Courage, not Compromise? A Rallying Cry that Failed a Deadlocked COP Meeting

Posted on by admin

Biodiversity, Civil Society, Climate Action, Climate Change, Combating Desertification and Drought, Environment, Global, Headlines, Sustainable Development Goals, TerraViva United Nations

Opinion

Negotiations on a future global drought regime got underway at UNCCD COP16 in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia December 2-13.

KATHMANDU, Nepal, Dec 4 2024 (IPS) – Courage and not compromise. That was the motto desperately launched by members of the civil society in the twilight of the negotiations of the Plastic Pollution Treaty in Busan, South Korea last week.

As we now know, the negotiations did not yield the results that would have helped Planet Earth set a groundbreaking target to reduce the amount of plastic being produced.

Meanwhile, the international community is onto another crucial meeting in Riyadh, the capital of Saudi Arabia to discuss global efforts against desertification. It is going to be another COP process, what is formally known as the 16th Session of the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification or UNCCD. (COP16, December 2-13).

Apparently, this time, the host, Saudi Arabia, is going to lead a tremendous effort to ensure a strong outcome. Over the last two and half months, Riyadh, rather than being a global leader to ensure the survivability of our planet, a champion of sustainability, has been a disruptor.

The Saudis were among those who have been undermining the recently concluded Climate COP 29 in Baku and, to a lesser extent, the COP 16 on Biodiversity in Cali, Colombia.

But a review of what unfolded over the last two and half months, would also bring an indictment for act of omission not only to the Petro states but also to all developed nations.

Indeed, the eleventh-hour rallying cry– “courage, not compromise”– should have been embraced as the North Star by all those nations who were ready to take bold steps in the three recently concluded COP processes.

In Busan, as explained by the Center for International Environmental Law, CIEL, ” negotiators had several procedural options available, including voting or making a treaty among the willing”. Yet the most progressive nations, around 100 countries, including the EU and 38 African nations and South American countries, did not dare to go beyond the traditional approach of seeking a consensus at any cost.

Ironically what happened at COP 16 and COP 29 was equally a travesty of justice as developed nations did not budge from their positions. At the end, the final deals on biodiversity and climate financing, were in both cases extremely disappointing especially in relation to the former.

Indeed. in Cali, there was no agreement at all in finding the resources needed to implement the ambitious Kunming- Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework.

According to BloombergNEF (BNEF), in its Biodiversity Finance Factbook, ” the gap between current biodiversity finance and future needs have widened to $ 942 billion”.

The Global Biodiversity Framework Fund (GBFF), the financial vehicle to implement the Framework, is still very far from becoming a true game changer.

The millions of dollars that a small group of European nations have pledged during the negotiations in Cali, are still a miniscule contribution in relation to what was agreed two years ago in Montreal where the second leg of the COP 15 was held.

There, the final outcome underpinning the Framework, required the mobilisation of financial resources for biodiversity of at least US$200 billion per year by 2030 from public and private sources and identifying and eliminating at least US$500 billion of annual subsidies harmful to biodiversity.

What unfolded in Baku at the climate COP was also, in terms of financing, embarrassing for developed nations. The hardly negotiated agreement of tripling the US$ 100 billion per year by 2035 with a commitment to reach up to US$ 1.3 trillion by the same year through different sources of money, including difficult to negotiate levies, is far from what is required.

On this front, the embarrassment was not only on the traditional developed nations but also on countries like China and the Gulf Nations who stubbornly rejected their responsibility to play their part in climate financing.

At least, as part of a last minute compromise, the developed nations (G7 and few others like Australia) will now co-lead the responsibility of finding the resources. China and others wealthy nations that, according to an outdated UN classification are still officially considered as “developing”, will contribute but only on voluntary basis.

As we see, the final outcomes of these three COPs were far from being courageous. Compromising, epitomized by concepts like ” constructive ambiguity”, agreeing on something that can be interpreted differently by the nations at the negotiating tables, instead dominated.

