Introduction
The 17th Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), hosted by the Republic of Armenia and held in Yerevan, came to a close on 31 October 2026 [1]. The CBD is an international treaty for the conservation of biodiversity, sustainable use of its components and equitable sharing of benefits from genetic resources [2]. The Convention’s governing body is the Conference of the Parties (COP) which meets every two years to review progress, establish priorities and agree future commitments [3]. The previous summit, COP16 in Cali, Colombia, ended in disorder, and negotiations had to be finished at a resumed meeting in Rome several months later [4].
Key outcomes
Assessing progress
The Yerevan talks marked the halfway point of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (KM-GBF), established in 2022 and acting as the “Paris Agreement for nature” [4]. The KM-GBF sets out a shared roadmap for halting and reversing biodiversity loss by 2030 via 23 global targets covering the sustainable use of natural resources, biodiversity finance, and inclusive decision-making [5]. Its most prominent ambition is “30 by 30”: conserving 30% of land and sea by 2030, in line with the UN Sustainable Development Goals deadline [6]. In Yerevan, countries undertook the first global review of collective progress under the framework, examining achievements to date and identifying where faster action is needed [6]. Nearly 90% of the 196 parties to the CBD have set national targets, although fewer than half of those assessed are on track to meet them [6].
Sevan Guidelines
Yerevan agreed to a set of rules of operation, termed the ‘Sevan Guidelines’, for a new permanent body strengthening the role of Indigenous Peoples and local communities in shaping global biodiversity policy [7]. These guidelines signify a major step in formally recognising the inclusion of these communities and protecting their traditional knowledge in relation to environmental protection by providing a formal route to advise on biodiversity negotiations [7].
Finance
While some progress was made in terms of implementing the financial roadmap agreed at COP16, Yerevan highlighted the scale of the financial challenge yet to be achieved [8].
There was division between developed and developing countries over who should bear the responsibility for biodiversity finance [4]. Major economies pushed to expand the range of nations expected to provide finance, arguing that emerging economies should contribute to biodiversity financing in light of shifting economic circumstances [4]. The global review found that developed countries had failed to meet earlier commitments to mobilise at least US$20 billion annually by 2025 [4]. The list of donor countries was not expanded, but it was agreed that countries not on the list can voluntarily signal their interest in assuming these obligations through confidential consultations ahead of COP18 [4].
The landmark Cali Fund agreed at COP16 in Colombia to pay communities for the genetic resources derived from nature in the form of digital sequencing information (DSI), remains almost empty two years on [4]. The fund was expected to raise at least US$1 billion a year, funded by large companies using DSI contributing 1% of their profits or 0.1% of their revenue [4,9]. At least half of the money from this fund should go to Indigenous people and local communities, in acknowledgement of the fact that the countries and communities where these organisms come from have rarely been remunerated for their use [4,9]. Negotiations as to which companies should contribute, how much they should pay, and how money should be distributed remained divided, with several decisions postponed to further discussions before the next conference [4,9].
With the negotiations operating against a backdrop of development aid cuts, shortfalls are harder to address [9]. The summit presidency announced that more than US$1.8 billion had been pledged from governments, philanthropic organisations and investors [9]. Although welcome, this is negligible compared to what is needed [9].
What next?
Unlike the chaotic conclusion of COP16 in Cali, Yerevan saw the successful sign off of nearly 50 critical implementation decisions and the definition of the Yerevan Pathway [10]. This is no mean feat at a time when multilateralism is under significant pressure. However, the planet remains a long way off its target to halt and reverse biodiversity loss. Any real success of seeming diplomatic consensus on priorities going forward will be measured by what governments implement in the next two years. In 2028, Parties will convene for COP 18 in Quito, Ecuador [11].
