Press Conference: Key reports launched to support the monitoring framework of the KMGBF, UN Convention on Biodiversity - COP 17

Yes, Adamu, yeah.

Thank you. Thanks to the GIBN policy team and also the representative from GIBN Armenia and is it the other organization, I forgot the name. I truly appreciate what was said by young people and what young people are already doing. And I would just like to ask just two specific questions. First on the global review, what it is already showing in terms of contribution of young people to the implementation of the KMGPF, which is mostly of ad hoc participation, meaning that our key actions on the ground in terms of halting and reversing biodiversity loss is not taking into consideration into the different NbS from what we can already see. What is the Global Youth Biodiversity Network doing actually to curb that gap and to make sure that all our key actions on the ground are taken into consideration and reflected of course into this global review process. So also again, I will have the second question mostly on finance. I would like to know, knowing specifically about the GBFF, that the GFF is the global mechanism, financial mechanism to this process. We know that most of these funds are not truly predictable. Countries are still having difficulties to access this fund. And of what young people are already doing, we are not having a specific financial source coming directly to our actions. Knowing that these funds are not really predictable, how do you think that we need to proceed to make sure that we have a share into these funds that is hopefully going to be delivered to not only parties but other right holders? Thank you.

Thank you, Adam, for that question. Maybe I'll give it over to Sefa and Eetu.

Thank you for the question. So what the global report states about youth action, well, first it affirms something that is for us very clear, that the framework cannot be achieved by governments alone. So this is key message five of the report. It says that implementation of the framework relies on the contributions from different parts of the whole of society. And for us, this means that it relies on the distinct roles and knowledge and expertise of these different groups, including young people. So this is something that is clear, but there are also things that we don't know. The global report actually does not have enough information from the wealth of information that's out there beyond country plans and country reports. from traditional knowledge or youth data or from community-based monitoring. So this is an information gap that is present in the global report. We know that there were many limitations that led to this, but this is something that should be improved upon in the future so that the conclusions of the scientific and technical base of the global review will be based in more inclusive and robust and participatory information that is out there, including data from youth. But we know from the data that we've been collecting as the Global Youth Biodiversity Network that youth contributions are rich, they are many, they are very valuable. but they're not supported enough. So this is something that if you want to know more about the initiatives of our chapters to map youth contributions, you're very much welcome to approach us and we can direct you to the right people. Thank you.

Thank you for the question on the specific dimension of the GEF. So the way that the GEF operates right now, it really demands institutional reform of the GEF. And this is why it is critical for us, the decisions that are being taken here on agenda 8A specifically, because we are also defining the criteria for access. the financial mechanism and the potential development of any future arrangement. So the way that the GEF operates right now, it really demands for intermediary agencies together with the national countries to allocate resources. But these resources go through implementing agencies before reaching out to communities. In many cases, even before reaching out to communities, you do have executive agencies in the middle of the process that are more national institutions. The way that the mechanisms operate really have due diligence process that most of the cases do not accommodate the diversity of the institutions that we as youth groups have. Bureaucratic demands, different types of legal demands, or even formalizations that do not allow us to access resources. So these are the things that when we are trying to understand how biodiversity finance needs to be more equitable, we also need to understand how the financial institutions that are holding resource allocation needs to be improved and reformed in that can transform the way that we put resources to the ground, to the communities, and allow us as youth as well to have access to that. So these are most of these things. Thank you.

Thank you so much, Sefanito, for your answer and also for your question. We are actually at time, but maybe we can take one more question if there is, or if not, we can close the panel. Yes.

If the convention actually taking count this narrative we are proposing, how we will see a change in the negotiations, how we will perceive they are actually deciding to close the justice gap.

Thank you for that amazing question. Maybe we can, since it's a broader question, one of the panelists can answer it. I'll let you choose. Repeat.

