Individual countries’ promises don’t match up to the Global Biodiversity Framework’s ambitions, it warns, while progress is too slow to meet 2030 targets on pollution, invasive species, and including biodiversity in land use planning.
The UN’s 17th biodiversity conference begins next week in Armenia.
The SMC asked NZ experts about the scorecard and what they’re looking out for at the conference.
Professor Cate Macinnis-Ng, School of Biological Sciences, University of Auckland, comments:
“The 17th UN Biodiversity Conference is an opportunity for a stock-take on progress towards the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework. This Framework includes a range of targets for 2030, and goals for 2050. Of the
23 targets, many are focused on steps towards protecting and enhancing biodiversity, such as reducing pollution and minimising the impacts of invasive species and climate change.
“They also include actions focused on communities and peoples, such as encouraging customary sustainable use by Indigenous peoples, sharing the benefits from natural resources and ensuring decision-making is inclusive of diverse knowledge. While these targets are global, every country needs to contribute with intentional policies that will align with the targets, if they are to be reached.
“In New Zealand, our current government seems to be working against the Global Biodiversity Framework targets with policies that side-line Māori, rushed developments without proper consideration of environmental impacts, woefully inadequate spending on conservation and minimal action on climate change.
“In March 2026, the Action for Nature: Implementation plan for Te Mana o te Taiao – Aotearoa New Zealand Biodiversity Strategy 2020 was released. This may seem like an improvement on COP16 two years ago where there was no plan for New Zealand. However, while the strategy includes some worthwhile action items, it is unclear how these will be resourced. Without proper funding and staffing capacity, it is unlikely the strategy can be delivered in the timeframe indicated.
“Healthy ecosystems and thriving biodiversity underpin human health and well-being and economic prosperity. As we head towards an election, we desperately need policies that are fully funded and actively engage with the Global Biodiversity Framework targets. Failure to act on this is internationally embarrassing and threatens the future of future generations.”
Conflict of interest statement: “Cate Macinnis-Ng is Lead Author for the IPCC Assessment Round 7 (Working Group II) but the views expressed here do not represent those of the IPCC.”
Professor Jonathan Tonkin, School of Biological Sciences, University of Canterbury, comments:
“The new global assessment makes it clear that the world is not on track to meet its biodiversity commitments by 2030. The Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework has helped to galvanise action and to identify clear targets, but it has been less successful at addressing the underlying drivers of biodiversity loss.
“The world has agreed on what needs to happen. But agreement does not mean ecological recovery, nor do national plans that are not implemented. Measurable progress is happening. But it’s not happening at the scale and pace required. Implementation, monitoring, finance, and governance are the key challenges.
“For Aotearoa New Zealand, the report is a reminder of the commitment-implementation gap.
Our own reporting highlights that we are behind on many of our national targets towards protecting biodiversity. There has been progress in some areas but it remains limited relative to the scale of the challenge. Reversing the declines in our native biodiversity requires sustained action on the drivers of biodiversity loss, including habitat destruction and land-use intensification, invasive species, and climate change. It also requires adequate resourcing and monitoring that tells us whether our actions are actually improving the state of nature.
“New Zealand highlights conservation successes in places where progress is measurable and visible, while many of the ecosystems most affected by ongoing land-use pressures, such as freshwater ecosystems, continue to decline.
“As we approach 2030, intensifying existing efforts alone will not be enough. Improving our ability to track, evaluate and learn from biodiversity interventions is equally important.
“The recently released
Living Planet Report tells a similar story. The numbers are stark: abundances of monitored vertebrate populations have declined by 73% on average since 1970; freshwater populations by 85%. Nature remains in crisis. But it’s important to open our eyes to both sides of the story. The latest Living Planet Report has also shown around half of the monitored populations are either stable or increasing. Our planet supports an extraordinary diversity of life. While we may have made it harder for that life to persist, we’ve also shown that we can turn things around.
“The challenge is no longer making strong commitments, but to translate them into measurable ecological outcomes. The Living Planet Report reminds us that positive change is within reach. The upcoming COP17 UN Convention on Biological Diversity meeting is an opportunity for countries to honestly evaluate these gaps between commitments and outcomes. New Zealand should take leadership in this space by demonstrating delivery at home.”
Conflict of interest statement: “No COIs.”
Dr Philippa Brakes, behavioural ecologist, University of Canterbury, comments:
Note: Dr Brakes is part of a group hosting a side event on Animal Culture at the UN biodiversity conference, livestreamed here.
“We increasingly recognise that culture is not unique to humans. Many animals learn from others, including birds, mammals and fish, passing on knowledge and behaviours that can shape how they find food, communicate, migrate and survive.
“We have some remarkable examples here in Aotearoa and across the Pacific. Humpback whales share and spread complex songs across the ocean, with new songs travelling between populations over thousands of kilometres. Sperm whales form distinct cultural clans, each with characteristic patterns of clicks. Southern right whales learn about the location of critical habitat from their mothers, which informs conservation and helps us understand how to support recovery of whales visiting our coastlines.
“These examples are fascinating, but they are also important for conservation. Learning from others can help animals respond to challenges in their environment. Losing experienced individuals, or disrupting social groups, may mean losing valuable knowledge that cannot easily be replaced.
“At the upcoming Convention on Biological Diversity in Armenia, our side event on animal cultures will explore how animal culture may be one of the missing puzzle pieces for wildlife conservation and how understanding of non-human cultures can be better recognised in international biodiversity policy and conservation practice.
“Protecting biodiversity is not simply a matter of maintaining population numbers. We also need to consider the social relationships, learned behaviours and the ecological knowledge that will help wildlife populations survive and adapt in a rapidly changing world.”
Conflict of interest statement: “I am the Chair of the UNEP CMS Expert Working Group on Animal Culture and the Co-Chair of the IUCN Task Force on the Conservation of Animal Culture – so I am part of the team that is organising this event.”
