Mexico: capacities for conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity
Global
Environment
Facility
México
Conabio
UNDP
Mexico:
capacities for conservation and
sustainable use of biodiversity
National Commission for the Knowledge and Use of Biodiversity
United Nations Development Programme
Mexico:
capacities for conservation and
sustainable use of biodiversity
Global
Environment
Facility
Project coordination: Irene Pisanty
Assistants: Rafael Pompa, Alejandra Martínez Berdeja,
Elizeth Escamilla
General coordination
Conabio: UNDP: Patricia Koleff, Tania Urquiza Haas
Verania Chao, Kyoko Bourns, Mariana Díaz
The opinions, analysis and recommendations contained herein do not necessarily
represent the views of the United Nations Development Programme, its Executive
Board or its member states.
This publication presents the results of the project Mexico: capacities for conservation
and sustainable use of biodiversity funded by the Global Environment Facility and
coordinated by the National Commission for the Knowledge and Use of Biodiversity
and the United Nations Development Programme.
Editorial coordination and design: Rosalba Becerra
Proofreading: Gabriela Becerra
Illustrations: Sergio Koleff
Translation: Keith MacMillan
Printing: Offset Rebosán
ISBN: 978-607-7607-34-2
National Commission for the Knowledge and use of Biodiversity
Liga Periférico-Insurgentes Sur 4903, Parques del Pedregal, Tlalpan,
14010 México, D.F.
www.conabio.gob.mx
Citation format
Conabio-UNDP. 2009. Mexico: capacities for conservation and sustainable
use of biodiversity. National Commission for the Knowledge and Use of
Biodiversity and the United Nations Development Programme, Mexico.
Acknowledgements
We thank the following people for their invaluable support in the various
stages of development of this project: Verónica Aguilar, Ariel Álvarez, Pedro
Álvarez Icaza, Clara Balderrama, Hesiquio Benítez, Jaquelina Bravo, Edgar
Castilla, Ana Córdova, Lizardo Cruz, Antonio Díaz de León, Ernesto Enkerlin, Carlos Enríquez, Gloria Espinosa, Cecilia Fernández, Patricia Galindo, Esteban García, Francisco García, Alejandra García-Naranjo, Eduardo
González, Benjamín González Brisuela, David Gutiérrez Carbonell, Andrés
Lira-Noriega, José Luis Gutiérrez Miranda, Diana Hernández, Ricardo
Hernández, Roberto Hernández, Elleli Huerta, Mauricio Limón, Gabriela
López Segurajáuregui, Ariadna Marín, Juan Martínez, María Eugenia Mondragón, Eduardo Morales, Nubia Morales, Elizabeth Moreno, Susana Ocegueda, Marcelo Olivera, Sol Ortiz, Enrique Pérez, Hibraim Pérez, Sylvia Ruiz,
Augusto Segovia, Gabriel Solano, Marcia Tambutti, Martín Vargas, Araceli
Vargas-Mena and Rocío Villalón.
The various workshops benefited enormously from the participation of
many enthusiastic members of the governmental, academic and social sectors.
We extend our deepest gratitude to all of them for finding the time to attend
these exercises, and especially for their valuable contributions which formed
the core of this project. Participants in the Workshop of Preliminary Results
contributed greatly to achieving the goals of this project. For this we are
profoundly grateful to José Sarukhán, Ana Luisa Guzmán, Hesiquio Benítez,
Daniel Piñero, Diana Ponce, Ricardo Hernández, Enrique Provencio,
Jonathan Ryan, Yosu Rodríguez, Israel Saavedra, Karina Santos del Prado
Gasca, Ricardo Juárez Salas, Daniel Sánchez and Adrian Méndez Barrera.
Finally, we extend our appreciation to those who, despite heavy workloads,
found the time to review the various chapters of this work. Their comments
were very enlightening and significantly contributed to improving the material
compiled here. Grateful thanks go to Gonzalo Halffter, Claudia Moreno,
Eduardo Pineda, Antony Challenger, Anna Horvath, Rocío Esquivel, Eduardo
Vega, Eduardo Peters, Enrique Provencio and Ricardo Hernández Murillo for
their support.
