Delegates at the UN Biodiversity Conference in Armenia adopted 14 decisions during the first week of negotiations.
A week into the ongoing United Nations Biodiversity Conference (CBD COP17) in Armenia, negotiations have focused on translating global commitments into concrete action to halt biodiversity loss, mobilise conservation funding and strengthen accountability among countries.
The conference, which kicked off on 19th October, is themed “taking action for nature” and is scheduled to conclude on 30th October.
During the first week of the ongoing negotiations, PREMIUM TIMES observed that the talks focused on implementation, with delegates grappling with how to translate global biodiversity targets into measurable progress.
However, reports of disagreements over financing, access to genetic resources, benefit-sharing and the direction of international cooperation, have highlighted differences among negotiating blocs, particularly Russia and African countries.
The disagreements come against the backdrop of the inconclusive conclusion of COP16 in Cali, Colombia, where several critical issues remained unresolved, leaving delegates in Yerevan to continue negotiations on some of the most contentious aspects of the global biodiversity agenda.
Despite the disagreements, the Executive Secretary of the Convention on Biological Diversity, Astrid Schomaker, said significant progress had been made during the first week of negotiations.
“One week into #COP17Armenia and we are making progress for nature. The stakes have never been higher, and now is the time to act decisively,” she said.
Ms Schomaker said delegates had adopted 14 decisions across the Convention on Biological Diversity and its Cartagena and Nagoya Protocols, describing the development as a significant milestone.
Although she did not list the decisions, she said they advanced work on several issues, including biosafety, invasive alien species, gender equality, awareness-raising, compliance and monitoring.
“These decisions advance work on issues ranging from biosafety and invasive alien species to gender equality, awareness-raising, compliance and monitoring. Each contributes to the foundations we need for more effective implementation of our global biodiversity commitment,” she said.
She noted that the decisions followed hours of negotiations, careful listening and efforts to build consensus among countries.
“At a time when multilateralism faces significant challenges, this progress matters,” she said.
Ms Schomaker said COP17 was particularly significant because countries needed to address existing implementation gaps and hold one another accountable for accelerating progress towards the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (KMGBF).
“Of course, some of the most complex issues are still ahead of us,” she said, adding that the success of the conference would ultimately be measured by the difference its decisions made for nature and people.
The KMGBF remains the central framework guiding negotiations at COP17. Adopted in 2022, it sets out global biodiversity goals and targets, including 23 targets to be achieved by 2030.
The framework’s implementation remains a major concern as countries work to translate national commitments into measurable conservation outcomes.
Although many countries have established national biodiversity targets, questions remain about whether existing policies, financing arrangements and monitoring systems are sufficient to deliver the agreed goals.
Negotiations in Yerevan are, therefore, focusing on strengthening implementation, improving accountability and establishing reliable indicators for assessing progress.
Among the key priorities is the target to conserve at least 30 per cent of the world’s land and inland waters, as well as 30 per cent of coastal and marine areas, by 2030.
Delegates are also working to improve the measurement of progress on issues such as pollution, nutrient reduction and ecosystem restoration.
The outcome of these discussions could determine how effectively governments track their commitments and identify areas requiring urgent intervention.
Biodiversity financing remains one of the most difficult issues confronting negotiators, particularly for developing countries that argue they need substantial financial support to implement the global framework.
Discussions include how to mobilise additional public and private funding, improve access to existing resources and redirect environmentally harmful subsidies towards activities that support nature conservation.
One major issue is the implementation of the Cali Fund, established following COP16 to support benefit-sharing from the commercial use of digital sequence information (DSI) on genetic resources.
The mechanism seeks to ensure that companies benefiting from the use of such information contribute to conservation and the sustainable use of biodiversity.
For African countries, the debate is closely linked to questions of equity, resource ownership and the continent’s capacity to finance conservation.
African negotiators argue that the continent’s rich biological resources contribute to commercial activities globally, while the benefits generated from their use do not adequately support the communities and countries from which those resources originate.
They want benefit-sharing arrangements to deliver tangible financial resources for biodiversity protection, community development and the implementation of national conservation plans.
The negotiations also cover ways to mobilise private investment and redirect environmentally harmful subsidies, with the global framework calling for at least $500 billion annually in harmful incentives to be eliminated or redirected by 2030.
