The global target to protect at least 30% of the world’s land and water ecosystems by 2030 faces “huge” challenges, a top facilitator of UN biodiversity talks warned ahead of the COP16 summit starting next week in the Colombian city of Cali.
According to the UN’s biodiversity agency, only 29 countries – out of 196 – have so far submitted key updates to their national biodiversity plans, which are meant to include ways to reach the headline 2030 conservation goal agreed in 2022 in Montreal.
Chirra Achalender Reddy, chair of India’s National Biodiversity Authority and head of work on implementation at the UN biodiversity negotiations, said countries face a “humongous” challenge to meet the 30% by 2030 target – known as “30×30” – and need to formulate strong National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plans (NBSAPs) to get there.
UN approves carbon market safeguards to protect environment and human rights
“This is not just a walk in the park. The challenges that parties are facing are huge and complex,” Achalender Reddy told journalists at a briefing on Wednesday ahead of the COP16 summit.
“This is a very ambitious target when you take the 196 parties into consideration. Different countries have different circumstances, different capabilities and different priorities. The differences between parties makes this exercise very challenging,” he added.
Little protection for oceans
A report published on Thursday by a consortium of nature NGOs and foundations estimates that only 8.3% of the world’s ocean has been designated as marine protected areas (MPAs). When accounting for the lack of enforcement and loopholes that still allow for overfishing and fossil fuel extraction, just 2.8% of MPAs are likely to be effectively protected, it added.
The report warned that, at the current rate of progress, no more than 9.7% of the ocean will be protected by 2030.
In a foreword, John Kerry, former US secretary of state, and José María Figueres, former president of Costa Rica, urged governments to “act together with urgency” to meet the 30×30 target.
“Protecting and conserving at least 30% of the world’s ocean is vital to safeguard marine biodiversity and the billions of people who depend on it for their livelihoods and food security,” they wrote. “It is also essential to preserving the ocean’s ability to act as our greatest climate ally by absorbing billions of tonnes of carbon emissions every year.”
New biodiversity plans
At COP15 in December 2022, countries adopted a landmark deal known as the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF), which lays out a set of 23 targets to halt and reverse biodiversity loss, including the 30×30 goal.
Countries were tasked with setting national targets that are aligned with the global ones, as well as updating their NBSAPs with specific action plans on how to implement the GBF.
The plans are meant to make progress towards a range of GBF goals including restoring 30% of all degraded ecosystems, reducing subsidies that harm nature by at least $500 billion per year, raising $200 billion a year for nature protection, and disclosing biodiversity impacts from businesses.
Most governments missed an October deadline to submit their updated biodiversity plans, including megadiverse countries like COP16 host nation Colombia, Brazil, Democratic Republic of Congo and Indonesia. Colombia’s vice-minister of environment, Mauricio Cabrera, said in a statement that the country will present its updated NBSAP on October 21, the first day of the summit.
More NBSAPs are expected to be announced at COP16, according to Astrid Schomaker, executive secretary of the UN’s Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), who said the involvement of diverse government agencies in the plans was a positive outcome.
“This whole-of-government approach, bringing various ministries together, discussing amongst them and coming to agreement remains the strongest expression of political will and commitment,” Schomaker told reporters. “But it also takes more time.”
Colombia adds nature to the mix with its $40-billion energy transition plan
Nina Mikander, director of policy at Birdlife International, urged governments to commit at COP16 to deliver outstanding NBSAPs by the end of 2025. “Having a plan is just the first step to making sure that you’re able to progress on implementation,” she said.
In contrast, more countries have presented national targets, with 91 countries filing submissions, as reported by UN Biodiversity’s Schomaker.
“Parties have been focusing on national targets. Full NBSAPs take longer to prepare,” Achalender Reddy said. “The adoption of the NBSAP, when done right, involves a political process that culminates in the adoption at a high political level.”
Biodiversity fund nearly empty
Those biodiversity plans that have been presented to date vary in ambition, an analysis by WWF shows. While some countries addressed all of the commitments in the GBF, others did not.
Australia’s NBSAP, for example, has no action plan for implementation and avoids a commitment by developed countries to pledge financial support for conservation in developing countries, according to the WWF analysis.
