CBD COP 16: what is at stake at the Convention on Biological diversity in Colombia

The 16th Conference of the Parties (COP16) to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), represents a pivotal moment in international efforts to combat the escalating biodiversity crisis. Parties will discuss the modalities and means of implementing the Global Biodiversity Framework at global and national levels.

We interviewed Nele Marien, Forests and Biodiversity programme co-coordinator at Friends of the Earth International, to understand why these discussions will be crucial for the protection of biodiversity.

We are currently in the midst of the sixth mass extinction. In order to address the ongoing biodiversity crisis, marked by accelerating species extinction and ecosystem degradation, the UN Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) is crucial. This convention facilitates international cooperation, which is essential because individual countries alone cannot tackle such a vast issue.

The recent Global Biodiversity Framework, adopted in 2022, addresses various factors impacting biodiversity, from preservation and conservation efforts to human interactions with ecosystems. It includes specific targets related to conservation measures, agriculture, climate, the rights of indigenous people, governmental regulation and finance, laying a foundation for comprehensive action.

Nevertheless, we believe that these issues cannot be addressed without a complete system change, and the multilateral system – at the current stage – is not providing it.

Several priorities emerge for negotiating parties. One central theme is the development of robust indicators to ensure efficient implementation and enable a proper assessment of the success of biodiversity measures. In addition, nations’ assessment must reflect the accountability towards the rights of indigenous people and gender equality in biodiversity policies. A failure to include these indicators risks undermining hard-won agreements.

Amount and distribution of finance constitute critical issues as well. There’s an urgent need to establish a dedicated biodiversity fund directly managed by the Conference of Parties rather than through donor-controlled avenues like the Global Environment Facility, in order to assure more fairness in the equity and distribution of the available funds. This change would enhance the financial equity among countries, especially those in the Global South, where inadequate funding stifles biodiversity initiatives. It is also essential that adequate amounts of funding are provided, including to indigenous peoples, and that these do not rely upon false solutions, such as finance from philanthropy and biodiversity offsetting and crediting.

Respect for Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities is also paramount for the preservation of biodiversity. This COP will approve the work program of the negotiation stream oriented at IPLCs. FOEI has proposals to enhance the rights of IPLCs through upcoming work for the next COPs. We also wish to see the process institutionalized through a subsidiary body.
Friends of the Earth International also strongly advocates for policy measures that regulate the impact of all economic sectors on biodiversity. A process called “Mainstreaming biodiversity in all sectors” had previously pushed to enhance all the false solutions, including Nature-based Solutions. FoEI wishes to see an alternative process that focuses on strong, implementable, and enforceable multilateral regulations.

FoEI will fight back on false solutions wherever they appear in texts, such as in the climate and biodiversity, and the finance discussions. Or, when they are being promoted by many actors, even if they are not officially in the negotiation texts, such as is the case with Biodiversity Offsetting.

Climate change is currently having profound effects on global biodiversity. Rising temperatures push species toward cooler as well as higher altitudes, disrupting delicate ecosystems and interspecies relationships. Additionally, ocean acidification jeopardizes coral reefs, which are critical to marine life. These changes not only threaten species but also human societies that are reliant on these ecosystems. At the same time, biodiversity loss is undermining the climate. Carbon is stored in all living beings, and as nature gets lost, also the capacity to store carbon is also undermined. 

This negative cycle gets exacerbated by many climate policies, which have negative impacts on biodiversity, and are false solutions. Examples are monoculture tree plantations for capturing carbon, offsetting and nature-based solutions, and biomass energy, amongst others. All of these policies undermine ecosystems. 

Biodiversity is frequently viewed as a tool for carbon capture, often through Nature-Based Solutions projects focused on offsetting. However, with carbon capture as the primary aim, these projects frequently fail to benefit biodiversity or ecosystems. Instead, they tend to favor monoculture tree plantations, which support little to no biodiversity, undermining ecological health rather than enhancing it. 

FoEI will advocate to keep Nature-Based Solutions out of the climate and biodiversity decision. We will also push to ensure that in the future, all climate policies will be reviewed on their impact on biodiversity. Wherever the impacts are negative, a moratorium should be set up.

Biodiversity offsetting poses significant risks as it attempts to compensate for ecosystem destruction, leading to greater ecological harm. This makes them even less environmental sound than carbon offsets. When one area is developed, offsetting relies either on preserving another area, claiming that this would have been destroyed otherwise. Effectively this means accepting the destruction of one out of two natural areas. Other offsets are based upon restoring another area, but replacement ecosystems are typically of lower quality. Additionally, the urgent need for ecological restoration can take decades, during which the lost biodiversity cannot be recovered. Offsetting policies often also infringe on indigenous lands, as their territories are compromised under the guise of environmental protection.

A successful COP16 would hinge on several outcomes.

• Strengthening the indicators framework to incorporate human rights and the rights of indigenous people setting a precedent for fairer, more accountable environmental governance.
• Financially, creating a dedicated fund under the authority of the COP would help ensure that funds reach countries most in need, enabling real change on the ground. There needs to be clear commitments by developed countries to deliver the committed funds, and the reliance on false solutions to provide funds must be reversed.
• The process of “mainstreaming biodiversity into all economic sectors” should be redirected toward a new process on strong regulations against practices that harm ecosystems, steering clear of false solutions.
• Addressing the inadequacies in climate-related policies is vital. A robust scientific review of the impacts of carbon-offsetting schemes and other negative climate decisions on biodiversity could illuminate the detrimental consequences of such policies, leading to subsequent moratoria on such policies.

The future of our ecosystems—and life as we know it—depends on the outcomes of this vital conference. Now is the time for us to unite in advocating for policies that truly protect our planet’s rich biodiversity. Let’s make our voices heard and be part of the fight to ensure they do!