Convention on Biological Diversity

• 1. Introduction

  ›

  The Convention on Biological Diversity opened for signature at the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro on the 5th of June, 1992. By its closing date the following June, 168 nations had signed it. The United States was not among those that went further and ratified it. What exactly does this treaty require of the countries that join it? Who benefits from the genetic wealth locked inside living organisms, and who decides? And why are some scientists now warning that one of its protocols may be chilling the very research it was meant to encourage?

• 2. What the Treaty Requires

  ›

  On the 29th of December, 1993, the Convention on Biological Diversity entered into force. For the first time in international law, a treaty had declared the conservation of biodiversity 'a common concern of humankind.' Countries that ratify are legally bound, not merely encouraged, to act on that commitment.

  Conservation of biological diversity is the first of the treaty's three stated goals. The second is the sustainable use of its components; the third is the fair and equitable sharing of benefits from genetic resources. All three must hold together for the treaty to meet its purpose.

  The precautionary principle shapes how the Convention expects governments to act. When a credible threat of biodiversity loss exists, scientific uncertainty cannot be used as grounds for delay. The Convention also explicitly states that natural resources are finite. It argues that protecting them will return environmental, economic, and social benefits.

  The secretariat of the CBD is based in Montreal, Quebec, Canada, and operates under the United Nations Environment Programme. The governing body is the Conference of the Parties, known as the COP. It convened for the first time in Nassau, Bahamas, in 1994. The COP has the authority to review progress, set priorities, amend the Convention, and create advisory bodies. A technical committee called SBSTTA provides expert scientific and technical recommendations; by 2024, that committee had convened 26 times, most recently in Nairobi, Kenya.

  Biotechnology presented a challenge the main treaty text could not fully address. CBD signatories eventually held an extraordinary meeting in Cartagena, Colombia, in February 1999 to begin filling that gap.

• 3. The One Holdout

  ›

  Ratification requires a two-thirds majority in the United States Senate. Republican senators have blocked that threshold for decades. The concerns driving that resistance are specific. The Convention's rules around sharing genetic resources raised alarms in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries. A broader worry held that the treaty could interfere with domestic environmental regulations in the future.

  The United Kingdom, New Zealand, and Tanzania all carried out detailed responses focused on individual species and specific habitats. Through long-standing species recovery programs, the United States itself produced one of the most thorough national implementation programs among all CBD signatories. As of 2016, the Convention counted 196 parties: 195 states and the European Union. The Cook Islands, Niue, and the State of Palestine had ratified the treaty despite not being full United Nations member states.

  The Nagoya Protocol, adopted in 2010, addressed the genetic resource sharing rules that had contributed to the Senate's long resistance.

• 4. Protocols and Frameworks

  ›

  Six times between July 1996 and February 1999, the CBD's Working Group on Biosafety convened. The group submitted a draft text for a protocol. After several delays, the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety was formally adopted on the 29th of January, 2000. Its purpose was to govern the movement of living modified organisms produced through modern biotechnology across national borders.

  Under the Cartagena Protocol, countries can refuse imports of a genetically modified organism on safety grounds. The protocol also requires that shipments of genetically modified commodities, including corn and cotton, be clearly labeled. The 50 instruments of ratification required for the protocol to take effect were received in May 2003. The protocol entered into force on the 11th of September, 2003.

  The Nagoya Protocol was adopted on the 29th of October, 2010, in Nagoya, Aichi Prefecture, Japan. It entered into force on the 12th of October, 2014. The protocol provides a transparent legal framework for benefit sharing from genetic resources, targeting the third of the Convention's three objectives.

  The 15th Conference of the Parties met in Montreal in December 2022. After multiple delays caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, the parties adopted the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework. Among its commitments is the 30 by 30 initiative: at least 30 percent of global land and sea designated as protected areas.

  Digital sequence information emerged as the sharpest point of contention during the framework negotiations. This was a frontier the original 1992 text never anticipated.

• 5. The Aichi Reckoning

  ›

  Twenty goals, collectively called the Aichi Biodiversity Targets, were set at the 2010 Nagoya meeting to cover the decade from 2011 to 2020. Following a recommendation by CBD signatories, the UN declared 2011 to 2020 the UN Decade on Biodiversity in December 2010. The CBD Secretariat served as the focal point for the 2010 International Year of Biodiversity.

  By the end of 2020, countries had failed across all 20 targets. The assessments pointed to several converging problems. The targets lacked clarity and were difficult to measure in practice. Actions that nations took were not consistently reported. Funding was limited, and biodiversity protection received lower prioritization than sectors like agriculture.

  At COP 12 in Pyeongchang, Republic of Korea, in October 2014, a mid-term evaluation of the decade's progress was conducted. The meeting adopted the Pyeongchang Road Map, committing parties to technology cooperation and funding support for developing countries. Pyeongchang reached 35 decisions in total, including one on mainstreaming gender considerations into biodiversity analysis.

• 6. Gaps in the Record

  ›

  The International Society for Fungal Conservation assessed more than 100 national biodiversity documents for their treatment of fungi. Using a defined six-category scale, the Society found that none of the documents merited a rating of good or adequate. Less than 10 percent were rated even nearly adequate or poor. The remainder fell into categories of deficient, seriously deficient, or totally deficient.

  The European Union's fifth national report illustrates the pattern. It makes frequent reference to animals, particularly fish, and to plants, but does not mention bacteria, fungi, or protists at all.

  The Nagoya Protocol, several scientists have warned, may discourage the very research it was designed to protect. Natural history museums fear that maintaining biological reference collections and exchanging material with other institutions will become harder. Medical researchers have separately raised alarm at proposals to make it illegal to share genetic information publicly, including through platforms such as GenBank.

  Brazil has argued that despite holding most of the world's biodiversity, it receives inadequate financial and technological support from wealthier nations. Developed countries benefit from access to genetic resources, Brazil contends, without providing commensurate funding in return. Critics more broadly argue that the treaty has grown soft in practice. Without strict enforcement mechanisms, countries face no penalties for overlooking its provisions.

  William Yancey Brown of the Brookings Institution proposed that the CBD require preservation of intact genomes and viable cells for every known species. Brown extended the logic to new species as they are discovered, an acknowledgment that the full catalogue of life remains unfinished.