Scientists ahead of COP15: “Improvements are urgently needed”
Well implemented marine protected areas, as well as goals and targets for preservation of genetic diversity. That's what the scientists Susa Niirinen and Linda Laikre, who participated in the most recent Baltic Breakfast, hope will come out of the ongoing biodiversity conference in Montreal.
The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) was established 1992 with the goals to conserve biological diversity, sustainable use of its components and fair and equitable sharing of the benefits arising from genetic resources. The convention has been ratified by all UN member states except the USA.
As an implementation framework, the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020 was developed, which includes five strategic goals and 20 more specific so called “Aichi Biodiversity Targets”.
“The targets weren’t met but there has been some progress”, says Susa Niiranen, co-leader of the Human Ocean research team at Stockholm Resilience Centre, together with Robert Blasiak, whom she replaced at the last minute as speaker at the last Baltic Breakfast.
The ocean is specifically addressed in Aichi Target 11 of the strategic plan which states that by 2020, at least 17 percent of terrestrial and inland water and 10 per cent of coastal and marine areas should be preserved. Today, slightly more than 8 percent of the ocean has some form of protection, but only just over 2 percent are fully protected.
“Many of these areas which are highly protected are in very remote regions where we would not have much human influence anyway”, says Susa Niirinen.
One of the expectations on the upcoming UN Biodiversity Conference, COP15 is that it will result in a post-2020 Biodiversity Framework. Since 2018, a large-scale advocacy campaign called “30x30” has been striving for 30 percent of the world’s oceans to be protected by 2030. The first draft of the new framework also includes a target stating that at least 30 percent of land and sea should be conserved.
“Why pushing for 30 percent when the previous targets weren’t met, one may ask”, says Susa Niirinen. “There really is an urgency of action. The stressors on our oceans are not decreasing, it’s the opposite. It’s also clear now that Marine Protected Areas, MPAs, provide conservation benefits. But it is also increasingly promoted that MPAs can be an ocean-based solution to mitigate climate change.”
The science behind the numbers
Is there then science to support a 30 percent target, or is “30x30" just a catchy slogan? A meta-analysis from 2009 of 33 studies with fisheries focus concluded that to benefit fisheries, approximately 30 percent of the ocean is a reasonable area to preserve. A meta-analysis from 2014 of 144 studies with a broader scope concluding that 37 percent of the oceans would be an optimal area to preserve.
More recently, Robert Blasiak together with colleagues from several research institutions around the world did a systematic review of 22,403 publications. The researchers concluded that MPA:s really do have clear climate benefits, as well as other social and ecological benefits. However, these benefits are clearly dependant of the level of protection provided.
“If the MPAs are fully protected or highly protected you really get these full range of benefits, but if they are not, the benefits are really not there”, explains Susa Niirinen.
The conclusion of the study is that the protection level should be prioritized – there is a risk that a 30 percent target leads to a lot of weekly implemented MPAs with limited benefits. The researchers also concluded that governance is a fundamental factor behind successful MPAs.
“You should have diverse stakeholder groups that are consulted throughout the planning and implementation phases to get legitimacy”, says Susa Niirinen, “and there is a considerable scope to expand the consideration and recognition of MPAs in national climate strategies”.
Read the study "Ocean conservation boosts climate change mitigation and adaptation"
The importance of genetic diversity
Linda Laikre, Professor in population genetics at the Department of Zoology, Stockholm University, will be attending the conference in Montreal. Together with colleagues in The Coalition for Conservation Genetics she is working for strengthen the protection of genetic diversity, by including it in the CBG.
“Most people when they think about species diversity and ecosystems”, she says. “This is very important and we know that when species go extinct this could have effect on the whole ecosystem. But in additional to these levels, we also have variation within species – genetic diversity.”
This diversity originates from the DNA level, where a specific gene can occur in different variants, which builds up into genetic variation within populations and between populations. Variations between populations often reflects adaptations to local environmental conditions. An example from the Baltic Sea is the herring, whose sight has been genetically adapted to the turbid water.
“This variation is actually the key for evolution”, says Linda Laikre. “When a specific genetically distinct population goes extinct this can have the same effect as when we lose entire species. It can affect other species and ecosystems. So, loss of genetic diversity is a large problem.”
Decades of genetic conservation research have shown that populations with high genetic diversity, in general have higher adaptive capacity and higher resilience to pressures, than low diversity populations. For example, kelp forests with high genetic diversity have shown to be better at surviving heat waves and corals with high genetic diversity have been shown to better adapt to warmer ocean temperatures.
Mentioned in the convention – but targets are lacking
The UN Convention on Biological Diversity recognises genetic diversity as one of three levels of biodiversity (along with ecosystems and species). However, when it comes to implementation, genetic diversity has long lagged behind, tells Linda Laikre.
“Not much has been done. We have not had any targets or ways to monitor this diversity. This has been pointed out repeatedly by scientist and we, conservation geneticists, now feel that improvements are urgently needed, and we hope there’s a chance for improvement at COP15.”
Several factors can result in loss of genetic diversity, for example if genetically distinct populations are lost and if population sizes are reduced. But also human induced harvest, like fisheries, can contribute if the individuals that are removed have specific genetic compositions, as can the introduction alien populations in nature.
To keep track of these processes, The Coalition for Conservation Genetics suggests three different indicators to be adopted at COP15, one of which is now suggested to be included in monitoring framework as a headline indicator stating that the proportion of species within an effective population size should be above 500.
“This is a scientific well-established rule of thumb”, explains Linda Laikre. “When the effective population size is 500 and above, we have a potential for long-term survival.”
The second indicator is focused on the proportion of populations maintained within species and the third one includes the use of DNA-based monitoring methods, something that is already being implemented in Sweden by agencies and universities in cooperation.
“One of the species in focus is the herring in the Baltic Sea”, says Linda Laikre. “Managers want to find out how many genetically distinct spawning populations we have along the coast. Similar work is also ongoing on cod, eelgrass, bladderwrack, brown trout and salmon.”
A strong goal and target for genetic diversity along with the suggested indicators is what Linda Laikre hopes for as an outcome of the COP15.
“Finally, we have some wording on the table that is a large improvement from before, and that is largely I would say because of the work we conservation geneticists have been doing over the past two years. But we haven’t seen the final outcome yet…”
Read more about Coalition for Conservation Genetics
Text: Lisa Bergqvist
See the full seminar
Last updated: December 8, 2022
Source: Östersjöcentrum