COP15 & COP16: Are We Finally Taking Biodiversity Action Seriously?

Why COP15 and COP16 Matter: The Urgency of Biodiversity Action

Nature is in freefall. Scientists warn that one million species could vanish within the next few decades. Forests are disappearing, oceans are suffocating, and entire ecosystems are collapsing. The Amazon, once called the lungs of the Earth, is losing one football field’s worth of trees every second. Coral reefs, which support a quarter of all marine life, could be wiped out by 2050.

This isn’t just about wildlife. Biodiversity is life support for humanity. It secures the food we eat, the air we breathe, and the water we drink. Destroy nature, and we destroy ourselves.

COP15: A Turning Point for Global Biodiversity Governance

December 2022, Montreal. After years of negotiations and delays, COP15 delivered what many called “the Paris Agreement for nature.” With ecosystems collapsing and species disappearing faster than ever, the stakes were clear: humanity needed a global rescue plan for biodiversity.

COP15 wasn’t just another UN summit. It was a moment of reckoning. Governments, businesses, and indigenous leaders all came to the table with one goal: to stop the destruction of nature before it’s too late.

The Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF)

The biggest outcome of COP15 was the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF)—a historic agreement aimed at reversing biodiversity loss by 2030. This framework introduced 23 ambitious targets, including:

• 30×30 Goal– Protect 30% of the world’s land and oceans by 2030.
• Restoration of degraded ecosystems– Restore at least 30% of damaged ecosystems to a functional state.
• Cutting harmful subsidies– Eliminate or reform $500 billion per year in government subsidies that encourage environmental destruction.
• Funding biodiversity efforts– Mobilize $200 billion annually for conservation efforts.

A Global Commitment, But Not Without Challenges

While COP15 marked a major step forward, it wasn’t perfect. The agreement lacks legally binding enforcement, meaning countries must hold themselves accountable. There were also intense debates over financing—who should pay for biodiversity protection, and how much?

Despite these challenges, COP15 set the stage for real action. It created the roadmap. Now, the world had to follow through—and that’s exactly what COP16 was supposed to ensure.

COP16: Building on COP15’s Promises

COP15 set the vision. COP16, held in Cali, Colombia (October 2024), was about turning commitments into reality. The world had two years to show progress on the 23 targets of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF)—but were we any closer to reversing biodiversity loss?

Governments arrived at COP16 with reports, funding strategies, and national biodiversity plans. Businesses faced increasing pressure to align with sustainability goals. Indigenous communities demanded stronger protections for their lands. This wasn’t just about talking anymore—it was about action.

The “Cali Fund” and the Push for Financial Accountability

One of the biggest developments at COP16 was the launch of the Cali Fund, a global mechanism for benefit-sharing from Digital Sequence Information (DSI) on genetic resources. This ensures that industries using genetic data—like pharmaceuticals and biotech—pay a portion of their profits toward biodiversity conservation.

At the same time, countries debated how to mobilize the $200 billion per year promised at COP15. Some of the key financial discussions included:

• Who pays? Developing nations pushed for wealthier countries to contribute more funding.
• How is the money spent? Transparency in fund allocation became a major concern.
• Private sector involvement– How much should corporations be responsible for biodiversity financing?

The Role of Indigenous Communities Grows Stronger

A landmark decision at COP16 was the establishment of a permanent subsidiary body to ensure indigenous and local communities have a direct voice in biodiversity governance. Given that 80% of the world’s remaining biodiversity is found on indigenous-managed lands, this was a crucial step toward protecting the people who protect nature.

Did COP16 Deliver?

COP16 made progress, but challenges remained:

• More countries submitted National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs) to align with the GBF.
• New commitments were made to protect ecosystems and increase funding.
• The $200 billion target was still underfunded, with key financial gaps remaining.
• Some countries lagged behind in implementing biodiversity policies.

With just six years left until 2030, the world needed to accelerate its efforts. Would COP16’s momentum be enough, or would biodiversity targets remain out of reach?

Policy & Business Impacts: What COP15 and COP16 Mean for Governments and Corporations

For decades, protecting biodiversity was seen as a responsibility of governments and environmental organizations. Today, it’s a boardroom priority. With global supply chains, financial markets, and regulatory bodies increasingly factoring in biodiversity risks, businesses can no longer afford to ignore their impact on nature.

COP15 set the foundation with ambitious global biodiversity targets. COP16 took it further, pushing for corporate accountability, policy integration, and financial commitments. The message is clear: If governments and companies fail to align with biodiversity goals, they risk regulatory penalties, financial losses, and reputational damage.

