The COP16 summit, the world’s largest nature conservation conference, concluded in Colombia in the early hours of Saturday, November 2nd. The summit has fallen short of its ambitious funding goals, as delegates from nearly 200 countries gathered to attend the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework. The conference highlighted intensive discussions on creating a global nature fund that would direct revenues from genetic data used in industries like pharmaceuticals and cosmetics toward biodiversity efforts. However, after prolonged negotiations lasting 12 hours beyond schedule, no consensus was reached. This deadlock lead president Susana Mohamad to suspend the event. Not all was lost as countries did agree on a mechanism to collect payments from companies benefiting from biodiversity, with a portion of the funds intended for indigenous communities. 

Reactions to the COP16 summit reflect both optimism over incremental progress and frustration over unresolved issues, particularly over financing. Ginette Hemley of the World Wildlife Fund US praised the advancements in benefit-sharing for genetic resources, emphasising the significance of aligning health and biodiversity efforts. However, it was also emphasised that the lack of a clear financial roadmap jeopardises the 2030 effort to halt biodiversity loss.

David Ainsworth, from the UN Convention on Biological Diversity, highlighted that COP16 remains “open”, ensuring that agreed-upon elements stay operative. However, the event did arouse some criticism. Pierre du Plessis, a former negotiator for African countries, said the agreement represented a “small step forward”, but doubted its potential to attract sufficient funding. Meanwhile, Carlos Pacheco criticised developed countries for blocking the resource mobilisation decision, branding it a setback. This setback has severe consequences as Catherine Weller of Fauna & Flora warned that many ambitious conservation targets of Montreal 2030 remain unfunded, highlighting the need for urgent financial commitments.

The outcomes of COP16 represent an important step forward in fostering dialogue as a peaceful  means of addressing environmental issues. The new fund requires that businesses contribute to conservations efforts, which showcases the value of diplomatic engagement and negotiations in overcoming global challenges. Although this approach is non-binding, it is still a significant example of how dialogue can pave the way for private sector accountability.

However, it is important to note that the failure to secure a robust financial framework reflects an area where dialogue between nations can be improved in future. The summit highlighted the need for broader conversations between economically diverse nations that, if avoided for much longer, may lead to rising tensions and may even pave the way towards conflict. Nevertheless, COP16 does signal a shift towards conflict-free collaboration. 

COP16 is the 16th conference of the parties to the UN convention on Biological Diversity, which gathered around 14,000 delegates from 180 countries. The summit hoped to advance the Kunmig-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, an agreement that aims to reverse biodiversity loss by 2030. 

In short, the summit showcased both progress and setbacks in the global pursuit of biodiversity protection. The establishment of a fund sourced from business profits represents a critical step forward, with the acknowledgement of Indigenous stewardship. Yet, the lack of a binding financial agreement underscores the challenges of aligning diverse interests. The hope is that future meetings will foster cooperative, accountable solutions that address the gaps left unfilled by this summit. Ultimately, effective biodiversity protection will require the steadfast commitment and collaboration of the whole international community.