A significant portion of the Yerevan negotiations focused on how to mobilize the resources needed to support conservation efforts in developing countries.

During the nearly 12-hour closing plenary session, participating countries voted for Quito, Ecuador, to host the COP18 biodiversity summit in 2028.

Finance

At COP17, financial discussions had to achieve several objectives. The first task was to take stock of the biodiversity resources mobilized so far to achieve the goals of the nature conservation agreement. Developed countries failed to meet their commitment to provide “at least $20 billion per year” by 2025 for nature conservation.

The second task was to agree on mobilizing resources for the coming years to meet the targets of the Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF). Countries agreed on a resolution under which nations wishing to be added to the list of developed donors can indicate their intent prior to COP18.

Finally, countries also agreed on criteria to establish and finance a new, permanent post-2030 biodiversity finance mechanism.

The original goal of the GBF mid-term resource mobilization negotiations was to agree on closing the “biodiversity finance gap” and “increasing resources from all sources” to at least $200 billion per year by 2030. However, discussions were largely dominated by the push from developed nations to “expand the contributor base.“

Although the final resolution “recognizes” that “contributions from a broader range of parties would improve the mobilization of biodiversity resources,” it stopped short of setting specific criteria for expanding the list of donor countries. No one will be added to the list without an invitation to the countries concerned and confidential consultations with them.

23 goals

The 23 Action Targets for 2030 of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF)

Reducing threats to biodiversity (Targets 1–8)

Biodiversity-inclusive spatial planning: Bringing the loss of areas of high ecological value close to zero through integrated land-use planning.
Ecosystem restoration: Effectively restoring at least 30% of degraded terrestrial, inland water, coastal, and marine ecosystems by 2030.
Protected areas (30×30 target): Conserving at least 30% of terrestrial and marine areas through protected areas and other effective area-based conservation measures (OECMs).
Species conservation and human-wildlife conflicts: Halting the extinction of threatened species, maintaining genetic diversity, and ensuring human-wildlife coexistence.
Sustainable use of wild species: Ensuring that the harvesting and trade of wild species of plants and animals is sustainable, legal, and safe.
Control of invasive alien species: Reducing the introduction and establishment of invasive alien species by at least 50% and mitigating their impacts.
Pollution reduction: Halving nutrient loss and the overall risk from pesticides, and working towards eliminating plastic pollution.
Climate change mitigation: Minimizing the impact of climate change and ocean acidification through nature-based solutions and ecosystem-based approaches.

Meeting people’s needs through sustainable use (Targets 9–13)

Management of wild species for human benefit: Ensuring sustainable use for the nutrition, food security, and livelihoods of people—especially indigenous and local communities.
Sustainable agriculture, forestry, and fisheries: Enhancing the sustainability and resilience of production sectors while protecting biodiversity.
Enhancing ecosystem services: Restoring, maintaining, and enhancing nature’s contributions to people (water and air regulation, pollination, soil health).
Urban green and blue spaces: Expanding the coverage, quality, and accessibility of urban green and blue spaces.
Fair and equitable benefit-sharing (ABS): Ensuring fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from the utilization of genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge.

Tools and solutions for implementation (Targets 14–23)

Biodiversity mainstreaming: Integrating biodiversity values into policies, planning, development processes, and accounting at all levels of government and economy.
Corporate responsibility and transparency: Mandating businesses and financial institutions to regularly assess, disclose, and reduce their biodiversity risks and impacts.
Sustainable consumption: Encouraging responsible consumption choices, halving global food waste, and drastically reducing waste generation.
Biosafety: Regulating and managing potential adverse impacts of biotechnology on biodiversity and human health.
Phasing out harmful subsidies: Identifying and eliminating, phasing out, or reforming incentives harmful to biodiversity, reducing them by at least $500 billion per year.
Resource mobilization: Increasing financial resources for biodiversity to at least $200 billion per year from public and private sources by 2030.
Capacity-building and technology transfer: Strengthening scientific and technical cooperation, technology transfer, and joint research, particularly for developing nations.
Access to data and knowledge: Ensuring that relevant ecological data, research findings, and traditional knowledge are readily accessible for decision-making.
Inclusive and equitable participation: Guaranteeing the full, equitable participation and rights of Indigenous peoples, local communities, women, and youth in decision-making.
Gender equality: Ensuring women and girls equal rights, access, and leadership in biodiversity conservation actions.

Global Review

In Yerevan, countries agreed on the first synthesis of progress toward the 2030 biodiversity targets, known as the “global review.” The concept of a global review of “collective progress” is anchored in the GBF and its foundational decisions. This stocktake relied heavily on the findings of a global report and additional information submitted by countries.

