The International Chamber of Commerce (ICC), the institutional representative of more than 45 million companies in over 170 countries, has issued a formal statement welcoming the Friends of the Cali Fund initiative and its recent declaration regarding the management of Digital Sequence Information (DSI). As the global voice of business, the ICC emphasized the critical need for a collaborative approach between governments and the private sector to overcome existing barriers to the implementation of a multilateral benefit-sharing mechanism. This mechanism is intended to ensure that the commercial and scientific use of genetic data contributes directly to the conservation of global biodiversity, a goal the ICC asserts is essential for long-term economic and environmental stability.
The ICC’s endorsement comes at a pivotal moment in international environmental diplomacy, as parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) seek to operationalize the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF). The Cali Fund, named after the host city of the COP16 biodiversity summit in Colombia, represents a proposed solution to one of the most contentious issues in international law: how to fairly share the benefits derived from DSI. By engaging with the Friends of the Cali Fund—a coalition of countries and stakeholders dedicated to moving this agenda forward—the ICC aims to build a foundation for a benefit-sharing system that is not only effective in its conservation goals but also practical and predictable for the global business community.
Contextualizing the Cali Fund and Digital Sequence Information
To understand the ICC’s position, it is necessary to examine the evolution of Digital Sequence Information (DSI) within the framework of international biodiversity agreements. Historically, the 1992 Convention on Biological Diversity and its 2010 Nagoya Protocol established rules for "Access and Benefit-Sharing" (ABS) regarding physical genetic resources, such as plants, animals, or microbes. However, as biotechnology advanced, scientists became able to sequence the DNA of these organisms and store the information in digital databases. This allowed researchers to access the "blueprint" of a species without needing a physical sample.
This shift created a significant legal loophole. While physical access was regulated, digital access remained largely outside the scope of existing ABS frameworks. Developing nations, which are home to the majority of the world’s biodiversity, argued that this constituted "biopiracy" in a digital age, as companies could develop profitable pharmaceuticals, agricultural products, or cosmetics using DSI without compensating the provider countries. Conversely, the private sector and the scientific community expressed concerns that overly restrictive regulations on DSI could stifle innovation, delay the development of life-saving medicines, and complicate global research efforts.
The Cali Fund emerged as a proposed multilateral solution to this impasse. Rather than relying on a complex web of bilateral contracts between individual companies and countries, a multilateral mechanism would collect contributions—likely from industries that benefit most from DSI—and distribute those funds to support biodiversity conservation and the rights of Indigenous peoples and local communities (IPLCs).
The ICC Perspective: Clarity, Certainty, and Innovation
In its recent declaration, the ICC highlighted that the private sector recognizes the inherent value of nature and supports the principle of fair and equitable benefit sharing. However, the organization stressed that for a multilateral mechanism to be successful, it must adhere to several core principles. Specifically, the ICC called for a system that is proportionate, provides legal certainty, and avoids economic distortion.
For businesses, "legal certainty" is a primary concern. Under the current fragmented landscape, companies often face a "patchwork" of national regulations that make compliance difficult and expensive. A unified multilateral mechanism, if designed correctly, could streamline these requirements. The ICC’s insistence on "proportionate" measures suggests that the financial obligations placed on companies should not outweigh the benefits derived from using DSI, particularly for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and research institutions.
Furthermore, the ICC noted that any new mechanism must be part of a "coherent benefit sharing landscape." This refers to the need for alignment with other international instruments, such as the World Health Organization’s (WHO) Pandemic Influenza Preparedness (PIP) Framework and the newly adopted High Seas Treaty (BBNJ). Without such alignment, businesses could find themselves subject to overlapping or conflicting payment obligations for the same genetic data.
Chronology of the Multilateral Mechanism Development
The journey toward the Cali Fund and the ICC’s current engagement can be traced through several key milestones in global environmental governance:
- December 2022 (COP15, Montreal): The Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework is adopted. Decision 15/9 specifically addresses DSI, agreeing to establish a multilateral mechanism for benefit-sharing, including a global fund.
- 2023 (Intersessional Period): An Ad Hoc Open-ended Working Group on Benefit-sharing from the Use of DSI is formed. This group meets to debate the modalities of the fund, including who should pay, how much, and how the funds should be distributed.
