Expectations for the COP17-Conference of the Parties in Yerevan are high. From October 19 to 30, the parties to the UN Convention on Biological Diversity will discuss the implementation of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, adopted in 2022. The track record so far is sobering: none of the 23 global targets is likely to be met by 2030. For ISOE researcher Marion Mehring, this highlights a fundamental problem in international biodiversity policy: there is no lack of knowledge or political agreements. The key challenge is to translate these into effective action—and to create the conditions for better protection of biological diversity.
International biodiversity policy faces a crucial test: At COP17 in Armenia, the UN member states intend to take stock of progress toward the global protection of biodiversity. Experts expect that they will find the implementation of the global biodiversity framework has fallen short of expectations. The goals of the 2022 “Kunming-Montreal Agreement” included, among other things, protecting 30 percent of land and marine areas by 2030, restoring damaged ecosystems, and better incorporating biodiversity into all economic sectors.
The fact that none of the 23 targets is expected to be met by the end of the decade highlights, for biodiversity researcher Marion Mehring, the fundamental problem with biodiversity policy: “The state of biodiversity and the causes of its loss are well documented scientifically,” summarizes the head of the Biodiversity and People research area at the Institute for Social-Ecological Research (ISOE). “It is crucial that all this knowledge finally translates into action. Goals must be designed in such a way that they can actually bring about societal change.”
Reversing the trend of species extinction requires a concerted effort by society as a whole
Mehring therefore calls for a shift in the perspective in biodiversity diplomacy: “We can no longer limit ourselves to negotiating what we want to achieve for biodiversity. We must now focus on which measures actually have an impact so that the state of biodiversity, habitats, and ecosystems improves sustainably,” says the co-author of German Biodiversity Assessment, who therefore advocates for a fundamentally different approach to nature conservation.
For the ISOE researcher, biodiversity must not be conceived of and preserved solely within protected areas. Rather, it must be integrated into the way we, as a society, use nature in all areas of life. “Reversing the trend of biodiversity loss requires a concerted effort by society as a whole. This naturally includes an ambitious biodiversity policy,” says Mehring, emphasizing: “These policies must finally create the conditions—at the international, national, and regional levels—that enable consistent, biodiversity-friendly action by government, business, and society.”
From Knowledge to Action for Effective Biodiversity Conservation
Many people are aware of the need for biodiversity-friendly action, summarizes Mehring from her research. But there is a gap between knowledge and the willingness to act. “Someone can be very well informed about biodiversity without necessarily drawing conclusions that affect their own behavior,” says Mehring. ISOE’s social-ecological biodiversity research therefore examines what actually empowers people, business, and political institutions to take action—and what challenges hinder necessary action.
A research project involving stakeholders from agriculture and forestry illustrates this aspect: Many respondents were motivated to do more for biodiversity conservation. At the same time, they reported significant barriers in implementing corresponding biodiversity conservation measures. “Greater protection of biodiversity often fails not because of a lack of will, but because of a lack of opportunities,” summarizes Marion Mehring.
Understanding Biodiversity Conservation as a Cross-Cutting Issue
This insight is of central importance for international biodiversity policy. “Effective biodiversity conservation does not arise solely from laws, regulations, and requirements; these must always be accompanied by appropriate framework conditions that promote biodiversity-friendly behavior and make it attractive.” This applies not only to nature conservation policies and, above all, not only to individual stakeholders.
Biodiversity policy has long been viewed as an environmental issue. But when it comes to preserving biodiversity, we are dealing with a cross-cutting issue that affects all areas of life, politics, and the economy,” says Mehring. That is why, Mehring argues, biodiversity must be taken into account wherever decisions are made regarding land use, investments, infrastructure, agriculture, or economic development. “Many decisions regarding our economic activities and lifestyles could have positive effects on biodiversity if we consider the consequences for nature, the climate, people, and animals from the very beginning.” COP17 thus also faces the task of further developing policy goals in a way that enables changes beyond individual nature conservation measures.
Contact:
