Connect with us

Published

on

More than half of countries have not committed to protecting 30% of their land and sea for nature by 2030 in plans submitted to the UN – despite signing a global agreement to do so less than three years ago, a Carbon Brief and Guardian investigation can reveal.

In December 2022, nearly all nations agreed to protect “30% of Earth’s land and sea for nature” by the end of the decade. This commitment – referred to as “30 by 30” – is the flagship target of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF), often likened to the “Paris Agreement for nature”.

But, 70 out of the 137 (51%) countries that have submitted UN plans outlining how they will meet the targets of the GBF do not commit to “30 by 30” within their borders, according to analysis of these documents by Carbon Brief and the Guardian.

Instead, these countries either pledge to protect a lower percentage of their territory for nature or fail to explicitly commit to a numerical target at all.

Countries failing to commit to “30 by 30” in UN plans represent just over one-third of Earth’s land surface, the analysis shows.

The list includes some of the most nature-rich nations on Earth, such as Indonesia, Peru and South Africa, along with developed countries such as Finland, Norway and Switzerland.

Speaking to Carbon Brief and the Guardian, one nation said that meeting “30 by 30” within its borders would be “extremely challenging” to achieve, while another said that developing countries in particular should not face an “unnecessarily heavy burden” in reaching the global goal.

The investigation shows that “many countries have not been ambitious enough with their domestic conservation commitments and, as a result, we are collectively not currently on track to meet the global 30 by 30 target”, one expert said.

A third of Earth

At the COP15 nature summit in 2022, countries agreed to the GBF, a broad set of targets and goals with an overall aim to halt and reverse biodiversity loss by 2030.

Target 3 of the GBF – which says countries should ensure “at least” 30% of Earth is in protected areas or governed by other conservation measures by 2030 (“30 by 30”) – is considered by many to be the flagship aim of the agreement and has been likened to the 1.5C temperature goal of the Paris Agreement in articles and speeches stressing its importance.

Target 3 of the Global Biodiversity Framework
Target 3 of the Global Biodiversity Framework. Credit: UN Convention on Biological Diversity

All countries were asked to submit plans to the UN Convention on Biological Diversity outlining how they will meet the targets of the GBF within their territories ahead of the COP16 nature summit in 2024. These are called national biodiversity strategies and action plans, or “NBSAPs”.

A separate Carbon Brief and Guardian investigation last October found that 85% of countries missed the deadline to submit their NBSAPs, with some arguing that the deadline was too challenging or that they were not able to access funds to help prepare their documents.

Countries unable to produce their NBSAPs were asked to instead submit national targets to the UN. These are simple lists of targets that countries will aim for without an accompanying plan of action.

As of 24 February 2025, 44 countries and the EU had submitted NBSAPs to the UN, while 124 parties had submitted national targets. (As some countries submitted both national targets and NBSAPs, it means that, overall, 137 countries have put forward a plan of some kind.)

To investigate whether countries have committed to the “30 by 30” pledge within their borders in these plans, Carbon Brief and the Guardian analysed the full text of each NBSAP, as well as any target that had been tagged as relating to target 3 of the GBF.

The analysis finds that, of 137 countries that have submitted plans to the CBD, more than half – 70 countries, or 51% – do not commit to protecting 30% of their land and sea by 2030.

Of these, 21 countries did not supply a numerical target for protecting their land area, 26 set targets for land protection that were less than 30% and eight set land targets of or greater than 30%, but sea-protection targets less than 30%.

Of the remaining countries, 13 did not submit any targets relating to coverage of protected areas. Two others set goals further in the future than 2030.

A further 10 countries, or 7%, do not make it clear from the plans that they submitted whether or not they have a pledge that meets the conditions of 30 by 30. This includes: countries that specify that they will protect 30% of “areas of particular importance”; countries that gave a target for improvement, but did not provide a baseline; and countries that submitted only one or two targets.

Just 42% of countries – 57 in total – commit to protecting 30% of both land and sea by 2030.

The chart below shows the countries that have submitted NBSAPs and/or national targets to the UN. On the chart, countries are clustered by the percentage of land they have pledged to protect and the size of each bubble represents their land area. (Countries clustered around the 30% line and outlined in grey all have pledges to protect 30% of land area.)

Countries clustered below “no target” are those that have not pledged a numerical target for protecting their land or those who have produced a plan, but have not included a protected area target.

The various pledges made by countries when it comes to protecting a proportion of their land for nature
The various pledges made by countries when it comes to protecting a proportion of their land for nature. Chart by Tom Pearson for Carbon Brief. Data source: UN CBD NBSAPs and national targets. Land area data from the UN Food and Agriculture Organization.

