Unpacking the Global Biodiversity Framework with WildSight
The Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) is a key piece of the puzzle when it comes to achieving a nature-positive future. While the idea of ecosystems thriving and businesses working with nature might sound inspiring, getting there requires far more than just good intentions. It demands massive shifts across governments, businesses, and financial systems.
The GBF, with its ambitious targets and shifting policies, is pushing businesses to reconsider their environmental impact and invest in nature-based solutions. As companies navigate the complex terrain, understanding how the GBF influences decision-making, investment, and market dynamics is becoming crucial for business leaders, investors and policy makers.
To help unpack the GBF and how it connects to nature tech, the Nature Tech Collective organized a dedicated session with Emily Birch, founder of WildSight. WildSight helps companies integrate nature into their sustainability strategies.
Watch the playback of this session:
What is the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework?
The Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) can be thought of as the Paris Agreement for nature, a global action plan designed to halt and reverse biodiversity loss. Much like the Paris Agreement for climate change, the GBF outlines clear targets and guidelines for countries and organizations to follow, aiming to protect and restore the natural world.
The framework is critical because it sets the stage for coordinated global action, and establishes the policy and regulatory environment needed to prioritize biodiversity protection. The significance of this is clear: for the first time, nations are coming together with a unified goal under a measurable, time-bound framework for biodiversity.
How many countries have signed on?
The Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) has been endorsed by 196 parties, representing 195 countries and the European Union, a significant show of global commitment. All United Nations member states have ratified the GBF, with one notable exception: the United States. Nevertheless, the framework continues to gain traction worldwide.
What these countries are committing to is the alignment of their national policies with the goals of the GBF, as well as regularly reporting on progress with their commitments.
National reporting takes place through two primary mechanisms:
National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs): Each country needs to update its action plan to reflect the GBF’s targets, ensuring national policies align with global biodiversity goals.
Progress Reporting: Countries are required to submit regular updates on their implementation efforts, similar to how climate commitments are reported under the Paris Agreement and Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs).
What are the primary goals of the framework?
The Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) lays out two key milestones:
By 2030, the aim is to halt nature’s decline and start its recovery, with measurable progress against a 2020 baseline.
By 2050, the goal expands to fully restoring ecosystems, species, and nature's capacity to support both economies and communities.
A major shift introduced by the GBF is its whole-of-society approach, which emphasizes the collective responsibility of not just governments, but also businesses, investors, and civil society. This broad, inclusive framework means everyone, from policymakers to private enterprises, needs to step up and take action to preserve nature.
To help guide the journey toward these ambitious goals, the GBF further breaks down 2030 and 2050 targets into specific, actionable steps.
For example, by 2030, the framework includes 23 measurable targets, such as:
Conserving 30% of the world’s land and ocean
Redirecting a significant portion of capital away from harmful subsidies
These targets provide a clear, time-bound roadmap for governments and organizations to follow, making the transition to a nature-positive future more achievable and transparent.
See the full list of targets here
How are different regions responding to the Global Biodiversity Framework?
While the Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) sets a common global goal of halting and reversing biodiversity loss, the path to achieving this naturally looks different across various countries and regions. Primarily this is because regional challenges tend to be unique - for example, an island nation won’t have the same biodiversity priorities as a country with vast amounts of forest land. Further, governments differ in their policy tools, economic structures, and levels of political will and priority.
Some countries have moved swiftly to turn GBF commitments into binding laws and regulations: The EU and UK are leading the way through initiatives like the UK’s biodiversity net gain (BNG) policy, which mandates developers to leave nature in a better state. The EU is also enforcing reporting requirements on companies, requiring them to disclose nature-related risks and dependencies and ensure product and supply chains are deforestation-free through the EUDR.
Other regions have adopted more voluntary frameworks or have created systems based on incentives and public-private collaboration. For example, Scotland is funding extensive afforestation projects, while Singapore is working towards becoming a “green urban mecca” through the prioritizing of urban biodiversity.
In South Africa, the government is focused on restoring large areas of degraded habitats.
In many other parts of the world, the GBF remains largely aspirational. Some countries are yet to submit comprehensive action plans, and there’s a noticeable lag in their progress. However, even where commitments are in the planning stages, it is possible to find inspiring examples of landscape-scale conservation efforts in places like Sweden and Scotland.
Watch this bitesize video from WildSight to see how it all fits together:
How are businesses impacted by the Global Biodiversity Framework?
The Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) sets ambitious targets, but the real work begins at the national and regional levels, where governments translate goals into actionable policies, regulations, and reporting requirements.
