Target 21: Data and information

Generated: 2026-04-18T02:26:01Z

Landscape

Of 69 countries with Target 21 extractions, 65 articulate a dedicated commitment to biodiversity data and information; four treat the target as cross-cutting without a standalone formulation. The dominant architecture pairs a national biodiversity information system — most commonly the CBD Clearing-House Mechanism (CHM) — with an indicator framework aligned to the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (KMGBF) monitoring decision. Countries draw the perimeter of the target differently: some center their commitments on physical infrastructure (databases, portals, monitoring networks), others on access conditions (open data, multilingual dissemination, community channels), and others still on the governance of traditional knowledge under free, prior and informed consent (FPIC). A recurring motif across plans from every region is a self-diagnosis of fragmentation — data described as sector-specific, project-based, and not consolidated into a coherent national framework. Some plans extend commitments to emerging monitoring technologies, including environmental DNA (eDNA), bioacoustics, remote sensing, and citizen-science applications.

Variation

The institutional anchor for this target takes many forms. Australia establishes Environment Information Australia and the Biodiversity Data Repository as new entities mandated under reformed environmental legislation. Germany names the National Monitoring Centre for Biodiversity as the coordinating body; Luxembourg proposes a real-time implementation dashboard anchored in the MECDD and its "PNPN unit." Plans from Nigeria, Uganda, and Zambia identify the strengthening of an existing CHM as the central instrument. Indonesia federates more than ten contributing systems across three lead ministries — including InaBIF (the National Research Agency's biodiversity facility), SIDAK (Forestry), SIDAKO (Marine Affairs), and the citizen-science platforms Burungnesia, Kupunesia, and GoARK — into the Indonesian Biodiversity Clearing House (BKKHI), while Colombia documents a multi-system federation spanning SIAC, SiB Colombia, Runap, and multiple Indigenous information systems, and frames data governance through an explicit principle of "information sovereignty" for Indigenous Peoples and ethnic communities.

Treatment of traditional knowledge varies. Argentina's NT19 names ILO Convention 169/89 and National Law No. 24,071 as the statutory basis for FPIC requirements. Iran specifies that the prior and informed consent of "villagers, pastoralists, and nomadic tribes" must be obtained under Iranian legislation. The United Kingdom includes FPIC as a footnote to the national target text, referenced to national legislation. China and Czechia integrate traditional knowledge into their data systems without an explicit FPIC framing.

Costing granularity varies from per-action USD allocations (Lebanon, Madagascar, El Salvador, Rwanda, Equatorial Guinea, Sudan) to unpriced commitments characteristic of most European plans. Denmark's Red List, prepared by Aarhus University, assesses approximately 13,900 species using IUCN criteria. Egypt reports a gap analysis of more than 1,200 indicators across the NBSAP and commits to consolidating them into aligned groups under a KMGBF-aligned monitoring action plan. Norway commits to a publicly available map of natural forests not clear-felled since approximately 1940 by end of 2024, to update the Nature Index for all ecosystems in 2025, and to complete terrestrial ecosystem condition assessments by 2026. Mauritania reports that 82% of stakeholder-survey respondents cited lack of data as a barrier and targets 1,000 registered users on a centralised database by 2028, with 150 of 200 trained decision-makers placed at Wilaya level.

Indicator architecture ranges from headline-only reliance to layered headline, component, complementary, and national suites (Benin, Congo, Lebanon, Paraguay). India tracks four national indicators under Target 21, including trends in the number of electronic Peoples Biodiversity Registers (e-PBRs), documentaries and films on biodiversity, exhibits in science centres and museums, and visits to protected areas, zoological and botanical gardens.

Standouts

China commits to construct "a smart biodiversity monitoring and early warning system integrating space, air, and ground capabilities," using intelligent monitoring equipment and AI for data collection, transmission, identification, and application. The China Species Catalogue is to be updated annually.

Indonesia's National Target 15 measures progress by a single headline indicator — the number of nodes integrated into the BKKHI. The NBSAP states targets of 2 nodes integrated by 2025, 7 by 2030, and 22 by 2045, from a baseline of zero.

Japan commits to maintain no fewer than 1,000 Monitoring Sites 1000 locations (1,089 in FY2021) across forest, satoyama, alpine, coral reef, and other ecosystems, and states that "comprehensive analysis will be conducted building on 50 years of biodiversity data."

Madagascar allocates USD 17,728,736 to Target 21 — the largest single budget line in Programme 3, at 21.96% of that programme — with USD 16,826,635 of that total directed to capacity building, technological tools, and strengthening the Science-Policy Interface.

Malaysia's Action 2.5 sets a quantitative research-to-policy target: "by 2030, at least 30% of research is effectively translated and implemented into policy papers."

Afghanistan's Action 21.2 names "schools, mosques, and media" as channels for biodiversity awareness-raising, with the Ministry of Haj and Religious Affairs listed alongside the Ministry of Education and the Ministry of Information and Culture as cooperating institutions.

Nigeria maintains its Clearing-House Mechanism (www.chm-cbd.com.ng) with "translations in Igbo, Hausa, and Yoruba," naming three national languages for biodiversity information access.

Luxembourg commits to "Explore and deploy new monitoring technologies (remote sensing, environmental DNA, bioacoustics, camera traps)," to joining the European research network Biodiversa+, and to developing a "GDP Well-being" indicator incorporating the state of nature.

Paraguay draws a structural distinction between two national targets: Target 26 governs the general knowledge management system, with an indicator of 60,000 visitors to the SIAM (Environmental Information System) public portal by 2030 from a baseline of zero; Target 27 governs access for indigenous peoples and local communities specifically, and commits to producing dissemination materials covering at least four indigenous languages.

Argentina's NT19 specifies that access to traditional knowledge must be "strictly and solely with their free, prior and informed consent, in accordance with national legislation (ILO Convention 169/89, National Law No. 24,071)" — a formulation that cites named statutes.

Analysis

The CHM functions as the near-universal institutional anchor across this set, but countries occupy different positions relative to it. For some, the CHM is an operational platform being expanded; for others, it is a goal being built for the first time; and for a third group — Nigeria, Zambia, Uganda — the CHM figures explicitly as a lesson from a prior NBSAP cycle in which the plans describe the mechanism as established but not operationalised. The strategy Zambia carries into NBSAP2 names the failure of NBSAP1's CHM and the absence of a monitoring and evaluation framework as the central lessons. The variation is not regional: the same institutional gap appears in high-income and lower-income contexts alike.

Free, prior and informed consent for access to indigenous and local community traditional knowledge appears across every region and political system in this set — not as a common template borrowed from the KMGBF text, but grounded in specific national statutes in multiple cases. Argentina names ILO Convention 169/89 and National Law No. 24,071. Iran specifies consent of "villagers, pastoralists, and nomadic tribes" under Iranian legislation. Sudan, Sweden, and the United Kingdom each anchor the principle to national legal instruments.

A recurring self-diagnosis — data fragmented, project-based, not consolidated — appears in plans from contexts as different as Bhutan, Switzerland, Luxembourg, and Mauritania. In each case, the plan frames Target 21 primarily as a coordination and integration challenge rather than a generation challenge: data, in some form, exists; what the plan identifies as absent is a mechanism to draw it together.

