Roland Kupers, a lead architect at the United Nations Environment Programme’s (UNEP) International Methane Emissions Observatory
BAKU, Nov 18 2024 (IPS) – Methane emissions have emerged as a focal point of discussion as global leaders congregate at COP29 in Baku to tackle the escalating climate crisis.
The Methane Problem: Sectoral Challenges and Opportunities
“Methane emissions are not a singular issue but rather a collection of problems spanning five key sectors: oil and gas, coal, waste, rice, and livestock,” Kupers said. He adds that each sector requires tailored solutions.
“UNEP has prioritized the oil and gas industry due to its substantial potential for reduction.”
“The oil and gas industry could achieve a 75 percent reduction in methane emissions by 2030. It’s not only affordable but also feasible, given the industry’s access to technology, capital, and expertise,” Kupers said, adding that the waste sector also presents significant opportunities, although organizing mitigation measures in this sector poses logistical challenges.
UNEP’s approach includes creating detailed programs to address emissions in high-impact industries like oil, gas, and steel.
“Methane emissions account for a third of the climate footprint of steel production, yet they can be eliminated at a cost of less than 1% of steel’s production price.”
Data: A Cornerstone for Action
Kupers also underlined the critical role of accurate data in driving methane mitigation efforts.
“Data is essential for human agency. Without precise, measurement-based data, it’s impossible to identify and address the specific sources of emissions effectively.”
According to him, many existing datasets rely on emission factors derived from outdated studies. UNEP advocates transitioning to real-time, site-specific measurements to better target interventions.
“When you gather accurate data, you often find emissions in unexpected places, stressing the need for precise monitoring.”
Systemic Shifts in the Energy Sector
To align with the 2030 climate goals, Kupers argues for a fundamental transformation of the global energy system.
“While mitigating methane emissions is crucial, it’s not a substitute for decarbonization. The ultimate objective must be to eliminate fossil fuels entirely.”
He also highlighted the health benefits of reducing methane emissions.
“Methane, both directly and through incomplete combustion, contributes to significant local health hazards.”
The Financial Perspective
While climate discussions often center around the financial challenges of adaptation and mitigation, Kupers believes that addressing methane emissions, particularly in the oil and gas sector, is not a financial burden.
“The oil and gas industry is highly profitable and well-resourced. It has no excuse for not addressing its methane emissions,” Kupers said, adding that even oil and gas operations in developing countries operate in highly sophisticated, well-funded environments.
Responsibilities of Developed Nations
The methane issue differs from broader climate equity debates, Kupers explained.
“For methane emissions in oil and gas, the responsibility to act is universal. Whether in Nigeria, Argentina, or Indonesia, the industry operates with the same high standards and capabilities as in developed countries.”
This universality makes methane mitigation a “climate good news story,” as it bypasses some of the equity challenges seen in broader decarbonization debates.
Barriers to Progress
Despite decades of climate discussions, significant hurdles remain in addressing global warming. He attributes the slow progress to a lack of prioritization and awareness about methane’s role.
“Methane has only recently gained prominence on the global agenda. The science highlighting its importance has emerged in the past decade,” Kupers said. Policymakers are often unaware of methane’s substantial climate footprint or the cost-effective solutions available.
Key COP-29 Objectives
“UNEP has established ambitious goals for methane mitigation. The Oil and Gas Methane Partnership (OGMP 2.0), a UNEP-led initiative, currently includes companies responsible for 42 percent of global oil and gas production. Kupers urged more companies to join, with the aim of achieving 80 percent participation,” Kupers said.
Another critical initiative is the Methane Alert and Response System (MARS), which integrates data from a dozen satellites to identify significant emission sources. UNEP then notifies governments and companies of these emissions.
“Over the past year, we’ve sent 1,200 notifications to governments, but the response rate has been dismal—just 1 percent,” Kupers said, a disappointing lack of engagement that points to the need for stronger accountability measures at COP29.
The Stakes: Why Methane Matters
Human-induced methane emissions are responsible for a third of the current warming. Unlike CO2, which is often a byproduct of energy use, methane emissions are largely waste streams. This makes them easier to address and a critical opportunity for climate action.
“Methane mitigation is not just an environmental necessity but a low-hanging fruit. It’s a solvable problem, and we must seize this opportunity,” Kupers said.
