by Jake Spring

CALI, Colombia (Reuters) – Wealthy countries appeared to have reached a limit on how much they were willing to pay to protect nature around the world; Instead, at the two-week UN biodiversity summit, they turned their focus to discussions of private money bridging the funding gap.

At the COP16 negotiations in Cali, Colombia, countries could not figure out how to mobilize $200 billion annually in hedge funds by 2030; Of this, $30 billion would come directly from rich countries.

Promised as part of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework agreement two years ago, the money aims to fund activities that support nature, such as sustainable agriculture or patrolling wildlife reserves.

But no consensus was reached as talks extended beyond the planned summit on Friday, when dozens of delegations left. Organizers had to abruptly suspend the meeting after polling on Saturday morning failed to provide a sufficient majority among nearly 200 countries to pass the agreement.

“I am both saddened and angry that COP16 has not been concluded,” said Shilps Gautam, managing director of project finance firm Opna.

“The crazy thing about the nature financing debate is that the numbers being discussed are so small anyway.”

Human activities such as farming, mining and urban development are increasingly pushing nature into crisis; Approximately 1 million plant and animal species are thought to be at risk of extinction.

Climate change, a result of the burning of fossil fuels, adds to nature’s woes by raising temperatures and disrupting weather cycles.

Countries will meet again in Azerbaijan next week for the UN’s COP29 climate summit, which will again focus on the urgent need for financing from rich countries to poor countries to help meet climate costs.

LESS MONEY THAN RICH COUNTRIES

Even before the talks collapsed, developed countries had signaled their reluctance to offer large amounts of cash.

European governments, including Germany and the Netherlands, cut their foreign aid budgets last year, while France and the UK also made cuts.

The government’s development fund, which specifically targets nature conservation abroad, has fallen from $4.6 billion in 2015 to $3.8 billion in 2022, according to the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development.

At COP16, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres demanded that countries make significant new contributions to the Global Biodiversity Framework Fund.

The response was muted. At COP16, countries pledged to contribute $163 million to the fund, bringing total contributions to roughly $400 million; This is far from a major contribution to the nation’s $30 billion target by 2030.

The United States, which is not a party to the UN Convention on Biological Diversity, did not contribute.

“Public money is being used as much as possible,” Florika Fink-Hooijer, the European Union’s director general for the environment, told reporters at the summit.

“We now have to look at other sources of funding.”

PRIVATE CASH

When it comes to pursuing private capital, delegates at the COP16 summit agreed on a plan to charge pharmaceutical and other companies for using genetic information in the research and development of new commercial products.

Pharmaceutical companies Pfizer, Merck, AstraZeneca and Sanofi did not respond to a request for comment on the deal.

Experts estimate the plan could generate nearly $1 billion in revenue annually.

That still doesn’t cover the billions needed to stop the collapse of ecosystems like the Amazon rainforest or coral reefs. UN Development Program global policy director Marcos Neto said the world must find ways to encourage private investment in nature-friendly projects.

Some tools include green bonds or debt-nature swaps, where countries refinance their debt at lower interest rates to spend on preserving savings. The World Economic Forum estimates that debt-nature swaps could create $100 billion in nature funds.

(Reporting by Jake Spring; Additional reporting by Simon Jessop and Oliver Griffin; Editing by Katy Daigle and Diane Craft)