COP16 President Susana Muhamad. Parties to the UN Biodiversity adopted decisions to implementation of the Global Biodiversity Framework. Credit: IISD Earth Negotiations Bulletin/Mike Muzurakis.
BLOOMINGTON, U.S.A & ROME, Feb 28 2025 (IPS) – The second round of the UN Biodiversity Conference, COP16, concluded in the early hours of Friday, February 28 in Rome, with an agreement to raise the funds needed to protect biodiversity.
COP16 was suspended in Cali, Colombia, in 2024 without any major financial support decision to support biodiversity conservation. But in the second round of the conference in Rome, Italy, governments agreed on a financial strategy to address the action targets of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (KMGBF), which was adopted in 2022 with the aim of closing the biodiversity finance gap.
In a final document, all parties to the biodiversity convention agreed to mobilize resources to close the global biodiversity finance gap and achieve the target of mobilizing at least 200 billion dollars a year by 2030, including international flows of USD 20 billion per year by 2025. Which will be rising to USD 30 billion by 2030.
In the closing press briefing in the early hours of Friday, COP16 President Susana Muhamad said the Rome conference came to a successful end. “It was a remarkable achievement of being able to approve all the decisions, especially the most contentious, difficult decisions.” She said, “And not in a way that made the parties feel that they were compromising their main objectives.”
The agreement includes the commitment to establish permanent arrangements for the financial mechanism in accordance with Articles 21 and 39 of the Convention while working on improving existing financial instruments. It also includes a roadmap of the activities and decision-making milestones until 2030.
COP16 president Muhamad also said that the agreement between governments in Rome will help bring the agendas of biodiversity and climate change together. In November, Belem in the Amazon rainforest region of Brazil will be hosting the UN climate conference, COP30.
“The importance of these resolutions that have been approved in Cali and also here of the cooperation between the different conventions,” she said.
The biodiversity COP also adopted a Strategy for Resource Mobilization to mobilize the funds needed for implementation of the KMGBF. Which includes public finance from national and subnational governments, private and philanthropic resources, multilateral development banks, blended finance, and other approaches.
The Cali Fund
The Rome gathering of parties also agreed to establish a dedicated fund for fair and equitable sharing of benefits from the use of Digital Sequence Information on Genetic Research (DSI), known as the Cali Fund.
The fund was launched on 26 February 2025—at least 50 percent of its resources will be allocated to indigenous peoples and local communities, recognizing their role as custodians of biodiversity. Large companies and other major entities benefiting commercially from the use of DSI are expected to contribute a portion of their profits or revenues in sectors and subsectors highly dependent on the use of DSI.
Pharmaceuticals, cosmetics, plant and animal breeding, agricultural biotechnology, industrial biotechnology, laboratory equipment associated with the sequencing and use of digital sequence information on genetic resources, and information, scientific and technical services related to digital sequence information on genetic resources, including artificial intelligence. Academic, public databases, public research institutions and companies operating in the concerned sectors but not relying on DSI are exempt from contributions to the Cali Fund.
The fund is part of a multilateral mechanism on the fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from the use of digital sequence information on genetic resources adopted at COP15 in December 2022 alongside the KMGBF.
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.
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.
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,
Indigenous women in Cali hold a protest commodificationof their traditional natural products. Majority of the indigenous organizations participants in the COP have been vocal about their opposition to biodiversitycredits, which they think is a false solution to halt biodiversity loss. Credit:Stella Paul/IPS
COP16 Logo, installed at the conference venue atCali, Colombia. Credit: Stella Paul/IPS
CALI, Columbia, Oct 26 2024 (IPS) – At the end of the first week at the 16th Conference of Parties on Biodiversity (COP16), finance emerges as the biggest issue but also shrouded in controversies.
On Saturday, as the COP moved closer to its most crucial phase of negotiations, resource mobilization—listed under Target 19 of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (KMGBF)—took centerstage, with most parties demanding faster action, greater transparency and the adoption of true solutions to halt biodiversity loss.