Well, I might be repetitive because this is exactly what I mentioned, but again, on biodiversity finance, this is specifically the criteria to include the two dimensions. One, decision making, participation in decision making for indigenous with local communities, even in youth. And the second dimension that is providing direct access to resources to those same groups. So this would be that something that we really allow us to close the biodiversity finance dimension of the justice gap.

And then on the global review, discussions so far have been, I think, not as ambitious as we need. There are There is weakening of language with regards to transforming economic and financial sectors that are causing biodiversity loss. And there's also weakening of language regarding acknowledging that there are gaps in equity and governance, in participation, and in following section C of the framework. So this is something that we're seeing. We're also seeing that there are objections to more inclusive participation in many other different items. So this is something we need to talk to our governments about and how to keep it strong, because otherwise we will be not doing enough to close the justice gap in the policy and in the documents that are being discussed right now.

Thank you, Sefa and Aitor. So with that, we can come to the end of today's press conference. I would like to again thank the incredible speakers of today, Sefa, Shaw, Michelle, Nani, and Aitor for their powerful messages, and also all of you in the room for being here and also for your questions. Maybe we can give our speakers another round of applause. And if you'd like to connect with any of our speakers and learn more about Gibbon's positions, please come and find us after the session. We'll also be at the Youth Pavilion. Thank you once again, and wish you all the best for the rest of COP.

Okay, great.

Hello, everyone. Thank you very much for being here and joining us both in the room and online on UN Web TV for this press conference at the UN Convention on Biological Diversity COP17 in Yerevan, Armenia. We're going to be looking today in a bit more detail at the newly agreed universal state of nature indicators and metrics, and how they will drive meaningful business action to help implement the Global Biodiversity Framework. And these newly released indicators and metrics have been already integrated in TNFD and SBTN updated frameworks, which are now available to help businesses and financial institutions to accelerate action for a nature positive economy and society. And to talk a little bit through this new set of indicators and metrics, we have a great panel and I'm going to introduce them to you now. My name is Gemma Parkes. First of all, I'm the head of communications for the Nature Positive Initiative. Immediately to my left is Marco Lambertini, convener of the Nature Positive Initiative. Next to him, we have Tony Goldner, who's the CEO of the Task Force on Nature-Related Financial Disclosures, TNFD. And lastly, Ross Barton, senior manager of climate change and sustainability services for EY. So We recently released this new set of aligned indicators and metrics on the state of nature. And of course, to achieve the global biodiversity framework, government action is obviously crucial and central to that process. But the targets of the coming Montreal global biodiversity framework cannot be achieved or delivered without private sector commitment and action. The space in nature is often overwhelming with a multitude of ways to measure progress on the state of nature. But the solution that we have released in this new set of indicators and metrics is a simplified minimum set that will really help galvanize and simplify and clarify action for the private sector and all players across society. But, Marco, I'm going to turn to you, first of all, and just ask you to introduce to us a little bit this the framework and the approach. So the Nature Positive Initiative has developed this new set of indicators and metrics. Why and why now?

