Deal still eludes nations on final day of UN nature summit

COP17 is the UN biodiversity summit, bringing representatives from most of the world’s nations together in Yerevan, Armenia. It reviews progress on the 2022 agreement often called the “Paris agreement for nature.” The meeting matters because biodiversity loss is continuing while countries are falling behind their 2030 promises.

Before the summit ends, governments are trying to settle several connected decisions. They must agree on how to tackle harmful subsidies, increase money for protecting land and oceans, improve the Cali Fund’s corporate contributions, and adopt a “global review” of progress. That review would recommend concrete steps for speeding up action.

The negotiations began on October 19, but progress has been slow. Countries remain far from a broad deal, and major breakthroughs have been scarce. They are also expected to decide whether Panama or Ecuador will host the next biodiversity summit in 2028.

In 2022, nearly 200 nations made a historic promise to halt and reverse biodiversity loss. The agreement is described as the “Paris agreement for nature” because it created a shared global framework. Its purpose is to move countries from recognizing the nature crisis toward measurable protection and restoration.

The pledge contains 23 global targets for 2030. These include protecting 30 percent of the world’s land and oceans, tackling pollution and invasive species, and restoring ecosystems that have been degraded. Together, the targets cover major pressures damaging nature and set a deadline for governments to act.

The promise has not yet translated into enough progress. A UN assessment before COP17 warned that action was insufficient for almost all the targets. The summit’s negotiations are therefore focused on finding concrete ways to accelerate implementation before the 2030 deadline.

The 2030 conservation goal is part of a wider package of 23 global targets agreed by nearly 200 nations in 2022. Its most prominent numerical aim is to protect 30 percent of the world’s land and oceans. The target matters because it sets a clear scale for conservation rather than leaving protection as a general ambition.

Thirty percent means nearly one-third of each broad environment should receive protection by 2030. The agreement also calls for action on pollution and invasive species, plus restoration of degraded ecosystems. These targets work together: protection preserves important areas, while restoration addresses places already damaged.

The article reports that a UN assessment found the pace of action insufficient for almost all the targets. COP17 is seeking a “global review” with recommendations to speed progress. Until countries agree on that review and funding, the 30 percent goal remains difficult to deliver.

The global review is a stocktake of how countries are progressing toward the nature pledges made in 2022. It is meant to do more than record results. It should produce concrete recommendations for turning delayed promises into action and accelerating progress before the 2030 deadline.

For example, the review could help governments identify where implementation is lagging across goals such as protecting 30 percent of land and oceans, reducing pollution, addressing invasive species, and restoring ecosystems. Its key mechanism is shared assessment followed by agreed priorities, giving countries a common basis for improving their efforts.

The review remains unresolved after days of negotiations, despite early optimism that it would be adopted. That delay leaves countries without an agreed set of recommendations while biodiversity continues to be “pummelled from all angles.” It also makes the summit less likely to deliver the concrete priorities environmental groups are demanding.

Harmful subsidies and new conservation funding are difficult because they require countries to change established economic support and decide who should provide more money. Governments are negotiating while public budgets are under strain. That creates tension between the urgent need to protect nature and competing demands for limited funds.

The article gives two clear examples. Countries have not agreed how to tackle harmful subsidies. The European Union is also pressing wealthy emerging economies, including China, to join biodiversity funding. Separately, governments are trying to improve the Cali Fund, which shares profits from corporate use of genetic data from plants and other organisms.

These disputes have slowed the summit and pushed finance talks toward stalemate. The Cali Fund aimed to raise one billion dollars each year for conservation in developing countries, but it has attracted only about US$10,000. Without new commitments, conservation efforts may lack the resources needed to meet 2030 targets.

Protecting biodiversity is expected to require contributions from wealthy countries and wealthy emerging economies. The article specifically identifies China and other wealthy emerging economies as countries the European Union wants involved. This reflects the summit’s central funding problem: conservation needs more money, while public budgets are under pressure.

The main mechanism under discussion is shared financing for biodiversity protection in developing countries. Another is the Cali Fund, which is designed to share profits from corporations using genetic data from plants and other organisms. Its planned income would support conservation, but corporate contributions have been almost nonexistent.

The issue remains unresolved because countries have not agreed on who should contribute, how much, or through which arrangements. The Cali Fund was designed to raise one billion dollars annually but has received only around US$10,000. Without broader financial commitments, the 2030 nature targets will be harder to achieve.

Biodiversity means the variety of living organisms, including plants, animals, and other life, along with the ecosystems where they exist. It matters because ecosystems depend on many connected forms of life. When biodiversity falls, those systems can become less able to function, recover from damage, and support human societies.

The article identifies several pressures: pollution, invasive species, ecosystem degradation, and broader destruction of nature. The 2022 agreement responds with targets to protect 30 percent of land and oceans and restore damaged ecosystems. These actions aim to preserve living communities and repair places already harmed.

A UN assessment warned that the pace of action was insufficient for almost all the 2030 targets. COP17 is therefore trying to turn broad promises into funded, practical steps. Delays over the global review and conservation finance could leave biodiversity exposed as the deadline approaches.