mobilizing africa’s policy ... - biodiversity...

Mobilizing Africa’s policy & decision-making relevant biodiversity data

24 March 2014, Pretoria National Botanic Garden - Russell Galt

Outline

• Programme

• Recap on project

– Aims, objectives, outputs and outcomes

• Progress

- Berlin workshop

- Toolkit

- Questionnaire

- Website

Programme of the 2nd JRS project workshop

Setting priorities

Workshop: Setting priorities: the 2nd in a series of workshops held in the framework of the project, Mobilizing Africa’s policy and decision-making relevant biodiversity data

Dates: 25-27 March 2014

Venue: Biodiversity Centre, Pretoria National Botanic Garden, Pretoria, South Africa

Convenor: SANBI

Sponsor: JRS Biodiversity Foundation

Partners: GBIF Secretariat and GBIF Africa Group

Objectives:

• Decide what biodiversity data is required for making evidence-based policies and decisions in Africa;

• Map institutional landscapes to determine the significant sources and repositories of required biodiversity data;

• Determine the current availability and accessibility of required biodiversity data;

• Set priorities for the mobilization (collection, digitization and publication) of required biodiversity data; and

• Identify regional capacity constraints in biodiversity informatics and, accordingly, agree on the type of training to be provided at subsequent workshops;

+ Acquaint newcomers to the community of practice;

+ Galvanize the community.

DAY 1: Setting the scene and determining the data - 25 March 2014

Until 12h00 Arrival of delegates

12h00 – 13h00 Lunch at Pretoria NBG

13h00 – 13h30 Introductions, ground rules, aims and expectations - Selwyn Willoughby, SANBI

13h30 – 13h45 Biodiversity informatics: a global overview - Olaf Bánki, GBIF

13h45 – 14h00 Global Biodiversity Information Outlook - Selwyn Willoughby, SANBI

14h00 – 14h15 Regional progress and roadmap - Hulda Gideon, TanBIF

14h15 – 15h00 Update on progress implementing the JRS project - Russell Galt, SANBI

15h00 – 15h20 Tea and coffee

15h20 – 16h00 Review of draft toolkit to determine policy-relevant

biodiversity data - Russell Galt, SANBI

16h00 – 17h30 Determining and verifying policy-relevant

biodiversity data per country - All delegates

17h30 – 17h45 Bus to Protea Hotel

19h00 – 20h00 Supper at the Protea Hotel Restaurant in Hatfield

DAY 2: Institutional maps and data gaps - 26 March 2014

07h00 – 08h30 Breakfast in Protea Hotel Restaurant

08h30 – 09h00 Bus to Pretoria NBG

09h00 – 09h15 Welcome remarks of the CEO - Tanya Abrahamse, SANBI

09h15 – 10h00 Toolkit review: feedback from groups - Russell Galt, SANBI

10h15 – 10h30 Tea/coffee and group photograph

10h30 – 11h15 Determining policy relevant data in each country - Selwyn Willoughby, SANBI

11h15 – 12h00 Mapping institutional landscapse - Olaf Bánki, GBIF

12h00 – 12h45 Lunch

12h45 – 18h00 Field trip to Apartheid Museum in Johannesburg

19h00 – 20h00 Supper at the Protea Hotel Restaurant

DAY 3: Paving a way forward - 27 March 2014

09h00 – 09h15 Recap on previous two days - Russell Galt, SANBI

09h15 – 10h00 Report back from groups - Group nominees

10h15 – 10h30 Tea and coffee - Fatima Parker-Allie, SANBI

10h30 – 11h00 Mapping institutional landscapes - Olaf Banki, GBIF

11h00 – 11h45 Capacity enhancement: opportunities - Fatima Parker-Allie, SANBI

11h45 – 12h00 Next steps and wrap up - Selwyn Willoughby & Russell Galt, SANBI

12h00– 13h00 Lunch and short garden tour

13h00 – 13h15 Biodiversity Heritage Library: scope for

collaboration - Anne-Lise Fourie, SANBI

13h15 – 14h30 Regional planning including workshop in

Benin

- Prof. Jean Ganglo, GBIF Science

Committee

- Hulda Gideon, TanBIF

14h30 – 16h45 Any other business - Selwyn Willoughby, SANBI

16h45 – 17h00 Closure and thanks - Selwyn Willoughby, SANBI

17h00 onwards Departure of delegates

ALL DATA

RELEVANT

MOBILIZED

SWEET SPOT

Creating a virtuous cycle

Project aim

• To mobilize policy and decision-making relevant biodiversity data to ensure that the use of biodiversity data contributes towards informed and sustainable decision-making whilst contributing towards country level socio-economic developmental objectives.

