Indigenous Peoples are vital knowledge holders and custodians of many of the world’s most biodiverse landscapes. Respecting and advancing their rights is imperative to achieving the world’s major international commitment on biodiversity, the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (KMGBF). 

Indicators related to traditional knowledge (TK) help reveal how Indigenous Peoples’ rights, practices and knowledge systems contribute to biodiversity outcomes. In addition, TK indicators help illuminate national and global progress towards shared biodiversity goals, informing management responses that are relevant across society. 

In March 2024, an expert workshop hosted at the UN Environment Programme World Conservation Monitoring Centre (UNEP-WCMC) informed recommendations for using TK indicators. These indicators are now included in the monitoring framework for the KMGBF to measure progress against its targets and goals.  

In January 2026, a second Expert Workshop on TK Indicators brought together more than 30 experts from Indigenous and local organizations to governments and technical partners. Co-hosted by UNEP-WCMC, Forest Peoples Programme and the Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity, the workshop provided a space to share experiences of community-based monitoring, methodological developments for TK indicators and identify opportunities for mobilizing local and national data for biodiversity monitoring and reporting. 

The workshop’s key takeaway was that rights-based monitoring, which respects Indigenous Peoples’ rights, knowledge systems and meaningful participation across society, is essential for delivering the KMGBF in line with its vision of living in harmony with nature. 

Monitoring traditional knowledge is vital for inclusive conservation 

Indigenous Peoples’ rights, practices and knowledge systems contribute to positive biodiversity outcomes. Indicators related to TK are vital in ensuring these contributions are understood and accounted for. They enable countries and stakeholders to track progress and ensure that national biodiversity policies reflect a whole-of-society approach to nature conservation. 

Participants emphasized that monitoring is not only about what data is collected, but how that data is collected, and whose knowledge is valued. Data related to TK indicators were also identified as an important tool for Indigenous self-determination and for strengthening evidence and advocacy for Indigenous Peoples land and territorial rights. 

The importance of community-based monitoring and information systems (CBMIS) for both providing data and for showing the inseparability of people and nature was emphasized in community experiences shared by participants. Insights from Colombia, Kenya, Cameroon and the Philippines highlighted experiences of youth engagement in Indigenous-led monitoring as a vital space and mechanism for intergenerational knowledge transfer between elders and youth, helping to sustain traditional knowledge systems while fostering mutual respect across generations. 

Rights-based indicators are ready to use, but awareness and data flows are still limited 

During the workshop, experts reported that the methodologies for the five rights-based indicators are now operational, although further guidance is still needed for some component indicators such as linguistic diversity and participation. 

However, many countries still face challenges in collecting and reporting the data required to apply these indicators at a national level. Among the countries represented at the workshop, validated national data were often unavailable due to limitations in statistical systems, lack of disaggregated data and difficulties linking community-level information with national monitoring frameworks. 

Despite these challenges, participants highlighted encouraging examples of how governments and Indigenous organizations are beginning to integrate community knowledge and data into national monitoring processes.  

Bridging local knowledge with national monitoring and reporting 

A recurring theme across the workshop was the need to create spaces and processes for community-generated knowledge to feed into national monitoring and reporting systems. 

Participants emphasized a range of actions that could help to improve the use and uptake of TK indicators and community-produced data in national monitoring systems, including institutionalizing participatory mechanisms such as multi-stakeholder platforms, improving interoperability between datasets and ensuring that Indigenous and local knowledge is treated as a legitimate source of evidence for policymaking.  

Insights from the workshop are being collated by UNEP-WCMC to build an understanding of how and why countries are using the TK indicators, with such country case studies potentially informing the deliberations by CBD Parties, including at COP17.  

Crucially, participants emphasized that Indigenous Peoples and local communities are experts in biodiversity monitoring and countries can benefit from their expertise to fulfil their global commitments. Advances in rights-based monitoring could be accelerated with greater financial support, the institutionalization of mechanisms for broader participation, as well as practical guidance for countries on how to integrate community-generated data into national monitoring and reporting frameworks. 

By continuing to build these partnerships and refine the indicators, the international community can move closer to a monitoring system that recognizes a diversity of knowledge forms and promotes the rights of Indigenous Peoples and local communities and the essential role they play in protecting the planet’s biodiversity. 

The post Building understanding of the use of Traditional Knowledge Indicators for monitoring biodiversity  appeared first on UNEP-WCMC.

The international community has reached an important global milestone, with 10.01 per cent of the ocean now officially designated within protected and conserved areas.

Whilst this represents considerable progress, an area approximately the size of the Indian Ocean still needs to be designated by 2030 if international ambitions for ocean protection are to be achieved.

In 2024, current records show that 8.6 per cent of ocean and coastal areas globally were within documented protected and conserved areas. Over the past two years the world has protected about 5 million square kilometres of ocean, an area bigger than the European Union.

Governments collectively committed to conserve 30 per cent of Earth’s land and seas by 2030 in December 2022 at the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biodiversity (CBD). This commitment is referred to as Target 3, and is one of 23 targets agreed as urgent steps to tackle the global nature crisis under the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (KMGBF). With this target, CBD Parties committed to conserving nature through protected and conserved areas, including those that allow for the sustainable use of resources, recognising Indigenous and traditional territories.

Increasing coverage of these areas is critical, but insufficient. The KMGBF highlights that protected and conserved areas must be effectively conserved and managed, and equitably governed. The Protected Planet Report 2024, the official progress report from the UN Environment Programme World Conservation Monitoring Centre (UNEP-WCMC) and the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), is the most recent comprehensive analysis of global progress towards KMGBF Target 3. It found that data was insufficient to fully measure and understand the effectiveness of systems of protected and conserved areas. Only 1.3 per cent of the ocean was covered by protected areas where management effectiveness had been assessed and reported.