Jagadish Vasudev, known widely as Sadhguru, at COP29. Credit: IPS
BAKU, Nov 16 2024 (IPS) – A sudden flurry of activity as Jagadish Vasudev, known widely as Sadhguru, emerges from an interview room in the COP29 media centre. It’s early days of the conference and there is energy and excitement at the venue in Baku.
With his long flowing beard and blue turban, it’s clear that many journalists are keen to interview the influential spiritual leader from India and the founder of the Isha Foundation, which has been dedicated to humanitarian projects since 1992. His initiative, Cauvery Calling, aims to support Indian farmers by encouraging the planting of 2.4 billion trees through agroforestry to restore the Cauvery River basin.
Now in Baku for COP29, Sadhguru shares his insights in an exclusive interview with IPS.
Inter Press Service: Sadhguru, climate change has been a known crisis for over four decades. Yet despite numerous conferences and terms like “loss and mitigation” and “climate finance,” we’re still facing rising temperatures, floods, and droughts. Why are we not succeeding? Are we missing the right approach?
Sadhguru: “Succeeding in what, exactly? The problem is that there’s no clear, actionable goal. We talk about economic development, which many nations pursue without pausing to consider its impact on the planet. At the same time, those who have already achieved a certain quality of life tell others not to follow the same path. It’s a paradox. We tell people to give up hydrocarbons—coal, oil—yet offer no viable alternatives. If we shut off hydrocarbons today, this very conference wouldn’t last ten minutes!
We’re all focused on what to give up but lack sustainable, scalable alternatives. Solar, wind, and similar sources only cover a tiny fraction of our energy needs—less than 3 percent. For real change, we need technology that provides clean, non-polluting energy, but we’re far from that. Nuclear energy is a powerful option, yet there’s too much activism and fear surrounding it. Meanwhile, electric cars, often touted as solutions, don’t really address ecological well-being; they just reduce urban air pollution.”
IPS: So, what would be a more pragmatic approach?
Sadhguru: It’s simple. We need to focus on soil restoration. Changing the soil composition can mitigate up to 37 percent of climate issues, according to studies. The emphasis has shifted a bit from ‘oil’ to ‘soil,’ and that’s a good sign. But beyond that, our entire mindset needs to shift from activism to pragmatic, science-based solutions. Over the past 70 years, we’ve lost 84 percent of wildlife, 92% of freshwater aquatic life, and 84 percent of insect life. The soil lacks organic content, and without it, trillions of microorganisms essential to life are perishing. Most scientists warn that if we continue at this pace, we may only have 40–50 harvests left—about 25–30 years of viable farming.
IPS: Climate change is often seen as a distant, scientific issue. Many people don’t connect with it. Why is that?
Sadhguru: An idea must have legs to walk. If it can’t, it won’t go anywhere. Rather than lofty ideals, we need simple, actionable goals. Soil is foundational to life: we eat from it, and when we die, we go back to it. Ninety-five percent of life forms depend on it, and over half the human population interacts with it daily. We must invest in soil regeneration, not just technologies to replace oil.”
IPS:How do we make this understandable for the common person?
Sadhguru: The common person doesn’t need to grasp all the details. It’s the responsibility of governments to act—to create laws and policies that enforce soil conservation. Blaming consumerism misses the point. People aspire to improve their lives, and those who criticize ‘consumerism’ often hold to a double standard. You can’t stop human aspirations. If anything, we need to reduce our population’s environmental impact over time, but even mentioning that sparks controversy. The truth is, over the past century, life expectancy has increased dramatically—from an average of 28 years in 1947 to over 70 years today. As people live longer, reproduction should be adjusted to balance the population. But people resist even these pragmatic realities.
IPS: You have been advocating for a long time to make living in a village a lucrative affair. How can we make village life sustainable and attractive?
Sadhguru: Yes, but it’s about making rural life viable, not romanticizing it. If the soil is rich, rural life can be economically rewarding. Today, people pay more for organic produce. Imagine if we branded food by the soil’s organic content—consumers would pay more for nutrient-dense produce, and this would incentivize soil conservation. Our agriculture needs to move beyond rice and wheat dependency, which was a temporary solution during the Green Revolution. Now we must transition from that ‘bridge’ to sustainable practices.
IPS:This needs government policies but there are few. Why don’t we see climate change as a political agenda?
