Biodiversity and Conservation

, Volume 16, Issue 1, pp 259–274 | Cite as

Administrator of global biodiversity: The secretariat of the convention on biological diversity

Original paper
First Online:
Received:
Accepted:

Abstract

The paper presents a case study analysing the effects of the Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity as an intergovernmental organisation. Within the study, the effects of organisations are measured by their outcome, i.e. the influence on the behaviour of other actors such as national governments. Three forms of outcomes are being distinguished, namely knowledge brokerage and diffusion, capacity building, and negotiation facilitation. In addition, the paper tries to explain the observed effects on the basis of internal and external variables. The CBD Secretariat has been established in 1992 and is now located in Montreal with about 70 employees. As most other secretariats of international conventions, it is the main organiser and facilitator of the convention process. The empirical material shows that the Secretariat has a measurable influence on the intergovernmental cooperative process which can be attributed to the effective internal management processes and the qualities of its leaders. Lacking capacity building functions and highly selective effects with regard to the provision of knowledge are explained by the limited formal autonomy and the structure of the global biodiversity problem.

Keywords

CBD Secretariat Convention on Biological Diversity Intergovernmental organisations 

Abbreviations

CBD

Convention on Biological Diversity

CHM

Clearing-House Mechanism

CITES

Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora

CMS

Bonn Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species

COP

Conference of the Parties

FAO

Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations

GEF

Global Environment Facility

IUCN

World Conservation Union

OECD

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development

NGO

Non-Governmental Organisation

UN

United Nations

UNCCD

United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification

UNCED

United Nations Conference on Environment and Development

UNEP

United Nations Environment Programme

UNFCCC

United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

UNFF

United Nations Forum on Forests

UNON

United Nations Office in Nairobi

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

Acknowledgements

The author is grateful for the time and effort provided by the interviewees at the CBD Secretariat and the respondents of our anonymous stakeholder questionnaire. Comments on the text from members of the Secretariats are also gratefully acknowledged. The stakeholder survey would not have been possible without the continuous efforts of Mireia Tarradell from the Global Governance Project. Steffen Behrle provided excellent support for the field studies. The paper has profited from intense discussions with Frank Biermann, Steffen Bauer, Per-Olof Busch, Klaus Dingwerth, Torsten Grothmann, Robert Marschinski, and Sabine Campe. Financial support by the Volkswagen Foundation and administrative support by the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research is gratefully acknowledged.