Index
Preface
7
Presentation
11
Summary
13
Introduction 15
Assessment of the capacities for knowledge: the National
Biodiversity Information System as a case study 23
Federico Escobar, Patricia Koleff and Matthias Rös
Introduction
Methodology
Main results
Set of estimates
Use of SNIB data
Synopsis: lessons learned
Analysis of the national capacities for in situ conservation Esmeralda G. Urquiza Haas
51
Vision
Methodology
Natural protected areas
Management units for the conservation of wildlife
Payment for environmental services
Voluntary-community conservation areas
Forest Certification
Indicators for the instruments of in situ conservation Véronique Sophie Ávila Foucat,
95
Felipe Ramírez Ruiz de Velasco and Ana Ortiz Monasterio
Scope and vision
Conceptual framework and synopsis of the workshops
Main results
Action plan
Lessons learned and challenges
5
Capacities for public policy implementation Sofía Cortina Segovia and María Zorrilla Ramos
Scope and vision
Federal level
State level
Barriers and threats to national policy implementation
Final considerations
Capacities for conservation in Mexico: final considerations 153
Authors 159
References 161
Acronyms 169
Appendixes 173
Irene Pisanty
6
117
Preface
On analysis of Mexico’s biodiversity, one cannot but be surprised by the wealth of
species and ecosystems as well as the underlying ecological diversity of the country, and multiplicity of expression of cultural diversity that accompanies the natural diversity of the nation. The contrasting view is to note that the biodiversity of
Mexico and of many other parts of the world, particularly during the last six or
seven decades, has been facing serious threats from deforestation, fragmentation of
ecosystems and overexploitation of natural resources. The problem becomes much
more serious when we consider that the conservation of Mexican ecosystems and
biodiversity in the following decades will be largely dependent upon our ability to
feed the population of the country by the mid-century. Against this background,
pessimists claim that all is lost and that nothing has been done to conserve the
remaining natural capital while others, motivated by different intentions, state that
the problem is not that serious and that there will always be a technological solution
to help us solve the dilemma we face.
Like all aspects of the environmental crisis facing societies worldwide since the
mid-twentieth century, attention to the loss of biodiversity demands a multidisciplinary vision, because the origins of the problem are multidimensional. Biodiversity
loss, and its consequences, go unnoticed by the large sections of society that have
no direct relationship with ecosystems and the services they provide (such as food,
water capture, soil conservation and fertility, etc.). As a consequence, they do not
immediately perceive the enormous costs that the loss of these ecosystems and their
services signify for their welfare and for that of future generations.
It is not easy to convince society that biodiversity is closely linked to human welfare as a fundamental part of our life support systems: society at best perceives the
message regarding the urgency of conservation through protection campaigns for
certain charismatic species (whales, turtles, jaguars, etc.), but rarely through clear explanations illustrating the fundamental importance of the ecological network (ecosystems and their biodiversity) that sustains services vital for the maintenance of life
on Earth, and the importance of knowing how to conserve or use this sustainably.
With only some exceptions (e.g. food), humanity has had no need to put a value on
the ecological services they receive every day, and has taken until now to understand
the effects of certain types of economic development on ecosystems and climate
change. Many countries have taken the first steps towards economic assessment
of the particular costs of the forms of development typical of their nation, but we
7
are in an early stage of this assessment and therefore the consequences are not yet
adequately perceived by the majority of our society.
It is therefore necessary —and urgently so— to convey these ideas to the many
sectors of society. Today, biodiversity is an issue of fundamental importance to our
country: in order to achieve a future with equitable levels of social welfare, the natural capital of the nation cannot be ignored. Our first task is therefore to consider the
conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity as a key component for development and not as a contradiction of it.
To properly evaluate the natural capital of a nation first requires knowledge: recognition of what it is, where it is, what the characteristics are, and in what condition
it is. As has always been said, you cannot appreciate the unknown. This is particularly true of assets that are at once very important and very complex.
Mexico ranks high among the 12 megadiverse countries of the world, but our
country has stood out among the others for the progress in knowledge of its natural
capital it has achieved in only a few decades. These advances in knowledge, which
have been mainly effected by the Mexican academic sector, have allowed some extremely successful efforts to be made by both governmental and social sectors.
The development of both human and institutional capacities in Mexico has been
neither easy nor automatic. It has taken several decades and has had to face barriers
and limitations, some of which still exist. However, the process has benefited from
the involvement of many different sections of society.
An assessment of what has been achieved in the country in the shaping of the
human and institutional capital, and in the generation of a body of rules and laws
that constitute a normative framework for the conservation, restoration and rational
management of our natural capital, is an important step. This is true not only in
order to appreciate what has been achieved so far and what remains to be done, but
also to learn about the central actions that drove this progress and to recognize the
obstacles which prevented greater achievement.
