OECD Environmental Performance Reviews: Colombia 2026

Report

28 January 2026

Assessment and recommendations

Copy link to Assessment and recommendations

Abstract

The Assessment and Recommendations present the main findings of the OECD Environmental Performance Review of Colombia. They identify 46 recommendations to help the country make further progress towards its environmental objectives and international commitments.

1. Towards green growth

Copy link to 1. Towards green growth

Addressing key environmental challenges

Environmental pressures in Colombia have continued to rise, although at a slower pace than economic growth

Colombia is an upper middle-income country that has experienced steady economic growth over the past decade. The economy is projected to grow by 2.6% in 2026, roughly in line with the average of regional peers (OECD, 2025[1]). Despite this progress, gross domestic product (GDP) per capita remains among the lowest in the OECD. Levels of poverty and inequality are high – above the regional averages for Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC).

Colombia is rich in natural resources, including minerals, metals and fossil fuels. Fossil fuels are a major export commodity, accounting for 51% of total exports in 2023. The hydrocarbon sector contributes significantly to government revenues via taxes, royalties and dividends (GoC, 2025[2]). As demand for fossil fuels is projected to decline with the global clean energy transition, the country needs to diversify its economy and reduce reliance on fossil fuels. Critical minerals offer opportunities to support the Just Energy Transition.

Several environmental pressures have continued to rise since 2010. Domestic material consumption, greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and total energy supply (TES) increased over the period, albeit at a slower rate than GDP. Over 2010-2021, the relative decoupling of most air pollutant emissions has been more pronounced with only slight increases in emissions of sulphur oxides (SO_x) and carbon monoxide (CO). Emissions of fine particulate matter (PM_2.5) declined slightly until 2020, then increased again. Household waste increased at roughly the same pace as economic growth (Figure 1).

Figure 1. Many environmental pressures have continued to rise, although most at a slower rate than economic growth
Copy link to Figure 1. Many environmental pressures have continued to rise, although most at a slower rate than economic growth

Decoupling trends, 2010-2023

Climate risk assessment and adaptation indicators strengthen Colombia’s capacity to monitor and respond to climate change

Colombia is increasingly exposed and vulnerable to climate-related risks, including higher temperatures, shifting precipitation patterns, wildfires and more frequent extreme events, such as floods and drought (IDEAM, 2024[3]). Climate projections of the Institute of Hydrology, Meteorology and Environmental Studies for 2020-2100 cover a broad range of climate variables and offer high spatial resolution, supporting risk assessments and guiding adaptation actions. The Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC 2.0), submitted in December 2020, set 30 targets for adaptation and places a strong emphasis on nature-based solutions, which can enhance synergies with biodiversity conservation and combatting desertification. A comprehensive set of quantitative and qualitative indicators to monitor progress on adaptation has been developed, including indicators to assess vulnerability and risk to climate change, consolidated in the Integrated Information System on Vulnerability, Risk and Adaptation (SIIVRA). The NDC 3.0, submitted in September 2025, explicitly links future adaptation targets and monitoring to the eight strategic axes of SIIVRA. Meanwhile, the National Adaptation Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) system established in 2023 provides a structured framework to track, assess and report on the country's progress. However, adaptation indicators in the national M&E system rely primarily on national-level data, which can overlook regional disparities. Efforts to enhance the territorial dimension of the M&E system should be continued, building on developments to track progress at the subnational level, such as SIIVRA. Setting mid-term targets to reduce economic losses and vulnerability, as well as increasing adaptive capacity for 2030 and at regular intervals thereafter, would help track progress towards enhancing climate resilience.

While Colombia has made progress on adaptation, further steps are needed to enhance resilience to climate impacts. The 2016 National Plan for Adaptation to Climate Change (PNACC) is updated periodically and several sectoral plans have been adopted, including for agriculture, energy and mining, housing, health and industry. However, plans are lacking for other sectors. Territorial and development plans are legally obliged to incorporate climate risks, but implementation by local authorities remains inconsistent (OECD, 2024[4]). As a result, spatial planning and infrastructure projects may not reflect climate-related risks in siting and design.

Scaling up and better targeting financing for adaptation will be essential. One study estimated the country should invest 0.2% of GDP per year in adaptation through 2030, and that financing levels were only one-third of total needs (DNP, 2020[5]). The 1st Biennial Transparency Report estimates financing needs for adaptation at over USD 2 billion to implement the 30 NDC 2.0 targets (GoC, 2024[6]). There is also a low degree of alignment between adaptation financing and exposure to climate-related risks across departments. This highlights significant scope for better targeting adaptation finance (DNP, 2020[7]). In addition, local communities face resource constraints (financial and technical) to implement adaptation projects, further hindering progress.

Colombia has ambitious climate targets requiring steep emissions reductions and further measures

Colombia’s GHG emissions have continued to rise (Figure 2). In contrast to most other OECD countries, where the energy sector is the main source of emissions, the country’s GHG emission profile is dominated by agriculture, forestry and other land use. In 2021, land use, land-use change and forestry (LULUCF) accounted for 34% of total net emissions, the energy sector accounted for 33% and the agricultural sector accounted for 21%. Methane emissions accounted for 27% of total carbon dioxide equivalent (CO₂e) of emissions in 2021; this share has remained largely stable since 2014.

The carbon intensity of the economy has declined, but energy consumption is increasing, driven by economic and population growth. The government estimates that energy demand could further rise by 21‑48% to 2050, depending on the economic growth scenario (IEA, 2023[8]). Transport represented the largest share of energy sector emissions (15% of total net emissions in 2021) and grew the fastest, increasing by 54% between 2010 and 2021.

The government has committed to ambitious climate mitigation targets, progressively strengthening its policy and institutional framework over the past decade. In its NDC 2.0, Colombia raised its targets to achieve a 51% reduction in net GHG emissions1 by 2030 compared to the business-as-usual scenario (GoC, 2020[9]). The long-term strategy for Carbon Neutrality and Climate Resilience Strategy (E2050), adopted in 2021, set a net-zero target for 2050 and introduced an absolute cap on total emissions for 2030. Achieving this will require sharp reductions: the average annual growth rate of GHG emissions between 2005-2020 was 1.7%, while reaching the 2030 target will require annual average reductions of 5.4%. The NDC 3.0 reaffirms the 2030 targets and sets a new target to limit GHG emissions to between 155 and 161 Mt CO₂e in 2035 (GoC, 2025[10]). The 2035 target requires a slower rate of emissions reductions between 2030 and 2035 than the emissions reductions required to meet the 2030 target and will require an acceleration of emissions cuts after 2035 to meet net zero by 2050.

Colombia has strengthened climate action through laws and binding targets. The Climate Action Law, adopted in December 2021, consolidated commitments in the NDC 2.0 and enshrined the net-zero target in law. The 2018 Climate Change Law requires the development of Sectoral Climate Change Management Plans (PIGCCS), including an “intersectoral” target for deforestation. PIGCCS have been adopted for agriculture, energy and mining, housing, health and industry but are lacking for other key sectors, notably transport. Several PIGCCS also need to be updated to align with NDC targets. Integrated Territorial Climate Change Management Plans (PIGCCTS) are mandatory and have been adopted by all but one department. A national carbon budget for the first three periods (2020‑2025, 2026‑2030 and 2031‑2035) was established in 2024.

Although Colombia has taken important steps towards climate action, the mitigation policies, actions and measures identified in the NDC 2.0 are not sufficient to reach net zero (GoC, 2024[6]). Detailed actions and measures have not yet been defined under the NDC 3.0. A portfolio of sectoral and territorial measures is expected to be detailed as part of the updated NDC 3.0 by the end of 2025. Emissions have recently declined relative to the NDC 2.0 reference scenario, mainly due to an emerging stabilisation trend related to the LULUCF and energy sectors (Figure 2). Nevertheless, achieving climate targets will require identifying and implementing additional mitigation measures to drive steep reductions in emissions, in particular from deforestation and agriculture, as well as curbing fast rising emissions from transport.

Figure 2. Colombia has increased climate mitigation ambition, but emissions continue to rise
Copy link to Figure 2. Colombia has increased climate mitigation ambition, but emissions continue to rise

Historical GHG emissions, targets, projections and indicative pathways to targets, 1990-2050

Meeting climate targets depends critically on reversing deforestation

Reducing deforestation is central to the achievement of climate and biodiversity targets (Chapter 2) and broader environmental objectives such as improving water security. Colombia’s NDC 2.0 set a target to reduce deforestation to no more than 100 000 hectares (ha) per year by 2025 (equivalent to a 42.6% reduction compared to 2021) and to achieve net-zero deforestation by 2030.2 The National Biodiversity Action Plan, adopted in 2024, raised the ambition by committing to the goal of restoring 5 million ha and limiting annual net deforestation to no more than 33 000 ha by 2030 (GoC, 2024[11]). The NDC 3.0 set a target to reduce the deforestation rate to between 37 500 and 49 999 ha/year in 2035 and to restore over 68 000 ha annually between 2031 and 2035.

Since 2017, deforestation levels have been generally trending downward and in 2023, they reached their lowest point since 2000. As a result, net LULUCF emissions declined by 14% between 2017 and 2021. Several factors have been key to this positive development: strengthened enforcement against illegal activities; greater inter-ministerial co‑ordination; peace agreements with illegal armed groups; and expansion of protected areas and conservation agreements with communities, including programmes for payments for ecosystem services, such as REM Visión Amazonía and “Conservar Pagar” (Chapter 2). The delimitation of the agricultural frontier and progress on the multi-purpose cadastre have also been key to limiting further expansion of agricultural production, notably livestock, into forest reserves. However, preliminary data for 2024 indicate a renewed increase in deforestation, rising by an estimated 35% compared to 2023, calling for reinforcement of measures and sustained vigilance.

Emissions from agriculture continue to rise while progress implementing mitigation measures is too slow

Agriculture is a major contributor to Colombia’s GHG emissions. Emissions from agriculture have risen steadily since 2014, albeit at a slower rate than other sectors, including forestry and other land uses, industrial processes and waste. Enteric fermentation, manure management, use of synthetic fertilisers and rice cultivation are the major sources of methane and nitrous oxide (N₂O) emissions. Livestock production, mainly cattle, is the largest contributor to agricultural emissions, accounting for 14% of total GHG emissions in 2021. Livestock also uses 77.2% of the country’s agricultural land (DANE, 2023[12]) and is a major driver of deforestation. Support to agricultural producers has generally declined since 2014 (OECD, 2025[13]) and Colombia is pioneering reforms to reduce environmentally harmful subsidies in the agricultural sector (UNDP BIOFIN, 2025[14]) (Chapter 2). Further reorientation of support from distorting input subsidies towards general services would foster more inclusive and sustainable growth (OECD, 2022[15]). The agricultural sector remains characterised by low productivity (OECD, 2022[15]), and weak institutions and governance related to land use (Chapter 2).

The mitigation policy mix is comprised mainly of regulatory measures, such as zoning, land-use plans, technology and performance standards (OECD, 2024[16]). The PIGCCS for the agricultural sector, approved in 2021, include measures to promote the intensification and sustainable management of livestock, agroforestry and ecosystem restoration. They also encourage climate-smart practices such as improved fertiliser management and reducing methane emissions from rice and livestock. Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions are in place for livestock and key crops. The Sustainable Bovine Livestock Policy aims to achieve carbon neutrality in the livestock sector by 2050 but lacks mid-term targets. Implementation of the PIGCCS has proceeded slowly; 65% of initiatives are still in the early stages, 26% have not begun and only 8% have been fully implemented. Regularisation of land tenure to promote rural and sectoral development needs to be accelerated. More secure land tenure would encourage private investment and development of rural areas (OECD, 2023[17]) and reduce incentives for illegal land grabbing that contributes to deforestation.

The government aims to reduce dependence on fossil fuels, but policy signals are inconsistent and the clean energy transition is at a nascent stage

Reducing dependence of the economy on fossil fuel production and consumption towards more sustainable economic activities is a core pillar of Colombia’s clean energy transition strategy. The Socio‑Ecological Transition Portfolio launched in 2023 aims to mobilise USD 36 billion to support the transition to more sustainable production systems. Colombia also became the first Latin American country and the largest producer of coal and gas to endorse efforts to negotiate a Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty and announced it would not sign new hydrocarbon exploration contracts. The government has also identified specific coal-producing regions that could transition towards more sustainable activities. Existing mining leases are set to progressively expire through the end of the 2030s (Argus, 2024[18]).

The government has aimed to accelerate the transition away from fossil fuels in the energy sector over the past decade, but progress has been incremental. Colombia has a relatively high share of renewables (24%) in TES, twice the OECD average, due to the prevalence of hydropower. Despite high potential to develop non-conventional renewable energy (solar, wind, geothermal3), these account for a small share of TES (2%). The share of renewables remained stable between 2010 and 2024, while TES grew by one‑third. Colombia failed to reach its target in the National Development Plan (NDP) 2018-2022 to increase electricity supply from non-conventional renewables.

Given Colombia’s aim to reduce its dependence on fossil fuels, it needs a clear commitment to exit from coal and should reassess its reliance on natural gas during the transition to clean energy. The Roadmap for a Just Energy Transition, launched in 2024, is a comprehensive, multi-sector strategy until 2050. It aims to reduce dependence on fossil fuels, while promoting economic diversification, social inclusion and environmental protection (GoC, 2025[2]). The Roadmap indicates an exit from coal in electricity generation in 2035 due to higher operational costs and the end of operational contracts. However, the government has not committed to exit coal by a specific date. Law 2128, passed in 2021, declared the use of natural gas to be in the national interest and promotes its widespread use (Fifth Permanent Constitutional Commission, 2021[19]). Natural gas can provide a transition fuel, however, the increasing reliance on natural gas needs to be managed to ensure alignment with climate objectives, as envisaged in the just energy transition scenario in the Roadmap.

There are several targets to increase the use of renewables by 2050, including one to double the share of renewable energy in TES by 2050, largely by increasing bioenergy and solar (GoC, 2021[20]). However, renewable energy targets are inconsistent across policy documents and lack mid-term targets.4 The latest update of the National Energy Plan (PEN) is not aligned with NDC emission reduction targets. The most ambitious scenario (“energy transition”) would only achieve part of the emissions reductions needed by 2030 and 2050 (UPME, 2023[21]). The PEN acknowledges that this shortfall underscores the need to accelerate the clean energy transition, as well as the importance of carbon capture, use and storage technologies to meet emission reduction targets (UPME, 2023[21]).

To meet energy savings and decarbonisation targets for buildings, industry and transport by 2030,5 efficiency and electrification measures should be accelerated (IEA, 2023[8]). The government has introduced a range of energy efficiency strategies and policies. It has made progress in some areas, notably in the building sector, with the green building code and tax incentives that have spurred energy efficiency improvements (World Bank, 2023[22]). However, there is limited evidence of the impact and cost effectiveness of energy efficiency programmes (IEA, 2023[8]).

New policy instruments support the transition to renewable energy but face technical, financial and social barriers. The government has expanded policy instruments to support the transition, including adopting a carbon tax; expanding tax benefits for renewables; establishing the Fondo Único de Soluciones Energéticas (FONENERGIA); and promoting “energy communities” to encourage associations of energy users to generate, market and efficiently use non-conventional renewable energy (GoC, 2023[23]). However, most carbon emissions are either not priced, priced at low levels or effectively subsidised. The Roadmap for the Just Energy Transition and the PEN highlight the key role of the carbon tax to provide a market signal for decarbonisation, but the price signal is weakened by the low tax rate and offsetting mechanism (see below). Investment in fossil fuels continues to far outstrip investment in renewables (see below).

There are several other barriers to accelerating deployment of renewable energy in Colombia. Transmission capacity from high potential sites is lacking and support for projects by local communities in remote areas is often weak, contributing to delays in permitting (IEA, 2023[8]). The country will also need to mobilise additional finance, including private finance, to achieve the clean energy transition.

Colombia faces significant public health and economic burdens from air pollution, calling for a strengthened regulatory and financial framework

Despite a notable reduction in the share of municipalities exceeding national PM_2.5standards since 2017 (Garzón Herrera and Buitrago Mesa, 2024[24]), air pollution remains a serious public health and environmental concern in Colombia. The economic burden of air pollution is substantial, with welfare costs from premature mortality due to exposure to PM_2.5estimated at 2.9% of the country’s GDP in 2019 (OECD, 2025[25]). In 2023, it is estimated that more than 7 000 premature deaths could have been avoided if air quality levels had met the World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines (Garzón Herrera and Buitrago Mesa, 2024[24]).

Indoor air pollution remains a significant health concern in rural areas, where access to clean cooking technologies is limited and firewood remains the predominant fuel source (IDEAM et al., 2024[26]). In 2021, stationary residential sources – largely linked to household cooking – accounted for 59% of PM_2.5emissions, with firewood consumption contributing a significant share source (IDEAM et al., 2024[26]). The National Firewood Substitution Plan (PNSL) seeks to ensure universal access to clean, efficient cooking energy by 2050, prioritising vulnerable populations based on fuel type, infrastructure and rural gas coverage. It targets an 87% reduction in firewood use through alternatives like biogas and hydrogen, with expected social and economic benefits of COP 1.7 trillion (UPME, n.d.[27]). The plan leverages existing subsidies, including the Programa Piloto for liquefied petroleum gas (IEA, 2023[8]), though the latter has faced challenges related to project timelines, and delays in budget and funding execution (Zapata Quinchía, 2024[28]). Timely and full disbursement of committed resources are essential to ensure the effectiveness and long-term sustainability of the PNSL.

To fulfil its pledge to halve air pollution-related health impacts by 2040 (MinAmbiente, 2025[29]), Colombia must continue strengthening its institutional, regulatory and financial frameworks for effective air quality management. The Air Pollution Prevention and Control Policy (CONPES 3943) outlines a progressive and technical roadmap for improving air quality in a context-specific manner. As of 2024, notable progress had been made towards meeting most of its defined objectives. However, although implementation accelerated, it remains uneven – particularly at the local level – due to persistent institutional, resource and capacity constraints.

Colombia has regulated and adopted some of the WHO interim targets for air pollution through Resolution 2254 of 2017. However, national air quality standards for PM₁₀, PM_2.5and NO₂ remain below guideline levels. The country should pursue efforts to progressively converge towards guideline levels, using interim targets as achievable milestones, considering the national context and evolving capacities. It should also continue expanding coverage of the national monitoring system, particularly for under-monitored air pollutants, as this is key to supporting more effective management of air quality and related health risks.

