It has been more than one year since the gavel came down at the last UN biodiversity summit, where almost every country in the world agreed on a plan to protect nature.
The Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework was signed off at the COP15 summit in Montreal, Canada in December 2022. (See Carbon Brief’s in-depth summary of the key outcomes.)
The landmark deal contained a number of goals and targets for countries to achieve over the coming years – such as setting aside land for wildlife, reducing pesticide risks and restoring ecosystems.
In the months since, more nature pledges have been announced, a new biodiversity fund was established and more science showing the impacts of humans on nature has been published.
Countries will gather at the next UN biodiversity summit, due to be held in Colombia this October, to take stock of progress since the deal was given the green light and submit new national plans outlining how they will protect biodiversity.
Carbon Brief has taken an in-depth look at progress on individual nature issues and the key biodiversity updates since the COP15 summit.
- What was agreed at the UN biodiversity summit in Montreal?
- What has happened since the Global Biodiversity Framework was adopted?
- Key negotiation issues
- What do we know about the next UN biodiversity summit?
What was agreed at the UN biodiversity summit in Montreal?
The UN biodiversity summit takes place every two years, unlike the climate COP, which takes place annually.
At COP15 – the last round of biodiversity talks in Montreal in December 2022 – almost every country in the world agreed to a landmark deal to repair nature.
The Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) included four long-term global goals and 23 specific targets, with an overall mission of halting and reversing biodiversity loss by 2030.
Some of the key targets include conserving 30% of the world’s land and 30% of the ocean by 2030, reducing the impact of invasive species, cutting pesticides, sustainably managing agriculture and prioritising involvement of Indigenous peoples and local communities in different ways.
Alongside the overall framework, dozens of other decisions were made around the more technical aspects of the negotiations, including figuring out ways to monitor national progress and gather finance to fund action, particularly in lower-income countries.
Although the agreements made at the summit are not legally binding, nations also agreed on a plan to report on, review and voluntarily increase their ambitions to tackle biodiversity loss. This is similar to the plan drawn up to implement the Paris Agreement for climate change.
A lack of implementation was widely cited as one of the major factors behind the failure of the Aichi targets, the last set of global biodiversity aims.
Although the COP15 agreement was widely seen as a success, some countries – particularly the Democratic Republic of Congo – felt frustrated and outraged at the manner in which the GBF was given the green light.
In the final stages of the summit, the deal was seen to be quickly gavelled through by summit president, Chinese environment minister Huang Runqiu, despite objections from the DRC minutes earlier in the plenary.
Following the close of the plenary, there were arguments over the manner in which the final approval happened, but all countries eventually supported the deal.
In the wake of the agreement, UN secretary general António Guterres said that “we are finally starting to forge a peace pact with nature”.
Canadian environment minister Steven Guilbeault said that the GBF is a “major win for our planet and for all of humanity”, which will chart a course “away from the relentless destruction of habitats and species”.
The International Indigenous Forum on Biodiversity welcomed the “timely recognition” of Indigenous peoples and local community contributions, roles, rights and responsibilities to nature. A statement from the group said:
“We have spoken and you have heard us, let us now put those words into action.”
What has happened since the Global Biodiversity Framework was adopted?
Several events and meetings since COP15 have addressed nature and biodiversity in different ways.
On 15 February 2023, Dr David Cooper took over from Elizabeth Maruma Mrema as the new acting executive secretary of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). The CBD is an international treaty established in 1992 with the objective of conserving and sustainably using biodiversity, and ensuring the fair sharing of benefits from the use of genetic resources.
Before his appointment, Cooper had assisted the CBD secretariat as deputy executive secretary, contributing to a “successful finalisation and adoption of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework”, according to the CBD. He was a lead author of three editions of the Global Biodiversity Outlook and other assessments.
Mrema was appointed deputy executive director of the UN Environment Programme.
March saw the emergence of the High Seas Treaty, a legally binding global agreement for conserving and sustainably using areas of the ocean beyond national jurisdictions – also known as the “high seas” or international waters. Carbon Brief reported that the treaty “provides the framework for establishing protected areas where previously there had not been a clear mechanism for doing so”. (For more on the high seas treaty, see: Oceans.)
The Amazon Summit, held in August last year, gathered leaders of the eight Amazon basin countries, who delivered the Belém Declaration. The document will strengthen the Amazon Cooperation Treaty Organization to prevent the rainforest “from reaching the point of no return”. The summit’s outcomes were labelled as “hopeful, but insufficient” by various civil and Indigenous organisations for having no specific targets for curbing deforestation.
In late 2023, countries from the Amazon, the Congo Basin and south-east Asia agreed to protect their rainforests and boost nature finance during the Three Basins Summit in the Republic of the Congo. However, experts told Carbon Brief at the time that the meeting failed to reach a unified alliance and was, ultimately, “underwhelming”.
October marked the official end of COP15 with a meeting in Nairobi, which served to finish off some “outstanding business in Montreal” and advance the recommendations from the Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical and Technological Advice (SBSTTA) on implementation and review. Delegates also issued a draft recommendation on climate change and biodiversity.
Key negotiation issues
Over the past year, there have been a number of summits, finance pledges and intergovernmental talks relating to biodiversity.
Below, Carbon Brief outlines the progress on the key biodiversity COP negotiation topics and related issues in the months since Montreal – from movement on the “30 by 30” goal to the focus on Indigenous rights.
Halting and reversing biodiversity loss
Back in Montreal, countries agreed that the overall mission of the GBF should be to “halt and reverse biodiversity loss by 2030”.
The GBF has been likened to the “Paris Agreement for nature”, with some comparing the 2030 goal of halting and reversing biodiversity loss to the aspirational 1.5C temperature limit.
After the GBF was agreed, Carbon Brief spoke to a range of biodiversity scientists who said that halting and reversing biodiversity loss by 2030 would be incredibly challenging.
A landmark report released in 2019 by the world’s biodiversity authority, the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES), found that one million animal and plant species now face extinction. This is more than at any other point in human history.
Across the world, populations of mammals, birds, amphibians, reptiles and fish decreased by an average of 69% between 1970 and 2016, according to a 2022 WWF report on more than 30,000 animal populations. In tropical central and South America, the animal populations covered by the study fell by an average of 94% over this period.
Scientists also told Carbon Brief that achieving the mission would largely be decided by meeting the targets of the GBF that tackle the direct causes of biodiversity loss.
These include target 18, which addresses subsidies harmful to biodiversity; target 7, which addresses pollution; and targets 5 and 9, which address the “sustainable use” of biodiversity. (Progress on several targets is discussed in more detail below.)
One issue that negotiators have continued to work on since the GBF was agreed is developing a set of indicators for measuring biodiversity loss.
While many people associate “biodiversity” with iconic species and tropical rainforests, the term actually covers the whole spectrum of Earth’s biological diversity, ranging from the organisation of genes within organisms to the communities of animals and plants that make up ecosystems. This complexity makes biodiversity loss particularly difficult to measure.
At COP15, countries decided to set up a technical group to develop biodiversity loss indicators ahead of COP16, spearheaded by Colombia and the UK. Comprising 45 experts, the group has met several times virtually in 2023 and will meet for in-person discussions in Cambridge, England in March of this year.
30 by 30
One aim that grabbed the attention of politicians, media, activists – and even celebrities – at COP15 was the pledge to protect 30% of the world’s land and seas for nature by 2030, commonly referred to as “30 by 30”. It is contained within target 3 of the GBF.
The fight to get 30 by 30 into the GBF was spearheaded by a group of countries calling itself the High Ambition Coalition for Nature and People (HACN&P). It is led by Costa Rica and France, with the UK acting as a co-chair for the ocean component of the pledge.
Since COP15, the HACN&P set up a secretariat directed by former Costa Rican biodiversity negotiator Rita El Zaghloul.
During an interview at the COP28 climate summit in Dubai in December 2023, El Zaghloul told Carbon Brief that with the GBF agreed, the HACN&P has shifted its focus to ensuring the most vulnerable countries have the tools required to meet the target.
At COP28, she announced that the HACN&P had created a new “30 by 30 solutions toolkit” and a financial and technical “matchmaking” service. Explaining the purpose of these tools to Carbon Brief, she said:
“Because it was HACN&P that started the 30 by 30 movement, it is also our responsibility to ensure that countries have the sufficient support and tools to meet the target.
“We know that it is an ambitious target, because we have to move from approximately 17% on land and 8% on oceans [that is currently protected] to 30% on both. Many of the megadiverse countries are developing countries and small island developing states, so we need to provide them with the tools.”
Elsewhere at COP28, China surprised delegates by announcing that it was joining the HACN&P. The announcement came from COP15 president and China environment minister Huang Runqiu via videolink at a high-level session on 30 by 30.
El Zaghloul told Carbon Brief that the announcement came after more than two years of talks with China, who were initially reluctant to join the initiative while still maintaining the “neutral” role of COP15 president.
As of the end of COP28 in December 2023, 118 countries had joined the HACN&P. This compares to 114 in December 2022. (There are 196 countries, including the EU, that are party to the CBD. All of these countries have committed to 30 by 30 through the GBF.)
Finance
At COP15 in Montreal, the gavel went down adopting the GBF and its finance package amid controversy and objections from biodiverse developing countries.
The final finance target seeks to mobilise “at least $200bn per year” by 2030 from “all sources” – domestic, international, public and private. For comparison, the biodiversity finance gap for conservation is estimated at roughly $700bn per year for this decade.
Developed countries – along with others that “voluntarily assume” their obligations – are expected to “substantially and progressively increase” their international finance flows for nature “to at least $20bn per year by 2025 and to at least $30bn per year by 2030”, according to the GBF’s Target 19l.
Despite calls from many developing countries for a distinct fund housed under the COP, COP15 requested the Global Environment Facility (GEF) set up a special trust fund. This would be called the “Global Biodiversity Framework Fund” (GBF Fund) and be established “in 2023, and until 2030” to receive “financing from all sources”.
On June 29 last year, the GEF’s governing board approved plans to set up this “game-changing” new fund to finance the Framework’s implementation.
The GEF’s governing board approved plans to establish the fund on 29 June last year. A month later, at the GEF assembly in Vancouver, 186 countries ratified and officially launched the GBF Fund.
At the GEF assembly, COP15 hosts Canada contributed an initial capitalisation of C$200m ($147.3m), while the UK pledged £10m ($12.6m).
As much as 20% of the funds are intended for supporting Indigenous-led initiatives to protect and conserve biodiversity.
Indigenous groups – often sidelined from direct access to conservation funding – welcomed the dedicated allocation. Brazil’s Indigenous minister Sonia Guajajara pointed out that this “should not just be an aspirational criterion, but a concrete target that needs to be constantly updated” and called for “shared governance mechanisms that include recipient countries”.
Separately, at least 36% of the fund’s resources are to support small island developing states and least-developed countries.
At the assembly, Cuba and Honduras called for “simplified processes for obtaining” funding, the Earth News Bulletin reported. At the same time, the DRC, Namibia, Yemen and the Gambia “urged” more direct access to funds and minimising transaction costs.
At a side event on the sidelines of the UN general assembly in September, Germany pledged the final €40m ($43.3m) to put the fund into operation.
On Nature Day at COP28, Japan then pledged ¥650m ($43.8m). While this took the fund’s initial total capitalisation to about $247m, this falls far short of the “at least $20bn per year by 2025” target that developed countries were to raise. The US and EU, who supported and “welcomed” the fund, are yet to commit any new money.
The fund’s governing body will meet for the first time on 8 and 9 February this year in Washington DC to discuss its budget, business plan and how resources are allocated, with projects set to be funded by the end of 2024.
Projects backed by all eligible countries will have to go through consecutive selection rounds for funding based on criteria, including their potential to generate global environmental benefits, alignment with the GBF’s goals and National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs), and their ability to raise resources from the private sector.
Not all the money raised will go to funding biodiversity projects directly: it will also have to cover staff costs, travel, consultants, monitoring and independent evaluation.
Additionally, if the fund’s current budget request is approved, it will have to pay the World Bank – the GEF’s host– an indirect charge of 11% on all direct costs for administrative support – a 300% increase from last year.
The UN Environment Programme’s State of Finance for Nature 2023 report, released at COP28, found that public finance still accounts for the majority of conservation spending in the GBF’s first year. At the same time, it found that contributions from biodiversity offsets and credits grew sharply in 2022 as countries including the UK, France and Australia rolled out new nature markets.
The report also noted that philanthropy – “driven by support for 30 by 30” – and private finance mobilised by debt instruments such as blue bonds and rhino bonds grew last year as well. But, it added, these small numbers paled in comparison with $7tn in nature-negative investments made the same year.
Implementation
Ensuring that the targets contained within the GBF are actually implemented by countries will be the major challenge in the coming years, experts tell Carbon Brief.
Details for how the agreement should be implemented – the so-called “teeth” of the deal – are contained within Section J of the GBF itself and a separate document called “mechanisms for planning, monitoring, reporting and review”. (It is worth noting that the GBF and its underlying documents are not legally binding.)
The agreed plan for how the GBF should be implemented by countries follows three key steps – sometimes referred to as “present, review and ratchet”. This closely mirrors the implementation schedule of the Paris Agreement.
Section J of the GBF specifies that countries should present national biodiversity strategies and action plans, or “NBSAPs”, that are “in alignment” with the GBF and its goals and targets. The underlying document adds that this should be done “by COP16”.
Since the end of COP15, France, the EU, Luxembourg, Hungary, Japan and Spain have submitted updated NBSAPs. The UK has indicated it will release its new NBSAP in May of this year.
In September 2023, an “accelerator partnership” to “fast-track and upscale” new NBSAPs was officially launched at New York Climate Week, after first being agreed at COP15. The initiative is headed by Colombia and Germany, with the support of various UN bodies.
As for the “review” step, countries have agreed to conduct a global analysis of whether NBSAPs align with the GBF at COP16 and hold a “global review” of progress at COP17 and COP19.
After this, countries “may take the outcome of the global reviews into account in future revisions and implementation of their” NBSAPs. This is the “ratchet” element of the implementation mechanism.
In October 2023, negotiators met in Nairobi to officially close COP15. The aim of this meeting was to tie up loose ends remaining from the landmark agreement of the GBF in Montreal in 2022.
The event brought together scientific and technical experts to give advice on what should be included in the global review earmarked for COP17 in 2026. Bernadette Fischler Hooper, the head of global advocacy at WWF International, told Carbon Brief:
“The technical experts and scientific experts discussed what should be in this report. So it was very focused on what that report should contain.”
Nature-based solutions
The use of nature to mitigate and adapt to climate change – known as nature-based solutions – featured a number of times in the GBF’s targets.
At COP28 in Dubai, nature-based solutions were also discussed at different stages. The global stocktake text – a key outcome of the summit that showed how countries can increase action to meet climate goals – “encourages” the implementation of nature-based solutions.
A report released in June by the International Institute for Sustainable Development recommended ways to ensure that nature-based solutions will boost biodiversity and ecosystems.
In a list of draft recommendations from the final round of intergovernmental talks on nature-based solutions, the co-chairs suggested ways to support their use.
These include setting up a database of policies related to nature-based solutions to enable learning between countries, analysing the technical tools available to support implementing such solutions and making a how-to guide for accessing finance for these projects.
At COP28, more than 150 companies and financial institutions said they would increase investments in nature-based solutions.
At COP16, nature-based solutions will likely feature in many national biodiversity action plans and will continue to be one of the key talking points, experts tell Carbon Brief.
For example, Spain intends to prioritise a number of different areas including nature-based solutions over the next few years to meet its climate and biodiversity targets, according to its revised NBSAP.
Invasive species
Invasive alien species are animals, plants or other organisms that have spread into places outside their natural habitats. These can negatively impact both nature and people, according to IPBES.
Target 6 of the GBF aims to reduce the establishment and introduction of invasive alien species by 50% by 2030.
Since the GBF was agreed at COP15, there have been advances in the knowledge of the distribution of invasive species across the world and the ways countries can handle biological invasions.
In September last year, IPBES published an assessment report on invasive alien species, which notes that humans have introduced 37,000 invasive alien species.
The report, based on more than 13,000 scientific studies, says that despite this, more than 80% of countries lack national legislation or regulations to address invasive species. However, it outlines three frameworks for governments to manage biological invasions, from introduction pathway management to species-based and site-based management. (For more, read Carbon Brief’s coverage of the IPBES report.)
According to reporting by the Earth Negotiations Bulletin (ENB), the CBD’s SBSTTA Nairobi meeting in October emphasised the need to develop strategies to simultaneously address two main causes of biodiversity loss – climate change and invasive alien species – and to step up collaboration among environmental agreements to implement the GBF.
It also reported that the SBSTTA adopted eight resolutions, including one on invasive alien species. Among other things, such a resolution addresses how to identify and minimise cross-border e-commerce of live organisms or manage invasive alien species by preventing risks from climate change.
The secretariat of the CBD issued a document providing draft voluntary guidance and advice on matters regarding invasive alien species. These guidelines included the best methodologies for managing invasive alien species, such as cost-benefit, cost-effectiveness and multicriteria analysis.
The SBSTTA recommended the use of the IPBES report on invasive species for implementing the GBF, the CBD and NBSAPs. It also called on COP16 to acknowledge the importance of enhancing information availability and accessibility to strengthen the management of invasive species, according to the ENB.
The full IPBES assessment on invasive species could be approved at COP16, ENB reported.
Links between climate and biodiversity
Several experts tell Carbon Brief that there was a marked increase in the attention paid to biodiversity and nature at the UN climate summit, COP28, compared to previous editions.
An event hosted during the summit’s thematic “nature” day saw the hosts of COP28 and COP15 – the United Arab Emirates and China, respectively – announce a Joint Statement on Climate, Nature and People.
The statement included a pledge by its signatories to work towards “comprehensiveness and cohesion” between countries’ national climate policies (“nationally determined contributions” or “NDCs”) and their national plans for nature (“national biodiversity strategies and action plans” or “NBSAPs”). Dr David Cooper, CBD acting executive secretary, says the statement was “very welcome”. He tells Carbon Brief:
“Countries have to now, in the light of the Kunming-Montreal [Global] Biodiversity Framework, develop their national targets and include them in their national biodiversity strategies and action plans, and they are currently doing that.
“It’s clear that in light of the stocktake [at COP28] NDCs will have to be ramped up. So that’s a big opportunity to make sure that the role of nature, the role of biodiversity [and] ecosystems is fully used in that…The need to protect those sinks and so on is also an additional motivation for strengthening the ambition of the NDCs.”
Pepe Clarke, global oceans practice lead at WWF-International, tells Carbon Brief:
“We’re continuing to see closer integration of biodiversity considerations into global climate negotiations, which is a really positive and continuing trend.”
Indigenous rights
According to the International Indigenous Forum on Biodiversity (IIFB), Indigenous rights figure in seven of the GBF’s targets, including spatial planning, area-based conservation, sustainable use and participation and respect for the rights of Indigenous peoples and local communities.
For example, Target 22 aims to ensure the participation of Indigenous peoples and local communities in decision-making and the respect of their rights over their lands and territories.
After the framework was agreed, the IIFB welcomed such recognition and said it would collaborate to implement the GBF and apply the “monitoring and reporting framework through community-based monitoring”.
In a meeting convened in November 2023, delegates reviewed the work programme for the section of the CBD that aims to respect and preserve Indigenous peoples’ knowledge and practices. They will continue these discussions at COP16.
The working group also looked at creating a permanent subsidiary body to offer advice to the COP and to enhance the participation of Indigenous peoples and local communities in other subsidiary bodies of the CBD.
In a comment piece, WWF’s head of policy research and development, Guido Broekhoven, said one of the goals of the GBF Fund (GBFF), created in August 2023, is elevating funding for conservation actions undertaken by Indigenous peoples.
The Global Environmental Fund, which administers the biodiversity fund, allocated 20% of funds from the GBFF to Indigenous peoples and local communities. The first instalment of the fund is expected to be delivered before COP16, Down to Earth reported.
Lucy Mulenkei, co-chair of the IIFB, said in a press release that “the creation of this fund and its commitment to supporting Indigenous Peoples and local communities is an important and clear recognition of the fundamental role they have had for generations [in] protecting biodiversity”.
However, Broekhoven noted in his comment piece that there needs to be more climate finance directly reaching communities protecting ecosystems, such as the Amazon and the Congo rainforest. He said that doing so “is critical to encouraging all countries to announce ambitious NBSAPs ahead of COP16 and to keeping the goal of halting and reversing biodiversity loss by 2030 in sight”.
Oceans
In the year since COP15, the world has moved forward on several marine-related treaties and policies, including the High Seas Treaty, an agreement on fishery subsidies at the World Trade Organization (see: harmful subsidies) and a global treaty on plastic pollution. In addition, debates around deep-sea mining have continued at both the national and international levels.
Officially finalised in June, the High Seas Treaty – a legally binding framework governing the use and conservation of international waters – has garnered more than 80 signatures since it opened for countries to sign at the UN general assembly in September. Dr Rachel Tiller, a chief scientist at Norway’s SINTEF Ocean, tells Carbon Brief:
“The path of getting a treaty up and standing and walking, is that first you have to sign it. And that doesn’t mean anything else other than that you intend not to in any way hinder its continued life…You’ve only said that ‘we have an intention of continuing this process and we intend to be part of it’.”
On 22 January, Palau became the first country to ratify the treaty. In total, 60 countries must do so before the treaty can come into effect. During this time, Clarke says, technical preparatory work can be done, but no formal work under the treaty body can be undertaken.
Tiller adds:
“What I worry, and what some others worry, about is now it’s going to be a race to do everything before they ratify – that everybody wants to do whatever they need to do before there’s some kind of legal agreement stopping them or hindering them in some way.”
While Norway recently approved seabed mining in its territorial waters in the Arctic Ocean, debates around such mining in international waters have continued at the International Seabed Authority. There is a “steadily growing number of countries that are coming off the fence” to support a moratorium, or a precautionary pause, on seabed mining, Clarke tells Carbon Brief.
If a pause took effect, Clarke says, “there would also need to be a significant body of work done on the scientific and technical side of things, to better understand the risks associated with seabed mining”. But it is unlikely that an agreement will be reached this year, he adds.
Overall, Clarke tells Carbon Brief:
“There has been quite significant forward progress in terms of the foundational architecture of agreements and government commitments needed to take forward key elements of the ocean policy agenda…[But] we’ve not seen the step change, particularly in protection, that we’re going to need to deliver the GBF in full by 2030.”
Digital sequence information
A new global mechanism and fund for sharing benefits from digital sequence information (DSI) was hailed by many as one of the big wins that clinched the deal at COP15. Digital sequence information refers to data derived from genetic resources, which is often sourced from biodiverse regions and communities who may not always benefit from its publication or use.
The COP decision on DSI established an ad hoc open-ended working group to finesse much of the crucial fine print that remains before COP16.
The group held its first meeting in Geneva in November 2023, where it identified five sets of core questions on how the fund is governed, who contributes to it, who benefits, what “non-monetary benefits” should look like and how the mechanism could work with existing national and other multilateral approaches to benefit-sharing.
According to the meeting report, countries agreed that the fund should contribute to achieving the GBF’s finance target and closing the $700bn biodiversity finance gap, with the COP deciding strategic funding priorities.
Developing and developed countries differed on several subjects, such as legally binding obligations on donors versus voluntary contributions and potential sources of funding, such as profit-sharing or a 1% retail levy on products derived from DSI. Another unresolved issue is how to distribute these benefits: by country allocation, on a project basis or something else.
Japan, Switzerland and the US – which is not party to the CBD – stressed “solely voluntary” contributions to the fund in their submissions, claiming this would be simple and easy to implement quickly.
Countries came together in favour of elements around capacity-building and the fund being used to meet biodiversity-related Sustainable Development Goals and the self-identified needs of Indigenous peoples and local communities..
Brazil, India, Argentina, Indonesia and the African Group maintained that non-monetary benefit sharing should go beyond just capacity building on how to use DSI and could include collaborative research.
According to Third World Network, “a very controversial question” that remains is whether funding allocations should be based, at least partially, on the geographical origins of genetic material.
In its closing plenary on 18 November, the working group adopted a final outcome on possible elements for the mechanism and fund.
But with much of the work still unfinished, they constituted an Informal Advisory Group to carry on intersessional work until the group’s second meeting in August 2024. That group convened online for the first time on 23 January to discuss data governance and DSI databases and is scheduled to meet five more times before August.
DSI developments under the CBD are being closely monitored for coherence with other treaty bodies and access-and-benefit sharing mechanisms, particularly the High Seas Treaty, the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture (ITPGRFA) and the World Health Organization’s pandemic preparedness framework.
Amid these ongoing negotiations, groups such as the DSI Scientific Network are calling for all current benefit-sharing mechanisms to be “harmonised” and saying that they should not “hinder” or “undermine” science.
Dr Siva Thambisetty, an intellectual property expert at the London School of Economics and an advisor to the G77+China bloc, tells Carbon Brief that the group’s viewpoint that “biology does not respect UN legal boundaries” is “catchy, but there is nothing natural about DSI use, circulation and storage – the consequences of which are closely connected to infrastructure, power and choice.”
Thambisetty adds that the GBF “must not sideline consensually-formed gains on benefit-sharing” under the High Seas Treaty but, instead, follow its lead.
Harmful subsidies
At COP15, countries agreed to identify – by 2025 – and then “eliminate, phase out or reform incentives, including subsidies” that are harmful for biodiversity.
The agreement also said that these incentives should be “substantially and progressively” reduced by at least $500bn each year by 2030, “starting with the most harmful incentives”.
Harmful subsidies were discussed at the COP28 climate summit in Dubai, particularly around fossil fuels.
The global stocktake text calls for the phasing out of “inefficient…subsidies that do not address energy poverty or just transitions, as soon as possible”. (For more on how countries plan to reduce biodiversity harmful subsidies, read Carbon Brief’s Q&A.)
The UN Development Programme recently published a report outlining a “step-by-step” guide to redirecting biodiversity harmful subsidies.
A World Bank report, published in June last year, said that explicit and implicit subsidies for fossil fuels, agriculture and fisheries now exceed $7tn each year. They are “harming people, the planet and economies”, the report said.
Early last year, the UK made moves away from harmful farming subsidies through its new funding scheme for farms in England, which is intended to replace the payments from the EU’s Common Agricultural Policy. The UK’s funding scheme was updated with more funding and incentives in recent weeks.
Over the past few months, German farmers have been protesting against government plans to phase out and cut some agricultural subsidies and tax breaks.
In other subsidy developments, the UK and the Gambia were among the countries to recently accept the World Trade Organization (WTO) agreement on setting new rules to curb fishing-related subsidies.
The deal – agreed in 2022 – has now been accepted by 55 WTO members, which brings it halfway to the 110 needed for it to take effect.
It might “reach the necessary threshold over the next year or so” as subsidy negotiations continue, according to WWF’s Clarke.
These talks are ongoing and a draft text on curbing subsidies that add to overcapacity and overfishing will be discussed at a WTO ministerial conference in Abu Dhabi in February. Clarke tells Carbon Brief that the fishery negotiations are “complex”, adding:
“Colleagues who have now been engaging with this technical negotiation track have really expressed to me how concerned they are about the fact that this seems to be entering into a traditional trade negotiation, where each country is seeking to advance its own interests rather than deal with a common challenge.”
What do we know about the next UN biodiversity summit?
The next biodiversity summit, COP16, will take place in Colombia from 21 October to 1 November 2024. Six cities have offered to host, but the exact location has yet to be decided, according to the CBD.
Turkey withdrew as host last July after being hit by three earthquakes earlier in the year that killed more than 50,000 people and displaced millions.
It is understood that the CBD was in talks with a number of countries in Europe and South America in recent months until Colombia’s offer was announced at COP28 in December 2023.
The country plans to move away from fossil fuels under its current leftwing government, but still relies heavily on oil production revenue.
CBD acting executive secretary Cooper says it is “exciting” for the conference to take place in a “mega-diverse country” with “very strong Indigenous peoples’ organisations [and] a very strong scientific base”.
He adds that the Colombian environment minister, Susana Muhamed, is a “very inspiring leader” who could boost political will and “momentum in implementing the GBF”.
Muhamad has said that the slogan of COP16 will be “peace for nature”.
Other environment ministers from around the world will attend COP16, but presidents and prime ministers are generally not invited to the UN biodiversity summits. Cooper says that there are currently no plans to invite them to Colombia either. He tells Carbon Brief:
“It is important, though, that leaders are fully engaged. We will only achieve the goals and targets of the Kunming framework through a whole government approach.”
Cooper says he wants to see nations to “come with a strong commitment and strong actions already in place”. He notes:
“The first important function of COP16 is to put the spotlight on countries in terms of what has been achieved, what is being achieved, what hasn’t been achieved and needs to be achieved.”
Ahead of COP16, countries need to submit updated national biodiversity strategies and action plans that better align with the Kunming-Montreal deal (See: Implementation).
China, France, Japan, Hungary, the EU and others have already submitted their plans.
Other issues due to be finalised at COP16 include the monitoring framework for the GBF and a strategy for financial resource mobilisation. Talks on digital sequence information are also due to wrap up, and Cooper says that he wants to see “very clear progress” towards 2025 financial goals.
Another expected announcement is a global plan of action on the ties between health and biodiversity.
Over the course of 2024, meetings of different groups focused on indicators, risk assessment, benefit sharing and implementation will take place. Key SBSTTA and implementation subsidiary body meetings will happen in Nairobi in May.
In addition, 2024 is a major election year for dozens of countries around the world – including biodiverse superpowers India, Indonesia, Mexico and Brazil. The DRC also held a presidential vote late last year.
Cooper says that while nature is “less of a political football than climate change”, there is always a risk of “populist politicians or vested interests trying to drive a wedge” between sectors – especially agriculture and biodiversity conservation. He tells Carbon Brief:
“We have to make the case and really try and prevent these communities from being driven apart.”
Road to COP16
| 22-26 Jan | Conference on cooperation among the biodiversity-related conventions for implementation of the GBF | Bern |
| 5-9 Feb | Meeting of the GEF Council | Washington DC |
| 26-29 Feb | World Trade Organization ministerial meeting | Abu Dhabi |
| 26 Feb-1 Mar | UN Environment Assembly | Nairobi |
| 18-29 Mar | 29th session of the International Seabed Authority, Part I | Kingston |
| 10-12 Apr | UN Ocean Decade conference | Barcelona, Spain |
| 23-29 Apr | Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee on plastic pollution | Ottawa |
| 13-18 May | CBD Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical and Technological Advice | Nairobi |
| 21-29 May | CBD Subsidiary Body on Implementation | Nairobi |
| 17-21 Jun | Meeting of the GEF Council | Washington DC |
| 15 Jul-2 Aug | 29th session of the International Seabed Authority, Part II | Kingston |
| 12-16 Aug | Meeting of the open-ended working group on digital sequencing information | Montreal |
| 10-24 Sep | UN general assembly | New York |
| 16-18 Oct | CBD Subsidiary Body on Implementation | – |
| 21 Oct-1 Nov | CBD COP16 | Colombia |
The post Q&A: What progress has been made on protecting nature a year on from COP15? appeared first on Carbon Brief.
Q&A: What progress has been made on protecting nature a year on from COP15?
Greenhouse Gases
DeBriefed 14 March 2025: US’s ‘moral case for fossil fuels’; Rainforest felled for ‘COP30 road’; Myanmar’s energy crisis
Welcome to Carbon Brief’s DeBriefed.
An essential guide to the week’s key developments relating to climate change.
This week
US ‘180-degree pivot’
‘SIDE EFFECT’: US energy secretary Chris Wright promised a “180-degree pivot” on climate policy while speaking in front of oil and gas executives, the New York Times reported. Addressing an industry conference in Houston, he said there was a “moral case for fossil fuels” to alleviate poverty and was dismissive of renewables, the newspaper added. CNBC reported that Wright also said: “The Trump administration will treat climate change for what it is – a global physical phenomenon that is a side effect of building the modern world.”
MORE CUTS: The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) terminated $20bn in grants for climate projects, awarded through a “green bank” known as the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund, Bloomberg reported. However, Inside Climate News said that a federal judge has “sharply criticised the agency for canceling the grants without presenting any evidence of wrongdoing, calling the administration’s justification weak and unsubstantiated”. It added: “The judge stopped short of issuing a ruling on reinstatement of the funds, leaving grant recipients in limbo.”
NASA CHANGES: NASA has dismissed its chief scientist, climate-science expert Katherine Calvin, along with 20 others as part of changes imposed by the Trump administration, says the New York Times. The newspaper also added the government “could be considering slashing the budget for NASA’s science activities by half”.
Road to COP30
COP30 HIGHWAY: Eight miles of “Amazon rainforest” are being cleared to build a four-lane highway ahead of the COP30 climate talks in Belém later this year, said the Times. BBC News, which broke the story, added the road is designed to ease traffic in the Brazilian city. However, the Brazilian government responded to say the media stories were “misleading” because the road was planned before COP30 was announced.
CLIMATE MULTILATERALISM: Meanwhile, the Times of India reported that, in the wake of the US withdrawal from the Paris Agreement, the Brazilian COP30 presidency has invited the hosts of all the UN climate summits since COP21 in Paris to form a “circle of presidencies” to enhance multilateral efforts to tackle climate change.
Carney for Canada
OH, CANADA: Mark Carney was elected leader of the Liberal party in Canada and will replace Justin Trudeau as prime minister, reported the Globe and Mail. CNN noted that the former governor of the banks of England and Canada has “advocated for the financial sector to invest in net-zero” and held the position of UN special envoy for climate action and finance in 2019.
BANKING ROLLBACKS: Meanwhile, the Financial Times reported that the Net-Zero Banking Alliance – the “top global climate alliance for banks” founded by Carney – will ask its members to vote on abandoning a pledge to align their $54tn in assets with the Paris Agreement aim of limiting global warming to 1.5C. There has been an “exodus of many leading US banks” since Trump’s second term, but major players such as HSBC and Barclays remain in the alliance, the newspaper said.
Around the world
- FLASH FLOODS: Agence France-Presse reported that a flash flood in Bahía Blanca, Argentina has killed at least 16 people and caused $400m in damages.
- ENERGY BILLS: A UK bill introduced to parliament this week sought to speed up approval of clean-energy projects and reduce energy bills by £250 a year for people living near new or upgraded pylons, BBC News reported.
- TWO SESSIONS: China’s influential “two-sessions” political meetings ended on Tuesday, with new climate commitments, Carbon Brief reported.
- FEWER EMISSIONS: Emissions in Germany fell 3.4% in 2024, noted Reuters, adding that it puts the country “on track” to meet its 2030 climate targets.
3.6%
The amount that the UK’s emissions fell by in 2024, seeing emissions reach their lowest level since 1872, according to a new analysis by Carbon Brief.
Latest climate research
- A study in Public Understanding of Science, co-authored by Carbon Brief’s Josh Gabbatiss, found that UK newspapers increased their support for climate action from 2011-21, but also featured “multiple discourses of delay”.
- New analysis from the World Weather Attribution group concluded that human-caused climate change increased recent heavy rainfall in Botswana by 60%.
- A study in PLOS Climate found smallholder farmers in rural northeast Madagascar witnessed increases in temperature and decreases in rainfall over a five-year period and are concerned about the effects of climate change on their livelihoods.
(For more, see Carbon Brief’s in-depth daily summaries of the top climate news stories on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday and Friday.)
Captured
New analysis by Carbon Brief revealed that nearly a tenth of global climate finance could be under threat, as Trump continues to cut spending on international aid. Since taking office in January, Trump has pulled the US out of multiple international climate funds and initiatives, including plans withdrawing the US from the Paris Agreement. He has also threatened to cancel virtually all US Agency for International Development (USAid) projects, with climate funds identified as a prime target. These actions are likely to endanger global efforts to help developing countries tackle climate change.
Spotlight
Myanmar’s energy crisis
This week, Carbon Brief looks at energy challenges in Myanmar and whether solar power could help to provide a solution.
Earlier this year, military rulers in Myanmar slashed power supplies for two of the country’s major cities – the capital, Naypyidaw, and Yangon. The order said that Yangon, the country’s largest city, would only receive eight hours of electricity per day on a rotating power schedule.
However, the reality on the ground is more severe. The capital of Naypyidaw appears to have been prioritised, with 16 hours of power on and eight hours off, while residents in Yangon report sometimes only receiving two hours of electricity per day. Other parts of the country have also been affected.
‘In the dark’
Rolling blackouts in Myanmar are not new. Back in 2019, the country experienced widespread energy shortages due to a widening power supply-demand gap.
However, Myanmar’s power-sector challenges have grown since the country’s military coup in February 2021.
The national power grid has been attacked and damaged due to armed conflict resisting the coup. A Frontier Myanmar article from 2023 reported that there had been 229 attacks on electricity infrastructure since the 2021 coup, which the military blamed on rebel groups.
A loss of foreign investment, economic turmoil and mismanagement have also all contributed to Myanmar’s energy crisis, said Richard Harrison, former CEO of Smart Power Myanmar, an NGO aimed at providing solar power to small businesses. He told Carbon Brief:
“Governments and donors no longer have direct relations with the national government and most NGOs are badly underfunded. There is almost no energy-related funding in Myanmar.”
Slowing solar
The country’s electricity mix currently mostly consists of gas and hydropower.
Before the coup, multiple projects, including solar farms, had been planned to help reduce the growing power supply-demand and increase electrification rates.
According to a report by the World Bank, a “major solar tender was launched in May 2020 for 30 solar power plants to be constructed throughout the country”. But “only one of those was completed since the military takeover in 2021 and the other 29 were cancelled”, the report said.
Myanmar has also experienced shortages of gas for power generation, compounded by investor exits and the decline of Myanmar’s largest gas field.
The Irrawaddy, a Myanmar-focused news site in Thailand, reported that military leaders have called for solar panels to be installed on all new buildings in a bid to solve Myanmar’s energy crisis. However, it is worth noting that, according to the Irrawaddy, the junta leader’s son has “won licenses to sell solar panels and equipment while the regime has granted tax exemptions on solar imports”.
Yet, the Irrawaddy has also noted that the cost of solar is “beyond the reach of many small businesses, which form the backbone of Myanmar’s economy”.
Not-for-profits have continued to build solar projects in the country since the coup, aimed at supporting local businesses and powering rural healthcare facilities.
However, the situation is volatile as the civil war drags on, Harrison noted:
“The outlook is bleak. Myanmar has failed to invest in new generation capacity and current sources of energy (gas) are declining or curtailed. This means that, even if conflict were to end, we will continue to see declining energy access and major shortages through 2030. In other words, Myanmar’s energy crisis is almost guaranteed to get worse and be protracted.”
Watch, read, listen
REMOVING CARBON: The Solving for Climate podcast spoke to Carbon Brief climate science contributor Dr Zeke Hausfather about whether the use of carbon removal technologies should expand.
BLACKOUTS: Dialogue Earth reported on how extreme weather events exacerbated by climate change are causing more frequent power outages in Latin America.
SABOTAGE TACTICS: A feature in the Guardian said “tougher laws” are said to be “inspiring clandestine attacks [by climate protesters] on the ‘property and machinery’ of the fossil fuel economy”.
Coming up
- 16-20 March: Applied Power Electronics Conference (APEC), Atlanta, Georgia
- 17-18 March: First part of the 30th annual session of the International Seabed Authority, Kingston, Jamaica
- 21 March:UN observed International Day of Forests
Pick of the jobs
- Stockholm Environment Institute , climate project intern | Salary: Unknown. Location: Tallinn, Estonia (onsite, hybrid or remote)
- Doughnut Economics Action Lab , junior communications freelancer | Salary: £250 a day. Location: Remote (UK hours)
- EarthRights International, policy advisor | Salary: $85,000-$95,000. Location: Remote (US)
- Birmingham and Black Country Wildlife Trust, conservation officer | Salary: £24,570. Location: Flexible
- British Antarctic Survey, field coordinator – Antarctica | Salary: £29,273 to £30,201. Location: Antarctica
DeBriefed is edited by Daisy Dunne. Please send any tips or feedback to debriefed@carbonbrief.org.
This is an online version of Carbon Brief’s weekly DeBriefed email newsletter. Subscribe for free here.
The post DeBriefed 14 March 2025: US’s ‘moral case for fossil fuels’; Rainforest felled for ‘COP30 road’; Myanmar’s energy crisis appeared first on Carbon Brief.
China’s climate ambition at this year’s “two sessions” (两会), which ended on 11 March, was relatively subdued, with analysts expecting economic concerns to trump climate action in the year ahead.
The “two sessions”, which takes place every spring, is a major political event held in Beijing that gives an indication of China’s broad policy direction for the year.
It covers every area of governance, including energy and climate policy.
