SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
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)
End of Destructive Subsidies Key Demand at COP15 Biodiversity Talks
"Governments must address subsidies to extractive and otherwise harmful industries and stop encouraging such business models through trade and investment," asserted Greenpeace.
Dec 12, 2022
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."
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
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 has always been 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, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
indiaeuropean uniongreenpeaceoceansfossil fuelsunited nationsjapanagricultureenvironmentbiodiversity
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."
From Your Site Articles
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."
From Your Site Articles
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.