A key UN report on the state of the global environment has been 'hijacked' by the United States and other countries who were unwilling to go along with the scientific findings, the co-chair has told the BBC.
The Global Environment Outlook, the result of six years' work, connects climate change, nature loss, and pollution to unsustainable consumption by people living in wealthy and emerging economies.
It warns of a 'dire future' for millions unless there's a rapid move away from coal, oil, and gas and fossil fuel subsidies.
However, during a meeting with government representatives to agree on the findings, the US and certain allies expressed their inability to support the summary of the report's conclusions.
As scientists declined to dilute their findings, the report has now been published without the summary and without the backing of governments, consequently diminishing its potential impact.
Researchers noted that the objections to this new report echo similar concerns raised during the recent COP30 talks.
Typically issued every six to seven years, the Global Environment Outlook serves as a significant scientific analysis detailing the major threats to our planet.
Drafted under the UN’s auspices, prior studies have normally seen key conclusions and recommendations agreed on by governments and published as a 'summary for policymakers'. This is crucial as it demonstrates governmental endorsement of scientific findings and their commitment to action.
In contrast, this iteration of the Global Environment Outlook lacks such a summary due to breakdowns in negotiations among political representatives of around 70 countries during a contentious meeting in Nairobi in October.
Compiled by nearly 300 scientists worldwide, the report emphasizes that our consumption patterns—regarding food, clothing, and energy—are unsustainable due to excessive resource extraction.
To address the intertwining issues of climate change, pollution, and biodiversity loss, it recommends a drastic reduction in fossil fuel usage and significant cuts to farming and fossil fuel subsidies.
Despite anticipating short-term economic challenges for consumers, the authors assert that these necessary actions will yield long-term benefits globally.
Participants at the approval meeting, which traditionally necessitates consensus, noted that the stringent recommendations concerning fossil fuels and plastics were too contentious for the US, Saudi Arabia, and Russia, among others.
'A small number of countries basically just hijacked the process, to be quite honest,' said Prof. Sir Robert Watson during an interview. He expressed disappointment that the US did not engage genuinely in discussions.
Sir Robert Watson, a highly regarded scientist and previous chief of the UK Department of Environment, noted that the US’s withdrawal from the agreement process undermined consensus efforts.
Activists expressed concern that such discord over the Global Environment Outlook could foreshadow similar divisions in future Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change reports, which are integral to the global response to climate change.
