What would tropical forests say about the outcomes of COP28? Would they throw a party to celebrate any good news or rather decide to turn into a savannah right away when faced with the reports reaching them from COP28?
There is potential for both reactions, depending on personal inclination towards optimism or pessimism and depending on which part of the outcomes you look at.
After a year of declining deforestation rates in Brazil, Colombia, or Indonesia it is generally easier to be optimistic. The global stocktake at COP28 underlined the “vital importance of protecting, conserving, restoring and sustainably using nature and ecosystems”. Also, a global commitment to restoring mangroves can be seen as good news.
Plans for ending deforestation until 2030 emphasised as an important measure can be a reason for hope, though seven years can seem a long time, especially if you are a tree close to the current deforestation frontier.
In a world, in which money plays an important role, pledges to increase funding to reduce deforestation or promises for results-based payments in the case of continuing reductions in deforestation, can be seen as a good sign. For instance, both Norway and the UK increased their support for the conservation of tropical forests in Brazil by more than one billion Norwegian kroner. However, as we have also addressed in a recent post, the finance gap is nowhere near to be closed and the money pledged frequently never reaches its destination.
As tropical forests are not only endangered by logging or land conversion e.g. to cattle farms or palm oil plantations but are also increasingly threatened by climate change impacts, like the severe drought in the Amazon, the fact that for the first time a transition away from fossil fuels made its way into the final text can be good news. However, there is no fixed timeframe, and the formulations could be more determined, to put it mildly. Even worse, as shown in the 2023 Production Gap Report issued by the UNEP, top fossil fuel producers plan even more extraction despite climate promises, exceeding by far the amount of extraction considered to be compatible with limiting global warming to 1.5°C or 2°C.
The tropical forest countries themselves are divided about the issue of fossil fuels. While Colombia has become the 10th country to sign a global treaty to phase out oil, gas and coal consumption and exploration, Brazil joined OPEC+, a group of oil-exporting countries. While the Colombian President Gustavo Petro put it very clearly, stating that “We are facing a confrontation between fossil capital and human life, Earth life. I have no doubt about what position to take. My position is next to life.”, the narrative from the Brazilian side seems more contradicting emphasising the protection of the Amazon, while at the same time planning on becoming the fourth-largest oil producer in the world by 2030.
When it comes to indigenous people and their known role for the preservation of tropical forests e.g. in the Amazon, hopes were disappointed. Despite the largest delegation of indigenous people ever present at an UN climate summit, indigenous voices remained marginalised and unheard. There was no recognition of indigenous people‘s rights to give free, prior and informed consent to projects within their territories or to refrain from doing so. Therefore, concerns about oil and gas auctions in the Amazon or agricultural projects on indigenous lands remain in place. Phasing out all fossil fuels as soon as possible is an important measure for climate change mitigation overall, but also for the fate of tropical forests.
Looking at this mixed bag of outcomes, many of them still open to elaboration and implementation, makes it even more important for all of us involved in tropical forests in one way or the other to help shape the path for tropical forests. As long as we have not managed to integrate nature or rights of nature properly in our decision making, we better involve those people who do, e.g. by acknowledging local and indigenous knowledge, or take responsibility ourselves and stand up for preserving tropical forests.
Further reading: