No funding for biodiversity at Colombia summit. Could Canada have helped?

Nature is being pushed to the brink as logging, mining and the relentless burning of fossil fuels destroy ecosystems — but even while acknowledging the problem, countries at an international summit in Colombia still failed to agree on how to pay for conservation efforts.

The COP16 summit, which wrapped on Saturday, was intended to put into action the two-year-old Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF), a Paris Agreement-level pact to protect nature. 

Central to convincing countries to adopt biodiversity protection plans is agreeing on a way to pay for it, given many poorer countries are already struggling under high debt burdens and have far-ranging and expensive priorities, including sustainable development, fighting climate change and protecting nature. 

Without a dedicated fund in place to provide the cash, many developing countries say they can’t develop more ambitious plans to protect nature. As it stands, just 44 of 196 countries have put forward biodiversity protection plans as required under the Kunming-Montreal GBF, according to an analysis from Carbon Brief and The Guardian. 

Negotiations on unresolved issues stretched into overtime on Saturday. Many officials had flights to catch and left the summit, leaving delegates without the quorum to reach consensus. 

Failing to reach agreement on financial issues is common in diplomacy, but is also a subject Canada has increasingly played constructive roles in, said Catherine Abreu, director of the International Climate Politics Hub and member of Canada’s Net Zero Advisory Body. 

She said in recent years Canada has been “playing an outsized role” when it participates in multilateral negotiations, and with Environment and Climate Change Minister Steven Guilbeault at the helm, the country “has been playing a more constructive role in conversations around climate finance than traditionally Canada plays.”

“The breakdown in the negotiations around COP16 were around finance, and [I’m] not necessarily suggesting that Canada being there would've changed the ultimate outcomes,” she said. “But I think having the minister and co-chair of COP15, and a trusted relationship broker around issues of climate finance at the COP in Cali would've been helpful.”

In an interview with Canada’s National Observer a day after COP16 wrapped, Guilbeault suggested COP16’s subpar results are at least partially linked to ongoing political turmoil on the home front. 

Because Pierre Poilievre’s Conservative Party is pursuing every attempt to topple Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s government, the House of Commons is at a standoff. Typically when international summits are ongoing that Canadian government officials would attend, the governing party and opposition parties pair MPs to maintain the House’s balance of power to avoid parties having a vote advantage while government officials are away on government business. 

Guilbeault said the Conservative Party’s refusal to pair meant he was unable to attend COP16 in person — effectively blunting Canada’s ability to fully participate. 

“I know a lot of ministers personally, and even negotiators from all around the world that I've worked with, many of them for years now,” Guilbeault said. “I think they've come to trust our ability to help people build bridges.”

The Conservative Party did not return a request for comment. 

From hosting countries in Montreal in 2022 to negotiate nature protection, to working alongside Germany for three years in a row to advance a $100-billion climate finance commitment, to being tapped by the United Arab Emirates last year to help break through negotiating stalemates, the evidence is there that Canada has a role to play, Guilbeault says.

Last week’s nature protection summit was the first of three major international negotiations this year. Next week, climate change negotiations called COP29 kick off in Azerbaijan, and later in the year, South Korea will host what is expected to be the final round of talks to land a plastics treaty. But after Canada failed to fully participate at COP16 due to the minister’s absence, it remains unclear what Canada’s role will be at the upcoming talks.

Guilbeault said he will be in Azerbaijan for the first week representing Trudeau, but not the second week of negotiations. 

“Because of the silliness of what's happening in the House right now, and the Conservative Party refusing to pair, I can only go the first week of the COP, because it's a non-sitting week” in the House, he said. 

The first week of COPs are usually attended by heads of state to help galvanize momentum for long, grueling negotiations. But since Guilbeault became climate minister, he has attended the full two weeks to stickhandle the finer sticking points that become evident as negotiations unfold. Being present at the end of the COP is important because that is often when breakthroughs happen, as it did two years ago at COP27 when Canada changed tact, and supported calls to phase out unabated fossil fuels. Without the political heft of a minister present at the end of the negotiations, breakthroughs are less likely. 

At COP29, the major topic under negotiation is a new climate finance target. Previously, rich countries agreed to provide US$100 billion to developing countries each year by 2020 (that target was met in 2022), but experts agree trillions of dollars need to be mobilized each year to slash emissions, adapt to warming already locked in, and pay for climate-induced damages. Deciding what the new climate finance target should be, and who should pay, are widely expected to be the focal point of next week’s summit. 

Abreu said she’s feeling “quite worried” about progress toward the new financing target, formally called the “new collective quantified goal” (NCQG). 

“Canada would ideally be helping to build that coalition of developed and developing countries, because the leadership around NCQG is very murky right now and I don’t think we can rely on the Azeri presidency to take charge of those conversations,” she said. “And it's unclear whether Canada will have the capacity to step in and help be a part of that coalition, and help lead those conversations, when I think Canada's presence in that space would actually be extremely helpful."

COP16 Outcomes

In Colombia, several major issues were under debate. Countries managed to agree on a way to share genetic resources, as well as establish a new permanent body for Indigenous Peoples to participate in the negotiations going forward. That new Indigenous Peoples body represents the first time Indigenous Peoples have a formal seat at the table, as opposed to trying to advance their priorities through colonial nation states at the conference. 

“We can certainly celebrate the fact that we now collectively established a permanent body for Indigenous Peoples… which is something Canada championed,” Guilbeault said. But, “I am saddened by the fact that we didn't get an agreement in the end on resource mobilization, and the COP was kind of cut short.

“Given more time, perhaps it would've been possible [to reach agreement],” Guilbeault said. “But it just means we'll have to work harder moving forward.”

In a statement, Greenpeace Canada applauded the establishment of the Indigenous Peoples’ body, progress on ocean protections, and steps to more closely link climate action with biodiversity protection, but said the failure to close the financing gap was a “disappointment.”

“Two years after talking a good game by being one of the key architects of the landmark Kunming-Montreal agreement, Canada ended up missing the opportunity to live up to its nature protection commitments at COP16 in Colombia,” said Salomé Sané, a campaigner with Greenpeace Canada. “Nature is collapsing in plain sight and we can no longer afford any broken promises. 

“We need the Canadian government to step up its game and show solidarity with those bearing the brunt of nature destruction by urgently passing an amended Nature Accountability Act that ensures transparency, accountability and justice for Indigenous Peoples and local communities.”