In this article, Carbon Brief outlines key signals from the 2025 “two sessions”, including: a new energy target for 2025; clean-energy and climate priorities; the ongoing development of coal in a “supporting role”; and China’s response to “green trade barriers”.
This is an update of Carbon Brief’s 6 March China Briefing newsletter, expanded to cover developments during the last few days of the event.
A key meeting
The “two sessions” (两会) is the annual gathering of the National People’s Congress (NPC) and the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC). This year, it ran from 4 to 11 March.
The gathering is attended by Chinese Communist party members, as well as members of other political parties, academics, industry leaders and other prominent figures, known as delegates or deputies.
Its centrepiece is the “government work report”, a speech delivered by the premier – the head of China’s State Council, the top body of the country’s central government. This outlines the previous year’s achievements and priorities for the year ahead, including the annual GDP target.
At the meeting, China also releases a report by the National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC), the country’s top economic planning body, as well as a central and local government budget report.
In addition, the event allows thousands of delegates to meet and raise policy proposals with senior government officials.
Low energy target
China pledged to reduce energy intensity – a measure of energy consumption per unit of GDP – by 3% in 2025, the work report said. (This measure now excludes renewables and nuclear, meaning it only applies to fossil fuels.)
This target means China is “on track to miss its 14th five-year plan energy intensity target”, Yao Zhe, global policy advisor at Greenpeace East Asia, tells Carbon Brief.
She adds that it was an “inconvenient truth” that China’s economy has not become much more energy efficient in recent years, “offset[ting]…the decarbonisation effects of renewable technology deployment”.
China is lagging behind on its 2026 targets for reducing both energy intensity and carbon intensity – the amount of CO2 emissions per unit of GDP. Analysis for Carbon Brief has shown that they would need to fall by 6% and 7% per year, respectively, to meet the targets.
In its report, the NDRC attributed the shortfall in China’s 2024 carbon-intensity reduction figures to “rapid growth in the energy consumption in industries and the civilian sector as a result of post-Covid economic recovery and frequent extreme weather events”.
Lauri Myllyvirta, lead analyst at the Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air (CREA), wrote on Bluesky that the low target “shows the government is not prioritising controlling carbon dioxide (CO2) at the moment”.
He also said the new methodology for calculating energy intensity would, in theory, allow fossil-fuel demand to grow by 1.9% in 2025, pushing CO2 emissions up by more than 2%. (He added that he did not think this would actually happen.)
The 14th five-year plan’s carbon-intensity target, which measures CO2 emissions per unit of GDP, will likely also be missed, according to the Carbon Brief analysis. China does not typically announce annual carbon-intensity targets in the government work report.
The targets that were announced underscored that “economic growth remains the top priority, with environmental goals taking a backseat”, Li Shuo, director of the China climate hub and senior fellow at the Asia Society Policy Institute (ASPI), tells Carbon Brief.
The lack of an annual carbon-intensity target was “a further sign of carbon reduction being downplayed”, he adds.
Priorities in 2025
China’s climate and energy policy in 2025 will likely follow well-established priorities, such as balancing decarbonisation and energy security, based on the report’s language.
The state-run newspaper China Daily highlighted the report’s support of China’s “dual-carbon” goals on its frontpage, saying that China pledged to “diligently work” towards them.
According to the work report, China “will develop a package of major projects for climate change response and actively engage in and steer global environmental and climate governance”.
A number of climate measures were announced, but Li tells Carbon Brief that there were “no major surprises”, confirming his view that the “two sessions” has “increasingly become a platform to confirm pre-existing decisions rather than introduce new ones”.
Each year, the government work report lists a number of top priorities for the year ahead, as shown in the figure below.
For 2025, the report lowers the importance of high-quality development in favour of “expanding domestic demand”. The prioritisation of “low-carbon development” and other climate related tasks remained the same compared to 2024.
Ranking of key tasks in each government work report during the 14th five-year plan period (2021-2025). Source: Xinhua publications of the government work reports for 2025, 2024, 2023, 2022 and 2021.
The report discusses China’s climate and environment efforts for 2025 under the title:
“Making coordinated efforts to cut carbon emissions, reduce pollution, pursue green development, and boost economic growth and accelerat[e] the green transition in all areas of economic and social development.”
This stands in stark contrast to the climate section’s title last year, which only highlighted “enhancing ecological conservation and promoting green and low-carbon development”.
The expanded wording signals a more “comprehensive design at the policy level” to “systematically enhance the integration of different sectors for tackling environmental problems”, Xu Song, a registered environment evaluator in China, wrote on his WeChat account.
The work report lists a number of climate initiatives for the year ahead, including: expanding pilot programmes for local governments to peak carbon emissions; building “zero-carbon industrial parks”; accelerating the shift from “dual-control” of energy to dual-control of carbon emissions; and including more industries in the national carbon market.
Most importantly, renewable energy buildouts will continue, with a particular focus on “new energy bases in desert areas, the Gobi and other arid areas”, as well as offshore wind. The report also recognises the need for China to upgrade its electricity grid to cope with vast renewables additions.
But the report also continues to commit to fossil-fuel infrastructure. It reiterates calls to “better ensure both development and security”, which for the energy sector means that China should pursue a low-carbon transition while ensuring sufficient energy supply by keeping some fossil-fuel capacity.
This year, it says China will launch “low-carbon upgrade trials” for coal-fired power plants, which are seen as necessary for energy security. (Recent analysis found that a “substantial amount” of new coal capacity will soon come online.)
The separate NDRC report also reinforces coal as having a “basic supporting role” , announcing that China will “continue to increase coal production”.
The table below compares the language used in relation to coal in government work reports from 2021-2025.
| 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| While promoting the clean and efficient use of coal, we will make a major push to develop new energy sources, and take active and well-ordered steps to develop nuclear energy on the basis of ensuring its safe use. |
We will work to upgrade coal-fired power plants to conserve resources, reduce carbon emissions, make operations more flexible, and upgrade heating facilities. | We leveraged the role of coal as a major source of energy, increased advanced coal production capacity and stepped up support for power plants and heat-supply enterprises to ensure energy supplies. | We will see that coal and coal-fired power play their crucial role in ensuring energy supply and our energy supply meets the needs of economic and social development. | Low-carbon upgrade trials will be launched in coal-fired power plants. |
A table comparing the language used around coal in government work reports during the 14th five-year plan period (2021-2025). Source: Xinhua publications of the government work reports for 2025, 2024, 2023, 2022 and 2021.
Ilaria Mazzocco, senior fellow with the trustee chair in Chinese business and economics at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), tells Carbon Brief that the signal that coal would only have a supporting role in the future energy system was a “good sign”, but that the language underscored that there is “little interest” in phasing out coal “for now”.
The NDRC also pledged to reduce steel output and to encourage oil refiners to produce more petrochemical products instead of fuel.
Consumption and ‘involution’
Boosting domestic consumption is seen as key to achieving China’s 2025 GDP target of 5%. Consequently, it replaces fostering innovation as the top priority for policymakers for the year, as shown in the chart above.
China’s approach to boosting growth includes a number of stimulus measures. The net impact of these measures on China’s emissions, such via the building of energy-intensive infrastructure, is currently unknown, however.
At this year’s meeting, the government stated that domestic consumption will be the “main engine” for economic growth in 2025.
“The big question mark is real estate and construction”, Myllyvirta tells Carbon Brief. Real estate and construction have been the biggest driver of domestic consumption for decades.
However, Myllyvirta adds that the government would likely aim for stable growth in the sector, rather than stimulating it with rapid and energy-intensive growth.
In part, China is putting its hopes – and 300bn yuan ($41bn) – into a consumer trade-in programme, which will likely continue to allow drivers to swap combustion-engine cars for “new-energy” vehicles (NEVs, which refers to electric vehicles and plug-in hybrids).
The report also pledges to incentivise “eco-friendly consumption”.
While technological innovation remains a major priority, clean-energy technologies are not explicitly mentioned in the government work report in this context.
Last year’s government work report emphasised the need to “consolidate and enhance [China’s] leading position” in industries such as NEVs and hydrogen, as well as to “create new ways of storing energy”.
Nevertheless, according to power news outlet BJX News, this is not a signal that clean-energy technologies are out of favour, but rather a sign that they are already widely recognised as an essential part of China’s technology strategy.
Similarly, although hydrogen is not explicitly named as a “future industry” in the government work report, the NDRC confirmed it will receive support from a one trillion yuan ($138bn) fund that will be issued for “frontier fields”.