At this point, considering the frustrations of these mega gatherings, what could be done? Is the existing model of the COP with its complexities and endless delays and bickering, still viable?

The influential Club of Rome, on the last days of COP 29, had released a strongly worded press release asking for a major reform of the ways negotiations were carried out. “The COP process must be strengthened with mechanisms to hold countries accountable”. The document went even further with calls to implement robust tracking of climate financing.

Also, with each COP, a series of new initiatives are always launched, often just for the sake of visibility and prestige.

The risk is having a multitude of exercises and mechanisms that drains resources that, are at the end, are neither productive nor meaningful but rather duplicative and ultimately, a waste of money.

We should be even more radical, I would say. For example, the international community should introduce the same peer to peer review process in place in the Human Rights Council that, frankly speaking, is hardly a revolutionary tool.

And yet, despite the fact that nations with a solid track record in human rights abuses remain unscathed in the Council, such a change would represent some forms of accountability in the areas of biodiversity and climate.

This could be envisioned as a reform that should accompany the implementation of the upcoming 3rd wave of Nationally Determined Contributions due by 2025. Getting rid of the consensus model is also something that should truly be considered.

Why not holding votes that would break the vetoes of even one single nation? Why being so attached to unanimity when we do know that it is not working at all?

As show in Busan, it is the traditionally developed nations that lack courage and farsightedness in pursuing a procedure that might backfire against them. This is, instead, a cause that at least the EU, Canada and Australia should embrace. Yet we are still very far from reaching this level of audacity.

Another fanciful thinking relates to tie nations’ actions to the possibility of hosting prestigious sports tournament. Why not forcing international sport bodies like FIFA to reward the hosting rights for its mega events only to nations which are climate and biodiversity leaders in practice rather than through empty but lofty declarations?

Unfortunately, there will never be consensus within the football federations that run FIFA governing body or say, within the International Olympic Committee. A more promising area, though also not easy to put into practice, would be to find ways in which non state actors would have a real say in the negotiations.

Both the COP 16 and the COP 29 reached some breakthroughs in relation to giving more voice, for example, to indigenous people. In Cali, it was decided to establish a new body that will more power to indigenous people.

It is what is formally known, in reference to the provision related to the rights of indigenous people of the International Convention on Biodiversity, as the Permanent Subsidiary Body on Article 8(j).

The details of this new body will be object of intense negotiations but at least a pathway has been created to better channel the demands of a key constituency who, so far, has struggled to gain its due recognition.

Also at COP 29 saw some wins for indigenous people with the adaption of the Baku Workplan and the renewal of the mandate of the Facilitative Working Group (FWG) of local Communities and Indigenous Peoples Platforms.

Surely there can be some creative solutions to strengthen what was supposed to be the platform to incorporate and engage non state actors, the Marrakesh Partnership for Global Action.

The members of civil society could come up with new ideas on how to formally have a role in the negotiations. While it is impossible to have non state actors at the par of member states party to the conventions around which the COPs are held, surely the latter should be in a better place and have some forms of decision power.

Lastly one of the best ways to simplify these complex and independent from each other negotiations, would be to work towards a unifying framework in relation to the implementation of the biodiversity and climate conventions.

On this, the Colombian Presidency of the COP 16 broke some important grounds with Susana Muhammad, the Minister of Environment and Sustainable Development of Colombia who chaired the proceedings in Cali, pushing for bridging the gap between biodiversity and climate negotiations.

None of the propositions listed here are going to be easy to implement. What we need is simple to understand but also extremely hard to reach.

Only more pressure from the below, from the global civil society can push governments to make the right choice: setting aside, at least for once, the word compromise and instead chose another one that instead can make the difference while instilling hope.

This word is called courage.

