The 16th Conference of the Parties (COP16) to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) concluded without reaching essential agreements on financing and monitoring the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (KM-GBF). This shortfall represents a major obstacle to establishing the trust and momentum critical for the upcoming COP29, which begins next week.
COP29, often referred to as the “finance COP” in recent engagements, was once again underscored by the inability to secure a financial strategy for supporting the Kunming-Montreal Framework. Lobbying organizations criticized this delay, noting that repeated pledges have hindered progress on executing and implementing crucial biodiversity goals. Effective development of resilient biodiversity programs requires committed financial support for both creation and operation.
Catalina Gonda, an Argentinian campaigner and representative of Climate Action Network (CAN) at the talks, emphasized the urgency of action. “Countries must urgently resume these discussions and resolve outstanding issues to keep the Global Biodiversity Framework on track to halt and reverse biodiversity loss by 2030,” she said.
The financial impasse has highlighted the lack of a unified approach to mobilizing the US$200 billion annually needed for biodiversity by 2030, as specified in Target 19 of the KM-GBF. Significant divisions over funding mechanisms have stymied progress, with many developing nations advocating for a dedicated biodiversity fund managed by COP itself. This push reflects frustrations with governance and accessibility issues related to the existing Global Environment Facility (GEF).
Disagreements over funding have been intensified by the failure of developed nations to deliver on their promise of US$20 billion annually in public finance by 2025. Gonda criticized wealthier nations for shirking their financial commitments and minimizing the importance of public finance, noting that they “champion private finance in one room as a solution to the biodiversity funding gap but resist mandatory contributions from companies profiting from genetic data.”
Gonda also pointed out that some developed countries resist clear guidelines to prevent double-counting of climate and biodiversity finance, further undermining their credibility. “Their double standards and weak pledges seriously threaten progress as we approach the NCQG discussions in Baku,” she added.
While COP16 established a new fund, the “Cali Fund,” to support biodiversity by sharing profits from companies using digital sequence information (DSI) from genetic resources, contributions remain voluntary, and payment rates are indicative only.
Climate and Biodiversity Convergence
CAN welcomed COP16’s decision to align biodiversity and climate goals across the UNFCCC and CBD, marking a significant step toward connecting COP16 with COP30. However, ongoing political commitment will be essential to maintain this progress from Cali to Belém.
The decision, however, lacks robust language on transitioning from fossil fuels, addressing the risks of large-scale bioenergy and geoengineering, and ensuring safeguards for biodiversity, human rights, and financing.
Carlos Rittl of the Wildlife Conservation Society, co-coordinator of CAN’s Ecosystems Working Group, highlighted this decision as an important milestone. “Recognizing these outcomes at COP29 in Azerbaijan will be vital to achieving meaningful progress and ensuring that climate and biodiversity are treated as interconnected crises,” said Rittl.
Advancements in Indigenous Rights and Participation
COP16 made notable strides in Indigenous engagement, with CAN praising the establishment of a work program under Article 8(j) and a permanent subsidiary body to secure the active participation of Indigenous Peoples and local communities.
This initiative underscores the value of Indigenous knowledge and perspectives within the CBD process, reinforcing a collective approach to biodiversity conservation.
This move opens up the sessions to greater meaningful engagement with a step toward embracing collective action in averting the climate change crisis at hand. It’s evident the impacts of climate change are unprecedented eventualities that cause disruptions of infrastructure and livelihoods hence a need for intensified response and resilience measures.
