Skip to main content
Review article

Relating characteristics of global biodiversity targets to reported progress

Elizabeth J. GreenCentre for Conservation Science Royal Society for the Protection of Birds The Lodge, Potton Road Sandy SG19 2DL U.KGraeme M. BuchananCentre for Conservation Science Royal Society for the Protection of Birds The Lodge, Potton Road Sandy SG19 2DL U.KStuart H. M. ButchartBirdLife International David Attenborough Building, Pembroke Street Cambridge CB2 3QZ U.KGeorgina ChandlerCentre for Conservation Science Royal Society for the Protection of Birds The Lodge, Potton Road Sandy SG19 2DL U.KNeil D. BurgessCentre for Macroecology, Evolution and Climate, Natural History Museum University of Copenhagen Copenhagen DK‐2100 DenmarkSamantha L. L. HillDepartment of Life Sciences Natural History Museum Cromwell Road London SW7 5BD U.KRichard D. GregoryCentre for Biodiversity & Environment Research University College London London WC1H 0AG U.K
2019en
ABI

Abstract

To inform governmental discussions on the nature of a revised Strategic Plan for Biodiversity of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), we reviewed the relevant literature and assessed the framing of the 20 Aichi Biodiversity Targets in the current strategic plan. We asked international experts from nongovernmental organizations, academia, government agencies, international organizations, research institutes, and the CBD to score the Aichi Targets and their constituent elements against a set of specific, measurable, ambitious, realistic, unambiguous, scalable, and comprehensive criteria (SMART based, excluding time bound because all targets are bound to 2015 or 2020). We then investigated the relationship between these expert scores and reported progress toward the target elements by using the findings from 2 global progress assessments (Global Biodiversity Outlook and the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services). We analyzed the data with ordinal logistic regressions. We found significant positive relationships (p < 0.05) between progress and the extent to which the target elements were perceived to be measurable, realistic, unambiguous, and scalable. There was some evidence of a relationship between progress and specificity of the target elements, but no relationship between progress and ambition. We are the first to show associations between progress and the extent to which the Aichi Targets meet certain SMART criteria. As negotiations around the post-2020 biodiversity framework proceed, decision makers should strive to ensure that new or revised targets are effectively structured and clearly worded to allow the translation of targets into actionable policies that can be successfully implemented nationally, regionally, and globally.

Identifiers

Citations and references

Cited by 20 references