The analysis shows that, collectively, more than one-third of the Earth’s land area is covered by a pledge that does not fulfil the “30 by 30” target, while around half is covered by a “30 by 30” pledge.

Seven of the 17 “megadiverse” countries – which together provide a home to 70% of the world’s biodiversity – have not committed to 30 by 30, the analysis finds. This includes Indonesia, Malaysia, Mexico, Peru, the Philippines, South Africa and Venezuela.

A further 61 countries have not submitted an NBSAP or national targets and so have not been assessed in the analysis. This includes the world’s most biodiverse nation, Brazil.

The figures also do not include the US, which  – although a megadiverse country – is not party to the CBD and, therefore, is not subject to the goals and targets of the GBF.

Former US president Joe Biden committed the country to the “30 by 30” pledge. However, the “Project 2025” policy blueprint – which Donald Trump is largely following – calls for the target to be scrapped.

The EU submitted an NBSAP that covers its 27 member states and commits to 30 by 30.

However, individual countries are also party to the CBD and are expected to submit their own national plans. For the purposes of this analysis, EU member states were only considered to be meeting “30 by 30” if they submitted their own NBSAP or national target that did so.

‘Extremely challenging’

Carbon Brief and the Guardian reached out to megadiverse countries and developed nations to ask why they had chosen not to commit to “30 by 30” in their UN plans.

Indonesia, a megadiverse country that is home to the world’s third-largest rainforest, did not give a numerical target for how much of its territory it is able to protect for nature in its NBSAP.

A government spokesperson says that it is Indonesia’s view that “it is not essential to explicitly state that the 30% protection target is for terrestrial and marine areas” in its territory, explaining:

“Indonesia is of the view that all of us need to understand that the GBF is indeed global. And, by being global, it is natural that this framework should be implemented globally and collectively, without putting an unnecessarily heavy burden on some of us.

“Indonesia is committed to ambitious yet practical targets for the GBF, with an emphasis on the fact that not all parties are at the same level if targets are assessed numerically.”

The spokesperson adds that “managing biodiversity is not an easy task” and that the “balance of economic, social and environmental aspects must be maintained, particularly for developing countries like Indonesia”.

In its NBSAP, megadiverse nation Mexico commits to protecting 30% of its oceans, but only 22% of its land. 

Dr Andrea Cruz Angón, coordinator of biodiversity strategies and policies at Conabio, the federal government’s biodiversity commission, says that the targets are still “being reviewed and adjusted” by the appropriate federal agencies.

She adds that the targets were produced after workshops were held “with subnational governments, youth, Indigenous peoples and Afro-Mexican communities” to identify “barriers and opportunities for these actors to make voluntary commitments to the targets”.

Finland, one of the EU’s member states, has not yet released an NBSAP, but submitted its national targets for meeting the goals of the GBF to the UN in August 2024. In these plans, Finland does not commit to “30 by 30”.

A spokesperson for the Finnish government says it was still preparing its NBSAP and, as a result, none of its targets are final, but adds:

“Achieving a 30% increase in protected area by 2030 would be extremely challenging, as to reach this target, for example, the protected area in land areas would have to increase by about over 700,000 hectares per year.”

In its NBSAP, Norway committed to protecting 30% of its land for nature by 2030 – but says it was still assessing its ocean protection target and “will come back with a plan for how a future goal can be achieved in a way that also facilitates the sustainable use of Norwegian marine areas”.

A spokesperson for Norway says the nation is “committed to contribute towards the 30 by 30 target”, adding:

“A national conservation target for Norwegian sea areas has not yet been concluded. This is due to an ongoing national process to assess which marine areas that can be recognised as protected through ‘other effective area-based conservation measures’ (OECM), in accordance with [UN biodiversity] criteria.

“The conclusion of this process will clarify the current conservation status of Norwegian waters, and consequently enable us to set a national target.”

‘Go back to the drawing board’

Inger Andersen, executive director of the UN Environment Programme, tells Carbon Brief and the Guardian that “30 by 30” is a “global target and how countries take that on board at the national level will be different across the world, depending on national circumstances”.

She points to the Protected Planet Report 2024, which shows that only 17.6% of land and 8.4% of the ocean is currently being conserved for nature – with just five years to go until the “30 by 30” deadline, adding:

“As the world faces a nature and biodiversity loss crisis, it is clear we must go much further, much faster. This will not be possible without financial, technical and capacity support for many countries.”

