Do you know what…?
Why are finance ministers debating money that harms nature at a biodiversity summit?

AI-generated image, not a photograph. This edition's article, audio and test are AI-generated and published automatically without prior human review. Sources · Editorial & AI Policy
Listen to today’s article
Today, 27 October 2026, finance ministers are due to join environment ministers at COP17 in Yerevan, Armenia, to confront an awkward question: why fund nature protection while rewarding activities that damage it? According to the Convention on Biological Diversity Secretariat's media release issued yesterday, governments remain divided over reforming harmful incentives, including some agricultural subsidies. They also disagree over who should contribute to international biodiversity finance and through which mechanisms. The dispute is not simply about finding additional money. It concerns whether public budgets and conservation policy are working .
The scale of that challenge is already written into the Global Biodiversity Framework. Its existing Target 18 seeks a reduction in harmful incentives of at least US$500 billion a year by 2030, alongside stronger positive incentives. Governments can eliminate, or redesign damaging support: this is not a blanket demand to abolish agricultural subsidies. An incentive changes what an activity costs or earns; if it rewards environmental damage, conservation funding may have to counteract its effects. Crucially, the annual target is neither an achieved saving nor a new funding pledge from today's talks.
This helps explain why finance ministers belong in the room: protecting biodiversity involves the rules governing spending and investment, not just environmental programmes. The Secretariat also reports that more than 130 businesses and financial institutions support faster reform of damaging incentives. Support, however, does not settle how governments should conservation goals with the interests of those receiving assistance. In general, changing support can affect livelihoods, making the design of reform important. Outstanding decisions are scheduled for adoption when COP17 closes on 30 October. The challenge is to make protection and economic incentives pull in the same direction.
