FINAL 17 July 2013

TERMS OF REFERENCE
Research in Support of the High Level Panel on Global Assessment of
Resources for Implementing the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020

Aims and Objectives

This document sets out the proposed Terms of Reference for research to support the High
Level Panel on Global Assessment of Resources for Implementing the Strategic Plan for
Biodiversity 2011-2020.

The aims of the High Level Panel (HLP) are to:

a) Develop an assessment of the benefits of meeting the Aichi Biodiversity Targets,

examining both direct biodiversity benefits and wider benefits to society that result
from the investments and policy developments required.
b) Assess the range of the costs of implementing the activities needed to achieve the
targets, taking into account the further work proposed in the High Level Panel report
to COP-11.
c) Identify opportunities to secure the benefits most cost effectively through actions in
both the biodiversity sector and across economies as a whole that can mobilize /
make better use of resources, to deliver greatest progress towards meeting the Aichi
targets.

The HLP is also expected to ensure the alignment of its work with the Post-2015 UN
Development Agenda and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

The HLP will be supported by a Research Team who will work with the Panel and CBD
Project Manager to compile the evidence and undertake analysis required to meet these
aims, and to report its findings and recommendations. The Research Team will take
responsibility for ensuring the timely execution of the agreed programme of work and delivery
of the reports, ensuring that the HLP is able to report as anticipated in the timeframe set out
below. The research and drafting will be steered and reviewed by the HLP.

Approach

The HLP will:

• provide strategic leadership and guidance to the research and identify the priorities
within it;
• work directly with the Research Team and CBD Secretariat to draw key messages,
conclusions and recommendations from the research;
• engage with other relevant institutions and initiatives to secure the cooperation and
provision of evidence for analysis;
• engage with CBD Parties to raise awareness of the study and its findings; and
• oversee delivery of a draft report for WGRI-5 consideration and feedback, and a final
report for COP-12.

The HLP will operate through email exchanges, on-line discussions and teleconferences as
necessary, and three face-to-face meetings. In line with decision XI/4, paragraph 24, the
research of the HLP will be further scoped and delivered through multi-national involvement
from the UK, EC, Norway, India, Brazil, Sweden, and other countries who express their
interest. Parties offering financial or in-kind support will have an oversight of the project as a

1
whole, and will therefore need to be kept updated on the project’s progress, most likely
through monthly project coordination calls to be arranged by the CBD Project Manager.

Recognising that the benefits of investments vary from place to place, the research
underpinning HLP should draw and build upon a broad range of evidence from initiatives
taking place at smaller geographic scales. The research will incorporate desk-based analysis
of secondary data and analysis of qualitative and quantitative primary data. It will also include
country consultations, and a wide range of consultations with bottom-up initiatives.

To achieve this, international agencies such as the World Bank, UNEP, UNDP and the GEF
Secretariat, among others who fund and work with relevant initiatives, will be invited to sit as
official observers on the HLP. The need to work with “bottom-up” initiatives where possible
will be embedded in the research work programme.

The research will further the recommendations regarding research needs identified by the
HLP’s report to COP-11, including refining the cost estimates and filling gaps in coverage,
providing a more comprehensive global assessment based on wider stakeholder
engagement, examining the policy framework, assessing linkages and co-dependencies
between targets and with wider policy agendas, and examining national needs and priorities.

Research Questions

Based on these aims and objectives, and on the advice of the HLP at its first meeting, the
research will seek to address the following questions:

1. Benefits:

a) What will be the benefits of delivering the Aichi Targets?

This question will identify the range of economic, social and environmental benefits
that meeting the targets will deliver, identifying examples from different
geographies and initiatives.

b) What evidence is there of the nature, scale and value of these benefits, at national
and international levels?
Drawing on experience from different countries and initiatives, the research will
provide examples of the nature, scale, and, where available value of economic,
social and environmental benefits, and identify the types and numbers of
beneficiaries. The research team will also examine the implications (including
costs) of inaction with respect to meeting the Targets. The research will not
attempt to provide an overall estimate of the global value of benefits in monetary
terms.

2. Investment needs:

a) What investments need to be made to deliver the Aichi targets and to secure these
benefits?
This question will identify the types of investments that will need to be made to
meet the Aichi Targets, drawing on experience and priorities at different
geographical scales, and having regard for the drivers for each target and the
policy framework within which investments need to be made. It focuses on the
actions that need to be implemented (whereas question 3 examines the costs of
these actions and levels of expenditure required).

b) Where would these investments be best directed or focused?

The research will consider whether and how the types of investment required vary
between different countries and regions, depending on local conditions and

2
 priorities, in order to understand the overall implications for the programmes of
investment needed. It will also consider the scale of activity required in different
places.

c) Which Targets will these investments help to meet, and what are the synergies
and overlaps between Targets?
The first phase of the HLP’s work emphasised that many of the Aichi Targets are
interdependent and that particular investments may help to deliver more than one
Target. The research will examine examples of this in different countries and
initiatives, and assess the extent of overlaps and synergies between Targets. This
will include identifying the types of enabling activities that could help to meet more
than one Target.

d) What types of on-going annual expenditures will be required?

As well as one-off capital investments, most targets will also require ongoing
annual operational and management expenditures. The question will identify the
types of ongoing expenditures required in order to inform the assessment of
resource requirements.

e) How do the types of investments and ongoing expenditures identified compare to

those identified in the first phase of the HLP research?
The previous research outlined overall programmes of investment designed to
meet the Aichi targets globally. This research will provide examples of
requirements identified in different countries and initiatives that can be compared
with the needs proposed in the previous global assessment.

3. Resource requirements:

a) What evidence is there of resource needs at the project and country level?
This question focuses on the level of financial resources required to deliver the
Aichi Targets, by funding the investments and on-going expenditures identified in
question 2. It will include a review of evidence available at different geographic
scales and from different organisations and initiatives (including, for example, the
Biodiversity Finance Initiative (BIOFIN) and the Wealth Accounting and Valuation
of Ecosystems partnership (WAVES) projects).

b) How does this evidence compare with the analysis presented in the HLP’s report
to COP-11?
“Bottom-up” estimates on resource requirements will be compared with global
estimates made in the HLP’s first phase report. This will enable the previous
estimates for different Targets – as well as the aggregate global estimate – to be
checked and where appropriate revised or updated.

c) What evidence is there for current allocations relative to needs?

The HLP’s first report found that it was difficult to quantify current allocations of
resources for the delivery of the Aichi Targets or to compare them with the
estimated resource requirements. Examining evidence of allocations compared to
needs within different countries should help to address this question. The research
to address this question will examine what resources currently allocated within
different sectors or policy areas (e.g., agriculture, infrastructure development,
defence, transport and communications) benefit or have the potential to benefit
biodiversity or to negatively impact on biodiversity, presenting case studies where
appropriate.

d) What are the implications for the resources required to deliver the targets,
individually and collectively?

3
 Combining, comparing and contrasting the “bottom-up” evidence collected with the
previous “top-down” estimates of resource needs will enable further conclusions
and recommendations to be made about the resources required to deliver the Aichi
Targets.

4. Policy alignment and Development:

a) How do the identified investment needs and the benefits they will achieve align
with other policy agendas, such as the Post-2015 UN Development Agenda and
the Sustainable Development Goals?
The Terms of Reference of the HLP state that it is expected to ensure the
alignment of its work with the Post-2015 UN Development Agenda and the
Sustainable Development Goals. The extent that meeting the Aichi Targets
contributes to these agendas also has implications for net resource requirements
and funding strategies. The research will therefore examine how investments
contribute to the investment agenda.

b) To what extent can we identify synergies and opportunities for joint delivery at the
country and programme level?
The research will examine synergies between biodiversity and development
agendas, and opportunities for investments to deliver co-benefits. It will also
consider potential trade-offs, both in the short term and long term, and highlight
possible solutions through case studies. The beneficiaries of investments, and
potential distributional impacts, will be examined.

c) What are the implications for the overall resource requirements to meet the Aichi
Targets, and the degree to which additional resources need to be targeted to
them?
Synergies between the Aichi Targets and development objectives will reduce the
extra resources required to deliver them, and facilitate funding strategies.
Conversely, managing potential conflicts between biodiversity and development
goals could make the Aichi Targets more difficult and costly to deliver. The
research will assess the implications for resource needs of synergies and/or
conflicts with the Post-2015 UN Development Agenda and the Sustainable
Development Goals. Synergies in achieving the goals and objectives of other
conventions will also be considered.

d) To what extent can improvements in governance, institutional and policy

development at the country level contribute in a cost-efficient manner to deliver
actions to achieve the Targets?
The first report of the HLP identified improved governance and a better policy
framework as being important in achieving the delivery of the Aichi Targets in a
cost effective manner. The research will enable examples of this to be explored at
the country level, while also investigating the implications of governance
arrangements in enhancing synergies and managing potential conflicts.

5. Cost effectiveness:

a) How can the Aichi Targets be delivered at least cost, taking account of the
synergies between the targets and the investments required, the sequencing of
actions and the synergies with other policy agendas?
The HLP first phase report presented separate cost estimates for different Target
clusters, and assumed that these actions would proceed simultaneously. However,
the HLP also noted that: (i) synergies and overlaps between Targets and with
wider policy agendas mean that a more integrated approach to delivery could
reduce overall resource needs, and that (ii) the sequence in which investments are

4
 made will affect the overall cost, particularly if there is an initial focus on the
Targets that deliver the right enabling conditions for subsequent action. Drawing
on examples in different countries, this question will examine how synergies
between Targets and with wider policy agendas, and the sequencing of actions
both within and across Targets, will affect the overall cost-effectiveness of meeting
them. Evidence will be presented where available to highlight where and when it is
worth spending time and resources thinking about actions before implementing
investments to ensure the most cost effective actions are put into place.

b) What evidence is there of the cost effectiveness of different investments, taking

account of biodiversity gain and contribution to the Targets relative to cost?
It is likely that some investments will deliver greater biodiversity gain than others
relative to the costs incurred. The research will examine whether it is possible to
compare the cost effectiveness of different investments, either within or across
Targets.

c) What are the implications for the sequencing and/or prioritisation of investments in
moving towards achieving the Targets?
The researchers will identify the implications of the evidence collected for the cost
effective achievement of the Targets, considering whether there is merit in
prioritising certain investments over others (given limits on available resources) or
of sequencing investments in a particular order.

6. Benefits and costs:

a) What does the evidence as identified above tell us about the balance between the
benefits and costs of meeting the Targets?
Evidence about the relative scale of the benefits and costs of investments required
to meet the Targets will be examined for different initiatives, at different
geographical scales, and for different Targets and actions. The research will not
attempt a global cost-benefit analysis but will draw on existing evidence from
cases where costs and benefits have been compared. Both market and non-
market values will be examined, as will current and future, costs and benefits,
taking account of changing needs and opportunities.

b) How can this evidence be used to make the case for the investments required?
The policy implications of this evidence about costs and benefits will be
considered, particularly with regard to future funding strategies. Gaps in the
evidence base, and future research needs, will be identified.

These questions can be used to structure the research tasks to be completed as well as the
evidence presented by the HLP in its report.

Responsibilities of the Research Team

The Research Team will support the HLP in meeting its aims by undertaking the necessary
research work, assisting the HLP in addressing the research questions identified above, and
in developing its findings and recommendations.

The research will incorporate desk-based analysis of secondary data as well as analysis of
quantitative and qualitative primary data from country consultations, consultation with various
organizations (both within and outside the UN system) and bottom-up initiatives at various
levels, and other sources.

The research will build upon and feed into work already underway for the preparation of the
fourth edition of the Global Biodiversity Outlook (GBO-4) to develop scenarios for the

5
achievement of the Aichi Targets, as well as other work being undertaken at global, regional
and national scales to identify the costs and benefits of biodiversity-related interventions
(such as BIOFIN and WAVES).

Under the overall supervision of the Principal Officer of Technical Support for Implementation
(TSI) Division at the CBD Secretariat and the coordination of the CBD Project Manager, the
organization providing the Research Team will be responsible for the following functions:
a) management of the research in close collaboration with the CBD Project Manager;
b) research work following the leadership and guidance of the HLP;
c) participation in teleconferences with HLP and other observers as needed, and in
three physical meetings;
d) participation in teleconferences as needed to update Parties overseeing the broader
HLP work programme; and
e) participation as needed in meetings during WGRI and COP to support review and
presentation of the report.

Plan of activities May 2013 – April 2014

Based on guidance provided by the HLP at its first meeting, the tasks and responsibilities for
their completion are as follows:

1. Identification of sources: Identify sources of evidence that will help to meet the overall
goals of the HLP and the research necessary to accomplish it, by providing evidence
to answer the research questions identified above. These sources will focus on
country-level studies, bottom-up initiatives and consultations as stipulated in the
decision XI/4, paragraph 24, as well as taking account of regional and global
assessments.
Lead: Research Team, with input from the HLP and observers.

2. Scoping: Conduct an initial scoping review of available evidence, in order to inform

the structuring of the research, and make initial contact with relevant stakeholders
and initiatives, to identify opportunities for collaborative research, with the assistance
of the CBD Project Manager.
Lead: Research Team, with input from CBD Project Manager and HLP, including
suggestions about relevant contacts

3. Definition of a research programme: Specify a structured programme of research

activities designed to collate and analyse the evidence required, and identify
researchers capable of undertaking the required work.
Lead: Research Team

4. Preparation of a draft outline of the report: Drawing on the research questions and on
discussion during the HLP meeting, prepare a draft outline of the report for review by
the HLP.
Lead: Research team

5. Review and agreement on the research programme: With the assistance of the CBD
Project Manager, share the proposed work programme with members of the HLP.
Discuss the proposed work programme in a teleconference and through email
exchanges, and seek feedback from HLP members. Revise the work programme to
take account of the feedback received from Panel members. Agree the revised work
programme by 30 June 2013.
Lead: HLP provide comment and programme finalised by the Research Team,
teleconference organized by CBD Project Manager

6
6. Review and agreement on draft outline: With the assistance of the CBD Project
Manager, share the draft outline with members of the HLP. Revise the draft outline to
take account of comments received, and if necessary further discuss them with HLP
members.
Lead: HLP provide comment and draft outline finalised by Research Team

7. Allocation of research tasks: Divide the research activities among Research Team
members, assign them with responsibilities for their block of work (sub-contracting
work where this is necessary), and manage the process to ensure timely delivery of
the required elements.
Lead: Research Team

8. Specification of a Common Framework: Specify a Common Framework to be used to

structure and guide the research in order to ensure consistent methodologies and
approaches for a coherent and integrated analysis. This will define the scope of the
research, the questions to be answered, the definitions to be employed, the key
methodological issues to be addressed and the approach to dealing with these. It will
include topic guides to structure evidence reviews, consultations and case studies,
and will specify the types of data required and how these will be used in the analysis.
It will also provide guidance on ensuring that consultations and case studies cover a
representative range of countries, ecosystems and sectors as far as this is consistent
with the research results being conveyed.
Lead: Research team with input from HLP

9. Carry out research: Conduct research on bottom-up initiatives, projects, other local
efforts to evaluate benefits of the actions, costs of inaction, efficient or inefficient
allocation in terms of strategically, proactively and synergistically achieving the three
objectives of the CBD, and the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020 with its 20
targets, and identify potential opportunities for better allocation of resources in the
different sectors of the economy. This will include:
a) research management and coordination, including technical oversight of
researchers (including consultants), and bringing the research results together
meaningfully in terms of synthesis and analysis so that they can be used
appropriately at the drafting stage; and
b) research carried out by teams both within UNEP-WCMC and GHK, and other
researchers hired by the project to carry our research in particular regions and
sub-regions.
Lead: Research Team

10. Coordination with work on GBO-4: With the assistance of the CBD Project Manager,
coordinate with relevant work undertaken in preparation for GBO-4. Note that
deliverables associated with this are included within activities 16(a) and 21(a) below.
Lead: Research Team with input from the HLP, following the advice of the CBD
Project Manager

11. Preparation first draft: Prepare the first full draft of the document, and share with the
HLP members and observers as a basis for discussion at the second physical
meeting of the HLP. This draft may include sections where the research is not yet
complete, or not yet completely integrated. Where this is the case the draft will
include information on progress made and expected content so as to facilitate
discussion at the meeting.
Lead: Research Team

12. Second physical meeting of the HLP: With the assistance of the CBD Project
Manager, agree a strategy and the material to provide and present to a Second

7
 Physical Meeting with the HLP members, observers and CBD to report on progress,
review issues and difficulties, and further fine tune the results.
Lead: CBD Project Manager, with input from the Research Team and HLP

13. Revision and review of the draft: Revise the first draft based on the input from the
HLP, and complete the incorporation of research results. Prepare the 15-page
summary as part of this phase.
Lead: Research Team

14. Peer review of draft full report and summary: Share this draft with the HLP members,
CBD, the GEF, and individuals and organisations recommended by the CBD, for
feedback and comments (peer review). Receive the comments and prepare advice
for the HLP on how they might be addressed in redrafting the document.
Lead: Research Team, with input from HLP

15. Third physical meeting of the HLP: Support the CBD Project Manager in preparing for
the Third Physical Meeting with the HLP members, observers and key CBD staff. This
meeting will review the report and its findings, and the comments received on it and
how they have been – or are proposed to be – addressed for submission to WGRI-5.
Lead: CBD Project Manager, with input from the Research Team and HLP

16. Finalise draft report for WGRI: Finalise the draft report based on guidance of the HLP
and recommendations from the meeting, and circulate the draft report rapidly to HLP
members and identified others. Take all relevant feedback and comments and adjust
where need be and submit the report following a final review with HLP members of
the changes made. This will include a maximum 15 pages summary of the main
results that CBD will have translated into the official UN languages and present to
WGRI-5 that will take place in June 2014. In addition, ensure that limitations of
approach or data and any other constraints are indicated clearly in the report, and
that that further research needs and potential next steps for development of the report
are clearly indicated, as are recommendations for follow up. The following
submissions will be essential:
a) by March 31, 2014 first submission to GBO-4, for input that needs to be reflected
in the draft GBO-4 to be presented to SBSTTA (recognising that this cannot be in
its final format due to the timing of meetings and review, and that therefore may
need additional notes and explanations); and
b) submission of the draft report and a maximum 15 pages summary has to be done
at the latest by May 23, 2014 to allow time for translation of the summary for
WGRI-5.
Lead: Research Team

17. Support during WGRI: Provide support to the HLP at WGRI-5.

Lead: Research Team to support HLP during meetings and other activities planned
by the CBD Project Manager

Plan of activities May 2014 to July 2014

Based on guidance provided by the HLP at its first meeting the tasks and responsibilities for
their completion are as follows:

18. Preparation of second draft: Prepare the second full draft of the report based on the
report submitted to WGRI-5, comments and feedback from SCBD, the GEF, World
Bank, UNDP key staff, among other, and the recommendations from WGRI-5 by also
keeping a clear record of all relevant comments, feedback and recommendations with
their sources and how they have been addressed as annexes to the report.
Lead: Research Team, with input from HLP

8
 19. Review of second draft: Manage the review of the report by the HLP and other
international experts identified as observers (peer review), and ensure that any
additional clarifications that they require are all well addressed in the report.
Lead: Research Team, with input from HLP

20. Fourth physical meeting of the HLP: Support the CBD Project Manager in preparing
for the Fourth Physical Meeting with the HLP members, observers and key CBD staff
in Cambridge sometime in March 2014. This meeting will review the feedback
received during the review and agree how comments should be addressed and the
reports finalised.
Lead: CBD Project Manager, with input from the Research Team and HLP

21. Preparation of final report: Prepare the final reports for COP-12: a) an official
document of about 15 pages consisting of an executive summary of the key findings,
messages and recommendations; b) an information document, i.e. the complete
research report based on guidance and direction provided by the HLP by and
circulate the final report and refine one last time before final sign-off by the HLP. The
following submissions will be necessary:
a) at the latest by June 30, 2014 submit input to GBO-4 in time to finalize the final
version of this document (recognising that this cannot be in its final format due to
the timing of the review, and that therefore may need additional notes and
explanations); and;
b) at the latest by July 31, 2014 submit the report with the executive summary to
SCBD for preparation to present to COP-12.
Lead: Research Team, with input from HLP

22. Preparation of strategy for COP: Hold virtual meetings with the CBD among others to
review the recommendations and decide how to address them directly and at the
COP-12 if this is possible; and
Lead: HLP, with input from Research Team and Project Manager

23. Support during COP: Provide support to the HLP at COP-12.

Lead: Research Team to support HLP during meetings and other activities planned
by the CBD Project Manager

Expected Deliverables

a) Input to draft GBO-4 by end the March 31, 2014 in time for SBSTTA;
b) The revised draft of the report for submission to WGRI-5 at the latest by May 23,
2014 with earlier drafts circulated for comments before that allowing sufficient time to
receive comments and revise; a maximum of 15 pages Executive Summary of the
findings should also be presented to the CBD by May 9, 2014 for translation and
presentation to WGRI-5;
c) Input to GBO-4 by the end of June, 2014 so that this document gets finalized for
COP-12; and
d) The Final Report and an Executive Summary of about 15 pages with the main
findings, key messages and recommendations should be submitted for presentation
to COP-12 with earlier final draft circulated for comments and feedbacks and the
necessary adjustments made. The report and summary have to be submitted at the
latest by the end of July, 2014.

9
Key dates

Dates HLP Milestones

25 May 2013 Deliver draft research TOR
30-31 May 2013 HLP 1st meeting (Trondheim, Norway)
28 June 2013 Agree research TOR
26 July 2013 Agree research plan and report outline
26 July 2013 Initiate research
22 Nov 2013 First draft report to HLP
2-4 Dec 2013 HLP 2nd meeting (probably Bangalore, India) to review 1st draft
14 March 2014 Delivery of 1st draft of 15-page summary
17 March 2014 Revised draft report available for peer review
31 March 2014 Input to draft GBO-4
15 April 2014 Comments received
Mid-April 2014 HLP 3rd meeting (possibly Quito, Ecuador)
9 May 2014 Delivery of draft 15-page summary for translation to CBD
Secretariat for WGRI-5
23 May 2014 Delivery of draft report for WGRI-5 to CBD Secretariat
16-20 June 2014 WGRI-5 (Montreal, Canada)
30 June 2014 Comments received from HLP on draft GBO-4
4 July 2014 Revised draft report to HLP
14-17 July 2014 HLP 4th meeting (Cambridge, UK) to review the final draft
31 July 2014 Delivery of final report and 15-page Executive Summary for
COP12 to CBD Secretariat
6-17 October 2014 COP12 (Pyeongchang, Korea)

10