This is the purpose of this collaborative work between the UNDP and Conabio
which tells how, in a relatively short time and with varying scopes, the management
of our natural capital was structured. It details the consolidation of a solid body of
scientists which, though still small in number in the face of the magnitude of the
challenges facing our country, are dedicated to the environmental problem. This
work describes how strategies were implemented to provide the soundly based arguments which demonstrated the false dichotomy between economic growth and the
sustainable management of natural capital, and also underlines the persistence of
the development model followed in our country to date. This model has destroyed a
large part of our natural capital, while failing to remedy major social inequities and
8
serious deficiencies in public administration. This project is an assessment of the national capacities for knowledge generation and in situ conservation, an evaluation of
the instruments required for this goal and of the generation and implementation of
public policies. It also includes an assessment of the facts and figures, and the voices
of those from different sectors who participated in workshops and shared their valuable insights, and of others that were expressed through interviews or written texts.
Thus, the UNDP and Conabio hope to have contributed to the production of a
fair and balanced assessment of what Mexico has accomplished, with the participation of the academic, social, governmental and productive sectors, in relation to
advancing our knowledge of the country’s natural capital, its management based increasingly on sound scientific information, the efforts to inform its citizens of these
advances as well as the significant challenges we face ahead in the conservation and
sustainable management of our natural capital, and the responsibility we have both
as a country and as citizens to the conservation of the biodiversity we host which
today is under such serious threat.
José Sarukhán
National Coordinator of Conabio
9
Presentation
The protection and sustainable use of biodiversity are essential for human development; all people depend on nature and the environmental services that can provide
access to a dignified, healthy and safe life. The benefits that society receives from
healthy ecosystems include essential goods (food, fuel, medicines, building materials) and environmental services like purification of water and air, carbon sequestration, soil conservation, provision of genetic material for crops and a mitigation
of vulnerability to natural disasters. Nature also provides a number of cultural or
spiritual services, which are essential to human development and the identity of
communities.
In particular, rural populations living in poverty depend directly on biodiversity
to ensure their food security and welfare. Thus the most disadvantaged are those
most affected by environmental degradation. The accentuation of poverty derives in
a non-desirable use of natural resources, and the consequent deterioration causes a
spiral of conflict that hinders the chances of long-term development.
The causal relationship between poverty and environmental degradation thus
represents a challenge to sustainable human development, which is magnified in the
current global financial crisis where the contraction of developing economies clearly
leads to an increase in poverty. Furthermore, current climatic uncertainty threatens
the security and functionality of ecosystems and human populations.
In this context, it is necessary to press for the implementation of public policies concerning the protection and sustainable use of biodiversity for development.
Megadiverse countries such as Mexico, which have the privilege of biological wealth,
face the challenge and responsibility to ensure the proper management of natural
resources in line with development policies and objectives of poverty reduction, especially those of the United Nations Millennium Development Goals.
During the last two decades of the past century, governmental and social institutions of Mexico strongly promoted public policies and measures for the protection and management of natural resources, and established opportunities for the
participation of different sectors of society. However, conservation and biodiversity
management are still experiencing major delays. Public policies in this area must
improve mechanisms to ensure their effectiveness and efficiency, the instruments
of natural resource management must balance social, economic and environmental
benefits, and improved access and articulation is required regarding knowledge and
information about biodiversity.
11
Faced with these challenges, the constant development of individual, institutional
and community skills is necessary in order to establish priorities and to strengthen
public interventions and the relevant legal framework. All these factors are required
to meet our commitment to appropriately conserve and utilize biodiversity for the
assurance of human welfare.
In this context, this document has the central intention of presenting a sort of
radiograph of the most recent natural capital management in Mexico, and to emphasize equally the achievements and the shortfalls in the pursuit of sound management of biodiversity. In particular, the national capacity to generate knowledge on
biodiversity and in situ conservation and sustainable use is discussed, as well as the
existing capacity for the implementation of comprehensive public policies concerning biodiversity.
This work represents a joint effort between the National Commission for the
Knowledge and Use of Biodiversity (Conabio) and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). The analysis of the existing and required capacity for
conservation and biodiversity management was accomplished through workshops,
interviews and surveys, with the participation of experts and members of the social,
academic and governmental sectors.
It is intended that the sum of these efforts represents an instrument for action and
a foundation for strengthening capacities, knowledge, education opportunities and
social participation in biodiversity management. This is an integral part of sustainable human development in Mexico, and thus also of the struggle against poverty.
