*

Rich countries did not respond to UN chief's demand for

conservation donations

*

Delegates hope revamping global financial system will

generate

cash for nature

*

Countries reach deal on charging companies for genetic

information use

(Updated to add comment from US State Department in paragraph

17 and AstraZeneca ( AZN ) in paragraph 22)

By Jake Spring

CALI, Colombia, Nov 3 (Reuters) - Wealthy nations

appeared to hit a limit with how much they are willing to pay to

conserve nature around the world, instead shifting their focus

at the two-week U.N. biodiversity summit toward discussions of

private money filling the funding gap.

At the COP16 negotiations in Cali, Colombia, countries

failed to figure out how they would mobilize $200 billion

annually in conservation funding by 2030, including $30 billion

that would come directly from rich nations.

That money, pledged two years ago as part of the landmark

Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework agreement, is

meant to finance activities that boost nature, such as

sustainable farming or patrolling wildlife reserves.

But there was no consensus as talks dragged on beyond the

summit's scheduled end on Friday, during which dozens of

delegations departed. By Saturday morning's roll call, there was

no longer a quorum among the nearly 200 nations for an agreement

to pass, forcing organizers to abruptly suspend the meeting.

"I am both saddened and enraged by the non-outcome of

COP16," said Shilps Gautam, chief executive of project finance

firm Opna.

"The wild thing about the nature financing discussions is

that the numbers discussed are already a pittance."

Human activities such as farming, mining, and urban

development are increasingly pushing nature into crisis, with 1

million or so plant and animal species thought to be at risk of

extinction.

Climate change, a result of fossil fuel burning, is also

adding to nature's woes by raising temperatures and disrupting

weather cycles.

Countries will meet again in Azerbaijan next week for the

U.N.'s COP29 climate summit, which again will be focused on the

steep need for funding from wealthy nations to their poorer

counterparts to help shoulder climate costs.

LITTLE MONEY FROM RICH NATIONS

Even before the talks broke down, developed nations had

signaled an unwillingness to offer large amounts of cash.

European governments including Germany and the Netherlands

have slashed their foreign aid budgets over the last year, while

France and the U.K. are also cutting back.

Government development money specifically targeted at nature

conservation abroad fell to $3.8 billion in 2022 compared with

$4.6 billion in 2015, according to the Organisation for Economic

Co-operation and Development.

At COP16, U.N. Secretary General Antonio Guterres demanded

that countries make significant new contributions to the Global

Biodiversity Framework Fund.

The response was muted. Nations at COP16 pledged $163

million in contributions to the fund, bringing total

contributions to roughly $400 million - far from a major

contribution to the $30 billion target from nations by 2030.

The United States, which is not a party to U.N. Convention

on Biological Diversity, has not contributed.

A U.S. State Department spokesperson said the country

supports the convention and is helping to implement the

Kunming-Montreal agreement. The U.S. has contributed close to

half a billion dollars annually since the 2022 nature summit to

international biodiversity efforts through a variety of avenues,

the spokesperson said.

"The public money is already leveraged as much as we can,"

Florika Fink-Hooijer, the European Union's director general of

environment, told reporters at the summit.

"We now have to look at other sources of funding."

PRIVATE CASH

When it came to going after private capital, delegates at

the COP16 summit agreed to a plan to charge pharmaceutical and

other companies for their use of genetic information in the

research and development of new commercial products.

An AstraZeneca ( AZN ) spokesperson said in a statement the

company is aligned with an industry association's concerns that

payments for use of genetic information could stifle innovation,

delay research-and-development efforts and create legal

uncertainty.

Pharmaceutical companies Pfizer ( PFE ), Merck ( MRK ) and

Sanofi did not respond to request for comment on the

deal.

Experts estimate the plan could generate about $1 billion

annually.

That still doesn't cover the billions needed to halt the

collapse of ecosystems, like the Amazon rainforest or coral

reefs. The world will need to devise ways for enticing private

investment in nature-friendly projects, said Marcos Neto,

director of global policy at the U.N. Development Program.

Some tools include green bonds or debt-for-nature swaps,

whereby countries refinance their debt at lower interest rates

in order to spend the savings on conservation. The World

Economic Forum estimates that debt-for-nature swaps could

generate $100 billion in nature funding.