

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

A person walks by an illuminated sign at the United Nations Biodiversity Conference--also known as COP15--in Montreal, Canada on December 7, 2022. (Photo: Andrej Ivanov/AFP via Getty Images)
With just one week left at the United Nations Biodiversity Conference for countries to reach a deal to protect Earth's ecosystems, environmental campaigners on Monday implored negotiators gathered in Montreal to ensure that the elimination of harmful government subsidies is a core component of any agreement.
"Biodiversity offsets are not a substitute for real action to stop destruction of nature, just as carbon offsets are not a substitute for real emissions reductions."
Climate Home News reports the European Union announced its support for a proposal at the U.N. biodiversity summit--also known as COP15--to eliminate harmful subsidies by 2025 and redirect the funds toward activities that protect ecosystems.
"As a priority, existing resources need to be used more effectively, including by aligning all financial flows with nature-positive objectives," the European Commission said in a statement.
Experts have shown that governments spend at least $1.8 trillion annually--or about 2% of global gross domestic product--on subsidies to support ecosystem-destructive industries including fossil fuels, agriculture, and fishing.
Greenpeace amplified its pre-COP15 contention that "governments must address subsidies to extractive and otherwise harmful industries and stop encouraging such business models through trade and investment."
"Governments must also act to stop fossil fuel, forestry, and big agricultural companies from insidious attempts to co-opt nature protection through 'nature-based solutions' or offsets," the group said. "Biodiversity offsets are not a substitute for real action to stop destruction of nature, just as carbon offsets are not a substitute for real emissions reductions."
"Biodiversity offsets risk becoming as big a scam as carbon offsets," warned Greenpeace. "We don't have time for these false solutions."
Writing about ocean biodiversity in a Monday opinion piece in The Guardian, progressive British economist Guy Standing asserts that "countries should commit to scrapping the subsidies given to industrial fisheries, PS22bn of which contributes to overfishing and illegal fishing, devastating fish populations and marine food chains."
"They should also end subsidies to offshore oil and gas, which pose a direct pollution threat as well as fuelling the climate crisis," he added.
However, many countries including Japan--one of numerous nations that tried to remove references to agricultural and fishing subsidies in the Global Biodiversity Framework--and India oppose eliminating all subsidies.
"We are against the use of words like elimination, and are pushing for words like reducing, restoring, or repurposing of the subsidies," Vinod Mathur, who chairs India's National Biodiversity Authority and who is leading his country's COP15 negotiations, told CarbonCopy.
"The way the Western world interprets subsidies is different from how countries like India do," he added. "A subsidy can be pervasive or normal. Our farmers who are poor and disadvantaged need both social and economic support."
This country and this world are at a monumental crossroads. US voters have an opportunity to beat back the forces of fascism and confront the billionaires who are rigging the economy, our media system, and our democracy, making it increasingly impossible for ordinary people to get by. We’re not just talking about the election. We’re talking about what must be done once these fascist elements are vanquished from power. We need a bolder set of solutions than what either major party has so far been willing to offer and a working-class movement ready to fight like hell for it. Trump didn't emerge from nowhere. The conditions that fueled MAGA authoritarianism were created by decades of radical neoliberal economic policies and a corrupt political system dominated by corporate interests. They slashed taxes on the super-rich, promising that the benefits would trickle down. They said giveaways to the corporate titans would make life more affordable for the rest of us. It was all bullshit. And when a bitter, betrayed populace searches for someone to blame, right-wing demagogues have little trouble finding scapegoats. People know when they're being lied to, but you won't hear any of this from the corporate media. Only independent journalism—powered and funded by people who believe in building a better world—can deliver truly trustworthy daily news. If you share our vision, please contribute whatever you can to sustain our work. |
With just one week left at the United Nations Biodiversity Conference for countries to reach a deal to protect Earth's ecosystems, environmental campaigners on Monday implored negotiators gathered in Montreal to ensure that the elimination of harmful government subsidies is a core component of any agreement.
"Biodiversity offsets are not a substitute for real action to stop destruction of nature, just as carbon offsets are not a substitute for real emissions reductions."
Climate Home News reports the European Union announced its support for a proposal at the U.N. biodiversity summit--also known as COP15--to eliminate harmful subsidies by 2025 and redirect the funds toward activities that protect ecosystems.
