The world enters 2025 amid a triple planetary crisis. Pollution, the loss of biological diversity, and climate change threaten earth systems. While governments seek to cooperate on these issues, progress is not anywhere near what the science tells us is necessary. And momentum in global environmental diplomacy dissipated sharply in 2024. This year could be more challenging still.
The reasons for this loss of momentum are many. With the world distracted by conflict, worsening geopolitical competition, including a wasteful and dangerous arms race, and preoccupied with inflationary pressures, governments have turned their attention away from environment.
In this article, I analyze this loss of momentum and make the case for global leadership in Canada’s green diplomacy.
A Disappointing Year in Review
The past year has been a busy one in global environmental politics. Governments gathered in Colombia for the 16th Conference of the Parties (COP) of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), in Azerbaijan for the 29th COP of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), and in Saudi Arabia for the 16th COP of the UN Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD). States reviewed progress on the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and met for the 6th UN Environment Assembly (UNEA).
Let’s discuss these negotiations in turn. Despite a breakthrough on representation for indigenous groups and agreement to establish a fund for the use of Digital Sequencing Information of genetic resources, the biodiversity COP failed to make significant headway on supporting implementation of the Kunming-Montréal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF). Often referred to as the “Paris Agreement for Nature,” the GBF provides a vision for 2050 and twenty-three targets for 2030. Unfortunately, only 44 of 196 countries came to COP with the requested plans for implementing the GBF. And states pledged only US$163 million at COP to the GBF fund. This falls well short of the pathway to an annual commitment of US$200 billion by 2030. Governments also could not reach agreement on a monitoring framework for the GBF. Indeed, talks broke off abruptly when discussions ran over time.
The climate COP also faced significant challenges. Labelled “The Finance COP,” the November conference in Baku established a New Collective Quantified Goal for helping poorer countries transition to a low-carbon economy and adapt to climate impacts. Many estimated the need to exceed US$1 trillion/year. Negotiations were contentious, with wealthy countries balking at such a commitment. Agreement was concluded on US$300 billion/year by 2035 in public financing with a target of US$1.3 trillion from all sources. This fell well short of expectations and sparked widespread criticism. The agreement left plenty of wiggle room for wealthy countries to repackage existing commitments and offer loans, rather than grants.
The third of the “Rio conventions,” UNCCD, combats land degradation, draught, and desertification. Currently, the earth is losing 100 million hectares of healthy, fertile land per year. The December conference conducted a midterm evaluation of the 2018-2030 Strategic Framework. It also adopted an Action Agenda. Governments agreed to establish the Riyadh Global Drought Resilience Partnership. This included US$12 billion in pledges. Governments were, however, unable to reach agreement on whether to negotiate a legally-binding protocol for tackling drought worldwide.
Progress has been underwhelming in achieving the SDGs. Adopted in 2015, the SDGs comprise 17 goals and 169 targets for implementation by UN member states. Governments are on pace to meet only seventeen percent of targets by 2030. Nearly half of the targets show minimal or moderate movement and progress on more than a third of them have stalled. Many in the developing world see this as a betrayal of the global development agenda. UNEA 6 saw the adoption of a Ministerial declaration and called for greater cooperation with Multilateral Environmental Agreements. Here, the UN Environment Programme (UNEP) has an essential role.
2024 was thus an underwhelming year in global environmental governance. The election of President Donald Trump in the United States led to further pessimism. The U.S. president has already announced plans for an American withdrawal from the Paris climate agreement.
2024 was thus an underwhelming year in global environmental governance. The election of President Donald Trump in the United States led to further pessimism. The U.S. president has already announced plans for an American withdrawal from the Paris climate agreement.
2025: Another Pivotal Year
The coming year will be another pivotal one. On climate, a new set of Nationally-Determined Contributions (NDCs) are due by February 2025 for the period running to 2035. NDCs are specific national targets to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and adapt to climate change. Governments are obligated under the Paris agreement to ratchet up the level of ambition in each commitment period. Current targets are incompatible with the 1.5°C Paris goal and will need strengthening. Current trajectories are consistent with 3.6°C of warming. The environmental, social, and economic consequences of such warming would be disastrous.
Countries will gather in February for a resumed biodiversity COP. They will discuss funding for biodiversity initiatives, reducing nature-destroying subsidies, and establishing a monitoring system. The financial mechanism for the GBF, including the role of the Global Environment Facility and the new Global Biodiversity Framework Fund, will be considered.
A new round of talks for a Global Plastics Treaty will begin. Countries will also gather in France for Third UN Ocean Conference. The High-Level Political Forum (HLPF) will meet under the auspices of the UN Economic and Social Council in July. A packed year of earth negotiations will end with the 7th UN Environment Assembly in December.
Canada’s Role will be Critical
Canada has historically played a leadership role in global environmental governance. As the world faces a crisis of multilateralism, there is a need for strong leadership. Governments must reverse the loss of momentum on environment seen in 2024. The science is clear. Urgent action is needed.
There are good geopolitical reasons for leadership here. Just as world leaders used environmental cooperation to further détente in the 1970s, governments could reduce global tensions through tackling shared environmental threats. Deepening geopolitical competition is not in any country’s interest. The world needs mechanisms to renew multilateralism and deescalate what is becoming a dangerous and unstable global military competition. Such efforts would strengthen ties with Southern actors increasingly disenchanted with the fruits of international cooperation.
In 2025, Canada will chair the G7 and can use this opportunity for global environmental leadership. Few details have emerged on Canada’s “signature initiatives” for the Kananaskis summit but support for the green energy transition on a global basis would be worthwhile and in line with recent G7 agendas. The applications of Artificial Intelligence to greening energy grids would benefit from improved G7 coordination.
Canada’s UN Ambassador, Bob Rae, will preside over the UN’s Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) in 2025. This provides an excellent opportunity for bolstering progress on achieving the SDGs. Canada should put real diplomatic muscle behind the 2025 HLPF as a means of rebuilding momentum on the SDGs. This will include support for Financing for Development and the safe application of Artificial Intelligence.
Canada must emphasize links between biodiversity/nature and climate, including by enhancing coordination across multilateral environmental agreements. The UN Environment Programme provides a worthy vehicle for this. Canada should enhance its representation in Nairobi by appointing a dedicated Deputy Permanent Representative to UNEP.
U.S. politics will create obstacles. Canada must collaborate with likeminded international partners and leverage links with subnational U.S. actors to move this agenda forward.
While a Canadian election in 2025 creates uncertainty, pragmatic consultations across party lines are needed now to allow the current (and future) government to seize critical opportunities for Canadian global leadership on the immediate horizon. There is a need for a true “Team Canada” approach that puts the national interest above partisan politics.