• To agree on a set of priorities signed off by all partners that would help with the proactive collection, collation and management of biodiversity data.

Work areas

• Data publishing strategy and action plan: develop a biodiversity

data publishing strategy and action plan, incorporating a content gap analysis at the node level and ensuring there are incentives to cite and publish data.

• Enhanced Capacity Building: strengthen existing GBIF mentoring,

align existing training programmes and develop a post-graduate curriculum for biodiversity information management.

• Strategic Regional Engagement: strengthen engagement between

African countries and develop a sustainability plan.

Timeframe: October 2014 to March 2015 (18 months)

Objectives

1. Define policy relevant biodiversity data.

2. Gap analysis of priority data

3. Identify priority data holders

4. Enable data sharing (institutional arrangements)

5. On-line tools

6. Share lessons

PROJECT WORK PLAN

OBJECTIVE 1: At a country level, define policy and decision making relevant biodiversity data.

Key Activities Outputs Outcomes

1. Workshop with African partners on 16 April 2013.

2. Desktop survey of biodiversity data required for CBD national reporting by 30 April 2013.

3. Develop a draft Toolkit by 31 July 2013.

4. Appoint regional coordinator by 1 July 2013.

1.1. Draft online and print guides and Toolkit to determine policy and decision-making relevant data published by 31 July 2013.

A. Access and use of toolkit. B. National environmental leaders

have clarity on what biodiversity data must be collected and why.


1. Assemble and validate national level inventory of policy relevant biodiversity data by 30 August 2013

2. Finalize the Toolkit by 30 November 2013.

2.1. A draft report on the priority biodiversity data that must be mobilized will be published on line by 30 November2013.

A. Report will be used and cited. B. Strategic direction to data

mobilization activities at participant country level.

PROJECT WORK PLAN

OBJECTIVE 2: A gap analysis of how much of priority data is readily available and how much must be collected.


1. Meet with node coordinators and national officials from western Africa by 16 August 2013.

2. Meet with node coordinators and national officials from eastern Africa by 24 August 2013.

3. Meet with node coordinators and national officials from northern Africa by 7 September 2013.

4. Meet with node coordinators and national officials from southern Africa by 14 September 2013.

5. Convene partners for review by 8 October 2013.

3.1 A report on the physical data curation and ownership for 4 countries by 16 August 2013.

3.2 A report on the physical data

curation and ownership for 4 total countries by 24 August 2013.


curation and ownership for 4 total countries by 7 September 2013.


curation and ownership for 4 total countries by 14 September 2013.

3.5 Review and finalize the consolidated

report on national level biodiversity requirements 8 October 2013.

A. Knowledge of the location and ownership of available data to enable strategic institutional arrangements.

PROJECT WORK PLAN

OBJECTIVE 3: An inventory of who holds the identified priority data.


1. Analyze the institutional barriers (including issues pertaining to standards, intellectual property rights, sensitive data and commercial use) and opportunities to share data.

4.1 A national partnership map of data holders and owners detailing institutional barriers to sharing information and possible approaches to address these barriers by 31 March 2014.

4A. A managed network of partners that would enable easy sharing of data.

PROJECT WORK PLAN

OBJECTIVE 4: An enabling institutional environment to facilitate the sharing of the data.


1. In conjunction with GBIF, undertake an assessment of the readiness of national partners to implement the Nodes Portal Toolkit by 31 October 2014.

5.1 Scoping of use cases for the application of the NPT for pilot countries (pilot countries to be identified through consultation). 5.2 The implementation of the Nodes Portal Toolkit at country level with support from GBIF and other supporting nodes to publish the biodiversity data.

5A. Easy and responsible management and dissemination of information.

PROJECT WORK PLAN

OBJECTIVE 5: Appropriate and responsive on-line tools to support the capture, collation and collection of policy &

decision-making relevant biodiversity data.

Key Activities Outputs Outcomes 1. By January 2015

disseminate the lessons leant and ensure uptake of outputs of the project in the post graduate programme on biodiversity information management.

6.1 A module developed on data mobilization for the Biodiversity Information Management post graduate programme at the University of the Western Cape. 6.2 A presentation at the GBIF nodes meeting. 6.3 A presentation at the GBIF Africa meeting. 6.4 A final project report.

6A. Capacity increased to support informed management of biodiversity information.

PROJECT WORK PLAN

OBJECTIVE 6: To share the lessons learnt in the project.

