The Convention on Biological Diversity: Conclusion and Implementation

The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) arose in response to gaps in existing nature-conservation arrangements. Research by the International Union for Conservation of Nature noted that treaties on wetlands, trade in endangered species and migratory species each had their own focus. Even together, they did not comprehensively address diversity at the genetic, species and ecosystem levels.

The International Union for Conservation of Nature began developing relevant provisions in the 1980s, and the United Nations Environment Programme subsequently organized intergovernmental discussions. Negotiations gradually extended beyond species protection in a narrow sense to include sustainable use of biological resources, access to genetic resources, technology transfer and finance. Sharing conservation costs and allowing resource providers to share benefits from their use became part of the Convention's design.

References: [1]

Expert meetings and several negotiating rounds took place from November 1988 to May 1992, with later meetings held in Madrid, Geneva and Nairobi. On 22 May 1992, the parties met at UNEP headquarters in Nairobi, Kenya, to adopt the agreed text. Participants included countries such as China, Brazil and India, along with the European Economic Community. Research and environmental organizations also sent observers.

UNEP Executive Director Mostafa Tolba opened the meeting and served as its Secretary-General, while Sánchez of Chile served as President. The meeting adopted the agreed text of the Convention, together with the Nairobi Final Act and four resolutions. This stage established the treaty's content and made arrangements for opening it for signature and for interim cooperation before entry into force.

References: [2]

The Convention opened for signature in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, on 5 June 1992, and subsequently remained open at United Nations Headquarters in New York until 4 June 1993. After signing, states still had to complete ratification, acceptance or approval procedures and deposit the relevant instruments with the UN Secretary-General. Those that had not signed during the signature period could accede.

Article 36 set general entry into force for the ninetieth day after deposit of the thirtieth instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession. The actual date was 29 December 1993. Depositary records show that China signed on 11 June 1992 and deposited its instrument of ratification on 5 January 1993; the Convention likewise entered into force for China on 29 December. These three dates correspond to different legal steps.

References: [3] [4]

Article 1 establishes three objectives: conserving biological diversity, sustainably using its components, and fairly and equitably sharing benefits arising from the use of genetic resources. Diversity as defined in Article 2 includes variation within species, between species and among ecosystems. Its scope extends beyond rare animals and nature reserves.

Article 6 requires parties, according to their own conditions and capabilities, to develop national strategies, plans or programmes and integrate conservation and sustainable use into relevant sectoral policies. Articles 7 and 8 further address surveys and monitoring, protected areas, restoration of degraded ecosystems and management of alien species. Many specific obligations are qualified by the phrase 'as far as possible and as appropriate'; implementation still requires domestic legislation, personnel and budgets.

References: [3]

The Convention recognizes states' sovereignty over their natural resources. Under Article 15, national governments determine access to genetic resources in accordance with domestic legislation. In principle, access requires the provider's prior informed consent, and benefits from research and commercial use are shared on mutually agreed terms. No fixed benefit-sharing percentage applying uniformly to every country is established.

Technology transfer and additional finance form the other side of the arrangement. Developed-country parties undertake to help developing countries meet agreed full incremental costs, while transfer of patented technology also involves intellectual property protection. The guide by Glowka and colleagues notes that these provisions leave considerable scope for implementation and that some financial arrangements required further clarification by the Conference of the Parties. Concluding the Convention was therefore only the starting point for negotiation.

References: [3] [1]

The first Conference of the Parties met in Nassau, the Bahamas, from 28 November to 9 December 1994. Decision I/2, recorded in the formal meeting report, confirmed that the restructured Global Environment Facility would continue operating the Convention's financial mechanism on an interim basis and required it to act according to policies and programme priorities set by the conference.

Funds were not allocated unconditionally. Projects had to meet eligibility criteria, receive the support of the relevant party and draw on local and regional expertise wherever possible. Priorities included preparing comprehensive national strategies, identifying and monitoring wild and domesticated biodiversity, and strengthening institutions and personnel. The conference also called for further consultations on a memorandum of understanding and for review of procedures for monitoring and evaluating the use of funds, gradually turning treaty obligations into administrative processes.

References: [5]

Implementation requires regular assessment rather than merely counting meetings or policy documents. The 2020 Summary for Policy Makers of Global Biodiversity Outlook 5 combined national reports, indicators and research to assess the Strategic Plan for 2011–2020. None of the twenty global Aichi Targets had been fully achieved, while six had been partially achieved. This evaluated the global targets for that period; it did not mean that every country and every action had made no progress.

The report also recorded achievements such as expansion of protected areas and updates to national strategies, while noting that many national targets did not adequately match the scope and ambition of the global targets. Improvements in policy-action indicators had not simultaneously reversed trends in biodiversity loss. This reveals an enduring challenge in the Convention's operation: once common rules are established, resources, sectoral decisions and local action still have to produce observable conservation results.

References: [6]