Just finished the COP16 of the Convention on Biological Diversity in Cali (Colombia), and as expected there was no significant progress in the restoration and protection of naturenor in significant assistance to indigenous people and local communities.
COP16 below the minimum values
After the previous summit, COP15, where established the Global Biodiversity Framework Currently, this appointment had the mandate to deepen the implementation of the said framework. Consequently, the countries (also referred to as “the Parties”) should have presented their progress in the form of a National Biodiversity Plan for this COP.
However, only 44 out of 196 countries presented these (and generally with insufficient ambition and specification of indicators). Moreover, since the obligation for the CBD to generate reports to know the progress of each country has disappeared, the entire agreement can remain only declarations, without no real impact on biodiversity.
On the financing side, another of the big issues of this summit is: nor has there been any progress on “mandatory” on the part of the rich countries to finance actions in the South, and no agreement has been reached on an increase, which is a deep disappointment. This is another part of the World Framework that could be in jeopardy, just like the previous framework (the framework known as the “Aichi Goals”, none of which have been met).
And what causes this? Well, in addition to the very low commitments on the part of the states – some of which worked directly to lower the ambition of every point – ‘corporate capture’, that is to say the kidnapping of negotiations by polluting multinationalswho were present with them, and with an alarming number of negotiators, was once again decisive for the failure of the summit.
One of his “successes” from the COP16 has systematically deployed false solutions, proposals that have been shown not to work to improve the state of biodiversity, but which are nevertheless useful to perpetuate business models that threaten it. One of the most repeated these days is that of ‘biodiversity offsets’, an illusory concept that can facilitating the destruction of an ecosystem through presumed conservation or the recovery of another (under minimum targets, which also means that this will usually not flourish, or that it will within 50 years).
To name two successes this has yielded COP16, On the one hand, an evaluation and monitoring framework has been established that includes a set of indicators to collect data on whether or not the objectives of the Global Framework have been achieved, and on the other hand, steps have been taken in recognizing of communities and indigenous peoples as ‘guardians’ of biodiversity on their territory, despite the impetus given to it. false solutions can leave this part of the text on wet paper.
Friends of Earth claim that although a COP16 Infinitely better could have been done – and they will continue to fight for it every year – we must not forget that the current economic and political system has come back to life, and although these summits can take steps in the right direction, they never will become. enough to the change of course that we as humanity must implement.
We must restore ecosystems at a rate never seen before, ensure we protect the few undisturbed natural habitats, grow hundreds of climate refuges that fill cities with nature and produce food without destroying the soil that supports cropsamong other measures. It’s not time for patches. It’s time to change the system.
The COP16 It was another missed opportunity, where participating countries could implement changes that implied a significant and positive turn in the economy serious problems affecting the world’s biodiversity. In a few days the same countries will meet in Baku to celebrate COP29 and the question that arises is inevitable: will they just talk and debate or will they make decisions once and for all? We have little time left to keep losing it.