Simone Galimberti writes about the SDGs, youth-centered policy-making and a stronger and better United Nations

IPS UN Bureau

  Source

COP29 Falls Short on Finance

Posted on by admin

Biodiversity, Civil Society, Climate Action, Climate Change, COP29, Economy & Trade, Environment, Featured, Global, Headlines, Inequality, Sustainable Development Goals, TerraViva United Nations

Opinion

Credit: Murad Sezer/Reuters via Gallo Images

LONDON, Dec 2 2024 (IPS) – COP29, the latest annual climate summit, had one job: to strike a deal to provide the money needed to respond to climate change. It failed.

This was the first climate summit dedicated to finance. Global south countries estimate they need a combined US$1.3 trillion a year to transition to low-carbon economies and adapt to the impacts of climate change. But the last-minute offer made by global north states was for only US$300 billion a year.

The agreement leaves vague how much of the promised target, to be met by 2035, will be in the form of direct grants, as opposed to other means such as loans, and how much will come directly from states. As for the US$1 trillion annual funding gap, covering it remains an aspiration, with all potential sources encouraged to step up their efforts. The hope seems to be that the private sector will invest where it hasn’t already, and that innovations such as new levies and taxes will be explored, which many powerful states and industry lobbyists are sure to resist.

Some global north states are talking up the deal, pointing out that it triples the previous target of US$100 billion a year, promised at COP15 in 2009 and officially reached in 2022, although how much was provided in reality remains a matter of debate. Some say this deal is all they can afford, given economic and political constraints.

But global north states hardly engaged constructively. They delayed making an offer for so long that the day before talks were due to end, the draft text of the agreement contained no numbers. Then they made a lowball offer of US$250 billion a year.

Many representatives from global south states took this as an insult. Talks threatened to collapse without an agreement. Amid scenes of chaos and confusion, the summit’s president, Mukhtar Babayev of Azerbaijan, was accused of weakness and lack of leadership. By the time global north states offered US$300 billion, negotiations had gone past the deadline, and many saw this as a take-it-or-leave it offer.

The negotiating style of global north states spoke of a fundamental inequality in climate change. Global north countries have historically contributed the bulk of cumulative greenhouse gas emissions due to their industrialisation. But it’s global south countries that are most affected by climate change impacts such as extreme weather and rising sea levels. What’s more, they’re being asked to take a different development path to fossil fuel-powered industrialisation – but without adequate financial support to do so.

These evident injustices led some states, angered by Babayev bringing talks to an abrupt end, to believe that no deal would have been better than what was agreed. For others, waiting another year for COP30 would have been a luxury they couldn’t afford, given the ever-increasing impacts of climate change.

Financing on the agenda

Far from being settled, the conversation around climate financing should be regarded as only just having begun. The figures involved – whether it’s US$300 billion or US$1.3 trillion a year – seem huge, but in global terms they’re tiny. The US$1.3 trillion needed is less than one per cent of global GDP, which stands at around US$110 trillion. It’s a little more than the amount invested in fossil fuels this year, and far less than annual global military spending, which has risen for nine years running and now stands at around US$2.3 trillion a year.

If the money isn’t forthcoming, the sums needed will be eclipsed by the costs of cleaning up the disasters caused by climate change, and dealing with rising insecurity, conflict and economic disruption. For example, devastating floods in Valencia, Spain, in October caused at least 217 deaths and economic losses of around US$10.6 billion. Research suggests that each degree of warming would slash the world’s GDP by 12 per cent. Investing in a transition that reduces greenhouse gas emissions and enables communities to adapt isn’t just the right thing to do – it’s also the economically prudent option.

The same problems arose at another recent summit on a related issue – COP16 of the Biodiversity Convention, hosted by Colombia in October. This broke up with no agreement on how to meet the funding commitments agreed at its previous meeting. The international community, having forged agreements to address climate change and protect the environment, is stuck when it comes to finding the funding to realise them.

What’s largely missing is discussion of how wealth might be better shared for the benefit of humanity. Over the past decade, as the world has grown hotter, inequality has soared, with the world’s richest one per cent adding a further US$42 trillion to their fortunes – less than needed to adequately respond to climate change. The G20’s recent meeting said little on climate change, but leaders at least agreed that ultra-wealthy people should be properly taxed. The battle should now be on to ensure this happens – and that revenues are used to tackle climate change.

When it comes to corporations, few are richer than the fossil fuel industry. But the ‘polluter pays’ principle – that those who cause environmental damage pay to clean it up – seems missing from climate negotiations. The fossil fuel industry is the single biggest contributor to climate change, responsible for over 75 per cent of greenhouse gas emissions. It’s grown incredibly rich thanks to its destructive trade.

Over the past five decades, the oil and gas sector has made profits averaging US$2.8 billion a day. Only a small fraction of those revenues have been invested in alternatives, and oil and gas companies plan to extract more: since COP28, around US$250 billion has been committed to developing new oil and gas fields. The industry’s wealth should make it a natural target for paying to fix the mess it’s made. A proposed levy on extractions could raise US$900 billion by 2030.

Progress is needed, and fast. COP30 now has the huge task of compensating for the failings of COP29. Pressure must be kept up for adequate financing combined with concerted action to cut emissions. Next year, states are due to present their updated plans to cut emissions and adapt to climate change. Civil society will push for these to show the ambition needed – and for money to be mobilised at the scale required.

Andrew Firmin is CIVICUS Editor-in-Chief, co-director and writer for CIVICUS Lens and co-author of the State of Civil Society Report.

  Source

Brazil Vows to Make COP30 a Catalyst for Climate Action and Biodiversity Celebration

Posted on by admin

Biodiversity, Climate Action, Climate Change, Climate Change Finance, Climate Change Justice, Conferences, COP29, Development & Aid, Editors’ Choice, Energy, Environment, Featured, Global, Headlines, Human Rights, Sustainability, Sustainable Development Goals, TerraViva United Nations

Moisés Savian, Brazil's Secretary of Land Governance, Territorial and Socio Environmental Development at COP29. He looks forward to COP30 which will be held in his country. Credit: Umar Manzoor Shah/IPS

Moisés Savian, Brazil’s Secretary of Land Governance, Territorial and Socio Environmental Development at COP29. He looks forward to COP30 which will be held in his country. Credit: Umar Manzoor Shah/IPS

BAKU, Nov 21 2024 (IPS) – As Brazil gears up to host COP30 in Belém next year, Moisés Savian, the country’s Secretary of Land Governance, Territorial and Socio Environmental Development, outlined the event’s significance in showcasing Brazil’s environmental policies and fostering global collaboration.

In an interview with IPS, Savian highlighted Brazil’s progress under President Lula’s administration and outlined the country’s aspirations for the upcoming climate conference.

The 2025 UN Climate Change Conference (UNFCCC COP30) is scheduled for November 2025 in Belém, Brazil. This event will feature the 30th session of the Conference of the Parties (COP30), the 20th Meeting of the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol (CMP20), and the seventh Meeting of the Parties to the Paris Agreement (CMA7). Additionally, it will include the 63rd sessions of the Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice (SBSTA63) and the Subsidiary Body for Implementation (SBI63).

A Moment to Shine

“The next COP is a significant opportunity for Brazil. Our nation is blessed with immense natural resources, diverse ecosystems, and cultural richness. Hosting this event allows us to highlight our environmental policies and contribute meaningfully to the global dialogue on climate action.”

Savian said that past COPs held in nations like Dubai and Azerbaijan were remarkable in their own right but Brazil’s edition will be distinct.

“Brazil’s unique societal fabric, comprising contributions from people across the globe, coupled with its vast ecological diversity—from the Amazon to the Cerrado—will add an unparalleled dynamism to COP30,” he said.

