National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs) are key national policy instruments for planning and implementing the Convention on Biological Diversity and its decisions, optimally prepared in an integrated, multi-sectoral process underpinned by broad participation by stakeholders and rights and knowledge holders.
They are a key component of the planning, monitoring, reporting and review mechanisms of the KM-GBF and document how a country intends to fulfil commitments made to the CBD. They also include action or implementation plans, along with finance and capacity development plans. Tools and guidance are available to support the NBSAP process (Box 2.1). CBD COP Decision 15/6 requested Parties to revise and update their NBSAPs, including national targets, to align with the KM-GBF. They should also encompass all goals and targets, by CBD COP 16 in 2024. Updating the NBSAPs marks one of the first steps in the process to achieve the KM-GBF 2030 targets and 2050 goals (Fig. 5.1).
Source: Authors' own elaboration.
Where possible, NBSAPs are formally adopted as policy or within the legal or administrative framework of countries, and integrated with “national sustainable development plans, national development plans, poverty reduction strategies, and other relevant national sectoral and cross-sectoral plans, in line with national circumstances and priorities” (CBD COP Decision 15/6). For effective restoration implementation to occur, however, national policies must be translated and applied at the sub-national, local and even project scales. Please also refer to Sections 3.4 and 6.
In accordance with Annex I of CBD COP Decision 15/6, the CBD provides tools and guidance to assist countries to update NBSAPs and accelerate national efforts towards meeting goals and targets of the KM-GBF. These include:
Restoration targets should be set and planned as part of the overall NBSAP process. Actions to reach Target 2 should consider all factors for implementation identified in Section C of the KM-GBF (CBD 2024, Annex C). Focusing on the contributions of biodiversity and ecosystem services, countries must define clear, measurable actions; gather resources; forge partnerships; and build capacity for achieving concrete outcomes of restoration activities (FAO, 2023). Planners should take advantage of the stakeholder and rights and knowledge holder engagement process with Indigenous Peoples, as included in section C of the KM-GBF. They should also collaborate with teams working on other targets to mainstream restoration into all sectors (see Section 5.3 below). Some countries are creating participatory intersectoral spaces to encourage and support this process.
Restoration activities should be integrated into national finance and capacity development plans.
Key to the NBSAP process is the development of a finance plan or similar instrument, including a budget for developing or revising the NBSAP and a budget to carry out the priority actions identified in the strategy (CBD COP Decision 15/7).
In addition, a capacity development plan is needed to ensure that the organizational and technical skills needed to develop and implement the NBSAP are available, recognizing the role of multi-country regional organizations in developing capacity and science-technical cooperation (see Box 11 in KM-GBF EAS technical support guidance). In addition to training, capacity development must include provision of the tools and guidance needed to effectively carry out NBSAPs, whether those are developed at the national or global levels. This includes tools and guidance that recognize and incorporate Indigenous Peoples’ knowledge systems and territorial management practices, ensuring that restoration efforts are culturally appropriate and effective.
The enabling factors, challenges, and lessons learned from “The Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011–2020 and its Aichi Biodiversity Targets” can help countries develop new, achievable national targets, including for restoration, to include in their updated NBSAPs. Experts should review past NBSAPs and report what was achieved, what was not, and why. For Target 2, national targets and NBSAPs can be revised primarily from Aichi Biodiversity Target 15, but also from Aichi Targets 5, 14 and others. Countries may also draw from experiences planning for the Bonn Challenge, AFR100, REDD+, LDN, or other related national commitments (Fig. 5.2, Section 4). Optimally, current restoration commitments in other MEAs are included and counted toward KM-GBF Target 2 commitments.
Source: Authors' own elaboration
Well coordinated NBSAPs require the recognition of linkages between different targets (Fig. 5.3), increasing efficiency and outcomes and allowing for the balance of trade-offs, such as those between the ecological objectives of Target 2 and the need to deliver production and ecosystem services to meet the needs of people in Targets 10 and 11. NBSAPs also contribute to the overarching goals of the KM-GBF, especially Goal A about maintaining, enhancing, and restoring natural ecosystems; reducing extinctions; and maintaining genetic diversity, and Goal B on nature’s contributions to people. To date, most NBSAPs have focused on conservation measures, such as increasing national systems of protected and conserved areas, avoiding or minimizing destruction or degradation of habitats by reducing drivers of degradation, and reducing pressures on threatened species. However, updating and revising the NBSAPs provides an opportunity to integrate restoration across the KM-GBF. For example, integrating effective ecosystem restoration activities of Target 2 with the conservation and management of protected and conserved areas, OECMs, and Indigenous Territories in Target 3 can reduce the risk of extinction of threatened species as highlighted in Target 4.
All KM-GBF targets are interdependent and need concrete actions, policies and programmes to meet national and global goals and priorities.
© Jorge Watanabe
© FAO
Source: Authors' own elaboration.
