Biodiversity mainstreaming: experiences from Brazil

Mainstreaming biodiversity:
some relevant experiences
Camila Oliveira
Ministry of Environment – Brazil
Bioversity International
Rome, November 2013

Some history:
• UN Conference on the
Human Environment –
Stockholm, 1972;
• UN Conference on
Environment and
Development – Rio de
Janeiro, 1992;
Foundation for
mainstreaming!

c. Integrate strategies for the
conservation of biological diversity
and the sustainable use of
biological resources into national
development strategies and/or
plans;

Paragraph 44: … A more efficient and coherent implementation of
the three objectives of the Convention and the achievement by
2010 of a significant reduction in the current rate of loss of
biological diversity will require the provision of new and additional
financial and technical resources to developing countries, and
includes actions at all levels to:

Decision X/2 - The Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020 and the Aichi Biodiversity Targets
– NBSAP as “effective instruments for the integration of biodiversity targets into national
development and poverty reduction policies and strategies, national accounting, as appropriate,
economic sectors and spatial planning processes, by Government and the private sector at all
levels; “

4 main factors for successful integration of biodiversity:
• Good scientific information and understanding;
• Institutional capacity and commitment;
• Strategic cross-sectoral and public-private partnerships;
• Willingness to seize opportunities.
(Foreword – Kristalina Georgieva – The World Bank)
Situations characterized by:
• Incorporation of BD considerations into sectoral policies;
• Sectoral activities recognized to be dependent / based on;
• “Win-win” scenario (BD and economic sector);
• Situations where sectoral activities result in overall gains
for BD exceeding losses. (Introduction – T. Sandwith)
2002

The process of mainstreaming biodiversity
(generalizations from specific cases):
Given that certain prerequisites are in place, a set
of specific stimuli can catalyze activities which then lead
to the identification of appropriate mechanisms, with
the net result that effective mainstreaming, as
measured by outcomes, will happen!
http://bioterra.blogspot.it/2006/05/countdown
-2010-save-biodiversity-salve.html
Conclusions: The Fundamentals of Mainstreaming Biodiversity (R. M. Cowling, S. M. Pierce and T. Sandwith)

Pre-requisites (elements without which MS cannot happen):
• Scientific knowledge and understanding;
• Adequate institutional capacity;
• Effective NGO involvement;
• Commitment of stakeholders;
• Supportive legislation and policy;
• Existing protected area system;
• Need for socio-economic delivery;
• Implementation/management knowledge; and
• Awareness of global significance of biodiversity.

Stimuli (factors external and internal to the sector that offer
unexpected opportunities or catalyze awareness of the need
for mainstreaming actions):
• Change in governments;
• Threat to biodiversity/ecosystem service;
• Linkages to social-economic delivery;
• Demand for ecosystem service;
• Private sector involvement;
• Conflict resolution;
• Natural disasters; etc.

Mechanisms (actual activities to accomplish MS):
• Effective communication to stakeholders;
• Synergistic partnerships between government, private
sector and NGOs;
• Enabling legislation and policy;
• Creation of new institutions or institutional arrangements;
• Seed funding;
• Effective research;
• Key appointments (capable and committed individuals);
• Capacity building;
• Role models (positive example).

• Incorporation of biodiversity issues into
sector policies;
• Simultaneous biodiversity and sector
gains ("win-win");
• Net biodiversity gains-exceed-net-
biodiversity loss by sector activities;
• Sector activity based on or dependent
on sustainable use/management of
biodiversity; etc.
Outcomes
(measurable indicators of mainstreaming effectiveness):

Effective mainstreaming requires:
1. Awareness and political will from the highest levels, providing support;
2. Strong leadership, dialogue and co-operation at all levels;
3. Mutual supportiveness between biodiversity and development priorities;
4. Focus on economic sectors, supported by cross-sectoral approaches;
5. Analysis of the changing motivations and opportunities of each sector;
6. Identification and prioritization of entry points and the development of sector-
specific tools and interventions;
7. Awareness within sectors of the relevance of biodiversity conservation;
8. A coherent set of economic and regulatory tools and incentives that promote and
reward integration and added value, while discouraging inappropriate behaviours;
9. Sustained behavioural change (individuals, institutions and society - public and
private);
10. Measurable behavioural outcomes and biodiversity impacts.

