14 March 2017
IPBES-5 Focuses on Budget Shortfalls for Pending Assessments
Photo by IISD/ENB | Sean Wu
story highlights

The meeting adopted decisions on capacity building, policy support tools and methodologies, development of a second work programme, indigenous and local knowledge (ILK), the scoping report for a thematic assessment on the sustainable use of wild species, and review of the Platform, among others.

Due to insufficient pledges to the Platform’s Voluntary Trust Fund, delegates ultimately had to adopt a budget that does not allow for the initiation of any pending assessments.

10 March 2017: Discussions at the fifth session of the Plenary of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES-5) were dominated by issues related to the budget and resulting tensions regarding whether three pending assessments in the Platform’s first work programme could be initiated, and in what order they should be initiated if funds are insufficient to initiate all three.

IPBES-5 convened from 7-10 March 2017 in Bonn, Germany. It was preceded by the IPBES-5 Stakeholder Day on 6 March 2017. More than 460 participants attended the meeting representing IPBES member and non-member governments, UN agencies and convention secretariats, intergovernmental and nongovernmental organizations, indigenous peoples and local communities (IPLCs) and stakeholder groups.

The meeting adopted ten decisions on: capacity building; policy support tools and methodologies; development of a second work programme; indigenous and local knowledge (ILK); the scoping report for a thematic assessment on the sustainable use of wild species; enhanced participation of the European Union (EU) in IPBES Plenary sessions; review of the Platform; knowledge and data; assessments; and the budget.

Due to insufficient pledges to the Platform’s Voluntary Trust Fund, delegates ultimately had to adopt a budget that does not allow for the initiation of any pending assessments to reduce the risk of incurring a budget shortfall in 2018, and allows for the Secretariat to proceed in “survival mode.” While some delegates expressed their frustration about the delay in initiating these assessments, others suggested that the workload of ongoing assessments was already exceeding acceptable limits, noting that the first IPBES work programme was overly ambitious. The decision not to initiate pending assessments also affected discussions on development of a second work programme and the review of the Platform because many delegates saw these to be linked to the timely completion of the first work programme. Some delegates highlighted that IPBES-5 nonetheless adopted important decisions, including, on capacity building and the general approach to the inclusion of ILK in all of IPBES’s functions. [IISDRS coverage of IPBES-5]

related posts