Every four years the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) holds the World Conservation Congress, bringing together conservationists, governments and businesses from around the world to share their work, exchange ideas and take part in the decision-making activities that refreshes IUCN leadership and directs policy.
The IUCN is a network of government and civil society organisations, representing over 1,400 members in more than 160 countries with an estimated 17,000 experts volunteering in a range of roles to support the IUCN’s work and delivery. Probably the best known activity of the IUCN is producing the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species, involving around 11,000 volunteer species specialists around the world.
This was my first visit to the World Conservation Congress, attending with fellow trustees and team members from Synchronicity Earth (I am also the Co-Chair of Trustees for Synchronicity Earth). We gathered in Abu Dhabi to listen, meet partners, take part in Forum sessions and vote in the Members Assembly. With around 10,000 people attending, the range of topics covered was incredible and the feeling of being part of a global network of nature action, stretching around the world, was a great antidote to our often, euro-centric perspective.
What were some of my key takeaways?
Philanthropy Pavilion
“‘Trickle-down’ of funding is not working as effectively as it needs to… Whether funding comes from governments or philanthropists, large grants need to be able to go through some form of distribution network that means small, local organisations can benefit.”
Everyone’s journey through the World Conservation Congress will be different and mine was informed by Synchronicity Earth’s programmatic work. I looked for freshwater and ocean sessions, work in Southeast Asia and Melanesia, as well as Central Africa. Synchronicity Earth also co-hosted The Reimagining Philanthropy Pavilion working with Maliasili, Arcus Foundation, the ICCA Consortium, Cambridge Conservation Initiative (CCI), Forest Peoples Programme, the International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED), IUCN Commission on Economic, Environmental and Social Policy (CEESP) and Conservation Data Justice (Condjust).
This pavilion was a hub for presentations and conversations on how to get more funding to grass-roots organisations, how indigenous wisdom can truly be embraced and fed into western knowledge and what local organisations need from their donors. This produced a rich seam of robust conversations that continued to highlight how the ‘trickle-down’ of funding is not working as effectively as it needs to and that building in-country conservation networks and expertise needs to be a priority for all of us. Whether funding comes from governments or philanthropists, large grants need to be able to go through some form of distribution network that means small, local organisations can benefit.
Species protection in Asia
“Asian philanthropy will grow over the coming years and we need to build new partnerships and collaborations.”
Asia loomed large. Synchronicity Earth manages an Asian Species programme with a focus on Southeast Asia, so I had a natural interest in joining sessions covering that region. It’s clear that Singapore is increasingly becoming a philanthropy hub. Synchronicity Earth works closely with Mandai Nature and the Asian Species Action Partnership, both based in Singapore, and they are working to raise the profile of biodiversity funding there. In talking with some of our Asian partners, they are also engaging more with local donors to build support and awareness for their activities and know this is an important part of embedding care and protection for nature in local consciousness. Asian philanthropy will grow over the coming years and we need to build new partnerships and collaborations.
Our partner, the Saola Foundation, gave an inspiring presentation on the Annamite Mountains, that lie between Vietnam and Lao, and are home to many endemic species that western science is still discovering. The Saola Foundation has recently identified a new species (new to western science) of Leaf Monkey, yet to be named.
Freshwater, oceans & fishing
I also listened to the Co-Executive Director, Shera, of Progres Sulawesi (Indonesia) talk about learning to undertake freshwater fish conservation having previously worked on bats, tortoises and plant species. She and her team work with fishers on Lake Poso to reduce the impacts of invasive species, often introduced for fish farming. The work had been challenging, as communities around the lake rely on the invasive fish species for food and income. However, her conversations with older generations had surfaced memories of a very different fish ecosystem from their youth and curiosity in the younger generations to re-discover these fish was helping her and her team to adapt fisheries approaches. Her humility and enthusiasm for the communities she works with and the species she is working to protect was infectious.
