With an estimated 1 million plant and animal species currently facing extinction, member countries of the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) devised a framework with 23 targets aimed at stemming the loss of nature by 2030. That was two years ago. This week representatives from 196 nations will reconvene in Cali, Colombia at the 16th Conference of the Parties (COP16) to the CBD. But as deforestation, degradation of the ocean environment and climate change impact continues apace, will this initiative make any difference?
There seems to be general agreement that biodiversity is essential for our planet’s health and is beneficial to society and the economy generally. Biodiversity provides us with essential resources like food, medicine, and building materials and has implications for climate. Biodiversity also supports tourism, agriculture, and other industries. Protecting global biodiversity is not just about preserving nature; it’s also about ensuring a sustainable future for ourselves and generations to come. So why are some governments not acting decisively?
Click here to join our discussion forum on Discord
Known as the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, the CBD obligated participant countries to present “national biodiversity strategies and action plans” in time for COP16. But so far only 29 out of 196 CBD signatory nations have submitted fully complete plans. A further 91 have adopted the somewhat broader approach of “national targets.” Obligations of the framework include ring-fencing at least 30 percent of all land and water areas for conservation by 2030 and intervening to prevent the extinction of threatened species. The focus of the 2024 convocation involves agreeing on concrete approaches for monitoring and financing the required work.
Make no mistake. Regenerative finance (ReFi) has an important role to play here and the finance industry is waking up to the opportunity. King Charles III has been a champion for biodiversity and environmental remediation for decades. He recently provided part of his Sandringham estate to a company that will restore the wetlands, meadows and ancient forest over a period of 30 years. The company will estimate the improvement to the biodiversity and health of the land and package that value into tradable biodiversity credits. But without a global consensus, initiatives such as these would get little traction.
Some critics suggest that the proliferation of COPs on emissions, plastic waste and biodiversity are of little value in reducing human impact on the environment. The same critics argue that technological solutions and policy-making are a misdirection. They suggest that the only solution is for humanity to reduce consumption levels to a point where fewer demands are made on the living environment. But with global population forecast to approach 10 billion by 2050, is this a realistic solution? Perhaps advocates for biodiversity could follow the lead of the respected Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The IPCC have openly stated that a combination of energy transformation, technological approaches and policy are the way forward for emissions reduction.
COPs are more than just a talk-fest. Without globally connected conversations – there is likely to be no progress at all. But the discussion must lead to concrete actions. We can’t wait another two years to embark on this project.
Image credit: Charles J Sharp via Creative Commons CC-BY-SA 4.0
Genius ReFi is a collaborative platform for researchers, investors, entrepreneur and industry players interested in the commercialisation of regenerative sciences.
