Naturescapes at COP16: Hopes, Anxieties and Concerns

Merging the Climate and Biodiversity Agendas: Hopes

The links between climate change and biodiversity loss were emphasized by state and non-state actors at the biodiversity summit in Cali. Many called for integrated approaches such as Nature-based Solutions (NBS), again showing the importance of the Naturescapes project for the development of global environmental policy.

From wildlife corridors that facilitate climate migration for species, to working with rhinos and elephants to disperse seeds that promote carbon storage, to corals growing on legs of wind turbines, many NBS projects passed revenue at the biodiversity summit that aims to make ‘’peace with nature’’ (‘’Paz con la Naturaleza’’).

Although these synergistic interlinkages between climate and biodiversity were thoroughly addressed during the COP16 negotiations, less prevalent were discussions on the emerging conflicts in joining and enacting their agendas.

But first, besides hopes and calls for integrated approaches, what was actually agreed upon?

Merging the Climate and Biodiversity Agendas: Anxieties and Concerns

Indeed, accomplishments were made at COP 16, including a permanent subsidiary body of Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities (IPLCs) as well as the Cali fund, which promotes the equitable sharing of benefits derived from genetic data. Besides these moments of sunshine, countries failed to agree on a new fund dedicated to restoring nature. Disappointment and frustration were reported due to the summit’s unmet promises to mobilize the resources to “walk the talk.”

There is also anxiety about the ‘’climatization’’ of nature,[1] where biodiversity matters because of its (instrumental) value for combatting climate change. These tensions were reflected in a number of sessions and negotiations, where concerns arose about the duplication of lessons from the carbon journey to biodiversity, such as the (packed) sessions on biodiversity credits. In reaction to the launch of the guidelines by the International Advisory Panel on Biodiversity Credits (IAPB), some NGOs and IPLCs have pushed back on biodiversity credits, drawing attention to the lessons learnt from carbon credits.

This includes concerns regarding social justice and limited effectiveness, stressing that “reductionist’’ credits could never include the intrinsic and relational values of natures and deflects from tackling the root causes of both crises. Others argued that carbon credits are proven to work in leveraging capital and can secure ‘’high integrity’’credits to ensure both biodiversity, climate and community benefits. These tensions illustrate  the broader concerns on the financialization and climatization of the nature agenda[1].

Enacting the Climate and Biodiversity Agendas: Who is defining the menu?

While progress from countries has been slow, private actors like businesses, investors and tech companies are attempting to fill the voids. This is not without risks. The technologization of natures through the growing use of Nature Tech, is increasingly determining the solutions that are considered for addressing the climate-biodiversity crises [3].

As argued in one (packed) nature metrics session by a Nature Tech initiative, which aims to reduce confusion and complexity of biodiversity for the private sector: ‘’Imagine you are going to a restaurant and you want a really nicely curated menu. You don’t want to know how this menu has been prepared and what went into serving you this really fantastic menu.’’

As these actors are increasingly steering the possible climate-biodiversity menus, I worry that without policy coordination we will be faced with trade-offs between climate, biodiversity and social justice that will limit the potential to deliver transformative change for justice.

Although I left Cali in a slightly deteriorated state (i.e. on crutches) with amplified concerns on how these climate-biodiversity agendas are enacted, the many COP16 efforts that demonstrated care for communities, climate and biodiversity also resulted in feelings of hope that transformative change for justice is possible. I look forward to exploring these possibilities in the Naturescapes project moving forward.