On the ocean, the ratification of the UN High Seas Treaty, or BBNJ, this year has given cause for hope, as there is now a mechanism in place to create Marine Protected Areas and generally regulate activities in the High Seas and work is underway on quite a few. But a session I attended on shark and ray conservation stressed that it’s not just Marine Protected Areas that are needed, as so much legal fishing is still causing damage to shark and ray populations. This is true for many marine species and more work on fisheries subsidies and negotiating sustainable fisheries quotas is needed.
Having said that, the benefits of mangrove and coral protection and restoration along coastal systems is increasingly valued by governments and businesses and it was great to hear the owner of a tourism business talking about funding restoration of coral systems in the Caribbean as being essential for the prosperity of her business.
Ecosystem and biodiversity credits
“Most agreed these markets are currently driven by carbon offsets, but that the development of voluntary carbon markets should not define how biodiversity markets work.”
There were many sessions on ecosystem and biodiversity credit markets and whether they can be used to scale funding from private sources in an equitable way. Most agreed these markets are currently driven by carbon offsets, but that the development of voluntary carbon markets should not define how biodiversity markets work. Acknowledging that biodiversity benefits are place-based and are not interchangeable or fungible, I consistently heard speakers talk about embedding this into the way biodiversity markets continue to develop. This means buyers cannot offset, and can only use credits to show their contributions to specific, place-based biodiversity targets guided by the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework. This is the ’contribution’ approach. There was also agreement that demand is not yet emerging and ultimately, regulation is needed to seriously increase funding flows.
The richness of the forum is hard to communicate, and I would have loved to attend sessions on environmental education, Indigenous wisdom, supporting youth initiatives, legal strategies and so many on specific species conservation projects. But the programme is so packed, it wasn’t possible.
The transition from the World Conservation Congress Forum into the Members Assembly was a complete gear and style change. The conference moved overnight from an experience exchange and ideas hub to a policy and process hub.
The Members Assembly: democracy in action
“This is both the strength and weakness of IUCN. Relying on so many volunteers for large sections of work tends to mean long timelines, but the consultative process can harness greater support and involve more organisations in delivery.”
Out of 1,400 members, over 1,000 took part in the Members Assembly. Synchronicity Earth has funded IUCN membership for several of our partners as it’s important to build representation and engagement from all countries. A small team coordinated Synchronicity Earth’s voting activity, listening to and working with many other organisations. Having Dr Simon Stuart, our Chief Scientific Adviser and now a Trustee, as our guide through the process was invaluable. He was previously Chair of the IUCN Species Survival Commission (SSC) and spent many years working for the IUCN in different roles.
The Assembly process has a clear governance structure that enables members to feed into the wording of Motions ahead of voting. These Motions then guide IUCN process and policy. At this meeting, time was spent on reviewing 148 motions, including:
- The potential for use of genetic engineering in conservation strategies for species (approved for case by case decisions)
- IUCN should support international ecocide laws (approved)
- Many motions raising the profile and action on freshwater systems (rivers, lakes, wetlands and springs)
- A proposal to develop a policy on geoengineering (approved)
- A proposal to develop a policy and guidance on Artificial Intelligence and conservation and the integrity of digital evidence (approved)
The seven IUCN specialist Commissions and the IUCN Secretariat will lead work to implement the Motions over the coming years, leaning heavily on the 17,000 experts from across the world that give their time, without payment, to support the IUCN’s work. This is both the strength and weakness of IUCN. Relying on so many volunteers for large sections of work tends to mean long timelines, but the consultative process can harness greater support and involve more organisations in delivery.
I came away from the WCC with a deeper understanding of how the IUCN works, why being a member and taking part matters and with greater respect for the transparency and openness of their workings.
It’s an extraordinary gathering that represents some of the best of human nature; collaboration and challenge, listening and learning, hearing the latest research and voicing possibilities. Disagreements were respectful, different perspectives were welcomed and gathering so many different geographical and cultural approaches is essential to collaboration and effectiveness. We often mention being stuck in our environment ‘bubble’, but in this case I was very happy to just enjoy it.
Lead image is of discussions at the Reimagining Conservation Pavillion. Credit: Geanie Cresswell/Synchronicity Earth.