A group of emerging economies chaired by China has proposed that what they regard as protectionism by developed countries should be discussed formally at the COP29 climate summit, setting up an “agenda fight” that could disrupt the talks.
The BASIC group of nations – Brazil, South Africa, India and China – has put forward an agenda item for COP29 in Baku, seen by Climate Home, that addresses “concerns with climate-change related unilateral restrictive trade measures”.
The submission to the UN says these trade measures “under the guise of climate objectives represent a systemic concern with disproportionate effects on developing [countries]”.
“Such measures increase the cost of worldwide climate action, hinder the efforts of developing countries to advance their climate commitments and ambition, undermine the basis of multilateral cooperation and contradict” UN climate agreements, the text adds.
Sign up to get our weekly newsletter straight to your inbox, plus breaking news, investigations and extra bulletins from key events
Aaron Cosbey, a trade expert with the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD), told a recent webinar that BASIC’s proposal was “explosive”, adding “the potential for these issues to derail progress at that COP is very real.”
EU carbon border levy
The BASIC proposal is likely to be fiercely resisted by the European Union (EU) and the United States. Although the submission does not mention specific policies, BASIC has criticised the EU’s plan for a carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM) – essentially a carbon tax on imports – as well as certain provisions contained in the US Inflation Reduction Act (IRA).
The COP29 president, Azerbaijan’s Mukhtar Babayev, and the head of the UN climate body, Simon Stiell, are tasked with drawing up a draft agenda for the UN summit from a list of submissions, after consulting with governments. At the start of COP29, all governments will review the suggested items and agree what makes it on to the final agenda. Arguments could delay the start of talks.
Legal experts say Trump could quit Paris pact – but leaving UNFCCC much harder
Cosbey said the EU and others are “never going to agree” to the agenda item on trade, because its language is “prejudicial” and the issues it raises are already included under a track of the UN climate talks known as “response measures”.
“They will argue: ‘we don’t want to discuss this as a general agenda item – we want to put it in this box over here where we’ve been discussing it all these years’,” Cosbey added, noting it “may sound like a minor thing” but previous negotiations have been hung up for days over such “agenda fights”.
The BASIC countries have long opposed the CBAM – and they made a similar agenda proposal ahead of COP28. But, led by the group’s then chair Brazil, they backed down and accepted it being left off the agenda.
Cosbey said the question of whether it delays the adoption of the COP agenda this time around depends on whether BASIC countries are “serious” about wanting a formal discussion or are “putting it forward strategically” to draw attention to the issue and extract some concessions in return for dropping it.
The EU’s CBAM is a levy on certain carbon-intensive and heavily traded products imported into the bloc from countries that do not have a price on carbon. It was approved by the EU in 2021 and will come into force in 2026.
Its supporters argue it is necessary to avoid carbon leakage, whereby producers of energy-intensive products like steel, cement and aluminum move their operations out of the EU to countries with weaker environmental regulations.
But in a communique issued after their leaders met in Russia in late October, BASIC described the CBAM as a “unilateral, punitive and discriminatory protectionist” measure.
Aruna Sharma, a former secretary at the Indian steel ministry, told the same webinar the EU wants other countries to follow the pace of its emissions-cutting goals without consulting them properly. Measuring emissions of products in order to comply with the CBAM will be expensive, she added.
India’s then Steel Secretary Aruna Sharma speaks during an interview with Reuters in New Delhi, India, July 30, 2018. REUTERS/Adnan Abidi
Costs of compliance
Chantal Line Carpentier, head of the New York office of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), said many developing countries spend more on servicing their debt than on social welfare. “So how are these people supposed to be able to invest…in their [carbon] monitoring and verification systems when they can’t even finance their education or their health?” she asked.
IISD’s Cosbey added that even green exporters will have to pay to measure their emissions under CBAM, which adds up to “significant costs especially if you are a small producer”.
Both Cosbey and Sharma said these costs would grow if other nations brought in similar measures using different emissions measurement and reporting requirements. Cosbey said a proliferation of such systems would be “trade restrictive and undermine the ability of trade as an engine of development … to lift countries out of poverty”.
Canada, Australia and the UK are among the countries considering their own carbon trade levies.
How Azerbaijan locked up climate and social justice advocate ahead of COP29
Sharma added that the EU’s CBAM does not take into account a concept that is core to UN climate agreements of common but differentiated responsibilities (CBDR), under which developed countries are supposed to do more to tackle climate change than developing nations.
The EU has previously said the CBAM should be addressed at the World Trade Organisation (WTO) rather than in the UN climate talks. But UNCTAD’s Carpentier said WTO talks do not recognise the CBDR principle – and that taking up the CBAM there would “lead to a forever discussion”.
An UNCTAD study suggested the EU could use some of the revenues from its CBAM levy to help developing countries clean up production of goods that are taxable under the scheme. Sharma noted that, while the EU makes a lot of its steel with electric arc furnaces, many of its trade partners still use more polluting blast furnaces fired with coking coal.