Colombia should prioritise robust and integrated policies to reduce transport-related air pollution emissions and support progress towards climate goals

While emissions of PM₁₀ and PM_2.5 declined, overall air pollutant emissions increased between 2015 and 2021, with the largest rises in CO and non-methane volatile organic compounds (NMVOC). Emissions from fuel combustion remain a major source of air pollution. Transport is the largest contributor to nitrogen oxides (NO_x), NMVOC and CO emissions, making it a priority for abatement efforts. By contrast, SO₂ emissions mainly originate from energy industries, manufacturing and construction.

Colombia has made important strides to address emissions from fixed sources, including regulatory progress in the industrial sector through updates to Resolution 909 of 2008 and the Protocol for Control and Monitoring of Atmospheric Pollution from Stationary Sources. However, emission limits do not reflect best available techniques (BAT) (see below). In the transport sector, stricter vehicle and fuel standards have been introduced, including updated emission limits for mobile sources. Colombia met the NDP 2018 2022 target by adding over 6 600 electric vehicles (EVs) to the national fleet (IEA, 2023[8]). However, progress towards the 2030 goal of 600 000 – established under Law 2169 and in the NDC 2.0 – remains limited. By 2024, EVs accounted for around 1.1% of over 1 million new vehicle registrations, contributing to a total fleet of 38 057 – just over 6% of the 2030 target (RUNT, 2024[30]).

Vehicle taxes do not incentivise the renewal of the vehicle fleet (see below). Motorcycles, which make up 62% of the national vehicle fleet, require targeted regulations to better control emissions and manage circulation, as they were responsible of 33% of NMVOC and 25% of CO emissions in 2021 (IDEAM et al., 2024[26]). In highly populated urban areas like Bogotá, complementary measures such as low emission zones (Miguel Muñoz, Poveda and Gil, 2024[31]) and congestion charges would further encourage a renewal of the vehicle fleet and a shift from private car use at peak times (see below). Moreover, enforcement of vehicle emission standards and technical inspections must be strengthened, as over half of registered vehicles failed to comply with mandatory inspections in 2024 (RUNT, 2024[30]).

The country has made progress in public transport electrification, but much remains to be done. Colombia has introduced legislation requiring a gradual transition to zero-emission fleets in mass transit systems and introduced policies facilitating electric mobility in public transport co-financing. Enhancing the connectivity and reliability of sustainable transport modes – both within and between regions – would help reduce car dependency. At the same time, addressing challenges related to road safety and infrastructure inequity, while integrating active mobility into national climate policies, will be crucial to achieving cleaner and more inclusive urban mobility. Accelerating the rollout of charging infrastructure is also essential to boost the uptake of EVs.

High pressures on water quality and localised shortages in supply pose significant challenges for water management

Colombia ranks among the most water-abundant countries in the world, yet several areas remain vulnerable to water scarcity. Localised water shortages have significantly disrupted supply, as illustrated by the recent water rationing for household supply in Bogotá. Water quality is threatened by multiple sources: industry, including cattle slaughter and coffee processing; and wastewater from households (IDEAM, 2023[32]). In addition, hydrocarbon extraction results in heavy metals contamination (Arias and Andrea, 2017[33]). Pesticides and mercury, including from illegal gold mining, are also problematic. As of 2022, water quality in a quarter of monitored areas was classified as “bad” based on the Water Quality Index6 (IDEAM, 2023[32]). To respond effectively, national and regional water quality monitoring needs to be expanded and provide more granular information on pollutant loads in municipalities and sub-basins (IDEAM, 2023[32]).

Colombia has significantly advanced its policy framework for water management, emphasising freshwater ecosystem restoration, watershed protection, improved water quality standards and better monitoring. Water resources management is also a key pillar of the NDP 2022-2026, which aims to place water at the heart of territorial planning. Stricter protections have been provided for páramos – vital sources of freshwater supply – as a key strategy for climate change adaptation and mitigation. Extractive activities have been banned in Ramsar wetlands and páramos, with termination of some mining titles in those areas.

Despite a comprehensive regulatory framework for water quality, regulations have shortcomings due to weak institutions; lack of enforcement and compliance; and the influence of interest groups. These challenges, along with increasing pressures from a growing population and economic activity, have contributed to the deterioration of water quality (Tobón-Orozco and Vasco Correa, 2021[34]).

While Colombia has several mechanisms to generate income for water resource protection, they fall short of their potential. Colombia has an abstraction charge (“water use fee”) that applies to all water users, while a water pollution charge (“retributive fee”) applies to point source discharges based on total pollutant loads. Revenues from fees are used to fund water resources protection. However, the low levels of fees and low collection rates contribute to inefficient water use and do not provide an effective incentive to reduce pollution (World Bank, 2020[35]). Revenue raised only covers a small share of the costs of water resource management. Colombia also requires all licensed projects involving freshwater resources to allocate at least 1% of their total investment to watershed protection. This could raise significant funding for water resources management. However, high levels of non-compliance, legislative gaps and significant delays in approving compensation plans and execution have posed serious challenges for implementation (ANLA, 2021[36]; Contraloria General De La Republica, 2023[37]).

Progress in expanding access to drinking water and sanitation has been slow and disparities in access exacerbate inequality

Progress to improve access to safely managed drinking water and sanitation has stalled over the past decade and Colombia continues to lag behind regional peers (Figure 3). As of 2022, only 74% of the population had access to safely managed drinking water – a small increase from 2012. As of 2022, only 18% of the Colombian population had access to safely managed sanitation, also a marginal increase from 2012. As in many other countries, access to water and sanitation services of urban residents far exceeds access of the rural population. Quality of drinking water is a concern in several departments, and many rural areas do not comply with national drinking water standards. A national surveillance system monitors drinking water quality but faces significant reporting gaps (INS-MINSAL, 2024[38]). The share of wastewater treated is relatively low and losses to public water supply are significant. While urban areas collected just over 70% of wastewater in 2021, they treated only 32% of it (Figure 3). The adaptation target in the NDC 2.0 aims to achieve 68% of urban domestic wastewater treatment by 2030, requiring more than a doubling of the current share treated.

Figure 3. Access to safely managed drinking water and sanitation lags behind regional peers
Copy link to Figure 3. Access to safely managed drinking water and sanitation lags behind regional peers

Investment in water supply and sanitation (WSS) infrastructure has declined since 2012. In 2019, investment was only 37% of the total invested at the peak in 2012. It is well below levels required to meet the Sustainable Development Goals on WSS. The efficiency of public investment; co‑ordination among a large number of institutions in the sector; and diversification of commercial sources of finance need to be improved.

While tariffs for WSS have risen, they are lower than both the OECD LAC average and regional peers Chile and Costa Rica. Direct subsidies to low-income households to cover the basic subsistence cost aim to ensure affordability. These are complemented by cross-subsidies from higher income households and commercial users. However, the subsidies are regressive and poorly targeted. The subsidy programme merits reform to better target the most vulnerable population. In addition, WSS service quality should be expanded and improved to reduce reliance on costly alternative water sources (Pérez-Urdiales and Ramos dos Santos, 2024[39]).

Rising waste generation and uneven collection coverage challenge circular economy ambitions and require inclusive infrastructure development

Colombia has strengthened its waste information systems, notably through the development of the Environmental and Economic Account of Solid Waste Material Flows (CAEFM-RS); the Pollutant Release and Transfer Register; and the Circular Economy Information System. These efforts have improved monitoring of key indicators and enhanced traceability. However, important data gaps remain. Major waste streams – including construction and demolition waste, agricultural residues, and mining and quarrying by‑products – are not yet fully captured in national datasets. Moreover, official data on waste generation and recovery include solid waste products, which – while relevant for circular economy accounting – are not classified as waste under OECD methodology.7 This limits international comparability and may distort performance tracking. Further alignment and consolidation of data across institutions and information systems are needed to ensure consistency.

With 48% of solid waste still directed to landfills (DANE, 2024[40]), Colombia’s rising waste generation is placing increasing pressure on already limited disposal capacity. As of 2023, nearly one-third of landfills had less than three years of operational life remaining, and a similar share operated without permits. This underscores the urgency to accelerate the transition to more sustainable waste treatment. The country is gradually shifting from traditional landfilling to Technological and Environmental Parks (PTAs), which aim to treat and recover over 20 000 tonnes of biodegradable organic waste per facility each year.

Colombia has also introduced landfill closure plans, but these could be implemented more effectively. Closure plans for landfills provide opportunities for nature-based adaptation measures and climate change mitigation actions, such as those promoted under the Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Action on municipal solid waste. At the same time, the plans can help reduce open-air dumps. The Basura Cero (Zero Waste) Programme provides a framework to phase out landfilling and advance Colombia’s circular economy goals. To date, it has financed 12 recovery-focused projects with a total investment of nearly COP 119 billion. However, ensuring its effective implementation will require stronger co‑ordination, clear and measurable short- and mid-term targets, and alignment with the Green Growth Policy and the National Circular Economy Strategy, among others.

Waste collection and separation remain key challenges, especially in rural and dispersed areas. According to the 2024 Quality of Life Survey, 53% of households report sorting their waste, supported by mandatory separation rules and a national colour-coding system. Yet, limited infrastructure and weak co‑ordination often lead to mixed disposal, eroding public trust and long-term participation. While formal sanitation services cover 98% of urban households, nearly 70% of municipalities report rural waste collection rates below 30% (Superservicios, 2024[41]). As a result, more than half of rural households burn their waste and 17% rely on illegal dumping or informal services (DANE, 2024[42]). Strengthening and expanding separate waste collection and treatment services are critical to sustain progress.

The recycling rate increased from 9.5% to 16% between 2012 and 2022, progressing towards the Green Growth Policy target of 17.9% by 2030 (DANE, 2024[40]). Incineration with energy recovery accounts for 30% of waste treatment, while biogas contributes only 1% of TES (CONPES, 2023[43]). Among municipalities with recovery programmes, 96% have approved Municipal Solid Waste Management Plans (PGIRS), underscoring their key enabling role (ECLAC, 2021[44]). Still, 39% of municipalities lack updated PGIRS, which are often underused for regulatory and evaluative purposes (DNP, 2019[45]).

Sanitation fee systems are inadequate to ensure the financial sustainability of public sanitation services, with the severity of this challenge varying significantly across municipalities. Fees for sanitation systems cover only 16% of operational costs for waste picker organisations (OROs). These revenues are insufficient to cover basic expenses like collection, transport and piece-rate payments. As a result, the financial viability of OROs depends largely on revenues from material sales (DNP, 2019[45]). Although all households must pay a sanitation fee, this charge often fails to reflect the extent of treatment and recovery services provided (DNP, 2019[45]). A comprehensive review of fee regimes is therefore required to better reflect the full costs and benefits of waste treatment and recovery. Such a review should reformulate user fees in line with actual system coverage and traceability. It should further account for deductions from revenues derived from the sale of recovered materials and by-products. Finally, it should promote context-adapted pay-as-you-throw (PAYT) programmes to incentivise source separation and stimulate investment in recovery infrastructure (Svatikova, Brown and Börkey, 2025[46]).

Informal waste pickers are central to Colombia’s recycling system, accounting for over 65% of plastic recovery (Lesmes and Reyes, 2025[47]). Their role has been increasingly recognised through recent legal reforms and private initiatives, improving efficiency, traceability and working conditions. However, the status of informal waste pickers could be improved, both to support their livelihoods and to strengthen the sector. Key challenges include an incomplete registry for oversight; unreliable census data; limited traceability of recovered materials; and barriers related to education, finance and technical capacity. In addition, a sharp drop in PET prices, restrictive collection routes and fragmented governance – including competition for recyclable materials – have further weakened recyclers’ livelihoods and access to inputs. Building on existing formalisation efforts, strengthening the sector requires equitable and adequate remuneration, improved waste separation in residential areas, enhanced material traceability, and stronger government control and monitoring. This should be supported by a unified framework.

Advancing circular economy goals requires stronger economic signals and strategic use of municipal waste management planning tools

Colombia has made commendable progress towards a circular economy, but key areas require further attention. By 2024, the country had achieved 82% of the institutional targets under its National Policy for Integrated Solid Waste Management. Circular economy targets under the Green Growth Policy were fully met, with remaining gaps limited to pending legislative updates (DNP, 2024[48]). However, evidence of institutional fragmentation, unclear municipal mandates and persistent weaknesses in inter-agency co‑ordination remain. Following a mid-term evaluation of the National Circular Economy Strategy (ENEC) in 2024, Colombia updated its Circular Economy Roadmap in 2025 to strengthen implementation and address persistent challenges.

While preventive measures have had a positive impact, more sustainable approaches are needed to advance the circular economy. Preventive measures have achieved notable progress, including the tax on single-use plastic packaging. Nonetheless, as organic waste represents nearly 61% of urban solid waste in Colombia, efforts to manage this waste stream more sustainably are urgently needed. The National Circular Economy Strategy sets a target to increase biomass recovery by 20% by 2030 for both energy generation and agricultural products. To support this, the 2022 Action Plan for the Sustainable Management of Residual Biomass was adopted. This plan complements promotion of bio-inputs to replace agrochemicals under the National Agroecology Programme, and territorial planning instruments to facilitate land allocation for community-based organic waste management infrastructure. However, a consolidated system for tracking organic waste generation and recovery is still lacking, posing a challenge for effective policy design and implementation.

Six post-consumer programmes, formally operating as EPR programmes, have been established as part of Colombia’s broader circular economy efforts. There is scope to extend these plans to other sectors, such as textiles, where early efforts are already under way. Further strengthening EPR programmes requires tailoring economic tools to sector maturity. Advanced streams like packaging and electronics could benefit from modulated fee systems that encourage eco-design and reparability, drawing on international experience with bonus-malus systems (Brown, Laubinger and Börkey, 2023[49]). Less mature sectors could start with simpler advanced disposal fees (ADFs) to internalise end-of-life costs.

Despite some progress, the use of economic instruments remains insufficient to drive a nationwide shift towards a circular economy. The Incentive for Waste Recovery and Treatment (IAT), introduced in 2019, operates as a disposal surcharge – currently about USD 1.5 per tonne – marks a step forward. The surcharge provides an incentive to reduce waste generation and reliance on landfilling, while also generating funds for recovery projects (Carolina et al., 2023[50]). However, its application is contingent on whether a municipality’s PGIRS includes a recovery component, and implementation is further constrained by outdated Territorial Ordering Plans. These gaps limit funding eligibility and hinder formal expansion of recovery infrastructure.

Improving environmental governance and management

Colombia should swiftly conclude reforms to expand coverage of its environmental licensing regime and address gaps related to legacy projects

Colombia has progressively enhanced its environmental licensing regime to align with the OECD Council Recommendation on the Assessment of Projects, Plans and Programmes with Significant Impact on the Environment (OECD/LEGAL/0172). However, key economic sectors and activities that could have significant environmental impacts are not yet included in the licensing regime. This represents an important gap and should be swiftly addressed by pursuing the required reforms.

A significant gap remains for projects initiated before the passage of Law 99 (1993), which are governed by a less stringent transition regime. There are 621 large-scale legacy projects, including 441 in mining, operating without updated licences and not subject to current environmental standards. This increases environmental risk due to inadequate evaluation and control measures. Colombia could further strengthen the environmental licensing process. To that end, it could conduct periodic assessments that use pollution and risk reduction indicators to evaluate the environmental performance of licensed activities and the effectiveness of the licensing system both at national and regional levels.

Environmental impact assessments should require an evaluation of alternatives and a clear legal requirement for strategic environmental assessment should be established

Colombia uses environmental impact assessments (EIAs) as core instruments to assess high impact projects needing a licence, but additional measures may be required. In addition to EIAs, an environmental diagnosis of alternatives (DAA) may be needed to identify lower-risk options. The updated general methodology for environmental impact studies, aligning with Colombia’s commitments to the OECD, is under public consultation and expected to be finalised in 2026. This update unifies guidelines and procedures, and requires an evaluation of alternatives in design, technology and location for projects in cases where a DAA was not required. It also requires Colombia to notify neighbouring countries if the impact of projects is likely to cross its national borders.

DAAs and EIAs must include an economic evaluation using cost-benefit analysis (CBA) and multi-criteria analysis. However, CBAs face challenges in valuing non-market environmental benefits, variability in social discount rates and potential stakeholder bias in assumptions. It is recommended to adopt official reference values for CBAs in order to specify marginal external costs for non-market prices (e.g. social cost of GHGs) and standardise discount rates.

Colombia has conducted strategic environmental assessments (SEAs) effectively in various sectors, but they are applied inconsistently. Colombia has applied SEAs in various sectors, including transport, mining and energy, agriculture, tourism and environmental health, as well as in regional areas like the Pacific and Caribbean. While they have helped integrate environmental criteria into planning, SEAs are not legally required, leading to inconsistent application. To enhance their impact, Colombia should establish a legal mandate for SEAs, ensuring consistent integration of environmental considerations across all sectors and governance levels, thereby supporting more sustainable development outcomes.

Best available techniques should guide permitting standards and be updated regularly

Adoption and regular review of BAT could strengthen licensing and permitting. BAT standards and practices aim to ensure that industries adopt the most advanced and efficient techniques to reduce emissions, thereby limiting release of harmful pollutants into the air, water and soil. However, selected comparison of emission standards for various activities against BAT-based standards indicates a gap in requirements. To strengthen its licensing and permitting system, Colombia should adopt a BAT-based approach. This would involve setting BAT-based permit conditions (including emission limit values) technical and maintenance requirements, monitoring and reporting obligations, and resource efficiency measures. Adopting BAT standards would improve environmental outcomes, support climate targets and promote adoption of emerging technologies. BAT requirements should be periodically reviewed to reflect technological advancements.

Enhancing policy coherence for green growth

A comprehensive tax and subsidy reform is needed to align price signals with Colombia’s environmental goals

Colombia has taken steps to green its tax system and reduce longstanding fossil fuel subsidies, but further reforms are needed. Increasing and improving the design of environment-related taxes – along with removing fossil fuel subsidies and inefficient tax benefits – should be central to much-needed, comprehensive tax reform and fiscal consolidation. Such reforms should also make the tax system more effective, equitable and growth-enhancing (OECD, 2024[4]). A gradual fiscal and economic transition is needed to reduce reliance on government revenue from fossil resource exploitation as the global clean energy transition progresses.

