Summary report, 1–12 December 2025

At the end of a year marked by environmental catastrophes, reeling from a sharp downturn in development finance, and still in the throes of geopolitical shifts, the world gathered at the home of global environmental governance to take decisive action to better safeguard the planet and its people.

During the seventh session of the UN Environment Assembly (UNEA-7), the world’s highest level decision-making body on the environment, delegates worked tirelessly to build consensus to address issues with wide reaching consequences for people and planet. Delegates confronted new and emerging issues, linking the environment to technology, health, and the global economy, while also considering how best to deal with ever-growing concerns pertaining to climate change, biodiversity loss, and pollution.

In the end, the Assembly adopted a Ministerial Declaration, reflecting the theme of the conference, “Advancing sustainable solutions for a resilient planet.” After much discussion, often going well into the night, delegates agreed on 11 resolutions, addressing, among others:

• global actions to promote the climate resilience of coral reefs;
• international cooperation on the environmentally sound management of minerals and metals;
• the global response to the massive influx of Sargassum seaweed blooms;
• synergies, cooperation or collaboration for national implementation of multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs) and other relevant environmental instruments;
• the meaningful participation of youth in environmental processes and on environmental education;
• the preservation of glaciers and the broader cryosphere, in particular in mountain regions;
• the global management of wildfires; and
• the sound management of chemicals and waste.

The adopted resolutions also address topical issues, including the environmental sustainability of artificial intelligence (AI) systems and the environmental dimensions of antimicrobial resistance (AMR), as well as to promote sustainable solutions through sport for a resilient planet—all new areas of work for the UN Environment Programme (UNEP). Delegates were, however, unable to reach consensus on resolutions addressing deep-sea ecosystems, karst ecosystems, and crimes affecting the environment.

To ensure the smooth functioning of UNEP, they held sometimes fraught negotiations, finally reaching consensus on three decisions, related to: the Medium-Term Strategy (MTS) for the period 2026–2029 and the Programme of Work (PoW) and budget for the biennium 2026–2027; the management of trust funds and earmarked contributions; and the provisional agenda, dates, and venue of UNEA-8.

UNEP also launched the seventh edition of the Global Environment Outlook (GEO-7), but delegates were unable to agree on how best to reflect it in relevant decisions, finally agreeing not to include reference to the seminal report in the decision on the MTS. The launch of GEO-7 was nevertheless welcomed in the Ministerial Declaration. A resolution aiming to strengthen UNEP headquarters in Nairobi also proved too contentious, with delegates eventually opting to drop it, and perhaps revisit it at a future meeting of the Assembly.

Over 6,000 delegates registered for the meetings, which brought together representatives from governments, civil society, academia, youth, and business and industry. UNEA-7 was preceded by the seventh session of the Open-ended Committee of Permanent Representatives (OECPR-7), which made progress on negotiating the resolutions and decisions eventually considered by the Assembly. UNEA-7 featured a High-level Segment, where delegates shared experiences, engaging in leadership and multi-stakeholder dialogues.

The meetings took place from 1-5 December and 8-12 December 2025 at UNEP headquarters in Nairobi. During the course of the meeting, delegates also convened in the first Women’s Environment Assembly, the Youth Assembly, the Global Major Groups and Stakeholders Forum and numerous side events.

A Brief History of the UN Environment Assembly

UNEA was established in the wake of the UN Conference on Sustainable Development (Rio+20) in 2012, in response to the grave challenges stemming from environmental degradation, unsustainable patterns of production and consumption, and rising inequality among a global population projected to reach 11 billion by the end of the 21st century.

Origins of UNEA

The UNEP Governing Council (GC) was created as a result of the 1972 Stockholm Conference on the Human Environment, which established UNEP as the central UN node for global environmental cooperation and treaty making through UN General Assembly (UNGA) resolution 2997 (XXVII). The UNGA elected 58 members to the GC, based on the principle of equitable geographic representation. The Global Ministerial Environment Forum (GMEF) was constituted by the GC, as envisaged in UNGA resolution 53/242 (1998). Whereas the GC had a programme-focused role in reviewing and approving UNEP’s activities and budget for each biennium, the GMEF reviewed important and emerging policy issues in the field of the environment. Some of the highlights from GC/GMEF sessions during the 2000–2012 period include:

• adoption of the Malmö Ministerial Declaration in 2000, which agreed that the 2002 World Summit on Sustainable Development should review the requirements for a strengthened institutional structure for international environmental governance;
• creation of the Strategic Approach to International Chemicals Management;
• the 2005 Bali Strategic Plan for Technology Support and Capacity-Building;
• establishment of the Ad Hoc Open-ended Working Group to Review and Assess Measures to Address the Global Issue of Mercury; and
• establishment of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES).

Key Turning Points

The twelfth GC Special Session (GCSS-12) from 20-22 February 2012, in Nairobi, Kenya, marked the 40th anniversary of the establishment of UNEP. Rio+20 convened in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil from 13–22 June 2012. Its outcome document, “The Future We Want,” called on UNGA to strengthen and upgrade UNEP through several measures, including, inter alia:

• introducing universal membership of the UNEP GC;
• ensuring secure, stable, adequate, and increased financial resources from the UN regular budget;
• enhancing UNEP’s ability to fulfill its coordination mandate within the UN system; and
• ensuring the active participation of all relevant stakeholders.

Following Rio+20, the UNGA adopted resolution 67/213 on strengthening and upgrading UNEP and establishing universal membership of its GC. On 13 March 2013, the UNGA further adopted resolution 67/251, which changed the designation of the UNEP GC to “the UNEA of the UNEP.” The GC convened for the last time from 19–22 February 2013, in a universal session that laid the groundwork for the first meeting of UNEA, which took place in June 2014.

UNEA thus subsumes the functions of both the GC and the GMEF, and provides high-level leadership on the global stage in a role described by former UNEP Executive Director Achim Steiner as “the world’s parliament on the environment.”

The Committee of Permanent Representatives (CPR) is the Nairobi-based subsidiary body of UNEA, which meets intersessionally. With the advent of universal membership, the Open-ended Committee of Permanent Representatives (OECPR) meets in advance of each UNEA session to prepare for the session by negotiating resolutions.

Recent UNEA Meetings

UNEA-5.1: UNEA’s first online session took place amid the COVID-19 pandemic from 22–23 February 2021, adopting a limited set of three procedural decisions: endorsement of the MTS for 2022–2025, and PoW and budget for the biennium 2022–2023; the management of trust funds and earmarked contributions; and agreement to convene a resumed, in-person fifth session in 2022. The Assembly also launched the commemoration of the 50th anniversary of the creation of UNEP by the UN Conference on the Human Environment held in Stockholm, Sweden, in 1972.

UNEA-5.2: The resumed fifth session took place from 21 February – 2 March 2022, convening under the theme “Strengthening Actions for Nature to Achieve the Sustainable Development Goals.” UNEA-5.2 adopted 14 resolutions, one decision, and a Ministerial Declaration, as well as a political declaration commemorating the 50th anniversary of the establishment of UNEP. At this meeting, delegates also adopted resolutions establishing processes towards an international legally binding instrument to end plastic pollution, and on what is now the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Panel on Chemicals, Waste and Pollution (ISP-CWP).

UNEA-6: Under the theme “Effective, inclusive and sustainable multilateral actions to tackle climate change, biodiversity loss and pollution,” UNEA-6 convened from 19 February – 1 March 2024. The Assembly adopted 15 resolutions, two decisions, and a Ministerial Declaration. Resolutions addressed issues from the environmental aspects of minerals and metals, and the sound management of chemicals and wastes, and highly hazardous pesticides, to sustainable lifestyles, sand and dust storms, land degradation, and environmental assistance and recovery in areas affected by armed conflict.

UNEA-7 Report

On Monday, 8 December, UNEA-7 President Abdullah Bin Ali Al-Amri (Oman) opened the meeting, referring to the UNEA-7 theme, stating that to “advance sustainable solutions for a resilient planet,” delegates must deliver on implementable resolutions guided by science and supported by resources for implementation. He urged renewing coherence among MEAs to ensure interconnected systems and build a resilient planet.

In a video message, UN Deputy Secretary-General Amina Mohammed welcomed delegates to Nairobi, noting that the city embodies “the promise of our shared future.” UNEP Executive Director Inger Andersen stressed this is the time to step down from “the ramparts of individual positions and meet on common ground” in the face of accelerating environmental challenges and turbulent geopolitical waters.

Zainab Hawa Bangura, Director-General, UN Office at Nairobi (UNON), reiterated UNON’s support for UNEA-7, and called for tangible resolutions to assure that future generations inherit a world that is greener, safer, healthier, and just, where all people are treated equally and with dignity and respect.

Deborah Mlongo Barasa, Cabinet Secretary for Environment, Climate Change and Forestry, Kenya, urged the Assembly to spark sustainable solutions, strengthen resilience, and champion inclusive environmental governance.

Adoption of the Agenda and Organization of Work: On Monday, 8 December, the Assembly adopted the agenda (UNEP/EA.7/1 and Add.1) and organization of work (UNEP/EA.7/INF/1). The Assembly also established a Committee of the Whole (CoW), electing Joyelle Clarke, Minister of Sustainable Development, Climate Action, and Constituency Empowerment, Saint Kitts and Nevis, as the CoW Chair; and Nino Tandilashvili, First Deputy Minister of Environmental Protection and Agriculture, Georgia, as the CoW Rapporteur.

On Thursday, 11 December, the Assembly took note of the oral report on credentials, which noted that the Bureau had, at the time of reporting, accepted the formal credentials of 73 Members, and credentials-related information from 94 others. The report also noted that 26 Member States had not communicated any information on the credentials of their representatives.

General Statements

Delegates delivered their opening statements on Monday, 8 December. The EU underscored that delegates at UNEA-7 are united by a common expectation: that UNEA, as the world’s leading environmental authority, will take steps to address the triple planetary crisis for the benefit of people, planet, and prosperity.

Eritrea, for the AFRICAN GROUP, expressed concerns related to the negotiations, including: the use of the term “on mutually agreed terms” regarding technology transfer, which weakens commitments agreed under other MEAs; and the promotion of citizen science, which is not grounded in professional expertise.

Brazil, for BRICS (BRAZIL, RUSSIAN FEDERATION, INDIA, CHINA, and SOUTH AFRICA), called for UNEP’s enhanced cooperation with other related MEAs, including the three Rio Conventions.

Colombia, for the LATIN AMERICAN AND CARIBBEAN GROUP (GRULAC), said UNEA resolutions must promote multilevel and multisectoral actions that are inclusive and consider the plight of small island developing states (SIDS). Fiji, on behalf of the PACIFIC SMALL ISLAND DEVELOPING STATES (P-SIDS), stressed that P-SIDS are experiencing the triple planetary crisis in real time, and emphasized, among others, that ambition at UNEA-7 must be matched with resources for implementation.

The AFRICAN GROUP, GRULAC, and BRICS also called for acknowledging the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities, as well as for strengthening UNEP, including through the adoption of the MTS and PoW.

Stakeholder Statements: BUSINESS AND INDUSTRY stressed that the UN’s scarce resources must be deployed efficiently, underlining that “the same issues are discussed by the same people, just in new locations.” CHILDREN AND YOUTH reiterated a call for continued collaboration and compromise among Member States to deliver on the real potential of the resolutions under discussion to strengthen environmental governance.

FARMERS underscored that a resilient planet is impossible without resilient farmers and called for accountable governance. INDIGENOUS PEOPLES AND THEIR COMMUNITIES urged for the rights of Indigenous Peoples to be upheld at UNEA-7, and for the prioritization of the collective health of people and planet over profit.

LOCAL AUTHORITIES called for equitable financing and recognition of the role of cities in the implementation of UNEA resolutions. NON-GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS (NGOs) called for the recognition of: the rights of nature; ecocide as a crime against nature; and peace as a prerequisite for sustainable development.

The SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNOLOGICAL COMMUNITY noted, among others, that citizen science is growing rapidly, expressing concern that some governments will be left behind.

WOMEN called for recognizing that women’s health and environmental health must be achieved concurrently. WORKERS AND TRADE UNIONS stressed workers’ fundamental rights to decent work and safety, calling for environmental policies that recognize their role in addressing the triple planetary crisis.

OECPR-7 Report

On Monday, 8 December, OECPR-7 Chair Sultan Hajiyev (Azerbaijan) reported on the outcomes of OECPR-7. He noted that the draft decision on the management of trust funds and earmarked contributions (UNEP/EA.7/L.2) had been transmitted to the Assembly for adoption.

He also reported that 15 draft resolutions and two draft decisions were transmitted to UNEA-7 for further consideration, alongside non-papers forming the basis of discussions on preambular paragraphs, and non-papers reflecting outcomes of informal discussions held over the weekend.

Implementation of resolutions and decisions adopted by UNEA: On Monday, 1 December, during the OECPR, Patricia Kameri-Mbote, Director of UNEP’s Law Division, provided an update on progress in implementing resolution 6/4 on promoting synergies, cooperation or collaboration for national implementation of multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs), and resolution 6/6 on fostering national action to address global environmental challenges through increased cooperation between UNEA, UNEP, and MEAs (UNEP/EA.7/9).

Rose Mwebaza, UNEP Regional Office for Africa (ROA), reported on progress in implementation of resolution 6/3 on enhancing the role and viability of regional forums of ministers of the environment and UNEP regional offices in achieving multilateral cooperation in tackling environmental challenges (UNEP/EA.7/8).

Sheila Aggarwal-Khan, Director of UNEP’s Industry and Economy Division, provided an update on progress in the implementation of resolutions:

• 5/8 on a science-policy panel to contribute further to the sound management of chemicals and waste and to prevent pollution (UNEP/EA.7/6);
• 6/1 on the circularity of a resilient, low-carbon sugar cane agro-industry (UNEP/EA.7/7);
• 6/5 on environmental aspects of minerals and metals (UNEP/EA.7/10);
• 6/8 on promoting sustainable lifestyles (UNEP/EA.7/12);
• 6/9, paragraph 8, on the sound management of chemicals and waste pertaining to lead, cadmium, arsenic and organotins (UNEP/EA.7/13);
• 6/9 on the sound management of chemicals and waste (UNEP/EA.7/14);
• 6/10 on promoting regional cooperation on air pollution to improve air quality globally (UNEP/EA.7/15); and
• 6/11 on highly hazardous pesticides (UNEP/EA.7/16).

Susan Gardner, Director of UNEP’s Ecosystems Division, reported on progress in the implementation of resolutions:

• 6/7 on combating sand and dust storms (UNEP/EA.7/11);
• 6/12 on environmental assistance and recovery in areas affected by armed conflict (UNEP/EA.7/17);
• 6/13 on effective and inclusive solutions for strengthening water policies to achieve sustainable development in the context of climate change, biodiversity loss and pollution (UNEP/EA.7/18);
• 6/14 on strengthening international efforts to combat desertification and land degradation, restore degraded land, promote land conservation and sustainable land management, contribute to land degradation neutrality, and enhance drought resilience (UNEP/EA.7/19); and
• 6/15 on strengthening ocean efforts to tackle climate change, marine biodiversity loss and pollution (UNEP/EA.7/20).

The Secretariat informed delegates that it is the first time that the OECPR is devoting a session to discussion of the progress reports. The RUSSIAN FEDERATION lamented insufficient implementation of resolution 6/7 on combating sand and dust storms, with BRAZIL; and proposed creating a general fund to enable allocating resources to finance the implementation of all decisions, not only those “favored by developed countries.”

The EU, among other things, highlighted: concern about the slow pace of implementation for resolution 6/13 on strengthening water policies; and, supported by MEXICO, noted with regret that the GEO-7 Summary for Policymakers (SPM) was not adopted, opining that it provides a “stark reminder of the pressures facing global science today.”

BRAZIL stressed specifying that developed countries must significantly scale up financial resources to address implementation gaps concerning resolution 6/13.

MEXICO urged respect for the work of scientists and welcomed the reports on the priorities for advancing sustainable solutions for a resilient planet (UNEP/EA.7/2(I)) and UNEP/EA.7/2(II)).

With these comments, the Committee took note of the progress reports.

International Environmental Policy and Governance Issues

During OECPR-7, delegates worked in two informal working groups considering resolutions and decisions under four clusters, namely: nature and climate; governance and law; circular economy, chemicals, waste and pollution; and strategic, budgetary, and governing bodies matters.

At UNEA-7, the CoW finalized all outstanding resolutions and decisions. This section summarizes the discussions on the resolutions and decisions that were considered over the duration of both OECPR-7 and UNEA-7, including those that were not adopted.

Discussions on resolutions and decisions related to the four clusters took place on Monday, 1 December, Tuesday, 2 December, Wednesday, 3 December, Thursday, 4 December, Friday, 5 December, Monday, 8 December, Tuesday, 9 December, and Wednesday, 10 December, as well as in informal settings over the weekend between OECPR-7 and UNEA-7.

Cluster A – Nature and Climate: This cluster, co-chaired by Kanako Okano (Japan) and Marie Haraldstad (Norway), addressed six draft resolutions.

Strengthening global response on the management of fires: In addressing this draft resolution submitted by India, delegates debated, among others, the need to build on existing initiatives, such as the Global Fire Management Hub hosted by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the UN (FAO) and co-chaired by UNEP. Some countries called for greater specificity on the type of coordination efforts mandated by the resolution. Delegates diverged on a proposed insertion by a few developed country delegations of “voluntary and mutually agreed terms” for the sharing of wildfire prevention and management technology. Divergent views also ensued on the inclusion of citizen science as a methodology for developing integrated wildfire management. Delegates further discussed the types of national measures requiring fire risk reduction integration, as well as which groups should be involved.

On 10 December, the CoW approved this resolution and forwarded it to the Assembly, which adopted it on 12 December.

Final Resolution: In the final resolution on strengthening the global management of wildfires (UNEP/EA.7/Res.7), UNEA, inter alia:

• calls on Member States and members of UN specialized agencies, and invites other stakeholders and international organizations, building on existing initiatives, in particular the Global Fire Management Hub, to adopt sustainable forest management and ecosystem-based approaches, taking into account the Integrated Fire Management Voluntary Guidelines, to use the best available science-based evidence and tools, as appropriate, and to strengthen national and regional strategies for context-appropriate prevention, preparedness, response, and recovery from wildfire;
• encourages Member States, in accordance with national legislation, policies, and priorities, intergovernmental organizations and NGOs to consider promoting and enhancing international and regional cooperation for integrated fire management and wildfire resilience, including in wildfire-prone regions, forests, drylands, and grasslands, with the inclusive participation of relevant partners and stakeholders; and
• encourages Member States and invites the private sector and philanthropy to continue enhancing resource mobilization, in particular to developing countries, including through the Tropical Forest Forever Facility, as appropriate, to increase wildfire resilience.

The Assembly requests UNEP, subject to the availability of resources, to collaborate with the FAO, the UN Forum on Forests, the Collaborative Partnership on Forests, the World Meteorological Organization, the UN Office for Disaster Risk Reduction and other relevant partners, and in accordance with their respective mandates, as appropriate, to reinforce the activities being developed under the Global Fire Management Hub and other relevant UNEP initiatives, guided, inter alia, by the best available science-based decision-making, including:

• international cooperation for the development of interoperable early warning systems, risk assessment tools, satellite-based and ground-based monitoring of ecosystems, and community-based alert mechanisms;
• mechanisms for regional and international cooperation, with a focus on prevention, post-response measures, and ecosystem restoration;
• knowledge-sharing platforms on best practices concerning integrated fire management; and
• training and capacity-building programmes, including for enhancing cooperation.

Strengthening global response on the massive influx of Sargassum seaweed blooms: Delegates considered the scope of this draft resolution, proposed by the Dominican Republic, with many emphasizing that Sargassum blooms constitute a “crisis,” notably in the Caribbean and West African regions of the Atlantic Ocean. Others not affected by the blooms preferred referring to the issue as a “challenge.” A few countries queried retaining reference to climate change as a primary driver of Sargassum blooms. They also considered a request to UNEP to assist Member States or countries affected by the Sargassum blooms, with significant disagreement arising on whether to direct this support to “developing countries,” or to “countries with capacity constraints” resulting from the blooms. They eventually agreed to reference “affected developing countries.”

The group also discussed language calling for the organization of an open-ended working group or workshop, with a view to promoting coherence among existing initiatives on Sargassum, to ultimately lead to a coordinated global response framework. The resolution’s proponent tabled alternative language to reflect that technical and expert work on the matter had been exhaustive, pointing to efforts under the Cartagena Convention for the Protection and Development of the Marine Environment of the Wider Caribbean Region. They highlighted the importance of synergies and coherence, noting that countries differ in their approaches and capacities for management, monitoring, and prevention of Sargassum blooms.

On 10 December, the CoW approved this resolution and forwarded it to the Assembly for adoption. In plenary on Friday, UNEA adopted the resolution.

Final Resolution: In the final resolution on strengthening the global response to the massive influx of Sargassum seaweed blooms (UNEP/EA.7/Res.4), the Assembly, among others:

• calls on Member States to recognize the massive influx of these blooms as a severe, escalating, socioeconomic, and environmental issue in the wider Caribbean region and West Africa, and one that may also be a challenge in other regions; and
• encourages Member States to enhance international cooperation and collaboration for the sustainable monitoring, management, and use of Sargassum seaweed.

The resolution requests UNEP, subject to the availability of resources, to assist affected developing countries in particular, and upon their request, in developing and implementing national or regional measures and action plans; and collaborate with regional and subregional organizations, as appropriate, to:

• encourage cooperation on early warning and monitoring, alongside prevention, collection, safe removal, and management of Sargassum with a view to promoting solutions and best practices;
• prepare a report on existing activities, technical and financial resources, initiatives, and actions by regional and international organizations and relevant stakeholders for addressing Sargassum blooms; and
• initiate a high-level meeting on the above elements.

Active protection of deep-sea ecosystems: During discussions on this draft resolution submitted by Vanuatu, a number of delegations held some reservations centered on whether UNEP has the mandate to lead work in this area. Those expressing reservations argued that deep-sea issues fall under the framework of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) and the International Seabed Authority. Concerns also included whether this draft resolution would duplicate or undermine the work done under these processes, and the creation of inconsistencies that would stretch UNEP beyond its mandate. Those supporting the resolution recalled the broad nature of UNEP’s mandate.

On 10 December, during the CoW closing plenary, Vanuatu withdrew the draft. They underlined that the urgency of safeguarding ocean ecosystems remains valid and announced the launch of a next-phase scientific initiative for deep-sea science for knowledge sharing, including Indigenous science.

Accelerating global action to promote the climate resilience of coral reefs: Views diverged on the scope of this draft resolution, submitted by Fiji. States debated whether to highlight the types of coral reefs addressed, with some preferring no specification, others underlining that the resolution is targeted at warm-water and tropical ecosystems, and yet others emphasizing that cold-water deep-sea reefs are also threatened ecosystems requiring action. The group also debated, among other issues, specifying the nationally determined nature of actions, and on whether to include: marine spatial planning; climate adaptation and mitigation frameworks; and the Blue Economy in integrating the protection, conservation, and/or sustainable use of coral reefs in national plans, policies, and/or programmes.

On 10 December, the CoW approved this resolution, and forwarded it to the Assembly for adoption. In plenary on Friday, UNEA adopted the resolution.

Final Resolution: In the final resolution on accelerating global actions to promote the climate resilience of coral reefs (UNEP/EA.7/Res.1), the Assembly encourages Member States in which coral reefs are present to integrate the conservation, restoration, and sustainable use of coral reefs into their national biodiversity strategies and action plans and other relevant national plans.

The resolution further requests Member States and stakeholders to voluntarily contribute data, data syntheses, and expertise to coral reef monitoring systems, including the Global Coral Reef Monitoring Network, and encourages Member States to enhance national coordination and knowledge-sharing regarding coral reef conservation and restoration.

The resolution requests UNEP, subject to the availability of resources and as appropriate, to work in collaboration with the International Coral Reef Initiative and others to develop additional voluntary guidance supporting the integration of coral reef conservation, monitoring, restoration, and sustainable use into relevant national policies and plans. The resolution further encourages financial resource provision and mobilization for conserving, restoring, and sustainably using coral reefs, as well as for implementing the guidance requested, to be developed by UNEP.

Preservation of glaciers and the broader cryosphere: Unable to agree on the substance of this draft resolution, the proponents, Tajikistan and Peru, carried out bilateral consultations throughout OECPR-7 and UNEA-7 to resolve the initial challenges identified by the CPR prior to OECPR-7.

On 10 December, CoW Chair Clarke noted that the group had been unable to finalize consideration of this resolution, and delegates agreed to reconvene in informals to reach consensus. In plenary on 12 December, delegates adopted the resolution.

Final Resolution: In the final resolution on the preservation of glaciers and the broader cryosphere, particularly in mountain regions (UNEP/EA.7/Res.10), UNEA encourages:

• Member States to: take urgent action to preserve glaciers and the cryosphere, including through national legislation as well as the implementation of the principles, provisions, and objectives of relevant MEAs; and to enhance international cooperation to address glacier and cryosphere loss, as well as its causes and impacts in their mountain regions; and
• Member States, relevant multilateral environmental funds, as well as relevant regional and global development banks, to mobilize adequate and predictable means of implementation (MoI). 

UNEA calls upon Member States to implement policies that take into account the particular needs of Indigenous Peoples, local communities, and relevant stakeholders, and to promote their meaningful participation in actions related to preserving and responding to the loss of glaciers and the cryosphere.

UNEA requests UNEP to: 

• reflect aspects related to glacier and cryosphere loss, biodiversity, and socioecological systems, in relevant studies and assessments to bridge the science-policy gap; 
• promote the exchange of knowledge and good practices between Member States related to nature-based solutions and/or ecosystem-based approaches for the sustainable management of mountain ecosystems, particularly in post-glacial environments;
• develop a report identifying the gaps and needs regarding the preservation of glaciers and the broader cryosphere, with a particular focus on developing countries; and
• organize a side-event in the margins of UNEA-8 to explore the environmental implications of glacier and cryosphere loss.

Karst ecosystem for global water, biodiversity, climate resilience, and economic development: During negotiations on this draft resolution submitted by Indonesia, a number of delegates queried the “climate relevance” of karst ecosystems. Others clarified that these ecosystems act as underground carbon transport systems, natural water reservoirs, and are useful tools as early warning systems due to their fragile nature.

The group initially agreed to strengthen language on considering actions that contribute to the conservation of karst ecosystems, although they could not agree on whether to include their “sustainable use and/or management.” Divergence persisted on whether to specify the need for aligning to nationally determined approaches.

On 10 December, CoW Chair Clarke noted that the group had been unable to reach consensus on this resolution, and said that Indonesia had withdrawn its submission.

Cluster B – Governance and Law: This cluster was co-chaired by Sara Elkhouly (Egypt) and Martin Röw (Germany) and addressed five resolutions.

Environmental sustainability of AI systems: During negotiations on this draft resolution submitted by Kenya, delegates discussed text encouraging the adoption of water efficiency for AI infrastructure alongside other considerations for reducing water and energy-related impacts of AI systems. Many noted the language was overly prescriptive, calling for further work to ensure such actions are future proofed. Others underlined that while AI may be an emerging technology, it is not new and impacts on both water and energy are well documented.

An informal Friends of the Co-Chair group was established to address a paragraph on promoting the development and implementation of standards, norms, and/or policies supporting end-to-end environmental sustainability of AI systems.

On 10 December, CoW Chair Clarke acknowledged that the group had been unable to reach consensus on this resolution, and delegates agreed to engage informally to reach consensus. In plenary on 12 December, delegates adopted the resolution.

Final Resolution: In the final resolution on the environmental sustainability of AI systems (UNEP/EA.7/Res.9), the Assembly encourages Member States to, among other things:

• improve environmental data quality, accessibility, and interoperability, while safeguarding privacy and data protection;
• support the strengthening of national environmental public data systems in developing countries, with the aim to overcome digital and data divides; and
• enhance partnerships for scaled-up mobilization and provision of the required MoI to developing countries, to support the development and application of AI capacity for the environment that advances sustainability while also emphasizing the importance of increased investment to scale up AI capacity-building for sustainable development.

UNEA encourages Member States and all relevant stakeholders to promote, and cooperate toward, the sustainability of AI by harnessing the opportunities and benefits of AI systems in support of the environment and by minimizing its environmental impacts. Furthermore, UNEA requests UNEP, subject to the availability of resources, to:

• harness AI to enhance the work of UNEP, and its support to MEAs, transparently and accountably with robust human oversight;
• explore environmental benefits, risks, and impacts of AI, and make available an information report on this; and
• facilitate voluntary knowledge exchange and sharing of practical use cases pertaining to the sustainable development and deployment of AI systems, as well as the use of AI in support of the environment, among Member States and relevant stakeholders and partners.

Enhancing the meaningful participation of children and youth in environmental governance: Delegates held lengthy debates on this draft resolution, submitted by Sri Lanka, including on whether to ensure strengthened participation for children and youth in environmental decision-making and implementation. Those opposed preferred to limit engagement to establishing educational programmes.

One delegation objected in principle to the involvement of children and youth in decision-making, stating any involvement should be limited to technical and advisory roles, while another delegation stressed the need to limit the scope to the legal age of adulthood. One group of countries supported inclusion of youth delegates in national delegations and queried the controversy on the issue of children and youth engagement, pointing to agreed language in UNGA resolution 78/179. Several delegations requested language on equitable geographic representation when considering enhanced hiring of youth by UNEP.

Delegates also debated a reference to youth participation in decision-making, which had been replaced with a more general reference to “participation in environmental processes.” Several countries expressed strong objections, stating they would reject the resolution as a whole, unless “decision-making” is deleted. Delegates eventually compromised, agreeing to youth “participation in environmental matters and processes.”

On 10 December, the CoW approved this resolution and forwarded it to the Assembly for adoption. In plenary on 12 December, UNEA adopted this resolution.

Final Resolution: In its final resolution on enhancing the meaningful participation of youth in environmental processes and on environmental education (UNEP/EA.7/Res.6), UNEA, inter alia:

• invites Member States to provide youth with opportunities for full, effective, meaningful, constructive, and inclusive participation in environmental matters and processes, in accordance with national legislation;
• encourages Member States to consider integrating environmental education and literacy, as well as the competencies needed for sustainable development, including those needed for the workforce, into their education systems, in line with their national circumstances and priorities;
• requests UNEP, subject to the availability of resources, to further facilitate the meaningful and inclusive participation of youth in UNEP’s work, within its mandated activities;
• recognizes the Youth Environment Assembly as the principal youth platform under UNEA and requests UNEP to continue providing support for its organization in partnership with the Children and Youth Major Group;
• requests UNEP to support Member States, upon request and subject to the availability of resources, in promoting the full, effective, meaningful, constructive, and inclusive participation of their youth in environmental processes;
• encourages UNEP to promote the application of youth candidates within its Secretariat, as appropriate, aiming to ensure balanced and inclusive participation of qualified candidates from all regions; and
• emphasizes the importance of scaled up MoI to promote full, effective, meaningful, constructive and inclusive participation of youth, particularly from developing countries, in environmental processes.

Promoting sustainable solutions through sport for a resilient planet: Among several other points on this draft resolution submitted by Kenya, delegates debated the applicable governance levels, with most agreeing on local and national actions, but diverging on whether to also include regional and international levels. Views also diverged on the provision of technical and financial support and capacity-building. Delegates agreed to extend the scope of action to local authorities, where applicable, in addition to Member States.

On 10 December, the CoW approved this resolution, and forwarded it to the Assembly for adoption. In plenary on 12 December, UNEA adopted this resolution.

Final Resolution: In its final resolution on promoting sustainable solutions through sport for a resilient planet (UNEP/EA.7/Res.2), UNEA encourages Member States, in accordance with their national priorities and capacities, as well as relevant stakeholders and partners, to consider integrating sustainable development into sports-related national strategies, physical education curricula, and community-based sporting programmes, and, where applicable, to adopt policies and implement measures that help promote sustainable solutions through sport, minimize the environmental impacts, and maximize the benefits of sport. It also calls for the mobilization of scaled-up MoI for developing countries to advance sustainable solutions through sport. Additionally, UNEA requests UNEP to:

• support, in collaboration with relevant stakeholders and partners, capacity-building for sports organizations and local authorities, as well as the development of informational materials and public awareness campaigns on sustainability in sport;
• promote partnerships with relevant stakeholders in the fields of environment and sport; and
• update the UNEP long-term strategy for sport and environment by 2027 in collaboration with Member States and relevant stakeholders and partners.

Enhancing international response to address crimes that affect the environment: Delegates considered this draft resolution, submitted by Peru and Kenya, during OECPR-7. Following the presentation of a non-paper reflecting extensive informal-informal negotiations to address outstanding concerns and streamline the resolution, deliberations turned divisive and deadlocked. One regional group, supported by several delegations, called for the resolution’s withdrawal, stressing that it initiates a criminalization process by attempting to define “crimes affecting the environment,” and therefore is beyond UNEP’s mandate.

Some suggested that tackling this issue would require carefully specifying which crimes are being addressed. Among others, these delegations also questioned the scope and intention of the resolution, and pointed to parallel processes under the UN Convention against Transnational Organized Crime resolution 12/4.

A similar number of delegations emphasized they were strongly in favor of continuing deliberations, underlining that the resolution does not infringe on states’ sovereign rights, including that of defining and enacting national environmental and criminal legislation. Some noted that it is logical for UN agencies and entities to collaborate. One delegation, supported by many, stressed that such crimes are a transnational issue for which developing countries in particular require international and/or UN support to address, noting that these crimes undermine efforts to protect biodiversity and livelihoods, contribute to corruption, and have far-ranging socioeconomic impacts.

Several of those in favor of continued consideration suggested compromises, including to review the term “crimes affecting the environment” after negotiations on the remainder of the text, or to remove all reference to “crimes” at all and refer directly to UNGA resolution 76/185. A few delegations on both sides of the divide suggested replacing “crimes” with “activities,” “issues,” “subject,” or “topic.”

On 10 December, CoW Chair Clarke noted that the group had been unable to reach consensus, and that Peru and Kenya had withdrawn their submission.

Maximizing existing resources through enhanced coherence and synergies in MEAs and implementation: This draft resolution was submitted by Japan and Panama, and builds on UNEA resolution 6/4 on promoting synergies, cooperation, or collaboration for national implementation of MEAs and other relevant environmental instruments. Divergence arose on whether certain actions in the draft overlapped with those in resolution 6/4. Delegates considered a proposal for new language building on the previous resolution, as well as a suggestion to encourage the promotion of scientific research towards establishing “evidence-based” reasoning and methods for synergies, cooperation, and collaboration. 

Delegates also debated requesting UNEP to inform the CPR and UNEA on the proposed measures relevant to UNEP from the three workstreams of the UN Secretary-General’s UN80 Initiative and the relevant work packages of its Action Plan. Several delegations urged caution on the formulation of language pertaining to synergies, noting that MEAs have different membership and governing arrangements.

Other issues of contention included: enhancing UNEP’s coordination and administrative functions; requesting the Secretariat to explore the feasibility of tracking progress across multiple commitments under MEAs through unified interfaces; building on existing initiatives such as the Data Reporting Tool for MEAs; and referencing the Bern Process on synergies among biodiversity-related conventions.

On 10 December, the CoW approved this resolution, and forwarded it to the Assembly for adoption. In plenary on 12 December, UNEA adopted this resolution.

Final Resolution: In the final resolution on promoting synergies, cooperation, or collaboration for national implementation of MEAs and other relevant environmental instruments (UNEP/EA.7/Res.5), UNEA, among others:

• encourages Member States to continue enhancing synergies, cooperation, or collaboration in the implementation of MEAs, including by exploring additional approaches for implementing synergies at the national and local levels, including through cooperation with relevant stakeholders and partners; and
• invites regional and subregional cooperation bodies to facilitate multilateral and multi-stakeholder cooperation for promoting synergies, cooperation, or collaboration in line with nationally determined priorities.

The resolution requests UNEP to:

• support interested Member States, including through improved tools to assist them in efficiently preparing national reports to relevant MEAs that are consistent with the reporting guidance of the respective agreements;
• enhance the value of the MEAs Day as a valuable forum for enhancing cooperation; and
• continue providing support to the Bern process, to strengthen synergies, cooperation, or collaboration for the implementation of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF).

Cluster C on Circular Economy, Chemicals, Waste and Pollution: These discussions were co-chaired by Ontumetse Ontumetse (Botswana) and Michal Novotný (Czechia) and addressed three draft resolutions.

Environmental dimensions of Antimicrobial Resistance (AMR): Substantive discussions on this draft resolution, submitted by Kenya, considered measures to tackle AMR in the environment, including addressing microbial discharges through effective effluent treatment, sustainable production, and incentivizing adoption of manufacturing standards. Delegates also debated language on multisectoral national AMR action plans, with several referencing the 2024 UNGA Political Declaration of the High-level Meeting on AMR. Delegates debated alternative textual proposals for urging Member States to develop, update, and implement multisectoral national action plans on AMR by 2030.

A number of delegations highlighted insufficient MoI to undertake this work and opposed the prescriptive language and 2030 deadline. Among proposals to address these concerns was alternative language encouraging Member States to share their experiences, best practices, and lessons learned in addressing AMR in an annual dialogue and caveating any commitments as conditional upon the provision of financial support to developing countries.

On 10 December, CoW Chair Clarke noted that the group had been unable to reach consensus, and delegates agreed to engage informally to do so. In plenary on 12 December, delegates adopted the final resolution.

Final Resolution: In the final resolution on the environmental dimensions of AMR (UNEP/EA.7/Res.11), UNEA requests UNEP:

• to contribute to science- and risk-based environmental surveillance to support global efforts to analyze antimicrobial residues and resistance by identifying methods of environmental surveillance, collecting relevant official monitoring data contributed by Member States, on a voluntary basis, and feeding it into the Quadripartite Global Integrated System for Surveillance of AMR and Use (GISSA) system; and
• to assist Member States to: take actions to prevent, address, and reduce the discharge of antimicrobials into the environment; and facilitate research and the sharing of knowledge and best practices on the environmental dimensions of AMR.

The resolution further encourages:

• the mobilization of resources to address the environmental dimensions of AMR and calls for scaled-up MoI for developing countries, including through the AMR Multi-Partner Trust Fund;
• Member States to strengthen the environmental dimensions of their National Action Plans on AMR, and take action through relevant and appropriate measures to address AMR; and
• Member States and relevant partners and stakeholders to raise awareness of the environmental dimensions of AMR, including through existing platforms, such as the Antimicrobial Resistance Multistakeholder Partnership Platform.

Advancing options for international instruments on the environmentally sound management of minerals and metals and guidance for mineral resources circularity: Delegates considered this draft resolution, submitted by Colombia and Oman. Delegates debated the proposed establishment of a mechanism to enhance international cooperation in this area. The core question was the nature of the structure to be established. Options included an ad hoc open-ended working group, an expert group, or a technical platform. Some delegates were also concerned to specify that any work agreed upon would not lead to establishing a new negotiating track.

Delegations differed on whether a subsidiary body should be created, raising concerns about workload and mandates. Some preferred an informal cooperative space, potentially building on UNEP’s Digital Knowledge Hub, while others supported a more formal working group. Some delegations instead supported promoting dialogue and sharing national experiences, without creating a new body.

The proponents presented alternative language, stressing that, following consultations with the Secretariat, a task force is the most suitable format for the non-decision-making nature of the activities. These activities would entail: non-prescriptive options for international cooperation on environmental/sustainable management of minerals and metals; requesting UNEP to prepare a report and conduct a gap analysis of existing initiatives; and strengthening collaboration with existing mechanisms through the Digital Knowledge Hub.

On 10 December, the CoW approved this resolution and forwarded it to the Assembly for adoption. In plenary on Friday, 12 December, UNEA adopted this resolution.

Final Resolution: In its final resolution on strengthening international cooperation on the environmentally sound management of minerals and metals (UNEP/EA.7/Res.3), UNEA requests UNEP to compile submissions to inform the convening of dialogues among Member States, including, where appointed, national focal points pursuant to UNEA resolution 5/12, and relevant stakeholders and partners, while ensuring equitable participation among different regions, in particular by enabling developing country participation, to discuss:

• enhancing international cooperation on sustainable management of minerals and metals, and resource recovery from mining waste and tailings through sustainable approaches, such as circularity;
• best practices for the environmentally sound management of minerals and metals; and
• enhancing cooperation to strengthen technological, technical, financial, and scientific capabilities related to the management of environmental aspects of minerals and metals, in particular in developing countries.

UNEA further requests UNEP to compile submissions from Member States, including, where appointed, national focal points, and relevant stakeholders on the implementation and outcomes of UNEA resolutions 4/19, 5/12, and 6/5, and to report to UNEA-8 on the progress achieved in implementation, including compiling the results of the dialogues, and affirming that these do not establish a new negotiation track.

Sound management of chemicals and waste: In their discussion of this draft resolution submitted by Switzerland, delegates generally supported a request to enhance synergies between the new ISP-CWP, related scientific panels, MEAs, and the Global Framework on Chemicals (GFC). 

The group engaged in protracted debate on new text, which determines that: developed countries shall take full responsibility for the sound management of hazardous chemicals and waste exported to, or generated in, developing countries; and calls on developed countries to take the lead in funding and implementing solutions to the global proliferation of hazardous chemicals and waste, recognizing their historical responsibility.

Delegates considered a request to UNEP to support Member States in identifying their gaps, needs, and priorities related to lead, cadmium, arsenic, and organotins. A debate ensued when one delegate called for limiting the text to pollution from these substances, opining this would be consistent with UNEP’s pollution-related mandate. Many delegates disagreed, urging that work should be conducted on these substances in general, including on pollution, and on waste containing or contaminated with these substances.

On 10 December, CoW Chair Clarke noted that the group had been unable to reach consensus, and delegates agreed to engage informally to reach agreement. In plenary on 12 December, delegates adopted the final resolution.

Final Resolution: In its final resolution on the sound management of chemicals and waste (UNEP EA.7/Res.8), UNEA invites Member States to:

• identify national priorities and consider measures to address the challenges related to lead, cadmium, arsenic, and organotins, as well as to the waste containing or contaminated with these substances, as appropriate; and
• become members of the ISP-CWP, and invites its plenary to ensure its effective operationalization.

UNEA further:

• encourages Member States to continue providing and mobilizing scaled-up MoI for developing countries, taking into account the special circumstances of SIDS and least developed countries, for the sound management of chemicals and waste, and also invites the private sector to contribute to this effort;
• invites the Global Environment Facility (GEF), and encourages its donors, to consider the need for the sound management of chemicals and waste in the ninth GEF replenishment (GEF-9);
• urges Parties to the Basel Convention to ensure that compliance regarding the transboundary movement of hazardous wastes and other wastes is undertaken, ensuring that no Member State becomes a destination for such wastes when lacking the ability to manage them in an environmentally sound manner;
• encourages Member States to continue enhancing cooperation or collaboration in the national implementation of MEAs related to the sound management of chemicals and waste; and
• encourages Member States to step up their efforts to implement the Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS) as a global standard contributing to the safe management of chemicals, in line with target B6 of the GFC (implementation of the GHS by 2030).

Additionally, UNEA requests UNEP to:

• support Member States in identifying their gaps and priorities on the challenges related to lead, cadmium, arsenic, and organotins, as well as to the waste containing or contaminated with these substances, and to facilitate exchange of views, best environmental practices, and knowledge sharing on the sound management of chemicals and waste, and to report on the findings to UNEA-8;
• support cooperation or collaboration and upon the direction of the ISP-CWP, with relevant science-policy bodies, as well as other relevant MEAs and intergovernmental bodies related to chemicals and waste and the GFC, including by engaging with the heads of these respective processes, in support of the sound management of chemicals and waste, while respecting their existing mandates and avoiding duplication of efforts; and
• finalize the update of the report, State of the Science of Endocrine-Disrupting Chemicals 2012, before the first session of the International Conference of the GFC.

Cluster D on Strategic, Budgetary, and Governing Body Matters: Co-chaired by Tobias Ogweno (Kenya) and Nader Al-Tarawneh (Jordan), this group addressed one draft resolution and three draft decisions, with the latter pertaining to programmatic and budgetary matters.

Strengthening the role of the UNEP headquarters in Nairobi to address environmental challenges and enhance multilateral cooperation to address effective multilateral governance: In discussing this draft resolution submitted by Mexico, several delegations noted their reservations, with one sharing that they were unable to agree with the core assumption of the draft related to consolidating UNEP headquarters as a global hub for environmental decision-making processes. They called to instead focus on enhancing programme efficiency at UNEP, with others calling to include language on streamlining internal UNEP processes before any additional role could be entertained.

Delegations considered deleting text calling to transfer the Secretariats of existing MEAs to Nairobi, underscoring the loss of expertise and the tremendous associated costs of implementing this request.

The group also debated new text calling on all Member States to request CPR accreditation to enhance universal participation in the Committee’s work, and encourage them to consider establishing permanent representation in Nairobi. In this regard, some delegations underlined the importance of the host country upholding non-discriminatory conditions, proposing language that would extend the agreed UN Privileges and Immunities to the spouses and dependents of UN personnel, which, they stressed, includes protections for LGBTQI+ persons.

During the closing of the CoW plenary on 10 December, CoW Chair Clarke noted that Mexico had withdrawn their draft resolution and had submitted a new resolution on the matter, which it would introduce during the UNEA plenary. SWITZERLAND, RUSSIAN FEDERATION, SAUDI ARABIA, UK, QATAR, and the EU lamented this reintroduction noting, among others, the lack of time for negotiation of the resolution.

During the closing plenary on 12 December, MEXICO noted that the resolution they sponsored endeavored to respond to repeatedly voiced concerns about the need to strengthen UNEP and consolidate environmental governance amid the increasing fragmentation of the environmental agenda and the proliferation of parallel processes with financial and resource implications.

They stated that the resubmitted draft resolution has been discussed with full transparency, reflected a reasonable equilibrium, and complied with the rules of procedure. MEXICO further urged allotting the same amount of time and importance to all resolutions and revising relevant working methods; and reaffirmed their commitment to UNEP’s mandate and scientific leadership, as well as to strengthening UNEP’s headquarters as a way to promote diversity, geographic equity, and inclusion of developing countries.

MEXICO then withdrew the resubmitted resolution, reserving the right to present it again in the future.

KENYA urged keeping discussions on this matter alive to enable the matter’s consideration at a future UNEA session.

2026–2029 MTS and PoW and budget for the biennium 2026–2027: On Monday, 1 December, OECPR-7 Chair Hajiyev introduced the draft MTS for the period 2026–2029 (UNEP/EA.7/3), and the draft PoW and budget for the biennium 2026–2027 (UNEP/EA.7/4). He also introduced the report of the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions (UNEP/EA.7/4/Add.1).

In the discussions, views diverged on whether UNEA would “approve” or “take note of” the MTS. To address this, one regional group and several countries called to first address the preamble before returning to the operative text.

Another delegation underlined that the MTS should represent the views of Member States, calling for a consensus-based Strategy and lamenting that it contained “red-line” issues that would not be endorsed by some delegations. They noted that some issues pertained to climate and the ongoing plastics negotiations, as well as to provisions for the UNEP Executive Director to engage with the UN Security Council and UN Human Rights Council on environmental matters. Some responded that UNEP has a mandate related to system-wide coherence and advocating for the environment, and therefore it can only be beneficial for it to provide expertise on environmental matters within the UN system.

On 10 December, CoW Chair Clarke noted that the group had been unable to reach consensus, and delegates agreed to engage informally to reach consensus.

Delegates eventually agreed to approve the MTS, and delete the contentious references to the UN Security Council and UN Human Rights Council, while reflecting that the MTS is not a negotiated document. In plenary on 12 December, delegates adopted the final decision. The UNEP Secretariat clarified that a technical edit was made to paragraph 17 of the PoW, whereby: “UNEP will continue to provide leadership on the environmental dimension of sustainable development, informing global environmental policymaking through global intergovernmental bodies within the UN, under the guidance of UNEA.”

Final Decision: In the final decision on the MTS (2026–2029) and PoW and budget (2026–2027) (Decision 7/6), the Assembly, among others:

• approves the MTS 2026–2029 and PoW and budget for the biennium 2026–2027;
• recognizes that the MTS and PoW were prepared by UNEP and contain some components, definitions, and terminologies that were not agreed intergovernmentally, and therefore nothing in those documents should prejudge any future negotiations or agreements;
• also recalls consultations carried out between UNEP and Member States in efforts to consider all views within the documents, and further emphasizes the importance of enhancing efforts to reflect consensual views in the preparation of future MTS and PoWs; and
• approves appropriations to the Environment Fund in the amount of USD 200 million for the biennium.

Among others, UNEA authorizes UNEP to:

• reallocate resources between budget components and/or subprogrammes up to 10% of the appropriations, informing the CPR thereof, and in duly justified exceptional circumstances to reallocate resources in excess of 10% and up to 20% of the appropriations from which resources are reallocated, after prior consultation with the Committee; and
• enter into forward commitments not exceeding USD 20 million for Environment Fund activities to implement the PoW for the biennium.

The decision requests UNEP, inter alia, to:

• continue applying a prudent approach to the management of resources from all sources, including the Environment Fund;
• continue improving the achievement of programme objectives and the efficient and transparent use of resources to that end, subject to UN oversight, review, and independent evaluation;
• ensure that trust funds and earmarked contributions to UNEP are used to fund activities aligned with the PoW, apart from those funds administered by the Programme on behalf of other intergovernmental bodies;
• in consultation with the CPR, to submit for consideration and approval by UNEA-8 a prioritized, results-oriented, and streamlined PoW for the biennium 2028–2029.

UNEA urges all Member States and others in a position to do so to increase voluntary contributions to UNEP, notably to the Environment Fund, and in this regard requests UNEP to mobilize increased voluntary funding, including softly earmarked funding, to the Programme from all Member States and others in a position to do so, and to continue to broaden the contributor base.

UNEA welcomes the efforts made by UNEP, in close consultation with the CPR, to develop a resource mobilization strategy that improves the adequacy and predictability of resources, and encourages UNEP, in close consultation with the Committee, to update and implement the MTS with a view to strengthening donor relations and addressing the priority of broadening the contributor base PoW.

UNEA further stresses:

• the importance of early, extensive, and transparent consultations between UNEP, Member States, and the CPR on the preparation of the PoW and budget; and
• the need for the PoW and budget to be based on results-based management.

Provisional agenda, dates, and venue of UNEA-8: The group discussed how to revert UNEA to a February meeting cycle, beginning in 2029, with the main debates revolving around dates for the 2027 “transitional” UNEA-8. The Secretariat presented three options based on the 2027 MEA calendar, taking into account major religious holidays. The dates proposed were 3–14 May, 4–15 October, and 29 November – 10 December.

Protracted discussions related to, among others, the inclusion of a reference to GEO-7. Several delegations objected to the inclusion, noting that the SPM for this edition of the GEO had not been approved. Others opposed, noting that the reference to GEO-7 would highlight its importance to policymakers.

On 10 December, CoW Chair Clarke noted that the group had been unable to reach consensus, and delegates agreed to engage informally to reach consensus. Delegates eventually deleted the reference to GEO-7 and forwarded the decision to the Assembly for adoption.

In plenary on 12 December, delegates adopted the final decision.

Final Decision: In the final decision on the provisional agenda, dates, and venue of UNEA-8 (Decision 7/7), UNEA decides:

• to hold UNEA-8 at UNEP headquarters in Nairobi, from 6–10 December 2027, and OECPR-8 from 29 November – 3 December 2027;
• to hold future regular sessions of the Assembly at UNEP headquarters, in Nairobi, commencing on the last Monday of February in odd-numbered years, unless otherwise decided by the Assembly; and
• on an exceptional basis: UNEA-9 will consist of a three-day meeting; OECPR-9 will consist of a three-day meeting and be convened back-to-back with UNEA-9 in order to minimize financial costs; and in light of the reduced duration of UNEA-9, Member States will be strongly encouraged to limit the number of draft resolutions submitted for consideration;

The Assembly also approves UNEA-8’s provisional agenda, and decides, on the basis of the preference expressed by Member States, that the meeting will not have a theme, and clarifies that the present decision precludes the CPR, the Bureau, and the President of the Assembly from establishing or defining one on behalf of Member States.

UNEA further recognizes the need to limit evening negotiating sessions to reasonable hours to preserve the health of delegates, in particular those from small delegations, and recommends that unless otherwise agreed, preferably no session is to be scheduled beyond 13 hours from the start of the first open-ended meeting of each day.

Draft decision on the management of trust funds and earmarked contributions: This draft decision was mostly discussed during the intersessional period and was endorsed by the OECPR. The CoW agreed to forward this draft resolution to UNEA for adoption on 8 December. In plenary on 12 December, delegates adopted the decision.

Final Decision: In the final decision on the management of trust funds and earmarked contributions (Decision 7/5), UNEA, inter alia:

• notes that, in accordance with the UN Financial Regulations and Rules, UNEP carries out the function of administering trust funds on the basis of the principle of full cost recovery of administrative costs;
• recalls that the extension of trust funds is an administrative matter that falls under the delegation of the UNEP Executive Director and hence will, as of UNEA-7, no longer require a decision by Member States;
• recalls and reiterates Governing Council decision 18/44 B of 25 May 1995, in which the Governing Council requested donors to the trust funds to abide strictly by the terms of reference of the trust funds;
• requests the Executive Director to take necessary steps to establish a relevant trust fund, at the request of the Plenary of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Panel on Chemicals, Waste and Pollution; and
• approves the establishment of a general trust fund to support the activities of the GBF, financed by the GEF, with no fixed expiry date.

Adoption of the Resolutions, Decisions and the Ministerial Declaration

In plenary, on Friday, 12 December, UNEA-7 President Al Amri introduced the draft Ministerial Declaration (UNEP/EA.7/HLS/L.1), which he noted was the subject of informal consultations throughout the two-week period. Delegates then adopted it, as well as the 11 resolutions and three decisions summarized above.

In the Declaration, the Ministers agree to four comprehensive actions, noting that they will:

• drive sustainable solutions to address the global environmental challenges and crises of our time;
• implement respective obligations under MEAs and other internationally agreed environmental frameworks with collective resolve and commitment;
• advance equity, inclusive societal participation, and accessible MoI in actions for the benefit of present and future generations; and
• promote effective and coherent international environmental governance that adheres to international law.

Commenting on the adoption of the resolutions, decisions, and the Ministerial Declaration, CÔTE D’IVOIRE and CONGO noted support for the GEF as the financial mechanism for MEAs, and vital to enable addressing the urgent environmental priorities and realities on the ground. CONGO urged reinforcing GEF processes by increasing their equitability and accessibility.

The US underlined that they were disassociating their country from all UNEA-7 decisions and resolutions, and the Ministerial Declaration. Among others, they: stressed their concern at the direction and effectiveness of the Assembly; called for moving away from “bloated multilateralism”; and noted they cannot endorse language on divisive gender ideology, “climate change theater” initiatives, or anything that attempts to create new mandates for UNEP or recognize rights that do not exist under international law. They further noted their current review of participation and funding for international organizations, to ensure they are aligned with their country’s interests, and indicated their willingness to work with those who wish to “bring UNEA back to basics.”

SINGAPORE noted their reservation regarding the Ministerial Declaration’s omission of a clear affirmation of the primacy of UNCLOS as the legal framework within which all activities in the Ocean can be undertaken.

EGYPT lamented the lack of multilateral cooperation on water security issues, particularly highlighting transboundary water management, and expressed concern with language in the Ministerial Declaration specifying “mutually agreed terms” for technology transfer.

ECUADOR expressed regret that the Ministerial Declaration did not adequately reference the Agreement under UNCLOS on the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Marine Biological Diversity of Areas beyond National Jurisdiction (BBNJ Agreement) or the ongoing negotiations for a treaty addressing the full lifecycle of plastic pollution. They noted their reservation on all references to “mutually agreed terms” for technology transfer within the Declaration.

Noting it is unfortunate that many draft resolutions submitted by developing countries had to be withdrawn due to divergent views among Member States, TÜRKIYE urged proponents to submit draft resolutions early, accompanied by “true justification” and wide consultation efforts. They further: regretted the withdrawal of the resolution on karst ecosystems; and urged making work within UNEA more efficient in line with the UN reform process, as well as respecting UNEP’s depoliticized nature to avoid polarization of environmental matters.

VENEZUELA noted their disappointment that the impact of unilateral coercive measures directly affecting Venezuela had not been mentioned, noting these present major obstacles to sustainable development and environmental protection.

COLOMBIA stressed that the role of Indigenous Peoples must be strengthened, and their rights acknowledged; commended the adoption of the resolution on the environmentally sound management of minerals and metals; and urged more bravery to strengthen international cooperation and enable adoption of necessary measures with urgency.

“If UNEA turns against us, where will we turn?” asked FIJI, stating that UNEA-7 has seen multilateralism and the spirit of Nairobi tested to an unprecedented extent, and that those most affected by environmental crises are having to work harder each year and at each UNEA to retain language that was uncontroversial a few years earlier. They said that the success of UNEA-7 should be measured by tangible success on the ground and not by the number of resolutions adopted, and urged delegates to look beyond national interests to consider the judgment of the future.

MALAWI welcomed the MTS and Ministerial Declaration, and underscored the importance of MoI, including finance, capacity-building, and technology transfer to ensure no country is left behind. TANZANIA encouraged all governments to ensure that the resolution on enhancing the meaningful participation of youth in environmental processes and on environmental education is implemented nationally, noting youth are the future of environmental stewardship.

The EU said that the Ministerial Declaration reflects a delicate balance that should not be disturbed, noting among others that it: supports UNEP in its role as focal point and leading global authority on the environment; strengthens UNEP’s mandate related to a circular economy, water resilience, AI, and crimes that affect the environment; expresses the need to conclude negotiations of a treaty on plastic pollution; and reaffirms the essential role of science, welcoming GEO-7.

ARGENTINA noted missing references to common but differentiated responsibilities and disassociated from references to the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs); noting their non-binding nature. They also stressed that they understand gender as defined in Article 7.3 of the Rome Statute, which, for the purposes of the Rome Statute, refers to gender as “the two sexes, male and female.”

GHANA echoed Congo on recognizing the GEF as a major financial mechanism that supports developing countries and welcoming GEF-9. INDONESIA clarified their position on terminology regarding Indigenous Peoples and local communities in the Ministerial Declaration, noting it should respect national legal systems.

BANGLADESH stressed the role of science and acting with urgency, recognized GEO-7, and welcomed the ISP-CWP alongside the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and IPBES.

SWITZERLAND, on behalf of 58 Member States, underscored the vital contributions of scientific panels, research institutions, and the scientific community. They regretted instances when scientific uptake has been challenged, including in the GEO-7 preparation and its Summary for Policymakers, and called for science free from political and financial interference alongside strengthened inclusive and well-resourced scientific bodies.

DOMINICAN REPUBLIC and BARBADOS lamented the lack of recognition by some of the Sargassum bloom influx as a crisis, and rejected backtracking on language recognizing the special situation of SIDS.

SRI LANKA highlighted the resolution on youth participation, calling for its implementation. IRAN noted their earlier reservations, on GEO-7, the BBNJ Agreement, the SDGs, the Pact for the Future, and crimes affecting the environment, remain valid, stressing national considerations, and rejecting unilateral coercive measures.

The UK welcomed the Ministerial Declaration and its acknowledgement of tackling environmental crimes, and commitment to promoting gender equality. They called for science-based decision-making.

ZAMBIA called for implementing all adopted resolutions and decisions, and stressed their commitment to do so in line with national priorities and international obligations.

AUSTRALIA, also for JAPAN, the UK, SWITZERLAND, CANADA, NORWAY, and ICELAND, welcomed the Ministerial Declaration and the meaningful and implementable resolutions agreed, and stressed that UNEP now has a strong MTS to guide its work on the environmental dimension of sustainable development. Stressing that UNEP’s work should rely on science, GEO-7, and Indigenous knowledge, they regretted the lack of agreement on the resolutions on deep sea ecosystems and crimes affecting the environment. They further regretted the lack of references to climate change in key resolutions, noting this prevents effective synergies across the Rio Conventions. They also lamented that key major groups of rightsholders and stakeholders were not given sufficient time to intervene during negotiations.

Cooperation with MEAs

On Wednesday, 10 December, delegates participated in the second MEAs Day, engaging in two high-level dialogues on, “Turbocharging MEAs Implementation through Whole-of-Government and Whole-of-Society Approaches,” and “Boosting SDG Implementation through the MEAs.” Through these dialogues, they heard from various MEAs as well as the science-policy panels that contribute to them, with Member States sharing their experiences in implementing their obligations under these Agreements.

UNEA-7 President Al-Amri opened the day stressing that combating common global environmental challenges demands unified, collective action.

UNEP Executive Director Andersen highlighted that UNEA-7 has united over 170 countries and almost 30 global and regional agreements including the trifecta, which refers to the three science-policy bodies: IPCC, IPBES, and ISP-CWP.

In plenary on Friday, 12 December, Patricia Kameri-Mbote, Director, UNEP’s Law Division, reported on the dialogues.

High-level Segment

The High-level Segment opened on Thursday, 11 December. UNEA-7 President Al-Amri underscored that the theme, “Advancing sustainable solutions for a resilient planet,” is an invitation to redraft the relationship between people and nature, redress balance, and reaffirm our collective responsibility to overcome the environmental and political crises of our times.

Via video, UN Secretary-General António Guterres stressed that UNEA-7 marks an opportunity to invest in resilience, commit to justice, and “remember what we are fighting for,” urging efforts to transform broken systems, unite policy with science, and equitably share solutions.

UNEP Executive Director Andersen urged delegates to “look beyond the storm” and fix their eyes on the horizon, and highlighted progress at UNEA-7 on coral reefs, the sound management of minerals and metals, sports, and Sargassum seaweed blooms.

William Samoei Ruto, President of Kenya, underlined that a strengthened UNEP, working closely with the broader UN system, will deliver more coherent, cost effective, and inclusive global environmental governance. Delegates delivered national statements on Thursday, 11 December and Friday, 12 December.

Leadership Dialogues: During the High-level Segment, delegates convened in three leadership dialogues.

Why addressing environmental crises is essential for human health: On Thursday, 11 December, this dialogue was moderated by Antoinette Taus, UNEP Goodwill Ambassador. UNEP Executive Director Andersen illustrated the interlinkages between human, planetary, and economic health, underscoring the known co-morbidities of climate change and ecosystem collapse, from food insecurity and air pollution to forced displacement and premature death.

In a keynote address, Queen Mary of Denmark, UNEP Patron of Biodiversity, illustrated the natural world’s well-documented benefits to physical and mental health. She lamented that young generations today are born into a climate and biodiversity crisis they are not responsible for, and urged swift, collaborative, and effective action to build a safer, more equitable, and resilient planet.

Steven Victor, Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries, and the Environment, Palau, drew attention to the traditional practice “bul,” which prohibits resource extraction when resources are scare, thus allowing for recovery. Aluki Kotierk, Chair, UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues (UNPFII), highlighted Indigenous food systems as vital to ensuring food security, nutrition, and culturally appropriate food, as well as being better for the environment. IPBES Chair David Obura drew attention to the findings of the Nexus Assessment on biodiversity and health, emphasizing that the more health is integrated with other sectors, the more co-benefits can be generated.

Round and Round: Why circularity and sustainability are critical to the future of global industry: Moderated by Jocelyn Blériot, Executive Lead, Ellen McArthur Foundation, this dialogue on Friday, 12 December, explored how to use materials more sustainably to enable the energy and digital transition and build resilience in diverse sectors.

Janez Potočnik, Co-Chair, International Resource Panel, underscored that the current development model is wasteful and has in the last 50 years led to the tripling of global material use, driving planetary crisis. He described circularity as an instrument that will drive reduction of material use and waste, allowing shifting the balance for low-income countries to meet their needs while remaining within planetary boundaries.

Marie Nyange Ndambo, Minister of the Environment, Sustainable Development and New Climate Economy, Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), said her country, as a major supplier of critical minerals, is transitioning from an extractive to a circular value chain. She mentioned the DRC-Rwanda Peace Agreement, which will enhance peace and support a regional economic integration framework based on critical minerals trade.

Mark Cutifani, Chair, Global Tailings Management Institute, said mining takes up 0.3% of Earth surface activities but is enabling a 30% reduction in the human footprint. He noted that improvements can be made in the models of production and in reducing impacts to ensure the sector is a positive contributor to sustainable development.

ZIMBABWE discussed national policies to ensure producer responsibility in electronics, plastics, and packaging sectors. SINGAPORE drew attention to water circularity that has converted their country from a water scarce nation to a “thriving water circularity nation.”

PAKISTAN underlined the links between poverty, conflicts, and mining and the fact that those who use the least materials in their development bear the brunt of suffering for those who use the most. They called for rethinking the “journey from dust to development,” recommending that countries who take the dust into value-addition should support circularity in source countries in water recycling, energy, waste, and pollution. They further recommended setting up a fund to provide recycling capital, from high-to low-income countries.

The EU highlighted the upcoming 2026 EU Circular Economy Act, to shift the region from a “take-make-waste” system to a fully circular economy. The UK pointed to an upcoming circular economy growth plan.

BARBADOS noted they are committed to becoming a circular economy by 2030, noting efforts to control disposable plastics and use of returnable containers. NORWAY urged sector-specific circularity models, regulation, economic incentives, and partnerships, including between producing and consuming countries.

CHINA drew attention to a zero-waste initiative that has been rolled out across 113 cities and eight regions. UNITED ARAB EMIRATES identified green and sustainable manufacturing, infrastructure, transportation, and food as priority sectors. ESTONIA highlighted their efforts related to waste management systems, including separate waste collection.

FINLAND stressed that global standards for circularity metrics are needed, as well as new financial models and procurement practices. MOROCCO referenced national strategies and laws addressing sorting and recycling as well as extended producer responsibility (EPR). KENYA highlighted that all synthetic products in Kenya are subject to EPR.

UN OFFICE FOR PROJECT SERVICES (UNOPS) said that the world is becoming less and less circular every year, pointing to the Circularity Gap Report. CHILDREN AND YOUTH urged redefining the meaning of success from unsustainable economic growth to a sufficiency-based and human rights-oriented approach. BUSINESS AND INDUSTRY highlighted as priorities: coherent and globally-aligned policies; partnerships that scale implementation; and innovation including digital tools.

AFRICAN DEVELOPMENT BANK GROUP said that circularity can build resilience to global supply shocks, create new livelihoods, and negate the need to establish new mines. INITIATIVE FOR RESPONSIBLE MINING ASSURANCE noted the need for responsible recycling and sourcing to prevent child and forced labor and incorporate human and labor rights.

JAPAN mentioned their Fifth Fundamental Plan for Promoting the 3Rs (Reduce, Reuse, Recycle) and the Circular Economy. MAURITIUS said circularity is essential for SIDS, highlighting vulnerability due to resource dependency, and climate impacts and shocks.

AZERBAIJAN highlighted the role of the private sector and referred to measures to expand and institutionalize increasing resource efficiency, cleaner production, and eco-innovation among small- and medium-sized enterprises to create circular value chains. BELGIUM said circularity is complex and requires a whole-of-society approach, and is an opportunity to create green jobs and promote behavior change in households and populations.

TANZANIA highlighted work with industries in plastics, textile, food, and electronics toward EPR and ensuring decent jobs for women, youth, and those in informal sectors.

The Bottom Line: Why tackling environmental degradation is critical to the future of the global financial system: Attiya Waris, UN Independent Expert on Foreign Debt and International Financial Obligations, moderated this dialogue on Friday, 12 December, highlighting the principle of fiscal legitimacy: building an accountable, transparent, efficient, fair, and just system. Waris underlined this dialogue’s importance in conjunction with ongoing negotiations for a UN Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation. Highlighting the debate on increasing tax revenue, she noted that “the climate finance space must be made aware that the money has been identified, as it can counter austerity measures.”

Cristina Reis, Extraordinary Secretary of Carbon Markets, Ministry of Finance, Brazil, noted that for developing countries resilience is not enough, as many regions do not have the “technological density” to bounce back. She stressed the need for building robustness and upgrading value chains, highlighting this as one of Brazil’s key objectives alongside making information on financial flows transparent and avoiding greenwashing. Regarding progress in transforming financial architecture and reducing inequalities, she highlighted Brazil’s recently approved income tax reform, underscoring the need to tax the ultra-rich.

Pia Bernadette Roman Tayag, Assistant Governor and Chief Sustainability Officer, Strategy, Innovation, and Sustainability, Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas, showcased regulatory approaches to ensure banks consider environmental and climate risks but noted lack of private investment in adaptation since such investments are hard to quantify. She suggested connecting green project leaders with bankers and empowering all actors along the value chain. She underlined the role of research to understand the macroeconomic effects of climate change, and of biodiversity loss on the banking system, and highlighted UNEP’s role in mapping the adaptation finance gap at local, contextual levels.

ARMENIA noted the business and financial sector should play key roles in environmental finance, and highlighted upcoming work on the modalities of Cali Fund at the 17th meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD COP17) in 2026. SINGAPORE highlighted national efforts to manage risks of flooding and heat waves and reported on a USD 500 million blended finance initiative to support the region’s decarbonization.

PAKISTAN condemned suggestions by international financial institutions to repurpose financing for education and health toward disaster risk management. Stressing that carbon polluters have the greatest access to green funding, they called for a system redesign, including for citizen access to public spending worldwide.

GERMANY underscored that we need a financial system aligned with the Paris Agreement and GBF, which creates reliable frameworks for investment security and clear signals to redirecting financial flows from fossil fuels. UAE outlined integrated planning efforts aligning national financial plans and strategies with global environmental goals, including progress implementing their Net Zero Strategy 2050.

The EUROPEAN INVESTMENT BANK pointed to UNEP’s role in harmonizing standards, taxonomies, and regulatory frameworks to reduce fragmentation and provide clear signals to investors. The EU outlined regional initiatives for derisking investments, promoting the development of green bonds, and EU Taxonomy-aligned investments.

CENTER FOR SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE EXCELLENCE AND CONSERVATION underlined that when the triple planetary crisis is considered a risk, capital moves differently, and when healthy, resilient ecosystems are considered assets, then actors such as smallholder farmers and fishers are investable. MARINE ECOSYSTEMS PROTECTED AREAS lamented that despite local-level circularity initiatives’ proven impact, they are rarely eligible for funding.

AZERBAIJAN highlighted the Baku to Belém Roadmap, a climate finance initiative co-developed by the Azerbaijani and Brazilian Presidencies of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) COPs 29 and 30. CANADA noted the need to scale up finance, including through blended finance, and highlighted the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm (BRS) Conventions’ efforts to develop a non-state actors resource mobilization strategy for Africa. The UK highlighted the Taskforce on Nature-related Financial Disclosures and the creation of communities of practice and data tools to realign financial flows.

Highlighting the costly clean-up of pollution, BRS CONVENTIONS called for systemic change, not just streamlining of regulations and ensuring short-term benefits. WORLD ORGANIZATION FOR ANIMAL HEALTH called for coordination among relevant government entities to catalyze sustainable finance, especially in agrifood systems, noting UNEP’s role in facilitating coherence across standards.

NGOs called for avoiding greenwashing as private finance expands into climate and environmental finance, and stressed the need to invest more in tackling pollution. UN INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATION reported on co-hosting the Global Alliance on Circular Economy and Resource Efficiency with UNEP.

INTERNATIONAL UNION FOR CONSERVATION OF NATURE (IUCN) reported on a recently adopted 20-year vision that affirms nature-positive approaches as a default across markets. SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNOLOGICAL COMMUNITIES called for funding global citizen-science programmes, highlighting their proven effectiveness in biodiversity monitoring.

THE OFFICE OF THE UN HIGH COMMISSIONER FOR HUMAN RIGHTS called for greater transparency, inclusion, and realignment of financial flows in line with environmental obligations, including on climate change, as reaffirmed by the International Court of Justice’s 2025 Advisory Opinion.

Multistakeholder Dialogue: On Thursday, 11 December, delegates attended the dialogue entitled, Resilience through inclusive partnerships: Catalyzing solutions across sectors, co-moderated by Felix Dodds, University of North Carolina, and Joost van den Broek, UN Deputy Permanent Representative of the Netherlands.

UNEP Deputy Executive Director Elizabeth Mrema underscored that diverse voices bring legitimacy to UNEP’s work and that inclusive partnerships are essential to address interconnected global environmental challenges.

Election of Officers 

On Friday, 12 December, the Assembly elected the UNEA-8 Bureau, welcoming Matthew Samuda, Minister of Water, Environment, and Climate Change, Jamaica, as UNEA-8 President. They elected eight Vice-Presidents: Ibrahim Alarabi Munir (Libya); Hamad Yusuf Masauni (Tanzania); Mosese Bulitavu (Fiji); Dammika Patabendi (Sri Lanka); Nino Tandilashvili (Georgia); Anikó Raisz (Hungary); Joyelle Clarke (Saint Kitts and Nevis); and Jochen Flasbarth (Germany). They designated Felix Wertli (Switzerland) as Rapporteur.

UNEA-8 President-elect Samuda stressed his region’s presidency is rooted in the lived experience of communities facing the frontlines of climate change, pollution, and biodiversity loss, “who do not have the privilege of indifference, and cannot afford delay.” Among others, he called for transparent, practical action; strengthening the science-policy interface; and accelerating the transition toward sustainable consumption and production. Samuda urged delegates to rise to the moment and ensure that the environment is not only a global priority, but a global responsibility.

Adoption of the Meeting Report and Closure of the Session

In plenary, on Friday, 12 December, delegates adopted the meeting report (UNEP/EA.7/L.1). In closing remarks, KENYA highlighted events they are hosting in 2026, including Desertification and Drought Day and the Global Landscapes Forum. Noting that the African Ministerial Conference on the Environment had supported UNEP hosting the Secretariat of the ISP-CWP in Nairobi, they appealed to all Member States to support this decision at the first meeting of the Panel.

SAUDI ARABIA expressed their commitment to consensus-based progress, highlighting transparent member-driven processes and stressing the independence of each MEA. They reiterated the importance of common but differentiated responsibilities, MoI, and enabling environments for international cooperation.

Namibia, for the AFRICAN GROUP, commended the Assembly’s spirit of flexibility, goodwill, and constructive engagement. Concerned over the lack of references to common but differentiated responsibilities and MoI, they urged ensuring that adopted resolutions and decisions are implemented in the spirit of equity, transparency, and geographical balance, with no country left behind.

Tuvalu, for P-SIDS, welcomed the resolution on coral reefs and highlighted that the diversity of views in the withdrawn resolution on deep-sea ecosystems illustrated the complexity of the matter. Stressing that decisions must translate to real improvement for frontline communities, they reiterated principles of solidarity and shared responsibility.

COSTA RICA lamented regression in language on gender, stressed that science is non-negotiable, and called for finance for developing countries as well as a strengthened UNEP. URUGUAY celebrated the Youth Environment Assembly, highlighting the important role of stakeholders, and regretted the lack of consensus on tackling crimes affecting the environment and addressing threats to deep-sea ecosystems. They welcomed UNEP providing services to the ISP-CWP and lamented setbacks on human rights and gender language.

Brazil, for BRICS, stressed the necessity of elevating Nairobi’s role in international environmental governance to make multilateralism inclusive. They called for predictable, timely, and concessional financial resources and accelerated technology transfer and capacity-building to implement the adopted resolutions and decisions, rejecting any unilateral measures that restrict trade.

The EU noted that UNEA has proven its integral value by providing policy guidance and defining the future direction of UNEP to tackle pressing environmental crises. They highlighted positive results on the Ministerial Declaration, the MTS, and chemicals and waste; and said that resolutions on crimes affecting the environment and on deep-sea ecosystems require further discussions and global collaboration.

IRAN highlighted that the complex negotiations secured valuable progress, including the adoption of the Ministerial Declaration, and reaffirmed their commitment to working together with respect for national priorities and the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities.

SWITZERLAND welcomed the first upcoming plenary session of the ISP-CWP in 2026, noting that its success hinges on strong cooperation and an enabling environment; and indicated their readiness to host the ISP-CWP Secretariat.

Noting that 93% of their territory is comprised of mountains, TAJIKISTAN affirmed their commitment to preserving this fragile ecosystem, drew attention to the designation of 2025 as the International Year of Glaciers’ Preservation, and welcomed the adoption of the resolution on the preservation of glaciers and the cryosphere.

WOMEN, also for the following Major Groups and stakeholders: CHILDREN AND YOUTH, SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNOLOGICAL COMMUNITY, BUSINESS AND INDUSTRY, LOCAL AUTHORITIES, NGOs, FARMERS, and WORKERS AND TRADE UNIONS, lamented the shrinking of civic space at UNEA-7. They emphasized that environmental governance cannot be resilient if those most affected by the triple planetary crisis are excluded and stressed this leads to weakened policy outcomes and implementation. They further decried decision-making that is not grounded in scientific evidence, and called on the Assembly to recommit to principles of inclusivity and accountability in its processes.

INDIGENOUS PEOPLES AND THEIR COMMUNITIES decried the backtracking of their established rights, emphasizing that UNEA-7 missed the opportunity to center Indigenous Peoples and their knowledge in its decision-making for a resilient planet, which would have strengthened outcomes and advanced progress toward solutions.

The LEAGUE OF ARAB STATES welcomed UNEA-7 as a major turning point for environmental protection, pointing to the success of multilateral cooperation in striking a balance on the PoW.

CHILDREN AND YOUTH underlined the importance of the resolution on youth for institutionalizing their full, meaningful, constructive, and inclusive participation in environmental processes. They urged accelerated action to uphold intergenerational equity and safeguard the future.

“The beacon of environmental multilateralism that rises above the fog of geopolitical complexity and differences today shines a little brighter,” said UNEP Executive Director Andersen, in her closing remarks. She noted there are “major pathbreakers” among the 11 resolutions and three decisions adopted at UNEA-7, paving the way for critical environmental stewardship. She further highlighted: Member States’ commitment to bold actions that drive sustainable solutions in the Ministerial Declaration; and approval of the MTS, endorsing UNEP as the leading global environmental authority bringing together action and supporting Member States at the national level when requested. She urged Member States to deliver on their commitment to contribute USD 200 million for the next PoW, and to ensure a strong GEF-9.

UNEA-7 President Al-Amri, in his closing remarks, expressed gratitude for the collective efforts made to rise above disagreements and work in the spirit of unity rather than division. He underscored that the outcomes of UNEA-7 reaffirm the strong relationship between resilience and equity and contribute to strengthening MEAs and renewing confidence in UNEP.

Al-Amri further underlined that the measure of the Assembly’s success is not limited to what has been adopted on paper, but by the tangible changes seen on the ground: in cleaner air and water, restored ecosystems, and more resilient populations. He gaveled the meeting to a close at 7:26 pm.

A Brief Analysis of OECPR-7 and UNEA-7 

“As the UN enters its 81st year, your work here can remind the world of the power of multilateralism.” – UN Secretary-General António Guterres, message to the seventh session of the UN Environment Assembly (UNEA-7)

UNEA, the world’s highest-level decision-making body on the environment, exemplifies environmental multilateralism. Every two years, UNEA brings together all 193 UN Member States, their ministers, and key stakeholders to set global environmental policy and guide the work of the UN Environment Programme (UNEP).

The message of multilateralism, repeatedly emphasized by Member States and stakeholders gathered in Nairobi for the seventh session of the Open-ended Committee of Permanent Representatives (OECPR-7) and UNEA-7, propelled them throughout the two weeks of negotiations resolutions that will advance global environmental action.

This analysis focuses on how the discussions at UNEA-7 illustrate multilateralism in action, underlining the growing need for international cooperation, and considers UNEP’s evolving role and the need to strengthen its mandate and capabilities. The analysis also explores the “Nairobi Spirit,” commonly cited by delegates as a guiding ethos for shared ambition, synergy, and collective progress. 

Defining Global Priorities

UNEA-7 convened at a moment of profound global strain as the impacts of the triple planetary crisis of climate change, biodiversity loss, and pollution, exacerbated by desertification, land degradation, and drought, continue to intensify. Compounding this, turbulent geopolitical dynamics are placing a high tax on multilateral processes through what delegations referred to as the “triple political crisis”: mistrust, misinformation, and populism.

The need for evidence-based decision making is foundational to all environmental governance discussions and firmly positioned in the work of UNEA. The launch of the seventh Global Environment Outlook (GEO-7) at UNEA-7 signaled the importance of robust, authoritative science to inform environmental policymaking. GEO-7 is billed as the most comprehensive global environment assessment, highlighting that investing in planetary health can deliver substantial socioeconomic benefits including, GDP growth, improved health, and poverty reduction. However, delegates voiced concerns and reservations about the uptake and impact of GEO-7, considering the Summary for Policy-Makers (SPM) was not approved. The primary concerns relate to how effectively these findings can be translated into actual policy and action without the SPM.

The translation of the scientifically established facts in resolutions discussed at UNEA-7 into actionable resolutions was often evasive. Strained negotiations saw denial of evidence-based environmental realities and the severity of issues, including on a draft resolution for strengthening the global response to the growing harm caused by Sargassum seaweed blooms. A delegation from an affected region, frustrated by the discussions questioning the evidence base of the crisis, stressed, “Those that live it, feel it!” Similarly, the well-documented water and energy stresses caused by data centers was contested in a draft resolution addressing the environmental sustainability of artificial intelligence systems.

Amid these challenges, the Assembly considered a diversity of resolutions, from safeguarding coral reefs and soundly managing minerals and metals critical for the energy transition, to developing sustainable solutions through sport. This diversity reflected the multitude and interconnectedness of globally afflicted ecosystems and on challenges experienced by Member States. However, the difficulties in achieving consensus, regardless of the resolutions’ apparent lack of controversy, revealed deeper concerns from countries about how to ensure that the tasks they agree on at UNEA can both be implemented and reflect their national interests.

This brought UNEA-7 face-to-face with the challenge of juggling its ever-expanding workload with limited capacities and resources for action on resolutions. The concern delegates expressed focused on the high number of resolutions under consideration in the Assembly’s limited number of days and negotiating hours, and on the increased burden the adopted resolutions place on UNEP. Member States remained divided between those seeking to limit the number of resolutions for future sessions in order to preserve focus on priorities, and those defending their sovereign right to introduce a broad range of issues, despite historically low implementation rates.

As with all UNEA sessions, the resolutions that reach the finish line carry considerable weight in shaping the next cycle of global environmental governance and funding priorities. Meanwhile, the resolutions that were withdrawn due to lack of consensus, despite leaving their proponents frustrated, are likely to return in future UNEA sessions, often more refined and actionable, and ready to set the tone for the following biennium.

“The strength of UNEA-7,” reasoned Assembly President Abdullah bin Ali Al-Amri (Oman), “should not be measured by the number of resolutions adopted, but by the tangible impact seen on the ground,” as he urged national action in line with global priorities.

Spotlight on UNEP

With growing focus on implementable and impactful resolutions, UNEA-7 also put the spotlight on UNEP’s legitimacy and capacity to rise to the expectations of Member States and turn ambitions into actions.

Throughout the Assembly, discussions highlighted UNEP’s role in hosting and administering multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs) and the science-policy trifecta addressing the triple planetary crisis: the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES), and the newly established Intergovernmental Science-Policy Panel on Chemicals, Waste and Pollution (ISP-CWP).

However, tensions arose on whether UNEP’s proven track record allows it to branch out further to issues such as deep-sea governance, a domain perceived as the preserve of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea and its related agreements. While some voiced that UNEP has the mandate to act on all areas of environmental governance, others cautioned against duplicating efforts and undermining progress made by other bodies. Ultimately, the draft resolution on deep-sea governance was withdrawn.

Negotiations on the Programme’s Medium-Term Strategy (MTS) for 2026–2029 highlighted differences in delegates’ comfort with UNEP’s ability to “inform and influence” other UN bodies. Some recalled that the Rio+20 outcome document, “The Future We Want,” called for strengthening UNEP as the authoritative advocate for the global environment. Yet, funding constraints, heavy workloads, and political pressures continue to undermine UNEP’s ability to fully realize its mandate, raising persistent debates over how far the Programme can expand.

 The eleventh-hour approval of the MTS represented a significant step forward in providing a clear framework for UNEP’s priorities and actions for the next four years. It also, more importantly for many Member States, guides implementation, resource allocation, and multilateral cooperation, and establishes a roadmap to translate UNEA commitments into measurable outcomes.

At the same time, UNEA-7 brought into focus questions on UNEP’s institutional home. While frequent references to the “Spirit of Nairobi” reaffirmed the city’s symbolic role as the cradle of multilateral environmental action, delegates nevertheless queried whether Nairobi is still fit-for-purpose in a changing world. Human rights, specifically the inclusion and protection of UN staffers and diplomats belonging to the LGBTQ+ community, and their families, was a particularly sensitive matter due to Kenya’s criminalization of this community.

 While the LGBTQ+ question remains unresolved, it will likely make a comeback at future meetings, as Member States continue addressing broader challenges of equity, diversity, and inclusivity in strengthening and broadening UNEP headquarters and those of other multilateral agencies.

Synergies in Motion

UNEA-7 placed strong emphasis on “walking the talk and walking together,” highlighting that achieving common goals and scaling-up global environmental action requires collective efforts for coherent outcomes. The Assembly showcased UNEP’s potential to foster collaboration across MEAs, particularly through the highly visible MEAs Day Dialogue, MEA Pavilion, and related exhibitions, which promoted knowledge exchange and joint initiatives. 

This meeting demonstrated that true collaboration across the MEAs is increasingly urgent to combat interconnected environmental crises that cannot be tackled in silos. A good example is the resolution on the climate resilience of coral reefs, which straddles the realms of climate, biodiversity, and the Ocean. How to address these issues with institutional mandates engraved in stone remains unclear, requiring more alignment. The efforts underway to increase harmonization and efficiencies, including through UNEP’s efforts to consolidate and strengthen its role as a central, though contested, facilitator of global environmental governance, signaled a step towards finding balance in retaining institutional identities, honoring mandates, and finding true synergies in pursuit of coherent and actionable outcomes.

The Assembly also demonstrated that multilateralism, while sometimes slow, can steadily deliver, achieving tangible progress on environmental policy through strengthened cooperation across agencies. One clear example of this is the cooperation through the One Health Quadripartite alliance, which illustrated how early synergies have evolved into concrete policies. The environmental dimensions of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) was first raised at UNEA-6 as a crosscutting concern in discussions on the One Health approach. This dialogue fed into the high-level meeting on AMR convened during the 79th session of the UN General Assembly in 2024, from which the resulting political declaration called for coordinated cross-sectoral responses. Building on these foundations, UNEA-7 reinforced attention to AMR through a resolution linking UNEP’s environmental mandate with global health efforts and creating a clear pathway for implementation.

The three leadership dialogues convened during the Assembly also reinforced the role for multi-stakeholder and multi-level actions to advance solutions for planetary resilience. These highlighted the inseparable links between planetary and human health, economic resilience, and financial stability. Through its Ministerial Declaration, UNEA-7 emphasized multisectoral engagement across these issues and called for inclusive participation of women, youth, Indigenous Peoples, local communities, and other stakeholders.

Onward with the Nairobi Spirit

“Blaming each other is a waste of time. The only thing that matters is changing what’s wrong” – Gaia, the Spirit of Earth, in Captain Planet and the Planeteers

During the closing plenary session, incoming UNEA-8 President Matthew Samuda (Jamaica), quoted Captain Planet and the Planeteers, which he noted was his favorite childhood cartoon. He emphasized that finger pointing is pointless, and urged everyone to move from conflict to collective responsibility and constructive solutions. But the question of funding remains.

 For the first time in UNEA’s history, the OECPR devoted a session to progress reports on implementation of resolutions from previous sessions. During these discussions, delegates lamented the uneven degree of implementation, reflected by differences in the availability and sources of funding. One delegation pointed to donor prioritization, opining that earmarked financing is directed to resolutions reflecting developed countries’ interests and priorities. The delegation proposed establishing a general fund from which allocation for implementation would be agreed by all Member States. While this proposal was not ultimately taken forward, concerns about insufficient resources for implementation remain.

Negotiations on provisions on MoI at UNEA-7, saw the re-emergence of debates on whether funds should be channeled only from developed countries or from multiple sources and on who should be considered recipients. The proposals for new categories of recipients, such as “countries with significant capacity constraints,” were strongly opposed by developing countries. While some compromises were made on MoI, several delegations lamented the lack of specification on the financing modalities in many of the adopted resolutions.

Looking ahead, the two years before UNEA-8 present a range of strategic opportunities to reinforce UNEA-7 decisions and shape the next phase of global environmental governance. Key opportunities for UNEP include the ongoing, albeit difficult, negotiations toward an international legally binding instrument to end plastics pollution, which could offer an opportunity to bolster UNEA resolutions on pollution. The 2026 UN Water Conference offers an opportunity to advance integrated water management policies and strengthen implementation of UNEA resolutions on sustainable water governance, as underscored by countries like Egypt. Similarly, the BBNJ Agreement’s entry into force will be a pivotal moment to consolidate efforts on the conservation and sustainable use of marine biodiversity in areas beyond national jurisdiction.

As UNEA-7 came to a close, Fiji’s call served as a powerful reminder of the stakes ahead: “If UNEA turns against us, where will we turn?” Delegates were urged not to depart from the meeting with a sense of relief, but with a heavy awareness of the unfinished business that remains. The challenge now is to ensure that the Nairobi spirit, born of multilateral cooperation, ambition, and shared responsibility, does not fade into a mere memory, but instead ignites a sustained drive for courageous action.

Citation

For summary report citation, please use: Kantai, Tallash, Anna Dubrova, Katarina Hovden, Wanja Nyingi, and Emma Vovk. 2025. Seventh session of the Open-ended Committee of Permanent Representatives and the United Nations Environment Assembly. Earth Negotiations Bulletin/IISD, Vol. 16 No. 186.