17th meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity: ICLRC’s First Participation as an Observer

From 19 to 30 October 2026, the 17th meeting of the Conference of the Parties (COP17) to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) is taking place in Yerevan, Armenia. One of the central issues of the conference agenda this year is the global review of collective progress towards the implementation of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (KMGBF).

COP17 marks the ICLRC’s first engagement in biodiversity negotiations in its capacity as an observer. ICLRC’s participation in COP17 adds to its ongoing work on the legal aspects of biodiversity conservation. Last year, the Center launched the Biodiversity Legal Database, which provide access to international legal instruments, international and national case law.

Associate Researcher in Public International Law at Climate and Environment Anzhela Shmakova and Development manager Vera Bystrova share their observations from the first week of negotiations and parallel events.

The main focus of COP17 this year is the global review of collective progress towards the KMGBF implementation. A large part of the 53-item negotiating agenda focuses on achieving the KMGBF targets. Key areas also include nature-based solutions, genetic resources and sharing of benefits arising from their utilization, as well as rights of Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities and their participation in multilateral processes. The adoption of the modus operandi (rules governing the procedures and functioning) of the new Subsidiary Body on Article 8(j) and Other Provisions of the Convention on Biological Diversity Related to Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities¹ is also considered this year in Yerevan.

Discussions on the sidelines of COP17 also address legal issues of marine biodiversity conservation in areas beyond national jurisdiction, legal mechanisms for biodiversity conservation, and synergies among the Rio Conventions.

Global review of collective progress in implementing the KMGBF

On 15 October, ahead of COP17, the UN Secretary-General formally launched the State of Biodiversity Action report which provides the first global assessment of collective progress under the KMGBF. While the assessment has been completed, the Parties now need to determine the status of its findings. This issue remains contentious in the negotiations. There is no consensus on whether the report should serve as an informative basis for future action, including the development and revision of national strategies and action plans, and how closely Parties should follow its findings. The multilateral climate change legal regime is illustrative in this regard. The Paris Agreement expressly provides that the outcome of the global stocktake shall inform Parties in updating and enhancing their actions.

Biodiversity and climate change

During the intersessional period leading up to COP17, the CBD subsidiary bodies prepared documents aimed at promoting integrated approaches to tackling climate change and biodiversity loss crises. In Yerevan, the Parties are expected to decide how these documents should be taken forward. 

The draft decision submitted to Parties for adoption consists of an operative part and two annexes:

• a Supplement to the Voluntary Guidelines for the Design and Effective Implementation of Ecosystem-based Approaches to Climate Change Adaptation and Disaster Risk Reduction: Primer for Policymakers

• a Multilevel road map for enhancing cooperation, policy coherence and synergies across the Rio Conventions.

Consideration of the operative paragraphs has already revealed divergent views among the Parties.

In discussing possible challenges for adopting these documents and implementing the actions and principles set out in them, some Parties noted that the annexes contain concepts that are novel not only within the multilateral climate change legal regime but also in academic discourse. In addition, several Parties argued that some of the principles and proposals were not consistent with climate change obligations and legal architecture. The discussion therefore shifted to the main text of the decision. However, Parties were unable to reach consensus even on the preambular paragraphs. Disagreements concerned both the interconnected and interdependent nature of certain global challenges and the measures needed to prevent or mitigate their adverse effects. Parties also disagreed on whether issues not directly connected with the state of biodiversity and climate change should be addressed in these negotiations.

A separate debate emerged over references to the advisory opinions of the International Court of Justice and the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea concerning States’ obligations in respect of climate change. While some Parties support referring to the opinions and using such terms as “welcomes” or “takes note of”, others strongly oppose their inclusion, arguing that the advisory opinions are not relevant to the discussions in the negotiation forum.

Mechanisms for implementation of the Rio Conventions

A key issue discussed on the sidelines of COP17 is the strengthening of synergies among the Rio Conventions and the development of integrated approaches to achieving their respective objectives. On 20 October, Anzhela Shmakova presented the preliminary findings of her research on the institutionalism of compliance under the Rio Conventions at the Russian Federation pavilion.

The research shows that the Rio Conventions have much in common. Parties set national targets, incorporate them into action plans and national strategies submitted to the relevant secretariats, take measures to achieve them, and report on the outcomes. These actions are reflected in the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD), the CBD, and the international climate change treaties. However, the mechanisms for implementing these steps and assessing the progress achieved differ across the three regimes.

Under the UNCCD, the Committee for the Review of the Implementation of the Convention, a Subsidiary Body, reviews national reports and prepares recommendations for the Conference of the Parties. Under the CBD, the adoption of the KMGBF recently introduced a new mechanism for assessing global collective progress. In the climate change legal regime, the global stocktake is taken every five years.

The role of such assessments also varies. In some cases, they help assess the progress made and identify the remaining challenges on the path to achieving global goals. In others, the outcomes of the assessment shape the next stage of implementation, as Parties take them into account when setting new targets and planning further action for the next period.