The new areas were included in the latest update this month to the World Database on Protected and Conserved Areas (WDPCA). The WDPCA brings together national datasets, alongside data on protected and conserved areas beyond national jurisdictions, to track global progress towards KMGBF Target 3. The WDPCA is a joint product of UNEP and the IUCN. It is maintained by the UN Environment Programme World Conservation Monitoring Centre (UNEP-WCMC) in collaboration with national governments and other stakeholders.

In the world’s previous biodiversity pledges, the Aichi Biodiversity Targets, countries agreed to protect 10 per cent of the ocean by 2020. Six years after deadline, the world has achieved this important ocean protection target.

Huge gaps in high seas coverage

In assessing the pace at which protected and conserved areas had been designated, the Protected Planet Report 2024 found that the strongest progress since 2020 had been in the ocean, but most of this was in national waters.

An estimated 95 per cent of habitat on Earth by volume is in the high seas. In these areas beyond national jurisdiction however, coverage by protected and conserved areas is only 1.66 per cent. This is despite the high seas comprising over 60 per cent of the surface of the ocean.

The UN ‘High Seas’ Treaty came into force in January 2026, the first international agreement focused on protecting marine biodiversity in international waters. Two-thirds of the ocean is not controlled by any individual country and therefore is largely unprotected and unregulated. A key element of the Treaty is a mechanism to establish protected areas on the high seas.

Beyond coverage: effective conservation is vital

Recent analyses using the MPA Guide have shown that many marine protected areas (MPAs) are not actively managed. Destructive activities may be taking place even in those areas that are actively managed, reducing the effectiveness of these areas for biodiversity conservation. Data on effective management and equitable governance remains sparse.

Governments and other stakeholders are encouraged to report on the effectiveness of protected and conserved areas to the Global Database on Protected Area Management Effectiveness (GD-PAME) under the Protected Planet Initiative to help fill this persistent knowledge gap.

Coordinated action is needed by CBD Parties, international organizations, regional bodies, Indigenous Peoples and local communities, donors and technical partners to ensure that marine protected and conserved areas are sufficiently resourced and supported to be actively and adaptively managed and monitored.

The Protected Planet Report 2027 will provide the next official evaluation of global progress on all elements of Target 3.

For further information please contact: 
UNEP-WCMC Communications Officer, Natalie Taylor via natalie.taylor@unep-wcmc.org 

IUCN Media and Communications Officer, Amy Coles via amy.coles@iucn.org

Main image: Roebuck Bay, a Ramsar Nature Reserve wetland site in western Australia (Joe Gosling) 

The post World reaches milestone for nature: 10% of ocean now officially protected appeared first on UNEP-WCMC.

In the face of current world events, it can be hard to feel optimistic about action on three of the most pressing issues of our time: climate change, nature loss and pollution. But even now the world is still coming together to try to find solutions.

Governments converge in Brazil for migratory species

Hot on the heels of a new warning about the worsening plight of migratory species, our delegation of experts will soon join governments, scientists, conservationists, Indigenous Peoples and local communities, environmental leaders and civil society in the city of Campo Grande, Brazil. Appropriately, Campo Grande is a gateway for accessing the world’s largest tropical wetland: the Pantanal. This vast seasonal floodplain is home to an extraordinary diversity of wildlife, including many highly mobile species such as jaguars, catfish and Jabiru storks.

Ensuring the survival of the amazing animals that depend on places like the Pantanal will be driving us on through back-to-back meetings and the intensive discussions at the Fifteenth Meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS COP15).

CMS is a global environmental treaty. It provides an international framework for the conservation of migratory species and their habitats. The COP is the Convention’s main decision-making body, bringing together over 130 Parties to the Convention, and typically meets every three years. Over this week-long meeting, Parties will discuss more than 100 agenda items, which range from action plans for individual species to agreeing on the steps that should be collectively taken to tackle cross-cutting issues, such as the impacts of climate change on migratory species. 

The decisions Parties make will be informed by the best scientific information available. Earlier this month CMS launched an important update on the State of the World’s Migratory Species, revealing that the plight of migratory animals has worsened in just two years. We were proud to work with CMS to produce this interim report, putting the best scientific information before governments and others ahead of the meeting.

Throughout COP15, we will be supporting our partners and engaging in discussions on the agenda. But for months in the build-up to Campo Grande, we’ve been working behind the scenes to achieve the best possible outcomes for nature.

Implementing the Strategic Plan for Migratory Species

To make sure policymakers know as much as possible about the progress countries are making to conserve biodiversity, there must be a clear process between commitments being made, carried out and evaluated. Our major priority this COP is to help the world track the steps that are being taken and whether the situation for migratory species is headed in the right direction.

At COP14 in 2024, the Convention on Migratory Species adopted the Samarkand Strategic Plan for Migratory Species (2024-2032). Over the past year, working closely with CMS Parties, the CMS Standing Committee and Scientific Council and the Secretariat, we have identified which metrics could be used to measure progress against the six goals and 23 targets of the Strategic Plan, developing a monitoring framework. These metrics range from the status and pressures facing migratory species to whether CMS Parties have implemented core aspects of the Convention. They also align – where possible and where appropriate – with commitments made across other multilateral environmental agreements, most prominently the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework.

The monitoring framework will be discussed at the COP, where Parties will consider its adoption. Our team will support the CMS Secretariat and Parties throughout these discussions and contribute to finalizing the document.

Better information to guide interventions

As specialists in developing the knowledge and insight necessary for a better world, we are heavily involved in improving the availability of data on migratory species.

We will present our analysis of national reports to the COP, where we have reviewed the latest data countries have submitted, reflecting both the successes and challenges experienced by Parties since COP14. We will share a draft template for a revised national report questionnaire with Parties on the margins of the COP, which will be used for recording national-level data contributing to various indicators – crucial for monitoring progress towards the aims of the Convention.

We are also contributing to work to strengthen the data on the distribution of CMS-listed species. Countries need reliable, rigorously checked information on where listed species occur in order to ensure that they are meeting their obligations and to make informed conservation decisions. This information is shared through Species+, a publicly-accessible online database maintained by UNEP-WCMC.

Crucial initiatives for preventing nature loss

The build-up to and duration of a COP is a busy and exciting time for us, and we’re proud to be involved in multiple important initiatives.

A central priority under the CMS Strategic Plan for Migratory Species is maintaining a network of habitats linked by migration routes, on which migratory animals depend. This is known as ecological connectivity. The Global Partnership on Ecological Connectivity (GPEC), which was launched at the last COP in 2024, brings together key actors in connectivity conservation from international organizations, NGOs, government and the private sector to scale up efforts to maintain and restore ecological connectivity worldwide. This year, the work of the partnership will continue to gather momentum, and we are supporting two events for GPEC at COP15.

We’re involved in numerous other areas of work. These range from a new initiative to tackle the illegal and unsustainable taking of migratory species from the wild, to efforts to ensure that the net impact of infrastructure is not detrimental to nature.

Each of us can’t wait to experience Brazil and its iconic wildlife. But more exciting still is the opportunity to support one of the most important global frameworks for wildlife conservation, and contribute our knowledge and expertise to the effort to address the global biodiversity crisis.

Main image: The Ruddy Turnstone is a Near Threatened migratory shorebird that winters along the Brazilian coast (Adobe_1880176901)

The post Building momentum for a more connected world at CMS COP15 appeared first on UNEP-WCMC.

Australia has made globally important progress in protecting its land and sea. In recent years, the megadiverse country has ramped up how much of its territory is being conserved for nature.

In many instances, these protected and conserved areas support equitable governance and the participation of First Nations peoples.

Since June 2022, Australia and its overseas territories have:

• Reported 167 new areas, including 11 Indigenous Protected Areas (IPAs), and 2 IPA expansions
• Expanded a marine reserve with an additional protected area bigger than the size of Italy
• Recognized the country’s first Conserved Area through the National Other Effective Area-Based Conservation Measures (OECMs) Framework

The new areas were included in the latest update this month to the World Database on Protected and Conserved Areas (WDPCA). The WDPCA is where governments monitor and report their progress towards international environmental agreements, such as Target 3 of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (KMGBF) to protect and conserve 30 per cent of the Earth by 2030. The WDPCA, which was recently upgraded, is maintained by the UN Environment Programme World Conservation Monitoring Centre (UNEP-WCMC).

Protected and conserved areas are much more than legally designated, government-run parks. Furthermore, achieving the world’s pledges to protect and conserve biodiversity is only possible by recognising the work and rights of people who are already conserving huge areas of the world.

Australia’s update to the WDPCA showcases a genuinely diverse network of protected and conserved areas. Here, we identify three different types of land governance across the new reported areas and OECM: Indigenous Peoples, state government and private not-for-profit.

Governance by Indigenous Peoples

The way we think about protected and conserved areas has changed. The most effective reserves are not always strict protected areas that limit human access; rather, Target 3 of the KMGBF highlights that action on protected and conserved areas should not only respect the rights of Indigenous Peoples and local communities (IP & LCs), but also recognizes that IP & LCs have a crucial role to play in biodiversity conservation.

Many sites managed by IP & LCs meet the definition of protected areas or OECMs but have not been recognized by governments or gone through a formal process of recognition. In other cases, IPs & LCs might prefer not to use these terms to describe their lands and waters, but nevertheless play an important role in safeguarding biodiversity. The benefits to the world of understanding what areas are already conserved by IP & LCs are huge, and countries need clear national strategies to promote IP & LC recognition, guided by the preferences of IPs & LCs.

Australia’s update to the WDPCA this March contains important steps to give Indigenous People greater control over their ancestral lands. Of the 167 new protected sites, 12 are Indigenous Protected Areas (IPAs) – areas of land and sea that are managed by First Nations people in accordance with Traditional Owners’ objectives. There are currently 95 IPAs. Some of the largest cover vast areas of unique desert ecosystems and include the Central Western Desert and Ngurra Kayanta.

State governance: Heard Island and McDonald Islands Marine Reserve

Last year an existing marine reserve in the sub-Antarctic islands of Heard Island and McDonald Islands was expanded by 400 per cent, creating a protected area nearly the size of Norway.

One of the most remote places on Earth, the islands in the Southern Ocean are a World Heritage Area. They provide a crucial breeding and feeding ground for hundreds of thousands of seals and birds, including penguins, albatrosses and petrels. In addition, whales, dolphins and sea lions are regular visitors to the Islands.

Designating a large area of ocean around the islands as protected means that significant industrial or extractive activity is not permitted. Fisheries must be well-regulated and sustainable. This will help fish populations, in turn meaning more food for birds, seals and other marine animals. Shoring up nature will also ultimately contribute to lessening the impact of climate change, as healthier ecosystems are more able to store carbon and mitigate extreme weather.

Notably, the expansion of Heard Island and McDonald Islands Marine Reserve brings the world within touching distance of an important milestone: protecting 10 per cent of the ocean, with 9.97 per cent now covered.

Private non-profit governance: Weranga Scarps

A third type of land governance embodies the principle that private actors have a role to play as custodians of nature.

Weranga Scarps is a private property in the northeast state of Queensland. Covering 48 hectares of eucalyptus and cypress woodland, it is rich in iconic threatened species, such as the koala, glossy black-cockatoo and golden-tailed gecko. The site is governed by the Wildlife Land Fund, a not-for-profit organisation that acquires and manages land for wildlife.

Weranga Scarps was recognized in July 2025 and is Australia’s first OECM listed in the WDPCA. OECMs (‘Other effective area-based conservation measures’) are sites outside of protected areas. They achieve the long-term effective conservation of biodiversity, even though they may be managed primarily for other reasons.

OECMs are a vital tool for reaching the international target to protect 30 per cent of the planet by 2030. They can include but are not limited to heritage or cultural sites, military reserves and areas conserved by Indigenous Peoples and local communities.

With just four years left to achieve Target 3, UNEP-WCMC and the Protected Planet team are proud to support countries as they continue to make strides in designating, recognising and effectively managing new protected and conserved areas.

Main image: Heard Island © Mel Wells

The post Australia showcases diverse governance in globally significant protected areas update appeared first on UNEP-WCMC.

Much of today’s biodiversity policy is built around good intentions. It encourages better choices, greater awareness and more responsible behaviour. These efforts matter, and they have helped place biodiversity firmly on public and political agendas.

Yet there is a growing sense, across research and practice, that something remains misaligned. Even where awareness is high and commitments are strong, biodiversity loss continues.

Many environmental interventions still approach nature as a distinct sector, addressed through conservation measures, safeguards or targeted incentives. Less attention is paid to the economic and governance systems that influence what is produced, traded, financed and valued, and yet it is in these systems that the drivers of biodiversity’s decline can be found.

A new series of briefs by the UN Environment Programme World Conservation Monitoring Centre (UNEP-WCMC) explores what a more systemic approach to biodiversity policy could look like, drawing on insights from trade, fashion, agriculture and finance.

As we developed the briefs – part of the EU-funded PLANET4B project, which ran from 2022 to 2025 and sought to discover how to bring about better decision-making for biodiversity – a shared conclusion emerged. Behavioural change and inclusion remain essential, but progress depends on reshaping incentives, norms and institutions, and on addressing questions of power, equity and accountability. Together, the briefs identify five interconnected areas where change is already emerging.

1. Rebalance power and accountability

Deforestation, labour exploitation and ecological decline rarely occur by chance. They reflect where power sits in value chains and who carries risk. The Resilient Trade Beyond Traceability brief shows how to go beyond monitoring, emphasising due-diligence mechanisms alongside meaningful grievance and remedy processes. It outlines the need for a fairer distribution of value and risk with the EU’s major trade partners, examining the EU–Brazil partnership in particular.

It also draws attention to local food distribution systems – ‘territorial markets’ – and economies centred on livelihoods, equity and well-being, built through the sustainable use and restoration of ecosystems – ‘socio-bioeconomies’ – as ways to connect biodiversity conservation with inclusive rural development. This is how trade and cooperation policies can reinforce well-being and rights, not only constrain harm. Transformation tends to advance when responsibility travels the full length of a value chain and when accountability reaches the boardroom.

2. Redefine prosperity through well-being and sufficiency

Across the briefs, well-being and sufficiency offer a different way of defining success, shifting attention from the pace and scale of economic activity to the quality, equity and resilience of outcomes.

In practice, this means revisiting harmful subsidies, integrating equity and nature indicators into taxonomies and disclosures, and rewarding stewardship alongside productivity. It is not an accounting fix, but an emerging approach to understanding progress based on how societies, economies and nature thrive together.

3. Protect and expand seed diversity

Our Supporting Seed Diversity for Resilient EU Agriculture brief demonstrates how the role of farmers and Indigenous Peoples in saving, exchanging and developing seeds contributes to resilient food systems, cultural heritage and local autonomy.

Examples from Hungary show how community seed banks and school gardens, supported through collaborations with national gene banks, can become living classrooms linking ecological knowledge with social inclusion. These initiatives suggest that diversity of species, knowledge and livelihoods is not a byproduct of resilience; it is its foundation. The brief explores options such as proportionate seed rules, nano-enterprise exemptions and Common Agricultural Policy eco-schemes that recognise individual farms’ genetic diversity.

4. Build institutions that learn and are inclusive

A synthesis brief developed under the project brings together all the insights relevant for policy development and implementation. The brief shows how participation, reflection and collaboration can help turn engagement into agency and policy legitimacy. In Graz, Austria, a women-led garden turned a vacant plot into a shared landscape of confidence and biodiversity care. In the UK, Dadima’s intercultural countryside walks helped Black, Asian and ethnic-minority communities reclaim belonging in nature.

Such experiences suggest that facilitation and reflection are necessary for effective implementation. The brief sets out design principles that can help embed these capabilities in European and national biodiversity strategies, especially where contested trade-offs and uneven impacts can otherwise stall action.

5. Align policies and finance

The trade and finance briefs both highlight the importance of coherence across trade, finance, agriculture and industry, so that measures reinforce rather than contradict one another.

In trade, misaligned policies can send mixed signals to producers and investors. Greater alignment between EU deforestation regulations, sustainable-finance taxonomies and cooperation instruments could strengthen credibility and reduce unintended burdens on smallholders and suppliers.

Coherence is not bureaucracy; it is the architecture that enables change to hold together across sectors.

Towards a politics of care and accountability

The EU and its partners have ambitious biodiversity goals. However, fiscal, trade and innovation frameworks often still reward degradation more than conservation, restoration, or sustainable use. That paradox defines both the urgency and the opportunity of our time.

Transformative change is rarely linear or fully predictable. Progress depends on sustained learning, monitoring and the willingness to adjust course as conditions evolve. Transitions also generate uneven impacts. Some members of society face short-term costs, while others benefit earlier. Anticipating these dynamics, and ensuring that costs and benefits are shared fairly, is essential.

The PLANET4B insights provide insight for a policy agenda grounded in care, reciprocity and shared responsibility. Changing behaviour begins with changing the systems that shape it. Justice and inclusion are not secondary considerations to ensure that nature thrives; they are necessary conditions for success.

Main image: An organic farm on the outskirts of Sheffield run by a community benefit society (Main image: Alastair Johnstone via Climate Visuals / CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)

The post Behavioural tweaks are not enough to save nature. Here’s how we achieve transformative change appeared first on UNEP-WCMC.

Marina Huertas Garcia: Marina is an Associate Programme Officer working in the Protected Planet team, supporting many key areas of work, including management of the ICCA Registry, a global database covering the territories and areas conserved by Indigenous Peoples and local communities. 

Dr. Boipelo Tshwene-Mauchaza: Boipelo works at the science-policy interface, supporting countries to translate robust scientific evidence into effective climate change and biodiversity policy and action.  

Dr. Han Meng: Han is the Head of UNEP-WCMC’s Engagement team, working to bring together work across regional and country engagement, fundraising, communications, partnerships and capacity development to support in delivering the Centre’s strategy. 

What inspired you to work in conservation? 

Marina: From a very young age, nature was a constant presence in my life. I grew up watching National Geographic and nature documentaries, mesmerized by Steve Irwin and finding joy in David Attenborough’s voice. I also watched The Lion King on repeat (a formative influence, as it turns out). I spent my childhood outdoors in parks, forests and with animals. Nature raised me. I knew my life would somehow revolve around it, though I didn’t yet know how. 

Everything crystallized in my teenage years when my sister moved to Kenya. Seeing lions, gazelles, zebras and giraffes for the first time, and experiencing the smell of warm grass at sunset across the savannah, was transformative. I was in the landscapes that inspired my favourite childhood movie, The Lion King! But learning about the threats facing these landscapes, which were more evident than in the forests back home, meant the very things I loved were in danger. That made it click: I was going to work in nature conservation. 

Boipelo: Growing up in Maun, Botswana, a tourism hub at the gateway to the Okavango Delta, conservation was embedded in me from an early age. Witnessing how healthy ecosystems underpin livelihoods, cultural identity and long-term development shaped my belief that conservation must deliver benefits for both people and nature. This values-driven perspective motivates my work at the science–policy interface, where I support countries in turning evidence into inclusive, resilient solutions, such as ecosystem assessments and Nature-based Solutions that advance equity, sustainability and climate resilience. 

Han: I’ve been an environmentalist at heart for as long as I can remember. Growing up close to the mountains, I spent a lot of time outdoors, and one memory that has stayed with me is going mushroom picking with my family. Those moments taught me to slow down, observe, and appreciate how closely our lives are connected to nature. That early connection shaped how I see the world and laid a strong foundation for my commitment to conservation. Not just as a profession, but as a deeply held value. 

Do you have a proudest career moment? Could you tell us a bit about your choice? 

Marina: During my studies, I realized that nature conservation is not a “nature problem”, but fundamentally a “people problem”. I dove deep into the history of conservation, understanding its colonial roots, the relationships between humans and nature worldwide and learning about Indigenous ontologies and traditional ecological knowledge systems. I knew I wanted to build a career doing my very best to conserve our planet in a just and inclusive manner, working alongside Indigenous Peoples and local communities, and improving conservation practices by emphasizing Indigenous rights and traditional knowledge. 
 
As such, my proudest career moment so far has been getting this job. I get to work at an international organization alongside inspiring colleagues, focusing on territories conserved by Indigenous and local communities worldwide and supporting rights-based conservation across teams, which feels deeply meaningful. It brings together my values, interests, and passions. 

Boipelo: I’ve been fortunate to experience many meaningful moments in my career, but my proudest has been providing technical support to Botswana in undertaking its first full national ecosystem assessment under Decision 14/1 of the Convention on Biological Diversity. As someone from Botswana, this work was deeply personal, it felt like a way of giving back to my country while helping shape a more just and inclusive approach to conservation. Knowing that the assessment’s findings can influence policies to uphold human rights, recognize Indigenous Peoples and local communities and avoid marginalization has been especially powerful. It reinforced my belief that conservation in the Global South can, and must, be transformative, people-centred, and grounded in equity as much as in science. 
 

Are there any women across the conservation sector who inspire you? Who are they and how do they inspire you? 

Han: Jane Goodall has always been an inspiration to me. What I admire most is her lifelong commitment to conservation and the persistence she brought to her work. Her journey is a reminder that meaningful change takes time, and that staying curious, grounded and true to your values really matters, especially in a field like conservation. 

Boipelo: I’m inspired by several women across the conservation sector, particularly African women who have shaped both policy and practice. Elizabeth Mrema inspired me through her leadership within the Convention on Biological Diversity, demonstrating how African women can influence global biodiversity governance with integrity, confidence and a strong Global South perspective. I’m also inspired by Wangari Maathai, whose work showed that conservation, human rights and social justice are inseparable. 

I’m also deeply inspired by women who work at the community–policy interface—often less visible, but critical in ensuring that conservation is inclusive, rights-based and grounded in lived experience. Together, these women remind me that impactful conservation leadership is about courage, representation and advancing people-centred, transformative change. 

Have you faced any challenges as a woman in your particular field? 

Marina: I’ve been fortunate to grow up in a generation in which women are strongly represented in zoology, ecology and environmental sciences. In many of my university lectures, women made up the vast majority of students, and many of my professors were exceptional women. Even during my master’s in environmental policy – a more traditionally male-dominated field – women were highly present. 
 
