生物多样性

• • 上一篇    下一篇

《生物多样性公约》现行资金机制及其替代方案研究

王也, 王茜璐, 关婧, 王迎*   

  1. 生态环境部对外合作与交流中心, 北京 100035
  • 收稿日期:2025-09-01 修回日期:2025-09-30 接受日期:2025-12-01
  • 通讯作者: 王迎
  • 基金资助:
    科技部重点研发计划(2024YFF1307600)

Analysis of existing financing mechanisms under the Convention on Biological Diversity and its alternative options

Ye Wang, Qianlu Wang, Jing Guan, Ying Wang*   

  1. Foreign Environmental Cooperation Center (FECO), Ministry of Ecology and Environment (MEE), Beijing, 100035, China
  • Received:2025-09-01 Revised:2025-09-30 Accepted:2025-12-01
  • Contact: Ying Wang
  • Supported by:
    the National Key R&D Program of China(2024YFF1307600)

摘要: 全球生物多样性保护面临巨大的资金缺口,以全球环境基金(Global Environment Facility, GEF)作为实施《生物多样性公约》现行资金机制存在法律地位不确定、治理结构不匹配、资金可及性低、受援国自主权弱等结构性缺陷,难以满足《生物多样性公约》实施需求。本文系统梳理了GEF及其新设的全球生物多样性框架基金(Global Biodiversity Framework Fund, GBFF)的运作机制与局限性,深入分析了缔约方关于是否新建由缔约方大会(Conference of the Parties, COP)授权的正式资金机制的立场分歧,基于《生物多样性公约》第21条规定及谈判动态,构建了新建全球生物多样性基金(Global Biodiversity Fund, GBF)、深度改革GEF、设立GEF下混合过渡机制3种备选方案,并从治理结构、资金可持续性、运营效率、包容性等维度进行了可行性评估。研究旨在为建立更公平、高效、符合《生物多样性公约》宗旨的生物多样性国际履约资金机制提供科学依据,并为在后续相关谈判中维护国家利益、弥合南北分歧提供参考策略建议。

关键词: 《生物多样性公约》, 资金机制, 全球环境基金, 资源调动, “昆蒙框架”

Abstract

Background & Aims: This study aims to address the critical gap in the implementation of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) by systematically analyzing the structural deficiencies of the existing financial mechanism centered on the Global Environment Facility (GEF). It seeks to develop and rigorously evaluate alternative options for a new financial mechanism that operates under the authority of the Conference of the Parties (COP), as mandated by Article 21 of the Convention. The primary objective is to provide a robust, evidence-based framework to inform the ongoing international negotiations, particularly following the impasse at COP17. 

Method: The research employs a qualitative comparative policy analysis, grounded in the negotiation progress of CBD, in which the author was directly involved. A structured multi-criteria assessment framework was developed, evaluating proposed mechanisms against eight key dimensions: legal coherence with the CBD, governance effectiveness, financial sustainability, operational efficiency, accessibility for Least Developed Countries, inclusivity, political acceptability, and implementation feasibility. 

Results: The analysis confirms significant structural flaws in the interim GEF arrangement, including a governance misalignment with the COP, complex access procedures, and limited recipient country ownership. Three distinct alternative models were formulated and assessed: Establishing a new Global Biodiversity Fund demonstrates high legal coherence and long-term effectiveness but faces substantial political and implementation hurdles; Deeply reforming the existing GEF offers practical feasibility but yields uncertain and potentially limited outcomes in addressing core governance issues; A hybrid transitional mechanism within the GEF structure emerges as the most viable compromise, balancing political acceptability with a meaningful step toward a more accountable and accessible system. 

Conclusion & Recommendation: The study concludes that a hybrid transitional mechanism represents a possible viable pathway for breaking the current negotiation deadlock. It provides a concrete foundation for a consensus at COP17 while establishing a clear trajectory for future evolution. The findings underscore that the design of any new financial mechanism must strategically balance legal ideals with political and operational realities. This research provides a critical technical foundation for Parties to make informed decisions, ultimately supporting the establishment of a fair, efficient, and effective financial mechanism for implementing the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework.

Key words: Convention on Biological Diversity, financial mechanism, Global Environment Facility, resource mobilization, KMGBF