Last month, decision-makers, government representatives, investors and businesses gathered at Climate Week NYC 2026. Discussions covered energy, infrastructure, finance, technology and resilience, but nature and biodiversity were also central to the conversation. Natural capital and nature risk/resilience featured alongside supply chains, investment and long-term growth, reflecting a wider focus on how businesses both affect and depend on nature.

Attention now turns to COP17, the 17th UN Biodiversity Conference, taking place in Yerevan, Armenia, from 19 to 30 October 2026. It will conduct the first global review of collective progress towards implementing the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (KMGBF). Agreed at COP15, the KMGBF contains four long-term goals for 2050 and 23 targets for 2030, covering conservation and restoration, sustainable use, finance and the fair sharing of benefits arising from genetic resources. The newly published global progress report, "State of Biodiversity Action", provides a halfway stocktake of progress towards the targets set for 2030.

In this article, we explore the importance of COP17 in driving the biodiversity agenda forward and reflect on some of the key issues discussed at Climate Week NYC that are likely to cross over into COP17.

Why COP17 matters

COP17 focuses on biodiversity and nature and is separate from COP31 (the 31st session of the Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)) which takes place in Türkiye in November. The two COP agendas are closely linked however: climate change places further pressure on ecosystems, while healthy natural systems support food production, water security and climate resilience.

The theme of this year's summit is 'Taking action for nature' and reflects the wider move from setting targets to implementation, ownership and mobilising finance to support delivery. Over a two-week period, this international conference will bring together broad representation from stakeholder groups that are committed to and helping drive progress on key issues – from government representatives, business and private sector leaders, to scientists, researchers, indigenous people and local community representatives.

Why will COP17 be of interest to businesses? With a programme spanning seven thematic areas, plus various cross-cutting themes, it has broad scope. Following the review of progress at the conference, the resulting priorities may shape and accelerate national policy, biodiversity finance, reporting expectations, and the further development of nature markets; all of which will be relevant to businesses, particularly those with international operations, complex supply chains or significant dependencies on water, land and other natural resources.

COP17 will also build on work completed at COP16 in Cali, Colombia, and its resumed session in Rome. This included establishing the Cali Fund as part of a benefit-sharing mechanism linked to the use of digital sequence information on genetic resources – providing financial support for biodiversity conservation, particularly in biodiversity-rich countries and with indigenous peoples and local communities. Attention will turn to whether these and other commitments are delivering results.

Five themes businesses should be watching

1. Nature is becoming integral to wider business strategy

One of the clearest shifts at Climate Week NYC was the extent to which nature featured in many discussions, particularly those on operational resilience.

Healthy natural systems support water security, agriculture, raw materials and global supply chains. When those systems come under pressure, businesses can face increased costs, resource shortages and operational disruption.

The conversation is broadening from a business’s impact on nature to its dependence on nature. An organisation may have limited direct contact with sensitive habitats but still depend on water-intensive production, agricultural goods or natural materials through its supply chain.

For many businesses, the most significant nature-related exposures sit not within their own operations but several tiers upstream, in regions and production systems where visibility and control are limited. In food and beverage, soil degradation, water scarcity and pollinator loss can reduce yields and push up commodity prices, while commodities such as soy, palm oil, cocoa and cattle carry deforestation-related regulatory and reputational risk. Fashion depends on cotton, wool and leather and on large volumes of water for dyeing and finishing. Construction relies on timber, sand and aggregates, and pharmaceutical businesses on natural compounds and high-quality water.

These risks show up differently along the chain: physical pressures such as drought and declining soil health at the point of production; water and permitting constraints at processing and manufacturing sites; and regulatory, contractual, financing and reputational exposure at the brand and investor end. Many businesses are beginning by mapping which commodities matter most and where they are sourced, then engaging key suppliers on traceability, building nature-related requirements into procurement and contracts, and diversifying sourcing away from high-risk locations.

Reporting frameworks such as the Taskforce on Nature-related Financial Disclosures (TNFD) are helping organisations assess these connections, deliver change and determine how they can support nature-positive outcomes. Its LEAP approach (Locate, Evaluate, Assess and Prepare) encourages organisations to start by identifying where they interface with nature, including through their value chains.

Understanding these dependencies is increasingly a question of commercial resilience, not just reporting.

2. Shifting the focus on nature from ambition to delivery

Another observation from the week is that it's clear many businesses have already set sustainability targets. The landscape is evolving and biodiversity and nature issues are increasingly a part of boardroom discussions – shifting attention to delivery, value creation and environmental impact.