Achievements in Environmental Protection

Savian says that under President Lula’s administration, Brazil has made significant strides in reducing deforestation and transitioning toward sustainable agriculture. “In the past year alone, we have reduced deforestation by 30 percent in the Amazon and 25 percent in the Cerrado. These achievements reflect our commitment to protecting our vital biomes.”

In the agricultural sector, Brazil is heavily investing in an ecological transition to reduce emissions. 

In 2023, Brazil revised its Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) and enhanced its climate ambitions, committing to a 53 percent reduction in emissions by 2030. The country aims to position itself as the first G20 nation to achieve net-zero emissions while fostering job creation and economic prosperity. Brazil is also finalizing its 2035 emissions reduction targets, focusing on combating deforestation, promoting sustainable agriculture, decarbonizing industries, implementing nature-based solutions, expanding renewable energy sources, advancing sustainable transportation, and developing the bioeconomy. However, despite these initiatives, Brazil’s climate plans have received only a fraction of the necessary funding to meet its ambitious goals.

According to Savian, focusing on traditional and indigenous populations, ensuring their rights and territories are preserved is extremely important. “We are formulating a specific national plan for family farming, which constitutes the majority of our rural population. These communities are often the most affected by climate extremes, so targeted public policies are essential.”

Global Responsibility and Support

Savian also addressed the role of developed nations in supporting climate adaptation and mitigation in countries like Brazil. He outlined four key areas where global cooperation is essential.

Financing Climate Action- Developed countries must deliver on their promises to fund climate initiatives. Technological Support- Advanced technologies from these nations can aid in decarbonizing economies like Brazil’s. Sustainable Consumption- A focus on low-carbon products and sustainable supply chains is crucial. And Knowledge Exchange-Collaboration in research and capacity-building is vital for global progress.

“Less than 1 percent of global climate financing currently reaches family farmers and traditional communities. This needs to change. While funding is critical, so too are clear criteria for its allocation and ensuring it reaches those who need it most.”

Challenges and Priorities for COP29

Commenting on COP29, Savian expressed concerns about slow progress in implementing commitments. He stressed the need for tangible outcomes in three key areas Climate Financing—establishing actionable frameworks and ensuring funds reach grassroots communities; finalizing regulations to operationalize carbon trading and monitoring mechanisms, including setting up indicators to track progress and results.

“Without a focus on family farming and food system transformation, there can be no just transition,” he said.

Brazil’s Vision for COP30

Savian expressed confidence in Brazil’s readiness to host COP30, acknowledging the logistical challenges posed by Belém, a city of 1.5 million people.

“Despite these hurdles, we are committed to showcasing Amazon to the world. This will be a chance for global leaders and citizens to engage with the heart of Brazil’s environmental efforts.”

He also highlighted Brazil’s track record of successfully hosting major international events under President Lula’s leadership. “We aim to make COP30 a transformative experience that advances climate goals and deepens global appreciation for Brazil’s biodiversity and environmental stewardship,” Savian said.

 

Dazzling Wildlife Portraits at COP29: A Conversation with Photographer Brad Wilson

Posted on by admin

Arts, Biodiversity, Civil Society, Climate Action, Climate Change, COP29, COP29 Blog, Editors’ Choice, Environment, Featured, Global, Headlines, Sustainable Development Goals, TerraViva United Nations

COP29 Blog

Brad Wilson is an American photographer specializing in classical portraits of animals. Credit: Umar Manzoor Shah/IPS

Brad Wilson is an American photographer specializing in classical portraits of animals. Credit: Umar Manzoor Shah/IPS

As delegates at COP29 stroll through the venue in Baku, Azerbaijan, many pause to marvel at the stunning portraits of animals and birds adorning the pavilion walls. These 16 captivating images, showcasing Azerbaijan’s rich biodiversity, are more than just art—they’re a call to action.

Visitors, from diplomats to environmental activists, can often be seen snapping selfies with these majestic portraits, drawn to their lifelike intensity. Behind this collection is Brad Wilson, an American photographer whose mission is to “bridge the gap between humans and the natural world.” 

Wilson spoke to the IPS on his artistic journey and the philosophy underpinning his work.

“My name is Brad Wilson,” he begins. “I’m an American photographer specializing in classical portraits of animals.”

Classical portraits—usually a domain of human subjects—take on a unique depth when applied to animals.

“I aim to elevate animals to a higher level, presenting them as equals to humans—different but equal. Looking into their eyes through these photographs should invoke a sense of responsibility for their lives because we all share the same planet.”

For Wilson, animals represent a poignant connection to the natural world. “They are our closest relatives living in the wild,” he says. “They serve as a bridge, reminding us of our roots in nature.”

Brad Wilson photographic portraits were commissioned for the Haydar Aliyev Centre in Baku and are on display at the COP29 venue. Credit: Umar Manzoor Shah/IPS

Brad Wilson photographic portraits were commissioned for the Haydar Aliyev Centre in Baku and are on display at the COP29 venue. Credit: Umar Manzoor Shah/IPS

Process: A Dance of Patience and Precision

Creating these portraits is no simple task. Wilson describes the meticulous setup required for his work.

“All the portraits are done in a studio. I set up the studio close to where the animals live—often in sanctuaries or ranches. Then we bring them in for two or three hours,” he says. But those hours yield just fleeting moments of magic.

“I’m lucky if I get two or three good seconds with each animal. But that’s all I need—a single moment of connection that resonates.”

“My photo shoots are like meditations amidst organized chaos,” he says. Amid bustling activity, Wilson remains quiet and still, waiting for the animal to relax. “What I aim to capture is something uncommon—a glimpse of the animal’s soul, if you will. That’s what I hope viewers experience—a moment of connection.”

“I want people to understand that we are part of this planet’s biodiversity. We’re not separate from these creatures. It’s only been about 12,000 years—since the advent of farming and permanent settlements—that we began seeing ourselves as separate from the natural world. That’s a mistake. These animals remind us of our place in the web of life.”

“When we talk about climate action, it’s not just about saving the earth—it’s about saving humanity and the animals that share this planet with us. The earth will endure, but we might not.”

Behind the Scenes at COP29

Wilson’s collection at COP29 was commissioned by the Haydar Aliyev Centre in Baku.

“They brought me here in August to photograph animals in Baku and Shamaki,” he says. The project celebrates Azerbaijan’s biodiversity, showcasing species native to the region while promoting conservation awareness.

The portraits have been a hit among COP29 attendees, sparking conversations about the intersection of art, biodiversity, and climate action. Wilson hopes the images inspire policymakers and the public alike to take meaningful action.

“Climate change is already a massive problem, and it’s only going to worsen. We need to get serious about tackling it.”

Advice for Aspiring Photographers

For those inspired to follow in Wilson’s footsteps, he offers this advice: “Start with humans. I spent 15 years photographing people in New York City before transitioning to animals. That experience taught me about connection and emotion—skills that translate well to wildlife photography.”

IPS UN Bureau Report

  Source

From the Biodiversity COP16 to the Climate COP29: Building Equitable Accountability, Alignment, and Adequacy on Finance

Posted on by admin

Biodiversity, Conferences, COP16, COP29, Editors’ Choice, Featured, Global, Headlines, Sustainable Development Goals, TerraViva United Nations

Opinion

COP29 will need to build on COP16’s successes and mitigate its failures. Credit: COP16

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.

