cbd-ts-66-en

FOREWORD
Human-driven climate change is becoming an increasingly important cause
of biodiversity loss and degradation of ecosystem services. With the relatively
limited action to date to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, increasing attention has
been recently given to additional options that might lessen the severity of future
impacts, through geoengineering. There is a rapidly growing scientific literature
on this topic, with recent overview reports published by, for example, the Royal
Society, the US Government Accountability Office., and an Expert Meeting of
the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. However, those documents
did not specifically consider geoengineering from a biodiversity perspective.
The Conference of the Parties (COP) of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) first turned its attention to
geoengineering at its ninth meeting in 2008, in the context of ocean fertilization. The COP then requested Parties
to ensure that ocean fertilization activities do not take place until there is an adequate scientific basis on which to
justify such activities. In response to this request, the Secretariat prepared a synthesis and analysis of the impacts
of ocean fertilization on marine biodiversity, which was published as CBD Technical Series 45.
At its tenth meeting in 2010, geoengineering was considered by the COP more generally. Decision X/33, which
includes a section on climate-related geoengineering, called for studies on the possible impacts of geoengineering
techniques on biodiversity and associated social, economic and cultural considerations, and on gaps in the regulatory
mechanisms for climate-related geoengineering relevant to the CBD.
These studies—published here—were conducted by a highly authorative group of experts, thanks to financial
support from the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, the Government of
Norway and the European Commission. The studies were subject to two rounds of peer review, and then discussed
at the sixteenth meeting of the Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical and Technological Advice (SBSTTA-16),
where they were well-received.
At SBSTTA-16, the Parties to the CBD recognized that there remain significant gaps in the understanding of the
impacts of geoengineering on biodiversity and that there is currently no comprehensive science-based, global,
transparent and effective framework for geoengineering, while also noting the relevance of other treaties and
organizations for filling such gaps.
I hope that the studies will help inform discussions of those involved in these issues, as well as the very many
stakeholders involved in protecting biodiversity.
Braulio Ferreira de Souza Dias
Executive Secretary
Convention on Biological Diversity