Bridging Global Biodiversity Goals and National Actions at SBI-6

The sixth meeting of the Subsidiary Body on Implementation (SBI-6), held from 16–19 February under the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), marked an important milestone in the lead-up to COP17 in Yerevan, Armenia, under the theme “Taking Action for Nature.” SBI plays a critical role in reviewing progress, strengthening implementation, and addressing the operational dimensions of the Convention and its Protocols. 

With only a few years left until 2030, the deadline for achieving the 23 targets of the Kunming–Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (K-M GBF), Parties stressed that implementation must now accelerate at the national level. Discussions focused on finance, capacity building, monitoring, reporting, and review, setting the stage for COP17, where Parties will undertake the first global review of K-M GBF implementation.

Strengthening Coherence Across the Rio Conventions

In plenary, CGIAR underscored that integrated landscape and food systems approaches can support coordinated implementation of the K-M GBF. Several targets converge at the landscape level, where decisions on land use, agriculture, and ecosystem management interact. Such approaches can help translate global commitments into nationally aligned action.

According to FAO's analysis, 35 percent of planned national actions relate directly to agrifood systems, contributing across all 23 K-M GBF targets. At the same time, 48 percent of countries report that biodiversity loss is already affecting agrifood systems. Reported impacts include reduced yields and productivity, increased pest pressures, invasive species, and heightened risks for rural livelihoods.

Under the agenda item on cooperation with other conventions and international organizations, CGIAR — supported by several countries — underscored that sustainable agriculture and food systems transformation are integral to achieving the objectives of the K-M GBF. The intervention emphasized that greater policy coherence across biodiversity, climate, and land agendas within agricultural systems is essential to unlock synergies, reduce trade-offs, and deliver multiple benefits across the three Rio Conventions.

Building Capacity for Effective GBF Reporting 

Another central issue at SBI-6 was reporting. Parties were reminded of the 28 February 2026 deadline for submitting updated National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs) and National Reports, which will inform the first global review of the K-M GBF. As of the meeting, 74 countries updated NBSAPs, 147 national targets, and one national report had been submitted, alongside 11 commitments from non-State actors.

Through the MFL Science Program and the Genebank Accelerator, CGIAR is preparing commitments that contribute to national biodiversity strategies and action plans and to the implementation of the K-M GBF. Fourteen commitments have been submitted, and ten of them have already been published while others are still under review, reinforcing CGIAR’s role as a science-based implementation partner.

Under this agenda item, on updates to NBSAPs, national targets, and reporting, countries raised concerns about capacity constraints, delays in GEF disbursement, administrative burdens, technical gaps in methodologies and indicators, and the need to better align reporting requirements with financial and technical support. 

In this context, a bilateral exchange during the meeting led to a formal request for capacity-sharing support from CGIAR to a developing country in relation to national reporting, including the Agrobiodiversity Index. A first technical workshop has already been conducted to support this process. There was also interest in exploring future triangular cooperation to enable exchanges between countries facing similar implementation challenges. Such collaboration can contribute to strengthening national capacities while promoting peer learning across contexts.

The Persistent Finance Question

Resource mobilization remained one of the most politically sensitive and unresolved issues at SBI-6. Discussions took place amid a persistent global biodiversity finance gap and limited progress toward Target 19 of the GBF, which set a 2025 deadline to mobilize at least USD 20 billion annually in international biodiversity finance. While Parties agreed that public finance alone will not close the gap, views diverged on how to address the shortfall. Some questioned whether new dedicated funds would increase overall finance availability, while others promoted innovative instruments such as debt-for-nature swaps and stronger engagement between environment and finance ministries.

At the same time, examples shared in the broader biodiversity finance landscape demonstrate that progress is possible when finance reform moves from commitment to implementation. One example is UNDP’s Biodiversity Finance Initiative (BIOFIN), 41 countries have mobilized more than USD 2.7 billion for biodiversity since 2018, and with additional GEF support, 91 countries are now developing Biodiversity Finance Plans aligned with their NBSAPs and national climate and land agendas. These plans aim to shift biodiversity finance from short-term, project-based funding toward longer-term domestic and blended financing solutions, including green bonds, subsidy reform, and biodiversity screening of public credit systems.

SBI-6 also reviewed three commissioned studies on debt sustainability, safeguards in biodiversity finance, and the biodiversity–climate finance nexus. Given limited time for review, the peer-review deadline was extended to May 2026, with final consideration deferred to COP17. Broader concerns regarding the adequacy and disbursement of biodiversity finance were carried forward to SBI-7 in Nairobi (4–12 August), alongside other agenda items.

Strategic engagement in the SBI and SBSTTA processes is essential within the Convention's intersessional cycle. These subsidiary bodies address the scientific, technical, financial, and implementation dimensions shaping decisions at COP17, making them the key arena where evidence meets negotiation. Understanding how they work gives CGIAR a critical advantage: aligning its research with evolving Party priorities, bridging negotiating gaps with evidence, and arriving at COP17 as a prepared and effective contributor.

Author:  Adelaida Murillo Leon (ILRI)