Findings from COP16 on efforts to combat environmental crime

This blog was originally published by the Washington Brazil Office, an independent institution focused on strengthening the role of civil society and institutions dedicated to promoting and defending democracy, human rights, freedoms and sustainable socio-economic and environmental development in Brazil .

Last week, representatives from countries around the world met at the COP16 biodiversity conference in Cali, Colombia, to discuss national commitments to protecting biodiversity at a time when up to 1 million species are at risk of extinction.

Of course, environmental crime is squarely on the COP16 agenda. We know that illegal logging, mining and trade in wildlife pose major threats to biodiversity. This occurs through direct threats such as trafficking in endangered species, which drives them out of their habitats and endangers their immediate survival. It also comes from indirect threats, such as the use of mercury in illegal mining, which poisons living organisms downstream, including dolphins and jaguars.

The FACT Coalition came to COP16 having just published new research on environmental crimes and the dirty money that fuels them. FACT analyzed 230 environmental crimes over the past decade and found that the United States is the most common foreign jurisdiction for environmental crimes committed in countries in the Amazon region, targeting illegally obtained natural resources and the proceeds of their sale. In these cases, illegal proceeds are often laundered through anonymous shell companies. Additionally, FACT found that environmental crime often overlaps with other crimes such as corruption and terrorist financing, a phenomenon known as “crime convergence.”

Like FACT, many organizations came to COP16 with new research, cases and resources to share. After two weeks of intensive discussion, debate and exchange of ideas, these are some of the key findings on environmental crime:

1. There is widespread agreement that we need to “follow the money,” but there are also concerns about how we can effectively put this into practice. “Efforts to combat illicit finance linked to other illicit industries, such as drug trafficking, have produced disappointing results,” María Victoria Llorente, the director of one of Colombia’s leading think tanks, told me at COP16. “How can we ensure we do a better job of tackling environmental crime?” It’s a challenging question, but part of the answer certainly lies in raising awareness in the financial sector. For example, at COP16, the World Wildlife Federation launched a new toolkit to help financial institutions understand and mitigate the risks associated with environmental crime. Another part of the solution is to strengthen the government’s response. At a COP16 event, a government official from Colombia’s Financial Intelligence Unit explained that Colombia had recently made administrative changes to the way financial information is submitted to the Attorney General’s Office. The cases are now being forwarded not only to the environmental prosecutor’s office, but also to the anti-money laundering prosecutor’s office to ensure parallel financial investigations.
2. If the proceeds of environmental crime are recovered, they could help fund future efforts to protect biodiversity. Revenue from environmental crime is estimated to be up to $281 billion per year. According to Gastón Schulmeister of the Organization of American States, given the scale of this illicit economy, countries “should consider how recovering assets from environmental crime could help address financing needs related to COP16 and biodiversity conservation efforts.”
3. Greater cooperation between countries is needed to bring environmental criminals to justice. FACT research has shown that many of these crimes are of a cross-border nature. However, countries often defend themselves alone. As Hanny Cueva Beteta, head of the Global Program on Crimes Affecting the Environment at the UN Office on Drugs and Crime, explained at a COP16 event, “international law enforcement connectivity is critical.”
4. There is increasing recognition that the term “deforestation” is not sufficient to describe the full spectrum of harm caused by environmental crime. Illegal gold mining, arguably the worst environmental crime in Latin America, causes devastating environmental damage but does not always result in deforestation, especially when gold mining occurs along rivers. Meanwhile, experts point to the need to protect other ecosystems beyond tropical forests, such as wetlands, grasslands and the so-called alpine tundra paramos.
5. Illegal gold remains a major problem. With the launch of the Global Commitment to an International Agreement on Mineral Supply Chain Traceability on October 29, the Colombian government has made traceability a high priority for COP16. At the local level, Cali has been a leader in forming a regional coalition of cities dedicated to tackling environmental crimes such as illegal gold mining. Meanwhile, civil society also expressed concerns about illegal gold at dozens of COP16 events. FACT participated in an event with experts from Colombia, Peru and Brazil on the issue of illegal gold mining in the Amazon and presented a new policy brief with seven policy recommendations to address the problem.