Improved communication between the different stakeholders involved in biodiversity conservation (not only the local or indigenous communities, as pointed out by Heidi Wittmer) was a main theme of this last session. According to Caspian Richards, scientists have an important role in communicating the intrinsic value of biodiversity to people, and could benefit from and contribute to other people's knowledge in this way. Michalis Skourtos, however, argued that science and local knowledge could only benefit from one another once the values argument was abandoned and communication was improved. In his contribution, Martin Sharman pointed out that a difficulty in benefiting from local knowledge was the importance of cultural perspective (if humans are part of, or outside, nature). However, indigenous knowledge should be regarded as intellectual property, and any research, including the identification of local knowledge in Europe and the attitudes towards indigenous or local knowledge, should involve the local community and help perpetuate that knowledge. Heidi Wittmer added that research should also focus on understanding how property rights were being assigned and negotiated within the CBD framework. Sandra Bell agreed that the acknowledgement of indigenous knowledge was essential in conservation initiatives. And, even though the nature of indigenous knowledge involved long-term and costly studies, indigenous knowledge should be integrated in an inter-disciplinary network involving social and natural scientists.

The second main focus of discussion revolved again on the values attributed to biodiversity. Felix Rauschmayer took the debate on biodiversity values to more practical grounds by arguing that it was important to look at both intrinsic and instrumental values at the local level, with local communities actively involved in conservation. The role of scientists here, according to Felix Rauschmayer, is to combine local knowledge and values with scientific knowledge, develop decision-making structures and implement them at the local level. Gina Green described such an approach in the tropics, the Equator Initiative, promoting community-based activities that integrate biodiversity conservation with sustainability. Gina Green added that a major priority was to understand the links between policy and local action through an integrated framework reporting to civil society the benefits or costs of such projects. Still on the notion of biodiversity values, Timothy Swanson and colleagues identified a number of approaches designed to value biodiversity, including non-anthropocentric and non-market values. Felix Rauschmayer added that one had to identify the whole range of values associated with biodiversity, capture and aggregate them as a multi-criteria decision aid.

In the last session of this e-conference, we would like to develop the themes in session 2 a little further and discuss the ways in which we can integrate our knowledge into new technologies, innovative plans for local development and biodiversity conservation.

A joint session with the MARBENA project e-conference "Marine Biodiversity in the South Mediterranean and the Black Sea" will be held from today until the 17th April, focusing on marine aspects of the issues we have been discussing in earlier sessions.

Looking forward to your contributions,

The Organizing Committee