Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Perspective
  • Published:

Progress in developing and operationalizing the Monitoring Framework of the Global Biodiversity Framework

Nature Ecology & Evolution volume 8, pages 2163–2171 (2024)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

The failure to halt the global decline in biodiversity by 2020 contributed to the adoption of the ambitious Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, which includes transparency and responsibility as foundations. The Global Biodiversity Framework identifies the actions needed so that societies are living in harmony with nature by 2050. To support the delivery of this ambition, the transparency and responsibility mechanisms defined in the Global Biodiversity Framework include a detailed Monitoring Framework designed to prompt evidence-based actions and track progress towards its goals and targets at the national and global level. The Monitoring Framework includes a set of indicators selected by the Parties through a political process. These indicators have since been operationalized through a scientific process led by an expert group focused on assessing and clarifying their methods. Most indicators are now ready to inform on progress, but key limitations of data availability and methodological challenges remain. The onus is now on the Parties to resource implementation and on the scientific community to support indicator use and development. Implementation of the Monitoring Framework will provide an unprecedented view of the state of biodiversity at the national level, which can be used to assess both national and global progress. Investment to overcome the Monitoring Framework’s weaknesses will improve our ability to measure progress and mobilize the actions needed to protect and restore biodiversity and the many benefits we receive from nature.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on SpringerLink
  • Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: Expected functioning of the Monitoring Framework from data collection to monitoring and reporting progress.
Fig. 2: The functioning of the Monitoring Framework.
Fig. 3: Timeline of the development of the Monitoring Framework.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Slavin, T. How Elizabeth Mrema is striving to affect a ‘Paris moment’ for nature. Reuters (25 October 2022).

  2. New International Biodiversity Agreement Strengthens Climate Action (UN FCCC, 2022).

  3. Weston, P. COP27 must pave the way for ‘a Paris moment’ for nature, says UN. Guardian (11 November 2022).

  4. Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework https://www.cbd.int/doc/decisions/cop-15/cop-15-dec-04-en.pdf (CBD, 2022).

  5. Decision Adopted by the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity at Its Tenth Meeting https://www.cbd.int/doc/decisions/cop-10/cop-10-dec-02-en.pdf (CBD, 2010).

  6. Butchart, S. H. M., Di Marco, M. & Watson, J. E. M. Formulating smart commitments on biodiversity: lessons from the Aichi Targets. Conserv. Lett. 9, 457–468 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Buchanan, G. M., Butchart, S. H. M., Chandler, G. & Gregory, R. D. Assessment of national-level progress towards elements of the Aichi Biodiversity Targets. Ecol. Indic. 116, 106497 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Watson, J. E. M. et al. Talk is cheap: nations must act now to achieve long-term ambitions for biodiversity. One Earth 4, 897–900 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Monitoring Framework for the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework https://www.cbd.int/doc/decisions/cop-15/cop-15-dec-05-en.pdf (CBD, 2022).

  10. Chan, S. et al. The Global Biodiversity Framework needs a robust action agenda. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 7, 172–173 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Guidance for National Biodiversity Indicator Development and Use (Biodiversity Indicators Partnership, 2011).

  12. Hughes, A. C. & Grumbine, R. E. The Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework: what it does and does not do, and how to improve it. Front. Environ. Sci. 11, 1281536 (2023).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Guidance on Using the Indicators of the Monitoring Framework of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework https://www.cbd.int/doc/c/92cf/b458/18519b4c0b487bf9bfc23988/sbstta-26-inf-14-en.pdf (CBD, 2024).

  14. Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical and Technological Advice (SBSTTA) https://www.cbd.int/sbstta (CBD, 2024).

  15. Recommendation Adopted by the Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical and Technological Advice https://www.cbd.int/doc/recommendations/sbstta-23/sbstta-23-rec-01-en.pdf (CBD, 2019).

  16. Robert, K. W., Parris, T. M. & Leiserowitz, A. A. What is sustainable development? Goals, indicators, values, and practice. Environ. Sci. Policy Sustain. Dev. 47, 8–21 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. The Sustainable Development Goals Report 2016 https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/report/2016/the%20sustainable%20development%20goals%20report%202016.pdf (United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, 2016.

  18. Draft Monitoring Framework for the Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework for Review https://www.cbd.int/sbstta/sbstta-24/post2020-monitoring-en.pdf (CBD, 2020).

  19. Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework: Scientific and Technical Information to Support the Review of the Updated Goals and Targets and Related Indicators and Baselines: Proposed Indicators and Monitoring Approach for the Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework https://www.cbd.int/doc/c/82d2/cebf/13ebbf343d79abb69ae2119a/sbstta-24-03-add1-en.pdf (CBD, 2021).