Guidelines for mainstreaming success (guiding principles and key determinants for
effective biodiversity mainstreaming):
1. Develop an operational strategy embedded within a theory of change for BD MS;
2. Recognize that democratic, transparent and stable governance systems are
fundamental to success;
3. Develop science-based biophysical and socio-economic spatial information
systems and assessments at relevant scale;
4. Plan for extended project duration and financial sustainability and implement
adaptive management approaches;
5. Align mainstreaming projects with the CBD and other intergovernmental
processes;
6. Align mainstreaming initiatives with government priorities;
7. Develop strong and responsive teams led by champions;
8. Achieve positive behavioural change as a driver of mainstreaming;
9. Communicate effectively with stakeholders;
10. Strengthen capacity at individual and institutional levels;
11. Improve project design, monitoring and evaluation.

http://www.stapgef.org/workshop-mainstreaming-biodiversity-conservation-in-production-sectors/
Biodiversity mainstreaming is the
process of embedding biodiversity
considerations into policies,
strategies and practices of key public
and private actors that impact or rely
on biodiversity, so that it is
conserved and sustainably used both
locally and globally. (2013)

Other definitions:
Biodiversity mainstreaming is to internalize the goals of biodiversity
conservation and the sustainable use of biological resources into
economic sectors and development models, policies and
programmes, and therefore into all human behaviour. (GEF/STAP
2004)
Though “mainstreaming” has been called “integrating” biodiversity
into development, it has the added meaning of modifying that into
which it is integrated – changing the valence of development policies
and interventions towards consideration of the values of biodiversity.
(from Mainstreaming biodiversity conservation: A framing paper for the Scientific and Technical Advisory Panel of the Global
Environment Facility, by Kent H. Redford)
Other names:
Natural Capital, Green Economy, Green Accounting, Agri-environment
schemes, Building with Nature, Certification schemes, etc…

“the mainstreaming approach is still in its infancy in financial
and production sectors, although enjoying wide support by
conventions, agencies and institutions, such as the CBD, GEF,
UNDP, UNEP, World Bank, IUCN, WWF, CI.”
Biodiversity mainstreaming is happening…
Mainstreaming biodiversity conservation: A framing paper for the Scientific and Technical Advisory Panel of the Global Environment
Facility, by Kent H. Redford.
An analysis was done of mainstreaming projects that had been funded by
GEF (3,4, and 5):
• 327 biodiversity mainstreaming projects;
• totaling US$1,631,684,477 in GEF funding and US$5,249,734,936 in co-
financing (median GEF funding per project was US$3,586,364 with a median
of US$12,100,000 in co-financing).
GEF Biodiversity Mainstreaming

http://pubs.iied.org/G03673.html?k=Biodiversity and Development Mainstreaming
- Understand the political
economy;
- Identify all opportunities for
mainstreaming into development
frameworks;
- Identify entry points, ‘low
hanging fruits’ and win-win
situations;
- Communication;
- Network.
Mainstreaming tactics:

Upstream and downstream outcomes of biodiversity mainstreaming:

Learning from the experience other issues with mainstreaming:
• Environment;
• Gender;
• Other specific environmental challenges: Drylands and Climate
Change.
Be aware for negative effects:
A recent review of gender practitioners from 26 NGOs in South Africa
showed that gender mainstreaming had actually had a negative effect.
The review also highlighted the problems associated with inadequate
financing, failure to acknowledge power relations and the overly
technocratic nature of mainstreaming activities - all of which could be
of equal concern in biodiversity mainstreaming.