Colombia should continue its efforts to eliminate fossil fuel subsidies. The country has long subsidised energy use for transport and residential purposes. These subsidies weaken incentives for energy efficiency and fuel switching, weigh on public finances and are regressive. Subsidies to energy utilities to keep electricity and gas prices low are poorly targeted and disproportionately benefit non-poor households (IEA, 2023[8]; OECD, 2024[4]). In 2023, in a welcome development, the government eliminated petrol subsidies provided through its fuel price stabilisation fund. More recently, it also cut diesel subsidies for large consumers, although these subsidies remain substantial. In practice, most diesel users continue to buy fuel at below-cost prices when global oil prices are high. The removal of petrol subsidies significantly reduced the fiscal cost of fuel subsidies. Such subsidies have burdened the national budget for 15 years, reaching a peak of 2.5% of GDP in 2022. The government plans to gradually phase out diesel subsidies, but political and stakeholder resistance has been slowing reform (Böhl Gutierrez, Vega Araújo and Arond, 2024[51]). It is essential to engage key actors in the transport sector in a co‑ordinated subsidy reform plan, including targeted support for vulnerable operators and households. Restructuring and modernising the freight transport sector would help reduce reliance on road transport, while ending diesel subsidies would make other, more sustainable transport modes more competitive.

The use of environment-related taxes falls short of its potential, while tax benefits abound. Environment‑related taxes remain a minor source of fiscal revenue, accounting for only 0.6% of GDP in 2023 – the lowest share among OECD countries and below the LAC average of 0.9% of GDP. A portion of the proceeds is earmarked for environmental purposes and transferred to regional authorities. Low headline tax rates and exemptions constrain the effectiveness and revenue of these taxes. Colombia has traditionally favoured tax incentives to promote environment-friendly investment and consumption over taxing environmentally harmful activities. While well intentioned, the country’s broad array of tax benefits is potentially inefficient, inequitable and fiscally costly. Vested interests and distributional concerns are major barriers to reform generous tax breaks, along with fuel subsidies. A comprehensive review of environment-related taxes and benefits and of environmentally harmful subsidies at all levels of government is needed to enhance coherence and design of the tax and benefit system. This would help identify reform priorities and develop a tax and subsidy reform plan in consultation with relevant stakeholders. Such a plan should outline a stepwise phase-out of inefficient tax breaks and harmful subsidies, along with measures to support vulnerable households and help businesses adapt during the transition (Elgouacem, 2020[52]).

Colombia applies excise duties to energy products and is one of the few LAC countries to implement a carbon tax, although at low rates and with several exemptions. The carbon tax will be progressively extended to coal sales by 2028, starting at 25% of the standard rate in 2025. The carbon tax rate has gradually increased to reach about USD 7/tCO₂ in 2025. However, this is still well below the estimated level needed to achieve global climate goals (OECD, 2024[53])8 and below the average nominal rate of other similar-income countries (World Bank, 2025[54]).

Colombia is among the few countries with a carbon tax that permit the use of domestic carbon offsets to fulfil tax obligations, under the so-called non-causation mechanism (mecanismo de no causación). The mechanism extends the tax’s emission mitigation incentive to sectors beyond fossil fuel users, such as Colombia’s high-emitting land-use sector. However, it further reduces the price signal and revenue of the carbon tax. In 2022, the government reduced the offsetting provision from 100% to 50% of the carbon tax liability. This helped strengthen the incentive to reduce fossil fuel use in the taxed sectors, although it caused a sudden drop in demand of carbon credits. A higher carbon tax would stimulate demand of carbon offsets, in addition to encouraging mitigation measures in sectors that use taxed fossil fuels.

While the carbon tax offsetting mechanism has helped develop a domestic voluntary carbon market, there is an opportunity to enhance its implementation and the quality of offsets. The system has provided finance to Indigenous and Traditional Territories (ITTs), as well as to ethnic, peasant and local communities, that implement emission reduction projects – mostly forestry and land-use projects. However, there are concerns that a considerable portion of offsets generated may not reflect actual reductions (Wang-Helmreich and Kreibich, 2019[55]; Castiblanco Rozo, 2022[56]). Most carbon credits generated in the country come from independent mechanisms that often fail to meet international quality standards. Hence, the mechanism may over-subsidise cheap, low-impact mitigation projects at high revenue losses. In addition, several other instruments financially support forestry and land-use projects (Chapter 2), with potential overlaps and double financing. Colombia has made progress in developing environmental and social safeguards for activities generating carbon credits, but several implementation and enforcement challenges remain. These hinder project credibility – potentially undermining foreign investment – and increase the risk of double counting and carbon tax evasion (Gómez, 2024[57]; GFI, Transparency for Colombia and CEALDES, 2025[58]).

Strengthening carbon pricing is essential to reduce GHG emissions in line with Colombia’s targets. Low headline energy and carbon tax rates, combined with multiple tax exemptions and substantial fossil fuel subsidies, have resulted in negative effective carbon rates (ECRs) in Colombia (OECD, 2024[53]) (Figure 4). In 2023, only 13% of GHG emissions were effectively subject to a carbon price. That year, the average fossil fuel subsidy exceeded the average ECR from energy and carbon taxes. Consequently, CO₂ emitters (fuel consumers) received an average subsidy of about EUR 12 per tonnes of CO₂ instead of paying a carbon price (Figure 4). This subsidy was more than six times higher in road transport – the most heavily subsidised sector. However, Colombia’s ECRs have likely increased since 2023 thanks to the partial removal of fuel subsidies. In addition to raising carbon and energy tax rates and removing energy subsidies, implementing a national emissions trading system (ETS) would help strengthen carbon pricing. The 2021 Climate Action Law foresees the ETS to be launched by 2030, but a longer timeframe may be warranted to reinforce the necessary institutional, regulatory and monitoring frameworks. Transparent emissions reporting and close co‑ordination between the ETS, the voluntary carbon market and the carbon tax are essential to ensure the ETS is effective and to avoid double regulation or loopholes.

Figure 4. Colombia’s average effective carbon rate is the lowest in the OECD and turns negative when accounting for energy price subsidies
Copy link to Figure 4. Colombia’s average effective carbon rate is the lowest in the OECD and turns negative when accounting for energy price subsidies

Effective carbon rates, OECD countries, 2023

There is significant potential to improve vehicle taxation and road pricing systems to promote use of more energy-efficient and less polluting vehicles, as well as to encourage a shift towards public transport and active mobility. Such moves would help reduce GHG emissions and air pollutants from road transport. Municipalities levy annual vehicle ownership taxes, which do not vary with fuel efficiency or emission levels. In addition, the amount of tax decreases with the vehicle’s age, which discourages fleet renewal. Several tax incentives have encouraged a rapid increase in sales of hybrid and electric cars in the last few years, although their number is still negligible. While these subsidies can help establish a domestic electric car market, they tend to be regressive and a costly way to reduce GHG emissions and air pollution from vehicle use. In 2024/25, the government started to reduce incentives for plug-in hybrid cars. Further reducing subsidies for private electric cars would free up resources that could be repurposed towards charging infrastructure, as well as electric buses and motorcycles (see above). Aligning vehicle taxes with fuel efficiency and environmental performance would provide stronger, more cost-effective incentives to shift towards cleaner vehicles, including EVs. Transitioning to a distance- and time-based road pricing system and implementing congestion charging in major cities would help better reflect the social costs of driving. Colombia’s biggest cities – Bogotá, Medellín and Cali – have introduced forms of congestion charging alongside longstanding plate-based traffic restrictions. They could build on these experiences to gradually implement fully-fledged congestion charges.

Part of the revenues from increased environment-related taxes and harmful subsidy removal should be used to provide targeted support to the most affected households. Such allocation would improve social acceptability of the reforms (Dechezleprêtre et al., 2025[59]). Revenue could also be used to finance low‑carbon investment and other environment-related actions. It is encouraging that 80% of carbon tax revenue, along with all revenue from the planned ETS, is directed towards environmental purposes through the Fund for Life and Biodiversity (Section 2). However, this approach ties the financing of environmental investments to continued revenue from taxing fossil fuels or pricing GHG emissions, which conflicts with climate mitigation objectives. Moreover, allocating revenue to special purpose funds risks reducing fiscal transparency and further increasing Colombia’s budget rigidity and fragmentation.

Colombia should leverage royalty income from fossil resource exploitation more effectively to support regional environmental initiatives and the net-zero transition. In 2021-2022, projects in the environment and sustainable development sectors represented only about 5% of total funding, while the regions hosting some of Colombia’s most valuable ecosystems received the lowest share of royalty funding (MFPC and IDB, 2024[60]). This calls for systematically integrating environmental and climate resilience criteria into funded projects. Weak governance and capabilities of some subnational governments result in fragmented and small-scale projects, hampering the environmental, social and economic impact of royalty-funded initiatives. Moreover, delays in project execution have led to the incomplete use of allocated funds.

Aligning finance and investment with climate goals

Colombia is a regional pioneer in integrating climate into financial sector policies but needs to expand their scope and understand impacts

Colombia has shown regional leadership in connecting climate and finance, but the overall impact of its policies is unclear. The country is a frontrunner in the LAC region in integrating climate considerations into financial sector policies. It does this mainly through transparency measures and increasingly through supervisory expectations towards financial institutions to enhance financial stability. Colombia was the first country in the region to issue a green taxonomy and to conduct a climate stress test for its financial sector. Since 2012, the country has developed several other climate-related transparency and information policies for the financial sector. These include the Green Bond Guide issued by the Superintendencia Financiera de Colombia (SFC) in 2020 and climate-related disclosure requirements for large issuers in 2021. However, selected case studies point to continued transparency gaps across Colombian financial institutions despite disclosure policies. Climate-related reporting by banks and institutional investors remains limited, as noted in Transforma (2024[61]). Moreover, the effects of Colombian climate-related financial sector policies on climate goals have not yet been consistently assessed or monitored. Both the SFC and the Central Bank of Colombia (Banrep) need to make further efforts to identify and potentially adjust policies that still incentivise finance flowing to climate-misaligned activities.

Building on advances in climate-related transparency policies, expanded mandatory disclosure of climate‑related practices for financial institutions could strengthen monitoring and reporting. Several transparency policies related to climate remain limited in scope (e.g. mandatory disclosure policies only cover large issuers) or voluntary (e.g. Green Bond Guide). Mandatory and enhanced disclosure requirements of key climate metrics would help track the climate alignment of finance. Large financial institutions, which dominate the market, are well positioned to lead efforts to improve climate-related reporting and transparency. Progress on tracking the climate alignment of finance also depends on better data from borrowers and investees. The chambers of commerce can help build the reporting capacities of Colombian companies.

Climate-related transparency policies must evolve to cover quantitative information on both transition and climate-misaligned activities, in addition to climate-aligned activities. Required reporting can include quantitative metrics on emissions, composition of aligned/misaligned (or “green/brown”) activities and investments, as well as corporate climate strategy and governance. For example, more quantitative environment, social and governance (ESG) surveys of financial institutions by the SFC can provide improved coverage and comparability across institutions. The SFC could also consider expanding the green taxonomy to address climate transition activities in sectors that must improve their climate performance. Continued and expanded stress tests by Banrep can help identify exposure of financial institutions to carbon-intensive assets. Such processes to improve climate transparency in the financial sector can be leveraged to also incorporate biodiversity considerations over time.

Efforts to improve transparency on climate and other sustainability topics (including biodiversity) in Colombia need to continue to ensure co‑ordination across national policy communities and departments, as well as coherence with international best practices. Metrics would ideally be interoperable with international frameworks, as is already the case for the green taxonomy and disclosure requirements aligned with the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosure recommendations. Interoperability with international-level frameworks and developments ensure that Colombia can tap into global capital markets and investment sources.

Available evidence on financial flows and stocks points to a high degree of misalignment with climate objectives

Colombia needs to scale up investments in climate-aligned activities to transition its economy. Between 2020 and 2023, investments in clean energy were estimated at around 4% of total gross fixed capital formation annually, while investments in unabated fossil fuels represented around 10% (IEA, 2024[62]). These rates run counter to regional and global trends. In 2023, clean energy investments surpassed fossil fuel investments in LAC countries and worldwide, highlighting additional efforts needed for Colombia to accelerate its clean energy transition.

Colombia needs to strengthen efforts to redirect financial stocks and flows away from fossil fuel-related activities and towards climate-aligned activities. Where data are available, flows and stocks across financial asset classes show a low degree of alignment with climate goals. For example, in 2024, close to 40% of total equity of listed Colombian holdings was concentrated in carbon-intensive sectors, while only 3% could be considered “low carbon”.9 By contrast, in 2022, global listed equity in fossil fuels and renewables made up 10% and 4%, respectively. In Colombia, green-labelled corporate bonds accounted for only 1% of total issuance in 2024, while corporate bond issuance to carbon-intensive sectors represented about 40%. Colombia needs to transition its stock market from carbon-intensive activities towards more low-emission activities and increase adoption of green-labelled corporate bonds and loans. Such developments could, in turn, help attract more private capital and international investments, to activities contributing to climate change and broader sustainably objectives, including biodiversity, which is essential for Colombia to reach its policy goals.

Existing efforts to collect data on (mis)aligned real-economy investments and financial asset classes need to be scaled up to fill significant blind spots and enable more robust climate-alignment assessments. Such efforts need to account for both climate (mitigation and adaptation) and biodiversity to give a more comprehensive account of these investments and to avoid potential double counting. Closer co‑ordination among ministries, the SFC, Banrep and the National Administrative Department of Statistics (DANE) is essential to improve the coverage, quality and availability of data in Colombia’s monitoring, reporting and verification (MRV) system. An expanded MRV system would provide an opportunity to better connect real‑economy investments with underlying financial sector flows and stocks supporting climate goals. Moreover, building on internationally co‑ordinated 2025 updates to the System of National Accounts, DANE could ramp up efforts to collect and report on green finance more systematically. It could start with green bonds and expand progressively to loans, equity and investment fund shares. Parallel efforts are also needed to collect and disclose data on financial flows that undermine climate goals.

Recommendations on green growth

Copy link to Recommendations on green growth

Key environmental trends

Climate change adaptation

Set mid-term targets for 2030 to reduce economic losses and vulnerability to climate-related risks, as well as increasing adaptive capacity, in line with long-term goals for 2050. Continue development of adaptation indicators to track progress to enhance resilience to climate change at the departmental and municipal levels.
Strengthen implementation of the legal requirement to integrate climate-related risks into territorial and development plans with technical assistance, financial resources and operational guidance.
Scale up funding to implement the PNACC and sectoral adaptation plans, including providing financial and technical support to local communities and mobilising finance from the private sector; better target adaptation finance to align with climate-related risk exposure and vulnerability; enhance synergies with biodiversity conservation and sustainable use.

Climate change mitigation and air quality

Swiftly develop, adopt and update PIGCCS for all key sectors, including transport, with measures sufficient to meet NDC targets for 2030, 2035 and net zero by 2050 and in line with the binding carbon budget; enhance synergies with biodiversity and combatting desertification, including through nature-based solutions; measure progress implementing PIGCCS and adjust measures as needed.
Align targets across strategies, plans and policies, notably for deforestation and clean energy, to ensure coherence with emission reduction targets and to provide a clear mid-term and long‑term vision to reach climate goals.
Accelerate implementation of the Comprehensive Agricultural Sector Climate Change Management Plan and completion of related action plans to promote widespread adoption of climate-smart agricultural practices; set mid-term targets for the Sustainable Bovine Livestock Policy and accelerate implementation.
Advance implementation of the Just Energy Transition Roadmap, swiftly implementing measures to enable the transition set out in the just energy transition scenario aligned with climate mitigation goals; align sectoral targets with emission reduction objectives and the overarching aim to reduce dependence on fossil fuels; commit to a clear date to exit from coal; set mid-term targets for increasing the share of non-conventional renewables; accelerate energy efficiency and electrification measures; strengthen community engagement and provide mechanisms for benefit sharing from the expansion of clean energy projects.
Accelerate ongoing efforts to transition to sustainable urban mobility by improving connectivity across transport modes, advancing public transport electrification, expanding EV charging infrastructure, integrating active mobility into national climate policy, strengthening the enforcement of emissions regulations and implementing complementary measures such as low‑emission zones and congestion charges.
Continue strengthening the regulatory framework for air quality management and clean energy to progressively converge towards more stringent standards as national capacities evolve; expand and reinforce local monitoring capacity of air pollutants emissions; and ensure equitable access to modern energy sources.

Water resources management and water supply and sanitation

Ensure the territorial approach to water management embeds the principles of robust water allocation, including defining adequate environmental flows, promoting allocation to highest value uses (economic, environmental and social) and flexibility under changing conditions, including climate-related risks.
Strengthen enforcement of water quality standards; establish minimum requirements for wastewater re-use and enforceable regulations for sustainable urban drainage systems; expand water quality monitoring in terms of parameters covered, frequency of monitoring and coverage of water bodies.
Raise water use fees and retributive fees to strengthen economic incentives for water use efficiency and pollution reduction, as well as revenue for water resources management; address deficiencies in the implementation of the 1% programme for watershed protection.
Scale up financing to expand WSS and wastewater treatment infrastructure, incorporating climate resilience considerations; improve efficiency of public investment and diversify commercial sources of finance; review and reform subsidies based on socio-economic strata to better target support to vulnerable populations and reduce the fiscal burden on public budgets.
Consolidate and improve coherence of water data from different national sources; strengthen data on water abstractions (notably for agriculture and livestock production), on connection rates to wastewater treatment and on the tracking of freshwater flows.

Waste management and circular economy

Improve data collection and monitoring by expanding coverage to all major waste streams and consolidating data platforms to establish a comprehensive and reliable foundation for policy design and evaluation.
Strengthen waste management systems by expanding to rural and underserved areas, updating tariff structures and improving traceability of waste streams. Ensure the update, full adoption and implementation of PGIRS and establish unified legal and governance framework.
Strengthen enforcement capacity to address illegal waste disposal and ensure adequate waste treatment options; with these requisites in place, scale up economic instruments such as the IAT, PAYT programmes and targeted landfilling bans; mandate an EPR programme for textiles and tailor reforms to post-consumer programmes through ADFs or modulated fee structures based on sector maturity; expand fiscal incentives for eco-design, reuse and repair; and continue advancing organic waste management efforts.

Improving environmental governance and management

Swiftly conclude reforms to expand the environmental licensing regime to cover activities with potentially high environmental risk; address gaps related to large-scale legacy projects to ensure they align with current environmental standards and reduce environmental risks; introduce periodic assessments to evaluate the environmental performance of licensed activities at national and regional levels.
Adopt and consistently apply the updated methodology for environmental studies (EIA, DAA), to evaluate alternatives in project design, technology and location, as well as mandatory notification of neighbouring countries when projects may have transboundary effects; establish official reference values and standardised discount rates for CBA of projects subject to EIA.
Establish a clear legal requirement for SEA to ensure consistent integration of environmental considerations across all sectors and governance levels.
Adopt a BAT-based approach for permitting, including emission limits, technical requirements and monitoring obligations; periodically update BAT requirements to reflect technological advancements, ensuring industries use the most efficient technologies to reduce emissions and support climate and other environmental targets.

Greening the system of taxes and subsidies

Strengthen and broaden environment-related taxation, streamline green tax incentives and phase out subsidies harmful to the environment as part of a comprehensive fiscal reform, while providing targeted support to households in need; ground the reform in a thorough, systematic analysis of the environmental effectiveness and economic efficiency of environment-related taxes and fiscal incentives across all levels of government; systematically screen existing and proposed subsidies to identify those that undermine environmental objectives.
Follow through with the gradual phase-out of diesel subsidies by engaging relevant stakeholders to develop a subsidy reform plan that includes targeted support for vulnerable transport operators and households; replace discounted electricity and gas prices with means-tested cash transfers; and strengthen identification of vulnerable households by, for example, leveraging the Sisbén social registry.
Raise the carbon tax rate and gradually tighten the emission offsetting option under the carbon tax non-causation mechanism according to a clearly identified and communicated timeline; require alignment of offset-generating activities with increasingly stringent internationally recognised quality benchmarks and strengthen enforcement of the non-causation mechanism; ensure transparent emission MRV and close co‑ordination between the carbon tax, the planned ETS and the use of carbon offsets.
Periodically review revenue earmarking arrangements in a transparent way; develop a strategy to eventually decouple environmental investment funding from carbon pricing revenue as the net-zero transition advances.
Modulate vehicle taxes according to the vehicles’ fuel efficiency and local pollutant emissions; eliminate preferential tax treatment for old vehicles; phase out subsidies for private electric cars as the market matures and redirect resources towards charging infrastructure, public transport electrification and renewal of the freight vehicle fleet.

Aligning finance and investment with climate goals

Adopt a co‑ordinated approach across ministries and agencies to improve the coverage, quality and availability of data within the MRV system to more comprehensively cover investments in activities contributing to or undermining climate goals, while connecting to underlying financial asset classes and instruments. Such efforts need to account for both climate (mitigation and adaptation) and biodiversity objectives, leveraging existing co‑ordination through the Climate Finance Management Committee of the National Climate Change System.
Develop and test data collection approaches to collect and publicly report statistics on green debt securities, loans, equity and investment fund shares, as proposed by the 2025 System of National Accounts and seventh Balance of Payments Manual.
Building on advances in climate transparency policies, expand mandatory disclosure requirements on key quantitative metrics to cover a broader range of financial institutions and companies to inform credible assessments of progress towards climate goals. Key metrics need to cover transition and climate-misaligned activities, in addition to climate-aligned activities. Disclosure initiatives should take an integrated approach to climate and biodiversity topics.
Review the effects of financial sector policies on climate and financial policy goals, starting with an evaluation of the implementation and impacts of Colombia’s Green Taxonomy. This should assess the potential to further expand the coverage of environmental objectives in the taxonomy, such as biodiversity conservation and adaptation to climate change in sectors other than land use. Such a review should also seek to identify financial sector policies that may undermine climate goals and inadvertently incentivise financial flows and stocks in climate‑misaligned activities.

2. Biodiversity conservation and sustainable use

Copy link to 2. Biodiversity conservation and sustainable use

Status, trends and pressures

Colombia is a megadiverse country facing mounting pressures on its biodiversity

Colombia, one of the world’s most biodiverse countries, hosts about 10% of global biodiversity (Correa Ayram et al., 2020[63]) across 314 continental and marine ecosystems, with exceptional diversity in birds, orchids, butterflies, amphibians and mammals. Yet, despite this wealth of natural capital, over half of the national territory has lost ecological integrity10 (Gomez et al., 2021[64]). More than two-thirds of ecosystems are considered threatened, with severe degradation observed in wetlands, dry forests, deserts, mangroves and coral reefs (IUCN, 2024[65]). Structural pressures, including land-use conflicts, agricultural and urban expansion, timber harvesting, extractive industries, infrastructure development and invasive species, continue to drive ecosystem loss. Impacts are most acute in the Andes, where ecological stress is consistently high. Between 2015 and 2022, pressures increased in localised Amazonian hotspots, while some reductions occurred in the Caribbean and Orinoquía regions.

The country is highly exposed and vulnerable to hazards exacerbated by climate change, which alters hydrological regimes, accelerates glacier retreat and increases extreme weather events. Nearly 47% of the national territory faces high climate risk, threatening biodiversity, water security and food systems (GoC, 2022[66]). In the Amazon and coastal zones, climate-related tipping points could trigger irreversible ecological shifts. Projections suggest that 78% of Colombia’s bird species may be highly vulnerable to climate change, with high-altitude regions facing the greatest risks for endemic species. Climate risk assessments have provided a solid foundation for cross-sectoral adaptation planning, yet improved data are needed to support ecosystem resilience and reflect the country’s ecological and regional diversity (Gomez et al., 2021[64]).

Species diversity is also under significant pressure, with amphibians and vascular plants being among the most threatened taxa (OECD, 2025[67]). Monitoring remains limited relative to the country’s vast biodiversity (Gomez et al., 2021[64]), which includes over 79 800 recorded species. Invasive species represent a growing risk (GBIF, 2022[68]), especially in high Andean zones where they could displace native species by mid-century (IaVH, 2021[69]). The implementation of the 2012 National Plan for Invasive Species has been hampered by weak enforcement and limited capacity; an updated strategy was expected by 2025. Illegal wildlife trafficking further compounds biodiversity loss (GoC, 2024[70]), prompting an update of the national strategy for its prevention and control.

Colombia’s armed conflict and illicit economies have had severe environmental consequences, driving deforestation, loss of biological diversity and water degradation. Ongoing territorial control by armed groups continues to shape deforestation patterns, underlining the need to continue integrating environmental priorities into peace negotiations and national policy implementation.

Colombia’s forests and other globally significant terrestrial ecosystems need more protection

Colombia is one of the world’s most forested countries, with over 59 million hectares (ha) of natural forest (about 52% of its territory) – representing around 1.5% of global forest area (Mendoza et al., 2024[71]). It has the third-largest area of tropical forest in the Americas, with the Amazon region alone representing 67% (GoC, n.d.[72]). Since 2000, more than 3 million ha of forest has been lost, releasing 1.3 billion tonnes of CO₂ and affecting over 60% of key water sources. Forests within Indigenous reserves, protected areas (PAs) and Afro-descendant territories together store 88% of Colombia’s total carbon stocks (UNDP et al., 2023[73]), highlighting the critical role of these communities in contributing to biodiversity and climate policy.

The country has made marked progress in curbing deforestation over the past decade. While conflict dynamics at times restricted access to remote areas and resource use, the 2016 Peace Agreement opened access to previously isolated areas, accelerating deforestation and land-use change between 2015 and 2017 (Correa Ayram et al., 2020[63]). Since its peak in 2017, deforestation has steadily declined and, in 2023, reached its lowest level in more than two decades. This outcome surpassed the 2025 Nationally Determined Contribution submitted in December 2020 (NDC 2.0) target and the 2026 NDP target (Figure 5). However, preliminary data for 2024 show signs of resurgence of deforestation. Expansion of cattle ranching is the dominant proximate driver, alongside illicit crops, illegal mining and infrastructure development, notably transport infrastructure (GoC, 2024[70]). These pressures are reinforced by structural conditions such as persistent poverty, limited economic alternatives for rural populations, weak governance and armed conflict.

Figure 5. Deforestation declined to a historic low in 2023 but risks of rebound remain
Copy link to Figure 5. Deforestation declined to a historic low in 2023 but risks of rebound remain

Deforested natural forest area, projections, and NDC and NDP targets

The country has committed to ambitious reforestation goals but risks falling short of meeting them. Reforestation initiatives have targeted both planted and natural forests, with most of the area – 94% –corresponding to commercial forest plantations and the remainder to natural forest restoration (DNP, 2024[74]). The NDP (2022-2026) targets the establishment of 40 000 ha of new commercial forest plantations during this period. From 2022 to 2023, a total of 7 502 ha of planted forest was added, representing approximately 18.8% of the 2022-2026 target (MADR, 2024[75]). Efforts were mainly carried out through projects under the Forest Incentive Certificate (Certificado de Incentivo Forestal, CIF). However, there is a need for stronger technical, financial and institutional support to achieve reforestation objectives (DNP, 2024[74]).

Climate change, invasive species, overfishing and pollution continue to threaten Colombia’s exceptional marine biodiversity

Colombia’s marine and coastal ecosystems provide vital services and host exceptional biodiversity in both the Caribbean and Pacific regions (INVEMAR, 2024[76]). Yet, they face increasing pressure from pollution, overfishing, climate change, coastal erosion, and limited urban planning in coastal areas. In the Ocean Health Index,11 Colombia’s score declined slightly from 67 to 65 between 2014 and 2024 – below the global average of 69. This decline reflects pressures on artisanal fishing, biodiversity (habitat condition and species), natural products and tourism (Ocean Health Index, 2024[77]). Discharges of treated and untreated wastewater degrade water and sediment quality, impairing ecosystem functioning and posing risks to human health. Overfishing affects over 81% of marine and 90% of continental fish stocks (UNDP et al., 2023[73]), with capture fisheries production having sharply declined over the past decade. Meanwhile, bycatch of non-target species and non-selective techniques like bottom trawling accelerate biodiversity loss, degrade habitats and hinder species recovery. Aquaculture expansion adds additional pressures through nutrient loading, sedimentation and invasive species (MinAmbiente, 2025[78]). The fisheries legal framework (Law 13 of 1990 and Decree 2256 of 1991) should be updated to better reflect recent environmental and biological changes, align with institutional and sectoral developments, and promote sustainable fisheries. Regulation of navigation and port activities based on biodiversity criteria should also be considered to mitigate increasing pressures from river and maritime transport.

Coral reefs are in steep decline, with live coral cover below 30% in key Caribbean sites (MinAmbiente, 2025[78]). Rising sea temperatures, bleaching, the spread of coral diseases and other stressors are disrupting reef ecosystems and threatening artisanal fisheries (INVEMAR, 2024[76]; Mendoza et al., 2024[71]). Moreover, exotic and invasive species pose major threats to Colombia’s marine and coastal ecosystems, prompting an update of the National Plan for the Prevention, Control and Management of Introduced, Transplanted and Invasive Species.

Key structural challenges in islands, oceanic and coastal areas include weak institutional co‑ordination, insufficient maritime security, limited knowledge and innovation related to ocean resources, and underdeveloped maritime economic activities. To address these issues, the Colombia Sustainable Bio‑Oceanic Power 2030 Policy (CONPES 3990) was established in 2020. As of 2024, it has achieved nearly two-thirds of its objectives, including the creation of the National Bio-Oceanic System (SBBN). Nevertheless, inadequate land-use planning and limited enforcement continue to undermine the protection of marine and coastal ecosystems. Co‑ordination gaps and slow institutional responses make it difficult to manage conflicts, while monitoring continues to draw on voluntary civil society efforts (UNDP et al., 2023[73]). Stronger state-led action on monitoring is essential to ensure the success of national biodiversity and climate strategies.

Governance is stronger for continental territories than for islands, oceanic and coastal areas, where policies, regulations and management instruments are limited. This undermines efforts to conserve and sustainably manage marine and coastal ecosystems and adapt to climate change, particularly for carbon‑rich ecosystems such as mangroves and seagrasses. Community-based restoration and adaptation efforts provide models that could be expanded to strengthen the integration of traditional knowledge and link conservation efforts with local livelihoods. In addition, scaling up ecosystem-based approaches by prioritising nature-based solutions, fostering inter-institutional co-ordination and improving monitoring of high-risk areas will be key to halting coastal degradation and safeguarding marine biodiversity.

Policy framework and governance

Colombia’s policy framework for biodiversity has advanced significantly

Since 2014, Colombia has made notable progress implementing the National Policy for the Integral Management of Biodiversity and its Ecosystem Services (PNGIBSE). The national Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP), updated in 2024, is comprehensive with clear targets, lines of action and indicators to monitor progress. The update incorporated the targets of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework and aligned them with six overarching national goals. The plan resulted from impressive levels of engagement of Indigenous and Traditional Territories (ITTs), and ethnic, peasant and local communities. An extensive participatory process at local and regional levels identified priorities and actions tailored to the country’s five regions, grounding the national strategy in diverse territorial contexts. The update is a positive development and reflects strong commitment from the government on biodiversity. To strengthen implementation, BAP targets could be made legally binding and regulations updated to incorporate measures required to meet the 2030 goals.

Meanwhile, Colombia incorporated green growth and natural capital objectives into successive NDPs and has begun to integrate biodiversity and climate goals into territorial planning. In 2024, it hosted the 16th Conference of Parties of the UN Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). Overall, there is a solid, high‑level policy framework positioning biodiversity as a national priority for sustainable development.

The country surpassed some of the 2020 Aichi targets under the CBD but fell short on others (GoC, 2019[79]). In 2020, Colombia exceeded the target for PAs for marine and coastal zones with 13.5% of areas protected (compared to the goal of 10%) and narrowly missed the 17% target for territorial PAs (CBD, 2021[80]). It also made progress in raising awareness (Aichi Target 1), integrating biodiversity values into development policies and strategies (Aichi Target 2) and the integration of PAs into the National System of Protected Areas (SINAP) with CONPES 3680 from 2010 to 2019 (Aichi Target 11). Aichi Target 3, on incentives, was partially achieved with a wide range of positive incentives in place and some measures to mitigate negative incentives. However, insufficient measuring and monitoring systems impede proper assessment of the impact of positive incentives and the elimination of harmful ones (GoC, 2019[79]).

The country is restoring degraded ecosystems to boost climate resilience, support biodiversity and promote sustainable livelihoods. Key efforts include the National Plan for Ecological Restoration (PNRE) and the 2023-2026 National Restoration Strategy, which prioritise millions of hectares based on ecosystem integrity and vulnerability. The PNRE initially identified 23 million ha as suitable for restoration. Of these, 6.1 million ha was prioritised through the National Restoration Portfolio (GoC, 2022[66]). As of 2024, Colombia had begun restoring more than 75 000 ha.

Colombia has strengthened enforcement by targeting root causes of biodiversity loss, but challenges persist

Colombia has strengthened enforcement against illegal activities driving deforestation and other forms of environmental degradation. Combatting environmental crime is one of the six national targets of the BAP. CONALDEF, a high-level inter-ministerial body, was established in 2019 to advance the deforestation strategy, improve institutional co‑ordination and strengthen monitoring. The government has also been actively engaged in regional co‑operation through, for example, the Amazon Cooperation Treaty Organization, as a key lever to address transnational environmental crime. Colombia also has strict laws against wildlife trafficking and has increased enforcement since 2014, including specialised environmental police units. These efforts have improved inter-institutional co‑ordination in response to environmental emergencies and strengthened intelligence and prosecution actions.

The judiciary has grown more prominent in environmental governance. In 2021, the legal framework on environmental crimes in the Colombian Penal Code was strengthened, incorporating new types of crimes (such as deforestation) and imposing stronger penalties for serious environmental damage. Courts have delivered landmark rulings, declaring eight rivers as a subject of rights and mandating government action to restore water quality and ecosystem health. These rulings have spurred action from authorities, such as removal of mining titles in certain areas and the development of inter-institutional action plans.

Nevertheless, the implementation of environmental plans faces challenges due to insufficient financing, judicial oversight and co‑ordination with territories. The ratification of the Escazú Agreement in 2024 strengthens Colombia’s commitment to environmental information, participation, justice and the rights of ITTs, and ethnic, peasant and local communities. Despite advances, frequent violence against environmental defenders remains a pressing concern.

While Colombia has strengthened enforcement against illegal activities, some regions still face insufficient technical capacity, lack of co‑ordinated land-use planning and limited state control. The technical capacity and resources of the Corporations for Sustainable Development and Autonomous Regional Corporations (CARs), which are key actors in environmental governance, vary considerably. This is especially true in vast territories like Chocó and Amazonia, which have notable deficiencies (GoC, 2019[79]). SINA has structural and operational limitations in territories where environmental and social conflicts persist. Frequently, in these regions, state presence is limited, and illegal armed groups and organised criminals impose de facto environmental regimes. Land-use planning is another area of concern, with overlapping and sometimes conflicting national, regional and local plans complicating enforcement of land-use regulations (GoC, 2019[79]).

Data and information systems should be further consolidated and strengthened

Colombia’s biodiversity monitoring remains fragmented and uneven. Less than 10% of species have genetic data, and many biodiversity-rich regions face the largest gaps in data and capacity (UNDP et al., 2023[73]). While the Biodiversity Information System has expanded, most data are still based on single-time observations, limiting the ability to track long-term ecological trends. Community and civil society initiatives contribute, but coverage is insufficient (Gomez et al., 2021[64]). Innovative approaches are emerging: under the National Council to Combat Deforestation and Other Associated Environmental Crimes (CONALDEF) (see below), entities share satellite data, environmental forensics and field reports to improve the traceability of environmental crimes. Meanwhile, new national indicators under the BAP aim to deliver a clearer territorial picture of biodiversity impacts, liabilities and institutional responses. The first National Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services Assessment in 2021 marked a step forward in valuing nature’s contributions to economic growth and development. Colombia should invest in regular biodiversity assessments (particularly in underrepresented ecosystems and biodiversity hotspots), strengthen regional data capacity and ensure sustained funding.

