Last year witnessed parties to the three Rio conventions come together to discuss implementation of the agreements in the coming years. Delegates at all these meetings highlighted the need for more money to protect the environment in 2025.
The finances of these Conventions are managed by the Global Environment Facility (GEF), an international finance mechanism based in the United States.
GEF is ready to begin the negotiation process for the ninth replenishment in January 2025. The ninth replenishment will provide funds till 2030.
Other than the three Rio conventions — UN Convention on Biological Diversity, UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, UN Convention to Combat Desertification, Stockholm — GEF manages the finances of environmental agreements such as Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants and Minamata Convention on Mercury.
The GEF discussions come at a time when the Parties to the three Rio Conventions have indicated that more money is needed to ensure that targets are met. Many reported a funding gap.
For example, for combating desertification, $355 billion in annual investments will be needed in the 2025-2030. Funding mobilisation gap is likely to be about $278 billion. The Global Biodiversity Framework estimates the biodiversity finance gap as $700 billion a year between now and 2030.
Considering that the eighth replenishment had found $5.33 billion in pledges and an aspirational co-financing to the tune of 1:7, GEF needs to figure out a way to find more funds to meet these gaps.
The ninth replenishment negotiation process will try to do this. The process would span 18 months and members will look for ways to generate and allocate funds between the period of 2026-2030.
As of now, GEF seems to be spreading itself thin. At the 68th Council meeting held in December, nearly $700 million Work Program was approved.
A large part of this was given to work on chemicals and waste, as GEF hopes to be chosen as the financial mechanism for a global plastics treaty being currently negotiated.
To do justice to all these commitments, GEF would need to find new funders. At present, 40 countries provide donations to GEF. There are already calls that GEF needs to simplify access to funds.
The period till 2030 is crucial as it is the last few years for the world to meet more than 100 targets linked to biodiversity, climate change and sustainable development.
To keep itself relevant in the future, GEF would need to reform its working. The organisation has often been criticised on how it chooses beneficiaries: it has set criteria that lets developing countries get funds instead of the poor ones who need more.
Also, the resources are concentrated among a few GEF Implementing Agencies. Out of the 18 agencies, just a handful get most of the funds. At the recently concluded 68th meeting of the GEF Council, there were discussions to expand the number of Implementing Agencies.
The new ones would need to have adequate experience in underserved regions, along with a track record in engaging civil society and the private sector.
However, there is a more compelling and urgent reason that GEF should reinvent itself. In light of the inadequacies in its functioning, Parties to CBD discussed whether a new dedicated fund would be better. Members also accepted that this would fragment the available funds. Instead, efforts to address the shortcomings of GEF would be better.
This is likely to be discussed again at the resumed COP16 meeting in February where resource mobilisation would be on the agenda.
It is quite likely that GEF would continue to reign supreme because there is no alternative available but it would serve the environment better if the organisation figures out ways to be more effective.