Global Report

Directly preceding COP17, the United Nations released a comprehensive report finding that the world is off track on 22 of the 23 biodiversity targets set for 2030. The document underscored that unless collective implementation rapidly accelerates, the 2030 goals will remain out of reach.

Digital Sequence Information (DSI)

Digital sequence information (DSI)—meaning digital genetic data derived from nature—remained one of the most contentious issues among delegates. These data assets are utilized across numerous industries, from pharmaceuticals to agribusiness, to develop drugs, cosmetics, dietary supplements, and novel crop varieties.

At COP16, parties agreed to establish the first global fund—the Cali Fund—into which companies utilizing digital genetic data should contribute through a unique multilateral mechanism. However, much of the detailed framework was deferred to negotiations at COP18 in 2028.

Contributions and disbursements

The steering committee split the outstanding tasks into two primary tracks: contributions and disbursements.

Under contributions, rules must be settled on which corporate entities must pay and how much they must contribute to the Cali Fund. Contributions remain voluntary; indicative rates defined in the COP16 decision suggest 0.1% of revenue or 1% of profit.

The disbursement track determines how funds are allocated, transferred, and expended. Over the past two years, virtually no funds flowed into the vehicle: by the close of the COP17 summit, confirmed contributions remained below $9,000.

Much of the technical debate centered on incentives and certifications. Companies could receive exemptions from additional domestic obligations in a given year upon paying in full; industry representatives called for explicit legal certainty and uniform guidelines to avoid overlapping requirements under other international agreements.

On October 31, the presidency introduced a draft decision: the text affirms previously adopted indicative contribution rates, outlines disbursement methodology following COP18, and permits exceptional disbursements once the fund balance reaches $150 million.

Industry Initiatives

Alongside the formal negotiations, an industry initiative was announced at COP17: the Biodiversity Foundation Initiative, which aims to establish a distinct, privately financed fund. The rationale presented is that the official Cali Fund imposes complex payment and compliance burdens, along with unpredictable financial exposure, on companies.

Harmful Subsidies

Governments around the world spend approximately $1.8 trillion annually on subsidies and incentives that can harm biodiversity. Target 18 of the framework mandates that by 2025, these harmful incentives must be identified and subsequently eliminated, phased out, or reformed, reducing their total by at least $500 billion per year by 2030.

Marine Biodiversity

Three central debates emerged around the text on marine and coastal biodiversity:

The High Seas Treaty (BBNJ): The agreement on the conservation and sustainable use of marine biological diversity of areas beyond national jurisdiction—known as the “High Seas Treaty”—entered into force this January, having been ratified by more than 100 countries. However, proposed references to it were strongly opposed by Russia, which rejected the treaty’s entry into force. Ultimately, most of these references were deleted from the preamble.
Ecologically or Biologically Significant Marine Areas (EBSAs): The process for the scientific description of these areas was resolved at COP16. In Yerevan, debate flared over the naming of the guidance on peer review: instead of more legally suggestive “guidelines,” parties finally settled on the compromise term “voluntary guidance.”
Recognition of Indigenous Peoples, Women, and Youth: Explicit mentions of these groups in the marine texts were also contested by Russia, leading to the removal of most bracketed references to them.

Indigenous and Local Communities

A major outcome of COP16 was the decision to establish a permanent subsidiary body for Indigenous peoples, granting them direct representation at biodiversity summits. Article 8(j) of the Convention on Biological Diversity requires parties to respect, preserve, and maintain the traditional knowledge of Indigenous and local communities, and to encourage the equitable sharing of benefits.

Biodiversity and Climate Change

In Yerevan, a new resolution on the link between biodiversity and climate change was adopted. It provides voluntary guidance on scaling up nature-based solutions while omitting references to the International Court of Justice’s (ICJ) landmark advisory opinion on climate change as well as emerging scientific findings on biodiversity.

The Yerevan talks made one thing clear: bridging the gap between paper targets and tangible action still hinges on mobilizing finance. With the 2030 deadline rapidly approaching and the world lagging behind on almost all 23 targets, real accountability—whether through dismantling harmful state subsidies or securing fair contributions from multinational corporations—has become increasingly urgent.

The questions left unresolved in Yerevan and the finalization of financing mechanisms now fall squarely on COP18 in Quito, Ecuador, where the stakes will extend far beyond compromise phrasing to the very survival of global ecosystems.

The outcomes of the COP17 biodiversity summit