How Governments Are Adapting: The Rise of National Biodiversity Strategies

At COP16, nations reported on their progress in National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs)—the policies aligning countries with the 23 targets of the Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF).

Governments are now:

• Reforming harmful subsidies – Phasing out the $500 billion per year that incentivizes deforestation and unsustainable practices.
• Enforcing corporate biodiversity disclosures – Many countries are integrating biodiversity risk reporting into financial regulations.
• Expanding protected areas – Committing to the 30×30 target (protecting 30% of land and oceans by 2030).

But enforcement is still weak. While COP16 saw more policy commitments, few nations have translated them into binding laws with strict accountability measures.

The Business Wake-Up Call: What Companies Must Do Now

Regulations aren’t the only driver. Investors and consumers are demanding greater corporate responsibility on biodiversity. COP16 signaled that businesses must:

1. Measure & Disclose Their Biodiversity Impact

• New frameworks like the Taskforce on Nature-related Financial Disclosures (TNFD)and the EU’s Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) are making biodiversity reporting a mandatory business requirement.
• Companies in high-impact sectors (agriculture, mining, fashion, and finance) must track and disclose their dependencies on nature.

2. Shift Business Models to Regenerative Practices

• Deforestation-free supply chains– Businesses are being pressured to ensure no biodiversity destruction occurs in their production processes.
• Nature-positive investments– Firms are moving from damage control to actively restoring ecosystems, aligning with biodiversity net gain

3. Pay Their Share for Conservation

• COP16 introduced the “Cali Fund”, requiring biotech, pharma, and agriculture companiesto pay into biodiversity conservation if they use digital sequence information (DSI).
• The expectation is that corporate biodiversity financingwill expand beyond voluntary commitments into legally binding financial contributions.

Regulation vs. Voluntary Action: The Big Debate at COP16

While some businesses are leading biodiversity efforts, others are resisting regulations and pushing for voluntary commitments instead. COP16 saw heated discussions on:

• Should biodiversity disclosure be mandatory? Many businesses fear financial penalties if they are forced to report their full environmental impact.
• Who funds biodiversity efforts? Corporations argue that the burden should be shared between governments, consumers, and industries.
• How strict should enforcement be? Some countries advocate for financial consequences for businesses failing to meet biodiversity targets, while others prefer incentives over penalties.

COP15 vs. COP16: Key Differences & Advancements

From Promises to Execution

COP15 was about setting the stage. It gave the world the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF)—a historic agreement with 23 global targets to halt biodiversity loss by 2030. But like any big international deal, the real challenge was implementation.

COP16, held in Cali, Colombia (2024), was about answering the tough questions:

• Are countries actually making progress on their biodiversity commitments?
• Is the promised $200 billion per year materializing, or is biodiversity still underfunded?
• Are businesses stepping up, or is corporate responsibility still optional?

The contrast between COP15 and COP16 wasn’t just about timelines—it was about moving from policy to accountability.

 

How Did COP16 Build on COP15?

Aspect	COP15 (2022)	COP16 (2024)
Primary Focus	Setting global biodiversity targets (GBF)	Ensuring progress and funding commitments
Major Outcome	23 targets, including the 30×30 goal	“Cali Fund” to finance biodiversity conservation
Financial Pledges	$200B per year target set	Funding mechanisms debated but gaps remain
Indigenous Role	Recognized in GBF	New advisory body for direct participation
Corporate Responsibility	Encouraged but voluntary	More discussions on mandatory disclosures
Policy Progress	Countries promised National Biodiversity Strategies (NBSAPs)	More nations submitted and updated their plans

 

COP16’s Biggest Wins Over COP15

• The “Cali Fund” was created – A mechanism forcing industries using genetic resources (DSI) to pay into biodiversity conservation. This ensures companies profiting from nature also invest in protecting it.
• Indigenous governance was strengthened – A permanent subsidiary body was created to give Indigenous communities a formal role in biodiversity policymaking.
• More National Biodiversity Strategies were submitted – Countries are slowly aligning national policies with the GBF’s 2030 goals.
• Stronger discussions on corporate accountability – Governments debated whether biodiversity risk disclosure should be mandatory for businesses, similar to carbon reporting.

Where COP16 Fell Short

• Funding remains a problem – Despite the $200B target, real financial contributions lag behind expectations. Developing countries continue to demand more support from wealthier nations.
• Implementation is slow – While policy plans have been submitted, most countries are still behind in actual conservation efforts.
• Corporate action is still voluntary – Unlike climate finance, where net-zero targets are now mainstream, biodiversity reporting and investment are still optional for many industries.

