COP16, the Conference of the Parties (COP) to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), brought together 196 Parties and assessed the progress being made to the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework that was established at COP15. Expectations were high, and the conference ended with unresolved gaps in fund financing and the need for stronger commitments by governments and companies. However, there were initiatives made to combine nature and climate responses, as well as a growing number of corporations moving from setting targets to understanding how best to implement them. This article highlights three main takeaways from an intense two weeks.
For more information on what was expected from COP16, please read our article.
Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities: Strengthening their Role
COP16 saw the creation of a new Subsidiary Body and permanent group under the Convention on Biological Diversity that aims to give Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities (IPLCs) an institutional voice, while creating new ways for IPLCs to be part of global biodiversity decisions. The Parties also adopted a new Programme of Work titled “Programme of work on Article 8(j) and other provisions of the Convention on Biological Diversity related to indigenous peoples and local communities to 2030”. The role of Afro-descendant communities in biodiversity preservation and conservation was also formally acknowledged in Article 8(j).
This Programme of Work, meant to ensure IPLCs and traditional afro-descendant communities have a seat at the table, focuses on three main areas:
- Conservation, protection, and restoration of biological diversity
- Sustainable use of biological diversity
- Fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from the utilization of genetic resources
Regarding the third subject, the Cali Fund was established at COP16 which aims to create a multilateral financial mechanism for sharing benefits derived from Digital Sequence Information (DSI). Thanks to this fund, pharmaceutical, cosmetic, agribusiness, biotechnology, and other industries benefiting from DSI, are expected to put either 0.1% of their revenue or 1% of their profits derived from the use of DSI in this fund. At least 50% of these funds will be given to IPLCs. While contributing to this fund is still voluntary, companies who do so will receive legal conformity and access to a multilateral system of DSI, while also increasing their company’s reputation. While it remains unclear what the total sum of this fund will be, it is a step in the right direction and represents a transformative approach to fair and equitable benefit-sharing.
Land and Oceans: 30x30 Target
The Protected Planet Report 2024, launched at COP16 by UNEP-WCMC, is the first report of its kind to assess whether we will achieve the ambitious Target 3 of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework; conserving 30% of terrestrial, inland water, coastal, and marine areas by 2030 (target 30x30).
The report disclosed that as of August 2024, 17.6% of terrestrial and inland waters and 8.4% of ocean and marine areas are considered to be protected areas. While these numbers have gone up since 2020, they both increased by less than 0.5%. Work will need to be done to fill the missing gap of 12.4% for land and 21.6% for ocean.
The main report highlights:
- Most of the progress made to protect the oceans are those within national waters, despite the high seas accounting for more than 60% of ocean waters.
- There remains a lack of evidence as to whether the protected and conserved areas are being fairly governed. Around 0.2% of terrestrial and less than 0.01% of marine areas have reported government assessments.
- While indigenous territories account for 13.6% of global terrestrial areas, less than 4% of protected areas are governed by Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities.
National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans
Out of the 196 Parties, 119 submitted their national biodiversity targets, while 44 countries submitted revised National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plans, indicating there is still work to achieve the Global Biodiversity Framework 30x30 goals. While there was a strong presence of corporate representatives, and more than double the number of delegates compared to COP15, there is an artificial divide between nature and biodiversity responses and climate responses, despite being directly linked to each other.
Wealthier countries are falling short of their promise to contribute $20 billion per year (up to 2025) to help developing countries protect, conserve or restore nature and biodiversity. By contrast, the Global Biodiversity Framework Fund has raised $250 million.
Two organisations, The Taskforce on Nature-Related Financial Disclosures (TNFD) and the Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero (GFANZ), want to unite the two agendas together. The TNFD and the GFANZ put in motion separate consultation drafts during COP16 focusing on how corporates and financial institutions can integrate nature and biodiversity targets into their climate transition planning.
With just five years left to reach the 2030 targets set in the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, there is still work to be done. While progress has been made to advance biodiversity strategies, all stakeholders will need to increase their action and commitments. We can reach success by strengthening IPLC partnerships, continuing to expand the cover of protected areas, and increasing financial investments. While COP16 showed progress in implementing corporate nature and biodiversity strategies effectively, and promising starts have been made, now is the time to push.
Sources:
Share this
Biodiversity COP: How does it differ from the Climate COP?
The Rise of Biodiversity Credits: The Standards to Reach Nature Positive
