The six-day-long 28th meeting of the Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical and Technological Advice or SBSTTA 28 came to an end in the Kenyan capital of Nairobi on August 1, 2026, with consensus as well disagreements over a range of issues concerning global progress on biodiversity.
The SBSTTA is the science advisory group for the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity, the main global treaty on protecting nature.
The meeting, which began on July 27, was tasked with giving countries science-based, practical advice to speed up action on biodiversity goals. It took place ahead of the pivotal 17th Conference of the Parties (COP17) to CBD. COP17, which will take place in Yerevan, Armenia, from October 19-30, will decide on action for nature and reviewing global progress.
The meeting’s chair, Jean Bruno Mikissa from Gabon, said this gathering matters a lot right now. Back in 2022, countries agreed on a plan called the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework or KMGBF. It set 23 goals that the world needs to reach by 2030, like protecting more land and ocean, and stopping species from going extinct.
“#SBSTTA28 has just concluded its work. Parties to the CBD have made important progress on key scientific and technical issues that underpin the implementation of the #KMGBF and pave the way for taking action for nature at #COP17Armenia,” Astrid Schomaker, Executive Secretary of the CBD wrote on the social media platform X (formerly Twitter).
Schomaker told delegates that the first-ever global report on progress under KMGBF is not just a box-ticking exercise but a way to find out whether efforts are big enough and fast enough. Based on national reports from 129 countries, it found the world is not on track to meet most of its 2030 targets, and that money, technology and capacity haven’t flowed to developing countries fast enough.
Besides the progress report, SBSTTA28 discussed marine and coastal biodiversity, sustainable wildlife management, an update to the programme of work on protected areas as well as work related to the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services.
One issue that was the subject of intense debate through the week was synthetic biology.
Synthetic biology is the process of using genetic engineering and related technologies to design, modify or even build new biological parts, organisms or systems from gene-edited crops to microbes engineered to produce chemicals or medicines.
It (synthetic biology) puts the CBD in a tricky spot. On the one hand, it holds out the promise that engineered organisms could help restore degraded ecosystems, fight invasive species, or produce goods more sustainably. On the other, it carries real risks of unintended effects on ecosystems if the engineered organisms spread beyond laboratories or fields, uncertainty about how to regulate rapidly evolving tools, and questions about who controls and profits from the technology.
For developing countries, the worry is even bigger. Most of the world’s advanced synthetic biology research and patents belong to a small number of rich countries and companies. If poorer countries aren’t given real support, money, training, and fair access to technology, as promised under the CBD, they could end up facing the risks of this technology without ever getting to share in its benefits.
It’s a fast-moving field the CBD has tracked for years.
In 2014, countries set up an expert group to check if synthetic biology needed special rules. A second group in 2019 studied risks, including gene drives, but countries disagreed on how strictly to control them. At COP16 in Colombia’s Cali in 2024, governments agreed to draft a full action plan and set up a new expert group to study risks and benefits. Following an early 2026 online consultation, that expert group met in Montreal in May to prepare its findings, the basis for this week’s talks.
The debate isn’t limited to the CBD either. At the International Union for the Conservation of Nature World Conservation Congress in Abu Dhabi in October 2025, members narrowly rejected a moratorium on releasing genetically engineered organisms into the wild, opting for a case-by-case approach instead, a close vote that showed how divided the conservation community remains.
At SBSTTA-28, countries negotiated a draft plan called a ‘thematic Action Plan’ to help countries share money, training, and technology related to synthetic biology. This draft was put together by an Ad Hoc Technical Expert Group set up for the purpose.
Most countries said the draft was a good starting point. Many developing countries also agreed that more money, training, access to technology, and knowledge-sharing is needed so that every country, not just the rich and technologically advanced ones, can benefit from synthetic biology and also manage its risks safely.
But there were disagreements too. Like how flexible should the plan be. Since the technology keeps changing so fast, some countries wanted the plan to be easy to update. Others were more cautious. Secondly, on the need for expert groups, some countries felt that instead of forming new expert committees, the limited money and time should go toward actually putting the plan into action.
Lastly, there was a deeper disagreement on whether the plan should mention nature’s value beyond synthetic biology. Some countries wanted the plan to also recognise that nature has worth on its own, not just as raw material that scientists can use to build new organisms.
Co-chair Martha Kandawa-Schulz of Namibia said countries had agreed on many points but still couldn’t agree on setting up a new expert group. A summary document will now be passed on to SBI-7 for further talks.
SBI-7 CBD is the seventh meeting of the Subsidiary Body on Implementation (SBI-7) under the CBD. It takes place from August 4 to 12, 2026, at the United Nations Environment Programme headquarters in Nairobi.