Roadblocks & Criticisms: Are We Doing Enough?

COP15 and COP16 set ambitious goals, but two years after the landmark Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF), many wonder if we are actually moving fast enough. While governments and businesses have made bold promises, conservationists warn that biodiversity loss continues unabated.

The Key Challenges Holding Back Real Progress

Despite some wins at COP16, major roadblocks remain:

• The $200 Billion Funding Gap – Money promised is not money delivered. While governments and businesses pledged billions, very little has been mobilized for real conservation projects.
• Weak Enforcement & Accountability – COP16 saw progress in corporate biodiversity reporting, but most commitments remain voluntary, leaving companies and countries free to delay action.
• Conflicting Priorities – Economic interests often override biodiversity commitments. Countries continue to approve new fossil fuel projects, deforestation permits, and unsustainable agriculture subsidies, despite pledging to reverse biodiversity loss.
• Lack of Policy Integration – Biodiversity is still treated separately from climate policy, even though they are interconnected. Many national governments have not aligned biodiversity goals with climate action plans.

The Funding Debate: Who Pays for Nature?

Developing nations argue that wealthier countries should bear more of the financial burden, considering their historical role in biodiversity destruction. At COP16, this debate intensified, with major disagreements over:

• Who contributes to the $200B target? Wealthier nations hesitate to commit additional funds.
• How funds are distributed? Developing countries fear they won’t receive enough direct financial support.
• Private vs. Public Funding? Should large corporations be legally required to pay into biodiversity conservation?

Without clearer financial structures, the risk is that biodiversity conservation remains underfunded, slowing global progress.

Are We Still in an Era of “Nature-Washing”?

Similar to greenwashing in climate action, some companies and governments use biodiversity pledges as PR stunts rather than committing to real change. Critics warn that:

• Some businesses announce biodiversity goals without real action—similar to net-zero carbon pledges that lack substance.
• Governments create protected areas but still allow destructive industries to operate nearby.
• The private sector influences policy while avoiding financial responsibility.

At COP16, there were calls for tighter regulations, stronger transparency, and financial accountability—but implementation remains slow.

The Road Ahead: From Agreements to Action

The world is now six years away from the 2030 deadline set by the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF). The commitments made at COP15 laid the foundation, and COP16 built on them, but progress remains too slow.

The next question is clear: How do we ensure real action before it’s too late?

The Three Urgent Priorities for 2025 and Beyond

To turn biodiversity commitments into reality, the world must focus on three non-negotiable priorities before COP17:

1. Strengthen Accountability Mechanisms

• Governments need to make biodiversity goals legally binding, with clear enforcement measures.
• Countries failing to meet their National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs)must face financial or trade penalties.
• Corporate biodiversity disclosures should become mandatory, similar to carbon reporting under the Taskforce on Nature-related Financial Disclosures (TNFD).

2. Scale Up Financial Commitments (Beyond Promises)

• The $200B annual biodiversity funding goal remains underfunded.
• Wealthier nations must meet their financial obligations—without delays or bureaucratic loopholes.
• Companies benefiting from biodiversity—like agribusiness, biotech, and mining—must contribute directly to conservation, moving beyond voluntary pledges.

3. Align Biodiversity and Climate Action

• Many governments still treat biodiversity and climate as separate crises, but they are deeply interconnected.
• Nature-based solutions—like restoring forests, wetlands, and coral reefs—should be prioritized in national climate plans.
• The 30×30 goal(protecting 30% of the planet’s land and oceans by 2030) must become a central strategy for global climate resilience.

What to Expect at COP17 and Beyond

With COP17 set for 2026, the world is entering a make-or-break phase for biodiversity action. The focus will likely be on:

• Tracking which countries are actually implementing the GBF targets.
• Reviewing whether the “Cali Fund” and other financial mechanisms are delivering results.
• Stronger corporate accountability, moving beyond voluntary action.
• Bridging biodiversity and climate policies into a single, coordinated strategy.

If the world fails to act now, the 2030 targets will slip out of reach—and biodiversity loss will continue at irreversible levels.

 

The Bottom Line: It’s Time for Real Action

The science is clear: we cannot survive without biodiversity. COP15 and COP16 showed that the world recognizes the crisis—but awareness is not enough.

What matters now is implementation. Funding. Policy enforcement. Business accountability.

The question is no longer what needs to be done—we already have the roadmap. The question is: Will we do it in time?

COP17 will decide whether the world follows through on its promises—or continues sleepwalking into ecological collapse.