Written by Megan Short
For 2 weeks in October, COP16 took over Cali, Colombia, with over 700,000 participants attending the green zone, setting new records for engagement and inclusivity.
While it has been hailed as a “historic” “people’s” COP, many have criticised the summit for falling short on agreements on finance and monitoring. But what actually were the key decisions made at COP16, and what could they mean for transformative change?
Strengthening the role of Indigenous peoples and local communities
The knowledge and practices of Indigenous and local communities are crucial to protecting the planet, yet these groups are often amongst the first to face the direct consequences of climate change.
In a landmark decision at COP16, a new Programme of Work and subsidiary body on Article 8(j) of the Convention of Biological Diversity were adopted. This will set out provisions and specific tasks to ensure that the rights, contributions and traditional knowledge of Indigenous peoples and local communities are embedded in the global agenda, and will ensure their meaningful contribution to future negotiations.
The Cali Fund
Many industries, including pharmaceutical, biotechnology and agribusiness, use digital sequence information on genetic resources (DSI) for their commercial benefit, yet this has a detrimental impact on biodiversity.
Under new guidelines agreed at COP16, large companies and other major entities that benefit from DSI uses should contribute 1% of their profits (or 0.1% of their revenue) to the “Cali Fund”, in order to address the longstanding call for a more equitable distribution of the benefits generated by the private sector’s exploitation of natural resources.
The fund also plans to allocate 50% of its resources for direct payments to Indigenous peoples and local communities, to ensure these proceeds will protect and restore nature where help is needed most.
Adoption of Ecologically or Biologically Significant Marine Areas
After an eight-year delay, a long awaited decision was finally reached in Cali to outline a new and evolved process to identify ecologically or biologically significant marine areas (EBSAs).
Mapping these areas will inform science-based measures to conserve, restore and manage marine ecosystems. This is a key milestone on the path to protect 30% of the ocean by 2030, particularly as this agreement contains measures for identifying EBSA areas on the High Seas.
Is it enough?
Whilst these decisions mark progress in inciting the changes needed to protect the planet and prevent ecosystem breakdown, the suspension of other key negotiations, including the finalisation of a monitoring framework for the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, suggests that there is still a long way to go if we are to successfully bring about transformative change.
The Cali fund is a step in the right direction, however, while contributions remain voluntary and no consensus has been reached on the creation of the global biodiversity fund needed to raise the $200 billion set out in the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, the amount of money that can realistically be generated has been called into question.
The progress made at COP16 certainly shouldn’t be overlooked - nature is our most powerful ally in the fight against climate change and the record levels of engagement have showcased this on the world stage. Looking forward to COP30, to be held in the Brazilian Amazon next year, hopefully these steps can lead the way to more transformative change in the near future.