COP16 ends in failure despite all indicators for nature ‘blinking red’

Hopes for halting the destruction of nature are running low after the dedicated UN biodiversity summit ended in disarray. 

Negotiations at COP16, the 2024 United Nations Biodiversity Conference, in Cali, Colombia collapsed in overtime on Saturday morning as many governments had to leave to catch flights.

Crucially, countries failed to agree on how the major biodiversity treaty forged at the last COP to protect 30 per cent of nature will be achieved or funded.

“This COP was meant to be a status check on countries’ progress toward saving nature, and all indicators on that status are blinking red,” says Crystal Davis, global director of the World Resources Institute’s food, land and water programme.

“The primary concern is that countries are not on track to protect 30 per cent of the world’s land and water by 2030. Without conserving the most critical ecosystems, the consequences for all countries will be immense.”

There were some breakthroughs, including a global levy on companies profiting from nature’s genetic data and the establishment of a permanent body for Indigenous peoples at COP. But the verdict of most commentators is that – as director general of WWF International Kirsten Schuijt puts it – “we’re now veering dangerously off track.”

“This outcome jeopardises the implementation of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework [GBF],” she adds. “Nobody should be okay with this – because it will impact us all.”

Why did COP16 fail to deliver what’s needed for nature?

Delegates arriving in Colombia for the 21 October to 1 November conference faced a tall order.

Governments were due to submit new National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs) by the start of COP16, but only one-fifth did so.

Inger Andersen, head of the UN Environment Programme (UNEP), noted that those in Cali arrived with a “heavy agenda of work”.

But many countries were infuriated by the way the discussions proceeded, with vital issues left to the final hour. 

“We really question the lack of legitimacy of discussing such an important issue at the end of the COP,” Brazilian negotiator Maria Angelica Ikeda told the UK’s Guardian newspaper just before discussions of resource mobilisation were cut off. “We should have started discussing these issues at the beginning […] We should have decisions guaranteeing that we have the resources we need.”

Others lamented that developing countries were forced to leave the summit – which was due to finish on Friday evening – because they could not afford to change flights, resulting in the meeting losing quorum. Talks will need to continue next year at an interim meeting in Bangkok.

What did COP16 fail to achieve?

Under the GBF, countries pledged to collectively mobilise $200 billion (€184 bn) per year for conservation from public and private sources. Of this, developed countries committed $20 billion (€18.4 bn) per year for developing countries by 2025, rising to $30 billion (€28 bn) by 2030. 

However, COP16 failed to implement a strategy for raising money for the Global Biodiversity Framework Fund (GBFF).

Some new contributions were announced, including from six European countries. Yet,  with two months to go, the total only stands around €484 million, according to WWF.

“Following the negotiations on biodiversity finance here in Cali was as enjoyable as root canal surgery,” says Bernadette Fischler Hooper, head of international advocacy at the NGO’s UK arm.

COP16 also ran out of time to approve the Convention on Biological Diversity budget for the next two years.

“Finance remains the key sticking point,” says WRI’s Davis. “Most of the world’s biodiversity lies in developing countries that reasonably expect billions rather than millions to support their efforts to protect and restore nature.” 

“Yet wealthier countries’ pledges at COP16 fell far short of what is needed to meet their commitments. And almost no progress has been made on repurposing nature-harming subsidies.”

It also failed to reach a consensus on how the GBF’s four goals and 23 targets will be monitored. In the history of UN biodiversity agreements, the world has yet to meet a single target, and COP16 continued this dispiriting trend. 

Frustratingly, the Guardian reports, most countries were in agreement on the draft monitoring framework for the deal but were unable to sign off on it as time bled out on more divisive topics. 

What did COP manage to achieve?

“The pace of COP16 negotiations did not reflect the urgency of the crisis we are facing,” says Catherine Weller, director of global policy at Fauna & Flora, summing up the mood from many nature-focused NGOs.

“Two years on, the vast majority of nature targets agreed in Montreal [during COP15] regrettably currently still feel like unfunded words on paper.”

Yet Colombia’s COP has also been praised for its inclusive approach, and for managing to foster “major engagement on the sidelines” according to WRI – including on the Amazon rainforest, cities, and food and land use.

A fair – and lucrative – deal for genetic data from nature

One win from COP16 is that governments agreed on a global levy on products made with genetic data from nature. Known as Digital Sequence Information (DSI), pharmaceutical and chemical companies have thus far been able to access the information for free on global databases.

Now nature-rich countries will see some of the gigantic revenues these products generate. Under the terms of the new DSI fund, companies will need to contribute 1 per cent of profits or 0.1 per cent of their revenue if they meet two of three criteria: sales of more than $50 million (€45.8m), profits of more than $5m (€4.6m), and $20m (€18m) in total assets.

This funding will be ring-fenced for investment in nature conservation and restoration. At least 50 per cent of it will be allocated to Indigenous peoples, who play an outsized role in protecting nature.

There are some caveats here, however. With COP attendance dwindling, it was unclear if enough countries were present to formalise the vote that passed. 

The deal is voluntary and national governments will need to introduce the rules domestically. If approved, some estimate that the fund could generate more than £1bn a year for nature conservation.

Indigenous communities are given a permanent seat at the table

Indigenous peoples and local communities also secured a permanent role in the official decision-making of the UN biodiversity process.

Previously represented by an informal working group, this vital demographic will now have a permanent body, which means they can contribute to negotiations without being invited by governments. 

Jennifer “Jing” Corpuz, a lead negotiator for the International Indigenous Forum on Biodiversity (IIFB), described it as a “watershed moment in the history of multilateral environmental agreements”.

This is the first time a UN environment body has made this decision. It is also the first time a COP text has mentioned the role of Afro-descendant peoples in conservation.

“By formally recognising Afro-descendants as key stakeholders, COP16 acknowledges both the historical injustices we have endured and the critical role we play in preserving biodiversity through traditional knowledge and practices,” comments Esther Ojulari, co-director of Baobab Center for Innovation in Ethnic-Racial, Gender, and Environmental Justice.

“This inclusion in the Convention on Biological Diversity framework sets a precedent for environmental policies that honour racial justice and equity.”

Another point on the plus side was an agreement on ways of describing Ecologically Biologically Significant Areas (EBSAs) in the oceans. This takes the world closer to achieving its target of conserving 30 per cent of the seas by 2030.

What’s next for biodiversity action and the road to COP29

With the next UN climate conference, COP29, days away, much discussion was held on the need to link solutions to the entwined climate and biodiversity crises.

After a disappointing COP16, campaigners are now hoping that leaders can pick up the mantle in Baku next week. 

“Looking beyond COP16, we cannot continue at this snail’s pace, and decisive, practical action must continue across the board,” says Weller. “Negotiators at COP29 must keep nature front and centre of the climate agenda. Governments must work harder to get their national action plans through.”’

She emphasises that an ‘all-of-society approach’ is needed – encompassing the private sector, governments, philanthropists, and NGOs.

“Political leaders should now return home and start by raising nature to the top of their political priority list,” adds Davis. “All countries should start mainstreaming their biodiversity and climate goals into sectoral policies, including for agriculture, land use, infrastructure and energy.”

After a perceived lack of leadership from the EU, China, Canada and other powerful players in Cali, there will be an even greater demand for the bloc and wealthy countries to step up at CO29.