Thank you. Thank you, Gemma. Thank you, everybody, for joining today. Thank you also, hopefully, the many others that will be online watching this briefing. As Gemma said, first of all, the Nature Positive Initiative is a coalition of, this is a diverse coalition. You can find all the members online at our website, naturepositive.org. It's a coalition of a business platform, sustainable disclosure and standard and guidance agencies, environmental organizations, indigenous knowledge, academia. It's a very diverse group that initially defined the goal of nature positive, halt and reverse biodiversity loss by 2030. and advocated for that goal to become the global goal for nature that was agreed in the mission of the Global Biodiversity Framework in 2022 in Montreal under the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, in fact. And now we are coming together to provide tools on how to deliver the global goal for nature, nature positive, halt and reverse biodiversity loss. And one key dimension of all this is exactly the measurement. Now, next slide, please. COP17 is, as you know, a very important COP because it's a COP that happens midway to 2030, and so it's a COP that takes stock of the progress towards the GBF delivery and its mission. And And in that sense, one important thing that is emerging is that, on one hand, we are more clear than ever on the decline on nature. We are more aware than ever on the implications, the consequences that nature loss is having, not just on nature per se in isolation, but on our economy, on our society, on our well-being. Business awareness of the dependencies on nature is growing. And that is leading to the question on how can we accelerate action and how can we take action in a way that truly improve the state of nature? Because at the end of the day, we need to address the pressures, but we need to do the pressure at the point where nature is actually improving in state. And that's what we've been missing until now. a common way of measuring, a comparable way to hold ourselves accountable to this global goal of halting reverse biodiversity loss, measuring the state of nature. That's what our initiative is focused on. Next slide, please. And because the market has been demanding this clarity for some time, particularly business, financial institutions, but also increasingly regulators, They are asking for clarity on ways to measure and assess dependencies, the impacts on those dependencies, report on the risks that are generated by the impacts, and also to assess opportunities in addressing those risks, avoiding the cost, and embracing new business models. Next, please. We started two years ago a process, a deep engagement process with many organizations, not just the 27 members of the Nature Positive Initiative, but also many represented from academia, research, civil society, but perhaps most importantly, users. And users, particularly in terms of businesses and financial institutions, and this is a list of some of the companies, some of the many companies engaging the process, but particularly these are the companies that piloted the draft indicators and metrics. They actually applied those indicator metrics to their companies, their operations, their supply chains. And so, next slide, please. We came up with a list of four indicators that are, from a scientific perspective, the no-brainers of the state of nature, the the no-brainer proxies of the state of nature. Ecosystem extent is a forest increasing or decreasing. Ecosystem condition is a forest improving in quality or being degraded. Species extinction risk, how important is the site of the landscape to prevent extinction of species. And species populations, super important because many populations are critical in delivering key services that companies and investors are somehow depending on, and, uh, and so those four indicators are the ones that represent what we say the minimal universal indicators to really have a good sense of whether nature is in recovery or not. We are organized those in sites in order to be applicable to sites, to landscape. They are applicable to all geographies, all realms, terrestrial, marine, freshwater. They are applicable to all biomes. They are applicable to all users and they are applicable to many use cases as well. The idea was to try to simplify things in a way that one set of metrics could fulfill many use cases and create a common level playing field that encourage adoption and engagement. Next, please. And so we are excited to say that as part of this process of collective engagement, At the moment of the launch in last week, we already have two organizations, two very important frameworks. One is represented here, TNFD, the Task Force on Nature-related Financial Disclosure, and the Science Based Target Network. They have adopted the metrics in their framework. Other organizations, reporting organization like GRI, is in the process of doing so. And so some regulators and also multinational development bank and Uh, uh, the ISO, uh, itself, so there is a, a movement in terms of creating group of frameworks that are using the same metrics to help, uh, interoperability. And the last slide, I think, and then I will stop and hand over to my friends. These are the resources that we have produced. They are all available online. There is the description of the indicators and metrics. There's a guidance on how to measure them. And there is then longer report that explains the process, which you may be interested in because it's been quite a journey, I have to tell you. I bring together businesses, companies, academics, NGOs, and agree to those four metrics. It hasn't been a miracle, but not far from, I have to say, and so excited that that agreement has been reached. So I'll stop there for now. Thank you, Chairman.

Thanks, Marco. I think I'm going to come straight to you, Tony. So we just heard from Marco that the Task Force on Nature-Related Financial Disclosures has announced the adoption of these state of nature indicators and metrics. Could you share a little more on how they've been integrated and how organizations can use them?

