Alexis Vafeades, Minister of Transport, Communications and Works of Cyprus,
Jessika Roswall, EU Commissioner for Environment, Water Resilience and a Competitive Circular Economy,
Ministers.
My thanks for the opportunity to speak with you today as you seek to enhance strategic EU collaboration in global environmental diplomacy – a system that is currently undergoing a serious stress test.
Across the globe, we are seeing shifting alignments, with smaller and middle powers displaying greater agency. We are seeing trade and investment frictions, with national protectionism growing. We are seeing rapid advances in AI and other technologies, with uneven access and governance.
We are seeing growing competition for critical resources – including hydrocarbons, minerals, land and water – with significant environmental and social implications. And we are seeing disasters and conflicts, which are increasing already intense pressures on the environment and human well-being. The current escalation in the Middle East makes this painfully clear.
The consequences are unlikely to remain contained. Environmental damage and economic disruption ripple across borders and contribute to forced migration, displacement, food shortages and much more. Indeed, environmental stability is a key ingredient that helps underpin a secure tomorrow for nations everywhere.
UNEP’s mandate is to keep the global environment under review, and we will continue to support conflict-affected countries and regions – be it in Gaza, be it in Sudan, be it in Ukraine or indeed elsewhere. We will continue to support efforts to assess the environmental consequences of war and support the environmentally sound reconstruction that will have to follow each of these conflicts.
So, at a time when the world is undergoing profound change, our resolve to address the world’s environmental crises must not – cannot – weaken. It must grow even stronger.
2025 has shown that environmental multilateralism, despite strains, is holding firm under this stress test.
In Belém, at COP30, some very real and consequential divergences remained, but countries still came together with a focus on implementation. And while the pathway for the transition away from fossil fuels did not land as part of the formal negotiations, over 100 countries supported the concept. Next month, Colombia will host the Conference on the Just Transition Away from Fossil Fuels with the Netherlands. This is extremely timely as the conflict in the Middle East is once again exposing the fragility of our dependence on fossil fuels.
So, multilateral responses to the many crises that the world is facing are critical.
In December, at the seventh session of the United Nations Environment Assembly in Nairobi, nations handed UNEP important new mandates as well as approving our four-year strategy.
And last June, in Uruguay, Member States established the new Intergovernmental Science-Policy Panel on Chemicals, Waste and Pollution (ISP-CWP), creating a dedicated body to inform Member States’ decision-making and completing the trifecta of global science-policy panels alongside the IPCC on climate science, and the IPBES on biodiversity and land science. Yes, we are still in the establishment phase for the pollution panel, and yes, it is tough going. But the science is clear and we must strive forward together on this critical agenda.
The agreement on Marine Biological Diversity of Areas beyond National Jurisdiction received enough ratifications to enter into force this January with the third PrepCom scheduled next week.
On chemicals, the Basel, Rotterdam, Stockholm and Minamata Conventions made good headway at their respective COPs last year. And while talks continue on a plastic pollution treaty, countries reaffirmed their commitment to negotiations with the recent election of the new chair.
So, Ministers, yes, multilateralism is complex due to the fractured times. But progress is still being made. Easy? No. Tough? Yes. Science not always at the forefront in the negotiations? Yes. National interests playing a role? Yes. But time to give up? Absolutely not.
And so, to ensure the UN can continue to deliver in these challenged times, the UN80 reform initiative has a clear goal: building a UN system that delivers more effectively, more coherently and with greater impact, amid the reality of shrinking resources and rising needs.
We at UNEP are deeply engaged in UN80, leading – with the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) – on the environmental work package that is “undertaking a thorough assessment of current arrangements” and will “make proposals on possible structural changes and programme realignments on environmental issues”.
We ask for Member State support to ensure that the environment remains high on the UN and multilateral agenda. Because a vibrant and functioning environment, a predictable climate, a well-functioning nature and unpolluted air, soil and water are critical to underpinning the UN Charter’s three pillars: peace and security, human rights and economic development. The three pillars of the Charter are, as I see it, under girthed by a vibrant and functioning environment, a predictable climate, well-functioning nature and unpolluted air, soil and water. We will continue to actively engage Member States in this process and look forward to continuing support to the Secretary-General and delivering a more effective, impactful UN.
But we must keep pushing forward. As I see it, there are three conditions we must fulfil to deliver even more progress.
The first condition is to bolster science, the foundation of environmental multilateralism.
Science must remain at the core of environmental action. Together, we have made great gains in the past 50 years. Things that citizens in Europe may take for granted today –refreshing rain that does not smell like sulfur and does not acidify our lakes, rivers teeming with fish and air you can breathe – must be seen as a European commitment to have science inform policy-making and for leaders to have the courage to change the status quo, despite the temporary inconveniences. Yes, they made such changes through regulations. Yes, with rules. And yes, through enforcement.