  20. Selected Participants for the Expert Workshop on the Monitoring Framework for the Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework as per SBSTTA Recommendation 24/2 https://www.cbd.int/doc/notifications/2022/ntf-2022-033-monitoring-en.pdf (CBD, 2022).

  21. Report of the Expert Workshop on the Monitoring Framework for the Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework https://www.cbd.int/doc/c/3190/c3f4/1d9fe2d2dedc8c8b97023750/id-om-2022-01-02-en.pdf (CBD, 2022).

  22. Recommendation Adopted by the Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical and Technological Advice on 19 October 2023 https://www.cbd.int/doc/recommendations/sbstta-25/sbstta-25-rec-01-en.pdf (CBD, 2023).

  23. Selected Experts for the Ad Hoc Technical Expert Group on Indicators for the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework https://www.cbd.int/doc/notifications/2023/ntf-2023-040-indicators-en.pdf (CBD, 2023).

  24. Monitoring Framework for the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework https://www.cbd.int/doc/c/8fad/193d/e30d0be38e537019cdbefb35/sbstta-26-02-en.pdf (CBD, 2024).

  25. Guidance on Needs Related to the Implementing the Monitoring Framework of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework https://www.cbd.int/doc/c/6ac8/f3d3/ed9c797c898bf5377828a2de/sbstta-26-inf-19-en.pdf (CBD, 2024).

  26. Affinito, F. et al. Making the Monitoring Framework of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework fit for purpose. Preprint at bioRxiv https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.09.25.614896 (2024).

  27. Indicators for the Kunming–Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework. Indicator Repository https://gbf-indicators.org/ (UNEP-WCMC, 2024).

  28. Monitoring Framework for the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework https://www.cbd.int/doc/c/8df1/8242/dcb369b306f19bc37d32eb66/sbstta-26-l-10-en.pdf (CBD, 2024).

  29. Leung, B. & Gonzalez, A. Global monitoring for biodiversity: uncertainty, risk, and power analyses to support trend change detection. Sci. Adv. 10, eadj1448 (2024).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Boakes, E. H. et al. Distorted views of biodiversity: spatial and temporal bias in species occurrence data. PLoS Biol. 8, e1000385 (2010).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Faith, D. et al. Bridging the biodiversity data gaps: recommendations to meet users’ data needs. Biodivers. Inform. 8, 41–58 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Troudet, J., Grandcolas, P., Blin, A., Vignes-Lebbe, R. & Legendre, F. Taxonomic bias in biodiversity data and societal preferences. Sci. Rep. 7, 9132 (2017).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Chapman, M. et al. Biodiversity monitoring for a just planetary future. Science 383, 34–36 (2024).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Wilkinson, M. D. et al. The FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship. Sci. Data 3, 160018 (2016).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. Carroll, S. R. et al. The CARE principles for indigenous data governance. Data Sci. J. 19, 43 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Pritchard, R., Sauls, L. A., Oldekop, J. A., Kiwango, W. A. & Brockington, D. Data justice and biodiversity conservation. Conserv. Biol. 36, e13919 (2022).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Ferrari, M. F., De Jong, C. & Belohrad, V. S. Community-based monitoring and information systems (CBMIS) in the context of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). Biodiversity 16, 57–67 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Brondizio, E., Diaz, S., Settele, J. & Ngo, H. T. (eds) Global Assessment Report on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES, 2019).

  39. Costello, M. J. et al. A census of marine biodiversity knowledge, resources, and future challenges. PLoS ONE 5, e12110 (2010).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  40. Wafar, M., Venkataraman, K., Ingole, B., Ajmal Khan, S. & LokaBharathi, P. State of knowledge of coastal and marine biodiversity of Indian Ocean countries. PLoS ONE 6, e14613 (2011).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  41. Vadrot, A. B. M. & Wanneau, K. The social science side of marine biodiversity monitoring. ICES J. Mar. Sci. https://doi.org/10.1093/icesjms/fsae041 (2024).

  42. Canonico, G. et al. Global observational needs and resources for marine biodiversity. Front. Mar. Sci. 6, 367 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Danovaro, R. et al. Implementing and innovating marine monitoring approaches for assessing marine environmental status. Front. Mar. Sci. 3, 213 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Leadley, P. et al. Achieving global biodiversity goals by 2050 requires urgent and integrated actions. One Earth 5, 597–603 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Maney, C. et al. National commitments to Aichi Targets and their implications for monitoring the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework. npj Biodivers. 3, 6 (2024).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  46. Capacity-Building and Development and Technical and Scientific Cooperation https://www.cbd.int/doc/decisions/cop-15/cop-15-dec-08-en.pdf (CBD, 2022).

  47. Recommendation Adopted by the Subsidiary Body on Implementation https://www.cbd.int/doc/recommendations/sbi-03/sbi-03-rec-10-en.pdf (CBD, 2022).