Yeah, thanks so much, Gemma, and delighted to be here. This is a really important new component of the TNFD architecture that we've been building for five years now. And in many ways, it sort of completes the set of metrics that have been required. So if we think about the central premise that TNFD has put forward in its guidance, and we've seen companies now embrace, is that Nature is location specific. And so the first question that companies have to understand is, where am I interfacing with nature? The second question then is, what is the state of nature in those locations? And this set of metrics now gives business the opportunity to assess that in a rigorous science-based way. We had a provisional set of metrics around this in our earlier guidance released in 2023, and so we're delighted with the delivery of this work from the NPI, of which we are one of the contributing member organisations, and we've essentially upgraded our guidance to put this straight in. And, of course, once a company can understand the state of nature, it's then in a position to contextualise its impacts and dependencies in those landscapes. and also understand how its impacts and dependencies may give rise to risk and opportunity to the business. So at TNFD, we often like to think that metrics about nature and dependencies and impacts on nature are in units of nature. It might be a square kilometer or cubic meters or liters. Risk and opportunity to the business are in units of currency. They're in dollar terms or yen or euros. And so I think this work is really fundamental now in completing the assessment approach that the TNFD has been developing over the last few years. We've developed that with the market. We had thousands of contributors contributing to the iterative development of an assessment approach that they can use. And we've really, I think, tried very hard to strike a balance between an approach that's science based and one that's also practical to do. And I think we're now seeing thousands of companies using this assessment approach. It's called the LEAP approach. L for locate. And we've now got over 1,100 organizations now starting to disclose information to investors and other stakeholders once they've done this assessment. And we know that using artificial intelligence tools, and if you'd like more information on that, that's in our status report that we released a few weeks ago at New York Climate Week. So 1,100 organizations are now voluntarily reporting on their nature-related issues, having understood them. And I think it's reasonable to expect that investors who are worried about issues like deforestation, about pollution, about water and water use in water-stressed areas, are going to increasingly expect companies to be able to understand and explain the state of nature in the locations relevant to the business. And now we have the toolkit to enable them to do that.

That's brilliant. Thanks, Tony. And before I move to Ross, I wondered, could you also say a few words about, it's another member of the Nature Positive Initiative and a sister organization that's another target setter in the nature space. The Science Based Targets Network has also integrated the State of Nature Indicators and Metrics. Could you perhaps just say a couple of words on that as well? Thank you.

Yeah, thanks, Gemma. That's exactly right. So TNFD and SBTN are two of the business facing institutions trying to get business moving on their nature related issues. TNFD is about corporate reporting, SBTN, as the name suggests, is about target setting, which is a key input into what we're hoping to see happens now, which is nature entering into transition planning, because ultimately investors and other stakeholders want to know, not just does a business understand its nature related issues, but what are they actually going to do to reduce their negative impacts and contribute to nature positive outcomes. And of course, the best place to explain that is in a transition plan alongside their net zero transition plan commitments. So SBTN, like TNFD, has embraced these metrics. Like us, they have an assessment approach. And so we were very pleased last week to team up with the Nature Positive Initiative together, the three organisations, TNFD, SBTN and NPI to not only release these metrics but also signal that they are being built into these assessment tools by TNFD and by SBTN. So it's further driving consolidation, consistency and alignment of approach and the guidance for the business and finance community, which is simply going to make it easier for everyone to take action. And frankly, I think with the inclusion of these metrics, with the metrics that TNFD has already developed, with the target setting methodologies from SBTN, there's really no reason and no excuse now for business and finance not to start accelerating action on the nature agenda alongside the work they're already doing on climate change.

Thanks, Tony. And indeed, this new set of indicators and metrics, or final aligned set, is ready for any nature-based frameworks to really integrate. And Global Reporting Initiative are also moving towards integration. Ross, I'd like to come to you. Could you share a little bit about how EY has been involved in the metrics development and how you see them, the final set of indicators and metrics, bringing value to business generally? But also, I'd love to hear a little bit on how you would say professional services companies such as EY really see them being useful for businesses. Thanks.