Progress

Milestones until end of February 2014:

Convened African partners twice

Drafted toolkit to determine policy and decision-making relevant biodiversity data

1st JRS project workshop (1-2 Oct. 2013) in Berlin

Purpose of the workshop • Acquainted participants to the project; • Defined policy-making relevant biodiversity data; • Identified data-constrained policy areas and

relevant case studies linking data to policy; • Initiated the mapping of institutional landscape; • Identified barriers and solutions for data

mobilization; and • Highlighted financial, technical and technological

needs data mobilization.

Berlin workshop outputs

Policy-relevant data defined

• Serves to better inform policy-making, either directly or via scientific research;

• Results in discernible improvements in policy-making;

• Contributes towards broader development priorities;

• Is scientifically justifiable and defensible;

+ Serves to complete otherwise-incomplete data sets, thereby improving utility in research;

+ Necessitates inter-institutional cooperation, thereby strengthening networks.


Barriers to data sharing: • Concerns that data will be misappropriated • Concerns that data-sharing will somehow undermine the authority of

data-holders; • Concerns that data quality may be inadequate for publishing; • Concerns that imperfect data will be subjected to heightened scrutiny; • Inadequate incentives for data-sharing, or at least doubts over the

professed benefits; • Inadequate tools (including hardware e.g. scanners); • Inadequate skills and training, especially in languages other than English; • Inadequate human and financial resources; and • Inadequate policy framework that is not conducive to data sharing. • Inadequate communication.

Solutions for data-sharing: • Assure the data-holding institution/individual that they will retain

ownership of their data, regardless of how widely it is shared, and that they will be appropriately credited whenever the data is used.

• Highlight adverse implications of withholding data, insofar as the data-holding institution and its interests are concerned.

• Assure the data-holding institutions that data can be upgraded after being published to quell their concerns over data quality and scrutiny.

• Strengthen the incentives for data-sharing, highlighting the value of collaboration, citations, co-authorship, policy-relevance, and the strategic importance of the dataset.


Solutions for data-sharing (continued…) • Engage data-holding institutions at the highest appropriate level

where sufficient decision-making power to authorize data-sharing is vested.

• Convene data-holding institutions to identify common ground, build trust, and establish a national network.

• Communicate the strategic importance and multifarious benefits of data-sharing in a culturally, linguistically and technically appropriate manner.

• Foster a policy framework that is conducive to data-sharing. • Provide staff training on biodiversity informatics to build

competence in data-holding institutions.


Progress

Upcoming milestones by end of March 2014:

Develop a questionnaire to collate feedback on toolkit

Convening partners in Pretoria

Implement draft toolkit with partners

Draft report of priority biodiversity data for each country

Review of toolkit Questions for consideration:

1. Are there any important omissions in the proposed structure, contents and activities pertaining to this toolkit?

2. To what extent does the description of the relationship between data, science and policy concur with your experiences in practice?

3. Should the data-science interface be elaborated and if so, how?

4. Is the distinction made between scientists and policymakers sufficient, or should these categories be further subdivided (e.g. into groups such as field scientists, data curators, researchers, civil servants and politicians)?

5. Is the definition of policy relevance appropriate?

6. How practical are each of the four different “approaches” to determine priority policy-relevant biodiversity data?

7. Which of the four approaches would you be most likely to adopt?

8. Are there any alternative approaches that ought to be included?

Determining policy-relevant biodiversity data

Approach I: Refer to explicit stipulations of data needs

Approach II: Infer implicit, non-stipulated data needs

Approach III: Engage and consult stakeholders to determine and verify policy-relevance

Approach IV: Mobilize metadata and interpret demand signals

Experiences, case studies and intentions

1. What biodiversity data have you been most successful in mobilizing so far?

2. How did you decide which biodiversity data to mobilize? (low-hanging fruit, responding to a demand, intuition, etc.)

3. What biodiversity data will you prioritize to mobilize in the next few years and why? Please give 3 examples.

Country Institution Priority data

(e.g.

taxonomic

groups,

specific area…)

Timeline Condition (e.g.

written, digitized,

published)

Accessibility

(e.g. publicly

accessible, on

special

request,

inaccessible)

Completeness

of data

Data owner Data curator

Mauritanie E.N.S Wetlands Analogue,digitized

Partial accessibility

Not complete N.H.M Ahmed Ould

Aliyenne

Nationals

Parks

Birds Analogue


Not complete National Parks

IMROP Fishs Analogue,digitized


Not complete IMROP

mobilizing africa’s policy ... - biodiversity...

Documents