COP16 Biodiversity: Despite the enthusiasm, a mixed picture for implementing commitments

Following two weeks of intense negotiations in Cali, Colombia, the COP16 on biodiversity has ended and it’s time to take stock. Our experts, Sabrina Capon, Biodiversity Manager, and Jeanne Barreyre, Senior Consultant and researcher in nature-based solutions, attended the event to follow the discussions and meet partners and other experts. We sat down with them to discuss the main advances and their feedback from the event.

COP16 progress following the COP 15 Kunming-Montreal agreement

Under the presidency of Colombia, this COP was marked by debates and divergences between countries of the Global North and South. As a result, we are still waiting for some key decisions to be made.

Following the adoption of the Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) at COP15 in 2022, the objectives of COP16 focused on the implementation of this agreement. In two years, progress has been made, with 119 countries submitting biodiversity targets, and 44 associated strategies and action plans to achieve the 23 objectives of the Kunming-Montreal agreement. However, the importance and need to accelerate action in relation to the three main objectives of this COP was underlined:

1. Committing to targets and progress monitoring: Establish an operational framework for measuring states’ progress towards the targets set at the last COP.
   
   ❌ This was a key issue at the COP. It is regrettable that no agreement was made on a robust monitoring framework to implement national commitments and adopt a reporting process for each country’s progress. Emphasis was placed on the need to speed up the definition of strategies and action plans for each country, to bring the subject of monitoring back into the spotlight at forthcoming discussions.
   
   
2. Mobilising resources: Ensuring sufficient funding and technical resources to achieve GBF objectives
   
   ❌ Countries were unable to agree on a resource mobilisation strategy to secure $200 billion per year by 2030 from all sources to support biodiversity initiatives worldwide, which is one of the objectives of the GBF. Colombia did its utmost to propose a solution, but after 24 hours of debate, the accumulated fatigue and the departure of some negotiators prevented a consensus from being reached. The problem seems to go deeper, revealing a North-South imbalance in the governance and sharing mechanisms of these funds. This measure was highly anticipated, particularly by the private sector, and is therefore one of the main disappointments of the COP.
3. Fair distribution: Ensuring fair and equitable sharing of the use of genetic resources (genetic information contained in the DNA of species and used in the manufacture of medicines and cosmetics, for example). These resources are often to be found in developing countries, and mainly benefit large corporations in the developed countries.
   
   ✅ COP16 saw the historic creation of the “Cali Fund”, where all users benefiting from digitised genetic information on species (such as pharmaceutical or cosmetics companies) can, without obligation, contribute to protect and restore nature where help is most needed.
   
   ❌ Unfortunately, this non-mandatory measure does not live up to the expectations of developing countries, whose genetic resources are the most numerous and generate the most value for the richest countries. Many thorny underlying questions need to be addressed: What is the commercial value of this data? Is this information confidential? How can we encourage companies to contribute to this fund?

Second-tier decisions to strengthen biodiversity protection

Nevertheless, COP16 was an opportunity to make progress on several issues, including:

• COP16 decided to create a new permanent subsidiary body to strengthen the commitment and participation of indigenous peoples and local communities in achieving the objectives of the CBD (Convention on Biological Diversity).
  
• Biodiversity and climate: Countries agreed to align their climate and biodiversity policies at a national level and prioritise integrated actions. The fight against climate change must go hand in hand with the preservation of nature to guarantee a sustainable and viable transition. 
  
• Invasive alien species: The COP16 decision on invasive alien species proposes guidelines for managing the risks associated with these species: New databases, better regulation of cross-border trade, enhanced coordination with online trading platforms. These collaborative, cross-sectoral approaches are essential to protecting biodiversity.
  
• Oceans: COP16 breathed new life into this theme, agreeing new mechanisms for identifying new marine areas of ecological or biological importance and updating existing ones, important for implementing the 30×30 protected areas target (conservation of at least 30% of the planet by 2030).
  
• Other progress was made on several themes such as NGOs and risks, biodiversity and health, sustainable management of flora and fauna and plant conservation.

Real progress in engaging private-sector organisations

It is important to note the strong presence of private companies at this COP, demonstrating a real awareness and a move to action at their level. Numerous initiatives, coalitions and events have been mobilised and organised in parallel with the multilateral UN negotiations, testifying to the desire to give concrete expression to the commitments of public and private organisations.  

Regarding financing via biodiversity credits, the IAPB (International Advisory Panel on Biodiversity Credits) has published its guidelines defining a certification framework of high-integrity biodiversity certificates, supported by the EU. The principles and guidelines are as follows:

1. Tangible, verified results: Through rigorous credit validation and verification procedures that demonstrate positive results on nature.
2. Equity and justice for people: It’s essential to ensure that biodiversity certificates generate no harm, provide significant and equitable benefits, respect the rights of indigenous peoples and local communities, guarantee their inclusion and value their central role at the heart of biodiversity.

Markets governance: It’s necessary to establish a transparent and sound governance, both at the global level of biodiversity certificates markets and at the level of project implementation.

Regarding methodological frameworks on nature for companies, the TNFD has published a discussion paper about nature transition plans, in consultation until 1^st February 2025, along with first examples of TNFD and integrated TNFD/TCFD reports as key elements that can inspire our customers on this subject.

Climate and nature transition is also addressed in the GFANZ guidance, which proposes additional, voluntary guidelines on how to integrate nature-related levers as part of a strategic and credible plan for transition to a net-zero economy.

On the important subject of metrics, nature positive initiative have proposed a set of practical indicators that could be adopted by consensus and included in various reference frameworks (SBTN, TNFD, GRI, etc.). Here again, you can have your say until 13 November.

In France, the Biodiversity & Companies platform (“Entreprises et biodiversité”) was launched during the COP and lists all the tools, methods and initiatives related to biodiversity.[MS1]  Private stakeholders were strongly represented in Cali (20,000 participants) and actively participated in sharing new initiatives in line with their commitments. Many shared the need for clear rules, transparent governance and effective coordination at state level, so that they can move forward  on their biodiversity trajectory, in line with their climate strategy.

Climate and biodiversity are on the agenda for the forthcoming COP29 climate conference in Baku in November 2024, with a view to strengthening ties and governance on these issues. The EcoAct team will be keeping a close eye on the latest news and continue to encourage every organisation to take action to preserve and restore biodiversity!