G7-Elmau-Progress-Report-2015-Biodiversity-A-vital-foundation-for-sustainable-development

18 G7 ELMAU PROGRESS REPORTAs regards the reporting on biodiversity-related aid, the CRS includes activity-level data on both commitments anddisbursements. Yet, the presentation of ODA statistics has been to date typically based on commitment data. Rio Markersare purpose-based and seek information on the donors’ policy objectives or intentions and can therefore be best assessedat the design stage of projects. Rio Markers track policy objectives, rather than tracking and verifying that objectives have beenmet. The presentation of statistics on Rio Markers based on disbursements is a subject for debate among OECD members.Source: OECD (2014)Box 3.2 International biodiversity financing: Data reported to the Conventionon Biological Diversity (CBD)In 2012 and 2014, the Preliminary Reporting Framework was used for providing data on resource mobilization accordingto the following indicators:a) data, in monetary units, on flows of financial resources for biodiversity from developed to developing countries;b) data, in monetary units, on financial resources available for biodiversity;c) information on the steps countries are taking to implement the strategy for resource mobilization; andd) information (both qualitative and quantitative, including in monetary terms) on the role of specific initiatives,including those relating to technical cooperation, and innovative finance mechanisms.Data provided for the 2006–2010 period was intended to be used for the calculation of a baseline, whereas data providedafter 2010 was intended to be used to monitor progress.Direct vs. indirect fundingFunding for biodiversity includes not only funding for direct actions to protect biodiversity but also funding related toactions across different sectors (e.g., agriculture, forestry, tourism) to promote biodiversity-friendly initiatives that haveother primary purposes (e.g., ecosystem-based approaches to climate-change mitigation and adaptation), where a widerrange of funding sources is typical. The reporting framework distinguishes between two general types of biodiversityfunding: funding related to activities that are intended to directly affect biodiversity, and activities that focus on otherissues but that have an indirect positive effect on biodiversity.A Revised Financial Reporting Framework was adopted in October 2014 and is expected to be used for reporting byDecember 31, 2015. The revised framework is intended for use by Parties to the CBD for providing baseline informationand reporting on their contribution to reach the global financial targets, under Aichi Biodiversity Target 20, as adoptedby the Conference of the Parties (COP) to the Convention at its 12th meeting, in accordance with Article 20.Source: UNEP (2012, 2014a)3.2 OverviewSome G7 countries have already more than doubled theircontributions, which is in line with decisions on resourcemobilization under the CBD. Overall, the G7 countrieshave shown relatively stable financial contributions for biodiversityin developing countries, reflecting their strongcommitment to slowing the loss of biodiversity, even inturbulent times of a financial crisis and its aftermath.Bilateral data shows a commitment to mainstreaming biodiversityinto other development objectives, including povertyreduction, as reflected in the considerable amountsof indirect contributions. G7 countries are an importantpillar of financing biodiversity through official developmentassistance (ODA): Almost 50 percent of all bilateralcommitments for biodiversity aid reported in 2012 waspledged directly by the G7, excluding funding by France,Germany, Italy and the UK to EU institutions.