• Prevailing development paradigm – where biodiversity is an
externality;
• Lack of clear understanding of what biodiversity means in each
country’s context – wildlife, agricultural biodiversity, fisheries - and
what aspects of biodiversity contribute to what objectives of
development;
• Insufficient evidence on contribution of biodiversity to
development;
• Lack of successful models and blueprints;
• Need for - but difficulty of – working across different Ministries that
don’t usually deal with biodiversity;
• Limited capacity to move from policies and plans to implementation;
• Competition with other policy priorities for limited resources.
Key Challenges to mainstreaming:

• Tailor the argument to the audience – economists like
numbers…;
• Leadership is critical: Mainstreaming “champions” are
needed to push the process, and keep momentum going;
• Build on existing processes /planning /budgeting cycles
rather than creating something new or additional;
• Mainstreaming is iterative and requires adaptive
management
• Mainstreaming takes time – and money;
• Trade offs are inevitable.
Key Lessons:

A proposal by Kent Redford at the Scientific
and Technical Advisory Panel (GEF/STAP)
Cape Town, 1-3/10/2013

• 16 global leaders (MMA, CBD, IUCN, Bioversity, CGIAR, Sustainable
Food Trust, FBDS, Embrapa, Center for Science, Economics and
Environment, FANRPAN, UNEP, IPBES).

http://www.fao.org/infoods/infoods/food-biodiversity/en/
• Food biodiversity (varieties and cultivars +
neglected/underutilized or wild species) - significant
intraspecific differences – 1000-fold differences (statistically
and nutritionally significant);
• Can address multiple burdens of malnutrition - dietary energy,
macro- and micronutrients and other beneficial bioactive
constituents;
• Provides genetic resources for all crops, livestock and marine
species harvested for food.
Rationale - Biodiversity, Food and Nutrition:

Mainstreaming biodiversity into food and nutrition
strategies and policies – What needs to be done?
Increased evidence base:
• Nutritional composition data for biodiverse foods need to be
generated and widely disseminated to spread the knowledge
on the potential of these foods, especially to consumers and
professionals in nutrition, health, environment and agriculture
(raise awareness);
• More attention to the identification of foods below the species
level (variety/cultivar/breed) - consumption surveys need to be
designed to capture biodiverse foods;
More advocacy at the international and national levels:
• More funds need to be available for investigating food
biodiversity, since this information has great impacts on
nutrition and health programmes and policies.

Mainstreaming biodiversity into food and nutrition
strategies and policies – Why?
• Generic food composition data – wrong nutrient intake
estimations of the target population – wrong decisions and
policies in nutrition and health programmes;
• Foods with interesting nutrient profile could be included in
agricultural research and production programmes and
policies – better nutrition and health;
• Increasing problem of obesity due to simplification of diets
(in developing countries, beside micronutrient deficiencies
and undernourishment). Biodiverse foods – rich in
micronutrients + low in energy-density – reverse this;
• Shift towards food-based approach – inappropriate use of
medicalized approach (food fortification and
supplementation) – public health problem (malnutrition).

International declarations and endorsements:
• CBD/COP7 – Decision VII/32 – recognized linkages
between BFN and the need to enhance the sustainable use
of biodiversity to combat hunger and malnutrition;
• CBD/COP8 – Decision VIII/23 – Cross-cutting initiative on
biodiversity for food and nutrition;
• FAO/Commission on Genetic Resources for Food and
Agriculture (CGRFA) – 14 Regular Session (CGRFA-14/13/8
– Review of Key Issues on Biodiversity and Nutrition);
• FAO/ CGRFA /Intergovernmental Technical Working Group
on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture (WG-
PGR).

