shall be inter alia: (m) to select the appointed Councillor;

254

PROPOSALS BY THE IUCN COUNCIL TO AMEND THE RULES OF PROCEDURE OF THE WORLD CONSERVATION CONGRESS World Conservation Congress, September 2012 Current Provisions in the Rules of Procedure

Proposed Amendments to Current Provisions in the Rules of Procedure


Nominations and Method of Voting in Elections [...] 81. Where there is more than one candidate for the post of the President, Treasurer, Regional Councillor or Commission Chair: (c) where three persons are to be elected from among four or more candidates to serve as Regional Councillors for a Region, the vote shall be cast by placing an ‘X’ against the names of up to three preferred candidates. Where more than one candidate is nominated from the same State, only the candidate receiving the greater number of votes may be elected;

Nominations and Method of Voting in Elections [...] 81. Where there is more than one candidate for the post of the President, Treasurer, Regional Councillor or Commission Chair: [...] (c) where three or more persons are to be elected from among four or more candidates to serve as Regional Councillors for a Region, the vote shall be cast by placing an ‘X’ against the names of preferred candidates up to three the maximum number of the preferred candidates to be elected for that Region. Where more than one candidate is nominated from the same State, only the candidate receiving the greater number of votes may be elected;

Nominations and Method of Voting in Elections [...] 81. Where there is more than one candidate for the post of the President, Treasurer, Regional Councillor or Commission Chair: [...] (c) where three or more persons are to be elected from among four or more candidates to serve as Regional Councillors for a Region, the vote shall be cast by placing an ‘X’ against the names of preferred candidates up to the maximum number of the candidates to be elected for that Region. Where more than one candidate is nominated from the same State, only the candidate receiving the greater number of votes may be elected;

255

PROPOSALS BY THE IUCN COUNCIL TO AMEND THE REGULATIONS OF IUCN World Conservation Congress, September 2012 Current Provisions in the Regulations

Proposed Amendments to Current Provisions in the Regulations


Appointments and Vacancies 45. The elected members of the Council shall appoint as soon as practicable after their election, and for a term to run concurrently with their own: (a) up to five additional Councillors, selected with due regard to the need to maintain an appropriate balance of diverse qualifications, interests and skills;

Appointments and Vacancies 45. The elected members of the Council shall appoint as soon as practicable after their election, and for a term to run concurrently with their own: (a) up to fiveone (1) additional Councillors, selected with due regard to the need to maintain an appropriate balance of diverse qualifications, interests and skills;

Appointments and Vacancies 45. The elected members of the Council shall appoint as soon as practicable after their election, and for a term to run concurrently with their own: (a) one (1) additional Councillor, selected with due regard to the need to maintain an appropriate balance of diverse qualifications, interests and skills;

Current Provisions in the Regulations

Proposed Amendments to Current Provisions in the Regulations


ANNEX State Members of the United Nations, members of its Specialized Agencies, or of the International Atomic Energy Agency, or parties to the Statutes of the International Court of Justice. List of States by Region, as per Articles 16 and 17 of the Statutes and Regulation 36 of the Regulations: […] SOUTH AND EAST ASIA Bangladesh



256

Bhutan Brunei Darussalam Cambodia China Democratic People's Republic of Korea India Indonesia Japan Lao People's Democratic Republic Malaysia Maldives Mongolia Myanmar Nepal Philippines Republic of Korea Singapore Sri Lanka Thailand Timor-Leste Viet Nam WEST ASIA Afghanistan Bahrain Iran, Islamic Republic of Iraq Jordan Kuwait Lebanon Oman Pakistan Qatar Saudi Arabia Syrian Arab Republic United Arab Emirates Yemen

Bhutan Brunei Darussalam Cambodia China Democratic People's Republic of Korea India Indonesia Japan Lao People's Democratic Republic Malaysia Maldives Mongolia Myanmar Nepal Pakistan Philippines Republic of Korea Singapore Sri Lanka Thailand Timor-Leste Viet Nam WEST ASIA Afghanistan Bahrain Iran, Islamic Republic of Iraq Jordan Kuwait Lebanon Oman Pakistan Qatar Saudi Arabia Syrian Arab Republic United Arab Emirates Yemen

