World Leaders Gather at COP16 to Address Biodiversity Crisis

President Gustavo Petro Announcing Cali, Colombia as Host for COP16

Credit: Wikimedia Commons

The urgency of the biodiversity crisis is undeniable. Habitats are disappearing at an alarming rate and, according to The Nature Conservancy, an environmental nonprofit, nearly a million species face extinction. This pressing issue underscored the importance of holding the 16th Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (COP16), a biennial conference run by the United Nations (UN). 

Held in Cali, Colombia, COP16 was integral to the global fight to preserve biodiversity. As the world faces a crisis marked by the accelerating loss of species and ecosystems, COP16 served as a crucial platform for countries to convene, forge commitments, and take concrete steps to protect our planet’s ecosystems. 

Negotiators from COP16 convened to begin work toward the lofty objective of humanity coexisting peacefully with the environment by 2050. One of the most important frameworks from the 2022 UN Convention on Biological Diversity, 30X30, “calls for the effective protection and management of 30% of the world’s terrestrial, inland water, and coastal and marine waters by the year 2030.” This year’s conference focused on translating this framework and similar proposals into actionable solutions. 

The choice to hold COP16 in Colombia is significant, as it is a prime example of a country that faces challenges in preserving its biodiversity. National parks like Los Farallones de Cali suffer the consequences of issues such as armed conflict. These parks, usually located near mountains or jungles in biodiverse areas of the nation, have been used by groups like the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) to grow coca plants, used to make cocaine. Park rangers have historically been caught in the crossfire of conflicts between militant groups and law enforcement. Introducing toxic plants into the ecosystem for private benefit jeopardizes the safety of individuals defending these places and diminishes national efforts to protect these unique ecosystems. 

Threats like illegal mining have also resulted in the degradation of vital ecosystems. One of Colombia’s principal mineral commodities is gold. In recent years, there has been a surplus in the number of illegal gold mines across the country. This is due to the fact that gold is easier to launder than armed goods or drugs, allowing it to be easily sold on the fraudulent market. Natives rely on the Atrato River, Colombia's third-most navigable river, for water, transportation, and other daily services. However, the Atrato has been destroyed by illegal mining. Illegal gold miners have torn up the riverbed, leaked mercury into the water, and deforested the land. Since politicians can ignore illicit gold mining and cultivation if it suits them, reforms and openness are necessary to solve these problems. These issues represent broader environmental challenges that call for global collaboration, such as those addressed at COP16. 

Despite the progress achieved through frameworks like 30X30, a major obstacle in implementing these initiatives is a lack of funding. Due to issues of illegal mining and armed conflict in places like Colombia, biodiverse nations have been struggling to maintain their ecosystems. According to The Guardian, in 2022, nations pledged $200 billion annually by 2030 to fund nature protection, including $20 billion for developing countries by 2025. This effort fell short; out of thirty countries, only Norway, Sweden, and Germany met this goal. 

COP16 saw tension between developed donor countries and developing recipient countries. In 2009, developed nations promised at COP15 to “help developing countries reduce their emissions and adapt to the impacts of climate change.” However, at COP16, these promises were not kept. Nations could not agree on creating a new biodiversity fund, which would give nations receiving funding the liberty to use it however they see fit. Unfortunately, concerns from donor countries over the possible misuse of these funds halted talks and progress on this front. 

Another criticism of COP16 is that the conference’s outcomes may not go far enough in addressing the root causes of biodiversity loss. Upon arrival, nations were to come prepared with actionable plans to protect the environment. 85% failed to accomplish this task, many of which were countries most at risk for biodiversity loss. 

As COP16 drew to a close, the plenary session saw an unusual disruption: many delegates were forced to leave early to catch flights home, leaving critical discussion unfinished. Since talks extended beyond the planned November 1 end date this mass departure was inevitable. Nevertheless, the burden fell disproportionately on developing nations, whose representatives lacked the flexibility and funds to adjust travel schedules. Highlighting this disparity, Fiji delegate Michelle Baleikanacea asserted, “Unfortunately Fiji is the only remaining Pacific island country present at this COP — we came as a delegation of 10 and I am the only one left.” Ranking among the world’s thirty-six biodiversity hotspots, Fiji is directly impacted by the decisions made at COP16. Especially since it was the only Pacific Island country remaining at the convention. The premature departures not only showcase the logistical difficulties of international negotiations but raise concerns about the equitable participation of vulnerable groups in shaping global decisions on biodiversity. 

Despite these challenges, COP16 saw some significant achievements for minorities. This convention emphasized the inclusion of Indigenous communities — who have long been biodiversity champions — in conservation efforts for the first time in history. They have worked informally for the UN Biodiversity Process, with deep knowledge of sustainable land and resource management practices. At COP16, nations agreed to strengthen partnerships with Indigenous groups and ensure their rights and traditional practices are respected in pursuing conservation goals. 

While COP16 could have marked an important step in the global effort to address the biodiversity crisis, it failed to accomplish many of its goals. With negotiations continuing in Bangkok on an undetermined date, the world will wait to see if nations are committed to protecting ecosystems, securing conservation funding, and integrating Indigenous knowledge into biodiversity policies. Even though the conference provided a much-needed platform for collaboration, the real test will be whether the promises made before COP16 translate into meaningful, on-the-ground action. The fate of biodiversity and the planet's future depends on the international community's ability to turn these commitments into tangible results.