COP16 and COP29: Opportunities to address intersecting crises with a peace-responsive lens

This article was originally published by Ecosystem for Peace. Authors: Sudha Kottillil and Shruthi Kottillil, Global Youth Biodiversity Network; Natalia Chan, Saferworld

Note: This blog was published on 29 October 2024, the designated day at Peace with Nature at COP16, a first-of-its-kind day for the Convention on Biodiversity.

At COP16, time is running out for nature and biodiversity loss. The world must pay more attention, and addressing the relationship between climate, nature, peace and conflict is key.

The organisers of COP16 – taking place in Cali in Colombia from October, 21 to November, 1 – are keen to set a historic milestone in significantly ramping up global attention on biodiversity loss. The theme ‘Peace with Nature’ for COP16 is of significance given the history of armed conflict in Colombia and having a deep sense of understanding of how nature, peace and conflict are intertwined. We welcome the dedication of the ‘Peace with Nature’ theme and the clear message from Susana Muhamad, the COP16 President, that one of the main purposes for this COP is to make biodiversity and the global biodiversity framework as politically relevant as the climate agenda. While biodiversity loss and Convention on Biodiversity (CBD) COPs have historically not received as much attention as climate COPs, the time has come for the conversation to be mainstreamed and much more attention to be invested at a much faster rate. The political or media engagement associated with biodiversity COPs is much less compared to its counterpart, because of the tangible and immediate effects witnessed due to climate change. Biodiversity loss, often viewed as much slower and less visible, has far-reaching consequences, with biodiversity loss accelerating climate change.

A recent letter from a substantial number of climate scientists, ecologists, social scientists, law and governance scholars, environmental professionals and others requested that all key stakeholders involved in CBD COP16 and United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) COP29 highlight how deeply connected and interlinked the climate and nature crises are: ‘Changes in climate are negatively impacting biodiversity, while the loss of biodiversity is amplifying the breakdown of our climate, making us less able to adapt to it. Yet global strategies to half these crises…are formulated separately within two international conventions’. The United Nations (UN) has tentatively acknowledged this interlinkage by referring to these crises (climate change, biodiversity loss, pollution) as a ‘Triple Planetary crisis’, however much more needs to be done in translating this into concrete actions with joint policy frameworks, moving away from siloed actions. Integrated goals, joint action plans and interdisciplinary or cross-sector collaborations should be key to achieving the targets of both the frameworks. While the frameworks may be governed by different conventions, the impact felt by those most vulnerable is compounded, which jeopardises food security, health and access to resources.

As a community of practice of hundreds of organisations, institutions and individuals from across the globe, including the areas most exposed and vulnerable to the consequences of climate change and biodiversity loss, we represent regions where these existential threats are acutely understood, and the deeply connected nature of these crises play out every day. We realise every day how these intersecting crises must also be understood based on the real world settings in which we live and work – through a lens which integrates an understanding of conflict and fragility. There are many risks with global policy frameworks and approaches which do not take into account the fact that i) those in fragile and conflict-affected settings will be excluded from actions and interventions because their contexts are deemed too challenging even though they are also among the most vulnerable; ii) the potential effectiveness of interventions will be lessened by not designing them specifically for contexts in ways that achieve compounded environmental, social and peace impacts; or at worst iii) well-intended but conflict-blind action may exacerbate conflict and inequality. There are many real life examples of all of the above, which are accessible through our website.

By acknowledging and promoting the need to apply a conflict-sensitive and peace lens, high-level global policy decisions, institutional strategies and programme design and implementation can all achieve much greater impact and make considerable sustainable progress towards the 2030 climate and biodiversity goals. These 2030 goals are important, and humanity MUST achieve them to secure our well-being and existence – which seems to be increasingly under threat. We present specific recommendations and guidance for how this is possible through our policy messaging for COP29 and COP16. Here are some key topline messages across both:

• Recognise how climate change, nature, conflict and peace are interconnected and prioritise working in fragile and conflict-affected settings.
• Integrate conflict sensitivity into the planning, implementation and action mechanisms across the climate and biodiversity framework.
• Identify and promote inclusive financing approaches which are tailored to support the most vulnerable in areas affected by the Triple Planetary Crisis, conflict and insecurity.

We hope that COP16 and COP29 will strengthen longer-term change, building on the progress we have noted over recent years. As a global community, we must work together to accelerate momentum over the next year.
 
This blog was drafted as part of the Peace@CBD efforts at COP16. Learn more here: https://www.ecosystemforpeace.org/cop16.