In my early career, I’ve been surrounded by women: my colleagues, managers and leaders across international environmental organizations. That makes me proud. As women, we bring empathy, care and attentiveness; qualities that are not just valuable, but essential in conservation science and policy. 

Boipelo: I’ve been fortunate not to face many direct challenges as a woman in my field. The main challenge has been helping to shift dominant narratives around conservation in the Global South, particularly by advocating for more inclusive, rights-based and locally grounded approaches. I view this as a constructive part of my work and an opportunity to contribute to more equitable and effective conservation policy and practice. 

If you could give a piece of professional advice to your younger self, what would you say? 

Marina: Don’t be afraid to take up space. Women are still less likely to voice their opinions and advocate for their worth in professional environments, but they deserve to be heard! 

Boipelo: I would tell my younger self to trust her voice and lived experience and not feel the need to conform to dominant narratives to be taken seriously. I’d remind her that technical excellence and values can and should go hand in hand, and that working at the science–policy interface requires patience as well as confidence. Most importantly, I’d say: your perspective matters, and staying grounded in purpose will always be your greatest strength!

Main image: zaire, Adobe Stock #734247677  

The post Sharing the stories of women working in environmental science  appeared first on UNEP-WCMC.

A new report warns that 49 per cent of migratory species recognised by the world’s governments as needing protection have declining populations, up from 44 per cent two years ago. Species threatened by extinction have also risen, to 24 per cent from 22 previously.

The data has been published in an interim report, which provides an update to the landmark State of the World’s Migratory Species. The State of the World’s Migratory Species report was the first comprehensive assessment of migratory species and was released in 2024.

The new warnings come ahead of the global Conference of the Parties to the UN Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS COP15), which starts in Brazil on 23 March and is one of the most important global meetings for wildlife conservation.

The interim report was developed with the Convention on Migratory Species by conservation scientists at the UN Environment Programme World Conservation Monitoring Centre (UNEP-WCMC) and other contributors, including BirdLife International, researchers at the University of Queensland and the Global Initiative on Ungulate Migration (GIUM). Based on the latest data, it tracks significant changes in the conservation status of migratory species and highlights emerging population trends​, as well as recent progress in identifying and protecting critical habitats and migratory pathways.

The next State of the World’s Migratory Species report, due in 2029, will offer a comprehensive global view of how the situation for migratory species and their critical sites have changed since the 2024 baseline. Leveraging advances in technology and data availability, the report will provide deeper insights into the emerging threats, challenges and opportunities for the conservation of migratory species.

Today’s interim report also reveals that:

• 26 CMS-listed species, including 18 migratory shorebirds have moved to higher extinction risk categories.
• 7 CMS-listed species have improved​​, including the saiga antelope, scimitar-horned oryx​ and Mediterranean monk seal​.
• 9,372 ​Key Biodiversity Areas (KBAs) important for CMS-listed species​ have been identified.
• 47 per cent of the area covered by KBAs is not covered by protected and conserved areas​.
• Progress has been made to fill gaps in knowledge on important habitats and migratory routes for sharks/rays and marine mammals with the identification of hundreds of areas specifically important for CMS-listed marine species. More work is being done to identify areas for marine turtles.​
• Despite some important successes, key indicators – such as the overall proportion of CMS-listed species with decreasing populations – are heading in the wrong direction​.

The report underlines some encouraging developments:​

• Advances in mapping of migratory pathways to inform decision-making. Initiatives to map migrations are gathering momentum.​ This includes those spotlighted in the report – the Global Initiative on Ungulate Migration (GIUM), the Migratory Connectivity in the Ocean (MiCO) system, and BirdLife International’s work to identify and map six major marine flyways.
• Progress in identifying and safeguarding important habitats and migratory corridors.
• Recovery of some species through coordinated action.

This focussed update provides Parties with the latest available evidence ahead of CMS COP15 deliberations, helping to identify priority areas for action in advance of the next full report in 2029 at COP16.

Overexploitation, and habitat loss and fragmentation, are the two greatest threats to migratory species worldwide.

Building on a landmark baseline

The 2024 State of the World’s Migratory Species report marked the first comprehensive global assessment of migratory animals, covering the 1,189 species listed at that time in CMS Appendices I and II and its analysis linked to over 3,000 additional migratory species.

It found that:

• 70 CMS-listed species had become more endangered over the previous three decades, compared to just 14 that improved in status.
• Migratory fish populations had declined by 90% on average since the 1970s and 97% of CMS-listed migratory fish species face extinction.
• More than half of Key Biodiversity Areas important for CMS-listed species lacked protected status.

UNEP-WCMC looks forward to continuing this important work by supporting the delivery of the next State of the World’s Migratory Species report to ensure that governments at CMS COP16 have the best scientific information before them.

Main image: The jaguar was included in Appendices I and II of the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals at CMS COP13 in 2020 (Adobe_273607491)

The post Plight of migratory species is worsening, new report finds ahead of global wildlife meeting appeared first on UNEP-WCMC.

We will work to address direct drivers and underlying causes of nature loss 

Direct drivers of nature loss are the processes that contribute to reduction and degradation of biodiversity. These are both rapid and long-term changes in the use of land and the sea, overharvesting from nature, escalating climate change, ongoing pollution, and the uncontrolled spread of species outside of their natural range. 

The underlying causes of many of these drivers are found in social, political and economic systems. Addressing these underlying causes requires working with systems and imbalances of power to develop transformative solutions that drive structural changes to the way the world works. 