  48. Pereira, H. M. et al. Essential biodiversity variables. Science 339, 277–278 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Brummitt, N. et al. Taking stock of nature: essential biodiversity variables explained. Biol. Conserv. 213, 252–255 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Pereira, H. & Cooper, D. Towards the global monitoring of biodiversity change. Trends Ecol. Evol. 21, 123–129 (2006).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Scholes, R. J., Gill, M. J., Costello, M. J., Sarankatos, G. & Walters, M. in The GEO Handbook on Biodiversity Observation Networks (eds Walters, M. & Scholes R. J.) 1–18 (Springer International, 2017).

  52. Gonzalez, A. et al. A global biodiversity observing system to unite monitoring and guide action. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 7, 1947–1952 (2023).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Pereira, H. M. et al. Global trends and scenarios for terrestrial biodiversity and ecosystem services from 1900 to 2050. Science 384, 458–465 (2024).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Vihervaara, P. et al. How essential biodiversity variables and remote sensing can help national biodiversity monitoring. Glob. Ecol. Conserv. 10, 43–59 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  55. Xu, J. & Wang, J. Analysis of the main elements and implications of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework. Biodivers. Sci. 31, 23020 (2023).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Seidl, A., Mulungu, K., Arlaud, M., Van Den Heuvel, O. & Riva, M. Finance for nature: a global estimate of public biodiversity investments. Ecosyst. Serv. 46, 101216 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Gonzalez, A. & Londoño, M. C. Monitor biodiversity for action. Science https://doi.org/10.1126/science.adg1506 (2022).

  58. Briefing Note on Scientific and Technical Issues Related to the Global Monitoring of Biodiversity https://www.cbd.int/doc/c/0aef/09cb/0f9654d627222534df6c7a98/id-om-2022-01-inf-02-en.pdf (CBD, 2022).

  59. National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPS) https://www.cbd.int/nbsap/search (CBD, 2024).

  60. Admission of Qualified Bodies and Agencies to the Second Part of the Fifteenth Meeting of the Conference of the Parties and the Concurrent Meetings of the Parties to the Protocols https://www.cbd.int/doc/c/dae1/84c2/01b2db1667ce65086e30389a/cop-15-inf-02-en.pdf (CBD, 2022).

  61. Clearing House Mechanism Online Reporting Tool https://ort.cbd.int/ (CBD, 2024).

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank all members of the AHTEG and other experts who supported the AHTEG in its work for their time, input and commitment to the process. We extend our thanks to the Secretariat of the CBD for their help in organizing the AHTEG’s meetings and producing the supporting documents for SBSTTA and COP. Furthermore, we thank UNEP-WCMC for their support in facilitating the AHTEG’s work, especially during its meeting in Cambridge. We also thank the governments of the UK and Canada as well as the European Union for their funding in support of the work of the AHTEG. A.G. acknowledges the support of the Liber Ero Chair in Biodiversity Conservation and the GEO BON secretariat.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Biology, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada

    Flavio Affinito & Andrew Gonzalez

  2. Québec Centre for Biodiversity Science, Montreal, Quebec, Canada

    Flavio Affinito & Andrew Gonzalez

  3. Group on Earth Observations Biodiversity Observation Network, Montreal, Quebec, Canada

    Flavio Affinito, Maria C. Londono & Andrew Gonzalez

  4. Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Peterborough, UK

    James M. Williams

  5. Secretariat of the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity, Montreal, Quebec, Canada

    Jillian E. Campbell

  6. Alexander von Humboldt Biological Resources Research Institute, Bogotá, Colombia

    Maria C. Londono

Authors
  1. Flavio Affinito
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  2. James M. Williams
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jillian E. Campbell
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Maria C. Londono
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Andrew Gonzalez
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Flavio Affinito.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

Multiple authors are or were employed by organizations involved in the negotiation process: at the time of writing, F.A. and J.E.C. were employed by the Secretariat of the CBD, J.M.W. was part of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland delegation and co-chair of the AHTEG, M.C.L. was part of the Colombia delegation and co-chair of the AHTEG, and A.G. was co-chair of GEO BON, an observer organization to the CBD and member of the AHTEG. All authors were acting in a non-political capacity when conducting the work on the Monitoring Framework.

Peer review

Peer review information

Nature Ecology & Evolution thanks James Watson, Alice Vadrot and Alejandro Ordonez for their contribution to the peer review of this work.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Affinito, F., Williams, J.M., Campbell, J.E. et al. Progress in developing and operationalizing the Monitoring Framework of the Global Biodiversity Framework. Nat Ecol Evol 8, 2163–2171 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-024-02566-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Version of record:

  • Issue date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-024-02566-7

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing