By Viktor Chistyakov
Process, Key Insights, and Policy Recommendations
1. Introduction and Purpose
The consultancy was undertaken to help the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) of Guyana strengthen the country’s biodiversity governance framework and create an enabling environment for effective conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity. The work supports the alignment of Guyana’s National Biodiversity Targets (NBTs) with the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) Targets and formulates actionable reforms to close identified legislative, policy, institutional, practice, and cross-cutting gaps.
2. Methodological Approach
The assessment combined rigorous legislative and policy review, a review of institutional architecture, and broad stakeholder engagement, ensuring that recommendations rest on a strong evidence base.
Desk review. Over 50 legal and policy instruments—including the Environmental Protection Act, Protected Areas Act, Amerindian Act, and the Low Carbon Development Strategy 2030—were analyzed for coherence with the NBTs and GBF Targets.
Gap-Typology Analysis. Gaps were categorized as legal, policy, institutional, practice, or cross-cutting, allowing targeted remedies.
Stakeholder Consultations: Line ministries, including the EPA, Guyana Forestry Commission (GFC), Guyana Geology and Mines Commission (GGMC), and Ministry of Agriculture—contributed through bilateral in-person and Zoom meetings and a 2-day in-person workshop.
Comparative Case Studies. Lessons were drawn from Costa Rica, Belize, and Jamaica, highlighting best practices in biodiversity financing, community co-management, and integrated policy frameworks.
3. Key Insights from the Gap Assessment
The process revealed structural and operational weaknesses that, if addressed, will significantly improve Guyana’s capacity to meet GBF and NBT obligations.
a. Legal and Policy Frameworks Require Consolidation and Modernization
Many biodiversity-related laws and strategies are outdated or fragmented. Access and Benefit Sharing (ABS) regulations remain absent; the Protected Areas Act and related implementing regulations need revision; and the principles of the Escazú Agreement—particularly on access to information and public participation—are only partially reflected in national legislation.
b. Institutional Coordination is Weak
Overlapping mandates and limited information flows impede effective governance. Stakeholders called for standardized reporting channels, formal memoranda of understanding (MOUs), and a central, searchable database of existing agreements and terms of reference (TORs) to support inter-agency cooperation.
c. Capacity Constraints Limit Implementation
Agencies face shortages of staff skilled in spatial planning, GIS, biodiversity monitoring, and restoration. Without systematic training and retention strategies, enforcement and policy execution remain inconsistent.
d. Data Transparency and Public Engagement are Limited
Biodiversity data, including legal and spatial information, is not readily accessible. Proposals from improvement included quarterly “biodiversity newsletters,” shared databases, and the explicit framing of sectoral projects as biodiversity-related to improve visibility and accountability.
e. Local Inclusion is Critical
Community-level engagement—particularly of Indigenous Peoples, Amerindian Village Councils, and community-based organizations—is insufficient. Stronger procedural and enforceable guarantees of participation is essential for equitable benefit-sharing and compliance.
f. Cross-Cutting Systemic Gaps
Fragmented governance, financing constraints, and competing mandates hinder a unified biodiversity agenda. Biodiversity-sensitive zoning is not yet applied, and benefit-sharing mechanisms for genetic resources remain underdeveloped.
4. Policy and Legislative Recommendations
The consultancy translates these insights into a staggered sequence of actions.
Short-Term Actions (2025–2026)
- Finalize ABS regulations and revise the Protected Areas Act with implementing rules.
- Establish and maintain an inter-agency MOUs/TORs database and formal coordination mechanisms.
- Begin regular issuance of biodiversity newsletters and public information platforms.
Medium-Term Actions (2027–2028)
- Enact Escazú Agreement-aligned regulations, including strengthened provisions on access to information and public participation.
- Pilot biodiversity-inclusive Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs) and develop an ecosystem services policy.
- Launch a national biodiversity finance strategy, exploring mechanisms such as Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES), REDD+, and green bonds.
Long-Term Actions (2029–2030)
- Consolidate and modernize existing statutes into a comprehensive Biodiversity Act providing explicit mandates for ecosystem restoration, species conservation, and GBF-aligned indicators.
- Each recommendation is paired with a cost category and lead agency (EPA, GFC, GLSC, PAC, GWCMC, and others) to help decision-makers prioritize investments and track progress.
5. Strengthening Institutions and Participation
Beyond legal amendments, the recommendations emphasize inclusive and adaptive governance:
- Capacity Building: Continuous training in biomonitoring, spatial planning, and data management for EPA, GFC, GGMC, and regional authorities.
- Participatory Mechanisms: Formal roles for Amerindian Village Councils and CBOs in NBT decision-making, consistent with CBD Decision 15/11 on participation and equity.
- Knowledge Sharing: Centralized biodiversity data platforms to support science-based policymaking and improve transparency.
6. Expected Outcomes and Benefits
- Implementing these reforms will generate ecological, social, and economic gains:
- Biodiversity Conservation: Stronger legal and policy frameworks will protect habitats, conserve species, and reduce ecosystem degradation, supporting GBF Targets 2, 3, and 6.
- Data-Driven Management: Improved monitoring and reporting systems will facilitate adaptive management and fulfillment of CBD reporting obligations (Decisions 15/3 and 15/5).
- Sustainable Development: By mainstreaming biodiversity into mining, agriculture, and infrastructure, Guyana can reduce harmful land-use practices, improve climate resilience, and safeguard water security.
- Economic Opportunities: Green financing and market incentives will attract investment and support livelihoods, with particular benefits for Indigenous communities, women, and youth.
7. Conclusion
The work undertaken for this consultancy offers a coherent blueprint for Guyana’s biodiversity governance through 2030, anchored in global best practice and national realities. By acting on the prioritized legal reforms, institutional measures, and participatory mechanisms outlined above, Guyana can strengthen compliance with international biodiversity commitments
This work was conducted under the following UNDP project: https://www.undp.org/guyana/our-focus/energy-environment-and-extractive-industries/gbfeas