When it comes to pursuing those targets through nature-related projects and investing in voluntary nature markets, there are a number of practical considerations for businesses, as discussed in our earlier article – addressing questions around finance, governance, infrastructure and project design. A priority is to map the key issues and nature-related dependencies for your organisation and understand why successful initiatives do not always scale and how progress can be measured.

Many corporate commitments were developed when carbon was the main focus. Alongside carbon, businesses are now paying close attention to biodiversity, water, natural resources and their wider impacts and dependencies. Existing plans may, therefore, need to evolve as environmental risks, commercial priorities and stakeholder expectations change. Experience gained through mandatory nature markets such as biodiversity net gain in England shows how clear requirements can move biodiversity beyond specialist environmental teams and into decisions about investment, risk and project delivery.

COP17’s global review will apply a similar test to national strategies, assessing where progress is being made and where implementation needs to improve. For businesses, likewise, delivery means keeping a strategy relevant, not simply following a plan set several years ago.

3. Financing nature will remain high on the agenda

Discussions during Climate Week NYC underlined one of the main challenges facing nature recovery: how it is funded at scale.

The annual shortfall in biodiversity funding is estimated at US$700 billion. Governments will not close that gap alone, placing greater emphasis on private capital, environmental markets and new investment approaches. At COP17, discussions will cover resource mobilisation, financial mechanisms, and the redirection of financial flows and incentives that encourage activities positive to nature.

Parties are also expected to consider a possible governance framework for biodiversity credits, including safeguards for environmental integrity, human rights and equitable benefit-sharing. This is a developing voluntary market rather than an agreed compliance regime, but clearer principles could help build confidence.

As explored in our article on What makes nature markets work?, demand alone does not create a functioning market. Projects need clear governance, credible measurement and a practical route to long-term delivery.

4. Evidence builds trust

Another central theme across the week's events was the importance of accurate monitoring and reporting – building clear evidence towards set goals.

Investors and stakeholders want to know what nature-based projects are delivering and how environmental claims have been reached. Remote sensing, LiDAR (light detection and ranging) and bioacoustics, for example, are among the tools being used for monitoring across large areas and over long periods.

Technology alone does not establish credibility. Information must be collected consistently, understood in context and linked to clear responsibilities. Businesses also need to know what happens if a project underperforms or fails to deliver the anticipated credits or environmental outcomes. This makes project due diligence, long-term management and clear risk allocation important considerations for those engaging and investing in nature markets.

Monitoring, reporting and reviewing will be central to COP17. For businesses and nature markets, confidence will increasingly depend on evidence of delivery rather than ambition alone.

5. Nature takes time

Another practical point from Climate Week NYC was that natural systems operate on longer timescales than most corporate reporting cycles.

Afforestation, habitat restoration and regenerative agriculture may take years or decades to deliver their intended benefits. Nature-based projects therefore need robust governance, finance and management arrangements that can continue well beyond launch.

Farmers, landowners and local communities are central to delivery. Project structures need to address who will manage the land, how performance will be monitored and what happens if expected outcomes are not achieved. Long-term management arrangements, contractual protections and allocation of delivery risk can be particularly important where a business’s name and reputation are linked to a project.

There is also a balance to strike between improving standards and maintaining certainty. Voluntary methodologies will continue to develop, but physical projects cannot always be redesigned as market expectations change.

Nature markets need clear frameworks and recognised standards, but those standards must also be workable for projects expected to perform over decades.

Preparing for the next phase of biodiversity action

The KMGBF sets the destination for global nature and biodiversity goals, and the time by which we are expected to get there. With progress currently running behind that timeline, COP17 is likely to focus on the case for speeding things up. Many of the themes that came up at Climate Week NYC are likely to carry over into those discussions, although important questions remain around implementation, finance and how progress will be measured. COP17 therefore works as an early warning for businesses of how policy is likely to shift and tighten – allowing them to consider and adapt their approach before the expectations on them become firmer.

Businesses are not only affected by these discussions; their international footprints, investment decisions, purchasing power and supply chains give them an important role in supporting better outcomes for nature. Mapping material impacts and dependencies can help organisations identify risk, strengthen resilience and assess where investment in natural capital or environmental markets may support wider business goals.

Representatives from our Natural Capital team will be joining the conversations at COP17 in Yerevan and will share insights from the conference. The team helps organisations assess nature-related risks across their operations and supply chains, and explore opportunities linked to natural capital and environmental markets. Please get in touch with Ben Stansfield and Helen Emmerson if you are attending or would welcome more insight on any of the points discussed above.

Read our Climate Week NYC 2026 analysis, explore why voluntary nature markets are gaining attention and gain an insight into some of the key risks and practical considerations for organisations engaging in these markets. To find out more about Gowling WLG's work in this area and see our updates and insights, please visit our Natural Capital page.