COP16 on Biodiversity: Results and Reflections from Etifor

The 16th Conference of the Parties for Biological Diversity (COP16) was held in Cali, Colombia, from October 21st to November 1st, 2024. This COP aimed to be “The People’s COP” and “The COP of Action.” Did it accomplish its goal?

Let’s find out with the insights of the five Etifor delegates who attended this important international event. 

The COP16 on biodiversity ended right before the ongoing Climate COP29 in Baku. The results of the Colombian summit can serve as a crucial guidepost, shaping our expectations and understanding of the climate conference’s outcomes.

Highlights of COP16

The People’s COP

With the event divided into two zones—the Blue Zone for delegates and the Green Zone for the public—COP16 brought together politicians, civil society, and ordinary citizens, mainly from Latin America. The event saw record participation, with around 23,000 delegates, including 3,000 representatives from the business and financial sectors—almost triple the number at COP15—and approximately 800,000 total visitors. This format highlighted two perspectives: political and business representatives focused on financial and technological solutions, while local communities expressed their concerns about the impact of traditional policies on their lives.

Financial Gap: Insufficient Funding

COP16 can be considered a success in terms of engagement; however, regarding action—especially financial action—the results were less satisfactory. COP16 highlighted a shortfall of $4.6 billion to reach the $20 billion goal set for 2025 under the Global Biodiversity Framework. More decisive national action is needed, prioritising biodiversity across all policies and sectors, with public and private accountability.

The allocation of economic and financial resources is a significant indicator of the willingness of countries and businesses to address a particular issue. For example, $20 billion is invested annually in sustainable activities, while $7 trillion funds initiatives that damage ecosystems. Moreover, only 2% of climate funds are allocated to biodiversity.

Representation of Indigenous Communities

A key milestone was creating a permanent body representing Indigenous communities within the UN Convention on Biological Diversity framework. This body aims to give Indigenous populations a more significant role in decision-making, facilitate the recognition of Indigenous land ownership rights, and allocate economic resources. In this way, those who live most closely with the natural ecosystem will be able to care for it.

The Cali Fund for Digital Sequence Information (DSI)

Another significant milestone was the launch of the “Cali Fund,” which aims to promote fair redistribution of benefits and profits from using Digital Sequence Information (DSI) on genetic resources. Simply, companies profiting from the unique properties of plants and animals will be required to contribute a portion of their revenues to support biodiversity conservation.

The fund collects contributions from industries that benefit commercially from DSI use, such as pharmaceuticals and cosmetics. Participation in the fund is not mandatory and is targeted at companies that meet at least two of the following three criteria: total assets of at least $20 million, sales of $50 million, or profits of $5 million, averaged over the previous three years. These companies are expected to contribute to the global fund with 1% of their earnings or 0.1% of their revenues, as a suggested percentage.

The Cali Fund’s goal is to redistribute economic resources in favor of nature and to make DSI data accessible, promoting open science.

Tropical Forest Forever Facility (TFFF)

Brazil presented an important update concerning the Tropical Forest Forever Facility (TFFF), a fund aimed at mobilising $125 billion from nations and investors, with a return on investment over 20 years. The unique aspect of this fund is that it allocates part of its resources, $4 billion annually, from returns—directly to nature, funding tropical countries to protect their forests. The TFFF is set to be officially launched at COP30.

First Biodiversity Bond in Latin America

IDB Invest and BBVA Colombia have launched the first biodiversity bond in Latin America, valued at $70 million. Focused exclusively on biodiversity projects in Latin America and the Caribbean, the bond is structured in two tranches: one up to $35 million subscribed by IDB Invest and another up to $35 million subscribed by the International Finance Corporation. The proceeds will support projects aimed at combating biodiversity loss in Colombia. This bond reflects the growing interest in financial instruments dedicated to conservation.

Marine Biodiversity Conservation in International Waters

During COP16, a commitment was announced to raise $51.7 million to create protected marine areas in international waters, contributing to preserving these heavily degraded ecosystems. In this case, foundations and philanthropic institutions played a key role.

Absence of the Agricultural and Forestry Sectors

Sebbene i settori finanziario e tecnologico abbiano dimostrato un forte impegno, o almeno una presenza significativa, l’agricoltura e la silvicoltura sono state invece notevolmente assenti, nonostante il loro impatto diretto sulla biodiversità.

What could be improved?

Pure Conservation Vs Functional Biodiversity

Most of the discussions focused on building projects that financially rely entirely on biodiversity outcomes (for example, projects that generate income from the selling of biodiversity credits/offsetting). We often hear the words “fencing of areas.” 

In Etifor, we believe that a natural area can be sustainably managed (also in financial terms) only if we are able to capture most of its values. When it comes to biodiversity, we should strive for integrated management that can create the right tradeoff between biodiversity conservation, water, carbon, energy, food production, and bioeconomy.

Biodiversity is not confined solely to natural reserves; that’s why any project should adopt an ecosystem approach and value the benefits of nature

This approach ensures that actions and projects are sustainable, delivering lasting impact.

It is on these foundations that we developed LUCAS. This scientific methodology supports companies in understanding their dependencies on nature and the associated risks, helping them to manage these in an integrated way to become nature-positive.

Biodiversity credits: yes, if necessary, but not alone

One tonne of CO2 emitted today in Europe in two days would be across the globe. Given this situation, international carbon market mechanisms often make sense.

That is not the case for biodiversity and water. One hectare of ecosystem impacted in a certain biome should be reduced and restored in the same biome (like-for-like). The same applies to water at water basin level (water shared challenge).

Thus, for biodiversity (and water), the market supply chain could be very short. If the supply chain is short, we could avoid the creation of international markets, which would result in over-financialization, increased transaction costs, and poor benefit sharing. In such situation, we might prefer having local biodiversity impacts (always third-party independent certified). 

But, if we need to operate at a large scale or along the international supply chains, we should allow the participation of investors: in this case re-selling is compulsory, thus we might need market instruments like biodiversity credits. 

In any case a biodiversity credit only income project should be avoided. We should strive to be able to manage the complexity of nature, rather than try to simplify it.

At the Core: The Global Biodiversity Framework

As we mentioned at the beginning, COP16 in Cali was called “The COP of Action” because the goal was to turn into reality what had been theorized during the previous Conference of the Parties: the Global Biodiversity Framework. Protecting nature and biodiversity is essential for human health and for all economic sectors, which depend directly or indirectly on terrestrial and marine ecosystems. The Global Biodiversity Framework, approved during COP15 in Kunming-Montreal, committed 190 countries to this goal, setting the objective of protecting at least 30% of the Earth’s lands, oceans, coastal areas, and waters while halting and reversing biodiversity loss.

Regarding Etifor’s activities, we participated in COP16 in Cali by contributing our expertise in two specific areas and addressing seven targets:

Role of the Private Sector

• Target 15: Integrate legal, administrative, or policy measures within commercial and financial institutions.
• Target 19: Substantially and progressively increase financial resources.

Restoration, Conservation, and Sustainability

• Target 2: Restore degraded ecosystems.
• Target 3: Protect and conserve areas.
• Target 8: Minimize the impacts of climate change.
• Target 10: Ensure the sustainable management of agriculture, aquaculture, fisheries, and forests.
• Target 11: Restore, maintain, and enhance nature’s contributions to people, including ecosystem functions and services.

Conclusions

Despite the central role that the agricultural and forestry industries play in terms of impacts and potential solutions for biodiversity loss, their participation at COP16 needed to be improved. In contrast, the financial sector was well-represented, with a dedicated agenda supported by initiatives such as the IDFB and the Dutch Government Partnership for Biodiversity Accounting Financials (PBAF). The technology sector also presented scalable solutions for biodiversity monitoring and mapping.

Nature is complex and locally diverse; solutions must integrate local knowledge with a multifunctional use of resources, ensuring income flows compatible with a long-term vision and benefit-sharing mechanisms. This way, we can ensure sustainable management that respects local specificities and promotes natural biodiversity conservation.

Etifor events at COP16

Throughout the event, our delegates were engaged as speakers in various panels, events and workshops. If you are curious, you will find them listed below:

• Co-creating a Nature-Positive Economy: From Theory to Practice

During this session, Etifor explored the Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) targets that promote the integration of nature conservation into economic development (targets 14, 15, 18, and 19). The key message was that transitioning to a nature-positive economy is essential for achieving global biodiversity goals. The session analyzed the main challenges and incentives needed to make this change possible.

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

Organizers: Etifor | Valuing Nature, supported by the University of Oxford, ICLEI Colombia, and the Connecting Nature Business Platform, as part of the Horizon Europe project “GoNaturePositive!”

• Biodiversity and the Private Sector in Italy: Trends, Policies, and Financial Instruments

During this event, the results of the Etifor report exploring the relationship between biodiversity and the private sector in Italy were presented.

• The value of Ecosystem Services & Aligning Private Finance with Nature
• Unlocking Investment for GBF T19c: Blended Finance for Nature with a Landscape Approach
• Connecting Biodiversity and Finance through Ecosystem Services – Building the future of Environmental decision making
• Unlocking Investment for GBF T19c: Blended Finance for Nature with a Landscape Approach
• The value of Ecosystem Services & Aligning Private Finance with Nature
• Concept Note: From assessments to influencing decisions @ Business Sprint COP16