The US’s Inflation Reduction Act, introduced by the Biden administration, has also drawn criticism from other governments for including subsidies for electric vehicles that require a large share of their parts to be produced in North America.
This condition has angered other car-making countries which see it as an unfair attempt to get automakers to relocate to the US. The EU, the UK, Japan and South Korea have all complained to the US government over the provision.
(Reporting by Joe Lo, editing by Megan Rowling)
The post Emerging economies set up COP29 agenda fight over trade measures appeared first on Climate Home News.
Emerging economies set up COP29 agenda fight over trade measures
A first set of biodiversity plans filed by countries to reverse nature loss are “insufficient” to meet this decade’s global targets, including a landmark goal to protect at least 30% of the world’s land and marine ecosystems by 2030, a landmark UN report warned on Thursday.
The State of Biodiversity Action, put together by a panel of technical experts for the UN Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), was released in Yerevan, ahead of the COP17 nature talks starting on Monday in the Armenian capital.
Over the next two weeks, governments will for the first time take stock of progress towards the Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) agreed in 2022 – a set of 23 targets also known as the “Paris Agreement for nature” – and will decide on policy guidelines for ramping up ambition before the 2030 deadline. The UN report will be the main basis for these negotiations.
At a press conference in Armenia, UN Secretary-General António Guterres highlighted that, while there has been some progress on the GBF, the “bad news” is that less than half of country plans are on track to meet its targets.
If current commitments are met by the end of the decade, only 26% of land ecosystems and 12% of marine ecosystems will be protected – falling “real short” of the 30% target agreed in Montreal in 2022, Guterres said. “The war on nature has not yet ended,” he added.
UN Environment chief Inger Andersen said the report “sets the tone for the focus, ambition and urgent action we need to deliver” in Armenia, including by reducing subsidies that harm nature and mobilising new finance for biodiversity. “All leaders and all negotiators must respond to these findings,” she emphasised.
Andersen added that climate change amplifies threats to biodiversity, which makes protection all the more important as global warming is now almost certain to rise above a key threshold. “Exceedence of 1.5C increases the likelihood of forest diebacks, phenological shifts, warming oceans that become more inhospitable to species, irreversible tipping points and so much more,” she said.
-
Global deforestation slowed in 2025 but Brazil’s election could undo “fragile” gains
Countries remain 70% off track to meet a goal to end deforestation by 2030, as progress in Latin America offset by failures in Africa -
Carbon capture industry faces tough future, as UK raids green spending
Despite a spate of projects getting underway, the mood at an industry conference in London this week was low with government subsidies set to shrink -
World Bank and IMF should lead the financial system in responding to the climate crisis
Multilateral development banks have a vital role to play in delivering on donors’ climate finance promises and protecting the most vulnerable
Progress on land but ocean lags behind
The report shows that if countries meet all the biodiversity targets in their plans, this would protect about 27% of the world’s land and sea by 2030, a fivefold increase in the span of ten years.
Progress has been uneven, with most conservation efforts focused on terrestrial ecosystems. The report suggests that currently about 19% of land ecosystems are protected, up two percentage points from 2020, which UN authorities welcomed but said is not a fast enough pace.
However, the real gap is at sea, where only about 10% of the global ocean has some sort of protection. Coastal areas under national jurisdiction have done better, as currently 23% of this marine territory is protected, but the report shows most of the deep ocean is not.
Brian O’Donnell, director of Campaign for Nature, an advocacy group, said the new High Seas Treaty – which entered into force this year and will allow for the creation of Marine Protected Areas in the deep ocean – represents an opportunity, as only about 1.5% is under protection so far.
A group of environmental NGOs including WWF and Bloomberg Philanthropies has issued a call for governments to scale up ocean conservation and to designate $16 billion annually for marine protection measures, up from $1.8bn now.
SE Asia speeds up plan for connected clean power grid after oil shock
Some countries did not set a conservation target at all for both land and sea, the report says, blaming technical challenges like how to account for overlapping protected areas, difficulty recognising protections for private land and land-accounting methodologies changing over time.
A separate report by Campaign for Nature suggests that the 30×30 goal could still be met with “increased ambition and commitment”, and says that around 50 countries have already protected about 30% of their land.
A group of environmental NGOs has warned that, beyond the 30% headline figure, protected areas need to be “high integrity” and recognise the stewardship of local communities and Indigenous peoples.
Developing countries call for finance
Rich countries will arrive at COP17 with shrinking aid budgets and geopolitical preoccupations – yet they will likely hear the same plea they’ve heard for the past few years: stepping up commitments will require finance.
A submission by African countries in August said the “implementation gap” has at its core a shortfall in the provision of funds, and that bridging it will require predictable and accessible finance.
Pacific island nations launched a similar call, arguing there is “a treaty obligation” that developing countries, including themselves, will effectively implement commitments depending on the finance and technology made available by developed nations.
To close this gap, the EU made a proposal at preliminary talks in Nairobi in August to expand the base of donors so that richer developing countries could voluntarily assume donor responsibilities. Saudi Arabia and Qatar rejected the idea, while China said this should not weaken the responsibility of developed nations.
Pre-COP draws attention to Pacific’s climate plight and 1.5C goal
So far, wealthy governments have missed a target to provide $20bn per year in international public finance for nature protection by 2025, reaching only about $16bn per year from 2023 to 2025, according to an OECD report. By 2030, the GBF aims for developed countries to directly transfer $30bn per year, and mobilise $200bn from all sources.
The UN report released on Thursday shows even slower progress in redirecting harmful subsidies such as those which encourage the overuse of fertilisers and the production and consumption of new fossil fuels, and below-market fees that encourage overfishing. UN Environment estimates that for every dollar spent protecting nature, $30 goes on destroying it.
UN biodiversity chief Astrid Schomaker told journalists in Yerevan that “if you hear there is no finance, please do not believe it” because economies are continuing to grow. “It is being spent on activities that harm the economy rather than those that work with nature and sustain life on this planet,” she said.
Guterres said developed countries tend to say they are grappling with budget constraints due to increased defence expenditure, which “in my view does not justify a reduction” in international aid. He added that existing resources can be multiplied if they are used to mobilise private capital.
Campaigners, companies and the Armenian government want to shift the needle on this situation at COP17 by highlighting how positive subsidies help restore biodiversity. They will launch a flagship call to action that will be taken forward by countries and groups working to reform damaging incentives.
Global review: the main act
The Global Review of Collective Progress – a bit like the Global Stocktake for climate action – is set to be the most important outcome from COP17, and it will be the first time this process unfolds at the biodiversity talks. The actions decided in Yerevan will respond to the gaps outlined in the State of Biodiversity Action report and determine whether countries can turn the tide of biodiversity loss this decade.
Overall, the report shows that while countries have taken action to address all 23 targets in the GBF, none “present a fully positive picture”. A target to strengthen the resilience of ecosystems to climate impacts is the only one with high relative progress, the report says, as government have already made effective interventions that show “a positive trend”.
The report assessed each country’s national targets, which define their contribution to the global goals, as well as their separate National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plans (NBSAPs) outlining how they will achieve the national targets.
But it does not paint a complete picture, since at the cut-off date, only 89 NBSAPs and national targets from 162 countries had been submitted, leaving out a couple of dozen plans that arrived late. Pacific island nations said this might undercount commitments.
Many of those lacking an NBSAP are biodiversity-rich developing countries, which say they need financial and technical support to fully develop these plans. Some large nations pending an NBSAP include South Africa, Bolivia and Russia.
Since the GBF was agreed in 2022, governments have mostly focused on developing their biodiversity targets and plans, while the lion’s share of implementation is expected to happen towards the end of the decade, according to UN biodiversity chief Schomaker.
But O’Donnell said “accelerated political ambition” is still needed to improve commitments and translate them into effective protection on the ground or at sea.
The post Countries urged to ramp up “insufficient” nature policies at COP17 appeared first on Climate Home News.
Countries urged to ramp up “insufficient” nature policies at COP17
Countries will meet in Armenia this month to carry out the first global review of progress towards meeting key nature targets by 2030.
These targets – and the wider ambition to halt and reverse biodiversity loss around the world – were agreed in the landmark Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework in 2022.
But the ambitions will not be achieved in time for the 2030 deadline unless action “accelerates rapidly”, a key UN report found.
It noted that nations are falling short on 22 of 23 nature targets, which focus on restoring ecosystems, increasing nature finance and reducing harmful subsidies.
This report and other findings will inform the global progress review taking place at the COP17 biodiversity summit in Armenia over 19-30 October.
The sections below summarise the report’s findings on where progress has – and has not – been made on each of the 23 targets.
They also rank the extent to which countries have addressed elements of each target on a national basis. Click on each target for more information. Key terms are defined throughout each section and in a glossary below.
The post COP17: Tracking progress towards the UN’s 2030 nature targets appeared first on Carbon Brief.
https://interactive.carbonbrief.org/nature-targets-2030-progress/
The amount of finance for nature delivered to date “falls far short” of what is needed to meet the UN’s global goals, according to a report released ahead of the COP17 biodiversity summit.
The global stocktaking report, prepared by the UN Convention on Biological Diversity (UN CBD) ahead of this month’s summit in Armenia, finds that developed nations are failing to close the $200bn “biodiversity finance gap”.
Initiatives designed to support this goal are also stumbling, with a special “framework” fund for biodiversity receiving less than $140m from developed countries in the past two years and the “landmark” Cali Fund receiving only $6,000 from private companies.
The availability of finance – or lack thereof – is likely to be a key point of contention in negotiations at COP17 in Yerevan, Armenia, which begin on 19 October.
Target for 2025 ‘not achieved’
At COP15 in 2022, 196 countries agreed to an ambitious global deal to reverse biodiversity loss by 2030, dubbed the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF).
Goal D of the agreement, shown below, states that countries must “close” a $700bn “biodiversity finance gap” by 2030.