Biodiversity finance: Expectation vs Reality
On Thursday, October 24, the government of China formally announced that the Kunming Biodiversity Fund—first announced by Chinese president Xi Jinping in 2021—was now fully in operation. The fund promises to contribute USD 220 million over the next 10 years, which would be spent especially to help developing countries in implementation of the KMGBF and achieve its targets, said Huang Runqiu, Minister of Environment and Ecology, China, at a press conference. It wasn’t clear, however, how much of the promised amount had been deposited.
This has been the only news of resource mobilization for global biodiversity conservation received at COP16, as no other donors came forth with any further announcements of new financial pledges or contributions to the Global Biodiversity Framework Fund (GBFF), which was expected to receive USD 400 billion in contribution by now but has only received a paltry USD 250 million. In addition, there were no announcements of the countries reducing their current spending on harmful subsidies that amount to USD 500 billion and cause biodiversity degradation and biodiversity loss.
In absence of new contributions and lack of any concrete progress on reduction of harmful subsidies, the new mechanisms like biodiversity credits to mobilize resources for implementation of the Global Biodiversity Fund is fast gaining traction.
From October 21–24, the COP16 witnessed a flurry of activities centered primarily around biodiversity credits and the building of new pathways to mobilize finance through this means. Experts from both the UN and the private sector were heard at various forums discussing the needs of developing tools and methodologies that would help mobilize new finance through biodiversity credits while also ensuring transparency.
COP16 logo, installed at the conference venue in Cali, Colombia. Credit: Stella Paul/IPS
Inclusiveness and the Questions
According to a 2023 report by the World Economic Forum, the demand for biodiversity credits could rise to USD 180 billion annually by 2050. The report said that if major companies stepped into the market, the annual demand for biodiversity credits could go to as high as USD 7 billion per year by 2030.
Experts from the UN and a variety of technical people with various backgrounds said that since biodiversity credits are still in their infancy, there will undoubtedly be a lot of scrutiny and criticism. The Biodiversity Credit Alliance is a group that provides guidance for the establishment of a biodiversity credit market. The urgent need, they said, was to develop infrastructure and policies that would help answer those questions and tackle the scrutiny. The first and foremost of them was to help build digital tools and infrastructure that could be used to share and store biodiversity data in a credible and transparent manner.
Nathalie Whitaker, co-founder of Toha Network in New Zealand, a group of nature-based business investors, said that her organization is building digital tools, especially for helping local communities to participate in biodiversity credit programs and access the benefits.
“Once the communities have these tools, they can instantly see what data is being used to pay for the biodiversity credits or even decide the value of the natural sources in their territory. So, they can see what resources are being discussed, what is being valued, how it’s being done and how the whole discussion is moving forward,” Whitaker said.
Fabian Shimdt-Pramov, another speaker at the event, said that the quality of the tools would decide the course and results of a biodiversity credits project.
Shimdt-Pramov, chief business development officer at Biometric Earth, a German company that uses artificial intelligence to build biodiversity analytics tools from different sources such as remote sensing, wildlife cameras, acoustic monitoring, etc.
“If methodology is not correct, if the data is not correct, the system doesn’t work,” he said, emphasizing on the requirement of high-level technological expertise that is needed to get a biodiversity credit project off the ground.
However, when questioned on the cost of buying such high-end technologies and tools, especially by Indigenous communities living in remote areas without any internet connectivity, both speakers appeared to be at a loss for words.
“I have seen in the Amazon a community selling five mahogany trees on the internet, so I am guessing it’s not a big challenge,” Shmidt-Pramov said in a dismissive voice. Whitaker acknowledged that lack of access to digital technology in Indigenous Peoples communities was an issue but had no solutions to propose.
Terence Hay-Edie of Nature ID, UNDP, however, stressed the need to empower the communities with the knowledge and skills that would help them access the tools and be part of a biodiversity credit.
As an example, he cites restoration of river-based biodiversity as a biodiversity credit project where a river is considered to have the same rights as a human being. According to him, if values of credits are counted and traded for restoration of biodiversity around a river, it will require recognition of all these rights that a river has, which is only possible when the community living along the river has full knowledge of what is at stake, what is restored, what value of the restored biodiversity is to be determined and how the pricing of that value will be decided.
“A river can be a legal entity and have a legal ID. Now, can we build some tools and put them in the hands of the community that is doing the restoration to know the details of it? That’s what we are looking at,” Hay-Edie said.
A False Solution?
However, Indigenous peoples organizations at the COP16 were overwhelmingly opposing biodiversity credits, which they called “commodifying nature.”
What are biodiversity credits? It’s basically regenerating biodiversity where it is destroyed and earning money from that. But it doesn’t work that way, according to Souparna Lahiri, senior climate change campaigner at Global Forest Coalition.
“If we talk of a forest, the ecosystem is not just about trees but about every life that thrives in and around it—the rivers, the animals, plants, bees, insects, flowers and all the organisms. Once destroyed, it’s lost forever. And when you regenerate it elsewhere, you can never guarantee that it will be an exact replica of what has been lost. This is why the very concept of biodiversity credit is a destructive idea,” says Lahiri.
Valentina Figuera, also of the Global Forest Coalition, said that while trading carbon credits could work as a tool in carbon change mitigation, it would not be the same in biodiversity.
“In climate change, you can measure the total carbon generated by a forest, for example. But in biodiversity, how do you measure it? What is the mechanism? How do you even value life that thrives there? So, this concept is a straight import from climate change and forcefully imposed in biodiversity, which is nothing but a false solution, so that businesses that cause biodiversity loss can conduct their business as usual.
The Dilemma of Participation
COP16, dubbed the “People’s Cop” by Colombia, the host country, has drawn several hundred representatives of Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities (IPLC), especially from across Latin America, including Colombia, Brazil, Panama, Venezuela and Peru. While the Latin American IPLC organizations appeared united in their opposition to biodiversity credits, African organizations seemed to be willing to consider it.
Mmboneni Esther Mathobo of the South African NGO International Institute of Environment said that her organization was in support of biodiversity credits, which could, she said, not only help the community earn money but also motivate them further to preserve biodiversity.
“We are influencing and making sure that our rights are safeguarded and protected in this newly emerging market of bringing biodiversity credits,” said Mathobo.
Currently, Namibia is implementing its first biodiversity carbon credits project in partnership with the World Wildlife Fund (WWF). Known as the Wildlife Credits Scheme, the project is known as a Payment for Ecosystem Services (PES) that rewards communities for protecting wildlife and biodiversity. Mathobo said that the project in Namibia made her realize that there was a great opportunity for local communities to conserve and restore biodiversity and earn from it.
“We faced many challenges to earn carbon credits because that system was established and created behind our heads. And now we wake up, but we find ourselves sitting with a lot of problems in that market where our communities are not even benefiting. But we believe that with the engagement of the biodiversity alliance, UNDP, we are going to be the ones making sure that whatever happens in the biodiversity credit market, it benefits all our regions and all our communities, as well as safeguarding and protecting our rights,” she said.
“To each their own, if Latin American indigenous communities feel they don’t want to trade natural resources, that’s their right. But in Africa, we have the potential to earn biodiversity credits and we need the money, so we are supporting it,” Mahobo commented when reminded of the opposition of Latin American countries to biodiversity credits.
The International Livestock Research Institute is using genomics to breed livestock suited to local conditions and production systems to meet community needs. Credit: Busani Bafana/IPS
BULAWAYO, Oct 22 2024 (IPS) – Christian Tiambo has always wished to uplift local farmers’ communities through cutting-edge science.
As climate change wreaked havoc on local agriculture, Tiambo, a livestock scientist at the Centre for Tropical Livestock Genetics and Health (CTLGH) and at the International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI), focused on conserving and developing livestock that could withstand environmental stress.
Genomics, a Game Changer
Tiambo’s research took an exciting turn when part of his PhD studies was to characterize and establish local poultry populations with interesting resilience potential. Yet, the need for local access to advanced genomic tools was a barrier to fully unlocking this potential.
Today, the power of digital data and sequencing information is transformative. It is driving the discovery of genes and innovation in agriculture through the identification and deep characterization of pathogens in plants and animals. That is helping scientists to breed livestock suited to local conditions and production systems, thereby benefiting local communities that have been custodians of genetic resources for generations.
But there is a catch: Africa, like other parts of the global south, is a genetic goldmine but has not fully capitalized on the digital sequencing information (DSI) derived from its genetic heritage. DSI is a tool that provides information for the precise identification of living organisms and allows the development of diagnosis tools and technologies for conservation in animals and plants. Besides, DSI is also used in investigating the relationships within and between species and in plant and animal breeding to predict their breeding value and potential contribution to their future generations.
Tiambo said DSI can be used to adjust the genotypes and produce animals with desired traits, adapted to local conditions but which have higher productivity.
A promising innovation has been the development of surrogate technologies in poultry, small ruminants, cattle or pigs—giving opportunity to local and locally adapted and resilient breeds to carry and disseminate semen from improved breeds in challenging environments.
“Farmers would not need to keep requesting inseminators and semen from outside their village,” Tiambo explained, noting that this shift could dramatically improve livestock breeding, dissemination of elite genetics, boost food security and alleviate poverty in remote rural areas of Africa.
Global cooperation among stakeholders of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework is key to establishing international guidelines on benefit-sharing from animal genetics resources and their associated information, including DSI.
Christian Tiambo, a livestock scientist at the Centre for Tropical Livestock Genetics and Health. Credit: ILRI
Using genetics and associated traditional knowledge includes adapting specific livestock to specific environments. This contributes to the development of improved and elite tropical animal breeds with particular traits that meet community needs to improve livelihoods, he said.
“Local livestock is not just for food but is our heritage, culture and social value,” said Tiambo, adding that conserving livestock is conserving local culture, social ethics and inclusion, with gender aspects being considered. For example, the Muturu cattle and the Bakosi cattle in Nigeria and Cameroon are animals used in dowry, The Bamileke cattle remain sacred and maintain the ecosystem of sacred forest in part of the western highlands of Cameroon.
“I have never seen any traditional ceremony done with exotic chicken in any African village,” he said.
Genetics and DSI, according to Tiambo, are “game changers” in breeding livestock with desired traits faster. What used to take five to seven years or more, he says, can now be done in just three or four cycles with the help of genomics.
ILRI has been working with the Roslin Institute, the Kenyan Agricultural and Livestock Research Organization and collaborating with the African Union-InterAfrican Bureau for Animal Resources (AU-IBAR), the National Biosafety Authority, farmer communities, and National Agricultural Research Systems (NARS) in Africa and Southeast Asia in the conservation and development of improved local chicken using stem cell technologies.
Bridging the Capacity Gap
DSI needs infrastructure and human resources. “A lot of infrastructure, equipment and skills are coming from outside Africa, but how can we also generate DSI and use it locally?” Tiambo asked. He worries that without developing local capacity to harness DSI, “a lot of helicopter research will still be happening in Africa where people fly in, just pick what they want, fly out, and no scientists in Africa are involved in generating and using DSI.”
Technologically advanced countries have often exploited these genetic resources, developing commercial products and services without clear mechanisms for sharing the monetary and non-monetary benefits with local communities as ethics and common sense would require—an injustice that needs urgent correction.
The use of DSI on genetic resources is one of the four goals of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework adopted in 2022 with the aim of stopping global biodiversity loss by 2030.
ThankGod Ebenezer, bioinformatician and co-founder of the African BioGenome Project, argues that Africa must seize this moment to build and strengthen local capacity to produce and use DSI from genetic resources.
“The establishment of a benefit-sharing mechanism for DSI is a first step in the right direction and Africa needs to maximise even this first step by putting in a framework to generate and make use of DSI locally,” Ebenezer told IPS, explaining that Africa needs to be able to do genetic sequencing on the ground with local scientists having the capacity to translate and use it.
