The 16th UN Biodiversity Conference (COP16) in Cali concluded with an all-too-familiar scene: unfulfilled promises on funding commitments.
Despite lofty pledges from developed nations to allocate $20 billion by 2025 for biodiversity conservation, little concrete funding emerged.
According to official conference records and sources, only $163 million was pledged at COP16, falling drastically short of what the Global South deems essential to meet biodiversity targets.
Developing countries, represented by leaders from Brazil, the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), and others, called for a dedicated biodiversity fund outside the existing Global Environment Facility (GEF), which they argue lacks flexibility.
Minister Safiya Sawney of Grenada, in his speech, revealed the frustrations felt by many: “Your inactions are crippling us. Our debts to you are crippling us.”
Financial figures from BloombergNEF confirmed that 2024 saw no new public funds for biodiversity conservation, despite prior commitments.
Calls from the Global South for a new funding mechanism to avoid funneling money through climate finance structures went largely unanswered. European Union, Japan, and Canada argued that establishing a new fund would be administratively burdensome, while also citing “technical challenges.”
But the needs remain urgent. Dominique Bikaba DRC delegate noted that at COP15, their country nearly derailed negotiations over these same issues.
In Cali, they arrived with support from Brazil and the Africa Group, clearly stating that without a solution, the Global South would struggle to implement nature action plans.
As of COP16’s closing,only 44 of 196 countries had submitted their biodiversity plans, with many poorer nations citing lack of funds as the reason for delay.
Brazil proved the need for greater financial autonomy, explaining that without a specific fund for biodiversity, implementation in countries facing deforestation and wildfires would be challenging.
“We’re judged on whether we can afford implementation to stop deforestation,” Danilo Guajajara Brazil’s representative stated. Developing nations are not asking for charity but for accountability from the Global North, which for years has failed to meet its funding promises. These funds are integral to addressing a biodiversity crisis that disproportionately affects the world’s poorest nations.
Can the existing GEF structure,as designed, adequately address biodiversity finance needs? COP16’s shortfall raises questions about whether the GEF remains the right mechanism.
Experts observe that without urgent action, the biodiversity crisis may see less funding and even fewer results.
