Understanding the Global Report on Collective Progress in the Implementation of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework: Purpose, Content, and Science-Policy Engagement
Abstract
The Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (KMGBF), adopted under the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), establishes four long-term 2050 goals, 23 action-oriented 2030 targets, and a standardized monitoring framework to track collective progress. The 2026 global review marks the first operational test of the Party-led planning, monitoring, reporting, and review (PMRR) mechanism, representing a deliberate shift toward bottom-up national monitoring systems. Central to this review is the first Global Report on Collective Progress in the Implementation of the KMGBF, which synthesizes seventh national reports from 129 Parties, including agreed upon indicators, and other relevant sources of information. In this Perspective, we—co-authors of the Global Report at the CBD Secretariat and its Ad Hoc Scientific and Technical Advisory Group (AHSTAG)—explain the report’s intergovernmental mandate, strict data hierarchy, and role within the science–policy interface. We explain that interpreting its empirical findings requires distinguishing three interconnected dimensions: implementation effort; monitoring and reporting capacity; and ecological outcomes. This distinction is necessary to avoid conflating indicator data gaps with national inaction or ecological response lags with policy failure. The Global Report shows that while national targets align relatively well with conservation and restoration goals, substantial gaps remain in addressing indirect drivers of biodiversity loss, capturing whole-of-society and Indigenous Peoples and local communities’ contributions, and overcoming geographic inequalities in monitoring capacity. Finally, alongside aligning future reviews with Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) assessments, we identify actionable priorities for researchers: operationalizing existing mandated indicators, deploying open-source automated data pipelines, mining qualitative national narratives, and building collaborative domestic monitoring capacity toward 2030.
Related
- From evidence to protection: A critical review and original analysis of the implementation gap in managing oil and gas impacts on biodiversity
- A two stage analysis of smallholder membership and governance engagement in potato collective action in western and South Western Shewa Oromia Ethiopia
- Community Needs Assessment for Bamboo Marinduque: A Strategic Framework for Community-Led Bamboo Development and Engagement
- Ensuring sustainability and equity within the global wild meat sector is key to achieving the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework targets
- Incomplete coverage of the state of nature across biodiversity credit methodologies: an assessment using the State of Nature metrics framework
BibTeX
@misc{affinito2026understanding,
title = {{Understanding the Global Report on Collective Progress in the Implementation of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework: Purpose, Content, and Science-Policy Engagement}},
author = {Flavio Affinito and Tim Hirsch and Neil Burgess and Jillian Campbell and Cristina Eghenter and Ossama A El-Kawy and Shizuka Hashimoto and Alice Kammwamba and Marcel T. J. Kok and William A Mala and Alexander Shestakov and Andrew Stott and Usman Tariq and Josefa Tauli and Emily Nicholson},
howpublished = {EcoEvoRxiv},
year = {2026},
month = oct,
doi = {10.32942/x2zd6q},
url = {https://ecoevorxiv.org/repository/view/15497/},
note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY - UNPB
TI - Understanding the Global Report on Collective Progress in the Implementation of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework: Purpose, Content, and Science-Policy Engagement
AU - Flavio Affinito
AU - Tim Hirsch
AU - Neil Burgess
AU - Jillian Campbell
AU - Cristina Eghenter
AU - Ossama A El-Kawy
AU - Shizuka Hashimoto
AU - Alice Kammwamba
AU - Marcel T. J. Kok
AU - William A Mala
AU - Alexander Shestakov
AU - Andrew Stott
AU - Usman Tariq
AU - Josefa Tauli
AU - Emily Nicholson
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/10/14
PB - EcoEvoRxiv
DO - 10.32942/x2zd6q
UR - https://ecoevorxiv.org/repository/view/15497/
AB - The Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (KMGBF), adopted under the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), establishes four long-term 2050 goals, 23 action-oriented 2030 targets, and a standardized monitoring framework to track collective progress. The 2026 global review marks the first operational test of the Party-led planning, monitoring, reporting, and review (PMRR) mechanism, representing a deliberate shift toward bottom-up national monitoring systems. Central to this review is the first Global Report on Collective Progress in the Implementation of the KMGBF, which synthesizes seventh national reports from 129 Parties, including agreed upon indicators, and other relevant sources of information. In this Perspective, we—co-authors of the Global Report at the CBD Secretariat and its Ad Hoc Scientific and Technical Advisory Group (AHSTAG)—explain the report’s intergovernmental mandate, strict data hierarchy, and role within the science–policy interface. We explain that interpreting its empirical findings requires distinguishing three interconnected dimensions: implementation effort; monitoring and reporting capacity; and ecological outcomes. This distinction is necessary to avoid conflating indicator data gaps with national inaction or ecological response lags with policy failure. The Global Report shows that while national targets align relatively well with conservation and restoration goals, substantial gaps remain in addressing indirect drivers of biodiversity loss, capturing whole-of-society and Indigenous Peoples and local communities’ contributions, and overcoming geographic inequalities in monitoring capacity. Finally, alongside aligning future reviews with Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) assessments, we identify actionable priorities for researchers: operationalizing existing mandated indicators, deploying open-source automated data pipelines, mining qualitative national narratives, and building collaborative domestic monitoring capacity toward 2030.
ER -