• Leading role of FAO, Bioversity and Brazil;
• Programme of work on agricultural biodiversity;
• Biodiversity is essential for food security and nutrition –
offers key options for sustainable livelihoods and human
well-being – contribution to the achievement of the
MDGs;
• Interdisciplinary and inter-sectoral approaches to integrate
health, education, agriculture and environmental
objectives – urges Governments to integrate biodiversity,
food and nutrition considerations into NBSAPs and other
national plans and activities.
Cross-cutting initiative on BFN (Decision VIII/23)

“Mainstreaming biodiversity conservation
and sustainable use for improved nutrition
and wellbeing”

• 3.5.1 Review status of mainstreaming biodiversity tools and
approaches by sector and cross-sectorally with particular
emphasis on mainstreaming into food and nutrition
activities
• 3.5.2 Inventory relevant tools and methods for
mainstreaming biodiversity into food and nutrition
activities (National Sustainable Development Strategies;
National Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers; National
Nutrition Policies, Strategies and Action plans etc.)
• 3.5.3 Draft guidelines for using tools for mainstreaming and
methodologies to support inclusion of biodiversity into
food and nutrition activities
Output 3.5 - Tools and methods for mainstreaming
biodiversity into food and nutrition upscaled and
disseminated

What is going on in Brazil …
http://www.mainstreambiodiversity.ca/MainstreamingBioDiversity.aspx

Brazilian Public Policies
• 2003- Zero Hunger Program (MDG1: End hunger and poverty) -
among other guidelines, promote greater integration of all
actors involved and further development of partnerships:
– Bolsa Familia - income transfer to improve life conditions -
introduced a concept of intersectoriality;
– Food Acquisition Program (PAA) - boost household
agriculture;
– Prioritize the School Feeding Program (PNAE) – education
linked to food security and nutrition;

National Council on Food and
Nutritional Security:
57 members - two-thirds from
civil society and a third from the
government.
Interministerial Chamber on
Food and Nutritional Security:
19 ministries from CONSEA,
under the coordination of the
Ministry of Social Development
and Fight against Hunger.
Food and nutritional security covers biodiversity
conservation and sustainable use of resources
(art. 4th of Law 11.346, from September 15,
2006).

National School Feeding Program (PNAE)
Contribute to student’s biopsychosocial growth
and development, improve learning, school
performance, promotion of healthy eating habits
and the provision of healthy meals that cover at
least 20% of the nutritional needs during the
school year.
FOOD AND NUTRITIONAL
SECURITY and HUMAN
RIGHT to FOOD and
NUTRITION


Family Household Agriculture
Law 11.947 June 16, 2009
Art. 14º. Of the total financial
resources transferred by the FNDE,
within the NSFP, at least thirty
percent (30%) will be used in the
purchase of foodstuffs directly from
family farms and rural household
entrepreneurs or their organizations ,
giving priority to agrarian reform
settlements, indigenous and
traditional communities as maroon
communities.
native species from agrobiodiversity
and sociobiodiversity

Minimum Price Guarantee Policy (PGPM)
Objective
Biodiversity
conservation with
income generation
and the promotion of
food security to many
indigenous and local
communities
*Price research for 10 other
species are being conducted.

Food and Nutrition National Policy
(PNAN)
-The promotion of adequate and
healthy food as one of the
guidelines (food habit
appropriate to the biological and
sociocultural aspects of
individuals, as well as the
sustainable use of the
environment);

Recently launched National Plan of Organic
Production and Agroecology (October 17, 2013).
Interministerial Chamber of Agroecology and Organic Production –
Ciapo: • 14 representatives of the federal government;
• 14 representatives of civil society organizations.

Addresses the need of
the production of
healthy food aligned
with the conservation of
natural resources.
• Goal 10 - to invest 20.2 million Reais in access, use,
conservation and management of natural resource, with
emphasis on environmental regulation and the
strengthening of socio-biodiversity products.
– Initiative 3 – to demonstrate the nutritional value of 40 native
species of the Brazilian flora of current or potential economic
value and the role that these species may play in promoting
food and nutritional security, as well as in the composition of
healthy diets.