Bhutan Brunei Darussalam Cambodia China Democratic People's Republic of Korea India Indonesia Japan Lao People's Democratic Republic Malaysia Maldives Mongolia Myanmar Nepal Pakistan Philippines Republic of Korea Singapore Sri Lanka Thailand Timor-Leste Viet Nam WEST ASIA Afghanistan Bahrain Iran, Islamic Republic of Iraq Jordan Kuwait Lebanon Oman Qatar Saudi Arabia Syrian Arab Republic United Arab Emirates Yemen

257

[…] EAST EUROPE, NORTH AND CENTRAL ASIA Albania Armenia Azerbaijan Belarus Bosnia and Herzegovina Bulgaria Croatia Czech Republic Estonia Georgia Hungary Kazakhstan Kyrgyzstan Latvia Lithuania Montenegro Poland Republic of Moldova Romania Russian Federation Serbia Slovakia Slovenia Tajikistan The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia Turkmenistan WEST EUROPE Andorra Austria Belgium Cyprus Denmark

[...] EUROPE, NORTH AND CENTRAL ASIA Albania Andorra Armenia Austria Azerbaijan Belarus Belgium Bosnia and Herzegovina Bulgaria Croatia Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Estonia Finland France Georgia Germany Greece Holy See Hungary Iceland Ireland Israel Italy Kazakhstan Kyrgyzstan Latvia Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Malta Monaco Montenegro

[...] EUROPE, NORTH AND CENTRAL ASIA Albania Andorra Armenia Austria Azerbaijan Belarus Belgium Bosnia and Herzegovina Bulgaria Croatia Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Estonia Finland France Georgia Germany Greece Holy See Hungary Iceland Ireland Israel Italy Kazakhstan Kyrgyzstan Latvia Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Malta Monaco Montenegro

258

Finland France Germany Greece Holy See Iceland Ireland Israel Italy Liechtenstein Luxembourg Malta Monaco Netherlands Norway Portugal San Marino Spain Sweden Switzerland Turkey United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

Netherlands Norway Poland Portugal Republic of Moldova Romania Russian Federation San Marino Serbia Slovakia Slovenia Spain Sweden Switzerland Tajikistan The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia Turkey Turkmenistan United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland WEST EUROPE Andorra Austria Belgium Cyprus Denmark Finland France Germany Greece Holy See Iceland Ireland Israel Italy Lichtenstein Luxembourg Malta

Netherlands Norway Poland Portugal Republic of Moldova Romania Russian Federation San Marino Serbia Slovakia Slovenia Spain Sweden Switzerland Tajikistan The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia Turkey Turkmenistan United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

259

Monaco Netherlands Norway Portugal San Marino Spain Sweden Switzerland Turkey United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

260




Proposal to request the next Council to prepare an amendment to the IUCN Statutes and Regulations to make clear the authority of

the Members’ Assembly to modify IUCN’s mission and the nature of its membership

Origin: IUCN Council

Action Requested: The World Conservation Congress is invited to ADOPT the draft motion concerning ‘Proposal to request the next Council to prepare an amendment to the IUCN Statutes and Regulations to make clear the authority of the Members’ Assembly to modify IUCN’s mission and the nature of its membership’.

DRAFT MOTION The IUCN World Conservation Congress, Noting the Member proposal to amend the IUCN Statutes 101 submitted to Council by The Environment and Conservation Organisations of NZ Inc (ECO) and supported by the New Zealand Committee of IUCN; Noting that the Council concurs with the spirit and essence of the view expressed by ECO and the New Zealand Committee of IUCN that the authority to modify IUCN’s mission and the nature of its membership, including membership admission criteria, belongs with the Members’ Assembly; Considering that this matter and the specific proposal for amendment require further analysis to understand their scope and implications, in order to define the most appropriate way of clarifying in the IUCN Statutes and Regulations the respective authorities of the Members’ Assembly and of Council on this point; Requests the newly elected Council to prepare a proposal to amend the IUCN Statutes and Regulations in order to make clear the Members’ Assembly’s authority to modify IUCN’s mission and the nature of its membership, including membership admission criteria, for submission to the IUCN membership for adoption by electronic ballot in the first half of the next term. EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM By the deadline defined in IUCN Statutes 104 for IUCN Members to propose to Council amendments to the IUCN Statutes, Council received one proposal, namely a proposal from The Environment and Conservation Organisations of NZ Inc (ECO) to amend IUCN Statutes 101 with the purpose of ‘Limiting Changes to the Regulations to preserve the Character of IUCN while allowing the Council some flexibility to change the Regulations’. The proposal submitted by ECO as well as the letter from the New Zealand Committee of IUCN of 22 March 2012 expressing support for ECO’s proposal, follow hereafter. Council concurs with the spirit and essence of the view expressed by ECO and the New Zealand Committee of IUCN that the authority to modify IUCN’s mission and the nature of its membership, including membership admission criteria, belongs with the Members’ Assembly. However, Council is also of the view that this matter and the specific proposal for amendment require further in-depth analysis to understand their scope and implications, in order to define the most