UNDP
12
Magdy Martínez-Solimán
Resident Representative in Mexico
Summary
Any analysis of Mexico’s capacities for conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity
should be a systematic and regular exercise. In this way, it is possible to recognize what has
been accomplished, which are the successful methods, what needs to be modified in order
to prevent the expansion and multiplication of the effects of unsuitable practices, and to
identify needs that require priority attention over the long term, to name but a few benefits.
Therefore, an analysis of capacity for knowledge production, in situ conservation and an
evaluation of its results as well as the implementation of public policies aimed at the conservation and sustainable management of the natural capital of Mexico represents a starting
point for such evaluations.
The National Biodiversity Information System (SNIB), is one of the greatest efforts made
by a megadiverse country. It was chosen as a prime example of how create a bridge between
knowledge production and decision making. The SNIB was created to collect, organize and
distribute information about the biodiversity of Mexico; it is a point of contact between the
academic sector (generator of information) on one side, and decision makers and the general
public (users of information) on the other. As a case study, this analysis follows up —as few
cases in the country could allow— the results of the investment made by Mexico in the last
15 years to generate one of the instruments that makes information available for decision
making in the management and conservation of Mexico’s biodiversity.
In situ conservation is the most effective way to preserve biodiversity: it implies conservation of species in the habitats they require to maintain healthy populations which, in turn,
ensures their long-term survival. Protected areas (PA), management units for the conservation of wildlife (UMAs) and the program of payment for environmental services (PES) are
instruments promoted by both federal and state government in order to contribute to in situ
conservation of biodiversity, and of ecosystems and their environmental services. In general, progress has been made at different scales with regard to the number of instruments
implemented, area of coverage and amount of supporting budgets. However, in many cases
there are still serious shortcomings and difficulties in the effective implementation of these
instruments as strategies of conservation and sustainable management of Mexico’s natural
capital. There are also civil society schemes which promote in situ conservation, such as forest certification and voluntary community conservation areas, and it is necessary to support
and encourage these as they have the potential to contribute to overcoming the barriers to
conservation represented by traditional forms of productivity and economic development
without environmental criteria, and to reinforce results derived from local actions which can
have larger scale effects.
13
Assessing the impact of different strategies for in situ conservation is complex, since there are
no indicators that can be used in the long term and that allow the comparison of temporally and
spatially different results. Many of the available indicators were reviewed and a set was put forward incorporating the proposals and suggestions arising from the workshops conducted with
this objective. These indicators include references to natural, social and patrimonial capital. The
results are summarized in matrices (available for consultation online) comprising a total of 46
indicators grouped into criteria for planning, fulfillment and efficient implementation of objectives and management practices. All of them contribute to the conservation of natural vegetation and biodiversity, and produce positive results for the social organization of the beneficiaries.
In addition, they have the ability to propitiate social cohesion, greater environmental culture and
a generation of environmental awareness, greater and more equitable economic benefits, market
penetration and productive chains.
Also under analysis were the existing capacities of the institutions responsible for the generation and implementation of public policies that directly or indirectly affect actions for the
conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity. This analysis includes identification of the attributes of legislation at federal and state levels, and is complemented by a review of the instruments of planning, public policy and budget, in addition to interviews with officials from the
institutions of the federal environmental sector, conducted in order to understand and assess the
skills these institutions possess in relation to their responsibilities in the promotion of the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity in Mexico. The consideration is put forward that
the main problem in Mexico is not a lack of ideas or of environmental measures in public policy,
but a lack of transversal policies, agreements and partnerships between institutions and between
different levels of government. In this regard, it should be noted that important channels already
exist, such as the effective implementation of the Convention on Biological Diversity, the National Biodiversity Strategy and, more importantly, the State Biodiversity Strategies that aim to
be a step towards much needed coordination.
The past 15 years have witnessed intense activity in various sectors of society and government permitting us to firmly establish the strategic importance of conserving Mexico’s natural
capital. During this time, audacious and original instruments have been brought into being
allowing us to widen the options for sustainable management in a way which avoids the false
choice between conserving the environment and enjoying economic and social development,
and which can give alternatives to all sectors of society and help to reduce the serious inequities
that persist today.
One of the most important lessons of the current global environmental crisis is that attention to environmental issues must be continual and, given their multidimensional nature, must
include all stakeholders in a concerted manner. The results of this work show that we must not
lower our guard because, despite the undeniable progress in many areas, more still remain in
need of urgent action.
14