"As a priority, existing resources need to be used more effectively, including by aligning all financial flows with nature-positive objectives," the European Commission said in a statement.
Experts have shown that governments spend at least $1.8 trillion annually--or about 2% of global gross domestic product--on subsidies to support ecosystem-destructive industries including fossil fuels, agriculture, and fishing.
Greenpeace amplified its pre-COP15 contention that "governments must address subsidies to extractive and otherwise harmful industries and stop encouraging such business models through trade and investment."
"Governments must also act to stop fossil fuel, forestry, and big agricultural companies from insidious attempts to co-opt nature protection through 'nature-based solutions' or offsets," the group said. "Biodiversity offsets are not a substitute for real action to stop destruction of nature, just as carbon offsets are not a substitute for real emissions reductions."
"Biodiversity offsets risk becoming as big a scam as carbon offsets," warned Greenpeace. "We don't have time for these false solutions."
Writing about ocean biodiversity in a Monday opinion piece in The Guardian, progressive British economist Guy Standing asserts that "countries should commit to scrapping the subsidies given to industrial fisheries, PS22bn of which contributes to overfishing and illegal fishing, devastating fish populations and marine food chains."
"They should also end subsidies to offshore oil and gas, which pose a direct pollution threat as well as fuelling the climate crisis," he added.
However, many countries including Japan--one of numerous nations that tried to remove references to agricultural and fishing subsidies in the Global Biodiversity Framework--and India oppose eliminating all subsidies.
"We are against the use of words like elimination, and are pushing for words like reducing, restoring, or repurposing of the subsidies," Vinod Mathur, who chairs India's National Biodiversity Authority and who is leading his country's COP15 negotiations, told CarbonCopy.
"The way the Western world interprets subsidies is different from how countries like India do," he added. "A subsidy can be pervasive or normal. Our farmers who are poor and disadvantaged need both social and economic support."
With just one week left at the United Nations Biodiversity Conference for countries to reach a deal to protect Earth's ecosystems, environmental campaigners on Monday implored negotiators gathered in Montreal to ensure that the elimination of harmful government subsidies is a core component of any agreement.
"Biodiversity offsets are not a substitute for real action to stop destruction of nature, just as carbon offsets are not a substitute for real emissions reductions."
Climate Home News reports the European Union announced its support for a proposal at the U.N. biodiversity summit--also known as COP15--to eliminate harmful subsidies by 2025 and redirect the funds toward activities that protect ecosystems.
"As a priority, existing resources need to be used more effectively, including by aligning all financial flows with nature-positive objectives," the European Commission said in a statement.
Experts have shown that governments spend at least $1.8 trillion annually--or about 2% of global gross domestic product--on subsidies to support ecosystem-destructive industries including fossil fuels, agriculture, and fishing.
Greenpeace amplified its pre-COP15 contention that "governments must address subsidies to extractive and otherwise harmful industries and stop encouraging such business models through trade and investment."
"Governments must also act to stop fossil fuel, forestry, and big agricultural companies from insidious attempts to co-opt nature protection through 'nature-based solutions' or offsets," the group said. "Biodiversity offsets are not a substitute for real action to stop destruction of nature, just as carbon offsets are not a substitute for real emissions reductions."
"Biodiversity offsets risk becoming as big a scam as carbon offsets," warned Greenpeace. "We don't have time for these false solutions."
Writing about ocean biodiversity in a Monday opinion piece in The Guardian, progressive British economist Guy Standing asserts that "countries should commit to scrapping the subsidies given to industrial fisheries, PS22bn of which contributes to overfishing and illegal fishing, devastating fish populations and marine food chains."
"They should also end subsidies to offshore oil and gas, which pose a direct pollution threat as well as fuelling the climate crisis," he added.
However, many countries including Japan--one of numerous nations that tried to remove references to agricultural and fishing subsidies in the Global Biodiversity Framework--and India oppose eliminating all subsidies.
"We are against the use of words like elimination, and are pushing for words like reducing, restoring, or repurposing of the subsidies," Vinod Mathur, who chairs India's National Biodiversity Authority and who is leading his country's COP15 negotiations, told CarbonCopy.
"The way the Western world interprets subsidies is different from how countries like India do," he added. "A subsidy can be pervasive or normal. Our farmers who are poor and disadvantaged need both social and economic support."