Citizen-science data is formally incorporated into national monitoring architectures in plans spanning multiple continents: Japan's Ikimono Log records millions of access events annually; Indonesia formally names Burungnesia, Kupunesia, and GoARK alongside ministerial systems; Austria's national Biodiversity Monitoring Programme (ÖBM) integrates citizen-science with quality control across all habitat types; Hungary's National Biodiversity Monitoring System adopts citizen-science as an explicit collection mechanism; Sweden operates IT-based citizen-science reporting for invasive alien species. Canada's Domestic Biodiversity Monitoring Framework, meanwhile, classifies headline indicator 21.1 — biodiversity information for monitoring the KMGBF — as "not existing/requires development," placing a self-identified infrastructure gap in a high-capacity context alongside the gaps named in lower-capacity ones.

Per-country detail

Ordered by classification (explicitly_addresses → relevant_to → not_identified) then alphabetically by country name.

Country	National Target	Summary
Afghanistan	Afghanistan will ensure that the knowledge base, both scientific and traditional, necessary for the management and awareness of biodiversity is available and communicated.	The NBSAP commits Afghanistan to ensuring that the knowledge base, both scientific and traditional, necessary for biodiversity management is available and communicated, and that awareness of biodiversity is raised. Two actions are defined. Action 21.1 calls for developing a digital repository of information on the country's biodiversity for use (by 2027, NEPA responsible, with MAIL, Academy of Science, and Academia as cooperators). The indicator is an established digital repository. Action 21.2 calls for raising awareness about biodiversity through schools, mosques, and media (by 2030, NEPA responsible, with Ministry of Haj and Religious Affairs, Ministry of Education, and Ministry of Information and Culture as cooperators). The indicator is a report on biodiversity awareness-raising efforts. The headline indicator is biodiversity information for monitoring the global biodiversity framework (by 2030, NEPA responsible, MAIL as cooperator).
Argentina	Ensure that decision-makers, professionals and society at large have access to the best available data, information and knowledge in order to guide effective and equitable governance and integrated and participatory biodiversity management. Strengthen communication, awareness-raising, education, monitoring, research and knowledge management and, also in this context, ensure that access to the traditional knowledge, innovations, practices and technologies of indigenous peoples and local communities is strictly and solely with their free, prior and informed consent, in accordance with national legislation (ILO Convention 169/89, National Law No. 24,071).	National Target 19 commits to ensuring that decision-makers, professionals, and society at large have access to the best available data, information, and knowledge for effective and equitable governance and integrated and participatory biodiversity management. It calls for strengthening communication, awareness-raising, education, monitoring, research, and knowledge management. The target specifies that access to traditional knowledge, innovations, practices, and technologies of indigenous peoples and local communities must be strictly and solely with their free, prior, and informed consent, in accordance with ILO Convention 169/89 (National Law No. 24,071). Axis 2 (Knowledge and Management of Information on Biodiversity) provides the implementation framework across five sub-themes: information generation (2.1), transfer (2.2), biodiversity information portals (2.3), priority research topics (2.4), and biodiversity monitoring (2.5). The rationale identifies that primary information on national biodiversity is fragmented and not fully systematised, and calls for greater coordination between scientific sectors, local information generators, and decision-makers. The NBSAP references several existing data infrastructure systems: the National Biological Data System (SNDB), National Marine Data System (SNDM), National Digital Repository System, National Genomic Data System (SNDG), National Parks Biodiversity Information System, and the Integrated Environmental Information System (SInIA). Law No. 26,899 on Institutional Digital Repositories of Open Access provides the legal framework for data availability. Biodiversity monitoring objectives include: promoting biodiversity monitoring in sustainable production activities (2.5.4), systematising and making available to the citizenry the information generated from monitoring (2.5.5), and promoting harmonisation of monitoring systems with enforcement and control systems (2.5.6). Geospatial AIB data are to be made available through SInIA.
Austria		Chapter 10 of the strategy is dedicated to the improvement of the scientific basis for achieving and evaluating biodiversity objectives. Stated objectives include: implementation-relevant data on genetic diversity, species and habitats — in particular on the Habitats Directive, Birds Directive and Water Framework Directive — are available in sufficient quality; a systematic nationwide biodiversity monitoring programme has been implemented and secured on a long-term basis; indicators for the assessment of Austria's biodiversity have been developed, taking existing indicators into account; a central Biodiversity Information System Austria (BISA) has been established analogous to the EU BISE portal, with publicly accessible data while safeguarding data protection and sensitive-data considerations (e.g. breeding sites of rare species); taxonomic research is secured and expanded; and research on interactions of biodiversity with global change and economic activities has been expanded. Immediate monitoring measures include development and long-term securing of a nationwide systematic Austrian Biodiversity Monitoring Programme (Österreichisches Biodiversitäts-Monitoringprogramm, ÖBM) taking into account existing programmes (including the EU Copernicus Land Monitoring Service) and integrating citizen science with quality control, developing methods for integrating these data, developing an autonomous, low-maintenance, dense measurement-point network for biodiversity measurement in all habitats (including soil) and associated biotic and abiotic factors, and linking with satellite remote-sensing data. Further measures include preparation of datasets and a uniform description basis for use in BISA as a central data portal, taking into account GBIF Austria; securing valid data foundations for the Farmland and Woodland Bird Index; increasing resources in museums and universities; development and implementation of a concept for recording genetic diversity; establishment of a platform for plant genetic resources; mapping of old, rare and undescribed regional varieties; extension of monitoring pursuant to the NEC Directive 2016/2284 to further habitat types (peatlands, nutrient-poor grasslands, etc.); integrated monitoring of ecological impacts of chemical plant protection in the agricultural landscape; monitoring and evaluation of management plans for protected areas; regular publication of monitoring reports; development of a biodiversity index for Austria by which development of biodiversity becomes quantifiable; monitoring for the evaluation of restoration projects and publication in BISA; and digitisation of existing collections within BISA. Citizen-science infrastructures (databases, apps) for quality assurance and communication are to be supported.
Australia		One of the three enablers of change in the NBSAP is to ensure environmental data and information are widely accessible and support decision-making. This enabler is explicitly stated to align with GBF targets 1 and 21. The Australian Government is establishing Environment Information Australia, which will develop a National Environmental Standard for data and information under reformed environmental legislation, and the Biodiversity Data Repository. The intent is to make data of appropriate form, quality, and coverage available to and useable for all levels of government, business, and the public. The strategy leverages the State of the Environment Report, a comprehensive assessment produced every 2 years by independent experts. First Nations data sovereignty and Indigenous cultural and intellectual property rights are to be developed as part of these data initiatives, with adherence to free, prior, and informed consent processes for culturally safe use of First Nations data. Goal 3 and its objectives further develop data and knowledge-sharing commitments. Progress measures track accessibility of information to the public (11A), robust data from citizen science programs (11B), and collaboration between jurisdictions and research agencies (11C). The strategy commits to developing a comprehensive indicator and reporting framework to monitor progress.