But it is because of such actions that northern Europe no longer experiences acid rain; it is because of such actions that the Rhine River, the Seine River and many others are clean; it is because of such regulations that the “London Fog” is a thing of the past. We saw a rapid increase in childhood asthma in Europe from the 1970s through the early 1990s. But with regulations in countries with tighter air quality controls, we have seen a leveling off. That is what good and effective regulations can do.
Environmental leadership in Europe means healthier citizens and more secure economies and therefore more secure nations. And environmental leadership in Europe is often the gear shift that will lead to environmental shifts in other parts of the world. As EU leaders review prevailing regulatory standards, I urge you not to dilute them. Make them smarter, make them more navigable, yes. But be careful not to dilute, as the human health and environmental health consequences will be significant and the price to fix the consequences will be much more expensive.
Indeed, the science policy interface has always been at the core of UNEP’s mandate. As it has been for the EU countries.
But today we are witnessing science being challenged and selectively interpreted, fueled by networks, media and digital tools specializing in disinformation and misinformation. These attempts to erode trust in science and backslide on environmental commitments have both local and global implications. Here, the non-regression principle, which is increasingly recognized, will be crucial to prevent any regression of environmental standards or existing levels of environmental protection.
And we all know, of course, that the undermining or denial of science will not make our shared reality different. Nature will continue to send its invoices in the form of floods, droughts, fires, harvest failures and other natural disasters. Whereas, if we embrace what we know science is telling us, we can secure tomorrow. Create strong independent economies, increase resilience with renewable energy, vibrant agriculture and secure food supplies, all while creating jobs, growth and wealth across the world. I remain grateful for the EU’s leadership on science, and the scale of the funding dedicated to research and innovation. Please do not to back down on these ambitions.
The second condition is partnership building and solidarity.
That environmental security equals human security should be understood by all. And the interdependence amongst and between nations is undeniable. The air that I breathe out, you breathe in. My pollution becomes your asthma. My effluent into the river or the aquifer becomes your water crisis. My CO2 emissions become your flooding or your failed harvest.
So, no one actor can address the many challenges alone: the response must be shared across sectors, across borders, across societies and across the financial balance sheet at the global level.
And I am pleased to see many countries, in the global north and in the global south and east stepping up. I invite the EU to continue creating alliances beyond the EU. To continue with strong environmental leadership at home and to continue with strong and early engagement with partners and regional groups. Such partnerships pay off, particularly with the Global South. In this regard, it was extremely meaningful that Commissioner Roswell attended the African Ministerial Conference on the Environment meeting in Nairobi last year.
The EU can also build on existing engagements to infuse high ambition for environmental policies in other jurisdictions. Environment and climate must be strongly embedded in the EU’s external policies across the board. Using the strategic role of the EU Global Gateway and Team Europe Initiatives, the EU can make a difference in targeted investments that bring environmental benefits.
It is also crucial for the EU to maintain support of climate and environment security in fragile countries, for example through investments in resilience, which often translate into investments in nature, supporting “nature’s infrastructure” – be it a coral reef protecting against high winds, a mangrove cushioning the storm, the vegetative cover keeping the fragile lands intact or the wetland absorbing the heavy rain.
The third condition is stable and predictable funding for global environmental governance.
Member States have handed UNEP new mandates, on top of existing mandates, amidst a restructuring of the organization and the wider UN. We therefore need a strong contribution to UNEP’s Environment Fund, which is UNEP’s backbone, leveraging and supporting the capacity for nearly US$3.3 billion of earmarked project and programme related funding.
However, UNEP’s existence is based on non-earmarked contributions to the Environment Fund. This Fund pays for the spine of UNEP: the science, the environmental law, the capacity building, the standards and the convening. And it is this funding compact, which underpins multilateral action, that is under strain. In 2025, UNEP received a total of EUR 46 million from the EU Member States.
We remain deeply grateful to Belgium, Cyprus, Czechia, Denmark, Germany, France, Ireland, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Malta, Slovenia, Sweden and Spain for paying their full Environment Fund contributions, and we urge all other EU member states to step up and meet their agreed contribution. I am proud to mention that a total of 77 countries have met their full share contribution, while the total number of contributors amounts to 108. Sudan, Jamaica, Kenya, Somalia all made their full payment.
Ministers,
Even in these complicated geopolitical times, we must stay the course. Because every single nation, every single city, every single business and every single individual stands to benefit from environmental action.
And the EU has showed that action can be taken. That environmental security and human security go hand in hand. That smart environmental policies create jobs, sustain vibrant farming communities with healthy soil and clean water, and safeguard some of the most precious areas that define the very identify of the European nations.
Because the environment is not an add-on to economic growth and societal wellbeing. The environment is the very foundation upon which peace, prosperity, economic growth and stability rest.
In closing, I urge us all to act on science and reinforce that foundation, so that together, we can create a more sustainable, just and secure tomorrow.
