The 16th Conference of the Parties (COP16) of the UN Convention on Biological Diversity was held in October 2024 in Cali, Colombia. Emily Nicholson, a member of the IUCN delegation, reports on the highlights, with a focus on ecosystems.

 

Key Highlights from COP16

One of the most significant milestones of COP16 was the historic decision to establish a subsidiary body on Article 8(j) and related provisions of the Convention concerning matters related to Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities (IPLCs). This achievement reflects decades of work by IPLC representative bodies and was celebrated widely. The strong presence of Indigenous peoples at COP16—generously sharing traditional knowledge, customs, and dress—and the warm welcome of local Indigenous communities were among the standout moments of the conference.

Photo by IISD/ENB | Mike Muzurakis

 

Another highlight was the establishment of the Cali Fund, designed to address the biodiversity finance gap and reward the stewards of biodiversity. The Cali Fund will function as a multilateral benefit-sharing mechanism derived from the use of Digital Sequencing Information (DSI). While details are expected to be finalized ahead of COP17, contributions will be voluntary, primarily from the private sector, and targeted at large multinational corporations. Funds will be distributed both to national governments and directly to Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities.

 

Unfinished Business: Resource Mobilization and Monitoring Frameworks

Despite extensive negotiations, decisions related to resource mobilization were not resolved. The conference was suspended 12 hours after its intended closure (at 8:30 a.m. on Saturday, November 2) due to a loss of quorum. Other unresolved decisions included mechanisms for planning, monitoring, reporting, and review, particularly the monitoring framework. Ultimately, although most of the text on the monitoring framework was agreed in contact groups and working groups, the decision was not taken. It is hoped that this will be approved when COP16 reconvenes in early 2025.

Two key aspects of the monitoring framework that were agreed by parties are important for the Red List of Ecosystems and ecosystem approaches to conservation.

1. A new headline indicator, 22.1 Land-use change and land tenure in the traditional territories of indigenous peoples and local communities, which was proposed after ongoing work by a working group on Traditional Knowledge Indicators. There are also many recommended disaggregations of other headline indicators that relate to traditional Indigenous territories.

2. The IUCN Global Ecosystem Typology was recommended for reporting and disaggregation of ecosystem-related indicators. After lengthy discussions, the final text invites parties to “make use of the Global Ecosystem Typology, or an equivalent methodology, and cross-reference their national ecosystem data with levels 2 and 3 of that typology.” The typology is similarly listed in the recommended disaggregations for several headline indicators, including A.1 (Red List of Ecosystems), A.2 (Extent of Natural Ecosystems), and 2.1 (Area Under Restoration). This will support consistent reporting on ecosystems across indicators and countries, allowing for more effective measurement of progress in conservation actions and outcomes for ecosystems.

 

The Role of IUCN and the Red List of Ecosystems at COP16

Photo by IISD/ENB | Mike Muzurakis

 

In addition to the official actions, there were hundreds of events at the COP. IUCN hosted a large and successful pavilion at COP16, with events continuously booked from the first day until the close, all of which were well attended. CEM’s Red List of Ecosystems thematic group hosted an event focused on ecosystems in the monitoring framework, including the Red List of Ecosystems as headline indicator A1 and the role of the IUCN Global Ecosystem Typology in consistent reporting and disaggregation of ecosystem-related indicators. The event included case studies from three countries: Colombia (presented by Angela Andrade, CEM and CI-Colombia), Mozambique (Hermenegildo Matimele, WCS), and South Africa (Carol Poole, SANBI).

Our team also participated in a range of events covering ecological integrity, the GEO Global Ecosystems Atlas, science for monitoring in the Science-Policy Forum, and the launch of the Mapping Biodiversity Priorities book by SANBI. This launch featured outstanding presentations from several African countries sharing their experiences in developing national ecosystem maps and Red List of Ecosystems assessments.

Written by: Emily Nicholson. 

Emily Nicholson is a Professor in Conservation Biology at The University of Melbourne. She co-leads the IUCN Red list of Ecosystems Thematic group in CEM, and was a member of the Ad Hoc Technical expert Group (AHTEG) on indicators, set-up by the Convention on Biological Diversity to provide guidance to parties on the GBF monitoring framework.