Revision of the NBSAP - Dialogues on Biodiversity:
Building the Brazilian Strategy for 2020 – National Targets
Strategy objective:
Elaboration and proposition of national
targets and effective legal instruments
for the achievement of the Aichi
Biodiversity Targets and the update of
the National Biodiversity Policy
(participatory process).
Engagement of the whole society:
Participation of different sectors of the
brazilian society in the whole process, as
a way of obtaining the engagement and
commitment for achieving the Aichi
Biodiversity Targets.

• Sectorial Consultation:
- Private Sector (CNI, CEBDS, MEB);
- Academic Sector (SBPC);
- Environmental Sector – NGOs (IUCN-Brasil, WWF-Brasil, IPÊ);
- Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities Sector (Inbrapi, GTA, Comitê
Intertribal, Articulação Pacari de Plantas Medicinais);
- Governmental Sector (Abema – State Environmental Entities);
• 1st Consolidation for the creation of the Base Document;
• Public Consultation - Internet (19/12/2011 to 31/01/2012);
• Consolidation of the proposal by the Government (National Biodiversity
Commission - CONABIO) – approval of Resolution n. 06, September 3, 2013.
Process:

Action Plan for Biodiversity Conservation:
• Partnership with the Ministry of Planning
• Logic Model adapted to Plan
• Result Chain using Problem Tree Analysis
• Collection and analysis of information –
consultant – 40 interviews with technicians
from the Ministries to assess the causes that
are responsible for biodiversity loss;
• Begin the construction of the Problem Tree with technicians
from the environment sector of the federal government.
Biodiversity Loss

After 4 meetings with the environmental sector…

2nd Phase - 24 ministries and agencies of the Federal Gov.
• 1st meeting - validation of the Problem Tree
• new actors – new insights

Axis: Low Value of Biodiversity and Associated Traditional Knowledge
(55 causes)
Low importance to the
use of biodiversity into
food and nutrition.

Axis: Production and Consumption Models Incompatible with Conservation
(60 causes)

Axis: Loss, degradation and fragmentation of habitats
(47 causes)

2nd Phase - 27 ministries and agencies of the Federal Gov.
• 2nd meeting – assessment of existing actions and initiatives
that combat the causes
• 3rd meeting – gap analysis, establishment of new
partnerships and initiatives (opportunity)

• Cause (of the problem),
• Activities or initiatives (to attack the causes),
• Impact on the cause (1:no impact, 3:low impact, 5:medium impact, 7:high impact),
• Actual state of implementation (0-30%:initial, 31-60%:intermediate, 61-99%:advanced;
100%:concluded),
• National or regional reach (national, North, Northeast, Central-west, Southeast, South),
• Biome (Amazon, Caatinga, Cerrado, Atlantic Forest, Pampa, Pantanal, Coastal and Marine),
• Target group or beneficiaries,
• Organ responsible,
• Partners,
• Expected products,
• Targets (2013, 2014, 2015, 2020 – monetary or non-monetary),
• Total investment (multi-year plan budget or other sources or non-monetary actions),
• Observations.

MMA - implementation of the BFN Project;
- Plants for the Future initiative;
- geographical distribution of wild relatives of main crops;
Embrapa/MAPA - agricultural technologies for rural population;
- ecological based production system;
ICMBio/MMA - technical assistance to people dependent on
extractivism;
MCTI - Research Network Bionorte, Pro-Midwest, Center of the
Pantanal, Northeast Biotechnology, Institute for Sustainable Development
Mamirauá, Food and Nutrition Network (Food Composition Table Project);
FUNAI/MJ - capacity in best management practices of agricultural
biodiversity;
MPA - integrated centers of fisheries and aquaculture, fishery
stations and aquaculture research center;
- increase the share of fish in the institutional market, with
a focus on encouraging the consumption of fish in the school feeding;
- promote national agriculture and fishery products in the
national domestic and international market. …
Actions related to Low importance to the
use of biodiversity into
food and nutrition.