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

Voices from the Margins: Small-Scale Fishers Demand Rights, Recognition at COP16

Posted on by admin

Biodiversity, Conferences, COP16, Development & Aid, Environment, Featured, Food Security and Nutrition, Global, Headlines, Human Rights, Inequality, Least Developed Countries, Migration & Refugees, Natural Resources, Sustainable Development Goals, TerraViva United Nations, Trade & Investment

COP16

Small-scale fishers on the coast of Kerela, India with a variety of fish and prawns. Credit: Aishwarya Bajpai/IPS

Small-scale fishers on the coast of Kerela, India with a variety of fish and prawns. Credit: Aishwarya Bajpai/IPS

CALI, Columbia & DELHI, Nov 5 2024 (IPS) – Small-scale fishers play a fundamental role in feeding people—they use sustainable methods of catching and processing fish products and are a significant force in the employment and livelihoods of millions of people internationally—yet, until now, they have been excluded from climate and biodiversity conferences.

For the first time at COP 16, which closed in Cali, Colombia, on November 1, fishworkers, the most vulnerable small-scale fishers communicated that they seek active participation in decision-making processes that affect the oceans. It seems their message was heard because before the negotiations were suspended, parties adopted a historic decision to open the door for Indigenous Peoples and local communities to influence the global plan to halt the destruction of biodiversity.

Small-scale fisheries provide essential employment and sustenance across the globe, as highlighted in the Illuminating Hidden Harvests: The Contributions of Small-Scale Fisheries to Sustainable Development report (2023). Based on data from 78 national household surveys, around 60.2 million people were employed part- or full-time along the small-scale fishing value chain in 2016, representing nearly 90 percent of all global employment in the industry.

Of these, 27.5 million worked directly in harvesting, with 14.6 million engaged in inland and 12.9 million in marine fisheries. Women play a central role in small-scale fisheries, making up 35 percent of the workforce (around 20.9 million) and almost half (49.8 percent) of those in post-harvest roles.

Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity, fisherpeople conference held in Cali, Columbia. Credit: Aishwarya Bajpai/IPS.

Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity, fisherpeople conference held in Cali, Columbia. Credit: Aishwarya Bajpai/IPS.

This sector supports 113 million workers, who, along with their 378.7 million household members, make up a community of 491.7 million people reliant on these fisheries. Together, they represent 6.6 percent of the world’s population and 13.2 percent of those living in the 45 least developed countries. Despite the scale of their contributions, small-scale fishworkers remain among the most vulnerable populations.

These communities face entrenched poverty and social hardships, exacerbated by multiple challenges.

Environmental shifts—such as changing ecological cycles, biodiversity loss, fish diseases, and habitat degradation—disrupt their resources and directly impact their livelihoods. Economic pressures, including the modernization of fisheries, Blue Economy infrastructure projects, and port construction, threaten to marginalize these communities further.

Minfer Pervez, a Colombian fishworker speaking at a press conference in Cali, put it succinctly:

“I represent small-scale fishers. We face displacement and violations of our rights—the right to dignified work, access to social security, health services, and economic resources to strengthen small-scale fishing communities. We are also exploited due to pollution and hydrocarbons in the sea. Today, we call for a unified government position that includes us in decision-making and participation because we are key to conservation efforts.”

And it was clear these issues were faced by small-scale fishers around the globe.

A fish worker from Madina, Colombia, said the threats faced were often from mining and similar industries.

“The main threat we face is the proliferation of extractive industries, which intrude into our areas and damage the coastal system. This jeopardizes the productivity of fisher people and threatens food security. Governance must be returned to and entrusted to small-scale fishers and communities.”

Alfonso Simon from Panama added that declarations were often imposed upon them without their involvement or consent.

When asked about human rights in the context of small-scale representatives, a fisher from Panama who identified herself as Marta explained: “Our rights are violated when decisions are made without prior consultation or citizenship recognition. We are forcefully displaced, and when our families migrate from fishing areas, we lose not only our physical space but also our cultural identity, customs, and future. Denying us access to the sea and the right to fish, which is our ancestral practice, undermines both our food security and that of others (who do not fish). We feel vulnerable because decisions are made without considering the voices of our people. Small-scale fishers must be part of decision-making processes.”