New biodiversity plans should also recognise the “rights of indigenous peoples and other rights-holders”, said Achalender Reddy – which can often involve a long consultation process.
Biodiversity finance will also likely influence the production of updated NBSAPs, as developing countries face funding barriers in stepping up their efforts to protect nature, experts told Climate Home. Colombia, for example, has announced a $40-billion clean-energy transition investment plan that also aims to mobilise finance for forest restoration and sustainable use of ecosystems.
At the previous COP15, countries agreed to establish a biodiversity fund to support nature conservation, but it has so far received a scarce $200 million, and has faced hurdles to get up and running.
Despite the slow progress on finance and national plans, the UN’s biodiversity agency believes the GBF goals can be met.
“We really believe that through decisive action and by working together in solidarity, parties will be able to achieve the targets of the GBF by 2030,” Schomaker said. “Because they must achieve the targets of the GBF by 2030.”
(Reporting by Sebastian Rodriguez; editing by Megan Rowling)
The post COP16 confronts “huge” challenge of protecting 30% of world’s land and sea appeared first on Climate Home News.
COP16 confronts “huge” challenge of protecting 30% of world’s land and sea
Climate Change
Jimmy
Hello, I am Jimmy and the Captain of Oceania. I learnt to sail in my hometown of Hobart, Tasmania. I’ve spent years navigating Tasmania’s wildly spectacular coastline, and crossed Bass Strait many times, including the Sydney to Hobart yacht races. My first time sailing with Greenpeace was in 2017 as a volunteer on the Rainbow Warrior.
It is a privilege to be a part of the Oceania project, and I hope we can achieve many things with this beautiful ship.
https://www.greenpeace.org.au/team/jimmy/
Climate Change
Steve
I’m Steve the Engineer onboard. My happy place is on or under the ocean – offshore sailing, Surf Life Saving, scuba diving and ocean swimming .
I love adventure, problem solving and getting my hands dirty.
I’m excited to see Oceania on the high seas and promote and defend our magnificent oceans.
As an engineer it’s my job to keep everything running from the engine to the water and the bathrooms, (make cups of tea) and help sail the boat.
https://www.greenpeace.org.au/team/steve/
Climate Change
After Hormuz, Nepal and wildfires, people demand action to make polluters pay
Anne Jellema is executive director of 350.org; Mads Christensen is executive director of Greenpeace International; and Amitabh Behar is executive director of Oxfam International.
On Monday, global petitions with a collective total of more than 2 million signatures were presented to the United Nations, calling on governments to introduce binding mechanisms to make fossil-fuel companies and the super-rich contribute to the costs of the damage they have created.
The petition signatures were received by Selwin Hart, the UN Assistant Secretary-General for Climate Action, in New York during the UN General Assembly, sending a clear message to governments: there is no more room for excuses.
If governments are serious about resilience, energy security and protecting people from an increasingly unstable world, they must make the companies profiting from the fossil-fuel economy pay their fair share. Because the crisis we are facing is no longer some distant threat. It is unfolding in real time, and it is exposing the extraordinary costs of an economy still built around fossil fuels.
For more than six months, the Strait of Hormuz, the channel through which a fifth of the world’s oil once flowed without a second thought, has been closed, contested or effectively unusable. Tankers sit at anchor. Insurance premiums have gone through the roof. Petrol pumps from Los Angeles to Lagos have felt the tremor. It has taken a war to remind the world just how much of our daily lives still rests on a single, fragile artery of fossil fuels.
At the other end of the same emergency, a glacier came down on the Nepal–China border in the last week of August. A wall of ice, rock and water tore through the Bhote Koshi and Langtang valleys. It has been described as one of the deadliest disasters in the region’s modern history, unfolding in a landscape where the world’s glaciers are retreating and destabilising at a pace scientists have been warning about for years.
And this came only weeks after hundreds of thousands of people were displaced — not by ice, but by fire. Europe has experienced its worst wildfire season in more than a decade. Homes have been lost across Spain, Portugal, France, Greece and the UK. Firefighters and civilians have been killed battling the blazes, while damage and reconstruction costs continue to reach extraordinary levels.
These are not separate crises. They are different expressions of a world becoming more volatile, while the fossil-fuel economy continues to generate enormous profits for those at the top and pushes the costs onto everyone else.
Communities absorbing cost
Because the crisis we are facing is no longer some distant threat. It is unfolding in real time, and it is exposing the extraordinary costs of an economy still built around fossil fuels. One thread runs through all of these events: a global economy still organised around the profits of a fossil fuel industry that has known, for decades, exactly what it was doing to the planet.
At a moment when governments are gathering in New York for the UN General Assembly to talk about security, resilience and economic competitiveness, it is worth spelling out what “security” – or the lack of it, driven by our economy’s dependence on oil – actually means this year for ordinary people around the world: 35,000 excess deaths in Europe due to heat; the highest food prices in three and a half years; $700 billion in economic losses, threatening countless jobs and livelihoods, from a war and a closed oil chokepoint whose consequences are nowhere near over.
Meanwhile the companies that extracted, refined, shipped and sold the fuel behind all of this continue to report extraordinary profits. Households are paying more for energy. Governments are spending billions on disaster response, on reconstruction, on emergency deployments of firefighters and aid. Communities are absorbing the cost of a system they didn’t design and don’t control. We pay. They profit.
This is not a coincidence, and it is not inevitable. It is a political choice, repeated year after year, to let the companies most responsible for the climate crisis hoard the wealth they generate while the rest of us carry the risk.
Taxes and fines needed
That is why, together with communities and campaigners in dozens of countries have spent the last three years building the case for a simple, overdue idea: polluters should pay for the damage they have caused. Not through voluntary pledges or distant net-zero promises, but through binding mechanisms, climate damages taxes, surtaxes on fossil fuel profits, and fines ring-fenced for recovery and adaptation that put real money where the harm actually is. This is how we take the profit out of destruction and protect the generations to come.
The response has told us we are not alone in thinking this. Our petitions calling on governments to make polluters pay have now gathered a collective total of over 2 million signatures from people across every region of the world.
The case for making polluters pay has moved into the mainstream
That is not a fringe demand. It is what happens when people watch a choke-point war spike their fuel bill, watch a glacier take a thousand lives, watch their own summer holidays rearranged by fire. They draw the obvious conclusion: the people who caused this should be paying for it – not profiting from it.
We hear the objection already forming: that this is not the moment, with wars underway and economies fragmenting, to burden industry further. We would say the opposite is true. If governments can mobilise trillions for war, for bailouts and for new fossil fuel infrastructure, they can mobilise the political will to tax the companies that caused this crisis.
Money for clean energy and resilience
That money can go straight to the people paying for it, through cheaper, cleaner, more secure energy, and through funding for communities on the frontline of floods, fires and glacial collapse. There isn’t an excuse left. There is only a choice about where power and money go next. Every dollar we don’t spend now on adaptation, resilience and cutting emissions, we burn many times over later: on disasters we could have prevented and economies we scramble to fix too late.
This year’s UNGA should be the moment that choice gets made in public. Governments arriving in New York will talk about resilience, about energy security, about protecting their citizens from an unstable world. Let them explain on the record why a fossil fuel industry that has spent decades profiting from that instability should not be the one paying to fix it so wrecking the planet no longer pays off.
The fires, floods and storms won’t just go away. The system that keeps producing these disasters, and keeps paying the same companies for the privilege, will not change itself unless political leaders step up. It is on all of us to make sure they hear, as loudly as possible, that the time for excuses has run out.
The post After Hormuz, Nepal and wildfires, people demand action to make polluters pay appeared first on Climate Home News.
After Hormuz, Nepal and wildfires, people want action to make polluters pay
-
Greenhouse Gases2 years ago嘉宾来稿:满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change1 year ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases1 year ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Climate Change2 years ago嘉宾来稿:满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Renewable Energy11 months agoSending Progressive Philanthropist George Soros to Prison?
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Bill Discounting Climate Change in Florida’s Energy Policy Awaits DeSantis’ Approval
-
Greenhouse Gases1 year ago
嘉宾来稿:探究火山喷发如何影响气候预测
-
Carbon Footprint2 years agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits
