What happened
Talks on a global drought framework have reached an impasse at the 17th Conference of the Parties to the UN Convention to Combat Desertification, held in Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia. A small group of parties led by the United States said it would not accept an international drought text, whether legally binding or voluntary.
The central disagreement is over whether drought should be managed mainly through domestic, bilateral and regional action, or through coordinated multilateral arrangements. The African Group has argued that disconnected initiatives cannot close implementation gaps. Andrea Meza Murillo, deputy executive secretary of the convention, said the disagreement did not reflect the position held by most parties.
Negotiators are considering three routes. One would establish an open-ended intergovernmental working group to develop an international instrument. Another would concentrate on national measures and encourage countries without drought plans to adopt them. A third would reinforce implementation of existing provisions and identify gaps and their causes.
Chile has proposed a voluntary pilot mechanism based on case studies. It would seek to improve use of current tools and identify delivery gaps without creating a new mechanism or financing requirement.
Why it matters
The outcome could determine whether countries create a formal process for reporting drought preparedness and response, and whether funding becomes more predictable. The source material states that drought affected one in four people globally in 2022 and 2023, increasing pressure for a coordinated response.
For European and Turkish organisations tracking climate and land-restoration policy, the negotiations currently create uncertainty rather than new obligations. The European Union and Brazil backed a decision at COP17 instead of another deferral, while the United States argued that existing instruments should be used rather than establishing an international framework.
The divide also concerns access to support already pledged. Without a system connecting countries to available resources, funding commitments may be difficult to turn into action, according to delegates cited in the source material.
Background
At COP16 in Riyadh in December 2024, parties did not agree on whether to pursue a binding drought protocol or a voluntary framework and moved the decision to COP17. The Riyadh Global Drought Resilience Partnership secured commitments of more than $12 billion.
The United States pointed to the convention’s Drought Toolbox and the World Meteorological Organization’s international drought early-warning system as existing resources. The source material notes that only a small share of countries had completed the convention toolbox modules, and that many countries had not joined the early-warning system.
What's next
Delegations must decide whether COP17 will adopt one of the current options or leave the issue unresolved again. The source material reports that several parties are seeking a decision during COP17, while others caution against accepting an agreement solely to meet a deadline.