In its budget report, China’s Ministry of Finance pledges to “steadily promote” China’s climate action, such as by strengthening financial support for R&D for low-carbon technologies, enhancing the development of renewable energy, promoting NEVs and developing green finance standards and institutions.
This year’s government work report also emphasises the need to combat “rat-race competition” – a reference to what is described in China as “involution”. This term refers to the overcrowded markets and price wars plaguing some sectors, including NEVs and solar panels. The report states it will take “comprehensive” steps to address the problem.
The NDRC report notes that the government will take steps to “promote orderly development” of the NEV, lithium-ion battery and solar industries, underscoring government concerns about the sector.
Nevertheless, the government does recognise the importance of clean-energy technologies to economic growth, Mazzocco tells Carbon Brief. She explains:
“Energy is now seen as a tool to ensure the economy can grow rapidly and is meant to support technological transformation…Climate per se is not a goal that the Chinese government wants to prioritise over economic growth and international competition.”
Geopolitics
Trade tensions that underpinned the political atmosphere during last year’s two sessions have been exacerbated by a number of developments since then – particularly around export controls and tariffs.
This is reflected in the work report, which notes that “increasingly complex and severe” geopolitical tensions may “exert a greater impact on China in areas such as trade, science and technology”.
In response, the government will “take active steps to respond to green trade barriers” – pointing to the trade measures above as well as the EU’s carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM) – the report says.
However, in a press conference at the event, China’s foreign minister Wang Yi said that he believed China and the EU had the “capacity and wisdom” to resolve disagreements through consultations.
China will also continue to help African nations develop in “green sectors”, Wang said, building on language in the government work report that pledges to continue with “high-quality” projects in Belt and Road Initiative partner countries.
Extreme weather
There was continued recognition of the drag of “natural disasters” on China’s economic growth, with the work report pledging to “better guard against and respond” to floods, droughts, typhoons and other extreme weather events.
The report notes that floods “occurred frequently in some parts of China” last year. This was not explicitly linked to climate change.
However, the NDRC report attributes China’s failure to meet its energy-intensity goal in 2024 to, in part, “frequent extreme weather events”.
A recent Carbon Brief analysis found that, of 114 attribution studies for Chinese extreme weather events, 88 had their “severity or likelihood” increased by climate change.
Around the two sessions
Apart from the ministers and senior officials delivering work reports, side meetings between central leaders and local officials at the “two sessions” also send out political signals.
This year, President Xi Jinping met with a delegation from Jiangsu – an eastern province that is known for its affluent economy, manufacturing, strength in exports and technological innovation.
At the meeting, Xi emphasised the “need to upgrade traditional sectors and foster future sources of innovation”, although he also warned against creating industry “bubbles”, reports the Hong Kong-based South China Morning Post.
He added that policymakers should “actively promote high-end, intelligent and green development of industries”.
Meanwhile, MEE head Huang Runqiu emphasised the importance of low-carbon development, both in a meeting with a delegation from the northern Heilongjiang province and in a “minister’s corridor” press conference.
Delegates raised more than 700 policy proposals on “ecological civilisation” at this year’s meetings, energy news outlet BJX News reports, covering areas including addressing China’s industrial energy transition and developing the carbon market.
Among these, the US-based NPC Observer newsletter says, were two bills proposing the enactment of a “climate change response law” that would develop a legislative scheme for reducing carbon emissions.
Finally, as the meetings came to a close, NPC head Zhao Leji confirmed that the legislative body will continue to work on China’s environment and ecology code, according to news reports, as well as the atomic energy law in the year ahead.
The post Explainer: What does China’s ‘two sessions’ mean for climate policy in 2025? appeared first on Carbon Brief.
Explainer: What does China’s ‘two sessions’ mean for climate policy in 2025?
We handpick and explain the most important stories at the intersection of climate, land, food and nature over the past fortnight.
This is an online version of Carbon Brief’s fortnightly Cropped email newsletter. Subscribe for free here.
Key developments
Trump’s logging orders
IF A TREE FALLS: US president Donald Trump last week signed a pair of executive orders “to increase lumber production across national forests and other public lands”, Axios reported. The outlet explained that the first order “calls for considering new categorical exclusions” under the existing law that requires environmental reviews, while the second “promotes domestic timber production to replace imports”. The latter order dealt “a devastating blow” to forests on public lands, said Inside Climate News. The outlet added that “increasing timber production would likely target the larger, older trees that are the most critical to protect as climate change accelerates”.
QUESTIONABLE IMPACT: The Trump administration claims that increasing timber production will be “the next frontier in job creation and wildfire prevention”, USA Today reported. Timber groups and lawmakers representing rural districts were in agreement, the outlet said. It added: “But conservation groups and forestry experts say cutting down more trees doesn’t inherently reduce wildfire risk and can actually increase it.” The orders are “expected to face legal pushback”, USA Today said.
NOT SO CLEAR CUT: Despite the claims of a viral Instagram post, the executive orders do not compel the clearing of 280m acres (1.1m square kilometres) of national forest, noted a Yahoo News factcheck. The outlet added that the total area of land affected by the orders is actually 251m acres (1m km2) and that “even in the most extreme scenario, the US logging industry wouldn’t have the sawmills or workers required” to clear-cut that much forest in the next four years. It said: “But whatever the scale, environmentalists warn that expanding logging while reducing oversight will damage fragile ecosystems, threaten old-growth forests, increase pollution and even worsen wildfires.”
Tit-for-tat tariffs
FOOD FIGHT: On Monday, China began imposing tariffs on US farm products, in what the New York Times called “the latest escalation of a trade fight between the world’s two largest economies”. China’s tariffs include a 15% levy on US-raised chicken, wheat and corn, along with a 10% levy on other food products, the newspaper reported. Describing the food tariffs as “a high impact yet low-cost weapon” in the US-China trade war, Bloomberg noted that “the Asian giant remains a key export market for largely Republican states in the midwest farm belt”. Alongside the new levy, it added that China also halted all American timber purchases and soybean imports from three US firms. The Washington Post mapped where tariffs could “hit” US farmers and jobs “the hardest”.
AG INDEPENDENCE: The latest move is part of China’s “broader strategy” to strengthen its food security since Trump’s first term, reported Business Standard, tracing a timeline of the country’s initiatives “to reduce its reliance on US imports”. US farmers and experts who spoke to Time magazine said they “know from experience” that Trump’s “incipient trade war will make things tougher” for them. The outlet added that “around 80% of the money the US government took in from tariffs on Chinese imports [during Trump’s first term] went back to paying farmers” affected by retaliatory tariffs. The US-China food trade fight will give Brazilian exporters “an opportunity to take an even bigger share of the Chinese market”, Reuters reported, adding that it “could also fuel already-high food inflation in Brazil”.
UH OH, CANADA: At the same time, China “open[ed] a new front in a trade war”, announcing tariffs on over $2.6bn worth of Canadian agricultural and food products on Saturday, according to Reuters. The measures include a 100% tariff on Canadian rapeseed oil and pea imports, the newswire explained. It said that China’s tariffs on Canada are being seen as a “warning shot” and “retaliati[on] against levies Ottawa introduced in October” on China-made electric vehicles and aluminium products. Canada’s 40,000 rapeseed farmers are now “caught in the middle of political tensions far outside [their] control” amid two trade fights, the Globe and Mail reported, with China’s moves combining with the “threat of 25% tariffs on $7.7bn of exports to the US, their largest market”.
Spotlight
Mining drives ‘destruction’ in Peru’s peatlands
This week, Carbon Brief covers a new study that found that small-scale, artisanal gold mining in the Peruvian Amazon is a small but growing cause of “destruction” for the region’s carbon-rich peatlands.
Peatland loss due to small-scale gold mining in the Peruvian Amazon has released up to 0.7m tonnes of carbon – some 2.6m tonnes of carbon dioxide (CO2) – over the past 35 years, according to new research.
The study, published in Environmental Research Letters, used satellite imagery to determine where “artisanal” mining had driven deforestation in the Madre de Dios river plain.
The researchers found that while only 5% of the mined area overlapped with known peatlands, 55% of this peatland loss occurred within just the past two years.
They warned that mining in Peru’s peatlands is “happening at a scale sufficiently large to threaten the future existence of peatland on the Madre de Dios landscape”.
