Governments, key sectors and stakeholders at all levels have taken steps to achieve or have implemented plans for sustainable production and consumption, keeping the impacts of use of natural resources, including habitats, on migratory species well within safe ecological limits to promote the favourable conservation status of migratory species and maintain the quality, integrity, resilience, and ecological connectivity of their habitats and migration routes.
Note: Where there is uncertainty about what constitutes a “safe ecological limit” in a given case, a precautionary approach should be taken.
This target appears to envisage a sequence of three linked results, as follows:
- Governments and others implement plans or take other steps to achieve sustainable production and consumption.
- Governments and others keep natural resource use impacts on migratory species well within safe ecological limits.
- Keeping impacts within safe limits leads to favourable conservation status and integrity etc of migratory species, habitats and migration routes.
The first of these results involves certain events occurring, namely the taking of steps/the implementation of plans. In principle this is a measurable aspect, but it is a process rather than an outcome. It does not depend on being able to define “sustainable production and consumption”, since that is a matter left to the steps and plans concerned.
The second and third results may not need to involve a change, if impacts are within safe limits and conservation status etc is favourable at the outset. If impacts are not within safe limits and conservation status etc is unfavourable, then this would be expected to change. Assessing achievement of these latter two results depends on being able to define, in a given context:
- The impacts of use of natural resources, including habitats, on migratory species.
- Safe ecological limits for the impacts described above.
- Favourable conservation status of migratory species (this needs data on population dynamics/distribution etc for the species concerned).
- Quality, integrity, resilience, and ecological connectivity of the habitats and migration routes used by migratory species.
A - Outreach, promotion and uptake of the Plan
To be completed with sections of the Communication Strategy most relevant to the target once the Strategy is finalized
B - The delivery framework
- CMS COP Resolution 11.30 (2014) on Management of Marine Debris
- Resolution 11.16
- Intergovernmental Task Force to Address Illegal Killing, Taking and Trade of Migratory Birds
- Resolution 11.26 Programme of Work on Climate Change and Migratory Species
- Resolution 10.19 Migratory Species Conservation in the Light of Climate Change
- ASCOBANS Conservation Plan for the Harbour Porpoise population in the Western Baltic, the Belt Sea and the Kattegat
- Resolution 10.28 (2011) on the Saker Falcon
- Resolution 10.3- The Role ofEcological Networks in the Conservation of Migratory Species
- Resolution 11.25- Advancing Ecological Networks to address the Needs of Migratory Species
C - Key partnerships and other supporting delivery frameworks
D - Capacity development
E - Resourcing for biodiversity (including human, technical and financial resources)
F - Monitoring and evaluation, including indicators, milestones and feedback to the sub-targets, as well as headline measures of success by which overall success of the SPMS may be judged
See separate Indicator Factsheets document
G - Reporting on and review of progress at national level and by governing bodies such as the CMS COP