The Conference of the Parties (COP) on Biodiversity is the “ugly duckling” when compared to its sibling, the COP on Climate Change. The conventions that gave rise to both conferences were opened for signature at the 1992 Earth Summit (Eco-92) in Rio de Janeiro. Since then, the climate agenda has gained greater prominence and a stronger capacity to mobilize governments, businesses, and the academic community. Biodiversity, by contrast, has remained in the background—despite its significant implications for the economy.
Part of this disparity stems from the fact that the climate agenda is focused on a single, central axis: addressing climate change. While this axis involves multiple sectors, it facilitates a unified narrative. Biodiversity, however, is multifaceted: it encompasses the conservation of species and ecosystems, biosafety, access to genetic resources, and a host of other issues. Its broad scope makes communication more challenging, yet it also creates numerous points of intersection with business activities.
Next Monday, October 19, the 17th Conference of the Parties (COP17) to the Convention on Biological Diversity will begin in Yerevan, Armenia. The conference—along with meetings concerning its various protocols—will address topics that could influence costs, investments, and innovation. There are compelling reasons for businesses to follow these negotiations, as the decisions reached at these meetings have a direct impact on day-to-day business operations.
Regarding biosafety, for instance, the Cartagena Protocol—adopted during a COP—established international rules for the cross-border movement of living modified organisms. In Brazil, the Biosafety Law, which also stems from the Convention, regulates activities involving genetically modified organisms and their derivatives. This agenda affects laboratories, the industrial sector, and agribusiness.
The same applies to access to biodiversity. The Convention established principles for accessing genetic resources and sharing the benefits derived from them. The Nagoya Protocol, adopted in 2010, further developed this international framework. Brazilian legislation—which predates the Protocol and is currently centered on Law 13.123/2015—requires registration and other procedures, and mandates benefit-sharing under specific legal circumstances. For companies in the cosmetics, pharmaceutical, food, and biotechnology sectors, these rules impact the research and development of ingredients and products.
Protected areas and environmental licensing also illustrate this influence. While both predate the Convention, international decisions reinforce conservation goals and provide guidance on incorporating biodiversity into impact assessments. Their application at the national level can, for instance, affect the location and viability of business ventures.
Regarding COP17, two areas warrant particular attention from the business sector. The first is the implementation of a multilateral benefit-sharing mechanism (MLM) for the use of digital sequence information (DSI) on genetic resources, which includes the “Cali Fund.” This mechanism aims to ensure that benefits are shared when genetic information is utilized.
Preparatory work covers criteria and contribution rates, as well as the potential impact on competitiveness and the distribution of resources. These definitions could influence costs and investment decisions. It is crucial to identify which users fall within the scope and to ensure coordination with national regulatory frameworks to avoid overlaps and legal uncertainty. While an international decision does not, in itself, constitute an automatically enforceable charge for every company, it can shape domestic measures that have concrete, real-world effects.
The second area concerns the Nagoya Protocol, with a meeting of its Parties to be held in conjunction with COP17. The agenda includes an assessment of the Protocol’s effectiveness and measures to improve its implementation. This discussion is significant because the use of genetic resources within international supply chains requires an understanding of the rules established by provider countries, as well as the compliance measures adopted by user countries. For a company researching or purchasing an ingredient, contracting an overseas laboratory, or integrating resources from various origins into a project, the process may entail obtaining prior consent, meeting access conditions, including benefit-sharing clauses, and providing proof of regulatory compliance, in accordance with applicable standards. Advancing the implementation of these frameworks can facilitate partnerships and provide predictability for research efforts. Conversely, requirements that are unclear or inconsistent across different countries can drive up costs and jeopardize projects.
Monitoring the negotiations and outcomes of the COP will allow the business sector to identify opportunities, influence the process, and anticipate potential impacts on their operations. After all, while this aspect of environmental conferences may be the “ugly duckling”—receiving less attention—decisions made away from the spotlight eventually reach laboratories, factories, and markets alike.
João Emmanuel Cordeiro Lima is a lawyer and partner at Nascimento e Mourão Advogados. He holds a master’s degree and a PhD in Law from PUC/SP.
Valor Econômico, October 16, 2026, 7:00 AM
https://valor.globo.com/opiniao/coluna/cop-da-biodiversidade.ghtml