Mining-driven deforestation
Peatlands are carbon-rich, water-logged ecosystems that form slowly over time as plant matter dies and partially decomposes.
Although they make up only 3% of the Earth’s land surface, peatlands are estimated to contain 600bn tonnes of carbon – more than is stored in all of the world’s forests combined.
Despite their importance as carbon stores, peatlands are underprotected compared to other “high-value” ecosystems, such as tropical forests. A recent study found that just 17% of peatlands are protected globally.
Artisanal gold mining – referring to mining done informally and with basic tools – is one of the main drivers of deforestation in the Peruvian Amazon in recent decades. It is highly concentrated around the Madre de Dios river, which cuts through the south-eastern part of the country.
To understand the impact of this type of mining, the researchers used 35 years of data from NASA’s Landsat satellite to monitor changes in the region around the Madre de Dios river known as its alluvial plain. They then used an algorithm to differentiate deforestation that was caused by artisanal mining from deforestation due to other factors.
The researchers identified 11,356 hectares of mining in the alluvial plain, two-thirds of which was concentrated in a 50-kilometre stretch of river.
Peatland loss
The researchers then overlaid the identified mining sites with maps of the Madre de Dios peatland complex.
They identified more than 550 hectares of peatland that had been lost to artisanal mining between 1985 and 2023. They estimated that this “destruction” released between 0.2m and 0.7m tonnes of carbon into the atmosphere, resulting in emissions of up to 2.6MtCO2.
Moreover, mining in peatland areas has increased twice as quickly as the average rate of increase across the plain as a whole over the past five years. More than 10,000 hectares of peatland, containing between 3.5 and 14.5m tonnes of carbon, are at “imminent risk”, the authors warn.
Dr John Householder, a researcher at Germany’s Karlsruhe Institute of Technology and an author of the study, said in a statement:
“Even within a human generation, it is quite possible that large peat deposits can disappear from the landscape, before science has had a chance to describe them. For those peat deposits that are already known, these research findings are a wakeup call to protect them.”
News and views
IWATE ABLAZE: Japan was faced with its “worst wildfire in half a century” in early March, Agence France-Presse reported. The fire, which broke out in the Iwate prefecture on the country’s Pacific coast, “engulfed around 2,600 hectares” and “left one dead”, the newswire said. The Japan Times noted that “unusually dry weather, strong winds and the city’s terrain have made the situation worse than usual”. Dr Akira Kato, a forestry professor at Japan’s Chiba University, told the outlet: “There is a big misconception that fires don’t occur in humid climates, but this is actually not true, and forest fires can occur anywhere in the world.”
EXTINCTION LITIGATION: Australia’s environment minister, Tanya Pilbersek, is being sued by conservation non-profit the Wilderness Society for failing in “her promise to halt Australia’s ongoing extinction crisis”, the Sydney Morning Herald reported. The case does not mention Pilbersek by name but alleges “successive environment ministers are to blame” for failing to “implement plans to save endangered animals”, the newspaper said. Pilbersek, it added, has responded by saying “she had made double the number of [nature] recovery plans than her predecessor”. Separately, ABC News reported that Tasmania’s salmon industry is being hit by mass die-offs due to bacterial disease, with “chunks” of thousands of dead salmon washing up ashore.
ARMY OF ME: After the “worst drought in decades”, Context News reported that Zimbabwe’s maize farmers are now battling an infestation of the fall armyworm. The pests are “[n]ative to the Americas” but have “spread across almost all of sub-Saharan Africa” in just two years, according to the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). The outlet quotes Patrice Talla of the FAO saying: “Climate change has contributed to outbreaks of migratory pests beyond their regions of origin, notably the fall armyworm.” According to the story, the armyworm “reduces maize yields by up to 73% and inflicts annual economic losses valued at $9.4bn in Africa alone”, its “crop-munching” impacts also affecting Malawi, Zambia, Togo, Benin and Swaziland.
SUDANESE BREW: Excelsea coffee – discovered in South Sudan nearly a century ago – is drawing international interest “amid a global coffee crisis caused mainly by climate change”, the Associated Press reported. The coffee variety currently accounts for “less than 1% of the global market” but production trials by agroforestry company Equatoria Teak indicate that it can “thrive in extreme conditions, such as drought and heat, where other coffees cannot”, according to the newswire. While the beans “represent a chance at a better future” for the country, farmer Elia Box – who lost half his coffee crop to fire in early February – told AP that long-term crops, such as coffee, need stability: “Coffee needs peace.”
ESTATE SALE: A “mystery donor” made a record land purchase in the Scottish Highlands on behalf of the Scottish Wildlife Trust – “the largest donation in the trust’s 60-year history”, according to the Times. It quoted the charity saying that by securing the 7,618-hectare Inverbroom Estate, it could “significantly enhance its efforts to protect and restore wildlife at scale across Scotland”. Furthermore, the newspaper noted that “the trust has made a commitment to the donor that none of the work at Inverbroom would be funded through the sale of carbon credits”.
ILLEGALLY FELLED: According to a new report covered by Mongabay, nearly all of the deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon in the past year was illegal. It said Brazilian non-profit Center of Life Institute (ICV) found that 91% of deforestation in the Amazon and 51% in the tropical savanna of the Cerrado lacked authorisation between August 2023 and July 2024. The outlet noted that under Brazilian law, landowners with a government-issued permit can clear up to 20% and 80% of the vegetation on their property in the Amazon rainforest and Cerrado, respectively. However, it added that the ICV researchers found that much of the deforestation captured by Brazil’s national space agency “wasn’t registered in official databases” for deforestation permits. Separately, BBC News reported that a new highway being built for the COP30 UN climate talks in Belém is “cutting through tens of thousands of acres” of protected Amazon rainforest.
Watch, read, listen
FOREST FOR THE TREES: Dialogue Earth explained how extreme heat is affecting China’s trees – and magnifying other threats to the plants.
IN BLOOM: An in-depth piece in the New York Times covered how a warming ocean is “throwing plankton into disarray”, putting the entire marine food web at risk.
RADICAL INTELLIGENCE: A Noema long read looked at how studying intelligence as a biological property across species can “open up a world of commonalities” across all life.
EXTRACTIVE INVESTORS: The Guardian examined the investor-state lawsuit levelled against Greenland that is seeking to reverse its uranium mining ban.
New science
- Research published in PLOS Climate found that smallholder farmers in north-eastern Madagascar reported that they perceived increased temperature and decreased rainfall over the past five years. However, despite reporting concerns over their ability to feed their families in the future, only 21% of the 479 farmers surveyed reported changing their farming practices.
- Tropical forests in the Americas are changing certain functional traits, such as wood density, in response to warming temperatures – “but at a rate that is fundamentally insufficient to track climate change”, a new study published in Science found. Researchers used data from 415 forest plots over 1980-2021, along with temperature data, to determine how forest composition was changing in response to warming.
- A new review in Environmental Research Letters scanned nearly 10,000 scientific papers to identify the impacts of trees outside of forests on human well-being in South Asia. While most of the literature reported an increase in economic and material well-being, negative outcomes documented included a loss of agency, political voice and social equity – “in particular with afforestation and monoculture plantation projects”.
In the diary
- 17-18 March: First part of the 30th annual session of the International Seabed Authority | Kingston, Jamaica
- 21 March: International Day of Forests
- 22 March: World Water Day
- 29 March: Global Day of the Landless
Cropped is researched and written by Dr Giuliana Viglione, Aruna Chandrasekhar, Daisy Dunne, Orla Dwyer and Yanine Quiroz. Please send tips and feedback to cropped@carbonbrief.org
The post Cropped 12 March 2025: Trump and timber; Food fights; Peru’s peatlands appeared first on Carbon Brief.
Cropped 12 March 2025: Trump and timber; Food fights; Peru’s peatlands
-
Greenhouse Gases10 months 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 Change10 months 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
Spanish-language misinformation on renewable energy spreads online, report shows
-
Climate Change Videos1 year ago
The toxic gas flares fuelling Nigeria’s climate change – BBC News
-
Climate Change1 year ago
Why airlines are perfect targets for anti-greenwashing legal action
-
Carbon Footprint11 months agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits
-
Climate Change1 year ago
Farmers turn to tech as bees struggle to pollinate
-
Climate Change1 year ago
Clouds now contains plastic, contaminating ‘everything we eat and drink’