Responding to Carbon Brief and the Guardian’s investigation, Brian O’Donnell, director of the Campaign for Nature, a group advocating for the 30 by 30 target, says: 

“Many countries have not been ambitious enough with their domestic conservation commitments and, as a result, we are collectively not currently on track to meet the global ‘30 by 30’ target. This is troubling and action must be taken to put the world on track.”

To get on track for “30 by 30”, developed nations must “directly fund” the target to enable developing countries to protect more of their territories for nature, he says, adding that the “30 by 30” pledge also needs to be championed at a higher level by global leaders and the UN.

He adds that countries not committing to “30 by 30” in their UN plans “should go back to the drawing board and update their plans with ones in which conservation is commensurate with the challenge of biodiversity loss and the needs of communities”.

The full Carbon Brief and Guardian analysis can be found here.

The post Revealed: More than half of nations fail to protect 30% of land and sea in UN nature plans appeared first on Carbon Brief.

Revealed: More than half of nations fail to protect 30% of land and sea in UN nature plans

Continue Reading

Climate Change

IEA: Slow transition away from fossil fuels would cost over a million energy sector jobs

Published

on

A slower shift to clean energy could leave the world with 1.3 million fewer energy sector jobs by 2035 compared with a scenario in which governments fully implement their green policies, the International Energy Agency (IEA) has found.

In its annual World Energy Employment report, the Paris-based watchdog said on Friday that the Current Policies Scenario (CPS), which it reintroduced under pressure from the Trump administration, has “more muted” employment growth than the Stated Policies Scenario.

The CPS sees oil and gas demand continuing to rise until at least 2050 – a scenario that the IEA described as “cautious” and “anchored in enacted laws and measures” and was widely criticised by clean energy experts.

A fast energy transition would spur investment in construction, creating more jobs across the sector. New roles for electricians, building insulators, solar panel and energy-efficient lightbulb installers, and transition mineral miners would more than offset job losses in coal mines, power plants and oil and gas fields, the report found.

    Anabella Rosemberg, Just Transition lead at Climate Action Network International, lamented that the clean energy sector is “being undermined at a time when employment creation is of utmost priority”.

    “Climate ambition and decent job creation must go hand in hand – but as the recent conversations at COP30 showed, there is a need for both the right targets and just transition strategies to make it happen,” she added.

    A more ambitious Net Zero Emissions scenario, aligned with the Paris Agreement goal of limiting global warming to 1.5C, would see roughly ten million more energy jobs created than under the CPS, report author Daniel Wetzel told Climate Home News at a press conference.

    Bottleneck warnings

    The IEA warned that governments must act to train workers for these roles or risk facing shortages of electricians, welders, and grid specialists – a gap that could slow the energy transition and drive up wages and energy costs.

    IEA head Fatih Birol highlighted a particular shortage of qualified workers in the nuclear industry, warning that the problem could worsen as the sector’s workforce continues to age. “I hear nuclear is making a comeback, but the interest in the nuclear sector for the jobs is rather weak,” he said.

    Laura Cozzi, IEA’s Director of Sustainability, Technology and Outlooks, warned of a shortage of skilled workers in electricity grids. “That is one of the key ingredients why we are not seeing grids ramp up as [they] should,” she said. Over 60 governments pledged at COP29 to improve and expand their grids to enable clean electricity to flow to where it is needed.

      Bert De Wel, Global Coordinator for Climate Policy at the International Trade Union Confederation, celebrated that the energy transition is creating jobs but added that they should be good jobs with decent pay, conditions and union rights. Decent work would attract skilled workers, he added.

      The report found that wages in the oil and gas industry have generally risen faster over the past year than in the solar – and especially the wind – sectors. It noted that the oil and gas industry has a “historical tendency to offer highly competitive wages to attract and retain top talent”.

      At the COP30 climate summit, governments agreed to set up the Belém Action Mechanism to try and make the energy transition fairer to groups such as workers in the energy industry. It will give trade unions a formal role in shaping just transition policies, for what the ITUC says is the first time.

      ITUC General Secretary Luc Triangle called it a “decisive win for the union movement and working people across the world, in all sectors but especially those in transition industries.”

      The post IEA: Slow transition away from fossil fuels would cost over a million energy sector jobs appeared first on Climate Home News.

      IEA: Slow transition away from fossil fuels would cost over a million energy sector jobs

      Continue Reading

      Climate Change

      DeBriefed 5 December: Deadly Asia floods; Adaptation finance target examined; Global south IPCC scientists speak out

      Published

      on

      Welcome to Carbon Brief’s DeBriefed.
      An essential guide to the week’s key developments relating to climate change.

      This week

      Deadly floods in Asia

      MOUNTING DEVASTATION: The Associated Press reported that the death toll from catastrophic floods in south-east Asia had reached 1,500, with Indonesia, Sri Lanka and Thailand most affected and hundreds still missing. The newswire said “thousands” more face “severe” food and clean-water shortages. Heavy rains and thunderstorms are expected this weekend, it added, with “saturated soil and swollen rivers leaving communities on edge”. Earlier in the week, Bloomberg said the floods had caused “at least $20bn in losses”.

      CLIMATE CHANGE LINKS: A number of outlets have investigated the links between the floods and human-caused climate change. Agence France-Presse explained that climate change was “producing more intense rain events because a warmer atmosphere holds more moisture and warmer oceans can turbocharge storms”. Meanwhile, environmental groups told the Associated Press the situation had been exacerbated by “decades of deforestation”, which had “stripped away natural defenses that once absorbed rainfall and stabilised soil”.

      ‘NEW NORMAL’: The Associated Press quoted Malaysian researcher Dr Jemilah Mahmood saying: “South-east Asia should brace for a likely continuation and potential worsening of extreme weather in 2026 and for many years.” Al Jazeera reported that the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies had called for “stronger legal and policy frameworks to protect people in disasters”. The organisation’s Asia-Pacific director said the floods were a “stark reminder that climate-driven disasters are becoming the new normal”, the outlet said.

      Around the world

      • REVOKED: The UK and Netherlands withdrew $2.2bn of financial backing from a controversial liquified natural gas (LNG) project in Mozambique, Reuters reported. The Guardian noted that TotalEnergies’ “giant” project stood accused of “fuelling the climate crisis and deadly terror attacks”.
      • REVERSED: US president Donald Trump announced plans to “significantly weaken” Biden-era fuel efficiency requirements for cars, the New York Times said.
      • RESTRICTED: EU leaders agreed to ban the import of Russian gas from autumn 2027, the Financial Times reported. Meanwhile, Reuters said it is “likely” the European Commission will delay announcing a plan on auto sector climate targets next week, following pressure to “weaken” a 2035 cut-off for combustion engines.
      • RETRACTED: An influential Nature study that looked at the economic consequences of climate change has been withdrawn after “criticism from peers”, according to Bloomberg. [The research came second in Carbon Brief’s ranking of the climate papers most covered by the media in 2024.]
      • REBUKED: The federal government of Canada faced a backlash over an oil pipeline deal struck last week with the province of Alberta. CBC News noted that ​​First Nations chiefs voted “unanimously” to demand the withdrawal of the deal and Canada’s National Observer quoted author Naomi Klein as saying that the prime minister was “completely trashing Canada’s climate commitments”.
      • RESCHEDULED: The Indonesian government has cancelled plans to close a coal plant seven years early, Bloomberg reported. Meanwhile, Bloomberg separately reported that India is mulling an “unprecedented increase” in coal-power capacity that could see plants built “until at least 2047”.

      $518 billion a year

      The projected coastal flood damages for the Asia-Pacific region by 2100 if current policies continue, according to a Scientific Reports study covered this week by Carbon Brief.


      Latest climate research

      • More than 100 “climate-sensitive rivers” worldwide are experiencing “large and severe changes in streamflow volume and timing” | Environmental Research Letters
      • Africa’s forests have switched from a carbon sink into a source | Scientific Reports
      • Increasing urbanisation can “substantially intensify warming”, contributing up to 0.44C of additional temperature rise per year through 2060 | Communications Earth & Environment

      (For more, see Carbon Brief’s in-depth daily summaries of the top climate news stories on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday and Friday.)

      Captured

      A new target for developed nations to triple adaptation finance by 2035, agreed at the COP30 climate summit, would not cover more than a third of developing countries’ estimated needs, Carbon Brief analysis showed. The chart above compares a straight line to meeting the adaptation finance target (blue), alongside an estimate of countries’ adaptation needs (grey), which was calculated using figures from the latest UN Environmental Programme adaptation gap report, based on countries’ UN climate plans (called “nationally determined contributions” or NDCs) and national adaptation plans (NAPs).

      Spotlight

      Inclusivity at the IPCC

      This week, Carbon Brief speaks to an IPCC lead author researching ways to improve the experience of global south scientists taking part in producing the UN climate body’s assessments.

      Hundreds of climate scientists from around the world met in Paris this week to start work on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC’s) newest set of climate reports.

      The IPCC is the UN body responsible for producing the world’s most authoritative climate science reports. Hundreds of scientists from across the globe contribute to each “assessment cycle”, which sees researchers aim to condense all published climate science over several years into three “working group” reports.

