YEREVAN, Armenia - Governments are gathering Monday for the United Nations biodiversity conference in Armenia with global conservation funding and protection plans still far below the promises made four years ago.

COP17 runs from Oct. 19 through Oct. 30 in Yerevan and brings together governments, scientists, Indigenous peoples, civil society groups, young people and businesses. The meeting will assess progress on the 23 targets in the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework adopted in 2022.

The central pledge, known as 30x30, calls for protecting 30% of the world's important land and water by 2030. Yet a U.N. progress assessment found that current national commitments would cover only 26% of land and 12% of the sea by the deadline, according to the Associated Press.

Money is an even larger obstacle. Countries pledged to mobilize $200 billion a year for biodiversity by 2030, but data from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development showed annual financing between $75 billion and $92 billion from 2023 through 2025. That is less than half the target.

Governments also promised to reform or eliminate $500 billion a year in subsidies considered harmful to nature, including support that encourages destructive fishing, agriculture or land use. AP reported that few countries have even identified which subsidies they would reduce.

Support for developing nations came closer to its near-term target. The latest available data showed $19 billion was provided in 2024, compared with a goal of $20 billion annually by 2025. But cuts to foreign aid have raised doubts about whether that progress can continue, while the target rises to $30 billion a year by 2030.

The stakes extend beyond wildlife. Healthy forests, wetlands, oceans and soils support food production, drinking water, flood control and economic resilience. A 2019 U.N. assessment found that three-quarters of the world's land had been severely altered by human activity and that about one million plant and animal species were threatened with extinction.

There are signs of action. Countries have announced more than 5,000 initiatives connected to the biodiversity framework. A 17-nation coalition launched before the conference aims to accelerate the recovery of threatened species, while nine private organizations said they would spend $500 million over five years on preventing extinctions and restoring populations.

Armenia, a small mountainous country that contains about 60% of the Caucasus region's biodiversity, is using the summit to focus attention on monitoring technology, highland ecosystems, freshwater and economic incentives. The United States is not a party to the U.N. biodiversity convention, although American policy, finance and conservation decisions still have global reach.

The gap is political before it is financial

The numbers show that governments do not mainly lack targets. They lack the willingness to move money and political protection away from activities that damage ecosystems. Announcing a protected area is easier than enforcing limits on logging, mining, farming or fishing interests that already hold economic power.

That is why the subsidy promise matters as much as new funding. Governments cannot credibly spend billions restoring nature while directing far larger sums toward practices that destroy it. Reforming those incentives will create visible losers, which makes it politically harder than signing a declaration at an international summit.

Developing countries also have reason to distrust a system in which wealthy nations write global goals but deliver financing late or inconsistently. Many of the most biologically rich landscapes are in countries carrying heavy debt and urgent development needs. Conservation that ignores local livelihoods can become another demand imposed from abroad; conservation with reliable funding can support jobs, land rights and long-term stability.

Democratic accountability offers the best chance of closing that gap. Budgets, subsidy rules, land decisions and enforcement data should be public enough for voters, journalists and communities to see whether leaders are honoring their commitments. Authoritarian systems can announce vast protected zones, but without independent scrutiny it is difficult to know whether those protections exist beyond official maps.

The United States should not treat its absence from the treaty as an excuse for absence from the work. American science, private capital, development finance and diplomatic influence can help protect critical ecosystems while setting high standards for transparency and local consent. Leadership does not require accepting every U.N. mechanism, but it does require measurable action.

COP17 will produce speeches, pledges and technical negotiations. Its real test is whether countries leave Yerevan with financing that can be traced, harmful subsidies that can be named and protection plans that can be enforced. Nature does not benefit from ambition recorded in conference documents. It benefits when governments change the incentives operating on the ground.