The International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) has issued a definitive call to action for governments ahead of the 17th Conference of the Parties (COP17) to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), emphasizing that the global private sector is prepared to transition toward nature-positive operations but remains stifled by a lack of clear policy frameworks. As businesses increasingly integrate biodiversity considerations into their core decision-making processes—ranging from governance and financial risk assessment to supply-chain due diligence and innovation—the organization warns that the scale of action required to halt nature loss cannot be achieved without significant governmental delivery on international commitments. The transition from setting high-level ambitions to implementing practical, real-economy results has become the central demand of the global business community as the deadline for the 2030 biodiversity targets approaches.
The Shift from Ambition to Implementation: The Core Mandate for COP17
For years, the discourse surrounding global biodiversity has been dominated by the establishment of frameworks and the setting of long-term targets. However, the ICC argues that the upcoming COP17 must represent a fundamental shift in the international community’s approach. While the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF), adopted at COP15, provided a comprehensive roadmap for reversing nature loss by 2030, the private sector now requires the "how" rather than the "what." This involves the creation of enabling conditions that allow businesses of all sizes—from multinational corporations to small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs)—to align their commercial strategies with ecological restoration.
The urgency of this shift is underscored by the current state of corporate engagement. Leading firms are no longer viewing biodiversity as a peripheral Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) issue; instead, it is being folded into the highest levels of corporate governance. This mainstreaming of nature is driven by the recognition that environmental degradation poses a material threat to business continuity. Yet, without "policy certainty"—a term frequently cited by the ICC—investments in nature-based solutions remain risky. Businesses are calling for implementation pathways that provide clear regulatory signals, standardized reporting metrics, and financial mechanisms that de-risk green investments.
A Chronology of Global Biodiversity Governance and the Road to COP17
The trajectory toward COP17 is marked by several pivotal milestones in international environmental policy. The journey began in earnest with the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, where the Convention on Biological Diversity was first opened for signature. However, for decades, biodiversity policy lagged behind climate change policy in terms of corporate engagement and financial mobilization.
The turning point occurred at COP15 in December 2022, held in Montreal under the presidency of China. This summit resulted in the landmark Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF), often described as the "Paris Agreement for Nature." The GBF established 23 targets for 2030, including the "30 by 30" goal—the protection of 30% of the world’s land and oceans.
Following COP15, COP16 served as a foundational meeting for establishing the technicalities of monitoring and reporting. As the international community moves toward COP17, the focus has narrowed significantly. COP17 is slated to be the first global review of collective progress under the GBF. It is the moment when the "Global Stocktake" for nature will begin to take shape, allowing parties to assess whether national actions are actually meeting the 2030 roadmap. For the ICC and its members, this timeline is critical; with only six years remaining until 2030, any delay in policy implementation at COP17 could render the GBF targets unattainable.
The Economic Case: Quantifying the Stakes of Nature Loss
The primary driver behind the ICC’s advocacy is the profound economic dependency on healthy ecosystems. Data from the World Economic Forum (WEF) indicates that more than $44 trillion of economic value generation—over half of the world’s total GDP—is moderately or highly dependent on nature and its services. From the provision of clean water and pollination for agriculture to the raw materials required for construction and pharmaceuticals, the "services" provided by the environment are the invisible scaffolding of the global economy.
The risks of inaction are categorized by the ICC into three main areas:
- Physical Risks: Direct threats to operations, such as the collapse of fisheries, the loss of fertile topsoil, or the increased frequency of floods due to the destruction of coastal mangroves and wetlands.
- Transition Risks: The economic impacts of shifting toward a nature-positive economy, including changes in regulation, consumer preferences, and the potential for "stranded assets" in industries that fail to adapt to stricter environmental standards.
- Systemic Risks: The broader threat to the financial system if ecosystem collapses lead to widespread defaults in the agricultural or insurance sectors.
Furthermore, the "finance gap" remains a staggering barrier to progress. The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) estimates that the world needs to find an additional $700 billion per year to meet 2030 biodiversity targets. Other financial analyses, including those by Bloomberg, suggest the figure could be as high as $942 billion annually. Currently, many National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs)—the primary vehicles through which countries translate global goals into domestic law—remain either delayed, under-funded, or lacking in specific roles for private sector participation.
ICC Recommendations: A Blueprint for a Nature-Positive Transition
To address these challenges, the ICC has outlined a series of specific recommendations for the parties attending COP17. These recommendations are designed to bridge the gap between governmental policy and private sector execution.
1. Strengthening National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs)
The ICC is urging governments to ensure that their NBSAPs are not merely aspirational documents but are "investable" plans. This means including clear sectoral pathways that allow businesses to understand how they can contribute to national targets. The ICC emphasizes that for the private sector to scale its solutions, it needs to see how government spending and regulation will be deployed over the next decade.
2. Aligning Financial Flows with Global Targets
A central pillar of the ICC’s stance is the need for the reform of harmful subsidies. It is estimated that hundreds of billions of dollars in annual government subsidies currently support activities that are detrimental to biodiversity, such as intensive monoculture farming or unsustainable fishing. The ICC calls for these funds to be repurposed toward nature-positive outcomes, creating a level playing field for sustainable businesses.
3. Standardized Disclosure and Reporting
To prevent "greenwashing" and to allow investors to accurately price environmental risk, the ICC supports the adoption of standardized disclosure frameworks. This includes alignment with the Taskforce on Nature-related Financial Disclosures (TNFD), which provides a mechanism for companies to report on their nature-related dependencies, impacts, risks, and opportunities.
4. Enabling Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises (SMEs)
The ICC highlights that while large corporations may have the resources to navigate complex environmental regulations, SMEs—which make up over 90% of businesses worldwide—require specific support. COP17 must deliver outcomes that simplify the transition for smaller firms, providing them with the tools and access to finance necessary to adopt sustainable practices without compromising their competitiveness.
Official Responses and Stakeholder Perspectives
The call from the ICC has resonated across various sectors, though the path to consensus at COP17 remains difficult. Representatives from the banking sector have echoed the ICC’s concerns regarding the finance gap. Many institutional investors argue that while there is an appetite for "blue" and "green" bonds, the lack of a pipeline of "bankable" nature projects is a significant hurdle. They contend that governments must play a larger role in de-risking these projects through blended finance models.
Environmental NGOs, while welcoming the business community’s involvement, have expressed cautious optimism. Organizations such as the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) and BirdLife International have stressed that "delivery for the real economy" must not mean a dilution of environmental standards. They argue that the ICC’s call for "practical" outcomes must include rigorous accountability mechanisms to ensure that corporate actions lead to measurable improvements in ecosystem health.
Governmental responses have been mixed, largely due to the geopolitical tensions surrounding the "benefit-sharing" of Digital Sequence Information (DSI) on genetic resources. Developing nations, which hold the majority of the world’s biodiversity, are demanding a fair share of the profits made by pharmaceutical and biotech companies using their genetic data. The ICC has been active in these negotiations, advocating for a system that is simple to manage and does not stifle innovation, while acknowledging the need for equitable sharing of benefits.
Broader Implications: The Nexus of Climate and Nature
The discussions at COP17 will not occur in a vacuum. There is a growing recognition of the "Climate-Nature Nexus"—the fact that it is impossible to reach Net Zero emissions targets without protecting and restoring the natural carbon sinks provided by forests, oceans, and soil. Analysis suggests that nature-based solutions could provide up to one-third of the climate mitigation needed by 2030.
The ICC’s push for a nature-positive transition at COP17 is therefore also a push for climate resilience. If COP17 fails to deliver a coherent framework for business action, it will simultaneously jeopardize the goals of the Paris Agreement. The integration of biodiversity into financial risk assessment is increasingly mirroring the trajectory of carbon pricing and emissions reporting. Experts predict that within the next decade, "nature-neutral" or "nature-positive" certifications could become as essential for market access as carbon-neutral certifications are today.
Conclusion: COP17 as a Turning Point for the Global Economy
As the international community prepares for COP17, the stakes could not be higher for the global economy. The International Chamber of Commerce has made it clear that the era of framework-setting must end, and the era of implementation must begin. The $700 billion to $942 billion annual funding gap cannot be closed by public coffers alone; it requires the mobilization of private capital on an unprecedented scale.
However, that capital will only flow if governments provide the necessary policy certainty and enabling conditions. Businesses are signaling their readiness to invest, innovate, and scale solutions, but they cannot do so in a regulatory vacuum. COP17 represents a critical turning point. Success will be measured not by the eloquence of the final communique, but by the creation of practical, investable pathways that allow the global economy to operate in harmony with the natural world. For the ICC, and for the millions of businesses it represents, the time for ambition has passed; the time for results is now.
About the Author
