COP17 on Biodiversity: after the Commitments, the Test of Implementation
“The Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework gives us a common direction. At COP17, we must translate its goals and targets into national policies, investment decisions, and practical measures that deliver measurable results.”[i]
-Hambardzum Matevosyan, Minister of Environment of the Republic of Armenia and President of COP17 (27 October 2026)
Four years after the adoption of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, the 17th meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (COP17), held in Yerevan, Armenia, from 19 to 30 October 2026, marks a further step in international efforts to protect biodiversity. The challenge now is to turn commitments into concrete, measurable action capable of delivering results by 2030.
For businesses, this shift is especially significant. Biodiversity is no longer solely an environmental issue: it directly affects value chains, access to natural resources, water, land use, operational resilience and, more broadly, long-term performance.
Every business depends on nature and ecosystems, either directly or indirectly. Ignoring those dependencies does not make them disappear. Instead, it increases exposure to the risks they create. The priority is therefore to drive a genuine transformation of business models, beyond isolated initiatives.
Biodiversity: the focus is shifting from ambition to implementation
The first global progress review shows that most Parties have set national targets, but implementation is still moving too slowly to put the world on track to meet the 2030 goals.
At the time the Global Report was prepared, 162 Parties, or 83%, had established national targets aligned with the Global Biodiversity Framework[ii]. On average, those targets covered 22 of the Framework’s 23 global targets. Progress has nevertheless been uneven: conservation measures are more widely integrated, while socio-economic considerations, the means of implementation and the alignment of financial flows continue to lag behind.
This initial assessment shows that the issue is no longer only the level of ambition, but also the means of implementation. Finance remains central to the discussions, alongside the need to redirect public and private financial flows that continue to contribute to biodiversity loss.
COP17 therefore raises a fundamental question: how can global ambition for nature be translated into a genuine transformation of business models?
COP17 priorities
COP17 is not intended to redefine the Global Biodiversity Framework. Its purpose is to assess the gap between commitments and delivery, and to accelerate implementation. Priorities presented by the Convention on Biological Diversity include:
- conducting the first global review of collective progress in implementing the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework;
- accelerating implementation through finance, capacity-building and international cooperation;
- advancing the scientific and policy guidance needed to meet the 2030 targets;
- addressing the financial and economic conditions that shape biodiversity outcomes;
- taking concrete decisions on biodiversity conservation and sustainable use; and
- strengthening the role and participation of Indigenous Peoples and local communities.
Focus on Target 15 of the Global Biodiversity Framework
Target 15 calls on large companies and financial institutions to assess their impacts and dependencies on biodiversity, and to disclose this information transparently across their operations, supply and value chains and portfolios. A central challenge for businesses remains the fragmentation of methodologies and the limited comparability of indicators.
Updates from the Taskforce on Nature-related Financial Disclosures (TNFD), the Science Based Targets Network (SBTN) and the Nature Positive Initiative (NPI), presented ahead of COP17 and widely discussed in Yerevan, are supporting greater alignment between the assessment of nature-related dependencies and impacts, target-setting and progress measurement.
Standardization adds another layer to this developing framework. In 2025, the International Organization for Standardization published ISO 17298, its first dedicated biodiversity standard, Biodiversity - Considering biodiversity in the strategy and operations of organizations. It draws in particular on the TNFD recommendations and its LEAP approach: Locate, Evaluate, Assess and Prepare. In 2026, ISO also updated ISO 14001 to introduce normative requirements on biodiversity impact assessment for the first time. ISO participated in Yerevan through an official Convention on Biological Diversity event on 23 October, “Scaling up business action for biodiversity”, focused on reducing fragmentation across standards, tools and metrics in support of Target 15.
For businesses, the task is no longer simply to map impacts and dependencies, but to use those analyses to guide decisions, transition plans and resilience strategies. Greater alignment between frameworks can help organizations move from assessment to action, without replacing the operational choices that each business must make.
.
Jeanne Barreyre, Research Manager on Nature, SE Advisory Services, at COP17.
Focus on biodiversity credits
Biodiversity credits were not a formal COP17 negotiating item, but Yerevan became an important meeting point for initiatives seeking to structure these mechanisms. On 25 October 2026, on the margins of COP17, the International Advisory Panel on Biodiversity Credits (IAPB) launched its Nature Credit Market exposure drafts[iii] and opened them for consultation. The work is intended to establish safeguards for an emerging market whose credibility will depend on project integrity, demonstrable benefits for nature and robust governance.
Scaling up: beyond voluntary action
Scaling up will not depend on voluntary action alone. Clear rules and coherent incentives are needed to provide stronger demand signals, direct investment and make transformation economically viable.
COP17 should therefore be understood not as another diplomatic milestone, but as a signal: with four years remaining until the 2030 deadline, action for nature is both a responsibility and a resilience issue for companies. Voluntary initiatives will remain essential, but they will not be sufficient. Clear rules and coherent incentives are needed to turn commitments into decisions, redirect investment and support action at scale.
Synergies between COP processes are on the agenda, but still need to be translated into action
These discussions are taking place in a geopolitical context that is increasingly challenging for multilateral cooperation. Negotiations have revealed significant differences, particularly over finance and the means of implementation, as well as the need to redirect financial flows and subsidies that are harmful to biodiversity.
They also underline the importance of maintaining a robust scientific foundation and strengthening the connections between biodiversity, climate, water and forests. This search for convergence reflects the approach developed by the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) in its Nexus Assessment, which highlights the interconnections between biodiversity, water, food, health and climate change. SE Advisory Services has analyzed these links in more detail. The remaining challenge is to translate this integrated approach into practical cooperation mechanisms and concrete decisions.
Contributors:
Sabrina Collin, Biodiversity Manager
Jeanne Barreyre, Research Manager on Nature
.
Resources:
[i] ARMENPRESS, 27 October 2026, Minister: COP17 must translate global biodiversity goals into national policies and practical measures. https://armenpress.am/en/article/1263958