Target 2 and two other area-based targets (Targets 1 for spatial planning and Target 3 for protected and conserved areas, OECMs and Indigenous Territories) emphasize landscape, watershed and seascape approaches and principles, guiding actions to prevent biodiversity loss and to protect, restore and manage natural and production ecosystems. Effective ecosystem restoration will be achieved through activities contributing to all three targets. Indeed, the landscape, watershed or seascape context is a key consideration both for the assessment of degradation and for restoration planning (Gann et al., 2019; Nelson et al., 2024). Landscape, watershed and seascape approaches, such as Forest and Landscape Restoration, Multi-habitat Seascape Restoration, Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration, Source-to-sea and Landscape Approach also recognize the multifunctional mix of ecosystems and land use with multiple stakeholders and diverse human-nature interactions.
Importantly, the interdependence of the needs of nature and people must be elevated. Target 2 should be seen as strongly connected to Target 11, which aims to restore, maintain and enhance nature's contributions to people, and is essential to achieving sustainable livelihoods and poverty eradication (CBD, 2024). The complementarity of the headline indicators for Target 2 (area under restoration) and Target 11 (services provided by ecosystems) are particularly important to consider when planning, implementing and monitoring restoration. While not all restoration projects or programmes will yield improvements in all key outcome areas, effective restoration delivered through Target 2 can contribute to a diversity of goals and commitments simultaneously, and yield many benefits for both people and nature. These benefits flow to both natural ecosystems and production landscapes, underpinning the health and prosperity of each country individually and all countries collectively. Finally, national frameworks can and should guide planning and action at the subnational or local level where restoration functionally takes place, moving from commitment to implementation of effective ecosystem restoration.
Multiple stakeholder and rights and knowledge holder groups are optimally involved through broad, active participation in developing and setting national targets and in the preparation of NBSAPs. When working with Indigenous Peoples, it is pivotal to respect their right to free, prior and informed consent (Box 5.2). Because of the large number of potential participants, subnational and local stakeholders and rights and knowledge holders may be represented by groups at the national level, where they can provide key inputs into the process. The broader the stakeholder and rightsholder participation and buy-in, the more likely restoration will be sustainably supported.
One of the key functions of a broad, active consultation is to ensure the safeguarding of both nature and people, respecting their rights and knowledge and their active participation and leadership in restoration initiatives.
The KM-GBF recognizes the role of Indigenous Peoples as custodians of biodiversity and key partners in the protection of the environment. Indigenous Peoples possess individual, collective and customary rights, including rights over their lands, territories and natural resources. Their knowledge and governance systems are integral to effective biodiversity conservation and restoration. Additionally, their connection with the environment, based on relations of mutual respect and dignity, form part of their cosmogonic and spiritual values.
Section C of the KM-GBF encourages member states to ensure the full and effective participation of Indigenous Peoples in decision-making, and acknowledges the contributions of Indigenous Peoples to all targets.
Despite covering less than a quarter of the world’s land surface, Indigenous Peoples’ territories contain much of the world’s remaining biodiversity and intact landscapes (Garnett et al., 2018; Fa et al., 2020). Furthermore, over one-third of the world’s irrecoverable carbon is found within Indigenous Peoples’ territories (Noon et al., 2021). Research shows that by being holistic, Indigenous Peoples' food systems are key to preserving and restoring the biodiversity of the unique ecosystems they inhabit and contain pivotal knowledge to restore degraded ecosystems, which is crucial for achieving global environmental and climate change goals (FAO, 2021). generating their food without endangering the environment. Their knowledge is unique and fundamental to achieve the environmental and climate change goals and targets.
In the case of the KM-GBF Target 2, any restoration activity must recognize the benefits of involving Indigenous Peoples, including through Indigenous-led initiatives and rights-based approaches. Inclusive approaches must identify barriers to Indigenous Peoples’ participation, including land tenure issues. Engagement with Indigenous Peoples must include obtaining their free, prior and informed consent; informing relevant customary authorities; and respecting their customary and collective rights, territorial management practices and land tenure systems. Indigenous Peoples are holders of their knowledge and decide what they want to share (UNDRIP, 2007).
One example of Indigenous-led and rights-based approaches to support the implementation of Target 2 is the Indigenous Peoples' biocentric restoration approach. It was developed by Indigenous Peoples’ leaders and the FAO Indigenous Peoples, and defined as an alternative way of restoring degraded ecosystems. It places Indigenous Peoples’ cosmogony, knowledge, culture, beliefs and territorial management practices at the centre, with the main aim of re-establishing the forgotten memory of the territory.
From a biocentric perspective, Indigenous Peoples place their cosmogony and belief systems, the environment, and biodiversity at the centre of their restoration practices, in both natural and semi-natural ecosystems. They respect nature independent of the uses that humans derive from it. This follows a biocentric logic, meaning that rivers, lakes and forests have rights to existence that are not necessarily linked to their utilitarian value. Nature is often considered sacred and as a living entity that is inseparable from society. The approach recognizes the collective and customary rights of Indigenous Peoples and bases restoration on their collective work. It also involves communities and households in conservation and restoration activities, while considering all living beings in the ecosystem, as well as their relations and interactions with both biotic and abiotic elements.
