In this contribution, we analyze how the principles of regional, gender, and disciplinary balance that were adopted by IPBES have been applied to the Multidisciplinary Expert Panel (MEP): the body of experts responsible for the scientific and technical functions of IPBES and embedded in its knowledge-making practices.
In doing so, we compare the selection of the interim MEP in 2013 with the new MEP in 2015 and find a small improvement in gender and disciplinary balance that varies across the United Nations regional groupings. According to the ambition of IPBES, there is significant room for improvement, but “opening-up” expertise in an intergovernmental setting proves challenging.
Figure 1. The interim and 2015 MEP showing experts in regional groupings that were proposed (both inside and outside circle) and selected (inside circle only). Coloring shows: (a) gender (color: women – green; men – yellow) and (b) academic discipline (color: natural sciences – green; economics – red; social sciences – blue; other – purple; white – no data available) based on most recent university training. Regional labels: Africa (African group); Asia (Asia-Pacific group); EE (Eastern European group); GRULAC (Latin American and Caribbean group); WEOG (Western Europe and Other group).
Montana, J. and Borie, M. (2015; equal contribution). ‘IPBES and biodiversity expertise: Regional, gender and disciplinary balance in the composition of the interim and 2015 Multidisciplinary Expert Panel‘. Conservation Letters. DOI: 10.1111/conl.12192
This research was conducted as part of PhD at the Department of Geography, University of Cambridge. This research was supported by the UK Economic and Social Research Council.