We will support urgent action for transformative change across all sectors of society 

Our new 4-year strategy covers a critical period in which urgent action is needed to ensure progress towards achieving the 2030 global targets and putting the world on a pathway towards the vision of living in harmony with nature.  

Living in harmony with nature is a vision that requires a whole-of-government and whole-of-society approach. We will continue to embrace collaborative working with a diversity of partners, including: 

• Governments 

• Private sector and financial institutions 

• UN system and Multilateral Environmental Agreement partners 

• Non-governmental organizations 

• Scientific and technical communities 

• Indigenous Peoples, local communities, women and youth 

• Funders and donors 

We will deliver impacts across sectors  

Through engaging this array of partners, we will enable policy and decision making across sectors to reflect the very best knowledge and practice. These outcomes will take a variety of forms, from policies advancing sustainable development to financial flows aligning with ambitions for nature. 

Our areas of focus in delivering impacts for nature and people are: 

• Conservation 

• Nature-based Solutions 

• Nature Economy 

• Science 

• Policy Support 

• Digital Transformation 

We will ensure operational efficiency and effectiveness 

Our impacts depend on our partnerships as well as our strong organizational, operational and financial foundations. We will ensure excellence in project management, financial management and operations, and will retain, grow and diversify our sources of funding.  

We are embracing advances in technology, including artificial intelligence, to ensure that our innovation, research, science and technology is relevant to the real world and can be applied across geographies and scales. We will also deliver high impact, compelling communications, advocating for the systemic change in the world that we know is necessary for delivering the impacts of our strategy.  

Main image: Red Zeppelin/Unsplash 

The post UNEP-WCMC launches its new strategy for 2026-2029  appeared first on UNEP-WCMC.

UNEP-WCMC, in collaboration with partner organizations of the Strengthening Understanding and Strategies of Business to Assess and Integrate Nature (SUSTAIN) project, has launched the Nature Tools Compass to help businesses and financial institutions in navigating tools to assess their nature dependencies, impacts, risks and opportunities. It provides an overview of more than 70 tools as well as recommendations on how to use them. The tools are categorized according to the Locate, Evaluate, Assess and Prepare (LEAP) approach developed by the Taskforce for Nature-related Financial Disclosures (TNFD). The Nature Tools Compass will provide valuable support to businesses and financial institutions looking to respond to the findings of the recently released IPBES Business and Biodiversity Assessment. 

Help finding the right tools to understand and address nature-related risks and opportunities 

Businesses and financial institutions are increasingly recognizing their dependencies and impacts on nature as well as the risks and opportunities that may emerge because of these. Data and tools are critical for robust assessments that can inform action as well as disclosure. However, choosing the right tools can be challenging as each tool has its own specific use case, and many new tools have emerged in recent years. 

The Nature Tools Compass is more than just an inventory of tools. It helps businesses and financial institutions navigate the tools landscape and identify which ones may be relevant for different phases of a nature assessment. It also offers recommendations on how to apply each tool and highlights any key limitations. Users can find tools tailored to their needs, whether they are looking for data layers that can support a high-level screening of ecologically sensitive locations or remote sensing tools that can help them evaluate impacts at a specific site. 

The Nature Tools Compass is built to align with TNFD’s LEAP approach 

The Nature Tools Compass offers two pathways, one tailored to businesses and one to financial institutions. Both follow the phases of the LEAP approach. LEAP is used by organizations preparing for reporting in line with TNFD as well as other standards and frameworks, such as the International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB), GRI Standards, European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS) and Science Based Targets Network (SBTN). Businesses and financial institutions can also use LEAP and the Nature Tools Compass for non-disclosure purposes, for example, to inform their risk management processes or future strategy. 

Building on UNEP-WCMC’s expertise and research 

Several of the tools featured in the Nature Tools Compass have been developed or co-developed by UNEP-WCMC. Notable examples include Exploring Natural Capital Opportunities, Risks and Exposure (ENCORE), Integrated Biodiversity Assessment Tool (IBAT), Ecosystem Integrity Index, Global Critical Habitat Screening Layer, Natural and Modified Habitat Screening Layer and the Impact Indicators Directory. 

As a global centre of excellence on biodiversity, UNEP-WCMC develops tools and knowledge platforms for a wide range of stakeholders from public and private sectors to academia and civil society. 

As more businesses and financial institutions actively engage with understanding and disclosing on nature, the Nature Tools Compass can provide support in navigating the tools landscape. 

The Nature Tools Compass is an output of the SUSTAIN project funded by the Horizon Europe grant programme. The development of the output was led by UNEP-WCMC. SUSTAIN project consortium is made up of Capitals Coalition, Oxford Sustainable Finance Group, UNEP-WCMC, WBCSD, ShareAction, PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, ETH Zürich, Fundación Biodiversidad (Spanish Ministry for Ecological Transition and Demographic Challenge) and IUCN Secretariat (Headquarters and European Regional Office). More information on SUSTAIN can be found here.  

Main image: marcin jucha, Adobe Stock #202306731 

The post New Nature Tools Compass to support businesses and financial institutions  appeared first on UNEP-WCMC.

Landmark new IPBES Business and Biodiversity Assessment highlights approaches and more than 100 specific actions for businesses, governments, financial actors and civil society to understand, measure and respond to business impacts and dependencies on nature.

Every business depends directly or indirectly on biodiversity, and every business impacts biodiversity.  

Biodiversity loss now poses a critical and pervasive systemic risk to the economy, financial stability and human wellbeing. This is a central finding of a landmark new report published by the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES). 

Approved on 9 February 2026, by representatives of the more than 150 member Governments of IPBES, during the twelfth session of the IPBES Plenary, hosted in Manchester, United Kingdom, the IPBES Methodological Assessment Report on the Impact and Dependence of Business on Biodiversity and Nature’s Contributions to People (known as the Business and Biodiversity assessment) is a product of three years of work by 79 leading experts from 35 countries, in consultation with science and the private sector, and Indigenous Peoples and local communities.

