Rio Conventions requiring more coherence

Representatives from various international environment organisations got together with government officials and members of academic institutions in late March for a high-level event to discuss the three Rio Conventions – the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), the Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD). The meeting was designed to review progress made so far and take a look at future developments, and was held at the CIFOR-ICRAF European headquarters in Bonn/Germany, which also hosts event co-organiser Global Landscapes Forum (GLF).

In his opening remarks, Boris Erg, Director of the European Regional Office of the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), emphasised the need to join forces to protect nature and stressed the importance of Bonn as a “global hub for sustainability”. The city’s role in addressing the climate crisis and biodiversity loss, and particularly in supporting the three Rio Conventions, adopted at the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro/Brazil in 1992, was also emphasised by CIFOR-ICRAF Chief Executive Officer Elaine Ubalijoro, who noted that climate, biodiversity and land were inseparable, and that landscapes were essential to all three aspects.

Boris Erg (IUCN) opening the meeting. Photo: Louise Bazelaire/IUCN

In the panel session, Andrea Meza Murillio, Deputy Executive Secretary of the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD), noted that the current large number of political crises were making dialogue between NGOs, governments and other actors all the more important. “More efforts and more commitment are needed,” Murillo said. “Above all, the connections between the Rio conventions have to be understood to enable planning in a more integrated way.” She gave the example of a single plan presented to the three Conventions setting out from the perspective of land. “It is important to know where measures are to be taken,” Murillo emphasised. “Land brings cohesion. It has to be protected, also with regard to land-use changes leading to emissions. Furthermore, dialogue is needed when it comes to rangelands and pastoralists.” Murillo also emphasised the need for policies to achieve coherence and synergies with view to lasting system change.

Better alignment needed

Robert Spaull of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystems Services (IPDES) emphasised that given the large amount of evidence available, an evidence gap did not exist generally regarding the issues addressed by the Rio Conventions. Spaull also referred to strong ambition on the part of the parties involved to achieve the goals the conventions were working towards. “However, delivering on these goals is fragmented and often inefficient,” he noted, adding that “policies and efforts across sectors must be better aligned to avoid counterproductive overlaps and achieve global targets”. Backing Murillo’s statements, Spaull maintained that achieving true progress required changing both policies and the underlying practices, mindsets and approaches driving climate, biodiversity and land-use decisions.

Damon James of UNFCCC underlined the importance of the Paris Agreement as a multilateral, universal framework for progress. “It is important as a driver, and it has reshaped response,” James noted. “Nearly every country is now part of the effort and has made progress, also through the national climate plans.” He also referred to the increasingly important role of renewables in the energy sector. Nevertheless, plans had to be more interlinked. Referring to projections presented at the UNFCCC Conference in Belém/Brazil in 2025 that temperatures are set to rise by 2.5° C this century, James stressed the urgent need for countries to accelerate shifts to clean energy and to strengthen their national climate plans. He agreed with Spaull that implementation was lagging and emphasised the significance of transformation across sectors and of coordinating isolated, sectoral efforts.

Linking Indigenous and local knowledge with science

Other aspects taken up in the subsequent discussion included tension between various actors in transformation processes. Referring to relations between local communities and Indigenous Peoples, Murillio reported that efforts were being made to align the role of local communities as stewards of landscapes with Indigenous Peoples’ organisations. More discussion was required, e.g. regarding critical minerals, instead of addressing such issues in silo approaches. James emphasised the importance of just transition pathways. And Spaull stressed the importance of accessing the widest diversity of knowledge available. Here, it was vital to focus on linking Indigenous and local knowledge with science. Dialogue had to be established between Indigenous Peoples and science.

Further issues in the discussion included assessing which elements of an individual Rio Convention could be adopted by the respective other two Conventions. Conflicting issues were also referred to, such as the importance of growing more forests while bearing in mind the threat of invasive species. It was observed that forests indeed play a role in all three Rio Conventions.

Communicating the context of the Rio Conventions to the broader public was another key aspect at the meeting. Here, the role of media reporting was stressed in pushing for climate action and pressuring governments to make more efforts. It was important to demonstrate what civil society was doing, and that generally, people did care about climate and were taking action on climate issues.

Supporting governments in planning and taking action across different sectors was a further issue in the discussion. Here, the importance of providing knowledge and guidance was stressed, also with regard to the key role of science and research. Safeguarding funding to ensure that multiple goals were delivered simultaneously was another aspect addressed in the context of a transformative approach in tackling the issues concerning the Rio Conventions.   

Mike Gardner is a free-lance journalist based in Bonn, Germany and is German, Swiss and Austrian Correspondent for University World News.
Contact: mike.gardner(at)zaehlwerk.net   

Further reading:

Rural 21 no 4/2024: Land matters

Rural 21 no 1/2024: Indigenous people – why rights and resources matter

Rural 21 no 2/2021: Biodiversity