Policy instruments for biodiversity

Colombia has a diverse and innovative policy mix for biodiversity

Colombia has expanded the range of policies for biodiversity and has a diverse and innovative policy mix. Area-based measures, such as expansion of PAs and zoning regulations, remain the cornerstone of biodiversity policies in the country (Echeverri et al., 2023[81]). Economic instruments have expanded, including payments for ecosystem services (PES), biodiversity offsets, positive incentives for environmentally related investments and newer instruments such as voluntary biodiversity credits. Yet, consistent with its general approach to environmentally related taxation, Colombia only has a few taxes and charges on biodiversity-harmful activities, while tax expenditures are more prevalent. Although tax benefits (income tax and property tax deductions for conservation) aim to encourage investment in biodiversity, they reduce revenue, entail higher administrative costs and distort resource allocation (Chapter 1). Voluntary and community-led initiatives, including zero-deforestation agreements, Indigenous-led conservation and community-managed reserves, have grown in number, recognition and importance.

Colombia reinforced conservation through protected areas and OECMs, but their gaps in connectivity, governance and ecological representativeness persist

Colombia reached its 30x30 target for marine conservation ahead of schedule (Figure 6). In this way, it is protecting 47% of its exclusive economic zone (EEZ), including 5.5% through Other Effective Area-Based Conservation Measures (OECMs). On land, protection and conservation measures cover 26% of the national territory, with 9% through OECMs. This puts the country broadly on track to meet the 30x30 terrestrial target (Figure 6).

The BAP update raised the ambition to 34% by 2030, which will require recognition and inclusion of conservation areas within ITTs, and ethnic, peasant and local communities, as well as the sustainability of these governance arrangements. The government has strengthened co‑operation with these communities by reinforcing their autonomy in environmental management, their authority within the National Environmental System (SINA) and formally recognising their role as custodians of biodiversity and sustainable land use. Yet, progress remains threatened, as armed groups continue to restrict the work of park authorities and weaken community self-governance in conflict-affected regions.

Figure 6. Colombia has met its 2030 target for marine areas and is on track for terrestrial areas
Copy link to Figure 6. Colombia has met its 2030 target for marine areas and is on track for terrestrial areas

Protected area extent by IUCN Category, top ten OECD and OECD LAC countries, 2024

Colombia has made significant progress over the past two decades in addressing conservation gaps within SINAP. In 2022, representativity in the Andean biotic units improved significantly, and previously unrepresented marine ecosystems achieved full representativity across marine units with over half well or overrepresented (PNNC, 2022[82]). Despite these advances, SINAP remains ecologically incomplete. To strengthen ecological representativity, environmental authorities should maintain efforts to designate and expand PAs, OECMs and ITTs for underrepresented or previously omitted ecosystems, and advance the identification of conservation priorities within SINAP and beyond.

Landscape connectivity remains insufficient to support key ecological processes such as species migration and gene flow. Only 42% of PAs are structurally connected, with just 21% of this connectivity secured by formally protected or regional areas (CBD, 2021[80]). To close these gaps, Colombia must substantially scale up its efforts. OECMs offer significant potential to enhance connectivity, particularly within ITTs, and ethnic, peasant and local communities, where nearly two-thirds of the National Natural Parks System (SPNN) PAs and almost half of the country’s natural forests are located. Ensuring legal and technical support is essential to enable effective co-management of SPNN areas that overlap with these communities. SPNN-managed areas remain underfunded, with less than one-fourth of the estimated funding per hectare required (Mendoza et al., 2024[71]). Bridging the funding gap requires long-term financing mechanisms, diversified revenue streams and stronger public-private partnerships (Parques Nacionales Naturales de Colombia, 2021[83]; Mendoza et al., 2024[71]).

Management effectiveness in Colombia’s PAs remains uneven and anthropogenic pressures continue to undermine conservation outcomes. In 2024, 42.5% of the 327 PAs assessed were in a strong state, 47% in an intermediate state and 10% in a weak state, reflecting disparities in planning, resources and governance. Addressing these disparities will require strengthening planning, governance and resource allocation across environmental authorities, including capacity building and promoting peer learning from well-performing protected areas.

Monitoring is a major gap, with 54% of areas lacking biological records or remaining unsampled (Mendoza et al., 2024[71]). Illegal activities, including mining and illicit crop cultivation, affect 40% of national parks, particularly those in remote, difficult-to-monitor areas (Mendoza et al., 2024[71]). National Integrated Management Districts lack instruments to balance conservation with sustainable use, while monitoring and enforcement of fishing and other activities in marine and coastal protected areas are insufficient. Closing these gaps will require stronger co-management with ITTs, and ethnic, peasant and local communities, ensuring benefit sharing and technical support for territories contributing to conservation, including— but not limited to—areas where such communities hold territorial rights, improved institutional co‑ordination and better integration of climate objectives into biodiversity governance.

Payments for ecosystem services have mobilised significant funding for biodiversity, but their effectiveness and efficiency should be assessed

PES have significantly expanded over the last decade, taking on a more strategic role in supporting biodiversity conservation, climate action, peacebuilding and rural development. PES programmes target different environmental and social objectives, and types of ecosystem services, while mobilising various sources of funding. The experience gained with PES could be leveraged to expand them to other types of ecosystem services, such as blue carbon. In 2022, the National Programme of Payments for Environmental Services (PNPSA) was set up to provide more coherence and guidance. The PNPSA set a national goal to conserve 1 million ha under PES arrangements by 2030. In 2023, 163 PES projects were implemented. The number of beneficiaries increased more than five-fold from the previous year, reaching over 36 000 individuals, notably from peasant communities, Indigenous Peoples and Afro-descendants. In 2023, USD 16.74 million was mobilised and more than 580 000 ha was under PES by the end of the year.

PES have proven successful to expand the area under sustainable use, mobilise significant levels of funding and help align local livelihoods with conservation, but their effectiveness, monitoring and long-term stability could be improved. A consistent methodology for estimating the value of projects and determining levels of payment should be applied. The country could also strengthen the integration of PES programmes and REDD+ strategies. For example, in Costa Rica, both mechanisms operate under a unified legal and institutional framework with standardised technical criteria and prioritised strategic areas. In addition, monitoring systems are integrated with traceability through geographic information systems. This has enhanced the quality of projects and their environmental permanence, while avoiding duplication. Colombia could adopt similar practices to reinforce transparency, consistency and effectiveness across its incentive programmes. A comprehensive assessment of the effectiveness and efficiency of PES is needed to identify opportunities to better target funding, align funding levels with local opportunity costs, and ensure the environmental integrity of conservation efforts and their permanence over time. A robust reporting and monitoring system that consolidates accurate, verified information is a prerequisite for such an assessment.

Biodiversity offsets are well established but face several barriers that limit effective implementation

Biodiversity offsets are well established, although project execution by private companies and government oversight to ensure environmental benefits needs to be stronger. The government updated regulations on mandatory biodiversity offsets in 2018 and recognised and regulated habitat banks in the years that followed (OECD, 2025[84]). Most offset obligations arise from activities requiring environmental permits. Several barriers limit effective implementation and have results in a backlog of unexecuted offsets (UNDP BIOFIN, 2025[85]), calling for stronger oversight and sanctions for non-compliance. Biodiversity credits are creating opportunities to mobilise additional private funding to purchase credits for both compliance and voluntary purposes (OECD, 2025[84]). The regulatory basis for biodiversity credits should be strengthened, to provide a clear and coherent framework (including clear legal definitions, streamlined approval processes, clear guidelines to evaluate additionality and minimum duration for habitat banks). Transparency, traceability and monitoring should also be improved (Green Finance Institute, 2024[86]).

Integrating biodiversity with broader environmental and social objectives

Biodiversity has been increasingly integrated with climate and other environmental and social policies

Colombia’s national strategies and policies increasingly recognise that biodiversity underpins many other environmental, social and economic objectives, including climate mitigation and adaptation, food and water security, cultural protection of ethnic communities, economic diversification and poverty reduction. Between 2015 and 2020, its policy mix for biodiversity mostly expanded through integration with sectors and policy priorities such as poverty reduction, climate change and pollution (Echeverri et al., 2023[81]). The NDCs 2.0 and 3.0 include targets to reduce annual deforestation and promote their restoration by 2030 and 2035 (Chapter 1). The NDCs also emphasise the role of nature-based solutions, such as protecting páramos12 as a key strategy for climate change adaptation and mitigation. Financing for biodiversity is increasingly linked with poverty reduction, sustainable development of communities and the post-conflict peacebuilding agenda.

Despite numerous co‑ordination mechanisms, climate change and biodiversity policies and programmes are still fragmented and lack an integrated approach in territorial and sectoral planning. Challenges include lack of alignment in the timing and cycles for formulating and updating key policy instruments, lack of integrated analysis and decision making, insufficient and fragmented financing, and lack of interoperable monitoring systems, all of which limit an integrated evaluation of policy impact.

Several actions would help reduce fragmentation: stronger connection between the BAP, the NDCs and the National Action Plan to Combat Desertification and Drought; alignment of targets, indicators and reporting; integration of climate and biodiversity into land-use plans; and expanded financing and prioritisation of nature-based solutions. Efforts to strengthen the monitoring, reporting and verification of greenhouse gas emission reductions should integrate biodiversity variables to allow for a comprehensive view of investments and help align financing flows with climate and biodiversity objectives.

Tackling deforestation is a key lever to achieve biodiversity and climate goals

Colombia’s recent achievements in reducing deforestation are a result of a multi-pronged strategy to tackle its root causes and provide sustainable economic opportunities to communities. Strengthened enforcement against illegal activities, peace agreements with illegal armed groups, and expansion of PAs and conservation agreements with communities have yielded positive results. The delimitation of the agricultural frontier and progress on the multi-purpose cadastre have also been key to limiting further expansion of agriculture, notably extensive livestock production. The country has shifted from a broad territorial approach to a more strategic focus on 44 active deforestation hotspots – areas where forest loss has been most persistent and severe. To that end, it prioritises 28 of these areas for transformation into Forestry Development and Biodiversity Hotspots through formal agreements with ITTs, and ethnic, peasant and local communities.

REDD+ projects contribute to verified emission reductions and the development of the market for carbon credits, but several challenges undermine implementation.13 Colombia lacks complete information on the number, scale and impact of REDD+ projects in the country. This undermines the credibility of emissions reductions and accentuates the risk of double counting and double financing. There are also regulatory gaps relating to certification standards; additionality; market oversight; ensuring environmental integrity; and securing free, prior and informed consent of communities (Ovalle, Darío Valencia and Brown, 2023[87]; GFI, Transparency for Colombia and CEALDES, 2025[58]). The government has taken steps to strengthen environmental and social safeguards; still, mechanisms to enforce them are lacking. The regulatory basis for REDD+ should be strengthened to ensure transparency, avoid double counting and overlaps by adopting common standards aligned with international best practice, improving oversight of projects and verified reporting, as well as imposing sanctions for non-compliance.

Maintaining progress to reduce deforestation requires reinforced action, sustained vigilance and stronger regulations. Slow progress on implementation of rural reform under the Peace Agreement, difficulties in implementing the National Programme for the Substitution of Illicit Crops and renewed tensions with armed groups undermine conservation strategies. Limited state presence in some regions leaves forests particularly vulnerable, as socio-environmental conflicts remain unresolved. Community-based approaches have shown positive results, but the government needs to better integrate ITTs, as well as ethnic, peasant and local communities, into land-use and conservation decisions. Despite governing over half of the country’s land (Alianza Colombia TFA, 2021[88]), many leaders of these communities report limited influence (Alianza Colombia TFA, 2021[88]). Addressing the resurgence in deforestation requires a dual strategy: tackling immediate drivers, especially extensive cattle ranching, while strengthening long-term governance, rural development and incentives that align local livelihoods with conservation goals.

Mainstreaming

Efforts to mainstream biodiversity into agriculture are under way, but more action is needed to phase out harmful incentives

Agriculture is the major direct cause of deforestation and habitat loss in Colombia, accounting for around 75% of deforestation. Cattle ranching alone occupies 36-38% of the national territory (Mendoza et al., 2024[71]). This expansion often occurs in areas unsuitable for agriculture, resulting in low productivity activities, water overuse, soil degradation and erosion. The extensive use of agrochemicals also places high pressure on the environment. The intensity of fertiliser and pesticide use is among the highest in the OECD.

Land tenure insecurity remains a major obstacle to sustainable land use and the country’s legal and institutional frameworks for land management have yet to resolve persistent land-use conflicts. About half of the national territory reportedly faces land-use conflicts, largely driven by livestock and agriculture in zones better suited for conservation or sustainable use (MinAmbiente, 2017[89]). A draft law aims to strengthen cattle traceability systems through digital tracking, environmental certification, supply chain transparency and co‑ordination across institutions. Adoption of the law would be an important step towards addressing deforestation and biodiversity loss.

The Comprehensive Rural Reform, a high priority of the 2016 Peace Agreement and a foundation of the NDP 2022-2026, aims to address some of the core challenges relating to land tenure, agriculture and rural development. Goals include securing over 3 million ha of agricultural land for redistribution to landless rural inhabitants and formalising land titles covering an additional 7 million ha. Implementation has proceeded slowly but has accelerated in recent years.

Despite progress, rural reform faces several challenges. As a key tool to support rural reform, advancement of the multi-purpose cadastre (Catastro Multipropósito) covered 180 municipalities and 27% of national territory as of 2024. While this represents progress, it falls short of the 70% coverage target by 2026 (DNP, 2024[74]). The government also committed to formulate an environmental zoning plan that delimits the agricultural frontier, but progress has been slow and incremental. In a promising development, the government is developing Zonas de Reservas Campesinas as a new instrument to address untenured land use close to PAs. Key challenges to further advance implementation of rural reform include lack of sufficient financial resources, institutional fragmentation, and persistent conflict and lack of state presence in some areas (GoC, 2025[90]).

Unlocking the full potential of sustainable land-use practices requires stronger policy support and better alignment with local realities. Agroforestry and sustainable land management are essential to reducing deforestation and restoring degraded ecosystems. Silvopastoral systems, promoted through “productive reconversion” programmes, offer promising alternatives to extensive cattle ranching. However, they remain underused due to weak incentives, limited technical assistance and fragmented planning (OECD, 2022[91]; FINAGRO, 2025[92]). Instruments such as the Forestry Incentive Certificate provide economic opportunities for rural communities. Still, their uptake has been modest, hindered by administrative hurdles, low awareness and funding, and weak alignment with local contexts (OECD, 2022[91]). Strengthening these instruments – by linking incentives to ecosystem functions and adapting them to local conditions and ecological dynamics – could significantly improve their effectiveness.

Support to agricultural producers has generally declined since 2014 and is lower than in most other OECD Member countries. Producer support as a share of total gross farm receipts reached a low of 3.7% in 2021 before increasing to 9.4% in 2023 (OECD, 2025[13]). However, distorting support tied to production, namely market price, accounts for the largest share. Colombia is pioneering reforms to reduce harmful incentives in the agricultural sector and redirect financial instruments that may negatively affect biodiversity (UNDP BIOFIN, 2025[85]). The first national study of harmful incentives in the agricultural and rural development sectors in 2021-2022 identified public expenditure and financial incentives that contribute to biodiversity loss, ecosystem degradation and unsustainable land use. As a result, a roadmap to “green” agricultural finance was developed in partnership with the Agricultural Sector Financing Fund (FINAGRO) to eliminate and redirect credit subsidies granted by the National Agricultural Credit Commission (UNDP BIOFIN, 2025[85]). This is an encouraging development that should be pursued, and which other countries can learn from.

Mainstreaming biodiversity into mining and energy is still limited

The mining sector has made initial progress to mainstream biodiversity and environmental concerns into its practices. Mining companies are required to create environmental management plans that include biodiversity offsets and contributions to local environmental projects.14 Páramo ecosystems are now strictly protected from mining and farming with all but one officially excluded from development. However, renewable energy development (such as investment in solar and wind in the Guajira region) also needs biodiversity mainstreaming. Recent guidelines call for wind projects to avoid bird migration corridors and respect Indigenous land-use plans.

Illegal gold mining is a major driver of deforestation, ecosystem degradation and public health risks in Colombia. In 2022, nearly three-quarters of alluvial gold extraction was illegal, affecting around 95 000 ha, with severe impacts in the Chocó and Amazon regions, including PAs and ITTs (UNODC, 2022[93]). Mercury from mining contaminates rivers and food chains, reaching marine coastal ecosystems; it poses serious health risks to local communities (Donato-Rondón, 2022[94]).

Colombia is working to strengthen enforcement against illegal mining, including through CONALDEF and greater international co‑operation. However, entrenched criminal networks, high gold prices and weak enforcement undermine progress, calling for further strengthening of national mechanisms to prevent and control illegal mineral exploitation. Small-scale mining formalisation efforts under Law 2250 of 2022 face barriers, such as voluntary participation and burdensome double licensing. A more effective approach will require streamlined licensing, expanded access to credit and technical support, stronger community participation and investment in alternative livelihoods. Internationally, Colombia is also advancing initiatives to strengthen due diligence and gold traceability, while enhancing co‑ordination with neighbouring countries to combat transnational environmental crime. It is also proposing a resolution for the 7th UN Environment Assembly in December 2025 to establish an intergovernmental negotiating committee to develop a binding global instrument for the environmentally sustainable management of minerals and metals, through lifecycle and due diligence approaches.

While mainstreaming biodiversity into urban and land-use planning is limited, recent developments are promising

Colombia has made progress in developing the legal framework, operational strategies and guidance to support the greater integration of biodiversity and other environmental considerations into land-use planning. However, mainstreaming of biodiversity into both urban and rural territorial planning remains limited. Fewer than half of cities with populations above 100 000 consider biodiversity in urban planning, revealing significant governance gaps (Gomez et al., 2021[64]). Marine coastal areas and islands lack a dedicated legal planning regime and remain poorly integrated into territorial planning instruments, underscoring the need for integrated planning that accounts for diverse freshwater and marine ecosystems. Making Regional Biodiversity Action Plans mandatory and linking them with land-use plans would support the effective integration of biodiversity into territorial planning.

The adoption of the Green Cities Law in April 2025 is a positive development for integrating biodiversity into urban planning. The law requires municipalities with over 100 000 inhabitants to incorporate green infrastructure and the protection of urban ecosystems into urban planning. Specifically, this includes creating ecological corridors to connect green spaces; prioritising native species and ecological structures in urban reforestation; protecting rivers, wetlands and green spaces; and promoting nature-based solutions. In rural contexts, however, institutional fragmentation and weak inter-agency co‑ordination undermine the interoperability of biodiversity and information systems, limiting integrated policymaking (OECD, 2022[91]). Addressing these gaps by embedding biodiversity in both urban and rural planning, and improving institutional co‑ordination, is essential for effective and coherent biodiversity governance across Colombia. This requires ensuring sufficient technical capacity and resources (human and financial), notably for municipalities.

Scaling up financing for biodiversity

Funding for biodiversity has grown and the range of financing instruments expanded

Colombia’s ambitious BAP 2030 requires substantial financial resources, and a robust financing strategy to implement it. The total estimated budget for the BAP is over four times the average annual expenditure on biodiversity from all sources over 2014-2023. The financing strategy in the BAP focuses on mobilising resources from a diverse range of public and private sources, both domestic and international. These include reforming harmful subsidies; debt instruments (such as green bonds); positive incentives (such as PES); international co‑operation; blended finance; and use of the green taxonomy to align financing flows with environmental goals. Building on the targets in the BAP 2030, the financial strategy could be further elaborated to guide development of a broad suite of financing instruments to meet national goals. Financing the restoration of strategic ecosystems and addressing climate change contributes to Colombia’s economic growth by enhancing productivity and well-being and reducing economic risks (MFPC, 2025[95]).

Expenditure on biodiversity increased by nearly 60% (in nominal terms) between 2014 and 2023 (UNDP BIOFIN, 2024[96]) but remained insufficient to meet financial needs. A high share of public expenditure (57%) was under the responsibility of institutions outside of SINA, such as the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development or the Attorney General’s Office. Decentralised authorities accounted for 45% of the total (UNDP BIOFIN, 2024[96]). The high share of public expenditure managed by national authorities outside of SINA and by decentralised authorities calls for greater co‑ordinated tracking and comprehensive oversight of biodiversity spending. Data management systems are fragmented and lack interoperability, hindering efficient analysis and public access. More granular data, including at territorial level, would support more accurate analysis of the efficiency and impact of investments in biodiversity conservation (UNDP BIOFIN, 2024[96]). Public spending on biodiversity comes from several fiscal sources, including earmarked revenue from water-related fees and the carbon tax, 80% of which is channelled to the Fund for Life and Biodiversity and water-related fees (Chapter 1). The timely execution of biodiversity offset projects and compulsory investments under the 1% programme for water resources would further mobilise funding.

Support from international donors has provided considerable resources. Between 2014 and 2024, Colombia received over USD 895 million in non-reimbursable international co‑operation funds to reduce deforestation and to enhance biodiversity conservation in environmentally significant PAs. These included páramo and other ecosystems, national parks, and flora and fauna sanctuaries (APC Colombia, 2025[97]). These funds were provided by bilateral development co‑operation partners (68%); private sector and philanthropic sources (18.7%); and multilateral agencies (13.3%) (APC Colombia, 2025[97]). Germany, Norway, the United States, the United Kingdom and the European Union were the top five bilateral donors

Colombia’s financial sector has started to engage in biodiversity finance through green bonds and corporate sustainability commitments (Chapter 1). The green taxonomy, launched in 2022, targets biodiversity conservation, along with climate change, water management and other environmental objectives. Several banks offer “green credit lines” for sustainable agriculture and reforestation projects, supported by guarantees from FINAGRO. An MRV system for tracking all sources of finance for biodiversity, climate change and sustainable land use should guide investments to maximise their impact, and avoid overlaps and inefficient use of resources.

Efforts to promote the bioeconomy are promising and should be scaled up

Promoting the bioeconomy is one of the six main national goals of the BAP 2024-2030. It aims to contribute 3% to the national gross domestic product (GDP) and generate 552 000 jobs from high-value-added products and services based on the sustainable use of biodiversity. However, investment in science and technology remains low at only 0.2% of GDP, limiting research and innovation in biodiversity-related fields (MinAmbiente, 2025[78]) and highlighting significant scope for additional investment. To advance this agenda, the Colombia Bio Programme is developing policies and regulatory measures to mobilise science, technology and innovation to strengthen value chains of sustainable bio-based products and services, such as pharmaceuticals and ecotourism opportunities. This includes a focus on cultivating and curating local knowledge through scientific expeditions to identify new, potentially sustainable uses of biodiversity. A National Bioeconomy Observatory is under development to provide an information platform aimed at increasing public and private investment in bioeconomy value chains.

Recommendations on biodiversity conservation and sustainable use

Copy link to Recommendations on biodiversity conservation and sustainable use

Strengthening the policy framework and governance

Enhance sustainable management of fisheries, forests and land use through stronger enforcement, control of overexploitation, integrated pollution control and ecosystem-based adaptation to climate risks; promote biodiversity restoration by favouring native species and strengthening control of invasive species.
Reinforce action against illegal activities driving deforestation and biodiversity loss, building on positive developments to date; strengthen legal frameworks and enforcement against illegal mining, logging and wildlife trafficking while simplifying formalisation for small-scale operators and promoting alternative livelihoods; ensure that activities under sustainable-use regimes in protected areas align with conservation objectives and management plans, supported by stronger monitoring and enforcement.
Promote greater integration between climate, desertification and biodiversity policies by strengthening the articulation between the BAP, the NDCs and the National Action Plan to Combat Desertification and Drought, aligning targets and indicators, integrating climate and biodiversity into land-use plans and expanding financing and prioritisation of nature-based solutions; promote stronger mainstreaming into sectoral policies.
Continue strengthening biodiversity data, monitoring and research capacity, including community participation, to support evidence-based decision making and adaptive management; conduct systematic biodiversity assessments, particularly in underrepresented ecosystems; expand research on marine connectivity networks and underexplored ecosystems; ensure sustained funding; and improve SINAC to reduce data fragmentation and better articulate biodiversity conservation efforts with national administrative systems.

Improving the effectiveness and efficiency of policy instruments for biodiversity

Scale up ecological restoration and conservation, prioritising underrepresented and highly threatened terrestrial and marine ecosystems; continue promoting landscape connectivity through biological corridors; expand ecosystem-based adaptation in vulnerable areas; systematically integrate biodiversity into peace negotiations with illegal armed groups.
Increase sustainable financing for biodiversity both within PAs and beyond; diversify funding sources through public-private partnerships and ecotourism development; strengthening inter‑institutional co‑ordination; ensure benefit sharing and technical support for ITTs, and ethnic and peasant territories contributing to conservation.
Develop a robust reporting and monitoring system that consolidates accurate, verified information of PES programmes; conduct a comprehensive assessment of the effectiveness and efficiency of PES programmes to better target funding, align funding levels with local opportunity costs, and ensure the environmental integrity of conservation efforts and their permanence over time; improve the coverage and comprehensiveness of PES monitoring.
Strengthen the regulatory basis for REDD+ to adopt common criteria and oversight of projects to enhance accountability and social and environmental safeguards, especially with respect to the participation and free, prior and informed consent of ITTs, and ethnic, peasant and local communities; strengthen co‑ordination between PES programmes and REDD+ strategies.
Strengthen oversight of biodiversity offsets to ensure ecological equivalence and permanence; address barriers to implementation of offset projects, which result in a backlog of unexecuted offsets.

Mainstreaming biodiversity into sectoral policies

Accelerate implementation of the Catastro Multipropósito to improve land tenure data and support sustainable land use; advance delimitation of the agricultural frontier; strengthen integration of land-use planning across national, regional and local levels.
Pursue implementation of the Roadmap for green agricultural finance to eliminate and redirect biodiversity-harmful incentives; consider introducing taxes on agrochemicals to reduce the intensity of pesticide and fertiliser use.
Strengthen enforcement against illegal mining; streamline licensing procedures for small-scale mining; pursue efforts to strengthen due diligence and gold traceability; require Regional Biodiversity Action Plans and integrate with land-use plans and co-ordinate objectives and actions with PIGCCs and PIGTCCs.
Align infrastructure development with the 2030 BAP, notably for transport; include ecological connectivity criteria in transport project design; consider stricter environmental offset requirements in road, port and airport concessions.

Scaling up finance for biodiversity

Develop a comprehensive financial strategy to mobilise diverse sources of finance to implement the BAP 2030; strengthen and further develop innovative financial instruments to channel funding effectively from public and private sources, including via blended finance.
Strengthen oversight, transparency, public disclosure and co‑ordinated tracking of biodiversity spending; align reporting of public expenditure for biodiversity with principles of the System of Environmental Economic Reporting and the Target 19 recommendation of the Global Biodiversity Framework.
Increase investment in science, technology and innovation for the sustainable use of biodiversity; support bioprospecting and traditional knowledge to discover and develop new bio‑related products and value chains to enhance food security; pursue efforts to launch the Bioeconomy Observatory to mobilise and track investment in the bioeconomy.

References

[88] Alianza Colombia TFA (2021), Cero deforestación en Colombia: ABC de las cadenas cero deforestación de palma, cacao, carne y leche en Colombia, [Zero deforestation in Colombia: ABC of the zero deforestation chains of palm, cocoa, meat and milk in Colombia], Alianza Colombia TFA.

[36] ANLA (2021), Estrategia de la Autoridad de Licencias Ambientales : Compensacion ambiental einversión de no menos del 1%, [Environmental Licensing Authority Strategy: Environmental compensation and investment of not less than 1%], Autoridad Nacional de Licencias Ambientales, Bogotá, https://www.anla.gov.co/documentos/institucional/10_Gestionconocimiento/01_anla-asocars/07-09-2021-anla-compensaciones-y-1.pdf.

[97] APC Colombia (2025), International Cooperation Information System (CYCLOPE), APC Colombia.

[18] Argus (2024), “Colombia advances moves to end coal production”, 13 September, Argus, https://www.argusmedia.com/en/news-and-insights/latest-market-news/2608060-colombia-advances-moves-to-end-coal-production.

[33] Arias, V. and J. Andrea (2017), “Hydrocarbon contamination of soils and water in Colombia: Analysis of phytoremediation as a biotechnological recovery strategy”, Dialnet, Vol. 8/1.

[51] Böhl Gutierrez, M., J. Vega Araújo and E. Arond (2024), “A strategic phase-out of Colombia’s diesel subsidy to support the energy transition”, Policy Brief, No. 20, German Institute of Development and Sustainability, Bonn, https://doi.org/10.23661/ipb20.2024.v2.0.

[49] Brown, A., F. Laubinger and P. Börkey (2023), “New Aspects of EPR: Extending producer responsibility to additional product groups and challenges throughout the product lifecycle”, OECD Environment Working Papers, No. 225, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/cfdc1bdc-en.

[50] Carolina, M. et al. (2023), Lineamientos sectoriales para la gestión de residuos sólidos y el avance hacia la economía circular : Acelerando la transformación del sector, [Sectoral Guidelines for Solid Waste Management and Progress Towards the Circular Economy: Accelerating the Transformation of the Sector], Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo, División de Agua y Saneamiento, http://www.iadb.org.

[56] Castiblanco Rozo, C. (2022), “El papel del impuesto al carbono en la transición energética: una revisión de su aplicación en Colombia [The role of the carbon tax in the energy transition: A review of its application in Colombia]”, Gestión y Ambiente, Vol. 25/1, p. 102263, https://doi.org/10.15446/ga.v25n1.102263.

[80] CBD (2021), Aichi Biodiversity Target 11 Country Dossier: Colombia, Convention on Biological Diversity.

[43] CONPES (2023), Documento CONPES 4129: Política Nacional de Reindustrialización, [CONPES Document 4129: National Reindustrialisation Policy], El Consejo Nacional de Política Económica y Social, Bogotá.

[37] Contraloria General De La Republica (2023), Boletín macrosectorial; obligaciones en la inversión forzosa de no menos del 1% y compensaciones ambientales, inherentes al licenciamiento ambiental por proyectos, obras o actividades, [Macro-sectoral bulletin; obligations on compulsory investment of not less than 1% and environmental compensation, inherent in environmental licensing for projects, works or activities], Contraloria General De La Republica, Colombia, https://www.contraloria.gov.co/documents/3584410/4343744/2023_bolet%C3%ADn_macrosectorial_inversi%C3%B3n_forzosa.pdf.

[63] Correa Ayram, C. et al. (2020), “Spatiotemporal evaluation of the human footprint in Colombia: Four decades of anthropic impact in highly biodiverse ecosystems”, Ecological Indicators, Vol. 117/106330, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2020.106630.

[40] DANE (2024), Cuenta Ambiental y Económica de Flujos de Materiales de Residuos Sólidos (CAEFM-RS), [Environmental and Economic Account of Solid Waste Material Flows], 4 August, Technical Bulletin, National Administrative Department of Statistics, Bogotá, https://www.dane.gov.co/files/operaciones/CAEFM-RS/bol-CAEFMRS-2021pr.pdf.

[42] DANE (2024), Economía Circular: Noveno Reporte 2024, [Circular Economy: November Report 2024], National Administrative Department of Statistics, Bogotá, https://www.dane.gov.co/files/investigaciones/boletines/economia-circular/doc-ECircular-NovenoReporte.pdf.

[12] DANE (2023), Encuesta nacional agropecuaria, [National Agricultural Survey], National Administrative Department of Statistics, Bogotá.

[59] Dechezleprêtre, A. et al. (2025), “Fighting climate change: International attitudes toward climate policies”, American Economic Review, Vol. 115/4, pp. 1258-1300, https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.20230501.

[74] DNP (2024), Balance de Resultados 2024: Plan Nacional de Desarrollo 2022-2026, [Taking Stock of Results 2024: National Development Plan 2022-2026], National Development Plan, Colombia.

[48] DNP (2024), SisCONPES: Politicas publicas modernas y transparentes, (dataset), https://sisconpes.dnp.gov.co/SisCONPESWeb//AccesoPublico/DocumentosAprobados (accessed on 30 June 2025).

[7] DNP (2020), General Climate Finance in Figures, Department of National Planning, Bogotá.

[5] DNP (2020), Quantifying the Financing Gap in Climate Change Adaptation in Colombia, Department of National Planning, Bogotá.

[45] DNP (2019), “Evaluacion institucional y de operaciones de la Politica de Aprovechamiento de Residuos Solidos Urbana [Institutional and Operational Evaluation of the Urban Solid Waste Management Policy]”, Producto 4: Informe de resultados de la evaluación y segunda entrega [Output 4: Evaluation results report and second deliverable], Department of National Planning, Bogotá, https://colaboracion.dnp.gov.co/CDT/Sinergia/Documentos/InformeFinal_PGAU.pdf.

[94] Donato-Rondón, J. (2022), Decálogo de impactos ambientales: Geografía de las transformaciones en sistemas acuáticos de Colombia, [Decalogue of environmental impacts: Geography of transformations in Colombia’s aquatic systems], Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Bogota.

[81] Echeverri, A. et al. (2023), “Colombian biodiversity is governed by a rich and diverse policy mix”, Nature Ecology and Evolution, Vol. 7/3, pp. 382-392, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-023-01983-4.

[44] ECLAC (2021), La Encuesta sobre Gestión de Residuos Sólidos Domiciliarios 2019, Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean, Santiago.

[52] Elgouacem, A. (2020), “Designing fossil fuel subsidy reforms in OECD and G20 countries: A robust sequential approach methodology”, OECD Environment Working Papers, No. 168, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/d888f461-en.

[19] Fifth Permanent Constitutional Commission (2021), Law 2128, Congress of Colombia, Bogotá.

[92] FINAGRO (2025), La ganadería bovina en Colombia: ¿Qué incentivas está realizando FINAGRO para promover una gandería más sostenible?, [Cattle ranching in Colombia: What incentives is FINAGRO providing to promote more sustainable cattle ranching?] Gerencia de Investigaciones Económicas, Gerencia de Investigaciones Económicas], The Fund for the Financing of the Agricultural Sector, Bogotá.

[24] Garzón Herrera, W. and D. Buitrago Mesa (2024), “Informe del Estado de la Calidad del Aire en Colombia 2023 [Report on the State of Air Quality in Colombia 2023]”, https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/8d565731dfb1413eb679f9bd904de1c5 (accessed on 7 April 2025).

[68] GBIF (2022), Global Register of Introduced and Invasive Species – Colombia, (dataset), https://www.gbif.org/dataset/168568e7-eb5f-4ef6-8c59-f73ceaf57e91#description (accessed on 23 June 2025).

[58] GFI, Transparency for Colombia and CEALDES (2025), Voluntary Carbon Credit Market in Colombia: An Analysis in Light of Transparency and Integrity, Global Financial Integrity, Washington, DC and Transparency for Colombia and Centre for Alternatives to Development, Bogotá, https://gfintegrity.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/Voluntary-Carbon-Credit-Market-in-Colombia-To-publish.pdf.

[90] GoC (2025), Informe de ejecución y cumplimiento a las metas del Plan Plurianual de Inversiones para la Paz 2024, [Report on the implementation and fulfilment of the targets on the Multi-Year Investment Plan for Peace 2024], Government of Colombia.

[10] GoC (2025), NDC 3.0 Transformaciones para la Vida [NDC 3.0: Transformations for Life], Government of Colombia.

[2] GoC (2025), Roadmap for a Just Energy Transition: Executive Summary, Government of Colombia.

[11] GoC (2024), Colombia’s Biodiversity Action Plan to 2030, Government of Colombia.

[6] GoC (2024), First Biennial Transparency Report of Colombia, Institute of Hydrology, Meteorology and Environmental Studies, Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development, Ministry of Environment, National Planning Department, Cancillería, United Nations Development Programme; Fundación Natura.

[70] GoC (2024), Plan de Acción de Biodiversidad de Colombia al 2030, [Colombia Biodiversity Action Plan to 2030], Government of Colombia.

[23] GoC (2023), National Development Plan 2022-26, Government of Colombia, https://www.dnp.gov.co/plan-nacional-desarrollo/pnd-2022-2026.

[66] GoC (2022), Estrategia Nacional de Restauración 2023-2026: Juntos para recuperar la naturaleza perdida, [National Restoration Strategy 2023-2026: Together to reclaim lost nature], Government of Colombia.

