This article is also available in Italian / Questo articolo è disponibile anche in italiano

From Rome – A roadmap to mobilise at least 200 billion dollars from public, private, philanthropic, and multilateral funds, alongside the elimination of at least 500 billion dollars in environmentally harmful subsidies, was approved at COP16 bodiversity Rome (COP16 bis).

Amidst tears from the staff, Susana Muhamad, the Colombian president of COP16, approved the two pivotal negotiation documents—Resource Mobilization and Financial Mechanism—just before 11 pm on Thursday, the 27th of February. These documents lay out a roadmap to bridge the financial gap needed to achieve the 200 billion dollars target and address the difference of opinion over which institution and financial mechanism should manage the economic resources.

The room erupted in applause, among the delegations' sense of satisfaction. “The applause is for all of you. You have done an extraordinary job,” President Muhamad said with a smile.

For three days, the Parties debated whether to strengthen the Global Environmental Facility (GEF)—the UN fund established in 1992 to mobilise financial resources for climate and nature—to manage a portion of the 200 billion to be raised (at least 30 billion), or whether to establish a new, dedicated fund. This discussion is of particular interest to countries facing sanctions, such as Russia, as the GEF is often seen as discriminatory, being effectively inaccessible to them.

On the other hand, the PMRR—the mechanism for reporting and verifying progress on the National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs), as well as the Global Biodiversity Framework, the 2030 targets of the Biodiversity COP—was approved without issue. The Cali Fund has also been made operational, a fund voluntarily financed by private companies that utilise digital sequence information (DSI), which will further contribute to achieving the financial goals.

A step forward

The political and non-governmental worlds hailed the success of the Rome negotiations, highlighting the robustness of the process and reaffirming the Parties' commitment to nature conservation. As the Colombian president remarked, “muscles, legs, and arms have been given to the Global Biodiversity Framework.”

An Lambrechts, Head of Greenpeace COP16 delegation said, “This is a helpful move in maintaining trust that the nature finance gap can be closed but it's only one side of the coin, and we urgently need to see the other side too: money on the table. That means rapid delivery of 20 billion dollars per year of public funding as of this year and Cali Fund contributions from Big Pharma and Big Ag that amount to at least 1% of their revenues.”

Resource mobilisation

One of the key outcomes is the establishment of a financial strategy. The Resource Mobilization document outlines that by 2030, a “permanent” financial institution should be in place to manage at least 30 billion dollars in public funds annually, alongside a strategy to assess and enhance biodiversity finance from all available sources.

New collaborations will be sought between financial institutions, particularly with multilateral development banks. Then there is the issue of reporting: as COP spokesperson David Ainsworth noted, it has long been a challenge to determine how much has been disbursed for climate or biodiversity objectives. As a result, ensuring transparency in accounting will be crucial—no simple task, given that donor countries often apply this type of funding to multiple reporting categories (double accounting).

Attention must also be given to who will manage the resources. By COP17 in 2026, in Armenia, all criteria for the institutional structure responsible for overseeing the financial mechanism must be established. By 2028—given that the biodiversity COPs are held biennially—the nature of this institution will need to be determined, ensuring it is fully operational by 2030.

No surprises were expected in terms of new financial commitments, particularly given the low level of ministerial participation. After media criticism regarding the absence of Italian institutions, Italy sent Undersecretary Barbaro to represent them. Yet, despite this, the situation remains dire.

As outlined in the approved text, economic aid for biodiversity to support less developed countries, as of the 27th of February, within the Global Biodiversity Framework Fund, stands at 382 million dollars (with not a single cent from Italy). To reach the target of at least 20 billion by the end of the year, as stipulated, pressure will need to be applied both on refinancing during GEF-9 (see below) and in the mobilisation of new public resources through cooperation. The aim is to ensure that at least 20% will be dedicated entirely to indigenous populations.

A greater role for multilateral banks is essential, and for the first time, an opportunity has arisen for inter-ministerial dialogue between the environment, economy, and finance ministries of COP countries to identify the necessary resources.