As described in Section C of the KM-GBF (Annex C) a whole-of-government and whole-of-society approach is required (see Case Study 5.1), including ensuring considerations of human rights and the rights of Indigenous Peoples, gender equality and empowerment of women and girls, and the inclusion of youth and other underrepresented groups. In addition, while NBSAP planning takes place at the national level, plans ultimately must be operationalized to reflect the conditions, challenges and opportunities at the local level and prioritize the inclusion of Indigenous Peoples by recognizing their unique connection to the land and their role in biodiversity conservation and restoration.
a whole of government approach through multi-stakeholder process
Peru is one of the world’s most megadiverse countries, supporting extraordinary biodiversity across its many ecosystems, including a wealth of species of flora and fauna as well as remarkable genetic diversity. This natural capital supports sustainability within and beyond Peru including the well-being of its people, who depend on ecosystem services for the provision of food, water and other essential resources. Peru hosts the second highest share of the Amazon, placing forest conservation at the centre of the biodiversity and climate change agenda. The escalating degradation of ecosystems and loss of biodiversity, worsened by climate change, has heightened the urgency for ecosystem restoration in Peru. This destructive cycle begins with the conversion of pristine ecosystems into unsustainable farmland leading to habitat loss, fragmentation and the impoverishment of ecosystem functions.
Restoring the estimated 19.3 million hectares of degraded land (MINAM, 2022) is therefore crucial for recovering ecosystem functions across the agricultural-forest continuum. Successful restoration will yield significant biodiversity and conservation benefits by reducing pressure on natural habitats and bolstering vital ecosystem services. Achieving this ambitious goal demands a "whole-of-government" approach. Despite progress in developing restoration policies and monitoring tools, such as the National Strategy for Restoration of Ecosystems and Degraded Forest Lands (ProREST) and the National Restoration Gap, implementation on the ground remains hindered by fragmented responsibilities across environmental, forestry, and agricultural sectors, complicating collaboration at the subnational level.To address this challenge the Peruvian government needs to expand its restoration ambitions and leverage synergies across these sectors, build strong political will and collaboration across relevant ministries to restore both forested and agricultural lands.
Cross sectorial initiatives such as the platform “Grupo de Trabajo Multiactor de Restauración”, emerge as an effective transformative practice to convene and foster collaboration and alignment among sectors. By convening and fostering collaboration, these platforms establish the foundation for an integrated governance framework. This should be based on a common vision that reflects consensus on national priorities, considering the diversity of ecosystems, sectors and actors involved. This approach can effectively support the updating of Peru’s NBSAP and of National Development Plan in an innovative way that could also be extended and applied to other targets.
Note: This case study was prepared by Valentina Robiglio, V.Robiglio@cifor-icraf.org, Rocio Vasquez, R.Vasquez@cifor-icraf.org
Because of the potential broad geographic and social effects of restoration, key stakeholder and rights and knowledge holder groups may include:
© FAO
© FAO
Required citation:
FAO, SCBD & SER. 2024. Delivering restoration outcomes for biodiversity and human well-being – Resource guide to Target 2 of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework. Rome, Montreal, Canada and Washington, DC. https://doi.org/10.4060/cd2925en
The designations employed and the presentation of material in this information product do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), the Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity (SCBD) or Society for Ecological Restoration (SER) concerning the legal or development status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The mention of specific companies or products of manufacturers, whether or not these have been patented, does not imply that these have been endorsed or recommended by FAO, SCBD or SER in preference to others of a similar nature that are not mentioned.
ISBN 978-92-5-139246-1 [FAO]
© FAO, SCBD and SER, 2024
Some rights reserved. This work is made available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 IGO licence (CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO; https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/igo/legalcode).
Under the terms of this licence, this work may be copied, redistributed and adapted for non-commercial purposes, provided that the work is appropriately cited. In any use of this work, there should be no suggestion that FAO, SCBD or SER endorses any specific organization, products or services. The use of the FAO, SCBD and SER logo is not permitted. If the work is adapted, then it must be licensed under the same or equivalent Creative Commons license. If a translation of this work is created, it must include the following disclaimer along with the required citation: “This translation was not created by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), the Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity (SCBD) nor Society for Ecological Restoration (SER). FAO,SCBD and SER are not responsible for the content or accuracy of this translation. The original English edition shall be the authoritative edition.”
Disputes arising under the licence that cannot be settled amicably will be resolved by mediation and arbitration as described in Article 8 of the licence except as otherwise provided herein. The applicable mediation rules will be the mediation rules of the World Intellectual Property Organization http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/mediation/rules and any arbitration will be in accordance with the Arbitration Rules of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL).
Requests for commercial use should be submitted via: www.fao.org/contact-us/licence-request and publications@cbd.int and info@ser.org. Queries regarding rights and licensing should be submitted to: copyright@fao.org, publications@cbd.int and info@ser.org.
Cover photographs: ©Unsplash/Birger Strahl; ©Unsplash/Curioso Photography ©Unsplash/Qui Nguyen ©Pexels/Quang Nguyen