- October 2024 (COP16, Cali): The "Cali Fund" is formally proposed and debated. The "Friends of the Cali Fund" initiative gains momentum, seeking to bridge the gap between the Global North and Global South.
- Present Day: The ICC issues its response to the Friends of the Cali Fund declaration, signaling the private sector’s readiness to move from conceptual debate to practical implementation.
Supporting Data: The Economic Stakes of Biodiversity
The urgency of the ICC’s engagement is underscored by the staggering economic figures associated with biodiversity and the "nature-positive" economy. According to the World Economic Forum, more than half of the world’s total GDP—approximately $44 trillion—is moderately or highly dependent on nature and its services. The pharmaceutical industry, a major user of DSI, was valued at approximately $1.6 trillion globally in 2023, with a significant portion of new drug leads originating from natural products.
The funding gap for biodiversity conservation is equally significant. Estimates suggest that the world needs to spend between $722 billion and $967 billion annually by 2030 to reverse the decline of biodiversity. Currently, global spending on biodiversity is roughly $124 billion to $143 billion per year. The Cali Fund is viewed as a critical tool to help close this gap, potentially generating billions of dollars in annual revenue if the private sector’s contributions are effectively harnessed.
The ICC’s role is to ensure that these contributions are managed in a way that does not cripple the very industries—such as biotechnology and agriculture—that are essential for solving other global challenges, such as food security and climate change.
Reactions from Other Stakeholders
The ICC’s call for collaboration and legal certainty has been met with a variety of responses from other parties involved in the CBD process:
- Developing Nations (The G77 and China): Many countries in the Global South have expressed cautious optimism about the private sector’s willingness to engage but remain firm that contributions to the Cali Fund should be mandatory rather than voluntary. They argue that the "fair and equitable" requirement of the CBD cannot be met through corporate charity alone.
- Civil Society and NGOs: Organizations like Greenpeace and the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) have urged for transparency in how the fund is governed. They advocate for a direct "line of sight" between the profits made from DSI and the protection of the ecosystems from which that information originated.
- The Scientific Community: Academic researchers have voiced concerns that any mechanism—multilateral or otherwise—must maintain the "open access" nature of DSI databases. They argue that if researchers are forced to pay for every sequence they download, the pace of global scientific discovery will slow down significantly.
The ICC’s statement acknowledges these tensions, noting that "remaining important conceptual, governance, and practical implementation issues" must still be addressed.
Analysis of Implications: The Path to 2030
The ICC’s support for the Friends of the Cali Fund represents a strategic shift in how the private sector approaches environmental regulation. Rather than resisting the creation of a new fund, global business leaders are opting to sit at the table to shape its design. This "proactive engagement" strategy is likely intended to prevent the adoption of more radical, fragmented, or unworkable national-level regulations that could arise if a global consensus is not reached.
The implications of a successful Cali Fund are profound. If the mechanism is "workable in practice," as the ICC demands, it could serve as a global model for "nature-based finance." It would effectively internalize the cost of biodiversity loss into the supply chains of high-tech industries. However, the "economic distortion" mentioned by the ICC remains a major hurdle. If only companies in certain jurisdictions or sectors contribute, it could create an uneven playing field.
Furthermore, the governance of the Cali Fund will be a litmus test for international cooperation. The ICC’s emphasis on "clarity" suggests that businesses will demand a seat in the governance structure of the fund to ensure that the capital is used efficiently and for its intended purpose: the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity.
Conclusion and Future Outlook
As the International Chamber of Commerce looks forward to working with the Friends of the Cali Fund and other parties, the focus shifts to the technical details of implementation. The coming months will likely see intensive negotiations on the specific triggers for payment (e.g., at the point of commercialization vs. at the point of data access) and the percentage of revenue that should be diverted to the fund.
The ICC’s readiness to engage underscores a growing realization within the business community: the loss of biodiversity is a systemic risk to the global economy. By supporting a "coherent, effective and workable" multilateral mechanism, the ICC is not just advocating for corporate interests, but for a stable regulatory environment that allows for innovation while fulfilling the global mandate to protect the natural world. The success of the Cali Fund will ultimately depend on whether this spirit of collaboration can be translated into a legally sound and economically viable framework before the 2030 deadline for the Global Biodiversity Framework.
About the Author
