The summary of 16th APBON Web seminar“GEOBON Strategy”
1.

Date and time
12th April, 10AM-11AM (JST)2.

PlaceWebex meeting room (Online)

3.

Participants
18 people from 11 countries (2 speakers, 15 participants, 1 secretariat)

4.

AgendaModerator: Dr. Alice Hughes
Presentation 1: “GEOBON Strategy” by Dr. Maria Cecilia Londono
Presentation 2: “Bringing to life a global biodiversity observing system.” by Prof. Andrew Gonzalez

5.

Q and A session- What are the main actions in the short term to act and generate the data for the KunmingMontreal Global Biodiversity Framework (KMGBF)?
- How do we make use of the resources we have and act to mobilize the kind of data we need todevelop these indicators?
Historically, GEOBON has been about building capacity and developing a conceptual framework
for monitoring. What we have to do is pivot now, to be outward facing. It means engaging withpartners and offering services. One concept is the idea of “Knowledge-to-Action Hubs”. This is atrendy notion that many organizations are implementing because everybody is realizing that theonly way to support change is through engagement and trust building around the co-design ofimplementation. The indicators of “Knowledge-to-Action Hubs” are designed based on the parties’needs. There is a pull from the CBD for us to respond to the knowledge workflows.
The monitoring framework of the KMGBF is a big opportunity for us to capitalize on all that wehave been doing. The gap we are trying to fill is between the data and the NBSAPs. We should focus
on what is needed at the different countries and the different regions.

1 / 5

- Would it be able to develop partnerships between GEOBON and GEF to streamline funding tomobilize data and build capacity for where we urgently need to understand change?
I had a meeting with the IUCN Species Survival Commission. They are now developing a new initiative in China, but it is illegible to GEFfunding. They realized that the Red List just is not providing the resolution of data needed.

The key is to connect the people in the countries that could access those funds. Then they
understand the need of having a monitoring system, global observation, and observing system inplace. That is the challenge.
The angle of GEF into countries and then from countries back to GEOBON is the only route as
I talked with the CBD secretariat. Also, the amount of money is not enough either. Nonetheless, ifwe start to demonstrate capacity, even with modest means, then that could provide somemomentum.
Regarding the IUCN Red List, the idea that mapping the red list criteria to EBV is underconsideration. However, that would have to happen very fast and require resources. We can start tothink about some temporal sensitivity across the frameworks.
- What could be the motivation for local researchers to survey to contribute to global monitoring?
Is there any case, campaign or strategy for involving local researchers?
Network of the forest researchers is very tight. However, for marine, each of the marine stations has a kind of long-term data but
observes different things by their interests in Japan.

Many research institutions do not recognize the voluntary collective effort as a valuable
contribution to society. However, contributing to the global database could make opportunities forresearch, technology development, training, and publications that emerged from that. We aremoving away from a single laboratory approach to research to a much greater systematic effort.
I think I am excited to be a part of the global system.
Knowing what individual members can bring to the network is important. It could be themotivation that to know their experience is valuable and something new for others and they have aspace where they can confident that their opinion is reflected.
People lose their way chasing these metrics, but we all got into ecology because we arefascinated by the natural world. We need to get back to reawakening and facilitating the ability toindulge the passion.

2 / 5

- If there is any chance, we can start with available information and test the initiative by GEOBON
as a demonstration and identify the gap at the regional level.
For Asia Pacific, we have a comprehensive network such as APBON and LTER. We can show our initial results to the global community to
get more budget and partnership to fill the gap. Considering Asian culture, it is difficult to work and chat without project or action hubs.

It could be something GEOBON and APBON could work together on. What is the next step of
how APBON could become a flagship region for the GBioS’s prototype?
The next step is to collect the information which is related to members’ daily scientific research.
Then try to see what we have/do not have in the AP region as the activities, data, or knowledge. I
hope this could contribute to GBioS and IPBES regional assessments as well. Tight linkage with LTER
networks and Flux networks will be a key to gathering the information as well.
People lose their way chasing these metrics, but we all got into ecology because we arefascinated by the natural world. We need to get back to reawakening and facilitating the ability toindulge the passion.
- How can we work more effectively with AOGEOSS to have that complementary data between thebiodiversity data itself and the geospatial data?
The Essential Biodiversity Variables rely on both geospatial biodiversity data, but also complimentary satellite imagery. If we can work
well, it provides a truly useful lesson for the greater good of GEOBON as to how those two groups can work in partnership to leverage
those complementary types of data.

We should fully use the scheme of the GEO. Historically, APBON has a tight linkage with theGEOSS Asia Pacific symposium, and it is a part of the AOGEO task force. We contribute to theAOGEO symposium every year and we can use the occasion as a networking. The supersite conceptthat tries to link satellite remote sensing and in-situ observation could be a good example forcollaboration as well.
There is a network called GERI which stands for Global Ecosystem Research Infrastructure. It isan integrated network of site-based research infrastructures from multiple continents. We just needto make sure that networks complement each other rather than overlapping, especially if we'relooking at similar funding mechanisms.
Ensuring clear communication between all factions is important.

3 / 5

- Regarding the “Knowledge to action hubs”, what would be the scope of the partnership?
It seems very broad.

The needs of the multiple users should be addressed. Guiding knowledge to action on
monitoring, we need to take it to the one-one scale through local organizations where things
happen on the ground. For Colombian BON, the EBVs has used by local communities. It has beensucceeding because local communities have felt that now they are more in power, having data on
biodiversity and having indicators about their rights and diversity there.
Fundamentally, it is a commitment to an action outcome. It could potentially be a very broad
partnership network and it depends a lot on the entity that's being assessed. In the case of EBV, isapplied in situ. We have examples in Canada, working with First Nations who are engaging with anEBV process and finding it very useful to respond to the NBSAP process. Another example would bethe engagement with the UN SEEA process.
- Who can access the financial facility?
Identifying the needs is important and it allows us to create a conversation around funding.
- What is GEOBON’s strategy to work closely with the parties in preparing the NBSAPs in terms ofindicators?
Regarding the NBSAPs revision, the amount of the GEF fund is small for what we need to do forthe monitoring. We need to work together, and it is a kind of opportunity for GEOBON to alignconcepts and tools and all these ideas at the national level.
- What APBON could prepare by the All-Hands Meeting?
- How can we use the meeting to propel us forward under the GBF?
Valuable information to other participants could be- How does APBON work together as a regional group? (e.g., Introduction of ASEAN clearing
house mechanism)- What are the challenges/opportunities?
-State of playe.g., What does APBON have?
Where does APBON want to be?
Can APBON drive that through the idea of BON-based monitoring?
What APBON can do on a five years timeline? (If you cannot do that today, what ismissing?)
This kind of comprehensive information from the APBON to the GEO community is quite

important for the ministerial summit of GEO(November) and the AOGEO symposium.
4 / 5

5 / 5