The private sector matures to act on nature

I spent the last two weeks of October attending the UN Biodiversity Conference COP16 in Cali, Colombia – the world’s most important negotiations and discussions on the future of nature and biodiversity and the implementation of the Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF).

It was a pleasure to represent UN Global Compact Network Denmark in the discussions, and even though the outcomes of the conference were generally rather disappointing, some important private sector developments leave me hopeful for the future.

Here are my main takeaways from COP16.

Which agreements were reached?

Saturday morning, after delayed negotiations, the parties finally wrapped up COP16 with a few important sets of agreements, and some disappointing lack of progress.

First, the disappointing news:

85% of countries missed their deadline to submit national action plans on biodiversity before COP16.
No agreement was reached on the funding mechanism for the implementation of the GBF. I.e. rich countries still struggle to meet their promise to provide $20 billion a year up to 2030.
No agreement was reached on monitoring progress on national targets
No progress was made on Target 18 on reforming environmentally harmful subsidies.

As we are moving closer to 2030, we must do much better quickly to protect nature and reverse nature loss.

Secondly, on a positive note:

A subsidiary body was put in place to incorporate indigenous peoples in the official decision-making revolving around the GBF. As stewards of nature, indigenous peoples’ voices must be heard and recognized – now they will.
A deal was struck on sharing benefits from Digital Sequence Information (DSI). Hence, companies which rely on genetic data (such as pharma and cosmetics) will be encouraged to pay 1% of profits or 0,1% of revenue to a newly created biodiversity fund (the Cali Fund). This mechanism could become an important funding stream to nature protection going forward.

Nations will meet at an interim meeting in Bangkok next year to continue discussions on financing and other matters.

The private sector matures to act on nature

While COP16 yielded mixed results and lack of plans to implement the GBF, many of the private sector conversations and announcements were hopeful and constructive:

The TNFD reached a milestone with 500 corporate adopters of the framework. This is impressive as the first version of the framework was launched just a year ago. TNFD helps companies and financial institutions to assess, report and act on their nature-related dependencies, impacts, risks and opportunities.
The TNFD also published a draft guidance on nature transition planning which will help companies adopt an integrated approach when dealing with climate and nature.
The Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero (GFANZ) launched a consultation paper on voluntary, supplemental guidance for how financial institutions can integrate nature considerations in support of net-zero transition planning.
The Science Based Targets for Nature announced the first three companies which have set targets through the framework. The companies are Kering, GSK, and Holcim.

These announcements bear witness to a positive development on nature and biodiversity within the private sector globally. More companies and financial institutions are beginning to recognize the business potential in reducing nature-related risks and the dire consequences of failing to reduce negative impacts on nature. And while it is still early days for most companies (take into account, for example, the first benchmark assessment from Nature 100), progress is evident and more in-depth discussions on metrics and technology are taking place.

Apart from these positive developments, there are three interesting notions from COP16 worth sharing.

No need to wait for perfect data: In a lot of side events talks revolved around data: Data availability, granularity and reliability. But surprisingly some of the discussions also highlighted how companies and financial institutions should not wait for perfect data sets before acting on nature. What is available from frameworks such as IBAT, ENCORE and WWF’s Risk Filter Suite should be more than enough to start locating and assessing risks and building a nature strategy.
Difficult to compare action on nature: It is generally easier to compare companies’ emissions reductions profiles than it is to compare action on nature, as nature and biodiversity issues are location-based. For this reason, it is ever more important for companies to start using common frameworks such as SBT for Nature and TNFD (i.e. using the same language) to make it easier for investors and other stakeholders to assess their work.
Companies must lobby for more ambitious nature policies: There are a lot of the policy dependencies in the nature strategies and transition plans which some of the most ambitious companies have created. Many participants discussed and recognized that these frontrunner companies must lobby governments for more ambitious nature policies. That includes national measures to implement the GBF.

Take action on nature

How does your company start taking action on nature? There are several ways to get started within UN Global Compact Network Denmark:

Request an invitation to our Nature & Biodiversity Workshop on November 19. Large companies will be prioritized.
Check out our two Academy courses on biodiversity:

Join our Nordic TNFD Consultation Group and get the latest news from the TNFD along with case examples from Nordic companies.
Working on nature and biodiversity issues requires robust strategic measures on human rights. Apply to become part of the next round of Business & Human Rights Accelerator.

Information om dataopbevaring