Finally, a grassroots international campaign will be crucial to apply pressure on companies in the pharmaceutical, cosmetics, animal husbandry, and chemical sectors to raise funds through the Cali Fund mechanism. This initiative requires companies using digital genetic sequencing to voluntarily contribute 1% of profits or 0.1% of turnover. “The interested companies can contact the CBD Secretariat directly,” said spokesperson Ainsworth.

Not only that: the document “urges Parties to continue and enhance their efforts towards achieving Target 18 by eliminating, phasing out or reforming incentives, including subsidies, harmful for biodiversity, in a proportionate, just, fair, effective and equitable way, while substantially and progressively reducing them by at least 500 billion dollars per year by 2030, starting with the most harmful incentives, and scale up positive incentives for the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity”

This is no easy task, particularly given the ongoing trade wars and the diminished influence of the WTO. In the meantime, we will have to see what actions Italy will take and whether NGOs will organise dedicated campaigns on this often overlooked issue.

The financial mechanism

So, who will manage a portion of the biodiversity finance in the interim? Until 2030, the GEF will take on this provisional role, with its Trust Fund and the Global Biodiversity Framework Fund (GBFF), established during COP15. After that, a decision will be made on whether to create a new institution or retain the GEF, with appropriate reforms.

The most intense political clash during the three days of negotiations centred precisely around this institution. Many countries argue that the GEF is discriminatory because it is difficult to access: nations under US sanctions—such as Iran, Syria, Cuba, Russia, Venezuela, and others—are excluded, and there is no fast-track for projects led by indigenous communities.

For the time being, the GEF remains in place, allowing resources to be mobilised quickly, but it is under scrutiny. By COP18, in three years, a decision will need to be made on whether to establish a new institution to manage the mechanism or confirm the GEF, provided it addresses the many requests in the approved documents for improvements in its operations.

Among the COP's calls for reform of the UN fund are, among other things, support for indigenous and local communities, the sharing of knowledge from completed nature conservation projects, an expanded focus to include initiatives in international waters, and projects addressing climate change and soil degradation, as well as support for biodiversity plans and reporting.

“The GEF has been listening carefully to CBD Parties and is committed to continued improvements in order to respond to their expectations and capacities needs,” said Carlos Manuel Rodríguez, CEO of the GEF, in a statement, highlighting the positive experience of establishing the Global Biodiversity Framework Fund.

By December 2024, two years after COP15, the GBFF had allocated over 200 million dollars for 40 projects across 41 countries. Meanwhile, the GEF family of funds has approved 3.07 billion dollars for projects supporting the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (KMGBF) between June 2022 and December 2024. These projects are expected to mobilise more than 22 billion dollars in co-financing, including 1.9 billion from the private sector.

“The GEF will do its utmost, in its upcoming GEF-9 replenishment and through the GBFF, to mobilise and efficiently allocate new and additional resources to support the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework” added Rodríguez. To understand how developed countries plan to direct their financial support for biodiversity, it will be crucial to closely examine the GEF-9 documents, as they will cover the four-year period leading up to 2030.

PMRR

The Parties have further refined the monitoring framework for the GBF, which was agreed at COP15. This framework is crucial for the implementation of the GBF, as it establishes the common parameters that Parties will use to assess progress towards the 23 targets and 4 objectives of the KMGBF. During these negotiations, the Parties reached an agreement on the methods of measurement and the indicators to be used. This will ensure that all Parties monitor progress in a way that can be understood by national policymakers, while also generating data that can be aggregated globally, offering a comprehensive picture of the GBF's implementation.

The Parties also took significant decisions regarding how progress in implementing the GBF will be reviewed at COP17 as part of the planned global assessment. They established a way for incorporating the commitments of non-governmental actors into the PMRR mechanism, including those from youth, women, indigenous peoples and local communities, civil society, the private sector, and subnational governments.

Cover: photo by Mike Muzurakis by IISD/ENB