The Africa BioGenome Project, of which Tiambo is also a founding member, is a continental biodiversity conservation initiative that has laid out a roadmap for how Africa can benefit from DSI and the planned multilateral fund.
“The main benefit comes from being able to use DSI and ultimately share it with the global community in line with the national and international rules and regulations,” said Ebenezer. “Because if you cannot use DSI yourself, you will always feel like a supplier, like someone who gets crude oil from the ground and asks someone else to add value to it and gets several products.”
“The multilateral fund is key,” Ebenezer stresses. “If someone converts DSI into revenue, for instance, they’re only looking at paying 1% back into the fund. Is that enough for the communities that hold this biodiversity?”
At COP16 in Colombia (Oct 21-Nov 1, 2024), world leaders will discuss mechanisms for fair and equitable sharing of DSI benefits, a critical step for Africa and other biodiversity-rich regions. For example, Africa hosts eight of the 34 biodiversity hotspots in the world, according to the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES).
“In terms of the negotiation, we would like the DSI fund to be approved so that it’s ready for implementation because this is an implementation COP,” Susana Muhamad, Minister of Environment and Sustainable Development of Colombia and COP16 President-designate, told a press briefing ahead of COP16.
“We would like the decision of the parties to give the COP the teeth for implementation. One is the DSI,” Muhamad said.
Astrid Schomaker, Executive Secretary of the UN Convention on Biological Diversity, is hopeful that COP16 will operationalize the multilateral mechanism for the sharing of benefits from the use of digital sequencing information in genetic research.
“We are going to look at that. And I think it’s a very complex term and issue, but it is ultimately about how those industries, sectors and companies that use digital sequence information on genetic resources that are often located in the global south, but not exclusively, how they use it and how they pay for using it,” said Schomaker, noting that COP15 agreed to establish a multilateral mechanism and a Fund for DSI.
The fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising out of the use of genetic resources is one of the three objectives of the CDB, including the conservation of biological diversity and sustainable use of its components. Target 18 of the CBD seeks to reduce harmful incentives by at least USD 500 billion per year by 2030, money that could be channelled to halting biodiversity loss.
The World Resources Institute (WRI), in a position paper, has urged COP16 to provide more finance and incentives to support nature and biodiversity goals.
There is currently a USD 700 billion gap between annual funding for nature and what’s needed by 2030 to protect and restore ecosystems, the WRI said, noting that “many of the world’s most biodiverse ecosystems—and biggest carbon sinks—are in developing countries that cannot save them without far more financial support.”
The WRI commented that bringing in more private sector finance will require incentives, which can come from policy and regulation as well as market-based strategies to make investments in nature more attractive.
But this should not substitute for shifting harmful subsidies and delivering international public finance to the countries that need it most, WRI argued.
As the world scrambles to stop biodiversity loss by 2030, the upcoming COP16 discussions could be pivotal in ensuring that Africa finally benefits from its own genetic wealth.
Edward Mukiibi, President, Slow Food. Credit: Busani Bafana/IPS
TURIN, Italy, Oct 8 2024 (IPS) – Edward Mukiibi, President of Slow Food, champions agroecology as a transformative answer to the world’s most pressing crises: food insecurity, climate change, and violent conflicts.
In a world where these challenges intersect, Mukiibi called for an urgent rethink of our approach to food systems.
Agroecology, a practice already embraced by millions of farmers worldwide, is emerging as a sustainable alternative to the industrialized agriculture model that dominates today. It emphasizes biodiversity, environmental stewardship, and equitable livelihoods—elements that Mukiibi insists are key to addressing the multifaceted crises facing our planet.
Speaking ahead of the highly anticipated Terra Madre 2024 event in Turin, Mukiibi called for immediate global action to end the misuse of food as a weapon in war-torn regions like Gaza and Ukraine, where food scarcity is exacerbating human suffering.
“Slow Food strongly advocates for an end to all violence in the ongoing conflicts, from the Gaza Strip to Sudan, from Lebanon to the Democratic Republic of Congo, from Ukraine to Yemen, and opposes the use of food as a weapon of war, said Mukiibi, calling for immediate negotiations to achieve a just solution that ensures the dignity of all people and fosters a peaceful future for everyone.
With global crises growing more complex, Mukiibi stresses that agroecology is not just about farming techniques—it is a framework for building more resilient societies.
Carlo Petrini, Founder, Slow Food. Credit: Busani Bafana/IPS
The Power of Agroecology
As climate change accelerates, its devastating impacts—melting glaciers, rising sea levels, extreme weather events, and shifting ecosystems—are becoming harder to ignore. Mukiibi linked these environmental crises directly to our food systems, calling industrial agriculture a “leading culprit.” He argues that agroecology offers a path toward resilience, citing its ability to regenerate soil health, reduce social inequality, and provide local communities with economic opportunities.
Mukiibi’s call for change comes as 3,000 international delegates convene at the biennial Terra Madre event to explore solutions for sustainable food systems. He argues that agroecology not only regenerates soil fertility and promotes environmental health but also strengthens local economies, reduces social inequalities, and builds resilience against climate-induced disasters.
“As climate change intensifies, agroecology offers a path to more resilient and equitable food systems,” Mukiibi declared. “This situation compels us to reflect on the transformation needed if we want to achieve a food system that feeds all people well, regenerates and protects the environment, and allows local cultures to survive and prosper.”
A Call for Global Food System Reset
Carlo Petrini, the founder of Slow Food, echoed Mukiibi’s sentiments, calling for nothing less than a complete reset of the global food system.
“The current global food system is not only unfair but is criminal because it destroys our mother earth, it destroys biodiversity and is based on waste and it has turned food into a price, not into a value,” said Petrini. “We need to restore the value of food because food represents our common good; with food we can establish relations with each other, we can establish reciprocity.”
Petrini emphasized the political significance of food in shaping our future, asserting that the fight for sustainable food systems is inherently tied to larger social and environmental battles.
Petrini also condemned multinational corporations that prioritize profit over the health of the planet, calling on them to stop polluting ecosystems through unsustainable food production methods. He called for an ecological transition.
Food and Humanity
Pope Francis, head of the Catholic Church, also weighed in, highlighting the spiritual and cultural dimensions of food.
In a message to the Terra Madre network, the Pope criticized the commodification of agriculture, noting that it is being manipulated for profit at the expense of both the environment and human dignity.
The Pope praised Terra Madre for fostering a movement that respects the integrity of both food and culture. He argued that only through recognizing the value of food and promoting food education can humanity move towards a future of universal fraternity—a future where diversity is celebrated rather than a cause of division.
The Food Revolution
Launched 20 years ago, Terra Madre has sparked a global food revolution. Over the past two decades, it has united small-scale producers, farmers, and consumers committed to creating a better, cleaner, and fairer food system.
Mukiibi said Terra Madre 2024 serves as a reflection point, a moment to assess the progress made and chart a course for the future.
Coinciding with Terra Madre, the G7 Agriculture Ministers met in Sicily, where Slow Food has urged governments to place food at the center of global political agendas. The call is clear: food must be recognized as a cornerstone of fundamental rights and environmental sustainability.
Mukiibi underscored that millions of farmers around the world are already practicing agroecology, ensuring food sovereignty, food security, and healthy diets. He emphasized the need to build on these successes by expanding the Slow Food network and empowering more farmers to take up agroecological practices.
Agroecology is a path forward for resilient local food systems, Mukiibi noted, explaining that Slow Food was building a network of Slow Food Farms to empower farmers and make them central to future sustainable food systems.
A Hopeful Vision for the Future
Mukiibi’s message is agroecology is not just a farming method—it’s a movement with the potential to tackle some of the most profound challenges of our time.
“Agroecology is the solution, not just for a more sustainable food system, but for addressing inequality, social injustice, and the global environmental crisis.”
As the world grapples with the devastating impacts of climate change, violent conflict, and food insecurity, the vision laid out by Slow Food offers a hopeful path forward—one where food is not a weapon, but a source of unity, resilience, and renewal.
