by Simone Lovera
The meetings of the Subsidiary Bodies to the Convention on Biodiversity (CBD) that took place in May in Nairobi ended in disarray, as Parties ended up in polarized discussions about financial resources and other means of implementation for the historic Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) that was adopted in December 2022. As a result, no agreement was reached on many issues.
The main battlefield during the CBD meetings was undoubtedly the discussion on resource mobilization. The final text is far from agreed and still includes, potentially, the good, the bad and the evil. It includes unagreed references to highly controversial approaches and initiatives like biodiversity offsets and credits and the Task Force on Nature-related Financial Disclosures, but it also includes several reiterations of the need to eliminate harmful subsidies and other incentives that might cause biodiversity loss. One potential recommendation even goes slightly beyond the relevant target in the GBF by asking for Parties to take “effective action” in this field. Several draft recommendations also call for alignment of private financial flows, although only one of the voluntary actions mentions the need for regulations in this respect. Moreover, under the draft monitoring framework, Parties will probably be asked to report on whether they have policies, regulations, strategies or plans in place to progressively align fiscal and financial flows with the goals and targets of the Framework, and the amount of harmful subsidies that has not yet been eliminated.
Another potentially positive step is that a draft recommendation calls on Parties to “strengthen … coherence among revised national biodiversity strategies and action plans, [and] the next round of nationally determined contributions…” and to establish effective national coordination mechanisms in this regard. In the same draft recommendation, the Secretariat was asked to explore options for a joint work program between the CBD, the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Desertification Convention. The importance of synergy between climate and biodiversity finance is reiterated several times in the draft recommendations on resource mobilization as well, although it should be noted that there are probably a lot of actors that see this as an open door for forest carbon offset markets, rather than a caution that support to false climate solutions like bioenergy should not lead to biodiversity loss.
With the next Conference of the Parties being held in October Colombia, a country that has expressed a strong commitment to strengthening the voice of rightsholder groups like Indigenous Peoples, peasants and afro-descendant peoples during the biodiversity talks, it is hoped some of these good recommendations will survive the talks. However, it will undoubtedly take a lot of effort by rightsholders and other environmental justice movements to seize on this opportunity.
Back to News