Businesses will feel the impact of these policies in two main ways:
Direct: Some businesses will face mandatory reporting requirements, as seen in regions like the EU, where companies are required to disclose risks and dependencies related to nature.
Indirect: Other companies may experience more subtle pressure, such as changing investor expectations, as nature-positive business models gain traction.
Ultimately, the impact of the GBF will vary depending on sector and company size, and some industries will need to adapt more quickly than others. For example, in real estate, the UK’s biodiversity net gain policy requires any new development to leave nature in a better state, mandating a 10% biodiversity gain that must be maintained for 30 years. This results in both a direct and immediate change for companies operating in the construction and infrastructure space.
Meanwhile, nature disclosures are gaining traction in the EU, creating new reporting requirements for companies operating there. These disclosures will have direct consequences for all of the industries based in these regions or those doing business with them.
Industries such as agriculture, mining, and infrastructure are already adjusting to supply chain rules and reporting requirements related to biodiversity, while other sectors may face these changes a bit further down the road. As the framework progresses, we’ll see a growing ripple effect in how companies across the board will need to reassess their business models, policies, and strategies.
The EU Pollinators Initiative: Turning Lofty Goals into Reality
One example of how the Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) is being translated into action is the EU Pollinators Initiative. Pollinators, such as bees and butterflies, are essential to food production, with 80% of crops depending directly on animal pollination. However, these species are in steep decline, creating not just a biodiversity issue but a real economic challenge.
Recognizing this, the EU developed the Pollinators Initiative, which aligns with the GBF’s targets for ecosystem restoration and species recovery. GBF Target 2 focuses on ecosystem restoration, while Target 4 emphasizes species recovery, both of which are directly reflected in this initiative.
The initiative is structured around a three-pronged approach:
Improving knowledge: Raising awareness about the importance of pollinators and the threats they face.
Conserving and restoring Habitats: Creating and preserving environments where pollinators can thrive.
Mobilizing society: Encouraging action from all sectors, from farmers to city planners, to protect pollinators.
On the ground, the initiative is reflected through policies such as incentives for farmers that adopt practices benefiting pollinators, and subsidies to phase out harmful pesticides that endanger these species. While the initiative is still in its early stages, it’s a clear example of how the GBF's goals can be translated into actionable steps that involve all levels of society, from policymakers to businesses to individuals.
Nature tech as an enabler for national & corporate biodiversity goals
The GBF sets ambitious global goals to halt and reverse biodiversity loss, but turning these goals into concrete action requires the right tools and technology. This is where Nature tech comes in, providing the essential solutions that help governments, businesses, and communities achieve the GBF objectives more effectively, efficiently, and at scale.
To understand how Nature Tech aligns with the Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF), let’s look at the EU Pollinators Initiative as an example.
We can also view this through the lens of the Nature Tech Collective's 5M framework:
Measurement: Protecting pollinators begins with understanding their status and threats. Nature Tech is pivotal in this process. Technologies such as smart sensor networks can track pollinator movements, bioacoustics can monitor buzzing activity, and satellites and drones can capture land use changes. These technologies generate crucial data that informs conservation decisions.
Modeling: Data collection is just the first step: AI and machine learning models can predict which landscapes are most at risk for pollinator decline. Digital twin simulations and risk models assess how pollinator loss could disrupt ecosystems and economies. These predictive insights help shape targeted, effective conservation strategies.
Material Change: With data and insights in hand, we can take meaningful action. Farm management systems can assist farmers in adopting regenerative practices that support pollinators. Drone seeding technology, for example, can help restore vital wildflower habitats for pollinator populations. These technological innovations drive tangible changes in ecosystem management and restoration.
Monetization: Nature Tech also plays a critical role in valuing nature. Tools like natural capital accounting quantify the economic value of pollinators and other biodiversity assets. Emerging markets for biodiversity credits are further incentivizing farmers and other stakeholders to restore habitats and foster biodiversity, creating financial incentives for conservation.
Market Pressures: These are tools that help companies and governments track their progress toward nature-positive outcomes. A good example is the Taskforce on Nature-related Financial Disclosures (TNFD), which helps organizations measure their impact on nature.
Ultimately, nature tech is more than just a set of tools, it’s a key enabler of the GBF, translating the framework’s high-level goals into actionable solutions that facilitate large-scale, impactful changes for nature. So, while the GBF provides a guiding vision, nature tech can help to transform the vision into reality.
The challenge now is not just understanding what needs to be done, it's taking the necessary action.
Go further with our dedicated business guide to nature tech:
