Back from the “brink”: COP15 ended after nearly two weeks of fraught discussions, which saw a walkout by developing countries. A new Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) for 2030 was adopted but, HSBC views, its ambition level was somewhat muted. There was less certainty in its wording and many decisions were left for future discussions. There were objections to its adoption from DRC, Cameroon, and Uganda but these were overruled by the president of COP15, China. The delayed completion of COP15 (by two years) means there are only seven years left to implement this GBF with the next talks (COP16) slated for 2024.
Everyone happy? On paper at least, the new GBF covers all the bases and touches on the objectives of the convention (conservation, sustainable use, access, and benefits sharing), as well as the five main drivers of biodiversity loss (changes in land and sea use, exploitation of organisms, climate change, pollution, and invasive alien species). However, given the very broad remit of biodiversity, many felt that key issues were not adequately addressed by the GBF. There was a strong focus on inclusivity and traditional knowledge, such that indigenous peoples and local communities (IPLC) were acknowledged in many parts of the new GBF and other decisions. A new mechanism for benefit sharing was set up but with details to be agreed at COP16.
Describing nature positive: The GBF now has 23 targets but only a handful have numerical targets, such as the headline 30×30 target. In our view, vague language without certainty leaves the implementation of the GBF open to interpretation. Some were disappointed that there was no mention of the phrase “nature positive” (akin to “net zero” for climate), but we believe the definitions are insufficient for this phrase to be made official. Companies were asked to improve biodiversity disclosures.
Money for nature: Some Parties used finance to trade for ambition (hence the walk-out) and there were many calls for the establishment of a global instrument on biodiversity finance (for biodiversity in general), but COP15 only agreed to explore the issue. Instead, a GBF Fund (to assist the implementation of the GBF) was set up. There were efforts to close the biodiversity finance gap to the tune of USD700bn.
A biodiversity awakening: We think COP15 did a lot to raise awareness of biodiversity – with follow-up actions required for governments, businesses, and investors alike. However, we do not think the new GBF reached the ambition levels it could have. The banking group opines that COP15 was a Montreal moment, not a Paris moment.
Wai-Shin Chan, CFA
Head Climate Change Centre, Head ESG Research HSBC
