What COP15 Delivered
The fifteenth Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD COP15), held in Montreal, Canada, on 7–19 December 2022, adopted the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF). This framework replaces the Aichi Biodiversity Targets (2010–2020), most of which were not met, and sets 23 action-oriented targets for 2030, supported by four overarching goals for 2050.
The framework is, in ambition and scope, the biodiversity equivalent of the Paris Agreement. Whether it matches the Paris Agreement in implementation impact will depend on whether the failures of the Aichi targets — insufficient national action, inadequate financing, and weak accountability — are overcome.
Key Targets
- Target 1 (30x30): Ensure that by 2030, at least 30 per cent of the world's land, inland waters, coastal areas, and oceans are effectively conserved and managed through ecologically representative and well-connected systems of protected areas and other effective area-based conservation measures (OECMs).
- Target 2 (Restoration): Ensure that by 2030, at least 30 per cent of degraded ecosystems are under effective restoration.
- Target 3 (Species Protection): Halt human-induced extinction of known threatened species and reduce extinction risk across all species.
- Target 7 (Pollution): Reduce pollution risks and the negative impact of pollution from all sources by 2030 to levels that are not harmful to biodiversity.
- Target 15 (Corporate Disclosure): Ensure that large and transnational companies and financial institutions regularly monitor, assess, and transparently disclose their risks, dependencies, and impacts on biodiversity along their operations, supply chains, and portfolios.
- Target 19 (Finance): Mobilise at least USD 200 billion per year for biodiversity by 2030, including at least USD 30 billion per year from developed to developing countries.
30x30 in the Gulf Context
The 30x30 target is the headline commitment of the GBF, and its implementation in the Gulf raises specific challenges and opportunities.
Marine Protected Areas
The GCC states collectively have extensive marine territories in the Persian Gulf, the Gulf of Oman, and (for Oman and Saudi Arabia) the Red Sea and Arabian Sea. Current marine protected area (MPA) coverage varies significantly:
| Country | Approximate Marine Area (km²) | MPA Coverage (est.) | Key Marine Ecosystems |
|---|---|---|---|
| Qatar | ~35,000 | ~5% | Seagrass, coral, dugong habitat |
| UAE | ~58,000 | ~12% | Mangroves, coral, turtle nesting |
| Saudi Arabia | ~227,000 | ~8% | Red Sea coral reefs, mangroves, whale sharks |
| Oman | ~530,000 | ~3% | Coral, turtle nesting, upwelling zones |
| Kuwait | ~17,000 | ~6% | Mudflats, coral patches, mangroves |
| Bahrain | ~8,000 | ~4% | Seagrass, coral, pearl oyster beds |
Reaching 30 per cent marine protection will require a significant expansion of existing MPA networks — potentially a tripling or more of protected marine area in most GCC states. This creates direct tension with coastal development, port expansion, offshore hydrocarbon operations, and desalination intake/outfall siting.
Other Effective Area-Based Conservation Measures (OECMs)
The 30x30 target includes OECMs — areas that deliver biodiversity conservation outcomes without being formally designated as protected areas. For the GCC, potential OECMs include:
- Hydrocarbon exclusion zones: Safety exclusion zones around offshore oil and gas installations often inadvertently protect marine biodiversity by restricting fishing, anchoring, and development.
- Military restricted areas: Coastal military zones in several GCC states have protected shoreline ecosystems from development pressure.
- Industrial buffer zones: Environmental buffer zones around industrial facilities may qualify as OECMs if they demonstrably conserve biodiversity.
Identifying and documenting OECMs could help GCC states close the gap to 30 per cent without requiring the politically and economically challenging step of designating large new protected areas in contested waters.
Terrestrial Protection
On land, GCC states face different challenges. Much of the terrestrial area is desert with relatively low biodiversity density but significant ecological value — including endemic plant species, reptiles, and migratory bird flyways. Qatar's protected areas include the Al Reem Biosphere Reserve (a UNESCO designation) and several wildlife reserves, but total coverage remains below the 30 per cent target.
Target 15: Corporate Biodiversity Disclosure
Target 15 of the GBF is, for the private sector, the most immediately consequential commitment. It requires large companies and financial institutions to:
- Monitor their impacts and dependencies on biodiversity.
- Assess the risks these dependencies and impacts create.
- Disclose the results transparently.
This aligns directly with the Taskforce on Nature-related Financial Disclosures (TNFD), which published its beta framework in 2022 and is expected to release final recommendations in 2023. The TNFD framework mirrors the TCFD approach: governance, strategy, risk management, and metrics and targets — applied to nature rather than climate.
What Gulf Companies Need to Prepare
- Dependency mapping: Identifying which ecosystem services the business depends on — freshwater, coastal protection, pollination, soil stability — and assessing the risk of degradation or loss.
- Impact assessment: Quantifying the company's impacts on biodiversity across its operations and value chain, using metrics such as land-use change, water extraction, pollution loading, and invasive species introduction.
- Location-specific analysis: The TNFD LEAP framework (Locate, Evaluate, Assess, Prepare) emphasises that biodiversity risk is inherently location-specific. A development in a biodiversity hotspot has fundamentally different risk characteristics from the same development in a degraded urban area.
- Baseline data: Companies will need ecological baseline data for their operating sites — the kind of data that rigorous Environmental Impact Assessment generates but that many companies have not retained or updated.
Implications for EIA Practice in the Gulf
The GBF strengthens the role of Environmental Impact Assessment as the primary mechanism through which project-level biodiversity impacts are identified, assessed, and mitigated. Several implications for EIA practice follow:
Critical Habitat Assessment Will Become Standard
IFC Performance Standard 6 requires a Critical Habitat assessment for projects with potential biodiversity impacts. As the GBF raises the bar for biodiversity protection, regulators and lenders will increasingly require this assessment — even for projects not seeking IFC financing.
Cumulative Impact Assessment Must Improve
The 30x30 target is a spatial target, which means it must be implemented through marine and terrestrial spatial planning that considers cumulative impacts across multiple projects and sectors. EIA practitioners will be expected to assess not just individual project impacts but contributions to cumulative pressure on shared biodiversity resources.
Biodiversity Net Gain May Become Mandatory
The UK has already legislated mandatory biodiversity net gain (BNG) for development projects. The GBF's restoration targets (Target 2) and species protection targets (Target 3) create pressure for similar requirements in other jurisdictions. Gulf states that adopt BNG requirements will need robust baseline assessment, impact quantification, and offset/restoration planning — all within the EIA process.
Marine EIA Will Receive Greater Scrutiny
Coastal and marine development in the Gulf — including reclamation, port expansion, desalination plants, and offshore energy projects — will face heightened scrutiny as MPA networks expand and marine spatial plans develop. EIAs for these projects must incorporate hydrodynamic modelling, sediment transport analysis, and marine ecological surveys that go well beyond current minimum practice.
Finance and Investment Implications
The GBF's Target 19 commits to mobilising USD 200 billion per year for biodiversity by 2030. While the mechanisms are still being developed, several financial implications are clear:
- Biodiversity bonds: Following the model of green bonds for climate, biodiversity-linked bonds and sukuk are likely to emerge as a distinct asset class.
- Screening criteria: Financial institutions will develop biodiversity screening criteria for lending and investment, similar to existing climate screens.
- Stranded asset risk: Development projects in areas subsequently designated as protected may face regulatory restrictions that reduce their value — a form of nature-related transition risk.
Conclusion: Nature Is the Next Climate
The adoption of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework marks the beginning of a transformation in how businesses interact with the natural world — from treating nature as a free input to recognising it as a material risk factor, a disclosure obligation, and a strategic consideration.
For GCC states and companies, the framework creates both obligations and opportunities. The region's marine biodiversity is globally significant, its coastal development pressures are intense, and its institutional capacity for environmental management — while improving — must scale rapidly to meet the framework's ambitions.
The companies that begin building biodiversity data, developing TNFD-aligned disclosure, and integrating nature considerations into investment decisions now will be positioned ahead of the regulatory curve. Those that wait will find themselves responding reactively to requirements they could have anticipated — and shaped.
GSustain's Environmental Impact Assessment practice integrates biodiversity assessment in accordance with IFC Performance Standard 6, using seasonal baseline surveys, critical habitat analysis, and quantitative impact assessment methodologies that meet the emerging requirements of the Global Biodiversity Framework.