The central pledge of a planned new global nature pact — to protect 30 percent of the planet’s land and seas — is in doubt, with some biodiversity-rich nations refusing to commit because of jitters over funding and implementation, officials have said.
A coalition of about 70 countries — including wealthy G7 governments — have promised to conserve at least 30 percent of their land and oceans by 2030, a pledge known as 30x30, to help curb climate change and the loss of plant and animal species.
The 30x30 goal is part of a draft global treaty to safeguard plants, animals and ecosystems, due to be finalized in May next year at the COP15 nature summit in the Kunming, the UN Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) said.
“Many countries are supporting it, but also many countries are not supporting it. It is still very much for debate,” CBD executive secretary Elizabeth Maruma Mrema said, adding that effective management of a 30x30 goal would be key.
Improving protection of natural areas, such as parks, oceans, forests and wildernesses, is seen as vital to maintaining the ecosystems on which humans depend, and to limiting global warming to internationally agreed targets.
Dozens of nations pledged to do more to conserve nature and make farming greener at the COP26 UN climate talks this month.
Brian O’Donnell, director of the US-based Campaign for Nature, which is urging leaders to back the 30x30 pledge, said it was “perhaps the most supported target in the negotiations.”
There is broad scientific consensus that protecting or conserving at least 30 percent of land and oceans is the minimum needed to curb biodiversity loss and to reach climate goals, he added.
However, the inclusion of the pledge in the final COP15 accord is far from certain, with improvements needed, some green groups have said.
“Like it or not, 30x30 will be one of the defining issues for COP15,” Greenpeace China policy adviser Li Shuo said.
“The Kunming biodiversity summit will not be a success only with this target, but it will certainly not be seen as a triumph if without [it],” he added.
WAIT AND SEE
Southeast Asia covers just 3 percent of the Earth’s surface, but is home to three of the world’s 17 “mega-diverse” countries — Indonesia, Malaysia and the Philippines.
It is also the only region where a significant number of countries have yet to back the 30x30 goal, with only Cambodia signing up so far, O’Donnell said.
South Africa, meanwhile, has called for a much lower target of 20 percent, he added, while others such as Argentina have questioned the science behind the flagship pledge.
On a more positive note, India is the latest country to commit to 30x30.
At the first part of the COP15 talks, held online last month, host nation China announced a new national parks project that would bring 230,000km2 of land under stronger state protection.
While China has yet to endorse the 30x30 pledge, the signs are that it might be getting ready to do so at the Kunming summit, Nature Conservancy director of biodiversity Linda Krueger said.
Opposition to the 30x30 goal is largely linked to the challenges of putting it into practice, such as financing for developing nations, high population density, low levels of biodiversity and lack of domestic laws, environmentalists said.
However, Krueger said she had only heard Brazil clearly speak out against it.
“Many countries seem to be on the fence, and the support of others is conditioned on adequate financing being made available,” she added.
Some political leaders have yet to grasp the economic benefits of conservation, with many still relying on exploitation of natural resources to lift people out of poverty, green groups said.
Others are home to a large proportion of the planet’s biodiversity and want a protection target higher than 30 percent.
Despite these hurdles, there is significant momentum to land the 30x30 goal in the deal, said Susan Lieberman, vice president of international policy at the Wildlife Conservation Society.
Some countries are still studying how it would play out in their own contexts, she added.
“Many governments do not realize this is a global target and each country will contribute to achievement of the targets in different ways,” Lieberman said.
“Governments need to look not only at area-based conservation within their own territories, but at what their ‘footprint’ is globally,” she said, pointing to procurement of commodities such as timber and fish.
There are also concerns that the 30x30 target threatens the rights of indigenous and local communities, and that new protected areas could dispossess those groups, said Guido Broekhoven, head of policy research and development at World Wide Fund for Nature International.
These are the very people who for generations have done the most to sustain, defend and restore biodiversity, Broekhoven said.
The 30x30 pledge should be far more effective in halting and reversing biodiversity loss if protected areas are situated in the most important parts of the planet for biodiversity and ecosystem services, he said.
That means achieving the target should be “a collective, global effort,” he added, calling for more financing.
Countries with relatively few suitable areas should contribute as much as they can to conservation efforts in other biodiversity-rich nations, Broekhoven said.
However, 30x30 is not “a panacea,” he said, adding that the goal should be complemented by reforms to ecologically harmful investment, agriculture and consumption.
“On its own, it will be insufficient to reverse the loss of nature,” he said.
US President Donald Trump created some consternation in Taiwan last week when he told a news conference that a successful trade deal with China would help with “unification.” Although the People’s Republic of China has never ruled Taiwan, Trump’s language struck a raw nerve in Taiwan given his open siding with Russian President Vladimir Putin’s aggression seeking to “reunify” Ukraine and Russia. On earlier occasions, Trump has criticized Taiwan for “stealing” the US’ chip industry and for relying too much on the US for defense, ominously presaging a weakening of US support for Taiwan. However, further examination of Trump’s remarks in
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
It is being said every second day: The ongoing recall campaign in Taiwan — where citizens are trying to collect enough signatures to trigger re-elections for a number of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators — is orchestrated by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), or even President William Lai (賴清德) himself. The KMT makes the claim, and foreign media and analysts repeat it. However, they never show any proof — because there is not any. It is alarming how easily academics, journalists and experts toss around claims that amount to accusing a democratic government of conspiracy — without a shred of evidence. These
China on May 23, 1951, imposed the so-called “17-Point Agreement” to formally annex Tibet. In March, China in its 18th White Paper misleadingly said it laid “firm foundations for the region’s human rights cause.” The agreement is invalid in international law, because it was signed under threat. Ngapo Ngawang Jigme, head of the Tibetan delegation sent to China for peace negotiations, was not authorized to sign the agreement on behalf of the Tibetan government and the delegation was made to sign it under duress. After seven decades, Tibet remains intact and there is global outpouring of sympathy for Tibetans. This realization
RSS