261

appropriate way of clarifying in the IUCN Statutes and Regulations the respective authorities of the Members’ Assembly and of Council on this point. One alternative to reach the same objective might consist of moving some of the provisions of the Regulations (concerning the nature of the IUCN membership) into the Statutes so that they can in future only be changed by the Members’ Assembly. Such statutory reform requires in-depth analysis and warrants a discussion with and guidance from the IUCN Members during the 2012 Congress. Council therefore proposes that Congress requests the next Council to make a proposal to amend the IUCN Statutes and Regulations and, in order for such amendments to become effective during the next intersessional period, to submit them to the membership for adoption by electronic mail ballot in the first half of the next term, i.e. by 2014.

262

5 March 2012 IUCN Statutes: Proposed Amendment for the Jeju World Conservation Congress and Members’ Business Assembly, 2012 Limiting Changes to the Regulations to preserve the Character of IUCN while allowing the Council some flexibility to change the Regulations. Note: Amendments proposed are in bold italics. The numbering relates to the Statutes numbers. The Rationale for the changes is below the changes themselves. Members and the Council are urged to support these amendments and to indicate their support immediately to [email protected] and [email protected] 101. The Regulations implementing these Statutes, adopted by the World Congress, may be amended

by Council only to the extent that such amendments do not: alter the character of the Union, change any matter in relation to the membership of the Union, change any matters to do with voting or notice, change the Mission of the Union.

The Regulations shall conform to these Statutes, and neither limit nor expand the rights of the

Members to exercise control on any matter governed by these Statutes. Any proposed amendment shall be clearly notified to members at least 120 days in advance

of the first Council meeting at which they are considered, and placed on the agenda of one of the periodic Council meetings and shall be adopted by a two-thirds majority of the votes cast at each of two successive periodic meetings of the Council. Such proposed amendments must be clearly drawn to the notice of members at least 30 days after the first meeting of Council, and at each time of notice, submissions and objections by the members must be called for with at least 90 days for submissions and objections.

If the Council receives expressions of concern from five or more Members then it must

either withdraw that proposal or defer the matter to the next Members’ Business Assembly.

102. Any amendment to the Regulations shall be communicated to the Members as soon as possible

after it is adopted. Proposed by: The Environment and Conservation Organisations of NZ Inc and others. For the consideration of

a) The IUCN Council and b) The Members’ Business Assembly

EXPLANATION FOR THE PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE STATUTES The reasons for proposed changes to the Statutes of IUCN are as follows: 1. That as the agent of the Members, the Council should limit itself to changing minor matters that

do not alter the character or mission of the Union. As it stands, the Statute allows the Council to alter the Regulations with only the one proviso, which is that “The Regulations shall conform to these Statutes, and neither limit nor expand the rights of the Members to exercise control on any matter governed by these Statutes.” This proviso is needed but it insufficient, as

263

mailto:[email protected]


illustrated by the Council in 2011 resolving to change the Member Admissions criteria, including the weakening of the requirements for the commitment of Members to the Mission of the Union, changing the requirement that Members be not-for-profit, and other changes.

To limit the scope of Council proposed changes to the Regulations, we have proposed various

limits on the matters that the Council may alter. 2. The second area of change proposed by this motion is that the Council has to give clear and well

headlined notice to Members. The notice to Members was initially not headlined as a change to the Regulations until we raised the alarm. It was simply an anodyne email which did not draw attention to the significance of the changes the Council agreed, and did not flag that any change of the Regulations was agreed.

To remedy this situation, this motion proposes that the Union resolve to insert notification

requirements with time frames for objections and submissions by Members. You are invited and urged to support this Motion which is designed to leave the Council with

some flexibility to change the Regulations but to put out of bounds matters that are properly the decision of the Members in the Members’ Business Assembly.

Correspondence on this motion should be directed to [email protected] and [email protected], with IUCN Statutes in the subject line.

264



Agenda and Documentation · Agenda and Documentation . Issued on 5 April 2012 . World Conservation...

Documents

Transcript of Agenda and Documentation · Agenda and Documentation . Issued on 5 April 2012 . World Conservation...