References

  1. Aldrich HE (1979) Organizations and environments. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJGoogle Scholar
  2. Andresen S (2002) Leadership change in the World Health Organization: potential for increased effectiveness? FNI-rapport 08/2002. The Fridtjof Nansen Institute, LysakerGoogle Scholar
  3. Barnett MN, Finnemore M (1999) The politics, power, and pathologies of international organizations. Int Org 53:699–732CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barnett MN, Finnemore M (2004) Rules for the world: international organizations in global politics. Cornell University Press, IthacaGoogle Scholar
  5. Bauer S (2006) Does bureaucracy really matter? The authority of intergovernmental treaty secretariats in global environmental politics. Glob Environ Pol 6:(accepted)Google Scholar
  6. Bauer S, Busch P-O, Siebenhüner B (2005) Administering international governance: what role for treaty secretariats? Mimeo, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  7. Bennett AL (1991) International organizations: principles and issues. Prentice Hall, Englewood CliffsGoogle Scholar
  8. Biermann F (2000) The case for a world environment organization. Environment 42:22–31Google Scholar
  9. Biermann F, Bauer S (2005a) Managers of global governance. Assessing and explaining the influence of international bureaucracies. The Global Governance Project, Amsterdam, Berlin, Oldenburg, PotsdamGoogle Scholar
  10. Biermann F, Bauer S (eds) (2005b) A world environment organisation. Solution or threat to effective international environmental governance? Ashgate, Aldershot, UKGoogle Scholar
  11. Biermann F, Simonis UE (2000) Institutionelle Reform der Weltumweltpolitik? Zur politischen Debatte um die Gründung einer Weltumweltorganisation. Zeitschr Int Bezieh 7:163–183Google Scholar
  12. Boisvert V, Caron A (2002) The convention on biological diversity: an institutionalist perspective of the debates. J Econ Issues 36:151–166Google Scholar
  13. Dedeurwaerdere T (2005) From bioprospecting to reflexive governance. Ecol Econ 53:473–491CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gupta A (2000) Creating a global biosafety regime. Int J Biotechnol 2:205–230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Haas PM (1995) Institutions for the Earth, sources of effective international environmental protection. MIT Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  16. Heijden H-Avd (2002) Political parties and NGOs in global environmental politics. Int Politic Sci Rev 23:187–201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kimball LA (1997) Institutional linkages between the Convention on Biological Diversity and other international conventions. Reciel 6:239–248Google Scholar
  18. Koester V (2002) The five global biodiversity-related conventions: a stocktaking. Reciel 11:96–103Google Scholar
  19. Le Prestre P (2002) The operation of the CBD Convention governance system. In: Le Prestre P (ed) Governing global biodiversity: the evolution and implementation of the convention on biological diversity. Ashgate, Aldershot, pp 91–114Google Scholar
  20. Mc Graw D (2002) The CBD – key characteristics and implications for implementation. Reciel 11:17–28Google Scholar
  21. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2003) Ecosystems and human well-being. A framework for assessment. Island Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  22. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005a) Ecosystems and human well-being biodiversity synthesis. World Resources Institute, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  23. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005b) Ecosystems and human well-being: synthesis. Island Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  24. Polski M (2005) The institutional economics of biodiversity, biological materials, and bioprospecting. Ecol Econ 53:543–557CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Rittberger V (1999) Internationale Organisationen: Politik und Geschichte. Leske und Budrich, OpladenGoogle Scholar
  26. Rojas M, Thomas C (1992) The convention on biological diversity. Negotiating a global regime. In:␣Susskind L, Dolin EJ, Breslin JW (eds) International Environmental Treaty Making. Harvard Law School, Cambridge, MA, pp 148ffGoogle Scholar
  27. Rosendal GK (1995) The convention on biological diversity: a viable instrument for conservation and sustainable use? In: Bergesen HO, Parmann G, Thommessen ØB (eds) Green globe yearbook of international co-operation on environment and development 1995. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 69–81Google Scholar
  28. Rosendal K, Andresen S (2003) UNEPȁ9s role in enhancing problem-solving capacity in multilateral environmental agreements: co-ordination and assistance in the biodiversity conservation cluster. FNI report 10/2003. Frietjof Nansen Institute, LysakerGoogle Scholar
  29. Sandford R (1994) International environmental treaty secretariats: stage-hands or actors?. In:␣Bergesen HO, Parmann G (eds) Green globe yearbook of international co-operation on environment and development 1994. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 17–29Google Scholar
  30. Sandford R (1996) International environmental treaty secretariats: a case of neglected potential? Environ Impact Assess Rev 16:3–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. SCBD, Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity (2001) Global biodiversity outlook. CBD Secretariat, MontrealGoogle Scholar
  32. SCBD, Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity (2003) Handbook of the convention on biological diversity. Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity, MontrealGoogle Scholar
  33. Siebenhüner B, Suplie J (2005) Implementing the access and benefit sharing provisions of the CBD: a case for institutional learning. Ecol Econ 53:507–522CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Skjaerseth JB (1999) Can international environmental secretariats promote effective cooperation? Paper presented at the UNU International Conference on Synergies and Co-ordination between Multilateral Environmental Agreements. UNU, TokyoGoogle Scholar
  35. Sprinz D, Helm C (1999) The effect of global environmental regimes. A measurement concept. Int Politic Sci Rev 20:359–369CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Swanson T (1999) Why is there a biodiversity convention? The international interest in centralized development planning. Int Aff 75:307–331CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. ten Kate K (2002) Science and the convention on biological diversity. Science 295:2371–2372CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. UNEP (ed) (2001) Global environment outlook 3. Past, present and future perspectives. Earthscan, LondonGoogle Scholar
  39. UNEP/CBD (2006) Progress towards implementation of the convention and its strategic plan. Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity, MontrealGoogle Scholar
  40. Victor DG (1998) The implementation and effectiveness of international environmental commitments. MIT Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  41. WBGU (2000) New structures for global environmental policy. Earthscan, LondonGoogle Scholar
  42. Wettestad J (2001) Designing effective environmental regimes: the conditional keys. Global Governance 7Google Scholar
  43. Young OR, Levy MA, Osherenko G (eds) (1999) Effectiveness of international environmental regimes: causal connections and behavioral mechanisms. MIT Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Computing Science, Business Administration, Economics and Law, GELENA Research GroupCarl von Ossietzky University OldenburgOldenburgGermany

Personalised recommendations