Relationship with the Aichi Targets - prioritization

Next steps
• Current – consultant writing down the Action Plan;
• Incorporation of the contribution of other Plans (ex.
Action Plan for Control of Deforestation in the Legal
Amazon, Action Plan for Sustainable Production and
Consumption, the Biodiversity Thematic Program on
the Multi-Year Plan – PPA, and others);
• Identify the institutional capacity of government to
achieve the Aichi Targets;
• Develop a strategy for monitoring and evaluation of the
Action Plan.

Presidential
Message
Strategic vision
Macro challenges
Thematic Programs
(Context)
Annex I
Objectives
Initiatives
Management, Maintenance and
Services to the State Programs
Thematic Programs
Brazil’s Multi-Year Plan (PPA 2012-2015):
One of the objectives was to create space to deal with
transversal and multi sectoral policies and regionalization.

4 big axes: Economic Development, Social Development,
Citizen and Human Rights, and Management and
Infrastructure.

• S, T & I and systematization and dissemination of information
related to the subject;
• Expansion and consolidation of the National System of
Conservation Units;
• Valuation of agricultural biodiversity and socio-biodiversity and
the promotion of its sustainable use – Green Cash Transfer;
• Promotion of access to genetic resources and traditional
knowledge with the fair benefit sharing;
• Species conservation;
• Biosafety and balance of ecosystems;
• Proposition of the necessary regulatory and policy frameworks
related to international commitments.
Main points of the Biodiversity
Thematic Program:

Manager
Marcos Antônio Pereira de Oliveira Silva
Coordination – Environmental Sustainability
Elisa Monteiro Malafaia
Coordination - Agriculture, Livestock and Fisheries
Fabiano Chaves da Silva
Ismael Alves
de Brito Neto
Liane Rucinski
Ronan Silva Carlos Pinho Raquel Alves
Sustentabilidad
e Ambiental
Biodiversidad
e
Licenciament
o e Qualidade
Ambiental
Mudanças
Climáticas
Florestas e
Controle do
Desmatamen
to
Gestão de
Recursos
Hídricos
Agropecuári
a e Pesca
Agricultura
Irrigada
Pesca e
Aquicultura
Agropecuária
Sustentável
Defesa
Agropecuária
Inovações
para a
Agropecuária
Ilka
Kawashita
Department of Economic and Special Issues
Director - Bráulio Santiago Cerqueira
Ministry of Planning, Budget and Management
Secretary of Planning and Strategic Investiments

Lessons learned …
http://pubs.iied.org/G03673.html?k=Biodiversity and Development Mainstreaming
“Mainstreaming needs to recognise who holds power and
therefore who needs to be engaged - Ministries of
Finance, or Finance and Planning are particularly
important in this regard.”

MUNIC – IBGE Survey
• % of municipalities that have some body to deal with
environmental:
2002 – 67,8% 2012 – 88,5%
• % of municipalities that have City Council for Environment:
2002 – 34,1 % 2012 – 63,7% (77% are active)
MMA Survey – What the brazilian citizen thinks
about environment?
• % of Brazilians who could not mention an environmental
problem in Brazil:
2002 – 46% 2012 – 10%
Things are improving in Brazil …

Thank you!
camila.oliveira@mma.gov.br

Biodiversity mainstreaming: experiences from Brazil

Recomendados

Recomendados

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Mais procurados

Mais procurados (20)

Destaque

Destaque (9)

Semelhante a Biodiversity mainstreaming: experiences from Brazil

Semelhante a Biodiversity mainstreaming: experiences from Brazil (20)

Mais de Teresa Borelli

Mais de Teresa Borelli (19)

Último

Último (20)

Biodiversity mainstreaming: experiences from Brazil