Yeah, EY is very proud to have supported the MPI and the development and pilot testing of the State of Nature metrics. It's been a long two years partnership together. We've been there right from the start, identifying the initial terrestrial metrics through to pilot testing, the global pilot study that Marco just mentioned before with 29 companies internationally. and then also helping really translate those concepts, technical, scientific concepts, and the lessons learned from the pilot study into practical implementation guidance so businesses can actually begin adopting and implementing these metrics moving forward for their TNFD and SBTN reporting and otherwise. If I think about the value that these metrics bring for businesses, well, you know, they're being released at such a critical time. You know, as Tony's just touched on, businesses are increasingly being expected to produce credible, reliable information about their relationship with nature, their impacts, dependencies, risks, and opportunities. And these metrics are fundamental in actually understanding those issues and being able to communicate them effectively. But the metrics are not just about reporting. They should and can be a central component of any business's strategic toolkit. The natural systems upon which all businesses depend on are under pressure from climate change, invasive species, pollution, et cetera. And businesses that use these metrics can get a clear view of whether the systems that they depend on are in a state of decline from these pressures. and ultimately make better informed strategic decisions around where they invest in protecting and restoring the systems that they depend upon to maintain business resilience and protect long-term value. So that's the, I really think is the value of these metrics for businesses, that they are essentially strategic and resilience enablers. Now, if I think about what the professional services role is, and you know, I'd love to talk more about assurance as an, and a probably as a global accounting firm, but We've got kind of two roles, one of the advisor side where we help businesses understand and those technical concepts and translate them into, you know, useful decision, useful insights to inform their internal strategy, governance and risk management. But assurance also plays a really critical role in ensuring and basically helping businesses get comfort that the information that they're producing is credible and trustworthy. And that's important when it comes to investors and financial institutions because they need confidence that the outcomes that are being reported are delivering genuine nature positive outcomes before they're willing to take action and invest capital. So that's where I see our role in this as well.

That's great. Thanks for sharing, Ross. And these indicators and metrics have really been developed in this very consultative, collaborative process to ultimately be decision useful for businesses and all organizations and to really feed into their strategies. So we'd love to open the floor. If there are any questions, please, please do put your hand up and make yourself known. Please. Do we have a mic? I can repeat your question if you want to ask it. Yeah. Thank you. So question to EY, which sector, which industry is the most interested in implementing the metrics? Ross.

Yeah, it's a great question. And it's really a mixed bag, to be honest. It depends what jurisdiction you're in and which clients you have. But what we've seen through the pilot study and through the work that we do with our clients internationally is that there are certain sectors that are starting ahead of other sectors, for instance, like those heavily regulated industries like mining, forestry. They've been measuring different elements of nature for a very, very long time for regulatory purposes, but also an understanding that they depend on those ecosystems and they are extracting from the earth or natural processes. So I've definitely seen a lot of interest from those sort of primary industries like mining, forestry, agriculture, aquaculture. But interestingly, a lot of interest from the financial sector because they fundamentally understand that the portfolios depend on stable, healthy ecosystems. So there's a lot of interest in how they can support their portfolio companies and actually measuring and monitoring the state of nature as a way to kind of maintain oversight of the stability of their financial portfolios.

Thank you, Ross. Tony, would you want to add something?

I'd just add the sector that is the quickest or the largest adopter of TNFD to date is the construction and built environment sector as well. So real estate and built environment. And as you know, they're already very regulated. They have a lot of approvals for project-based approvals. So I think this will be particularly relevant for them as well.

Thank you. Other questions? Oh, yes, please, go ahead. Wait, there's a mic just coming?

Thank you. I am a journalist for the French media. The ISSB is going to unveil their nature recommendations. Did they commit to use those metrics?

Yeah.

