Opinion: COP 16 Was No Failure

The 16th Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity - more commonly known as COP 16 - which was held in Cali, Colombia, over the last couple of weeks, has widely been panned as a failure. Delegates have returned dejected. A narrative has formed that because the meeting could not deliver the ambitious results people wanted, it should therefore be written off completely, consigned to the dustbin of history. However to call COP 16 a failure would be a mistake. In many ways it has laid the foundations for future success. 

The first point to note is the expectations around COP 16 were sky high prior to the conference. It’s fair to say that this was being driven not just be the (at times dry) legal texts around nature and biodiversity that were to be scrutinised, but also the location. Cali, the salsa capital of the world, is not just an environmentally significant city, but also a culturally rich destination in itself. For many it was a dream destination for an all-expenses work trip. 

In addition, COP 16 presented an opportunity to shift the focus away from the usual climate-centric discussions. Speaking frankly, it felt like the time was right for a shift away from the same old issues and towards a new and exciting topic, a new issue to place front and center in global policy dialogues, around which novel solutions could be explored.

By the end of the conference however, much of the excitement had drained away as delegates started to bemoan the lack of tangible progress. The main issue that dominated the narrative around COP 16 was the failure to secure agreement on how to fund the treaty agreed upon at the previous COP. This treaty, which aimed to protect global biodiversity, had outlined ambitious financial commitments that would be crucial for its success. The problem? No consensus was reached on exactly who should shoulder the financial burden.

However, to write COP 16 off as a failure would be a mistake. There are two main reasons for this. 

Firstly, COP 16 was not without its successes. There were notable strides in discussions on the role of Indigenous communities in biodiversity conservation. One of the more celebrated developments at COP 16 was the commitment to strengthen the role of Indigenous peoples in protecting the environment and managing natural resources. This was a critical moment for those advocating for a greater role for Indigenous knowledge and governance in global conservation efforts.

And secondly - and perhaps most importantly - COP 16 was a resounding success in firmly placing a new sustainability topic (nature and biodiversity) on the map for ESG professionals, policymakers and Governments. It’s easy to forget the huge number of meetings and conferences on climate change before the signing of the Paris Agreement. These were all necessary to gradually build awareness around the issue and, crucially, to mainstream it. COP 16 has arguably done most of the work on the biodiversity and nature side already, nicely setting the stage for the next step of substantive and binding multilateral agreements, starting with financing. 

COP 16 may not have delivered the breakthroughs on funding or biodiversity protection that many craved, but it was not a failure and should not be regarded as such. The conference has demonstrated the huge support for biodiversity and nature as the next key sustainability topic to tackle. The groundwork has been laid for future success, and while the path to significant, legally binding environmental agreements is long, COP 16 has moved us closer to that goal.