We encourage you to republish this article online and in print, it’s free under our creative commons attribution license, but please follow some simple guidelines:
  1. You have to credit our authors.
  2. You have to credit SciDev.Net — where possible include our logo with a link back to the original article.
  3. You can simply run the first few lines of the article and then add: “Read the full article on SciDev.Net” containing a link back to the original article.
  4. If you want to also take images published in this story you will need to confirm with the original source if you're licensed to use them.
  5. The easiest way to get the article on your site is to embed the code below.
For more information view our media page and republishing guidelines.

The full article is available here as HTML.

Press Ctrl-C to copy

[BUENOS AIRES] Knowledge generation and capacity building should get a bigger portion of the budget of the major international organisation on biodiversity, says a paper.

The Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) is often compared to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

But unlike the IPCC, which mainly conducts assessments for policymakers, IPBES has additional aims, yet these get less than a third of its allocated budget, says the paper in this month’s edition of Trends in Ecology & Evolution.

“Climate functioning is reasonably well understood, unlike the biodiversity problem, which includes huge knowledge gaps.”

Jorge Soberón

Jorge Soberón, a Mexican researcher and one of the paper’s authors, thinks increasing local capacities to carry out biodiversity assessments would be more useful for preventing biodiversity loss than providing national politicians with the results of general studies.

“The assessment functions at the scale to which IPBES can organise the work — global or regional at best — are not that useful beyond their academic interest,” says Soberón, a researcher at the University of Kansas, United States, and an advisor to the National Commission for Knowledge and Biodiversity Use in Mexico.
IPBES also has a much more complex task than the IPCC, says Soberón.

Climate functioning is reasonably well understood, unlike the biodiversity problem, which includes huge knowledge gaps, [such as] how many animal species are there or how they interact with each other,” he says.

But Sandra Díaz, an Argentinean researcher who is on IPBES’s panel of experts, says the distinction between the amount allocated to each area in the organisation’s budget does not imply that more resources are exclusively used for assessments.

“IPBES’s functions cannot be separated: much [of the budget] that goes for assessment is used for capacity building too, and vice versa,” she says.

This is because assessment and capacity building go hand to hand, so one cannot be done without the other, Díaz adds.

But Soberón maintains the two budget lines should be separated.

“Capacity building is not about [doing assessments] but about general capacities to develop science and link that to decision making at a local and national level,” he says.

> Link to paper abstract in Trends in Ecology & Evolution


Trends in Ecology & Evolution doi: 10.1016/j.tree.2014.08.004 (2014)