Biodiversity Conference Ends With 'False Solutions,' says Friends of the Earth
Crunch time to make decisions but developed countries wrangle over financial commitments
As the United Nations biodiversity conference winds down to its final hours in Hyderabad, India on Friday, an environmental group warns of "false solutions" that favor corporate polluters, while lack of financial commitments by developed countries may put biodiversity goals at risk.
Agence France-Presse reports that the meeting, formally known as the 11th Conference of the Parties to the UN Convention on Biological Diversity (COP 11) "is meant to come up with tangible ways to execute what have become known as the Aichi Biodiversity Targets," biodiversity targets set at the previous convention meeting, COP 10, in Nagoya, Japan.
But the conference is ending with wrangling by developed countries over the funding needed to meet those targets, Inter Press Service reports:
Resource mobilization has been the most contentious area of negotiations at Hyderabad. Developing countries, home to rich biological diversity, are now doubtful that the promise of increasing financial resource flows from developed to developing countries by 2015 will materialize.
Developed countries are firm that a baseline is necessary to determine the sum that is already being spent and that needs to be increased. But developing countries are pushing for commitments on interim figures.
Experts say funding from diverse international and national sources, and across different policy areas, is required to secure the full range of economic and social benefits to be gained from meeting the Aichi targets.
Public funding and private sector investment (still under debate), innovative measures, incentives such as payments for ecosystem services, conservation agreements including with local communities, water fees, forest carbon offsets, and green fiscal policies are among possible sources.
At the same time, environmental group Friends of the Earth International warns against any "false solutions to biodiversity loss" led by corporate influences at the conference that treat nature as a commodity.
Financialization "is a way for corporate polluters to continue destroying biodiversity and threatening indigenous peoples and local communities. If UN talks start favoring the financialization of nature, community and Indigenous peoples' rights will be violated, leading to mass land grabs," stated Isaac Rojas, Friends of the Earth International Coordinator of the Forests and Biodiversity Program.
"The corporate influence on UN talks is extremely worrying. Multinational corporations lobby in favor of approaches which have negative impacts on communities and Indigenous Peoples and do not protect forests and biodiversity. These are false solutions. Instead, we need ways to properly protect traditional knowledge and ownership. For instance we need more community-based forest governance, which is an effective way for local people to help protect their forests as well as the climate," stated Rojas.
Urgent. It's never been this bad.
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission from the outset was simple. To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It’s never been this bad out there. And it’s never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed and doing some of its best and most important work, the threats we face are intensifying. Right now, with just three days to go in our Spring Campaign, we're falling short of our make-or-break goal. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Can you make a gift right now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? There is no backup plan or rainy day fund. There is only you. —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
As the United Nations biodiversity conference winds down to its final hours in Hyderabad, India on Friday, an environmental group warns of "false solutions" that favor corporate polluters, while lack of financial commitments by developed countries may put biodiversity goals at risk.
Agence France-Presse reports that the meeting, formally known as the 11th Conference of the Parties to the UN Convention on Biological Diversity (COP 11) "is meant to come up with tangible ways to execute what have become known as the Aichi Biodiversity Targets," biodiversity targets set at the previous convention meeting, COP 10, in Nagoya, Japan.
But the conference is ending with wrangling by developed countries over the funding needed to meet those targets, Inter Press Service reports:
Resource mobilization has been the most contentious area of negotiations at Hyderabad. Developing countries, home to rich biological diversity, are now doubtful that the promise of increasing financial resource flows from developed to developing countries by 2015 will materialize.
Developed countries are firm that a baseline is necessary to determine the sum that is already being spent and that needs to be increased. But developing countries are pushing for commitments on interim figures.
Experts say funding from diverse international and national sources, and across different policy areas, is required to secure the full range of economic and social benefits to be gained from meeting the Aichi targets.
Public funding and private sector investment (still under debate), innovative measures, incentives such as payments for ecosystem services, conservation agreements including with local communities, water fees, forest carbon offsets, and green fiscal policies are among possible sources.
At the same time, environmental group Friends of the Earth International warns against any "false solutions to biodiversity loss" led by corporate influences at the conference that treat nature as a commodity.
Financialization "is a way for corporate polluters to continue destroying biodiversity and threatening indigenous peoples and local communities. If UN talks start favoring the financialization of nature, community and Indigenous peoples' rights will be violated, leading to mass land grabs," stated Isaac Rojas, Friends of the Earth International Coordinator of the Forests and Biodiversity Program.
"The corporate influence on UN talks is extremely worrying. Multinational corporations lobby in favor of approaches which have negative impacts on communities and Indigenous Peoples and do not protect forests and biodiversity. These are false solutions. Instead, we need ways to properly protect traditional knowledge and ownership. For instance we need more community-based forest governance, which is an effective way for local people to help protect their forests as well as the climate," stated Rojas.
As the United Nations biodiversity conference winds down to its final hours in Hyderabad, India on Friday, an environmental group warns of "false solutions" that favor corporate polluters, while lack of financial commitments by developed countries may put biodiversity goals at risk.
Agence France-Presse reports that the meeting, formally known as the 11th Conference of the Parties to the UN Convention on Biological Diversity (COP 11) "is meant to come up with tangible ways to execute what have become known as the Aichi Biodiversity Targets," biodiversity targets set at the previous convention meeting, COP 10, in Nagoya, Japan.
But the conference is ending with wrangling by developed countries over the funding needed to meet those targets, Inter Press Service reports:
Resource mobilization has been the most contentious area of negotiations at Hyderabad. Developing countries, home to rich biological diversity, are now doubtful that the promise of increasing financial resource flows from developed to developing countries by 2015 will materialize.
Developed countries are firm that a baseline is necessary to determine the sum that is already being spent and that needs to be increased. But developing countries are pushing for commitments on interim figures.
Experts say funding from diverse international and national sources, and across different policy areas, is required to secure the full range of economic and social benefits to be gained from meeting the Aichi targets.
Public funding and private sector investment (still under debate), innovative measures, incentives such as payments for ecosystem services, conservation agreements including with local communities, water fees, forest carbon offsets, and green fiscal policies are among possible sources.
At the same time, environmental group Friends of the Earth International warns against any "false solutions to biodiversity loss" led by corporate influences at the conference that treat nature as a commodity.
Financialization "is a way for corporate polluters to continue destroying biodiversity and threatening indigenous peoples and local communities. If UN talks start favoring the financialization of nature, community and Indigenous peoples' rights will be violated, leading to mass land grabs," stated Isaac Rojas, Friends of the Earth International Coordinator of the Forests and Biodiversity Program.
"The corporate influence on UN talks is extremely worrying. Multinational corporations lobby in favor of approaches which have negative impacts on communities and Indigenous Peoples and do not protect forests and biodiversity. These are false solutions. Instead, we need ways to properly protect traditional knowledge and ownership. For instance we need more community-based forest governance, which is an effective way for local people to help protect their forests as well as the climate," stated Rojas.