Implementing the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework: Exploring the role of building States’ (self-)reflexive capacity

The Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) under the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) that was adopted in December 2022 has set ambitious collective goals on reversing the loss of biodiversity and degradation of nature. With four overarching goals and 19 quite ambitious targets there is enough to do for States (and other actors). Against the backdrop of the overall failure to achieve the Aichi targets set for 2020 under the CBD, much focus was given to the follow-up and review arrangements in the negotiations. These were upgraded to a limited extent with a visible inspiration from the Paris Agreement on Climate Change (PA) and its ‘ambition mechanism’. The GBF is to be accompanied by a ‘synchronized and cyclical system’ of planning, monitoring, reporting and review that includes: Parties submitting revised National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs), Parties reporting on national implementation; and regular global review of collective progress the outcome of which Parties may then be informed by in future revisions of NBSAPs and their implementation.

This paper explores the conceptual starting points for regular self-reflection by States in relation to their responsibility towards globally agreed goals as required by these two ambition mechanisms. The main objective is to elaborate on the components of the role of states’ capacity for (self-)reflexivity in complying with the procedural obligations under the GBF. The paper conceptualizes reflexive capacity based on but expanding from the concept of ecological reflexivity in literature; elaborates on the specific reflexive capacity that States need to acquire to engage meaningfully in the cyclical system of the GBF; and lastly explores possible national and transnational avenues (agents and strategies) for strengthening such capacity. The conceptual analysis will be supported with initial empirical data from the study of the recently concluded PA cycle. It is hoped that these preliminary reflections on States’ self-reflexivity in relation to global nature goals can contribute to discussing future research agendas for understanding the (lack of) implementation of the GBF and more broadly its role for transformative change.