Target 1

Land-use and sea-use change are major direct drivers of biodiversity loss. Land-use change has had the largest relative negative impact on terrestrial and freshwater ecosystems since 1970, with agricultural expansion being the most widespread form of land-use change. Marine and coastal ecosystems have been significantly affected by human activities as well, with research demonstrating increasing cumulative impacts of human activities in more than 60 per cent of the ocean.   

Increasing demands and conflicting uses of land, inland water and ocean space and resources underscore the need for cross-sectoral approaches that allow for the consideration of multiple interests, values and types of use. Integrated spatial planning and/or effective management processes allow countries to analyze and then effectively allocate the spatial and temporal distribution of activities in each environment to achieve various social, ecological and economic objectives. Integrated and participatory spatial planning helps bring together all stakeholders for a particular space and thereby ensure the prioritization and proper allocation of various activities and thereby balance the need to safeguard nature, while advancing sustainable socioeconomic development and ensuring food security and human well-being. The ecosystem approach as well as the many examples of guidance and experience in implementing this approach also provide a strong basis for this target. 

This target aims to ensure that all areas are under spatial planning or other effective management with the purpose of addressing the driver of land use change or sea use change and of bringing the loss of areas of high biodiversity importance close to zero by 2030.  

To accomplish this, the target further specifies a number of elements that need to be considered in carrying out action:

• Spatial planning – There are different definitions of spatial planning, however it is generally considered to be a method or process for analyzing and allocating the spatial and temporal distribution of human uses and activities in a given area, in order to achieve various social, economic and ecological objectives. It may also include integrating biodiversity considerations using spatial data during land- and sea-use planning exercises. When undertaken in terrestrial areas it is often referred to as “land use planning” while in marine areas it is referred to as “marine spatial planning”. For inland water and related ecosystems, planning processes often take place at the watershed level.
• Effective management processes –Effective management process may be utilised instead of or as a complement to spatial planning to address land use and sea use change. This may include such things environmental assessment, environmental impact assessment and strategic environmental impact assessment. 
• All areas – The spatial planning and/or management approaches should be applied to all areas. In other words, the aim should be that, by 2030, the entire territory of each country has been subject to some degree of spatial planning or effective management. This includes all terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems—both freshwater and marine—as applicable. 
• Participatory – Landscapes and seascapes are often used for different, and sometimes competing, purposes. For spatial planning and management processes to be effective in addressing habitat loss it is important that these processes consider how space and resources are being used by different actors, including indigenous peoples and local communities, how these uses align with biodiversity objectives and what possible conflicts could exist. Understanding and accounting for these different purposes necessitates a participatory approach to spatial planning and management processes. 
• Integrated and biodiversity inclusive – Spatial planning and management processes are carried out for various purposes. To be effective in achieving the goals of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, these processes must integrate biodiversity considerations, along with other considerations.
• Addressing land- and sea-use change – Land- and sea-use change refers to processes by which human activities transform the landscape and sea scape. As noted above these pressures are the leading cause of biodiversity loss in many ecosystems. Spatial planning and other effective management processes should be undertaken with the overall objective addressing such change.  
• Areas of high biodiversity importance – There is no single definition of areas of high biodiversity importance, and each country will need to identify such areas given their national circumstances and priorities. Generally, such areas would include areas high in species richness or threatened species, areas with unique, important or threatened biomes and habitats. There are various means and metrics by which to identify areas of high biodiversity importance, including (but not limited to) Key Biodiversity Areas, Important Bird and Biodiversity Areas, and ecologically or biologically significant marine areas.
• High ecological integrity - Ecosystems can be generally considered to have integrity when their dominant ecological characteristics (e.g., elements of composition, structure, function and ecological processes) occur within their natural ranges of variation and can withstand and recover from most disturbances.   
• Respecting the rights of indigenous peoples and local communities – The rights of indigenous peoples and local communities must be respected and preserved with their free, prior and informed consent, including their full and effective participation in decision making, in accordance with relevant national legislation, international instruments, including the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and human rights law. This may include the recognition of local spatial planning of indigenous peoples and local communities, which takes advantage of the local context, including cultural, governance and spiritual dimensions, as well as the planning and management processes being led by indigenous peoples and local communities within their respective lands and waters. 

• Actions to reach Target 1 should take into account all of the considerations for implementation identified in section C of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework. 
• Progress towards this target will support the attainment of goals A and B of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework. In addition, progress towards this target will directly support the attainment of targets 2, 3, 5, 10 and 12 of the Framework. Conversely, progress towards targets 14, 19, 20, 21, 22 and 23 will help to reach Target 1. 
• Target 1 addresses issues that were previously addressed by  Aichi Biodiversity Target 5.
• Elements of Target 1 are also addressed in the targets of the Sustainable Development Goals, including targets 14.2, 15.1, 15.2, 15.5 and 15.9. 

• What spatial planning or related management processes already exist in your country? Are these processes participatory, integrated and biodiversity-inclusive? How effective are these processes in bringing the loss of areas of high biodiversity importance close to zero? Do they need to be amended to account for and integrate biodiversity considerations? Do they respect the rights of indigenous peoples and local communities?
• Which authorities and stakeholders, and at which levels (e.g., national, subnational), play an active role in spatial planning or related management processes? What are their respective roles? How can collaboration be promoted to ensure biodiversity elements/concerns are considered in their work? 
• What additional resources (e.g., financial, human, technical) will be required to take actions to reach this target? How can additional resources be raised?  
• What measures are necessary to ensure the preservation and protection of the rights of indigenous peoples and local communities while implementing this target? 
• Which areas in your country are considered to be of high biodiversity importance, and/or high ecological integrity? What are the current rates of loss of areas of high biodiversity importance in your country? 

The monitoring framework for the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework identifies the following indicators for this target: 

Headline Indicators:

• A.1 Red List of Ecosystems
• A.2 Extent of natural ecosystems
• 1.1 Per cent of land and seas covered by biodiversity-inclusive spatial plans* 

 Component indicator:

• Priority retention of intact / wilderness areas 

Complementary indicators:  

• Number of countries using natural capital accounts in planning processes  
• Percentage of spatial plans utilizing information on Key Biodiversity Areas  
• Habitat patches located within marine protected areas or integrated marine and coastal area management (IMCAM)  
• Other spatial management plans (not captured as IMCAM or marine spatial planning in 14.2.1)  
• Number of countries using ocean accounts in planning processes 
• Proportion of transboundary basin area with an operational arrangement for water cooperation  
• Proportion of total land area that is under cultivation  
• Extent of natural ecosystems by type  
• Number of countries implementing national legislation, policies or other measures regarding free, prior and informed consent related to conservation  
• Ecosystem Integrity Index 

Assessments 

• IPBES Global Assessment Report on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (2019)

Tools and guidance        

• Information on the Ecosystem Approach under the CBD
• Sustainable Ocean Initiative Training Module: Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA): A strategic thinking framework for achieving sustainable development 
• Sustainable Ocean Initiative Training Module: Addressing Capacity Needs for Integrated Coastal Management
• Sustainable Ocean Initiative Training Module: Integrating the Aichi Biodiversity Targets into Integrated Coastal Management Development Program through the application of the Integrated Coastal Management System
• Information on CBD’s Ecologically or Biologically Significant Marine Areas (EBSAs)
• IOC-UNESCO’s key resources on marine spatial planning
• UNDP (2022). Integrated Spatial Planning Workbook
• UNESCO-IOC/European Commission (2021). MSPglobal International Guide on Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning.
• UNEP-WCMC (2021). National ecosystem assessments to support implementation of the Convention on Biological Diversity. Cambridge, United Kingdom.
• CBD Decision 13/9: Marine spatial planning and training initiatives (2016)
• CBD Technical Series No. 76: Integrated Coastal Management for the Achievement of the Aichi Biodiversity Targets: Practical Guidance for Implementation based on Experience and Lessons Learned from Coastal and Ocean Governance in the Seas of East Asia (2015).
• UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/20/INF/6: Report of the expert workshop to provide consolidated practical guidance and a toolkit for marine spatial planning (2015) 
• CBD Technical Series No. 68: Marine Spatial Planning in the Context of the Convention on Biological Diversity (2012).
• UNEP/CBD/COP/11/23, part II: Draft guidance on biodiversity-inclusive strategic environmental assessment in marine and coastal areas (2012)
• UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/16/7, section III: Marine spatial planning (2012)
• Voluntary guidelines on biodiversity-inclusive impact assessment (2006) 
• UNEP/CBD/COP/8/26/Add.1: Enhancing the implementation of integrated marine and coastal area management (IMCAM) (2006)
• CBD Technical Series No. 14: Integrated Marine and Coastal Area Management (IMCAM) Approaches for Implementing the Convention on Biological Diversity (2004).
• Decision 7/5, annex II: Guidance for the Development of a National Marine and Coastal Biodiversity Management Framework (2004)
• Akwé: Kon Voluntary Guidelines for the Conduct of Cultural, Environmental and Social Impact Assessments Regarding Developments Proposed to Take Place on, or which are Likely to Impact on, Sacred Sites and on Lands and Waters Traditionally Occupied or Used by Indigenous and Local Communities (2004)