Negotiators make progress on biosafety, gender equality and invasive species, but funding shortages, Indigenous rights and weak progress towards 2030 nature targets continue to challenge the UN biodiversity summit in Armenia.
Governments at the United Nations Biodiversity Conference (COP17) in Armenia have adopted 14 decisions during the first five days of negotiations, marking early progress in efforts to halt global biodiversity loss. However, disagreements over financing, benefit-sharing, and implementation continue to overshadow the summit.
The decisions, adopted during Friday’s stocktaking plenary, cover biosafety, invasive alien species, gender equality, environmental education, compliance and monitoring. More contentious issues, including international biodiversity finance and Indigenous Peoples’ participation, remain under negotiation.
The conference, running from October 19 to 30 in Yerevan under the theme “Taking Action for Nature”, is conducting the first global review of progress under the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, adopted in 2022.
COP17 President Hambardzum Matevosyan, Armenia’s environment minister, called for constructive engagement and cooperation among negotiating countries as they sought agreement on measures to accelerate biodiversity protection.
Early agreements, difficult decisions ahead
According to the International Institute for Sustainable Development’s Earth Negotiations Bulletin, Friday’s plenary adopted four decisions under the Convention on Biological Diversity, eight under the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety and two under the Nagoya Protocol on Access and Benefit-sharing.
The agreements addressed biodiversity awareness, information-sharing, invasive species management, compliance, biotechnology regulation and financial arrangements for biosafety.
The adoption of the Gender Plan of Action decision represented progress in strengthening gender-responsive biodiversity governance.
However, an agreement on communication, education and public awareness drew criticism from Fiji, which expressed concern that language providing dedicated resources for Indigenous Peoples, local communities, women and young people to lead community education initiatives had been omitted.
Guatemala also advocated establishing a dedicated subsidiary body on gender and biodiversity, although no agreement on that proposal was reported.
Biodiversity finance remains major obstacle
Financing continues to expose divisions between developed and developing countries.
The global biodiversity framework calls for mobilising at least $200 billion annually from all sources by 2030, including at least $30 billion a year in international biodiversity finance for developing countries.
Developing countries are pressing wealthier nations to fulfil existing financial obligations, while some developed countries are seeking to broaden the contributor base.
Negotiators discussing the Global Biodiversity Framework Fund agreed on draft provisions seeking stronger resource mobilisation and more transparent reporting of financial pledges and actual contributions.
They also proposed encouraging developed countries and others to increase contributions. However, these provisions remained under negotiation rather than constituting final COP17 decisions.
Questions persist over the fund’s limited capitalisation and how to ensure that countries most in need can access support.
A United Nations biodiversity assessment released ahead of the summit indicates that the international public finance target of $20 billion annually by 2025 was likely not achieved.
Cali Fund struggles to attract private contributions
Another significant issue is the Cali Fund, established to ensure that companies benefiting commercially from digital genetic information contribute towards biodiversity conservation and benefit-sharing.
According to the fund’s official figures, only two companies had contributed a combined $6,000 as of October 2026, highlighting the challenges of attracting corporate financing.
At a COP17 Presidency discussion reported on Saturday, participants examined ways to encourage business contributions, establish transparent allocation systems and strengthen technical support.
The fund is intended to direct at least 50 percent of its resources to Indigenous Peoples and local communities, with the remainder supporting biodiversity action in developing countries.
Negotiators are considering unresolved operational details, including contribution arrangements, allocation methods and mechanisms for ensuring that benefits reach intended recipients.
Global nature targets falling behind
The financial disputes come amid growing evidence that international biodiversity commitments are not being implemented quickly enough.
The UN’s State of Biodiversity Action report found that nearly 90 percent of countries have established national biodiversity targets, while close to 60 percent have developed national biodiversity strategies and action plans.
However, fewer than half of the national targets assessed by governments are currently on track.
The assessment also identified inadequate progress on the global commitment to conserve 30 percent of land and sea by 2030, alongside major shortcomings in reducing harmful subsidies, addressing unsustainable consumption and mobilising investment.
The report warns that stronger national commitments alone will not be sufficient without financing, improved monitoring and action across agriculture, fisheries, infrastructure and other economic sectors.
The findings are informing negotiations on the proposed Yerevan Pathway, intended to accelerate implementation of the global biodiversity framework before the 2030 deadline.
Indigenous rights and community participation
Indigenous Peoples and local communities remain central to discussions over biodiversity governance.
Negotiators are examining operational arrangements for a permanent subsidiary body under Article 8(j) of the biodiversity convention, which concerns traditional knowledge and Indigenous and local community participation.
Disagreements remain over leadership arrangements, national representation, budgets and the role of Indigenous representatives in decision-making.
Environmental defenders and civil society groups have also raised concerns about threats faced by communities protecting forests, wetlands and other ecosystems.
On Friday, Indigenous representatives and environmental rights campaigners staged a silent protest at the conference venue, calling for stronger safeguards against harassment, intimidation and criminalisation.
Their demands included accountability, meaningful participation and respect for community rights in biodiversity decisions.
Agriculture and ecosystem protection
Negotiations have also highlighted differences over agriculture and soil biodiversity.
Delegates agreed on several elements encouraging governments to integrate soil conservation into national planning and improve coordination among agriculture, environment and health authorities.
However, disagreements persisted over financial support, environmentally harmful subsidies and technical guidance on soil pollution.
These issues are particularly important for countries where agricultural livelihoods depend heavily on healthy soils, freshwater ecosystems and biological resources.
Bangladesh seeks easier access to finance
For Bangladesh and other climate-vulnerable countries, COP17 outcomes could influence future financing for wetlands, forests, coastal ecosystems and community-led conservation.
Bangladeshi negotiator Jahidul Kabir told The Climate Watch earlier in the conference that simplifying access to biodiversity finance was a national priority.
“Simpler access to biodiversity finance is a priority for Bangladesh,” he said, emphasising that supporting nature-dependent livelihoods could reduce pressure on biodiversity.
The negotiations also have implications for the Sundarbans, freshwater wetlands and hill forests, where ecosystem degradation threatens biodiversity and local livelihoods.
Critical negotiations ahead
With the ministerial high-level segment scheduled for October 27 and 28, attention is turning towards whether governments can overcome their remaining differences before the conference concludes on October 30.
Key unresolved questions include finance commitments, effective benefit-sharing, Indigenous participation and measures to accelerate progress on biodiversity protection.
Although the first 14 decisions demonstrate that governments can reach agreements on technical and governance issues, the conference’s broader success will depend on whether countries secure meaningful commitments capable of reversing biodiversity loss.
For COP17, the central challenge remains turning international promises into measurable action before 2030.