[20] GoC (2021), Carbon Neutrality and Climate Resilience Strategy of Colombia (E2050), Government of Colombia.

[9] GoC (2020), Update of Colombia’s Nationally Determined Contribution, Government of Colombia.

[79] GoC (2019), Sixth National Report to the Convention on Biological Diversity, Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development, Colombia.

[72] GoC (n.d.), Bosques Territorios de Vida: Estrategia Integral de Control a la Deforestación y Gestión delos Bosques, [Forests Territories of Life: A Comprehensive Strategy to Control Deforestation and Manage Forests], Government of Colombia.

[57] Gómez, N. (2024), “Effectiveness of carbon taxes in conjunction with offsetting mechanisms: The Colombian experience”, [Msc thesis], Wageningen University, The Netherlands, https://edepot.wur.nl/656472.

[64] Gomez, S. et al. (2021), Evaluación Nacional de Biodiversidad y Servicios Ecosistémicos de Colombia, [National Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services Assessment of Colombia].

[86] Green Finance Institute (2024), Habitat Banks, Colombia, Green Finance Institute Hive, BIOFIN and UNEP Finance Initiative.

[69] IaVH (2021), Biodiversidad y cambio climático: estado y tendencias de la biodiversidad continental de Colombia, [Biodiversity and Climate Change: Status and trends of continental biodiversity of Colombia], Instituto Alexander von Humboldt Colombia, https://reporte.humboldt.org.co/biodiversidad/2021/.

[3] IDEAM (2024), Climate Change Scenarios of the 4th National Communication of Colombia, Institute of Hydrology, Meteorology and Environmental Studies, Bogotá.

[32] IDEAM (2023), Executive Summary: National Water Study 2022, Institute of Hydrology, Meteorology and Environmental Studies, Bogotá.

[26] IDEAM, F. et al. (2024), “Anexo 1. Documento del Inventario Nacional de Emisiones y Absorciones Atmosféricas de Colombia: Gases de efecto invernadero (1990-2021), contaminantes criterio y carbono negro (2010-2021)”, Primer informe bienal de transparencia (BTR 1) de Colombia, [Annex 1. Document from Colombia’s National Inventory of Atmospheric Emissions and Removals: Greenhouse gases (1990–2021), Air Pollutants and Black Carbon (2010–2021), First Biennial Transparency Report (BTR 1) of Colombia].

[62] IEA (2024), World Energy Investment 2024, IEA, Paris, https://www.iea.org/reports/world-energy-investment-2024.

[8] IEA (2023), Colombia 2023, IEA, Paris, https://www.iea.org/reports/colombia-2023.

[38] INS-MINSAL (2024), Timely Reporting of Drinking Water Quality Monitoring Samples in SIVICAP and Urban and Rural Drinking Water Quality Risk Index (IRCA), 2023-2024, Instituto Nacional de Salud, Ministry of Health, Bogotá.

[76] INVEMAR (2024), Informe del Estado de los Ambientes Marinos y Costeros en Colombia, [Report on the State of the Marine and Coastal Environment in Colombia], Institute for Marine and Coastal Research, Gaira, http://www.invemar.org.co.

[65] IUCN (2024), Red List of Ecosystems Inventory, (dataset), https://iucn.org/red-list-ecosystems-inventory (accessed on 23 June 2025).

[47] Lesmes, P. and L. Reyes (2025), El reciclaje no es gratis, lo pagan los recicladores de oficio, [Recycling is not free; it is paid by informal waste pickers], La Silla Vacía, https://www.lasillavacia.com/red-de-expertos/red-de-ciencia-e-innovacion/el-reciclaje-no-es-gratis-lo-pagan-los-recicladores-de-oficio-y-reconocerlo-es-tarea-de-todos/ (accessed on 27 June 2025).

[75] MADR (2024), Boletin Estadistico Forestal – 9 Edicion, [Forestry Statistical Bulletin – 9th Edition], Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, Bogotá.

[71] Mendoza, J. et al. (2024), Parques Nacionales Como Vamos - PNC: Parques Nacionales Naturales Colombianos y su aporte a la paz con la naturaleza Informe 2024, [Parques Nacionales Como Vamos – PNC: Colombian National Parks and their contribution to Peace with Nature Report 2024], Fundacion Natura, Bogotá, https://parquescomovamos.com.

[95] MFPC (2025), Marco Fiscal de Mediano Plazo (MFMP) 2025 [Medium-Term Fiscal Framework 2025], Ministerio de Hacienda y Crédito Público, Bogotá.

[60] MFPC and IDB (2024), Green Finance for the Sustainable Development of Colombia. Comprehensive Climate Change and Biodiversity Management Plan for Fiscal and Financial Policy, Ministry of Finance and Public Credit, Bogotá, and Inter-American Development Bank, Washington, DC.

[31] Miguel Muñoz, H., R. Poveda and M. Gil (2024), “Políticas y regulaciones para impulsar la electrificación de los sistemas de transporte público urbano: los casos de Bogotá, Buenos Aires, Ciudad de México, San José, Santiago y São Paulo”, [Policies and regulations to promote the electrification of urban public transport systems: The cases of Bogotá, Buenos Aires, Mexico City, San José, Santiago and São Paulo], United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean, Santiago, https://hdl.handle.net/11362/80646.

[29] MinAmbiente (2025), “Colombia y el mundo avanza en la lucha contra la contaminacion del aire y sus efectos en la salud”, Noticias, [Colombia and the world move forward in the fight against air pollution and its effects on health], 27 March, Noticia, Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development, Bogotá, https://www.minambiente.gov.co/colombia-y-el-mundo-avanzan-en-la-lucha-contra-la-contaminacion-del-aire-y-sus-efectos-en-la-salud/#:~:text=La%20contaminaci%C3%B3n%20del%20aire%20causa,gravemente%20a%20las%20principales%20ciudades (accessed on 10 April 2025).

[78] MinAmbiente (2025), Review Mission Presentation : Biodiversity State, Pressures and Trends, Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development, Bogotá.

[89] MinAmbiente (2017), Biodiversity Action Plan: For the implementation of the National Policy for the Integral Management of Biodiversity and its Ecosystem Services 2016-2030, Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development, Bogotá.

[98] Minenergia (2021), National Energy Plan 2020-50, Ministry of Energy, Bogotá.

[77] Ocean Health Index (2024), Global scores: Colombia, https://oceanhealthindex.org/regions/colombia/ (accessed on 23 June 2025).

[25] OECD (2025), Green Growth Indicators, (dataset), https://data-explorer.oecd.org/s/3l4 (accessed on 28 August 2025).

[1] OECD (2025), OECD Economic Outlook, Volume 2025 Issue 1: Tackling Uncertainty, Reviving Growth, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/83363382-en.

[13] OECD (2025), Producer Support Estimate, (dataset), https://www.oecd.org/en/data/indicators/agricultural-financial-support.html (accessed on 21 August 2025).

[84] OECD (2025), Scaling Up Biodiversity-Positive Incentives: Delivering on Target 18 of the Global Biodiversity Framework, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/19b859ce-en.

[67] OECD (2025), Threatened species, (indicator), https://www.oecd.org/en/data/indicators/threatened-species.html (accessed on 12 April 2025).

[4] OECD (2024), OECD Economic Surveys: Colombia 2024, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/a1a22cd6-en.

[16] OECD (2024), PIMA-AFOLU: Policy Inventory for Mitigation Actions in Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use Sectors, (dataset), https://www.oecd.org/en/data/datasets/pima-afolu-policy-inventory-for-mitigation-actions-in-agriculture-forestry-and-other-land-use-sectors.html (accessed on 2 June 2025).

[53] OECD (2024), Pricing Greenhouse Gas Emissions 2024: Gearing Up to Bring Emissions Down, OECD Series on Carbon Pricing and Energy Taxation, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/b44c74e6-en.

[17] OECD (2023), Agricultural Policy Monitoring and Evaluation 2023: Adapting Agriculture to Climate Change, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/b14de474-en.

[15] OECD (2022), Agricultural Policy Monitoring and Evaluation 2022: Reforming Agricultural Policies for Climate Change Mitigation, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/7f4542bf-en.

[91] OECD (2022), Rural Policy Review of Colombia 2022, OECD Rural Studies, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/c26abeb4-en.

[87] Ovalle, K., I. Darío Valencia and M. Brown (2023), “Assessing the readiness and needs for Colombia’s participation in Article 6 of the Paris Agreement”, Technical Brief November 2023, Global Green Growth Institute, Seoul.

[83] Parques Nacionales Naturales de Colombia (2021), Estimación de la Brecha Financiera de las Areas Protegidas del Sistema de Parques Nacionales Naturales, [Estimation of the Financial Gap of the Protected Areas of the National Natural Park System], Parques Nacionales Naturales de Colombia.

[39] Pérez-Urdiales, M. and C. Ramos dos Santos (2024), Water Expenditure, Service Quality and Inequality in Latin America and the Caribbean, Inter-American Development Bank, Washington, DC, https://doi.org/10.18235/0013248.

[82] PNNC (2022), Representatividad y prioridades de conservación en el SINAP, [Representativeness and conservation priorities in SINAP], Parques Nacionales Naturales de Colombia, https://old.parquesnacionales.gov.co/portal/es/sistema-nacional-de-areas-protegidas-sinap/representatividad-y-prioridades-de-conservacion/ (accessed on 1 July 2025).

[30] RUNT (2024), RUNT en Cifras: Balance del Sector Tránsito y Transporte 2024, [RUNT in Figures: Balance Sheet for the Transit and Transport Sector 2024], National Registry of Drivers and Vehicles, Bogotá.

[41] Superservicios (2024), Informe Nacional de Disposición Final de Residuos Sólidos 2023, [National Solid Waste Disposal Report 2023], Superintendent of Public Services, Bogotá, https://www.superservicios.gov.co/sites/default/files/inline-files/Informe-Nacional-de-Disposicion-Final-de-Residuos-Solidos-2023.pdf.

[46] Svatikova, K., A. Brown and P. Börkey (2025), “Economic instruments for a resource-efficient circular economy”, OECD Environment Working Papers, No. 257, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/35a7051a-en.

[34] Tobón-Orozco, D. and C. Vasco Correa (2021), “Water environmental regulation in Colombia”, Kairós, Revista de ciencias económicas, jurídicas y administrativas, Vol. 4/6, pp. 82-96, https://doi.org/10.37135/kai.03.06.06.

[61] Transforma (2024), Evaluación del Estado de las divulgaciones climáticas en Colombia, [Assessment of the Status of Climate Disclosures in Colombia], Transforma, Bogotá, https://ccadi.transforma.global/estado-de-las-divulgaciones/.

[14] UNDP BIOFIN (2025), BIOFIN Project: Colombia, United Nations Development Programme, Bogotá, https://www.biofin.org/colombia.

[85] UNDP BIOFIN (2025), “Colombia”, https://www.biofin.org/colombia (accessed on 30 June 2025).

[96] UNDP BIOFIN (2024), La revisión del gasto en biodiversidad, [Biodiversity Spending Review], United Nations Development Programme Biodiversity Finance Initiative.

[73] UNDP et al. (2023), Evaluación Nacional sobre Biodiversida y Servicios Ecosistémicos, [National Assessment on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services].

[93] UNODC (2022), Colombia Explotación de Ordo de Aluvión (EVOA), [Colombia Alluvial Ordo Mining (EVOA)], United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, https://www.unodc.org/documents/colombia/2022/Junio/Informe_Colombia_Explotacion_de_Oro_de_Aluvion_Evidencias_a_Partir_de_Percepcion_Remota_2021_SP_.pdf.

[21] UPME (2023), Update of the National Energy Plan (2022-52), Mining and Energy Planning Unit, Bogotá, https://climate-laws.org/document/colombia-s-national-energy-plan-energy-principles-2050_e228.

[27] UPME (n.d.), Resumen Ejecutivo: Plan Nacional de Sustitución de Leña y Otros Combustibles de Uso Ineficiente y Altamente Contaminante para la Cocción Doméstica de Alimentos, [Executive Summary: National Plan for the Replacement of Firewood and other Inefficient and Highly Polluting Fuels for Domestic Food Cooking], Energy Mining Planning Unit, Bogotá.

[55] Wang-Helmreich, H. and N. Kreibich (2019), “The potential impacts of a domestic offset component in a carbon tax on mitigation of national emissions”, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Vol. 101, pp. 453-460, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2018.11.026.

[54] World Bank (2025), State and Trends of Carbon Pricing Dashboard, (dataset), https://carbonpricingdashboard.worldbank.org/ (accessed on 10 June 2025).

[22] World Bank (2023), Colombia Country Climate and Development Report, World Bank Group, Washington, DC.

[35] World Bank (2020), Colombia Turning the Tide: Water Security for Recovery and Sustainable Growth, World Bank, Washington, DC.

[28] Zapata Quinchía, A. (2024), MinHacienda no ha girado la plata de los subsidios de gas en cilindro para estratos bajos: gremio lanza alerta, [MinHacienda has not turned the silver from gas subsidies in cylinder for low strata: guild launches alert], 30 December, El Colombiano, https://www.elcolombiano.com/negocios/minhacienda-no-ha-girado-el-dinero-para-los-subsidios-al-gas-glp-alerta-gasnova-OC26249645 (accessed on 25 June 2025).

Annex 1. Actions taken to implement selected recommendations from the 2014 OECD Environmental Performance Review of Colombia

Copy link to Annex 1. Actions taken to implement selected recommendations from the 2014 OECD Environmental Performance Review of Colombia

Recommendations	Actions taken
Environmental performance: Trends and recent developments
Finalise and adopt the policies on climate change mitigation and adaptation set out in the 2010-14 PND; assess what additional measures will be needed to achieve the objectives; strengthen scientific and economic analytical capacity to support implementation and further development of climate policies; continue to engage in international co-operative activities that can help develop such capacity and provide financial support for climate-related initiatives (e.g. CDM, NAMAs, REDD+).	The National Climate Change System was established in 2016. The 2018 Climate Change Law (Law 1931) provided the legal and institutional framework for climate change mitigation and adaptation policy and governance, including the requirement to adopt Sectoral Climate Change Management Plans (PIGCCS) and Integrated Territorial Climate Change Management Plans (PIGCCTS). The updated Nationally Determined Contribution submitted in 2020 raised climate targets. The 2021 Climate Action Law (2169/2021) enshrined the commitment to net zero by 2050 into law. The Integral Strategy for Deforestation Control and Forest Management (ENREDD+) is embedded in Colombia’s national climate strategy, its commitments under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change and the international REDD+ mechanism.
Reinforce efforts to reduce the health impact of urban air pollution; develop a national emission inventory; gradually adjust air quality standards to converge with those issued by the World Health Organization; further promote cleaner mobility options.	CONPES 3918 (2018), "Strategy for the Implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals in Colombia", establishes targets for air quality monitoring, aiming for 70% of stations to meet the WHO 2005 Interim Target III guidelines for PM₁₀ and PM_2.5by 2030 (SDG targets 3.9 and 11.6). These targets are reinforced by Resolution 2254 (2017). CONPES 3943 (2018), "Policy for the Improvement of Air Quality", sets out measures to reduce concentrations of pollutants that affect human health and the environment. The National Strategy for Air Quality (ENCA) focuses on particulate matter, strengthening regulatory and technical instruments, scientific knowledge, emissions accounting, air quality governance and funding mechanisms to protect public health and prevent critical pollution episodes. Colombia submitted its first Biennial Transparency Report to the UNFCCC, which includes a national inventory of air pollutants from 1990–2021, in line with the Paris Agreement transparency framework. Law 2486 (2025) and the National Electric Mobility Strategy promote electric vehicle adoption to accelerate transport electrification, reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and improve energy efficiency. Law 1964 (2019) establishes incentives for low-emission vehicles, including a 30% EV quota for municipal public transport by 2025. Colombia has committed to 100% zero-emission light-duty vehicle sales by 2035 through the Zero Emission Vehicles Declaration and mandates electrification quotas for public sector fleets, including 100% EV acquisition in transit expansions in cities such as Bogotá.
Enhance the financial, social and environmental sustainability of water and sanitation service provision by: i) assessing water subsidies in all sectors to ensure that they do not incentivise wasteful water consumption; ii) better targeting public resources to expand access to water and sanitation services; iii) increasing water pollution charges to increase revenue available for investment in wastewater treatment infrastructure; and iv) developing the capacity of smaller municipalities to manage service provision contracts with the private sector.	Since 2017, a regional factor has applied to water use fees and water pollution charges (“Retributive Fee”). However, low fees and weak collection rates limit their effectiveness to promote more efficient water use and reduce pollution. Revenue raised is only a small share of water management costs. Tariffs for water supply and sanitation (WSS) services have risen. However, subsidies for WSS services are poorly targeted and regressive. Overall levels of investment in WSS have declined since 2012. Improved efficiency of public investment, better co-ordination among fragmented institutional landscape and diversification of financing sources are needed.
Consolidate and streamline existing laws and regulations with a view to establishing a comprehensive and coherent legal framework for waste management.	Colombia’s waste management framework remains fragmented across multiple laws and regulations. A bill on the regulation of comprehensive solid waste management, under discussion in Congress, aims to establish a more coherent and integrated legal framework. Law 2294 (2023) created the Basura Cero programme, regulated by Decree 670 (2025), to reduce landfilling, and promote waste recovery and the circular economy. Law 2232 (2022) introduced measures to reduce plastic production and consumption. Extended producer responsibility programmes have been progressively expanded through post-consumer programmes, including Resolution 1326 (2017) for tyres, Resolution 1407 (2018) for packaging, Resolution 851 (2022) for waste electrical and electronic equipment and Resolution 0799 (2025) for batteries.
Develop a long-term national waste strategy to reorient waste policy from a pollution control to a preventive approach; articulate a coherent policy response to key challenges (such as the shortage of landfill capacity, low recycling rates and the integration of informal waste pickers and community schemes in municipal waste management systems); provide guidance for the development of regional and municipal objectives and action plans.	The Integrated Solid Waste Management Policy (CONPES 3874 of 2016) set out a long-term framework to prevent waste generation, reduce landfilling, promote re-use and recovery, cut GHG emissions from waste, and strengthen waste separation and institutional co‑ordination. The Green Growth Policy (CONPES 3934 of 2018) and the National Circular Economy Strategy (2019, Resolution 2184) reinforced this shift by promoting circular economy practices, sustainable production and consumption, and extended producer responsibility programmes. DANE has developed indicators to monitor progress. The Sustainable Production and Consumption Policy (CONPES 4129 of 2023) provides further guidance for the transition of productive sectors towards more sustainable models. Specific waste streams are addressed through the National Policy for Hazardous Waste (2021-2030) and the National Policy for Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (2017). Law 2294 of 2023 and its implementing Decree 670 of 2025 created the Basura Cero Programme, which aims to guide the transition to a circular economy and defines strategies, infrastructure and financing mechanisms to strengthen waste recovery. Decree 1381 of 2024 and Decree 596 of 2016 established the formal inclusion of informal waste pickers in municipal waste management.
Reform economic instruments with a view to strengthening incentives for waste minimisation and recycling, and improving recovery of waste infrastructure costs, taking account of the impacts on poor households adversely affected by the related price rises.	Law 2277 (2022) introduced a tax on single-use plastics used for packaging, charged to producers and importers at a rate of around COP 2 per gramme. The Incentive for the Recovery and Treatment of Solid Waste (IAT), created by Decree 2412 (2018) and regulated by Decree 802 (2022), is applied at the municipal and district level where Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plans (PGIRS) are in place. The IAT is charged per tonne of solid waste not recovered and disposed of in landfills and passed on as an additional fee to subscribers of the public sanitation service. The average charge is around USD 1.5 per tonne, which remains low compared to international standards but represents a step forward in aligning incentives for waste minimisation and recovery.
Environmental governance and management
Reinforce the role of MinAmbiente as the main body for directing and overseeing the national environmental management system; provide MinAmbiente with the means to more effectively oversee and direct the work of CARs; ensure that the allocation of responsibilities, lines of accountability, financing and capacities of environmental authorities at all levels of government enable environmental policy objectives to be achieved efficiently and effectively; establish co-ordination mechanisms to strengthen regional dialogue and policy integration among CARs and among departments.	Colombia has strengthened the role of the Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development (MinAmbiente) in leading and co‑ordinating the National Environmental System (SINA). MinAmbiente has actively participated in regional decision making, modernised the system through regulatory updates and issued technical guidance to standardise environmental planning. It established minimum reference indicators for evaluating the performance of Autonomous Regional Corporations (CARs) and monitors the execution of their Four-Year Action Plans (PAC) through semiannual and annual reports. The ministry also prepares and publishes annual comprehensive management reports and calculates the Institutional Environmental Performance Index, which supports continuous improvement in CARs’ management across mission, financial and administrative dimensions. MinAmbiente has provided technical assistance to strengthen institutional capacities and improve the handling of environmental procedure requests, leading to an increase in the registration of streamlined processes in the national SUIT system. Co‑ordination mechanisms have also been enhanced to promote dialogue and policy integration across all levels of government.
Promote public participation in the EIA process; consider how citizens in neighbouring countries could participate in EIAs on projects in Colombia that could affect them.	Colombia has taken steps to align its practices with international standards. In updating the General Methodology for the Preparation and Presentation of Environmental Studies (MGEPEA), the Ministry of Environment incorporated guidelines to ensure the socialisation of projects with interest groups in neighbouring countries when transboundary environmental impacts may occur. These guidelines will become mandatory upon the formal adoption of the updated MGEPEA, expected in the second half of 2025.
Fully integrate environmental criteria into policies for land redistribution and agrarian reform; strengthen the means of enforcing environment-related land use in land-use plans, particularly in rural areas and coastal zones; ensure the implementation of river basin management plans and their integration into land-use plans.	The Comprehensive Rural Reform, a pillar of the 2016 Peace Agreement, incorporates environmental considerations. Progress has been made on the multi-purpose cadastre (Catastro Multipropósito). Resolution 1608 of 2021 adopted the Environmental Zoning Plan to delimit the agricultural frontier and protect Areas of Special Environmental Interest. Zonas de Reservas Campesinas are being developed to address untenured land use close to protected areas. Still, greater integration of environmental considerations into land-use plans and co-ordination across different levels of government are needed. Water resources management is also a key pillar of the NDP 2022-2026, which aims to place water as a core element of territorial planning
Require environmental licensing for mining exploration.	Currently, mining exploration does not require a licence.
Towards green growth
Establish green growth as a central element of the 2014-18 National Development Plan and in the future work of the National Council on Economic and Social Policy (CONPES); define concrete, measurable environmental objectives for key economic sectors and make ministries accountable for achieving them; ensure that all major programmes and projects are subject to SEA that takes into account the long-term effects of climate change.	Green growth and natural capital objectives have been mainstreamed into successive National Development Plans. MinAmbiente has led strategic environmental assessments (SEAs) in sectors like transport, mining and energy, agriculture, tourism and environmental health. However, despite the benefits and positive contribution, there is no clear legal requirement to carry out SEA.
Assess how the use of environmentally related taxes could be extended, including by: i) restructuring fuel and vehicle taxes to take account of their contribution to GHG emissions and local air pollutants; ii) removing tax exemptions on transport fuel and on mining and oil exploration; iii) introducing excise duties on energy products used for stationary purposes; and iv) taxing agro-chemicals.	Fuel excise taxes apply to petrol, diesel and other liquid motor fuels used in vehicles and in stationary combustion engines. In 2017, Colombia introduced a carbon tax, which applies to all uses of liquid fuels (excluding liquid petroleum gas for heating), as well as to solid fuels and natural gas used by refineries and in the petrochemical industry. In 2025, the carbon tax was extended to coal sales, at 25% of the standard tax rate. Coal sales will be fully taxed in 2028. As of 2025, the carbon tax rate was COP 27 900 (USD 6.75) per tonne of CO₂. The 2021 Climate Action Law foresees launching an emissions trading system by 2030. The 2021 National Air Quality Strategy foresees the revision of vehicle taxes to consider vehicle emissions of local air pollutants. The government developed a proposal to amend the vehicle tax legislation. The 2022 tax reform introduced a corporate income tax surcharge of 5%, 10% or 15% for oil and coal companies depending on international resource prices. These increments apply on top of the base rate of 35%.
Broaden the annual review of tax expenditure to include assessment of the environmental and social impact of tax expenditure and subsidies with a view to reforming those that are environmentally harmful; assess environmentally motivated tax incentives with a view to reforming those which are not environmentally effective and economically efficient.	The 2024 Comprehensive Climate Change and Biodiversity Management Plan for Fiscal and Financial Policy (PIGCCSH+B) recommends conducting a comprehensive review of environment-related taxes and fiscal incentives. In 2023 and 2024, Colombia eliminated petrol subsidies and cut diesel subsidies for large consumers provided through the fuel price stabilisation fund (Fondo de Estabilización de Precios de los Combustibles or FEPC).
Sustainable use of biodiversity
Develop an action plan to implement the 2012 National Biodiversity Policy that aims to reduce key pressures on biodiversity and ecosystems and provide the means needed to achieve the strategy’s objectives.	Colombia has made notable progress implementing the National Policy for the Integral Management of Biodiversity and its Ecosystem Services (PNGIBSE). The National Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP) 2030, updated in 2024, is comprehensive with clear targets, lines of action and indicators to monitor progress. The update incorporated the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework targets under the UN Convention on Biological Diversity and aligned them with six overarching national goals. Expenditure on biodiversity increased between 2014 and 2023 but was insufficient to meet financial needs.
Assess experience with policy instruments currently used to achieve biodiversity policy objectives, with a view to enhancing their efficiency and effectiveness.	MinAmbiente requested the NDP to initiate the evaluation process of the PNGIBSE, which was included in the DNP Agenda of the 2024 term. However, a full evaluation has not yet been completed.
Specify the steps needed to achieve the objectives for terrestrial and marine protected areas; prioritise the inclusion of under-represented ecosystems and the protection of endemic species and threatened biodiversity; reinforce institutional and management arrangements, particularly for marine protected areas; strengthen the financing of protected areas, including by expanding the use of economic instruments.	In 2021, Colombia issued the Policy for the Consolidation of the National System of Protected Areas (SINAP) through CONPES 4050, establishing strategies to reduce biodiversity loss and strengthen the management of terrestrial and marine protected areas by 2030. The policy aims to increase the coverage and connectivity of protected areas and guides their declaration and expansion based on ecological and socio-economic priorities, while strengthening their management effectiveness. It also seeks to improve governance, financing and knowledge management to promote co-responsibility of communities and productive sectors, and to ensure equitable distribution of conservation benefits. In addition, the SINAP category system is being reviewed to create new management categories that recognise public, private and community initiatives, including efforts by Indigenous and Traditional Territories, and ethnic, peasant and local communities. In line with the Kunming-Montreal Agreement, Colombia is also advancing the recognition of Other Effective Conservation Measures (OMECs), supporting voluntary initiatives that contribute to biodiversity protection and sustainable governance of protected areas.
Assess the need to strengthen measures to protect the marine and coastal environment by: i) reviewing implementation of the National Environmental Policy for Sustainable Development of Ocean and Coastal Areas and Islands; ii) assessing the results of the National Programme of Research, Evaluation, Prevention, Reduction and Control of Marine Pollution from Marine and Land-based Sources; and iii) considering the potential benefits of adhering to other multilateral environmental agreements in this area.	The National Programme of Research, Evaluation, Prevention, Reduction and Control of Marine Pollution from Marine and Land-based Sources (PNOEC), updated in 2017, and the earlier National Environmental Policy for the Sustainable Development of Oceanic, Coastal and Insular Spaces (PNAOCI), have faced limited implementation due to weak governance and co‑ordination. Evaluations by the Comptroller General and the National Planning Department underscored shortcomings in planning, monitoring and cross-sectoral integration. More recently, CONPES 3990 of 2020 – Colombia Sustainable Bioceanic World Power and NDC commitments on coastal restoration and protection have sought to address these gaps. At the international level, Colombia signed the BBNJ Agreement in 2023, reinforcing its commitment to global marine biodiversity conservation.
Reinforce the legal basis for implementing biodiversity offsets, particularly in key sectors like mining; promote use of the biodiversity offset manual and support its implementation, e.g. through demonstration projects.	The government updated regulations on mandatory biodiversity offsets in 2018 and recognised and regulated habitat banks in the years that followed. In 2018, the manual for allocating compensation for biodiversity loss was updated and strengthened to improve the content of compensation plans, implementation mechanisms and monitoring. The update to the manual was adopted by Resolution 256 of 2018, modified by Resolution 1428 of 2018. The manual is being updated again to further improve the performance of compensation plans.
Reinforce efforts to strengthen the Colombian Environmental Information System (SIAC); prioritise information needed to support decision making at different levels of government, particularly information on the main drivers of biodiversity loss; conduct a comprehensive assessment of the economic value of ecosystem services; gradually integrate biodiversity-related economic information into SIAC.	Successive National Development Plans (2014–2018, 2018–2022, 2022–2026) have included strategies to strengthen SIAC by improving interoperability, expanding access and linking it with systems for forests, biodiversity, climate change and disaster risk management. Similarly, several CONPES policies (3850/2015, 3926/2018, 3934/2018, 4004/2020, 4021/2020, 4050/2021) highlight the importance of SIAC and its articulation with subsystems such as the Forest and Carbon Monitoring System (SMByC) and the Monitoring, Reporting and Verification System in Climate Change (MRV). The SIAC Strategic Plan 2023-2030 further prioritises governance, technological development and democratisation of information. Meanwhile, Law 2294 of 2023 created the National Registry of Reduction of Emissions and Removal of Greenhouse Gases (RENARE) to be integrated into SIAC. SIAC now encompasses a wide range of subsystems (forests, water, air, biodiversity, climate change, protected areas), which has expanded available information. However, data remain dispersed across multiple institutions, as SIAC functions more as an inter-institutional agreement than a centralised platform.
Develop a co-ordinated plan to reduce deforestation from cattle rearing; promote more intensive but sustainable livestock rearing, with appropriate environmental safeguards, along with silvo-pastural practices.	Key frameworks include the Integral Strategy for Deforestation Control and Forest Management (ENREDD+) and the National Policy for Deforestation Control and Sustainable Forest Management (CONPES 4021) adopted in 2021. The PIGCCS for the agricultural sector, approved in 2021, include measures to promote the intensification and sustainable management of livestock, as well as agroforestry and ecosystem restoration. Silvopastoral systems, promoted through “productive reconversion” programmes, offer promising alternatives to extensive cattle ranching. However, they remain underused due to weak incentives, limited technical assistance and fragmented planning. A draft law to strengthen cattle traceability systems aims to improve digital tracking, environmental certification, supply chain transparency and co‑ordination across institutions.
Adopt and fully implement the measures necessary to prevent mining in protected areas.	Under CONPES 4050 (2021–2030), national institutions are developing an inter-institutional action plan to reduce illegal activities in the National System of Protected Areas (SINAP), including mining. Progress has been made in characterising illegal activities as a basis for this plan. In 2022, the Council of State issued a judgement obliging mining and environmental authorities to declare, delimit and zone areas where mining is prohibited or restricted, some of which fall under SINAP. This ruling reinforces the need for updated public policies on mining and environmental matters and allows temporary suspension of mining activities until compatibility with territorial zoning is ensured. Additionally, the government has adopted legal instruments to establish or expand protected areas with restrictions on mining. These include: Resolution 630 of 2023, updating the declaration of national protected areas. Resolution 1109 of 2023, updating the declaration of regional protected areas. Resolution 1501 of 2018, delimiting the Pisba páramo. Resolution 363 of 2024, expanding the Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta National Natural Park.

Source: OECD secretariat based on country submission.

Notes

Copy link to Notes

← 1. The mitigation target covers all sectors of the economy. GHG gases included: CO₂, N₂O, methane, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorinated compounds and sulphur hexafluoride.

← 2. Colombia intends to use co-operative and market approaches (including those of Article 6.2) to meet the NDC target of reducing deforestation of natural forest to 0 hectares/net year by 2030 (GoC, 2020[9]).

← 3. There is considerable potential for offshore wind (50 GW) in the northern regions and geothermal potential along the Pacific Ring of Fire (IEA, 2023[8]).

← 4. The PEN 2020-2050 set objectives for 2050 to achieve universal access to energy, increase the share of non-conventional renewable energy, reduce carbon emissions and improve energy efficiency (Minenergia, 2021[98]). An update of the PEN 2022-2052 in 2023 focused on increasing the share of non-conventional renewable energy (NCRE) in the energy mix and expanding the generation capacity of specific technologies like solar, wind, geothermal and green hydrogen. Targets are set for specific technologies across five scenarios. Overall, the PEN aims to achieve between 7-30% participation of NCRE in primary energy production by 2052.

← 5. There are 29 targets for buildings, industry and transport, including achieving a 15% reduction in electricity consumption in the residential sector compared to 2015 levels by 2030; implementing energy management systems in at least 300 large companies and 500 medium-sized companies; and reaching 600 000 EVs in the national fleet by 2030 and reducing the energy intensity in freight transport by 10% compared to 2015 (IEA, 2023[8]).

← 6. This is calculated based on pH, dissolved oxygen, chemical oxygen demand, total suspended solids, electrical conductivity and total nitrogen/phosphorus ratio.

← 7. Under the SEEA framework, solid waste products – discarded materials with market value (e.g. scrap metal) – are included in waste accounting. However, in OECD statistics, only solid waste residuals are considered, excluding items still treated as products within the economy. Residuals are flows of solid, liquid and gaseous materials, and energy that are discarded, discharged or emitted by establishments and households through processes of production, consumption or accumulation.

← 8. The High Level Commission on Carbon Prices concluded that carbon prices must reach a level of at least EUR 60/tCO₂ to EUR 120/tCO₂ by 2030 (converted to real 2023 EUR and rounded) for countries to remain on track with keeping global warming to below 2 degrees Celsius (OECD, 2024[53]).

← 9. This is defined as a company that is active exclusively in low emissions activities.

← 10. The term ecological integrity is frequently used to assess the condition or health of ecosystems or ecological reference units, notably within a protected area. Most definitions agree that a healthy ecosystem is stable, sustainable and active. It maintains its organisation and autonomy over time, its ability to recover from disturbances, and the flows of matter, energy and biotic components with other ecosystems.

← 11. The Ocean Health Index is a global assessment tool that measures the overall health of the world’s oceans by evaluating how well they sustainably provide a range of benefits to people, including food provision, biodiversity, coastal protection and cultural values. The Index integrates ecological, social, economic and governance factors to generate a comprehensive ocean sustainability score ranging from 0 to 100.

← 12. Páramos are unique high-altitude ecosystems found primarily in the northern Andes, located between the upper forest line and the permanent snowline. They consist of humid grasslands, shrublands and specialised vegetation adapted to cold, wet conditions. Páramos play a crucial role in water regulation and carbon storage, acting as natural water towers that supply fresh water to downstream communities.

← 13. REDD+ stands for Reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation, including the role of conservation, sustainable management of forests and enhancement of forest carbon stocks in developing countries.

← 14. For example, the country’s largest coal companies fund conservation of dry forest fragments to offset mining impacts. For its part, Ecopetrol has pledged to achieve net positive biodiversity impact by investing in conservation projects beyond compliance. It has also supported the declaration of new PAs in areas where it operates.

Featured topics

Agriculture and fisheries

Climate change

Development

Digital

Economy

Education and skills

Employment

Environment

Finance and investment

Governance

Health

Industry, business and entrepreneurship

Regional, rural and urban development

Science, technology and innovation

Society

Taxation

Trade

Energy

Nuclear energy

Transport

Featured topics

Agriculture and fisheries

Climate change

Development

Digital

Economy

Education and skills

Employment

Environment

Finance and investment

Governance

Health

Industry, business and entrepreneurship

Regional, rural and urban development

Science, technology and innovation

Society

Taxation

Trade

Energy

Nuclear energy

Transport

Countries A - C

Countries D - I

Countries J - M

Countries N - R

Countries S - T

Countries U - Z

Regional and global engagement

Countries

Countries A - C

Countries D - I

Countries J - M

Countries N - R

Countries S - T

Countries U - Z

Regional and global engagement

Publications

Publications

Featured publications

Data

Data

Featured data

News & events

News & events

Featured events

About OECD

About

Engage with us

Work with us

Featured topics

Agriculture and fisheries

Climate change

Development

Digital

Economy

Education and skills

Employment

Environment

Finance and investment