COP16 desertification: great progress despite impasse

The COP16 on desertification in Riyadh proved to be fairly successful. Sustainable agricultural practices such as agro-ecology and agroforestry will gain greater recognition, for example, and there is a growing consensus on the use of environmentally harmful subsidies in the battle against land degradation. However, this COP was unable to come to an agreement on how to take a more proactive approach to droughts.

The unsettled climate and the biodiversity loss make for a bleak future for humanity and the planet. But did you know that our soils are seeing a great rate of decline? According to the UN, between 1990 and 2020, no less than 4.3 million km² of desert or arid land was added to the world: around 140 times the surface area of Belgium, or one third more than the gigantic country of India. So this is land where virtually nothing can grow anymore. Today, 40% of all the land on Earth is already a desert, not counting Antarctica.

Declining soils are certainly not 'somebody else's problem'. In Flanders, too, 80% of the land has degraded, with 70% in Wallonia. For the EU, the figures are around 60 to 80%. Here, it is not just about dried-out or infertile land, but also about highly polluted land, owing to pesticides and other poisonous chemicals such as PFAS, among other things.

Zero net land degradation

And this is particularly bad news. After all, soil is the basis of essentials such as food, drinking water, animal feed, fibre, building materials and so on. Nonetheless, since 1992, the UN has had a convention on desertification, monitored by the UNCCD (United Nations Convention for Desertification). Every two years, the 197 Member States or parties to the convention meet for a Conference of the Parties (COP). The COP16 took place in Riyadh (Saudi Arabia) from 2 to 13 December 2024.

Despite the difficulties in progress, the UNCCD sticks to its goal: by 2030, no more net land may be affected (Zero Net Land Degradation). In practice, this amounts to (1) restoring the degraded land and (2) ceasing practices harmful to soil, such as excessive ploughing and building, alongside careless use of chemicals. And of course, sufficient funding must also be found for developing countries.

Some progress was still made

The discussions on desertification are less likely to be featured in the media than those on climate and biodiversity, but no less crucial for it. What was said about it in the media had a rather negative tone. Yet this very well-attended COP did make some genuine progress, according to our head negotiator for Belgium, Corentin Genin. The main positive points are:

• The budget for the UNCCD's secretariat was raised by 8%, which ensures its operations through 2026 – a success against all expectations! Owing to the many topics handled by the COPs, the secretariat's workload had risen sharply.
• Agro-ecology and agroforestry are clearly recognised in five resolutions as pertinent practices for combating land degradation and restoring land, and thus for making our agro-food system more sustainable. Among other things, there is a reference to the clear definition of agro-ecology (with 10 elements) from the FAO.
• Many fruitful discussions took place on environmentally harmful subsidies: subsidising pesticides, artificial fertiliser and suchlike that are harmful to soil. If these subsidies can be repurposed towards sustainable practices, a great deal of progress can be made. As such, millions of small farmers could still receive their subsidies on the condition that they use soil-friendly agricultural practices. At the insistence of the US, among others – who wish to protect their own pesticide and artificial fertiliser industry – this did not end up in the final text for this COP. However, there is a growing consensus that it is a prominent topic.
• The Global Environment Facility (GEF) – the worldwide funding mechanism for the three Rio Conventions, among other things – is encouraged to further support coherent policy. This means that developing countries should abandon environmentally harmful subsidies. The GEF is explicitly invited to carry on supporting those countries wishing to reform their public expenditure that leads to land degradation. The GEF is also asked to assign further financial resources to better drought management. In the next GEF cycle – the GEF9, from 2026 to 2030 – more money needs to go to the battle against land degradation (see below).
   

Impasse

The COP16 mainly stumbled over an impasse that has been dragging on for years now. The African countries insist on having a separate protocol (a legally binding instrument) and a related global fund for better avoiding and tackling drought. But the others – the EU, most Western and Latin American countries, etc. – mainly seek to reinforce the existing instruments and funds. These include the GEF, as well as the Green Climate Fund, the Least Developed Countries Fund and suchlike. After all, a new fund does not in the least guarantee that more money will be made available for the battle against desertification.

It also faltered in drawing up national plans against desertification. The major obstacle would seem to be money there too. Without sufficient funding, after all, those plans cannot be carried out. For example, 77 billion dollars per year are currently available for investments, but the need amounts to 355 billion dollars per year!
 

Spark of optimism

Yet colleague Corentin Genin does retain a spark of optimism. For example, he believes that the 278-billion-dollar gap can be closed in part by repurposing environmentally harmful subsidies. But shifts within the future GEF9 resources may also offer a breakthrough. The GEF funds five different domains. Today – in the GEF8 – land degradation gets 11.6% of the resources, biodiversity 36% and climate disruption 17%. If 20% of the GEF9 resources can flow to land degradation, this may satisfy the African countries.

In addition, much could be gained if the GEF could collaborate better with other environmental funds, such as the Green Climate Fund. Indeed, measures to combat climate disruption or support biodiversity can also combat land degradation and vice versa.

Finally, Saudi Arabia launched the Riyadh Global Drought Resilience Partnership at COP16. Budget: around 12 billion dollars, deriving in part from the Islamic Development Bank and the OPEC Fund for International Development. 85% of the funds are loans to the private sector, however. We must wait and see how this will play out. Projects to combat drought only bear fruit in the long term, while the private sector expects a profit in the short term.
 

The Great Green Wall

While the land restoration we must achieve is immense, we do still have one shining example: the Great Green Wall in the Sahel. The colossal project continues to make good progress. In all probability, it will be copied in southern Africa, and potentially also in the Arabian region. The EU is a strongly committed partner, as is Belgium. Belgium donated 50 million euros and APEFE is also very active in Burkina Faso.

So all is certainly not lost. The negotiations on drought were pushed back to COP17, which will take place in Mongolia in 2026, but there could still be some movement in the meantime. For example, work will continue in the coming months on the guidelines for the UNCCD's strategic framework after 2030. And in December 2025, a smaller interim summit on desertification (CRIC23) will follow in Panama.