The Report directly builds on the insights and evidence of many previous IPBES assessments – particularly the 2019 Global Assessment, the 2022 Values Assessment and the 2024 Nexus and Transformative Change Assessments. The report finds that the current conditions in which businesses operate are largely not compatible with achieving a just and sustainable future, perpetuating systemic risks. It then offers much-needed clarity and coherence to guide actions by businesses, governments and others to move towards an enabling environment in which both business and nature thrive.

A team of experts at UNEP-WCMC provided technical expertise and coordination support to IPBES throughout the Business and Biodiversity Assessment, including Matt Jones, UNEP-WCMC’s Chief Impact Officer serving as a co-chair to the assessment and Sharon Brooks, UNEP-WCMC’s Head of Nature Economy and coordinating lead author of Chapter 4 of the assessment. We also contributed to much of the data, tools and guidance that the assessment draws on. 

Business-as-usual Incentives are Driving Nature’s Decline  

Current conditions perpetuate business-as-usual and do not support the transformative change necessary to halt and reverse biodiversity loss. For example, large subsidies that drive losses of biodiversity are directed to business activities with the support of lobbying by businesses and trade associations. In 2023, global public and private finance flows with directly negative impacts on nature, were estimated at $7.3 trillion, of which private finance accounted for $4.9 trillion, with public spending on environmentally harmful subsidies of about $2.4 trillion.  

In contrast, $220 billion in public and private finance flows were directed in 2023 to activities contributing to the conservation and restoration of biodiversity, representing just 3% of the public funds and incentives that encourage harmful business behaviour or prevent behaviour beneficial to biodiversity. The Report highlights that business as usual is not inevitable and that with the right policies as well as financial and cultural shifts, businesses can alleviate their cumulative effects on biodiversity loss.  

Measuring Impacts and Dependencies  

The Report finds that a wide range of methods, knowledge and data exist for measuring business impacts and dependencies, but the application and uptake of these methods is found to be low and uneven across and within business sectors. A recent survey among financial institutions representing 30% of global market capitalisation value found that the three most cited barriers to greater uptake of nature-related risk assessment and management are: a) access to reliable data, b) access to reliable models and c) access to scenarios. This report brings greater clarity and coherence to the options by which businesses can measure and report on their interactions with nature, and signposts methods, metrics and policy tools are appropriate for the scope of business.

The Report authors emphasize that no single method to measure and manage impacts and dependencies is suitable for all business decisions – multiple methods or metrics will often be necessary. The Report proposes three overarching characteristics that can be used to assess methods that are most appropriate for any business, of any size or sector: coverage (geographic and the extent of impacts and dependencies included); accuracy (the degree to which results correctly describe what they are designed to measure); and responsiveness (the ability of the method to detect changes that can be attributed to the actions and activities of the business). 

Another key finding is that business could improve the measurement and management of impacts and dependencies through appropriate engagement with science and Indigenous and local knowledge. Scientific literature is not written for businesses and a lack of understanding and translation of scientific findings often hinder its uptake by businesses. There is also limited understanding and recognition of Indigenous Peoples and local communities as stewards of biodiversity and their role in its conservation, restoration and sustainable use. Industrial development threatens 60 per cent of Indigenous lands around the world and a quarter of all Indigenous territories are under high pressure from resource exploitation. However, Indigenous Peoples and local communities as well as the knowledge they hold are often inadequately represented in business analysis and decision-making.  

Sharing and better use of data, information, scientific insights and Indigenous and local knowledge can help foster better management of business risks and realise opportunities.

Enabling Environment Necessary for Business Action

Businesses often face inadequate or perverse incentives, barriers that hinder efforts to reverse nature’s decline, an institutional environment with insufficient support, enforcement and compliance, as well as significant gaps in data and knowledge. The Report finds clearly that fundamental change is possible and necessary to create an enabling environment that aligns what is profitable for business with what is beneficial for biodiversity and people. 

Priorities and Options for Business Action  

The Report makes it clear that all businesses, including financial institutions, have a responsibility to address their impacts and dependencies and could take further actions, given an enabling environment. Although trade-offs exist that prevent some transformative actions, the authors point to many actions that businesses can take now that benefit business and biodiversity – such as increasing efficiency and reducing waste and emissions.

The Report explores both actions that can be taken by businesses themselves and ‘signalling’ actions that can publicly influence and inspire action by others. Actions of each type can be pursued by businesses across four decision-making levels: corporate, operations, value-chain and portfolio.

The authors acknowledge that while there is a large existing knowledge base to guide action by businesses, there are also important gaps in knowledge and its application that constrain the ability of all actors to fully understand and effectively manage business activities. The Report groups these gaps as follows: business-relevant data; data accessibility and transparency; completeness of evidence; adoption of methods and applicability of methods – suggesting five sets of actions to address these priorities.  

Concrete Actions for Governments, Financial Actors & Civil Society  

The Report is clear that businesses cannot, by themselves, deliver the scale of change needed to halt and reverse biodiversity loss.

The Report identifies five specific components that are central to an enabling environment:

• policy, legal and regulatory frameworks 
• economic and financial systems 
• social values, norms and culture 
• technology and data 
• capacity and knowledge 

The Report also provides more than 100 specific examples of concrete actions that can be taken, across each of these five components, by businesses, governments, financial actors and civil society.  

The post IPBES Business and Biodiversity Assessment: 100 specific actions for businesses to lead transformative change or risk extinction appeared first on UNEP-WCMC.