COP15 Framework Draft Leaves Biodiversity Unprotected

Greenpeace

Montreal, Canada – Presenting a draft of the final agreement at the UN biodiversity talks at COP15, the Chinese presidency put forward a text that acknowledges the necessary rights, roles, territories and knowledge of Indigenous Peoples but leaves targets wide open for industry to continue biodiversity-destroying activities, even in protected areas.

An Lambrechts, Greenpeace International delegation leader for COP15, said:

"The draft agreement is weak. This is an open invitation to greenwash. In its present shape, it won't halt biodiversity loss, much less reverse it. Protection targets must exclude activities that destroy biodiversity, even if they're labeled as sustainable use. False solutions from climate talks seem to have been copied and pasted directly into the global biodiversity framework. Protections are moving sideways, not forwards.

"There can be no walking backward from this level of recognition for Indigenous Peoples rights, roles, and territories. Governments should accept that there's no turning back. Science is clear. The global community is clear. COP15 is making it clear: Indigenous Peoples are critical to global biodiversity protections. Indigenous Peoples' key role as decision-makers should only grow."

Li Shuo, Senior Policy Advisor, Greenpeace East Asia, said:

"The draft text highlights the interplay between ambition on protection targets and ambition on finance. This is a first attempt to navigate a hard split in the national interests we've seen at COP15. Providing USD $30 billion by 2030 is a start. Funding provides ground to land a deal but key questions remain on how this deal can be implemented. The biggest question is on the ratchet mechanism - how can countries enhance ambition and protections as the decade goes on? If you want a Paris moment for biodiversity, you need a ratchet mechanism."

/Public Release. This material from the originating organization/author(s) might be of the point-in-time nature, and edited for clarity, style and length. Mirage.News does not take institutional positions or sides, and all views, positions, and conclusions expressed herein are solely those of the author(s).View in full here.