COP17: from ambition to implementation

COP17 is approaching at a make or break moment for global biodiversity action. As Governments gather in Rome for the sixth meeting of the Subsidiary Body on Implementation (SBI−6) and the deadline for the submission of the seventh national reports looms closer on February 28, the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (KMGBF) is being put to the test ahead of COP17.

The focus is moving from ambition to accountability. As countries shift their attention to translate commitments into measurable progress, communications must do more than report on process – they must demonstrate delivery.

Breaking the COP17 implementation deadlock

After fraught negotiations at COP16, countries successfully passed a historic text on the Planning, Monitoring, Reporting and Review (PMRR) mechanism for countries to measure their conservation progress under the KMGBF.

• Planning – countries submit their National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs)
• Monitoring – countries use indicators to measure their progress
• Reporting – countries produce the seventh national reports (to be submitted by February 28, 2026)
• Review – a global review is created based on the seventh national reports at COP17

National reports allow countries to take stock of how successfully they have implemented conservation measures. These will inform the global review at COP17, which will be the first assessment of the KMGBF’s effectiveness in meeting its target to halt and reverse biodiversity loss by 2030. In other words, comprehensive national reports are the foundation upon which COP17 can build and deliver.

However, ongoing media scrutiny over failed NBSAPS submissions ahead of COP16 – and again before SBI-6 – is raising concerns about the implementation promise of COP17. Notably, more than half of the parties to the KMGBF have yet to submit their NBSAPS, one year after the deadline. Without all countries submitting their seventh national reports, COP17 risks only partially addressing how nature can and should be preserved.  

Accountability (or lack thereof) is hindering the credibility of multilateral nature protection, requiring a communications strategy that is grounded in how progress is measured and harnessed to drive global impact.

Biodiversity finance: the (divided) road to COP17

COP16 illustrated the ongoing financial tension between Global North and South, so much so that the 2024 summit was postponed to February 2025 for lack of quorum.

Countries disagreed over how to raise the required annual $200bn to finance nature conservation, with the Africa Group and Brazil calling for a more accessible nature finance mechanism. Negotiators ultimately agreed to a roadmap to establish a permanent fund for biodiversity, with a framework to be agreed upon by COP17.

The financial mistrust exhibited at COP16 highlights the need for communications strategies to be grounded in transparency and accountability to prevent further policy bottlenecks at COP17. For nature financing to be meaningfully implemented, messaging must be able to clearly address how resources are sourced, managed, and distributed.

Nature communications in the era of implementation

The planet’s environmental tipping points are making nature communications more urgent, and with them the need to testify progress rather than promise it. The narrative shift from ambition to accountability is not exclusive to policy, but is actively reshaping how nature is discussed in the communications landscape.

In the era of implementation, communications must be tailored to transparent messaging that explains – and proves – progress to strengthen trust in multilateral conservation. Accessible, data-driven messaging has the potential to cut through politicised implementation discourse and harness momentum toward collective action.

However, to do so, messaging must also go beyond numbers to demonstrate human impact, clearly demonstrating the causal link between data and human livelihoods. Effective storytelling strategies should:

• Ground communications in reliable, transparent, and publicly accessible data
• Balance numbers with diverse human stories so readers can understand experienced impact
• Clearly address how progress is measured from initial commitments and why this progress matters

For more tips on how to mobilise effective nature communications in the time of implementation, see our latest guidance on what it takes to make nature matter in 2026.

Keeping up to date with COP17

Subscribe to Greenhouse Morning News to stay on top of environmental stories every morning.

If you require any support at COP17, get in touch for more information.

Resources to better understand COP16 and COP17

• CarbonBrief – COP16: Key outcomes agreed at the resumed UN biodiversity conference in Rome
• CarbonBrief – Just 28% of countries have released nature pledges a year after UN deadline
• CarbonPulse – Biodiversity talks face implementation test as SBI6 opens amid delivery concerns
• Climate Home News – At COP16, countries clash over future of global fund for nature protection
• Guardian – About 80% of countries fail to submit plans to preserve nature ahead of global summit
• Guardian – Cop16 ends in disarray and indecision despite biodiversity breakthroughs