Unfinished biodiversity negotiations are back on the table. After a groundbreaking session in Cali, Colombia, delegations are reconvening in Rome to tackle unfinished business that will be critical for biodiversity action – with transforming agrifood systems emerging as a central element for global success.
The resumed session of the sixteenth meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (COP16) will take place at the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) headquarters in Rome from 25–27 February 2025.
For FAO, this conference is a pivotal opportunity to emphasize a vital message: transforming our agrifood systems is not just beneficial, it is indispensable for safeguarding global biodiversity.
To understand this and other critical issues at stake in these extended negotiations, FAO Newsroom spoke with Kaveh Zahedi, Director of FAO’s Office for Climate, Biodiversity and Environment.
Why is biodiversity important for food security and transforming agrifood systems?
Biodiversity is absolutely fundamental to food security and the transformation of our agrifood systems. Think of it this way: our ability to produce food sustainably, ensuring everyone has enough to eat now and in the future, is built directly on the foundation of biodiversity.
Agrifood sectors – whether we’re talking about crops, livestock, forestry, or fisheries – are inherently reliant on biodiversity. First and foremost, biodiversity is the source of the many species we directly use for food, fuel, and fiber. In other words, from the variety of crops we cultivate and the livestock we raise, to the trees that provide timber and the fish we catch, all of this originates from the diversity of life on Earth.
Beyond the species we directly harvest, biodiversity also encompasses the countless other species that play essential, often unseen, roles in making our food systems work. The thing is, these are the species that power vital ecosystem functions and services. Take pollinators, for example – bees, butterflies, and other insects are crucial for the reproduction of many crops, directly boosting our yields. Then there are the natural enemies of pests, which help regulate populations and reduce our reliance on harmful pesticides. Not to mention healthy soils, teeming with diverse microorganisms that are essential for nutrient cycling and plant growth. Even the oxygen we breathe and the clean water we use for agriculture are ultimately linked to biodiversity. And when it comes to fisheries, biodiversity provides food and habitats for the fish species we harvest.
Then, genetic diversity within species is also a critical component of biodiversity for food security. This genetic variation is what allows crops and livestock to adapt to changing environments, resist diseases, and evolve to meet our needs. Maintaining this genetic diversity is crucial for building resilient agrifood systems that can withstand future challenges, including climate change and emerging pests and diseases.
Ultimately, none of these elements operates independently. Diverse and healthy ecosystems—such as forests, mangroves, rangelands, seagrass beds, savannahs, and oceans—provide habitats, regulate climate and water, purify the air, and support the myriad species upon which we rely for food and nutrition, whether from agriculture, forestry, fisheries, or aquaculture.
In essence, biodiversity underpins the very productivity, resilience, and sustainability of our agrifood systems, making it indispensable for long-term food security.
What is at stake in Rome, and what is FAO’s role in it?
Essentially, this is the global community’s opportunity to set course for the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity in the years to come not just in a global context, but at the national and local level.
This meeting is about securing the financial bedrock needed to bring the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (KMGBF) to life. We’re talking about mobilizing $200 billion each year by 2030 – the minimum investment required to truly shift the trajectory for biodiversity. Equally vital is bending the curve on harmful incentives, aiming to reduce them by $500 billion annually. Put simply, these represent the scale of resources necessary to protect the natural systems that underpin all life.
Countries must finalize critical components: the resource mobilization strategy itself, the operational financial mechanism to channel funds where they are most needed, and the KMGBF monitoring framework – in other words, the compass that will guide our progress and ensure accountability.
A key point of discussion is the financial mechanism and the role of the Global Environmental Facility (GEF). With the Global Biodiversity Framework Fund emerging as a vital instrument for helping countries move towards sustainable use of biodiversity and sustainable agriculture, we will be watching the discussions closely to ensure we fully leverage our GEF operations. For FAO, this matters because the outcomes will have direct implications for how we can support nations to access much needed finance for their biodiversity efforts.
What important aspects related to agrifood systems remain unresolved and are now pending in these resumed negotiations?
To effectively implement the KMGBF, countries will be working to finalize the tools for measuring progress against its 23 targets – a crucial step for all Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). FAO is deeply invested in these negotiations and play a central role in supporting this vital monitoring framework, being the custodian of over 25 indicators included in the monitoring framework.
The decision on the monitoring framework – which contains many elements – is still being discussed. A key element for FAO is the proposed new Headline Indicator 22.1 on land tenure and land cover. It is designed to measure progress effectively by reflecting the crucial link between secure land rights for Indigenous Peoples and local communities and the health of ecosystems, with FAO as the intended custodian.
FAO is also involved in discussions about how to measure progress on reducing risks from pesticides – something that responds to the KMGBF Target 7. Countries are trying to agree on the best way to track if we’re actually reducing these risks. There are different ideas on the table: one is to measure “pesticide environment concentration” – basically, how much pesticide is ending up in nature. Another idea is to look at “aggregated total applied toxicity” (ATAT) – which is more about measuring the overall harmfulness of the pesticides we use. This decision will shape how FAO can help countries reduce pesticide risks and protect biodiversity in agriculture.
Beyond technical contributions, FAO is fostering vital collaborations with other conventions and international bodies. Why does this matter? Because a coordinated approach is essential to weave biodiversity considerations into the fabric of all relevant sectors.
Other key discussions for us in Rome include a potential invitation to prepare a draft action plan for the International Initiative on Biodiversity for Food and Nutrition. Also at stake is a request to the governing bodies of the chemicals and waste conventions, FAO and others, to collaborate with the three Rio Conventions and the future legally binding instrument on plastic pollution to achieve Target 7 of the KMGBF (To reduce pollution to levels that are not harmful to biodiversity).
Source : FAO
