Only 35 countries have submitted the national strategies required by the UN biodiversity treaty showing how they’ll meet its binding nature protection targets. While 33 of these plans recognise links between human health and biodiversity, they offer few specifics on implementation and policy, a Health Policy Watch analysis found.  Negotiators in Cali aim to bridge the gap this week by adopting a global health action plan under the treaty that provides a roadmap for meeting its health protection requirements.

Midway through the UN biodiversity summit COP16 in Cali, Colombia, delegates from nearly 200 countries remain deadlocked over rules to protect human health from Earth’s mounting ecological crisis.

UN Environment chief Inger Andersen urged delegates Thursday to break the impasse over the Global Action Plan on Biodiversity and Health, which would align conservation efforts with human health priorities as nations wrestle with implementing the landmark 2022 Montreal biodiversity treaty.

“Our health cannot be separated from the health of the planet and its many species,” she told delegates in Cali. “We must adopt this action plan and implement it with a holistic, systemic approach that unifies action across health, environment, finance, industry and agriculture.”

Over the weekend

Biodiversity deal seeks health rules – but keeps them voluntary

The proposed framework would strengthen the 2022 Kunming-Montreal biodiversity agreement – nature’s equivalent to the Paris Climate Accord – which committed 197 nations to protect 30% of Earth’s land and seas by 2030, but left crucial health provisions largely undefined.

While the Convention on Biodiversity itself is legally binding, the proposed health framework would serve as a voluntary roadmap for nations. It calls for health impact assessments in land-use planning, disease surveillance where habitat loss is rapid, and stricter wildlife trade rules — measures experts say are vital to prevent pathogens spreading from wild animals to human communities and food markets.

The framework also emphasises protecting genetic resources crucial for new medicine development and ensuring vulnerable populations have access to nature’s health benefits. The push comes amid controversy at the UN biodiversity summit over countries’ rights to demand “benefit sharing” when genetic resources, including digital sequences, are used in drug development — a fight at the frontiers of biodiversity science that nearly derailed the landmark 2022 Montreal agreement.

Beyond the fight over genetic resources, nations broadly agree on the framework’s other targets: combating vector-borne diseases emerging from shrinking habitats, reducing chemical exposure from industry, and protecting communities from the toxic toll of mass pesticide use.

If approved, the plan’s voluntary nature, combined with history, suggests an uphill battle: the world has not met a single UN biodiversity goal since talks began in Nairobi over 30 years ago.

Sweeping New Global Biodiversity Deal Sets Out Plan for Sharing Gene Sequences

The health focus at the UN biodiversity summit reflects a broader shift in environmental diplomacy, marked by the first-ever Health Day at UN climate talks (COP28) in Dubai last year.

While biodiversity has long been valued for medical discoveries — nearly half of all pharmaceuticals in use today are originally derived from nature — scientists increasingly see ecosystem protection as vital for preventing disease outbreaks, controlling disease vectors, and limiting chemical exposure.

Biodiversity loss and climate change have emerged as the leading drivers of infectious diseases worldwide, amplifying 58% of outbreaks. The mounting threat is forcing policymakers to reckon with an increasingly inescapable truth: human survival depends entirely on Earth’s life-sustaining systems — clean water, air, and food.

“Framing biodiversity as a resource – something separate, something that gives – has led to humanity converting nature, driving species to extinction, polluting ecosystems and pumping greenhouse gases into the atmosphere,” Andersen said. “But humanity is not separate from or above biodiversity. And in a closed system such as Earth, what goes around comes around.”

Deep divisions over superbug prevention and drug development mirror COP16 tensions

The 24-page Biodiversity-Health framework is as one of the summit’s most contested documents, with 54 bracketed sections exposing fundamental disagreements between nations.

The disputed clauses reflect wider fault lines in Cali. Nations remain divided over whether to classify improperly disposed antibiotic waste – a key driver of antimicrobial resistance – as “pollution” alongside microplastics and heavy metals. Proposals to “avoid the inappropriate use and disposal” of antibiotics are also unsettled, despite safe disposal practices being critical to preserving the efficacy drugs that save hundreds of millions of lives annually.

The sharing of benefits from genetic resources is another flashpoint. Developing nations demand strong commitments on technology transfer, while wealthy countries insist such transfers must remain “voluntary.” Nations with major pharmaceutical industries have pushed also back against draft language that would hold companies accountable for “the misappropriation of genetic resources and digital sequence information and associated traditional knowledge.

A crucial sticking point centres on whether to include “derivatives” and “subsequent applications and commercialisation” – essentially determining if companies must share benefits when they develop new products based on initial discoveries. Without such provisions, firms could potentially avoid sharing profits from derivative drugs or applications.

Finance – the dominant issue of COP16’s opening week – is another key battleground in the health framework. Nations have yet to approve clauses that would provide financial support to developing countries, which host most of the world’s biodiversity, for implementing plans to protect it.

Of the few plans submitted, most consider health

National biodiversity plans submitted before this week’s summit in Colombia summit reveal wide variations in scope and specificity for how countries intend to tackle environmental protection and human health concerns, a Health Policy Watch analysis of the COP16 database found.

Only 35 nations – just 18% – submitted biodiversity strategies, known as NBSAPs in UN jargon, by Monday’s UN summit deadline. All but Mexico and Jordan included human health concerns in their plans.

The submitted plans reflect clear regional priorities. European Union members emphasize a comprehensive “one health” approach that links human, animal and environmental welfare, focusing heavily on pesticide and chemical pollution regulation – areas where the EU leads global policy.

Colombia’s strategy takes a different focus, centering on health impacts from extractive industries, particularly mercury contamination from mining. In contrast, China and South Korea’s plans barely mention health, making single references to urban green spaces’ benefits for respiratory and mental health.

These varied approaches come as research increasingly links ecosystem destruction to public health crises, from floods to disease outbreaks. Scientists have documented two virus spillovers to humans annually over the past century, culminating in the COVID-19 pandemic.

The World Health Organization projects climate change could cause 250,000 additional deaths yearly between 2030-2050. Antimicrobial resistance already claims 1.4 million lives annually, while environmental degradation could cause 39 million deaths from 2025-2050.

The proposed health framework, though voluntary, would set higher standards than current national plans.

“From the air we breathe to the water we drink, our health is tied to the health of the planet,” said UN Environment chief Andersen. “We need a plan to protect biodiversity for the health of all species on earth.”

Critical regions and powers missing from submissions

Of the 17 nations hosting 70% of Earth’s biodiversity, only five have filed plans: Australia, China, Indonesia, Malaysia and Mexico. The crucial Amazon region is represented solely by Suriname, with no submissions from Congo Basin nations.

The G7 economic powers showed limited participation, with only Canada, Italy, France and Japan meeting the deadline. Among G20 members, Brazil indicated it needs more time to develop its long-term conservation strategy, while India plans to announce its commitments during the summit.

“The start was never going to be fast. I think the important thing we’re looking at is the work is underway,” UN biodiversity chief Astrid Schomaker told Carbon Brief about the limited submissions.

“Whether the deadline itself is met on the dot is not what I think we’re really looking at,” Schomaker said, adding she is “confident” this work is taking place globally. “I think our assessment is globally positive.”

Biodiversity and health deal advances, but key framework still faces hurdles

Negotiations on biodiversity and health took a step forward on Sunday as the second working group’s chair presented a draft decision – a document separate from but related to the broader biodiversity and health action plan. While the draft includes a provision to adopt the action plan, this remains in brackets, indicating no consensus has yet been reached among member states.

The draft makes several key advances, eliminating previous disputes over antimicrobial disposal protocols and removing qualifiers that made technology sharing optional. It also strengthens provisions for Indigenous peoples’ participation in global biodiversity initiatives and decision-making forums.

However, several contentious issues from the main biodiversity framework remain unresolved. These include questions of pharmaceutical companies’ liability regarding genetic resource usage and digital sequence information, whether derivatives and commercial applications should be included in fair and equitable benefit-sharing arrangements, and the creation of international oversight mechanisms to ensure countries meet their biodiversity and health commitments.

Finance remains a critical hurdle in the health and broader COP16 negotiations. While eight nations boosted the Global Biodiversity Framework Fund this week with pledges totaling $163m, bringing available funding to $400m, this falls dramatically short of global needs.

The Kunming-Montreal agreement calls for $200bn annually for nature protection – 500 times the current fund’s total, which isn’t even structured as yearly financing. Though there is broad agreement on the principle of financial support from development banks and environmental funds, the mechanisms for distribution remain hotly contested.

As with previous UN environmental negotiations, talks may extend beyond the official Friday deadline as delegates work to bridge these remaining gaps.

This article was updated to reflect progress in the negotiations 

Image Credits: CIFOR-ICRAF.