Abstract
In 2026 Armenia will be the host nation for the 17th Conference of the Parties (COP) Biodiversity summit, building on previous summits in Montreal (COP15) and Cali (COP16). Based on the results of negotiations in Rome that agreed a permanent funding mechanism beyond 2030, Armenia will have a major role to play in chairing discussions. It will have to play a balancing act between the Global North and Global South whilst also ensuring Armenia can benefit from biodiversity protection.
Introduction
During the 16th COP biodiversity summit in Cali, Colombia, Armenia was elected with a majority of 65 votes to be the next host nation, beating Azerbaijan in the process.[i] The COP biodiversity summit is one of three summits (climate change and desertification being the others) organised by the UN to help coordinate global action on pressing environmental issues. Hosting this summit is a big deal for Armenia; if successful, the summit has a chance to make significant progress on the back of agreements made in Cali and Rome, if unsuccessful, Armenia’s tenure as chair will be little remembered compared to other major COP summits and could hurt Armenia’s efforts to protect its large biodiversity reserves. This memo will outline firstly the achievements made in the recent COP negotiations and then Armenia’s options for building on those successes and increasing the inclusivity of COP summits.
COP Successes and Failures in Cali and Rome
Significant progress was made firstly at the official COP summit in Cali and then in a second summit held at the headquarters of the Food and Agricultural Organisation in Rome. The summit in Cali was significant for two reasons: firstly, there was an explicit acknowledgement of the role that African and indigenous peoples play in stewarding the environment[ii] and secondly, a voluntary fund was established to share the profits from genetic biodiversity resources.[iii] However, a quorum couldn’t be established on the final day to work out the biodiversity financing aspect so a second summit was held at the headquarters of the Organization for Food and Agriculture in Rome.[iv]
The negotiating period in Rome was shorter than in Cali and featured far fewer participants (1,000 in Rome versus 23,000 in Cali) yet there were meaningful outcomes produced in the more focused negotiations. In Rome, eleventh-hour negotiations came out with an agreement to establish a biodiversity financing mechanism by 2028 at the latest and to work towards building public-private partnerships that could generate up to $200 billion a year that would be invested in biodiversity protection.[v]
Armenia’s Role as Host of the COP17 Summit
There is a lot at stake not just for global biodiversity protection but also for Armenia. As the home to one of the world’s major biodiversity hotspots, particularly in crop diversity,[vi] Armenia has a significant stake in the outcome of negotiations when it hosts the COP17 summit next year. There will be a delicate balancing act Armenia will have to play between amplifying the interests of countries in the Global South who are most affected by biodiversity loss, versus not alienating countries from the Global North that have the financial tools at their disposal to help alleviate some of the negative outcomes from biodiversity loss. How can this be managed?
Firstly, Armenia should prioritize results over pomp and ceremony. One of the issues with COP16 in Cali was that negotiations which had already been underway for a week got sidetracked by ministers and heads of government flying in to deliver doorstep speeches.[vii] At the very least, the Armenian government should ensure that if such doorstep speeches are to be made, they should be kept to the first 48 hours of COP17 so that delegations have time to hold informal meetings in the background prior to formal negotiations with technical experts proceeding. While Cali was celebrated as ‘the people’s COP’[viii], 23,000 people is far too many to be showing up to what is supposed to be a high-stakes negotiation, even if not all of those delegates are to be involved in direct negotiations. Going forward, Armenia should be more selective and intentional about whom to invite to the next COP so that there will be not only a wide range of views but also the maximum amount of expertise on hand for the negotiations.
Secondly, Armenia should be focused on the kind of outcomes it wants to achieve at the next COP summit. It is clearly in Armenia’s interest that a meaningful financing mechanism is implemented or at the very least agreed upon in the next COP, and its main focus should be on building a coalition that can deliver on it. Prior to formal negotiations the Armenian government in cooperation with the UN should be leading discussions with multilateral financing agencies such as the World Bank, European Investment Bank, Asian Development Bank and private financial institutions to work out a credible financing package for biodiversity protection that it can present to the plenary as a basis for further discussion.
Thirdly, Armenia should make a greater effort to consult NGOs and green-tech companies on ways to ensure the money from the biodiversity fund will be used in the most efficient and equitable manner. It will be crucial that the biodiversity funding mechanism targets those who are impacted the most whilst also demonstrating that investing in biodiversity initiatives is a worthwhile financial investment, which is why the Armenian government needs to ensure that both groups have adequate representation at the COP summit to put forward their perspectives.
Conclusion
Armenia has a lot to gain and a lot to lose from hosting the next COP biodiversity summit, not least because of its own vast biodiversity resources which are under threat. Armenia will not be able to finance large-scale biodiversity protection on its own, so it is imperative that the government presents a clear, impartial plan that financial institutions and governments can consent to in order to implement the financing mechanism agreed upon in the last COP. If the summit is successful, there will be increasing momentum going forward to scale up action on biodiversity loss, which will benefit Armenia and other biodiversity hotspots around the world.
Analysis written by Conor Scannell, Intern Research Associate at Research Center on Security Policy.
[i] Armenia To Host UN Biodiversity Conference in 2026 (2024) thearmenianreport.com, available: https://www.thearmenianreport.com/post/armenia-to-host-un-biodiversity-conference-in-2026 [accessed 03.06.2025]
[ii] Vanegas, G. (2024) COP16: Landmark biodiversity agreements adopted, UN News, available: https://news.un.org/en/story/2024/11/1156456 [accessed 03.06.2025]
[iii] Zelli, F. (2025) ‘Groundhog Day at the 2024 United Nations biodiversity conference: What COP 16 can teach us for reforming environmental summits Groundhog Day at the 2024 United Nations biodiversity conference: What COP 16 can teach us for reforming environmental summits’, Earth System Governance, 25, available:
https://uol.primo.exlibrisgroup.com/permalink/353UOL_INST/1ldrf7d/cdi_doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_ba4ece64bf40437e852edae1921985c0 [accessed 03.06.2025]
[iv] Carbon Briefing (2025) COP16: Key outcomes agreed at the resumed UN biodiversity conference in Rome, available:
https://www.carbonbrief.org/cop16-key-outcomes-agreed-at-the-resumed-un-biodiversity-conference-in-rome/ [accessed 04.06.2025]
[v] Zelli (2025) See above citation
[vi] Skedsmo, P.W. and Andersen, R. (2021) ‘Governing crop genetics in post-Soviet countries: lessons from the biodiversity hotspot Armenia’, Euphytica, 217(5), available: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10681-021-02824-w.
[vii] Zelli (2025) See above citation
[viii] Vanegas, G. (2024) COP16: Landmark biodiversity agreements adopted, UN News, available: https://news.un.org/en/story/2024/11/1156456 [accessed 03.06.2025]