Yeah, thank you so much. Yes, thank you for highlighting that. It's a very important process. ISSB, the International Sustainability Standard Board, is starting, in fact, I think it's tomorrow, right? Tomorrow we'll publish an exposure draft, as they call it, a draft of what will be guidance in terms of nature standards from a perspective of investors, financial institutions. It's a super important process. For me, first of all, it's a very welcome development. is an indication on how nature is being included, more specifically in the set of standards that SSB is developing, just as a reminder, as it already has a general standard of sustainability that includes all sustainability dimensions, a point general, but very important, is called S1, and a second one, S2, which is dedicated to climate. So everybody was waiting when nature is coming up and now it's coming, which is I think a fantastic development. Of course, the consultation is important because we want to make sure that the specification on nature, the whole complement standard one, one on stability is specific enough and contains a clear guidance as the market demands in order to really support the sector in embracing nature disclosure and obviously use that disclosure and those assessment standards to drive action that help businesses to avoid nature risks. So, first message, it's important for development. Second message, it's all about the strength of the specificity of the outcome of that guidance. And we'll all contribute to make sure that the guidance is strong and it leads to nature positive outcomes.

Thanks, Mark. Penny, go ahead.

Yeah, I would just say to build on Marco's comments, and I don't want to spoil the release of the exposure draft tomorrow, but as you know from the ISSB's approach to standards generally, they focus on risks and opportunities to an organisation, but they recognise that in order to understand risk and opportunity, you have to understand your dependencies and impacts, in this case on nature or on the climate. So implicitly, for companies to have a robust understanding of the risks and opportunities, they're going to have to look into the location of where those dependencies and impacts are to understand which are the material risk and opportunities that may need to be disclosed under their existing standards. So I think this will flow through into the assessment process that will inform reporting using the ISSB standards.

Thank you. And another important note, since we are at the UN CBD COP 17, the first formal stocktake on where we're at with the coming Montreal Biodiversity Framework, Global Biodiversity Framework. There was a paper that was released, Marco, last week, an information paper, study on the alignment of the State of Nature Indicators metrics with the monitoring framework of the GBF. Could you say a couple of words just to that, because it joins the dots between this important set of indicator metrics and the GBF?

Thank you, Jim. So you see here on the press conference, organization facing the business. Because the business is where the footprint, the negative impacts on nature are, is coming from and, uh, therefore, the, the old exercise of the state of nature metrics were really, uh, uh, developed with business front and center to support, uh, those transitions, nature positive transitions in, in, uh, in business, in all business sectors and financial solutions. But of course, we also developed the metrics with the mind, the opportunity for business to contribute to the GPF and to be able to actually begin to report their contribution to the GPF. And that was clear from the beginning because increasingly the gap between what governments report and what business reports need to be bridged. And we believe that this set of metrics will help with that. They've been aligned with key targets and goals of the GPF. There's been a study, as Gemma said, done by an independent scientist that has looked at the GPF indicators and targets and compared it with the state of nature metrics, which is and make sure that the integration element is strong. So we believe that this is also an extra service for business, uh, in terms of allowing them using metrics to demonstrate their contribution to the GPF.

Thanks, Marco. Do we have a last question?

By the way, the study, if you're interested, quite technical, but is on the website, uh, Nature Positive Initiative.

Thank you. Indeed, if you go to naturepositive.org/news, you will find there a web story about this information paper as well as the launch statement of the indicators and metrics and the joint press release that we put out on the same day with TNFD and SBTN on the integration with those frameworks. Any last questions? Oh, yes, please, in our last minute.

Yeah, thank you. My name is and I work for RGI in Berlin, Renewable Grids Initiative. One of the things that I'm currently working on is on the use of certain metrics based on the NPI, of course, and specifically on trying to identify which metrics could we use to capture people impact. And this is a really complex, I am figuring out, and I'm wondering if you are, if you have that in mind, are you looking for any, if you have this plan ahead with the NPI, if you ever are, focusing in this.

Thank you for the question. And I'm going to combine brief answers with last words, if I may, from our panels. It's very out of time. And I'm going to start with you, Ross, if that's okay. So any just last reflections on the topic and also on next steps in reaction to the question. And then Ben to Tony and then last to Marco. Thank you.

Thanks, John. I'll leave your question to Marco to discuss plans for MPI coming up in terms of the people point that you raised. But I guess last reflections is, you know, we've spent a lot of time in the last two years identifying these metrics and developing the initial measurement guidance, and it's time now for businesses to actually take action. The pilot study has demonstrated that it is feasible to start measuring these metrics, and you might not be able to do location, ground-based, ground truthing right from the start, but the framework is set up in a way that takes that into account at different granularity levels. So businesses of any size, any capability can get started now. So That's a call to action from the people in the room.

Thank you.

We just say we hear a lot that nature is complex. Well, yes, nature is complex. That's its strength and that's its beauty. Our mission has been to make nature less complicated for business and finance to engage with as a sustainability topic. And I think, as I said before, seeing thousands of companies now embracing this agenda, they're doing the work, they're finding it easier. The more you like anything in life, the more you practice, the easier it gets. And I think to Ross's point, it's not about trying to do everything all at once. It's about focusing, prioritising, and starting to build the data sets and the experience of understanding these issues. And the confidence will grow over time. But we shouldn't let the perfect get in the way of be the enemy of the good. We have more than enough metrics now, and there is a huge amount of data that business can use to get started. And of course, that will improve over time as well.

Thank you, Tony, and last word to you, Marco.

Thank you, thank you. Now, uh, just maybe final, two, two final, uh, um, uh, comments, the first one is, um, all this is coming hand in hand with evolution of how business and financial institutions have been approaching nature, I've been living all this during my life, you know, from… public relations, philanthropy, corporate social responsibility, to now finally, more and more businesses understanding the materiality of nature to their business, to their resilience, to their profitability. And that is a major paradigm shift in terms of how the business relate to nature, which leads to the need for tools like this to allow business to engage in that agenda and deal with dependencies, impacts, opportunities, risks. Uh, the second thing to say is that the nature positive journey started by defining the ambition, uh, embedding the ambition in a multilateral agreement like the GBF, now providing the tools to monitor and drive progress towards that ambition. And the next step, uh, immediately that we'll start, uh, um, from after COP 30, so COP 17, is actually begin to also provide clarity and guidance on how companies in particular, but any actor, can communicate their work and their progress on nature positive. Because this is another issue. We hear sometimes the term nature positive is used too lightly, sometimes even abused in terms of how organizations communicate about their nature positive actions. Now that we have the metrics, we can actually put in place clear guidance, clear safeguards, and support companies in saying the right things without the risk of being accused of greenwashing or without the risk of being exaggerated their outcomes. This idea of communication will come next, which I think is important to complete the picture. Finally, we launch with this organization, with UNFV and other organizations, the idea of going towards a nature measurement protocol idea, which is equivalent of the GSG, the Greenhouse Gas Protocol for Climate, that will provide even more clarity and guidance to business and and financial solutions on how to measure those metrics that we just launched last week.

Thank you very much, Marco. Thanks, Tony. Thanks, Ross. And thank you all for joining. You can find out more on our website, agepositive.org, and keep in touch on social media as well. And see you soon. Thank you.

Start, here we go again! My check, my. I will. Check, check. Testing.

When it's red, it's on. Can you say some words?

Yes, I can say.

Can you hear me?

Can you hear him?

Can you hear him?

Can you hear him?

Can you hear me? Can you hear him? Can you hear him?

They're recording, they're, this is on UNTV, it's a big time.

Okay? No.

Omar, Amy, and Andy. Yeah.

It's tight, so Valentin, can you get the e-mail from the head interpreter so Andine can send her statement, please? Open your e-mail, please. And, we're gonna probably start one or two minutes just to anything after this, so we might go over a few minutes. 45, and they'll get out to you, too.

They also have an event. I don't know. I think they're going to come here. Oh. If we start earlier, we won't be able to get there.