On society, conservation, and development, Zoila Bustamante from Chile said, “Representing a geographical point on Earth, we must be heard. We are not only representing this region but also millions of small-scale fishers globally. We feed you, and it is important for you to listen to us. We represent several countries, and goal 23, which pertains to artisanal fishing, is being addressed. We want to be involved in drafting policies and decisions about us, not have others speak on our behalf.”

German Hernander from Honduras, speaking for 2 million fisher people, explained, “We are well organized and want our voices heard at the UN and other global platforms. We don’t want others speaking for us because we know our territories best and are better equipped to take part in global events and activities.”

Small-scale fishers are key to conservation, Eduardo Mercado from Panama said.

“We represent fisher people around the world and use ancestral fishing methods, including nets that do not damage the environment. We avoid fishing species that are reproducing and only fish for what we eat. Sadly, small-scale fishing is coming to an end.”

Aaron Chacon from Costa Rica added, “As artisanal fishermen, I believe we are here to pass the torch to the next generation. The future of artisanal fishing lies with young people, and this is an opportunity for us to preserve our culture and protect it for future generations.”

Libia Arcinieges from Colombia explained that this went beyond the seas.

“On behalf of fishworkers, we call on governments to respect and return our fishing territories. This is vital for the sustainability of water bodies and food sovereignty. Rivers and lagoons feed the world, and continental territories support 500 million people.”

Despite the acknowledgement of huge challenges, there was also an understanding that COP16 had opened doors.

“We must celebrate COP 16 because, for the first time, we have a platform to raise our voices. Conservation begins in rural territories. Real conservation is done by people, and it is necessary to guarantee food security. We must ensure good species management and work towards the 2030 goals. We deserve the proper treatment for our efforts in achieving these goals. Conservation cannot coexist with hunger,” said Luis Perez from Colombia.

This was crucial because Indigenous people and small-scale fishers look after the earth; their practices are sustainable.

“Conservation is the result of nature’s use and management by Indigenous people and small-scale fishers. It is not something that comes after the fact but is embedded in our practices. Problems cannot be solved by megaprojects. Evidence shows that the best conservation is done at the local level, and it is managed by Indigenous and local communities. We must not shy away from discussing this. We have a strong relationship with our territories, and our governance capacities lead to real conservation results,” Albert Chan from Mexico’s Maya Community said.

The fishworkers were emphatic—their representation may have been ignored until now, but they would continue to ensure their voices were heard. Their voices at COP16 underscore the determination of small-scale fishworkers worldwide to claim their place in global decision-making forums—a place where they have historically been absent, despite their role as the ocean’s frontline stewards.

Through their collective call for active participation, respect for territorial rights, and recognition of their contribution to sustainable fisheries, they have highlighted the urgent need for inclusive and equitable governance of ocean resources.

The conference ended with the saying, ‘Artisanal fishing is here to stay, and from now on, we will participate in all events, one way or another!’

The voices at COP 16 underscore the determination of small-scale fishworkers worldwide to claim their place in global decision-making forums—a place where they have historically been absent, despite their role as the ocean’s frontline stewards. Through their collective call for active participation, respect for territorial rights, and recognition of their contribution to sustainable fisheries, they have spotlighted the urgent need for inclusive and equitable governance of ocean resources.

As the world confronts the intersecting crises of climate change, biodiversity loss, and food insecurity, it is clear that the sustainable practices and ancestral knowledge held by small-scale fishers and Indigenous communities are indispensable to conservation and global food security.

Their call is not just for policy inclusion but for a fundamental shift that respects their lived realities, cultural heritage, and essential role in preserving marine ecosystems. With this historic milestone, small-scale fishers have opened a new chapter of advocacy that seeks not only acknowledgment but also partnership in building a sustainable and resilient future for the oceans and the communities that depend on them.

IPS UN Bureau Report

IPS UN Bureau, IPS UN Bureau Report, Cali, Columbia, COP16,

  Source