Subscribe
Two years ago in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, the 16th Conference of the Parties (COP16) to the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD) was hailed as a historic turning point — dedicated caucuses for Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities were created, formally recognising their right to participate in the convention’s processes.
Yet, as COP17 concluded in Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia, that hard-won progress stalled. Two years on, the caucuses that were meant to give those communities a formal seat at the table were never operationalised, leaving Indigenous Peoples and local communities without the standing they had been promised, and their agenda being postponed until COP18.
The setback is more than procedural. For communities whose lands and livelihoods are on the frontlines of desertification, drought and land degradation, meaningful participation is not simply a question of representation; it can shape whether the solutions adopted by the UNCCD reflect realities on the ground.
The trouble began on the very first day, when the provisional agenda came up for adoption on August 17, the United States (US) objected to including items including, on gender, on civil society participation, and on synergies among the three Rio Conventions. Without consensus, the items could not be adopted, and were effectively taken out of the agenda before COP17’s substantive work had even begun.
For the next two weeks, that decision was contested almost continuously. Indigenous Peoples, youth and civil society groups raised it at every available opportunity, even as a number of governments pressed for the items to be restored.
None of it moved the needle and by the closing plenary on August 28, the three items were still off the table, and now would stay that way until COP18.
It was not the only deadlock of the fortnight. As Down To Earth (DTE) had reported earlier, an agreement on a binding or voluntary global drought framework also could not be reached, repeating a pattern first seen at COP16 in Riyadh, and pushing that decision, too, to COP18.
On participation, too, those most affected were left waiting. Hindou Oumarou Ibrahim, coordinator of the Association of Peul Women and Autochthonous Peoples of Chad, who represented Indigenous Peoples through the negotiations, told DTE that the terms of reference of the caucuses should have been adopted at this COP17.
At the closing plenary itself, addressing the session on behalf of the Indigenous Peoples Caucus, Sonia Astua Manpardeva said, “Our lands have been subjected to growing pressure owing to desertification, degradation, drought, climate change, biodiversity loss and unsustainable development. And yet we, the indigenous peoples, continue to protect, restore and sustain our lands and territories through our knowledge, customary governance and generations of stewardship. We are not merely affected by these crises. We are rights holders, knowledge holders, custodians and solution providers.”
Civil society organisations, speaking in a joint statement on behalf of indigenous peoples, local communities, pastoralists, farmers, women and youth, voiced deep frustration at a small number of parties blocking key issues since the agenda was adopted, a move they warned risked undermining existing commitments and stalling negotiations that could not wait.
Referring to the convention’s theme of ‘Restoring Land, Restoring Hope’, the CSO statement said that “restoring hope requires respect, not imposition. Consensus must be built through negotiation, engagement and compromise,” the statement said, urging parties to ensure the regression did not become a precedent, and insisting that gender, civil society participation, including the indigenous and local communities caucuses, and Rio Convention synergies must all be on the COP18 agenda.
Beneath the references to “synergies” and “gender” lay a more specific fight over the direction of the UNCCD itself, and the role of the convention in a wider multilateral system dealing with climate change, biodiversity loss, and land degradation.
UNCCD COP17 was, in fact, the first of the three Rio Convention COPs to be convened this year, ahead of the CBD’s COP17 in Yerevan, Armenia, in October and the UNFCCC’s COP31 in Antalya, Türkiye, in November -- putting it in a position to help set the tone for the rest of the “triple COP” year.
The synergies item was not simply a procedural formality.
The three conventions deal with different but deeply interconnected crises: land degradation and desertification, climate change, and biodiversity loss. Many countries had hoped to use it to push for a more coherent, integrated response to these.
While coordination between the conventions has long been a political and institutional challenge, at COP17, the proposed agenda item on synergies among the three Rio Conventions was among those blocked at the outset itself.
Several negotiators DTE spoke to said that throughout the convention, the US resisted the very framing of “synergies of the three Rio Conventions” in agenda and decision texts, in keeping with a set of red lines it had laid out on the opening day.
In negotiating documents, the US made clear it did not want any reference to “climate change” “climate action” or “climate agenda,” or to the UNFCCC, the Paris Agreement or the Sustainable Development Goals. It similarly objected to any use of “gender,” “gender equality” or “gender-responsive,” and to the terms “Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities,” “Indigenous Knowledge” or “Indigenous Traditional Knowledge.”
Several countries made clear at the closing plenary that they did not regard the issues as dispensable.
The European Union said it remained committed to “stronger synergies across the Rio Conventions”, making clear that the failure to reach an outcome on the issue was unfinished business rather than a resolution. Spain was more explicit, arguing that climate change, biodiversity loss, desertification, land degradation and drought are “deeply interconnected” and calling for a more coherent and integrated response.
Paraguay, speaking on behalf of the Group of Latin America and Caribbean Countries said that strengthening synergies among the three Rio Conventions was linked directly to the effective implementation of the UNCCD.
The concern was not confined to synergies alone. Cameroon cautioned against any “explicit or implicit” attempt to alter or reinterpret the convention outside its established legal process, while India, speaking for the Asia-Pacific region, noted that gender, synergies and stakeholder participation had “arisen across multiple agenda items” and needed a more durable fix before COP18.
South Africa struck a similar note, expressing concern over the lack of progress on gender, civil society participation and synergies, and cautioning that evolving national priorities should not diminish collective commitments or weaken implementation of the convention.