Oh, he says, a big group from Friends of.

The Earth has posted comments here, so if you want to wait. But I thought it was minutes, that's okay.

Maybe do the group photograph at the end, please, thank you. And I will look at you if you're going over.

Cuando se dice, ya se le acabo su tiempo, le voy a mirar.

Si, si, si.

Seria, mente.

Esta bien.

Good afternoon and welcome. We will be starting momentarily. Please make sure you do have the translation equipment because this will be a bilingual or multilingual panel. one of our panelists will be presenting in Spanish. English is on channel one and Spanish is on channel three. Buenas tardes y muy bienvenidos. Vamos a comenzar en unos minutos, so in un minuto. There's also a translation into Armenian and French. We take advantage of this moment to thank the interpreters and the technical crew and Franca Domenico for all the support and expertise that they are offering to make this a success. So, without further ado, welcome to our press conference, which is officially entitled, "Will Nature Markets and Monetizing Charismatic Species Bridge the Biodiversity Financing Gap?" That is a mouthful. The real question is, will putting Indigenous peoples' sacred animal relatives and territories in the carbon and biodiversity markets stop the sixth extinction and solve the climate crisis? The answer is a resounding no. Carbon and biodiversity markets are scientifically unfounded. They accelerate destruction destruction of life, they accelerate global warming, they greenwash big oil and extractive industries, and they constitute green colonialism. But let me introduce myself and together with our distinguished panel of indigenous peoples and civil society experts, explain why this is the case. My name is Cassandra Smithies and I am a researcher with Global Justice Ecology Project. Please feel free to download my free new book entitled Climate Opium: How We Are Overdosing on False Solutions to the Climate Emergency. So, as you may know, here at the Convention on Biological Diversity, the Global Mechanism for Biodiversity Finance set the goal of closing the $700 billion annual biodiversity funding gap as one of its targets for 2050. Money is not necessarily the key to saving the world, and it can't buy you love. But there are some obvious ways to raise this kind of money, such as changing paradigms to put people over profit, making peace, and redirecting the world's annual military budget of $2.8 trillion. Unfortunately, instead of stopping wars and phasing out fossil fuels immediately, the United Nations, the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, governments and big conservation NGOs argue that commodifying indigenous people's territories and charismatic species is the way to raise the needed funding, the way to give capitalism a shot in the arm, and the way to save the environment and the climate. Given this scenario, one might well wonder if the Convention on Biological Diversity will become the Convention on Selling Biological Diversity. Putting a price on nature will not save nature; it will destroy nature. Nonetheless, based on REDD+, wildlife is being turned into permits to destroy our world. For example, we have a very succinct fact sheet that you can pick up in the back of the room as you leave that highlights emblematic cases of how offset projects with Indigenous peoples' sacred animals is greenwash for extractivism. For example, the prototype for jaguar offsets is the Jaguar Amazon REDD project, which logs the rainforest where the jaguars live. The project even has a sawmill operating in the project Jaguars, as you know, spend a lot of time in trees, so cutting down trees certainly is not a way to protect jaguars. Similarly, lion offsets are bought by oil giants like British Petroleum and Eni, and there is a mega lion carbon project in southern Africa in four countries that spans 10 million hectares of forest. And in case you thought this might protect lions, well, the bad news is that a large-scale open pit copper mine was approved in the project area. And obviously, mining is not good for lions at all. Megafauna is particularly targeted for carbon and biodiversity offsets and so-called nature-based solutions. A prototype whale offset project project in the Arctic, the Whale Carbon Plus project, has amongst its partners the Baffinland Iron Mines Corporation, which also uses the credits to greenwash the expansion of its iron ore mine in Indigenous peoples' territory, despite their opposition. So clearly, carbon biodiversity credits kill sacred animals because they allow pollution and destruction of life to continue, which drives the extinctions of the very animals that they purport to protect. It is now my great honor to give the floor to other