Sadhguru: In a democracy, politicians focus on what their voters demand, which often isn’t long-term environmental policies. To enact meaningful change, citizens need to express this desire. For example, our Save Soil movement reached 3.91 billion people in a hundred days. This kind of widespread support influences policy. We’re already seeing action in countries like China, India, and parts of Europe, though it’s gradual. Unfortunately, sometimes governments wait for a disaster before they act. Then only I understand there is a flood. It entered your house somewhere. I think, after all, it’s in the flooding region, you know.
IPS: And you’ve also mentioned that thirty percent of the human diet should come from trees. Could you elaborate on that?
Sadhguru: In Kashmir, for example, over thirty percent of people’s diet used to come from trees. They eat a lot of local fruits. When Hyun Tsang visited India, he observed that the intellect of Indian people was sharper because of the high fruit intake. Today, unfortunately, most fruit is bought in supermarkets, often imported from far-off places. The local connection is being lost, and this has implications for health. Eating local fruit is more than just cultural. The microorganisms in our body and in the soil where we live are continuously in contact. This link between diet and our microbiome is often ignored, yet it affects us deeply. The biome in your body has “cousins” in the land where you live. In yoga, we advise eating foods from within a radius that you can walk in a day. This keeps your body strong and in sync with the environment.
IPS: One critical issue back in India is farmer suicide. What can be done to address this?
Sadhguru: They’re not dying out of choice but out of desperation. When they take loans and cannot repay, life becomes unbearable. Many have inherited farming skills but lack alternatives. If someone with an MBA or MSc in agriculture were given land, they would struggle to match the knowledge and skill of a farmer, yet society undervalues this knowledge. Due to small land holdings—less than a hectare on average—they can neither sustain their families nor avoid debt.
In the past, villagers worked together as a community. Today, small farmers fence their tiny plots and install their own bore wells. The costs are immense and lead to further debt. We need to restore community support, enlarge land holdings, or provide viable alternatives to prevent this tragic cycle.
IPS: And what about faith? Can it play a role in addressing the climate crisis?
Sadhguru: Let’s not focus on faith in the context of climate change. It’s our responsibility to act. When things go wrong due to human error, people often call it fate or God’s will. But this crisis is of our making. And the crisis we talk about isn’t the planet’s—it’s a crisis for human survival. Life on Earth relies on delicate interconnections, from insects to microbes. If these were wiped out, life on the planet would soon collapse. Ironically, if humans disappeared, the planet would thrive. This is the perspective we need: climate change threatens our existence, not the Earth’s.
Soumya Guha, the Global Director of Programs, Plan International. Credit: Umar Manzoor Shah
BAKU, Nov 16 2024 (IPS) – Plan International, a global leader in advocating for children’s rights and gender equality, sees the need for women and Indigenous people to be at the forefront of climate negotiations.
Founded in 1937 during the Spanish Civil War, Plan International has spent over eight decades working to improve the lives of children in some of the world’s most underprivileged regions. While its initial focus was on broader child welfare, the organization has, over the last ten years, shifted its attention toward empowering girls, particularly those from disadvantaged backgrounds. This strategic pivot has an understanding that girls often face compounded barriers to education, health, and economic opportunities, especially in remote and conflict-prone areas.
Today, Plan International, says Soumya Guha, the Global Director of Programs, operates in 52 countries, supported by fundraising activities across 22 locations. Its programs target the most marginalized communities, focusing on holistic, long-term development alongside emergency humanitarian responses. This dual approach has allowed the organization to integrate its development goals with pressing needs, such as disaster resilience and conflict mitigation.
“We believe the first five years of a child’s life are critical in shaping their future,” Guha said. The organization’s “I Am Ready” program, implemented in countries like Laos, Tanzania, and Cambodia, addresses linguistic and social barriers faced by children from marginalized groups. By offering a ten-week intensive program that prepares children for primary school in their local language, the initiative has led to a remarkable 37 percent improvement in school attendance and retention rates.
In earthquake-prone areas, the organization has introduced disaster preparedness programs that equip schools to respond effectively during emergencies. “In the Kathmandu earthquake, schools participating in our safety programs were able to evacuate quickly, saving lives,” Guha said.
Beyond education, Plan International emphasizes sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR), ensuring that young people have access to critical information and resources. Programs that support economic empowerment, such as initiatives involving school feeding programs, complement these efforts. In Sierra Leone, for instance, women’s cooperatives not only supply food for schools but also reinvest their earnings to establish educational facilities in underserved areas. This approach has created a ripple effect, fostering gender equality, boosting local economies, and enhancing educational outcomes.
Recognizing the disproportionate impact of climate change on marginalized communities, the organization integrates climate adaptation strategies into its education and health programs. In Asia, combating child marriage and addressing climate vulnerabilities are emerging priorities. “Child marriage is a persistent issue in Asia, and we are determined to tackle it alongside climate change challenges,” Guha said.
He added that operating in regions affected by conflict and disasters requires a nuanced approach. In Ethiopia’s Tigray region, where prolonged conflict has displaced thousands, Plan International works with local organizations to provide immediate relief while also supporting host communities. This dual focus aims to ease tensions and promote peacebuilding. Similar strategies have been employed in Bangladesh during the Rohingya refugee crisis, where the organization ensured that support extended to both displaced populations and the local communities hosting them.
“Technology plays an increasingly important role in Plan International’s programs, particularly in remote and resource-poor areas. In Sierra Leone, for example, a digital platform called Televret enables real-time feedback on the quality of school meals, ensuring accountability and timely action. In Ethiopia, augmented reality tools are being piloted to support children with learning disabilities by making educational content more accessible and engaging,” Guha said.
The organization plans to continue its focus on early childhood development, education, economic empowerment, and climate resilience. While its geographic priorities remain centered on Africa and Asia, it will also maintain a presence in South America, addressing deep-seated inequities that persist despite overall economic progress in the region.
Guha stressed the importance of international cooperation at COP29, particularly in climate finance. The organization advocates for ambitious funding targets, stating that developed nations should bear a significant share of the responsibility. “The most marginalized communities, including women and indigenous populations, must be at the forefront of climate finance allocations,” said.
Ismahane Elouafi, Executive Managing Director of the Consortium of International Agricultural Research Centers (CGIAR). Credit: CGIAR
BAKU, Nov 16 2024 (IPS) – As COP29 negotiations continue in Baku, agricultural leaders are pitching the need for climate-resilient and data-driven solutions to support marginalized farmers and low-income communities.
In an exclusive interview with Inter Press Service (IPS), Ismahane Elouafi, Executive Managing Director of the Consortium of International Agricultural Research Centers (CGIAR), discusses the impact of digital tools, precision agriculture, and low-emission food systems on achieving a sustainable and equitable food future.
Inter Press Service: How helpful are digital tools in supporting marginalized farmers?
Ismahane Elouafi: Digital tools offer immense potential, especially in bridging the knowledge gap between agricultural experts and rural farmers who often lack access to information. Over the past few decades, funding for traditional extension services has dwindled, so digital solutions in local languages can fill this void. Imagine a farmer receiving real-time advice on managing water, soil fertility, or disease in a language they understand—this could revolutionize small-scale farming. Additionally, precision agriculture, which tailors input needs to specific locations and soil compositions, allows for highly customized farming strategies that optimize both resources and yields.
IPS: Can you explain how precision agriculture works in practical terms?
Elouafi: Precision agriculture allows us to deliver exact inputs—water, nutrients, or fertilizers—needed for a specific plot. This approach minimizes waste and environmental impact, and it’s especially useful in regions where resources are scarce. For instance, if a plant needs 20 milliliters of water in one square meter but only 10 milliliters a few kilometers away, precision agriculture ensures we don’t overuse resources. Ultimately, the goal is to increase productivity sustainably, producing more output per hectare with fewer inputs, especially in a time where climate pressures demand we be mindful of environmental impacts.
IPS: How essential is biodiversity to resilient farming systems?
Elouafi: Resilience means that after a shock—a drought, flood, or even conflict—farmers can bounce back and continue production. CGIAR’s focus is to provide tools, technology, and genetic resources that make this possible. We’ve developed rice varieties that survive flooding and maize that tolerates drought, helping farmers maintain productivity despite climatic stressors. Another key factor is small-scale irrigation, which allows farmers to respond to drought by providing supplemental water, ensuring resilience and food security.
IPS: You mentioned low-emission food systems. How can agriculture contribute to climate goals?
Elouafi: Agriculture is responsible for about 33 percent of global greenhouse gases. By shifting to low-emission practices, we can greatly reduce methane and other emissions. For example, traditional rice paddies release large amounts of methane. However, alternative wetting and drying practices can cut methane emissions by 30 percent while boosting productivity by 33 percent. In livestock, using specific forages and studying animal gut microbiomes can reduce methane emissions by up to 60 percent. Agriculture is uniquely positioned to sequester carbon through practices like cover cropping and biodiversity, which is crucial in mitigating climate change.
IPS: Could internet and data use enhance climate security?
Elouafi: Absolutely. Digital access and internet coverage in rural areas can provide timely climate information, like rainfall predictions, which empowers farmers to make better planting decisions. With projects like Elon Musk’s nanosatellite network expanding internet access, marginalized farmers can increasingly leverage climate data. CGIAR also focuses on producing accurate data for the Global South, as existing climate models often rely on data from the Global North, which doesn’t reflect realities in places like Sub-Saharan Africa or South Asia. Our data can inform region-specific, actionable climate strategies.
IPS: How does CGIAR support innovations and resilience in vulnerable regions?
Elouafi: CGIAR operates the largest publicly funded international agricultural research network, with a strong focus on least-income countries. Our goal is to close the yield gap between high- and low-income nations by providing bundles of innovations: drought-resistant varieties, small-scale irrigation, processing improvements, and access to markets. By helping farmers integrate these innovations, we ensure they’re more resilient and have a steady income. Additionally, our research helps policymakers design better frameworks to support smallholders and incentivize sustainable agri-food systems.
IPS: What do you hope COP29 will achieve in advancing agricultural and climate agendas?
Elouafi: COP29 must carry forward the momentum from COP28, where the UAE’s Declaration on Sustainable Agri-Food Systems was endorsed by 160 countries. Agriculture, food, and water systems need to be central to climate discussions. As we look to COP30 in Brazil, with its expertise in regenerative and climate-smart agriculture, I hope we continue viewing agriculture not as part of the climate problem but as an essential solution to it. Climate adaptation in agriculture is non-negotiable—lives and livelihoods depend on it.
Whaia with her daughter Moana at COP29. Credit: Aishwarya Bajpai/IPS
BAKU, Nov 15 2024 (IPS) – Kaitiaki! Whaia says she is at COP29 to bring indigenous wisdom to influence policy and to provide guardianship (kaitiaki) of the climate negotiations.
Whaia, who now lives in Aotearoa, New Zealand, was raised as an Indigenous Aboriginal in Australia, where through her community she led a life of cultural practices that protect the environment.
“Our cultural practices, our cultural ways, and the environment have always been our teacher and our classroom. To recognize our ‘Kaitiaki’ responsibilities is to be with the environment in the way that we have always lived.”
She came here with the Wisdom Keeper delegation and non-profit Indigenous Global Eldership, expressing a preference for saying, “That we are walking with them.” There are 16 members in the delegation with people from all across the globe—Hopi nation, Totemic Mexican, Māori, Palestinian, African, Canadian, Australian, U.S. and Amazonian.
Advocating for people from diverse backgrounds in the policy space, she said, “People are from different places here but united by a common goal. Some of us have been working in this policy space and some of us are new to the policy world. So we are about bridging the gaps between these spaces.”
With regard to promoting Indigenous knowledge, Whaia said, “Sometimes we feel that we don’t know policy. However, if we know our rights of passage, our ancient practices and our protocols, then we know policy. It just gets lost in translation within the language. So we are here to cross the bridge.”
Whaia came to the COP29 with her daughter. Moana beamed when she told IPS that it was Moana’s second COP. “Moana also walked with the Wisdom Keeper delegation in Dubai last year when she was just seven years old.”
On bringing Moana to COP 29, she said, “I take her to all important meetings. I believe that we should actually bring the wisdom into our younger generation. They are the ones who will inherit the choices that we make.”
Whaia, beautifully playing multiple roles as an indigenous person, policy advocate, feminist, and mother, says, “Time taken to take care of our children is never a burden. Taking care of family are the rights and responsibilities that we all must step into. It starts at home, within our communities and extends globally.”
COP29 will need to build on COP16’s successes and mitigate its failures. Credit: COP16
BAKU, Nov 15 2024 (IPS) – The United States just went through its most consequential election. While the outcome raises questions about what the re-election of Trump means for U.S. engagement in global climate talks moving forward (in view of his previous stunt), the game is still on, with or without him. Despite the challenges, local communities, cities, states, private actors, and the public more broadly have embarked on an unstoppable journey—upholding the spirit of the Paris Agreement.
The world’s biodiversity agreement just faced its first big test in Cali, Colombia, at the United Nations’ 16th Biodiversity Conference of the Parties (COP16). The results were decidedly mixed, with some breakthroughs but also critical missed opportunities. Ultimately, it left the international community with a suite of urgent priorities to address our rapidly closing window to halt biodiversity collapse and to align the protection of nature with action on climate change.
With countries rapidly pivoting to the UN climate conference (COP29) this week, they will need to build on COP16’s successes and mitigate its failures, prioritizing the equitable delivery of main “AAA” objectives that are relevant to both: accountability, the alignment of biodiversity and climate plans, and the adequacy of resource mobilization and access to finance.
COP16 in Cali was the first Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) COP since the December 2022 adoption of the landmark Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (KMGBF or, commonly, GBF). The GBF set forth a plan to reverse and halt biodiversity loss by 2030 through the achievement of 23 action-oriented targets and to live in harmony with nature by 2050 by meeting four overarching goals.
COP16 offered a chance to make progress on the AAA objectives, as they are essential to delivering on the GBF, while also ensuring equity is built into each of them. These objectives manifest in some of COP16’s most notable outcomes, including the adoption of a work program and the creation of a permanent subsidiary body on Indigenous Peoples and local communities (IPLCs) under the CBD, with a recognition of the role of Afro-descendants. The outcomes also included decisions on a historic and long-overdue fund to foster equitable benefits sharing from their knowledge.
Overall, however, the international community left Cali with a long road ahead for meaningful, enduring, and equitable implementation.
Accountability A long history of failed promises on biodiversity cast a broad shadow as the international community began negotiations at COP16. None of the biodiversity conservation targets set for 2010–2020 were fully met, making the challenge of halting and reversing biodiversity loss in the following decades much harder. While parties to the CBD have had two years since adopting the GBF to revise their National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs), which are supposed to detail how they will fulfill their GBF obligations, only about 22 percent of countries had done so by the conclusion of the COP.
Developed countries have been particularly notorious for sidestepping accountability, especially on forest commitments. For decades, international policy has largely focused on addressing deforestation in the tropics while allowing the wealthier countries of the Global North to evade scrutiny for their own forest degradation. As countries chart their ambition under the GBF and related commitments at the intersection of nature and climate, voices from the Global South, including the African Ministerial Conference on the Environment, have begun calling for frameworks to drive more equitable accountability.
The GBF’s monitoring framework presented an opportunity to begin correcting this imbalance through the adoption of concrete, shared indicators to guide biodiversity protection and restoration. Instead, in the months leading up to COP16, negotiators began building a monitoring framework that risks cloaking business as usual under the guise of progress. Ultimately, without additional revisions and willingness to strengthen the indicators, the monitoring framework will be subject to the same inequities and weaknesses that have plagued policies for decades.
As countries look to build accountability, the enhanced transparency framework and global stocktake under the UN climate convention can provide models for how to bring more teeth into the CBD process and foster responsibility for all parties. In addition, wealthy countries need to ensure their NBSAPs are action-oriented and to hold themselves to the same standards on deforestation and forest degradation that they expect in the tropics.
There may also be opportunities to channel success elsewhere into greater accountability on biodiversity conservation. One example is the progressing ratification of the new high seas treaty, which is a once-in-a-generation opportunity for biodiversity conservation at a global scale. The treaty must be ratified by 60 nations to come into force and then be effectively implemented, both of which saw progress at COP16 with the announcement of Panama’s ratification during the COP and several countries confirming the signing of the treaty and announcing intentions to start working on the first round of high seas marine protected areas.
Alignment of biodiversity and climate efforts Biodiversity loss and climate change are inextricably linked, requiring aligned, synergistic action. The UN biodiversity and climate conventions have historically been siloed, resulting in disconnected, sometimes conflicting decision-making and ambition. Last December, at the UN climate conference in Dubai (COP28), countries agreed to the first global stocktake, which emphasized the need to halt and reverse deforestation and forest degradation by 2030 and to align with the GBF.
COP16 created an opening for fostering that alignment and ensuring coordination and complementarity. Parties agreed to establish a process, with submissions of views from all stakeholders by May 2025, for coordinating between the three Rio Conventions (addressing climate, biodiversity, and desertification). This creates a pathway for ensuring that climate mitigation and adaptation and biodiversity protection and restoration mutually reinforce each other’s priorities.
At COP29, negotiators should build off of this leadership, elevating the need to integrate climate and biodiversity commitments and reinforcing the importance of an efficient, robust collaboration process. Particularly given next year’s ocean and climate summits in France and Brazil, respectively, which will thrust oceans and forests to the forefront of the climate agenda, it is imperative that countries set the stage for the alignment between biodiversity and climate commitments, create opportunities for the exchange of lessons and best practices between the conventions, and deliver more robust and ambitious climate and biodiversity plans as soon as possible, and no later than in a year’s time in 2025.
Adequacy of finance As at COP15, the issue causing the greatest rift at COP16 was the question of how to fund the biodiversity conservation called for in the GBF. Since the signing of the GBF, positions—particularly divisions between developed and developing countries—have only hardened. The European Union announced in September that it was opposed to a key demand of developing countries: the creation of a new finance mechanism to distribute biodiversity finance. At the same time, the Ministerial Alliance for Ambition on Nature Finance released a statement from 20 Global South countries calling on the Global North to meet the commitments it made in the GBF to ensure that at least $20 billion per year is delivered from developed to developing countries by 2025 and that at least $30 billion per year is delivered by 2030.
Unfortunately, discussions on these issues started too late in the negotiations and dragged into the last day of the COP, until the meeting ended abruptly for lack of a quorum. The aborted talks adjourned with no agreed-upon strategy for increasing funds to finance nature conservation. Countries will now continue talks next year at an interim meeting.
This result is unacceptable. The vast majority of countries in the Global South will not have the resources necessary to meet their obligations in the GBF if the Global North does not meet its funding commitments.
The problem is compounded given that some of the key sticking points of biodiversity finance echo discussions about climate finance. For example, under the UN climate convention, there have been similar disagreements around appropriate finance mechanisms, such as around the creation of the Loss and Damage Fund in 2022. During those and other discussions, diverging opinions around sources of finance, transparency, and access to funding have stymied progress. Now, with the inconclusive end of COP16 on these issues, there is even larger, more entrenched distrust between developed and developing countries.
At COP29, countries need to agree to a new, ambitious climate finance goal to build the needed confidence among governments and the private sector to pursue more ambitious climate action that also drives the protection of nature; the richest and most-polluting countries must therefore dramatically enhance their efforts.
This is not charity—it is investment for economic and social justice, a matter of national, food, and energy security, and it is essential to building a climate-safer world for all.
Ultimately, all countries will get hurt by climate impacts with billions’ worth of damages. The richest countries are not immune to this (as we saw most recently in the United States and Spain), and they all need to step up. A deal on finance cannot just hinge on the United States. That was true before, and it’s truer now.
Looking forward For both climate and nature, 2030 is a deadline that will dictate our future. By then, the international community will need to have implemented transformative change across all sectors, establishing climate-safe, nature-positive economies while ensuring equity and human rights.
Government progress, including at the subnational level, on accountability, alignment, and adequacy of finance is particularly critical given the unprecedented attention from the private sector on biodiversity and climate risks and outcomes. Companies and investors had a major presence at COP16—they are paying close attention to these negotiations and to the growing risks of failing to take action. Signals from the government are critical to pushing money flows and supply chains toward sustainable, equitable outcomes and building the structures that will transform business practices.
COP16 made important strides but ultimately left far too much on the table. At COP29 and beyond, parties need to renew trust and pursue their resolve to rapidly scale up and invest in holistic, equitable, all-of-planet approaches that propel action at every level of society and government, finally turning global commitments into reality on the ground. COP29 needs to and can deliver.
Note: Yamide Dagnet, Senior Vice President of NRDC International, Amanda Maxwell, Managing Director of NRDC Global, Zak Smith, Senior Attorney of NRDC International, and Jennifer Skene, Director of NRDC Global Northern Forests Policy, International, wrote this article. It was republished with the permission of NRDC International.