      The reports inform the decisions of governments – including at UN climate talks – as well as the public understanding of climate change.

      The experts gathering in Paris are the most diverse group ever convened by the IPCC.

      Earlier this year, Carbon Brief analysis found that – for the first time in an IPCC cycle – citizens of the global south make up 50% of authors of the three working group reports. The IPCC has celebrated this milestone, with IPCC chair Prof Jim Skea touting the seventh assessment report’s (AR7’s) “increased diversity” in August.

      But some IPCC scientists have cautioned that the growing involvement of global south scientists does not translate into an inclusive process.

      “What happens behind closed doors in these meeting rooms doesn’t necessarily mirror what the diversity numbers say,” Dr Shobha Maharaj, a Trinidadian climate scientist who is a coordinating lead author for working group two (WG2) of AR7, told Carbon Brief.

      Global south perspective

      Motivated by conversations with colleagues and her own “uncomfortable” experience working on the small-islands chapter of the sixth assessment cycle (AR6) WG2 report, Maharaj – an adjunct professor at the University of Fiji – reached out to dozens of fellow contributors to understand their experience.

      The exercise, she said, revealed a “dominance of thinking and opinions from global north scientists, whereas the global south scientists – the scientists who were people of colour – were generally suppressed”.

      The perspectives of scientists who took part in the survey and future recommendations for the IPCC are set out in a peer-reviewed essay – co-authored by 20 researchers – slated for publication in the journal PLOS Climate. (Maharaj also presented the findings to the IPCC in September.)

      The draft version of the essay notes that global south scientists working on WG2 in AR6 said they confronted a number of diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) issues, including “skewed” author selection, “unequal” power dynamics and a “lack of respect and trust”. The researchers also pointed to logistical constraints faced by global south authors, such as visa issues and limited access to journals.

      The anonymous quotations from more than 30 scientists included in the essay, Maharaj said, are “clear data points” that she believes can advance a discussion about how to make academia more inclusive.

      “The literature is full of the problems that people of colour or global south authors have in academia, but what you don’t find very often is quotations – especially from climate scientists,” she said. “We tend to be quite a conservative bunch.”

      Road to ‘improvement’

      Among the recommendations set out in the essay are for DEI training, the appointment of a “diversity and inclusion ombudsman” and for updated codes of conduct.

      Marharaj said that these “tactical measures” need to occur alongside “transformative approaches” that help “address value systems, dismantle power structures [and] change the rules of participation”.

      With drafting of the AR7 reports now underway, Maharaj said she is “hopeful” the new cycle can be an improvement on the last, pointing to a number of “welcome” steps from the IPCC.

      This includes holding the first-ever expert meeting on DEI this autumn, new mechanisms where authors can flag concerns and the recruitment of a “science and capacity officer” to support WG2 authors.

      The hope, Maharaj explained, is to enhance – not undermine – climate science.

      “The idea here was to move forward and to improve the IPCC, rather than attack it,” she said. “Because we all love the science – and we really value what the IPCC brings to the world.”

      Watch, read, listen

      BROKEN PROMISES: Climate Home News spoke to communities in Nigeria let down by the government’s failure to clean up oil spills by foreign companies.

      ‘WHEN A ROAD GOES WRONG’: Inside Climate News looked at how a new road from Brazil’s western Amazon to Peru has become a “conduit for rampant deforestation and illegal gold mining”.

      SHADOWY COURTS: In the Guardian, George Monbiot lamented the rise of investor-state dispute settlements, which he described as “undemocratic offshore tribunals” that are already having a “chilling effect” on countries’ climate ambitions.

      Coming up

      Pick of the jobs

      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 5 December: Deadly Asia floods; Adaptation finance target examined; Global south IPCC scientists speak out appeared first on Carbon Brief.

      DeBriefed 5 December: Deadly Asia floods; Adaptation finance target examined; Global south IPCC scientists speak out

      Continue Reading

      Climate Change

      Alabama Regulators Approve Two-Year Electric Rate Freeze and Two Solar Projects for a Meta Inc. Data Center

      Published

      on

      Critics say the rate freeze will only delay financial burdens on Alabama Power customers while preserving a high profit rate for the utility.

      MONTGOMERY, Ala.—The Alabama Public Service Commission on Tuesday approved a sweeping package of temporary changes they say will keep electric rates steady for the next two years.

      Alabama Regulators Approve Two-Year Electric Rate Freeze and Two Solar Projects for a Meta Inc. Data Center

      Continue Reading

      Trending

      Copyright © 2022 BreakingClimateChange.com