Belgium		The NBSAP commits to improving biodiversity data, monitoring, indicators, and information-sharing through several operational objectives. Under Objective 1, common standards for biodiversity inventories and monitoring are to be defined using a short set of common indicators aligned with EU headline indicators and regional indicators, to enable evaluation of progress towards the 2020 target and facilitate reporting to the European Commission, EEA, OECD, CBD, and OSPAR. Operational objective 7.1 calls for compiling and synthesising existing data, developing a web portal in accordance with GBIF obligations that could serve as a national register of species, and disseminating information to the widest audience in accessible language. Objective 7.3 commits to developing monitoring methodologies and biodiversity indicators in collaboration with European and international programmes, taking Aichi targets and the SEBI initiative into consideration. The monitoring and support mechanisms include: SM1 — adopt, apply, and publish indicators to measure progress by 2015; SM2 — implement the EU reporting tool for NBSs on the CHM website by 2015; SM3 — have a functional Clearing-House Mechanism including a network of practitioners by 2015; SM4 — have functional Clearing-Houses for the CBD and its Protocols by 2015. The Belgian CHM website will integrate the EU module for online integrated reporting on Aichi Targets, EU Biodiversity Strategy, and national strategy.
Burkina Faso		The NBSAP establishes a three-level monitoring-evaluation system (regional, sectoral, national) with data flowing from regional directorates through budget programmes and ministerial sector councils to the national Thematic Group and ultimately to the CBD convention secretariat. The system relies on steering bodies at central and deconcentrated levels. The monitoring-evaluation tools identified include: activity programming templates, the logical framework, reporting templates, standardised information collection forms for each indicator, and indicator dashboards based on the DPSIR system. These tools draw on existing information systems: the Planning and Results Monitoring-Evaluation Information System (SIPSER), the National Observatory for the Environment and Sustainable Development (ONEDD) and its biodiversity data platform (Clearing-House Mechanism/CHM), the information exchange centres of the Cartagena and Nagoya Protocols on ABS, the Integrated Monitoring-Evaluation System (DISE), and the national MRV platform. The strategy provides for a mid-term evaluation in 2028 to assess body functioning and objective achievement (conducted by DGESS/MEEA with all implementation actors), and a final evaluation in 2030 to measure expected outcomes (mobilising independent expertise under a technical monitoring committee). Action 3.2.1.2 specifies the preparation of annual and mid-term implementation reports, development of a monitoring-evaluation manual, compilation of a compendium of good practices and know-how for sustainable biodiversity management, and training of managers in modelling, database management, geo-portal, and programming. The NP-BES and an existing environmental data collection and dissemination platform are noted as institutional achievements.
Benin		The NBSAP contains a detailed national monitoring framework (section 5.5) designed to provide Benin with a reliable, coherent, and dynamic instrument for assessing NBSAP implementation progress and fulfilling CBD commitments. The framework pursues five objectives: monitoring biodiversity state and conservation effectiveness; informing public policy on environment, planning, agriculture, fisheries, and forestry; facilitating national and international reporting under the CBD; strengthening stakeholder engagement through reliable data; and contributing to KMGBF target achievement through a continuous assessment mechanism (§124). Indicator selection followed participatory workshops involving officials, civil society, and local authorities, drawing on the NBSAP 2011-2020, the KMGBF, public consultations, and sectoral policy documents. A maximum of two headline indicators was retained per national target, following COP 16 Decision 16/5 and the Cameroon workshop recommendation to limit headline indicators to what can genuinely be reported on (§125). A national data collection mission in August 2025 deployed four teams of university professors, NGOs, traditional knowledge holders, private sector representatives, and forestry officers across the entire territory. For each indicator, the mission documented: definition, data-holding structures, collection methodology, source documents, evaluation cost, and responsible persons (§126). The monitoring framework development process extends from September 2024 to September 2026, comprising eight stages from preparation through to finalisation and validation (§127). All three programmes have detailed performance indicators with specified verification sources including technical reports, field inspections, geospatial data, management reports, GIS data, and MRV systems (§82, §84, §86).
Brazil	Ensure, by 2030, the production, qualification, accessibility, interoperability, and capacity for the reuse of data, information, and knowledge on Brazilian biodiversity, considering different territorial scales and data sources, including raw data repositories. This aims to inform public policies, promote effective and equitable governance, and enable the integrated and participatory management of biodiversity and sociobiodiversity data. It also seeks to strengthen communication, awareness, education, monitoring, research, and knowledge management, ensuring collective benefit and the participation of Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities in governance processes. In line with national legislation and relevant international obligations, it must also ensure that traditional knowledge, innovations, practices, and technologies of Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities are accessed only with their free, prior, and informed consent, and that benefits arising from such access are shared in a fair and equitable manner.	The NBSAP establishes National Target 21, committing to ensure by 2030 the production, qualification, accessibility, interoperability, and capacity for reuse of data, information, and knowledge on Brazilian biodiversity. The target considers different territorial scales and data sources, including raw data repositories, and aims to inform public policies, promote effective and equitable governance, and enable integrated and participatory management of biodiversity and sociobiodiversity data. The target calls for strengthening communication, awareness, education, monitoring, research, and knowledge management, while ensuring collective benefit and the participation of Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities in governance processes. Traditional knowledge, innovations, practices, and technologies of IPLCs are to be accessed only with free, prior, and informed consent, with fair and equitable benefit-sharing. The Brazilian Biodiversity Information System (SiBBr) was created in 2018 as a national data infrastructure. The NBSAP also notes the National Biodiversity Monitoring Programme (MONITORA) in conservation units, established by ICMBio Normative Instruction No. 3/2017 and updated in 2022. The monitoring section for EPAEBs and EPALBs states that structured monitoring across three government levels can feed into national CBD reporting. Synergies are cited with SDGs 14.a, 17.6, 17.7, and 17.8.
Bhutan	By 2030, ensure that information and knowledge related to biodiversity are available and accessible	Bhutan's National Target 9 states: "By 2030, ensure that information and knowledge related to biodiversity are available and accessible," aligned with KMGBF Target 21. The rationale notes that while Bhutan has made notable progress in generating data on key species and habitats, data remains fragmented across institutions, inconsistently managed, and often inaccessible. Weak coordination has led to inconsistencies in data quality and format, duplication of efforts, and limited accessibility. Two strategies are identified: strengthening the biodiversity information and knowledge base, and enhancing availability and accessibility of biodiversity-related information. Actions include identifying data gaps, conducting targeted biodiversity assessments to address them, developing SOPs for data collation, validation, and publication, updating Bhutan Biodiversity Statistics, establishing a national GBIF node to facilitate data sharing and integration, upgrading the Bhutan Biodiversity Portal as a centralized data repository, and making the Portal website/app user-friendly and accessible across multiple platforms. The implementation framework establishes M&E through a framework with specific indicators per action, led by the NBSAP unit at NBC with support from the Technical Working Committee. The Clearing House Mechanism, housed within DECC, serves as a platform for reporting on NBSAP implementation status.
Belarus	Raising the level of awareness of state bodies, public associations, bodies of territorial public self-governance, other legal entities, and natural persons, including individual entrepreneurs, regarding the state and significance of biological diversity, as well as the measures that need to be taken for its conservation and sustainable use.	Two strategy objectives address KMGBF Target 21. Objective 17 (mapped to Target 21) commits to raising awareness among state bodies, public associations, bodies of territorial public self-governance, other legal entities, and natural persons regarding the state and significance of biological diversity and the measures needed for its conservation and sustainable use. Objective 18 (mapped to Targets 20 and 21) addresses scientific knowledge enhancement. The National Action Plan contains an extensive set of data and information actions for 2026–2030: maintenance of state cadastres for the animal world (item 6), plant world (item 7), land (item 8), water (item 9), forests (item 10), and greenhouse gas emissions (item 11); the peatland register (item 12); monitoring of fauna and flora, ecosystems in SPNAs, peatlands, and surface waters (item 16); the SPNA register (item 17); and creation of an information resource and open geoinformation database on SPNAs, Red Book species habitats, typical/rare landscapes, and other nature conservation areas (item 20). The state governance chapter also describes national clearing-house mechanisms on biodiversity conservation and biosafety.
Canada		Canada operationalizes Target 21 primarily through the Domestic Biodiversity Monitoring Framework (DBMF), described in Annex 2 of the 2030 Strategy. The DBMF incorporates the mandatory 26 KMGBF headline indicators (most using internationally accepted IUCN/CBD standards) and adds domestic indicators where headline indicators do not reflect Canadian conditions or cover the full breadth of a target. The framework uses the 2011-2020 baseline period identified in the KMGBF Monitoring Framework, with assessments against baselines scheduled for the 2026 and 2029 reporting periods. Indicators are sourced from existing federal programs, notably the Canadian Environmental Sustainability Indicators, StatCan (including the Census of Environment), Parks Canada, NRCan, ECCC, DFO, AAFC, CIRNAC, and GAC. The DBMF tables in the briefing enumerate indicators per target, with statuses ranging from 'existing/in use' to 'under development' and 'not existing/requires development'. Supporting data infrastructure noted across other targets includes: NRCan's National Forest Inventory, National Forest Information System, National Forestry Database, and National Forest Carbon Monitoring Accounting and Reporting System; the State of Canada's Oceans and State of Canada's Forests reports; the Canada Marine Planning Atlas; DFO's eDNA laboratory (launched early 2024) and spatial data for AIS introductions and spread (to be launched by 2027); CFIA's Canadian Plant Health Information System (to be launched by 2024); the RADARSAT Constellation Mission; the Canadian Protected and Conserved Areas Database with data provided to the World Database of Protected Areas annually; and Canada's Open Data Portal for SAR data. Headline indicator 21.1 on biodiversity information for monitoring the KMGBF is listed as 'not existing/requires development'.
Democratic Republic of the Congo	By 2030, an intra- and cross-sectoral collaboration and coordination mechanism is established to guarantee equitable access to reliable data, traditional knowledge, available information and knowledge, so that their use enables decision-makers, practitioners and the public to apply good governance as well as rational, integrated and participatory management of biodiversity, with the aim of strengthening communication, awareness-raising, education, monitoring, research and knowledge management, in accordance with national legal frameworks.	Objective 21 commits the DRC to establishing an intra- and cross-sectoral collaboration and coordination mechanism by 2030 to guarantee equitable access to reliable data, traditional knowledge and available information for decision-makers, practitioners and the public. The objective supports communication, awareness-raising, education, monitoring, research and knowledge management, and operationalises the national Clearing-House Mechanism (CHM). The estimated budget is USD 20 million.
Republic of the Congo	Target 22/21: By 2030, at the latest, involve all national stakeholders in the review, development, updating and implementation of policies, objectives, targets and the national biodiversity strategy and action plan, as well as the monitoring and review of progress at all levels, in a transparent and accountable manner.	National Target 22/21 commits by 2030 to involve all national stakeholders in the review, development, updating and implementation of policies, goals, targets and the NBSAP, as well as in the monitoring and review of progress at all levels, in a transparent and accountable manner — and to ensure that decision-makers, practitioners and the public have access to the best available data, information and knowledge for effective and equitable governance and integrated, participatory management of biodiversity. Result A5O22R22 contains five actions: centralisation of biological diversity data at the INS (National Institute of Statistics) for dissemination through the INS Open Data portal (2027); involvement of all stakeholders in the development, review, updating and implementation of the NBSAP (2027); updating of the NBSAP (2030); establishment of a monitoring and evaluation mechanism for the NBSAP (2025); and integration of biodiversity conservation and sustainable use concerns into training programmes for each sector of activity (2025). Indicators include availability of the biodiversity database, updated NBSAP, training programmes on biodiversity conservation and use for each sector, operational monitoring and evaluation unit, and sex-disaggregated attendance lists involving stakeholders. Section 7.1.3.2 describes the management and monitoring unit placed under the Ministry responsible for Sustainable Development, with missions including secretariat for the national biodiversity advisory committee, central-level coordination and evaluation, periodic publication of the biodiversity assessment in Congo, awareness-raising, and ensuring Congo's participation in CBD Conferences of the Parties. Section 7.2 specifies that the monitoring framework follows Decision 15/6 of COP 15, uses indicator groups, and defines roles and responsibilities for CSOs and IPLC. Section 7.2.4 explains the indicator architecture (headline, component, complementary and national indicators as recommended by the GBF Decision 15/6), acknowledges absence of many indicators as a weakness, and proposes national-indicator specification sheets. Section 7.2.5 sets out a three-tier implementation monitoring mechanism (central, departmental, communal) with departmental committees developing annual action plans and unannounced site visits.
Switzerland		The NBSAP addresses Target 21 through Measure M14 (Optimised management of biodiversity data and information), under SBS Objective 7 (develop and disseminate knowledge). FOEN holds responsibility, with monitoring programmes, data and information centres, species protection coordination centres, advisory services, research institutes, the Swiss Biodiversity Forum of SCNAT, and museums as partners. The action plan notes that numerous organisations generate data and disseminate knowledge on biodiversity, but this information is not systematically adapted to diverse interest groups, which are often locally anchored (e.g. municipalities). The potential of existing data and expertise is therefore not optimally exploited. By the end of 2027, the organisation of biodiversity data and information processing and dissemination is to be analysed and network optimisation designed. By 2030, this optimisation is to be developed and implemented step by step, in particular establishing a network that assists with data interpretation, offers information services, and brings together experts. Implementation of biodiversity measures is to be supported by targeted advisory services. The analysis is to consider synergies with instruments addressing other challenges such as the global transition, renewable energies, food security, and health.
Côte d'Ivoire		The NBSAP commits to making an information system on biological diversity including the Clearing-House Mechanism (CHM) operational by 2020. The strategy calls for building a biological diversity database including information on species, threatened species, genetic resources (in situ and ex situ), ecosystems and habitats, followed by the integration of comprehensive analysis, planning, assessment, and management systems to achieve a national biodiversity information network. The CHM capacity is to be strengthened so it can fully play its role in sharing data on conservation and sustainable use. For fisheries, the strategy calls for strengthening resource monitoring and surveillance capabilities, noting that both deep-sea and artisanal fishing surveillance systems struggle due to weak material and human resources and poor coordination. Similarly, for wildlife, the strategy calls for developing standard methods for assessing and monitoring populations. A separate ABS clearing-house is planned under Article 14 of the Nagoya Protocol to facilitate information sharing on access and benefit-sharing. Monitoring and evaluation of strategy implementation is assigned to the Coordination Platform for Nature Protection Conventions and Multilateral Agreements on Biological Diversity.
Chile	By 2027, a Biodiversity, Ecosystems and Ecosystem Services Assessment will be initiated at the national level. I.7: By 2030, there will be an inventory of terrestrial, marine and inland water ecosystems housed in the biodiversity information system	The NBSAP addresses knowledge and data through multiple provisions. Objective V is explicitly oriented toward strengthening scientific and traditional knowledge. A national target under Objective V commits to initiating a national-level Biodiversity, Ecosystems and Ecosystem Services Assessment by 2027. National target I.7 requires that by 2030 an inventory of terrestrial, marine, and inland water ecosystems is housed in the biodiversity information system. The monitoring section describes the Ministry of the Environment creating a new platform for monitoring, building biodiversity trend indicators, and preparing the 7th National Biodiversity Report. The gap analysis identifies the absence of a platform for measuring NBS progress and biodiversity trend indicators as a gap. Linked instruments include the Escazu Agreement and the Water Resources Strategy.
Cameroon	Strengthen the systems for collecting, centralising, exchanging and making available biodiversity data and information to decision-makers, practitioners and the general public.	The NBSAP establishes a detailed architecture for biodiversity data and knowledge management, forming the backbone of the monitoring and surveillance system described in Chapter IV. The National Biodiversity Information System (Système National d'Information sur la Biodiversité, SNIB) is designated as the foundation of the data architecture, centralising spatial data and data from biological inventories, community observations, ecological monitoring, and various databases and thematic platforms. Information is structured according to indicators aligned with global and national targets, covering pressures on biodiversity, its state, socioeconomic impacts, and responses. The governance of the monitoring and evaluation mechanism is organised around three levels: (i) the operational level, which mobilises technical services, decentralised authorities, civil society organisations and local communities for field monitoring and participatory surveillance; (ii) the sectoral level, bringing together ministries responsible for sectors impacting biodiversity to collect, validate and integrate sectoral data; and (iii) the strategic level, led by the National Permanent Committee on Biodiversity, which consolidates information, validates results, analyses trends and produces national dashboards for public policy guidance. The Technical Secretariat of the National Permanent Committee constitutes the operational pillar, ensuring harmonisation, validation, integration, reliability, traceability and regular updating of data. Objective 14 in the action plan calls for strengthening the systems for collecting, centralising, exchanging, and making available biodiversity data and information to decision-makers, practitioners, and the general public. Action 14.1 includes: identifying data and information holders and establishing an institutional transparency mechanism (Activity 14.1.1, targeting at least 6 functional and interoperable platforms/systems including at least one integrated national platform, up from approximately 2 to 3 sectoral and non-integrated platforms); developing a model and mechanism for centralising and updating biodiversity and ecosystem services data (Activity 14.1.2); and capitalising on traceability initiatives by clarifying modalities of data access, cost-sharing, and roles through at least 10 operational protocols/agreements (up from approximately 1 to 2). The institutional framework includes the Steering Committee for the Clearing-House Mechanism (established 2021), responsible for identifying national biodiversity information sources and promoting them through the CHM, as well as using the CHM as a tool for dialogue with civil society and stakeholders. The CHM Cameroon portal (cm.chm-cbd.net) is listed among reference databases. The MINEPDED published a National Integrated Biodiversity Information System (SNIB) environmental data governance framework in 2024.
China	By 2030, regular surveys and routine monitoring shall basically achieve full coverage of ecosystems in key regions, key species and important biological genetic resources, and the level of biodiversity survey and monitoring shall be comprehensively enhanced.	The NBSAP dedicates two Priority Actions to data and information: Priority Action 21 on biodiversity survey and monitoring, and Priority Action 24 on smart biodiversity governance. The 2030 strategic objectives state that the national biodiversity monitoring network shall be essentially completed. Priority Action 21 requires improving technical standards for biodiversity survey and monitoring, promoting standardisation and normalisation. Comprehensive surveys are to be advanced in biodiversity conservation priority areas and key regions (Yellow River, Yangtze River, Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei, nearshore sea areas), covering ecosystems, key biological species, and important biological genetic resources. Existing monitoring stations and plots are to be leveraged to improve the biodiversity monitoring network, with biodiversity incorporated into ecological quality monitoring. The China Species Catalogue is to be updated annually. Priority Action 24 calls for applying new-generation information technologies to achieve system management, integrated display, and deep mining of biodiversity conservation information. A national biodiversity regulatory data integration and sharing system is to be established, promoting cross-departmental, cross-regional, and cross-level data aggregation. Social biodiversity data resources are to be uploaded and integrated, with data sharing promoted under information security safeguards. Big data-assisted scientific decision-making mechanisms are to be developed. A smart biodiversity monitoring and early warning system integrating space, air, and ground capabilities is to be constructed, using intelligent monitoring equipment and AI for data collection, transmission, identification, and application. By 2030, regular surveys and routine monitoring shall basically achieve full coverage of ecosystems in key regions, key species, and important biological genetic resources.
Colombia		The NBSAP documents a comprehensive national information architecture for biodiversity: SIAC (Sistema de Información Ambiental de Colombia) administered by MinAmbiente and SINA research institutes, subdividing into SIA (Sistema de Información Ambiental, monitoring quality and state of natural resources) and Sipga (Sistema de Información para la Planificación y la Gestión Ambiental). SiB Colombia (operated by the Alexander von Humboldt Institute) publishes national biodiversity figures interoperable with GBIF. Runap (Registro Único Nacional de Áreas Protegidas) is operated by PNNC. Additional systems referenced include SIPRA (agriculture), ANNA, SIMMA and SIMCO (mining and energy), SCAE (environmental accounts) at DANE, the IGAC cartographic and cadastral systems, and indigenous information systems operated by CNTI (GIS, SIMA, Simosof, Sivospi), ONIC (SMT) and OPIAC (Sistema de monitoreo para la Amazonía), plus the Indigenous Navigator and the Observatory of Ethnic and Peasant Territories. The Action Plan commits to the headline indicator 19 on biodiversity-related information for monitoring the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, led by MinAmbiente, with Instituto Humboldt responsible for data collection and calculation. For 2026 reporting, the Plan requires: mobilising species records and lists to SiB Colombia in 2025; strengthening existing Indigenous information systems during 2025-2026 ensuring interoperability with information of all peoples and integration with SiB Colombia; reaching memoranda of understanding with Indigenous and Campesino communities to safeguard traditional knowledge and to define public and non-public data during the 2025-2026 biennium; and reporting the indicator in 2026 respecting data-publication agreements. For 2030 reporting, the Plan requires methodological-sheet development in 2026-2027 covering monitoring efforts and representativeness; data collection in 2027-2028; and indicator calculation in 2029. Voices from the territories call for creation and strengthening of research centres in the Amazon, inter-institutional monitoring systems, the National Platform for Monitoring the implementation of the participatory Action Plan with a differential approach, access to scientific information for local actors, and reactivation of environmental knowledge centres as repositories of environmental, traditional and scientific information including ancestral-knowledge databases. The monitoring chapter stresses the need for information sovereignty with a national perspective that includes Indigenous Peoples and Black, Afro-descendant, Raizal, Palenquero and Rural communities, and for official reporting categories drawn from their own knowledge and information systems.
Czechia		The Strategy commits to systematic data collection, storage, and availability for biodiversity governance. The Nature Conservation Findings Database (NDOP) is designated as the central repository for all species occurrence data, and the Nature Conservation Information System (ISOP) integrates monitoring methodologies and makes data publicly available. AOPK ČR operates the nationwide system. The Strategy notes that unification of data collection and use has not yet been completed and that project-based financing of monitoring is a persistent problem. Species protection processes and permits are to be digitised to the maximum extent possible for consistency, transparency, and cumulative impact assessment. A new ISOP module — the Landscape Register — will create a unified and public register of green infrastructure elements (Measure 1.3.8, deadline 2030). A central register of significant landscape features (VKP) and their core zones will also be created within ISOP. Established indicators include Article 17 Habitats Directive and Article 12 Birds Directive reporting, Red Lists, the common bird species index (42 species representing 95% of nesting birds), and biodiversity indices including those introduced with the Nature Restoration Regulation. The Strategy commits to GBIF membership (Measure 9.2.2) and participation in pan-European monitoring harmonisation, including use of European Space Agency data. Additional evaluation options identified include the National Forest Inventory (NIL), the area of ecologically significant features, water quality surveys under the Water Framework Directive, and monitoring of pesticide content in non-target species.
Germany	By 2030, nationwide biodiversity monitoring will have been further developed and expanded at the National Monitoring Centre for Biodiversity, with the involvement of all ministries and stakeholders, and will make data on biodiversity in Germany available on a scale which, among other things, will facilitate better measurement of adherence to the targets in this strategy.	Target 6.2 of the NBS 2030 commits to further developing and expanding nationwide biodiversity monitoring at the National Monitoring Centre for Biodiversity by 2030, with the involvement of all ministries and stakeholders. The goal is to make data on biodiversity in Germany available on a scale that facilitates better measurement of adherence to the strategy's targets. The NBS dialogue platform (www.biologische-vielfalt.de) is designed to transparently set out progress on implementing measures and meeting targets, providing visibility and traceability regarding the dialogue process and its outcomes. Corporate reporting under the CSRD/ESRS framework (Target 16.2) will generate additional biodiversity data from the private sector. Several indicators in the Annex I are flagged as 'to be developed' or 'in development', reflecting an ongoing effort to build out the monitoring infrastructure.
Denmark		The NBSAP identifies three public databases on nature and biodiversity available in Denmark. The Danish Environment Portal (miljoeportal.dk) provides environmental data. Arter.dk collects information about Danish species and makes data available to scientists, nature conservationists, and the public. It is operated as a partnership between the Danish Environmental Protection Agency, the Natural History Museum of Denmark, Aarhus Natural History Museum, and DanBIF, with financing from the Aage V. Jensen Nature Fund, the 15 June Foundation, and the Danish state. The Danish Red List, facilitated and prepared by Aarhus University, provides a comprehensive overview of approximately 13,900 Danish species with information on how endangered each species is, assessed using the international IUCN Red List criteria. The strategy for managing endangered and red-listed species also identifies the possibility of increasing data collection with the assistance of the public and the creation of a joint-disciplinary biodiversity platform for stakeholders.
Egypt		The NBSAP reports a gap analysis on indicators included in the National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan, examining more than 1,200 indicators at all levels, consolidated into groups on cross-cutting topics (spatial planning, nature reserves, invasive species, threatened species, biodiversity, incentives, local communities, gender equality, awareness) and target-specific groups (biosafety, ABS). A monitoring action plan has been prepared aligning national indicators with the KMGBF monitoring decision. Section 46 sets out the establishment of a national biodiversity monitoring and reporting system, including defining objectives and vision, a legal and regulatory framework, partnerships with universities and research centres, environmental surveys using remote sensing, GIS, and AI, centralised national databases accessible to researchers and decision-makers, measurable indicators (habitat loss, threatened species, biological-population change), periodic (five-yearly) evaluations, national and international reports, awareness campaigns, community-science programmes for citizen submissions, and sustainable funding with human and technical resources. Section 60 elaborates the monitoring framework's objectives, components (indicators, data collection via monitoring-station networks in reserves, wetlands, and coral reefs; modelling-based analysis; periodic reports), implementation mechanisms (inter-ministerial cooperation including MoE and MoA, local-community involvement, satellites/drones/remote sensing, sustainable funding), and challenges (limited resources, data gaps, coordination). Section 26 on Biodiversity Knowledge Management targets information gathering, analysis, knowledge exchange between researchers, policymakers, and local communities, and policy development. Components include databases, documentation of species records and ecological sites, training, and partnerships among universities, NGOs, and government. Progress of GBF objectives is to be evaluated at mid-term (2027–2028), with an independent monitoring and evaluation unit proposed. Annex 4 reproduces KMGBF Target 21 and endorses free, prior, and informed consent for accessing indigenous and local community traditional knowledge.
Spain		The NBSAP commits to establishing a National System for generation, monitoring, and governance of knowledge on natural heritage and biodiversity from 2022 onwards, enabling continuous assessment of conservation status. The system covers all taxonomic groups and habitat types in terrestrial and marine environments, with specific programmes for pollinating insects, invasive alien species, soil biodiversity, wetlands, forests, geological heritage, and the marine environment. All information is to be managed and integrated into the Nature Data Bank (Banco de Datos de la Naturaleza), progressing towards effective implementation of all components of the Spanish Inventory of Natural Heritage and Biodiversity and approval of the Spanish System of Natural Heritage and Biodiversity Indicators. A new database on habitats throughout Spain including conservation status and cartography is to be operational by 2025. National atlases are to be updated within five years. Dissemination and accessibility of data and information on biodiversity are to be promoted, with annual and six-yearly reports of the Inventory serving as fundamental reference tools. The Action Plan for Environmental Education for Sustainability (PAEAS) is to promote dissemination and awareness-raising. For monitoring the Strategic Plan itself, an interim monitoring and evaluation report is planned for the first half of 2026, aligned with CBD national reports and EU Nature Directives six-yearly reports. Global CBD indicators of mandatory use are to be employed, supplemented by complementary and national-level indicators.
European Union		The strategy includes several initiatives to improve biodiversity data and information systems. The Forest Information System for Europe is to be further developed to produce up-to-date assessments of the condition of European forests and link all EU forest-data web-platforms. A new Knowledge Centre for Biodiversity is to be established to track and assess progress by the EU and its partners, including in relation to implementation of biodiversity-related international instruments. The new biodiversity governance framework includes a monitoring and review mechanism with a clear set of agreed indicators for regular progress assessment. The Commission also commits to developing an EU-wide methodology to map, assess, and achieve good condition of ecosystems. The strategy supports the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) and proposes a science-policy mechanism under Horizon Europe for research-based options to ratchet up implementation.
Gabon	Ensure that knowledge is available and accessible to guide action for biodiversity	Gabon's National Target 21 aims to ensure that knowledge is available and accessible to guide action for biodiversity. The strategic action is to create a website, with an operational website as the key indicator. MEEC is the responsible stakeholder. Beyond the website, the NBSAP describes a comprehensive data and monitoring architecture. The monitoring and evaluation system includes process indicators (monitored monthly or quarterly), outcome indicators (periodic surveys), and impact indicators (mid-term and final evaluations). A National Dashboard with priority indicators, graphical visualisation, and an alert system is planned. A Biodiversity Information System will be based on the Ministry's database and connected to the national database (SNORF — National System for the Observation of Natural Resources and Forests). The system will also feed the CBD's Clearing-House Mechanism (CHM), the Biosafety Clearing-House (BCH), and the ABS Clearing-House (ABS-CH). The communication plan calls for disseminating the NBSAP through official publication, simplified versions for the general public, summaries for decision-makers, and online availability through the CHM. Standardised progress reports, annual joint reviews (2–3 days with all stakeholders), a mid-term evaluation, and a final evaluation are all specified as part of the monitoring framework.
United Kingdom	The UK will ensure that the best available data, information and knowledge are accessible to decision makers, practitioners and the public to guide effective and equitable governance, integrated and participatory management of biodiversity, and to strengthen communication, awareness-raising, education, monitoring, research and knowledge management and, also in this context, traditional knowledge, innovations, practices and technologies of indigenous peoples and local communities should only be accessed with their free, prior and informed consent, in accordance with national legislation.	The NBSAP sets UK target 21, committing to ensure that the best available data, information and knowledge are accessible to decision makers, practitioners and the public. The stated purposes are to guide effective and equitable governance, integrated and participatory management of biodiversity, and to strengthen communication, awareness-raising, education, monitoring, research and knowledge management. A footnote specifies that traditional knowledge, innovations, practices and technologies of indigenous peoples and local communities should only be accessed with their free, prior and informed consent, in accordance with national legislation.
Equatorial Guinea	By 2030, have a well-defined national strategy that guarantees the collection of reliable data, access to information, as well as the awareness-raising, education and training of authorities, professionals and the general population on the importance of biodiversity and its sustainable management.	National Target 20 of the ENPADIB (corresponding to global Target 21) commits, by 2030, to establish an integrated national system of information, education and awareness-raising on biodiversity, ensuring the generation of reliable data, open and orderly access to environmental information, and the strengthening of technical, institutional and social capacities for informed decision-making and active participation of the population in biodiversity conservation and sustainable use. Implementation conditions include development of a resource mobilisation action plan allocated to biodiversity education and training, and continuous training of national technicians and authorities in environmental education, natural resource management and environmental techniques associated with strategic sectors (petroleum, gas and other hydrocarbons). A budget line of USD 2,000,000 is attached in §246 for training of staff and authorities. Table 19 in §216 establishes commitments to design a national biological diversity database, implement cooperation and information exchange mechanisms between governmental and non-governmental bodies, and use the CBD clearing-house mechanism with at least 2 information-collection protocols. Degree of alignment is HIGH (key enabling target for governance, transparency and informed decision-making).
Hungary		The NBSAP addresses data and information systems through multiple monitoring and database instruments and through Objective 17 on strengthening research and ensuring evidence-based conservation. Existing data infrastructure includes: the Ecosystem Map of Hungary (20×20m resolution, 56 categories, freely available and downloadable online); the National Forest Database containing official records of naturalness for individual subcompartments; the Forest Protection Measuring and Observation System (encompassing health assessment, intensive monitoring, national light trap network, forest protection forecasting, climate change monitoring, game-caused habitat change monitoring, systematic national forest inventory, national forest damage register, national forest fire database, and forest fire risk assessment); the central soil conservation database 'Talajweb' (planned); and the National Biodiversity Monitoring System. Target 17.2 commits to reviewing the NBMS, increasing citizen science data collection, and ensuring monitoring data are systematically stored and made available in an appropriately regulated framework. Target 17.3 calls for making scientific results available for evidence-based policy and disseminating them in accessible form. Target 16.1 commits to mutual provision of data between relevant sectors for ecosystem condition and services assessments.
Indonesia	National Target 15 (TN 15): Strengthening knowledge through the integration of biodiversity data and information.	National Target 15 (TN 15): Strengthening Knowledge through the Integration of Biodiversity Data and Information is the NBSAP's mapping to KMGBF Target 21. The Indonesian Biodiversity Clearing House (BKKHI), coordinated by the Ministry of Environment and Forestry as National Focal Point for CBD, serves as the primary integration platform. Contributing systems include the National Biodiversity Information Network (NBIN), InaBIF (BRIN), the Information and Data System for the Conservation of Natural Resources and Ecosystems (SIDAK, Kemenhut), the Conservation Database System (SIDAKO, KKP), the Spatial Monitoring and Reporting Tool – Resort Based Management (SMART RBM), Bank Gen Pertanian, KarstKITA, Makoyana, Whale Stranding Indonesia, and citizen-science apps Burungnesia, Kupunesia and GoARK. TN 15 is measured by one indicator: number of nodes integrated into the BKKHI, with targets of 2 in 2025, 7 in 2030 and 22 in 2045 (baseline zero). It is delivered through four action groups. The Monitoring, Evaluation, and Reporting framework (§199) feeds IBSAP outputs into the BKKHI and the Biodiversity Management Index (IPK), with variables aligned to IBSAP national targets. The IPK ranges 0-1, is embedded in RPJPN 2025-2045 and RPJMN 2025-2029 as a main development indicator, is measured annually at national and regional levels, and bridges to CBD national reporting. Lead entities are KLH/BPLH, Kemenhut, KKP, Kementan, Bappenas, BRIN, Barantin and local governments.
India	Ensure that the best available science, research, knowledge from all sources and evidence-based information are accessible to decision-makers, practitioners, and the public to guide effective and equitable governance, integrated and participatory management, and strengthen communication, education, awareness-raising, and knowledge management and research, and monitor conservation of biodiversity.	India's NBSAP commits to ensuring that the best available science, research, knowledge from all sources and evidence-based information are accessible to decision-makers, practitioners, and the public to guide effective and equitable governance, integrated and participatory management, and communication, education, awareness-raising, and knowledge management. The headline indicator is the KM-GBF monitoring information indicator (21.1), with component indicators on the participation of indigenous peoples and local communities in decision-making and the Index of Linguistic Diversity. Complementary indicators include growth in records in the Living Planet Index and species database, growth in species occurrence records accessible through the Global Biodiversity Information Facility, the IUCN Red List, and the Ocean Biodiversity Information System. Four national indicators are tracked: trends in digitisation of biodiversity data and associated traditional knowledge, including number of e-PBRs (electronic Peoples Biodiversity Registers) prepared (21.1); number of documentaries, films, and feature films related to biodiversity (21.2); number of exhibits and galleries on biodiversity in science centres and museums (21.3); and trends in visits to Protected Areas, Natural History Museums, Science Centers, exhibitions, zoological and botanical gardens, urban parks, city forests, and eco-tourism areas (21.4). Lead agencies include MoEFCC through its Environment Information Awareness Capacity Building and Livelihood Program (EIACP), National Biodiversity Authority, State Biodiversity Boards, Centre for Environment Education, National Council of Science Museums, Central Zoo Authority, and many others.
Iran	Ensure that the best available data, information, and knowledge are accessible to Iranian decision-makers, practitioners, and the public to guide effective and equitable governance, integrated and participatory management of biodiversity. Strengthen communication, awareness-raising, education, monitoring, research, and knowledge management. Traditional knowledge, innovations, practices, and technologies of villagers, pastoralists, and nomadic tribes should only be accessed with their prior and informed consent, in accordance with IR Iran legislation.	NT-21 commits to ensuring that the best available data, information, and knowledge are accessible to Iranian decision-makers, practitioners, and the public to guide effective and equitable governance, integrated and participatory management of biodiversity, and to strengthening communication, awareness-raising, education, monitoring, research, and knowledge management. It specifies that traditional knowledge, innovations, practices, and technologies of villagers, pastoralists, and nomadic tribes should only be accessed with their prior and informed consent, in accordance with Iranian legislation. Three actions are listed (one incomplete). The first addresses developing, constructing, and improving villages, identifying existing capacities, improving social status and quality of life, supporting employment and production, building rural housing for disadvantaged groups, creating sustainable livelihoods, and promoting reverse migration. The second calls for establishing a clear national DSI strategy aligned with Iran's biodiversity conservation goals and identifying gaps in the legal framework. NT-1 separately commits to developing a national data warehouse and Spatial Data Infrastructure by 2030 and launching an online biodiversity information portal. The NT-15 actions section adds commitments to developing data standards and protocols for sharing and exchange, promoting open data principles, and establishing secure national data repositories.
Iceland		The NBSAP addresses data and information under Guiding Principle F1 and in the policy summary. The policy identifies gaps in data on genetic diversity, ecosystem services and the impact of individual industries on biodiversity, and calls for consistency in data handling, preservation and dissemination. Under F1, the policy notes that where basic information has been collected systematically, it has proven to be of great importance for decision-making — citing map data on the distribution and condition of habitat types and species, and red lists as important prerequisites for prioritising conservation measures. The policy calls for compiling, mapping and regularly updating knowledge and databases on biological diversity for all major land, freshwater and marine ecosystems. Consultation responses emphasised the need for accessible data for decision-making and harmonised monitoring with indicators to assess results. An update to the habitat type map published by the Icelandic Institute of Natural History in 2016 is noted as underway.
Japan — National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan 2023–2030	Action-oriented target 5-1: Promote academic research in biodiversity-related fields and implement long-term survey and monitoring building on a sound system.	Action-oriented target 5-1 addresses science, monitoring and data. The government will conduct and enhance the National Survey on the Natural Environment under the Nature Conservation Act, with a master plan guiding efficient survey methods and data usage. The Monitoring Sites 1000 program (a Priority measure) maintains approximately 1,089 long-term monitoring sites (FY2021) across forest, satoyama, lakes/marshes, wetland, shorebirds, seabirds, alpine, and coral reef ecosystems, with a commitment to maintain no less than 1,000 sites. The Ikimono Log Biological Information Collection and Provision System aggregates occurrence records (17,044 cases FY2021, target ≥22,000 by FY2023) and records 22.76 million access events (FY2020, target ≥23 million FY2023). Additional monitoring programs include Bird Banding (at least 280 surveys/year across 9 stations), the Annual Anatidae Population Census (47 prefectures), National Census on River Environments (138 rivers, 144 dam lakes), and fishery resource stock assessments. The Japanese Red List is updated periodically. Comprehensive analysis will be conducted building on 50 years of biodiversity data.
Lebanon	NT 24: Ensure that the best available data, information, and knowledge are accessible to decision-makers, practitioners, and the public to guide effective and equitable governance and integrated, participatory management of biodiversity. This will also strengthen communication, awareness-raising, education, monitoring, research, and knowledge management.	The NBSAP dedicates Chapter 5 to the development of a National Biodiversity Monitoring System and Action Plan, setting objectives, identifying gaps in the existing monitoring system, issuing guidelines for setting up the system and specifying how the system is to be managed. National Target 24 (in the operational plan) ensures that the best available data, information and knowledge are accessible to decision-makers, practitioners and the public to guide effective and equitable governance and integrated, participatory management of biodiversity, strengthening communication, awareness-raising, education, monitoring, research and knowledge management. Progress is tracked through Headline Indicator 21.1 (biodiversity information for monitoring the Global Biodiversity Framework) and a national indicator measuring the share of decision-makers, practitioners and the public reporting in regular surveys that they have sufficient access to biodiversity information. National Actions include developing and implementing a survey programme with the Central Administration of Statistics to assess and monitor public awareness (NA 24.1, 2026–2027, US$100,000); strengthening the MoE's awareness unit (NA 24.2, 2026–2028, US$200,000); adopting and implementing a National Strategy on Greening Education being developed by MEHE and integrating biodiversity into school curricula with teacher training (NA 24.3, 2026–2029, US$500,000); organising participatory events such as national science fairs and MoE open-house events (NA 24.4, 2026–2031, US$300,000); supporting local biodiversity clubs and school environment clubs (NA 24.5, 2026–2031, US$100,000); and building NGO capacity to collect biodiversity-awareness data (NA 24.6, 2026–2028, US$100,000). Ensuring the CHM is fully operational and used to consolidate studies (NA 23.3) and the sharing of traditional knowledge on the CHM (NA 14.4) are treated as part of the information-access system.
Lesotho		Several elements of the NBSAP address data, information and knowledge for biodiversity governance. The Monitoring Action Plan (Annex 1b) establishes a monitoring framework with national targets, headline indicators, component indicators, and complementary indicators, along with mechanisms for planning, monitoring, reporting and review to track NBSAP III implementation progress. National Target 17 includes actions to assess understanding of biodiversity value among various groups (generating baseline information, 2026/27 repeated mid-term in 2029/30), update the Communication Strategy, and integrate biodiversity education into national curricula. The action to capacitate law enforcement agencies and the justice system includes establishing and maintaining a database on environmental crimes (USD 800,000, 2026/30). Across the NBSAP, multiple database development actions are planned: a database on IAS (NT4), a national LMOs database (NT9), a pollution hotspots database (NT6), a national database on wildlife crimes (NT7), a Waste Management Information System already operational (WMIS), and a database of incentives (NT13). National Target 7 includes installing biodiversity planning and monitoring systems in protected areas with environmental surveillance equipment. National Target 8 includes undertaking national biodiversity assessments and IUCN Red Data Listing. The briefing notes that the Monitoring Systems Gap Analysis Report (Annex 1a) informed the Monitoring Action Plan, identifying gaps and barriers in the national M&E system.
Luxembourg		The NBSAP devotes a full section (3.2) to strengthening monitoring, surveillance, data management, and knowledge systems for biodiversity governance. The strategy states that the fight against biodiversity destruction depends on the availability and relevance of scientific data, digitalised and collected by effective surveillance and assessment systems. A monitoring mechanism with clearly defined indicators and milestones is to be established, structured around four pillars: protection, restoration, transformative change, and international engagement. The MECDD and the "PNPN unit" are tasked with establishing this mechanism and a dashboard to measure completion rates of all actions and measures in real time. A single data entry interface and a standardised database are to be developed for collecting management and restoration measures, with interconnected databases transmitting data in real time to the ANF's central database for natural environment management. The strategy calls for ensuring interoperability of the various biodiversity-related databases held by multiple stakeholders, noting that the multitude of actors involved complicates analysis. Digitalisation in the field is to enable real-time synchronisation of data entry. The MECDD, together with STATEC, will analyse the statistical robustness of biodiversity data methodology and sampling used within the integrated system of ecosystem accounts, leading to joint development and communication of indicators. For data dissemination, the MECDD and its administrations will develop visualisation and analysis tools for monitoring programme information, made available to officials and specialists. Regular updating of the geoportal is planned. An annual "State of Nature" report is to be published by the MECDD and STATEC, and national indicators will be strengthened in databases of international organisations, with SDG 15 indicators prioritised for regular calculation and transmission. The strategy also proposes a "GDP Well-being" indicator incorporating the state of nature. Research is to be expanded in biodiversity, ecosystem services, nature-based solutions, and natural capital. Luxembourg commits to joining the European research network "Biodiversa+" and exploring new monitoring technologies such as remote sensing, environmental DNA, bioacoustics, and camera traps.
Madagascar	By 2030, biodiversity-related decisions are based on reliable, accessible and widely shared data, information and knowledge with decision-makers, stakeholders and the public.	The NBSAP commits that by 2030, biodiversity-related decisions are based on reliable, accessible and widely shared data, information and knowledge with decision-makers, stakeholders and the public. Thirteen actions are carried out around four strategic axes, with estimated financial needs of USD 17,728,736 — the largest Programme 3 line, 21.96% of the programme — allocated as: institutionalisation and policy integration framework for Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (USD 211,111); development of the biodiversity information system (USD 467,688); capacity building, technological tools and strengthening the Science-Policy Interface (USD 16,826,635 — by far the largest component); and resource mobilisation and partnerships for the sustainability of the National Biodiversity Platform (USD 223,302). Governance rests on institutionalisation and sustainability of the Plateforme Nationale sur la Biodiversité (PNB), which coordinates public, private, academic and community stakeholders through its bodies — CIME (Comité Interministériel de l'Environnement), Steering Committee, Executive Secretariat and thematic groups. The national biodiversity information system standardises and harmonises data collection, storage, sharing and access; traditional and local knowledge is inventoried, capitalised and valorised. The NBSAP broader monitoring-and-evaluation framework relies on a performance framework with quantitative and qualitative indicators aligned with the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, led by the Ministry responsible for the Environment in collaboration with sectoral institutions, territorial authorities, community organisations, NGOs, universities and research centres. Capacity building strengthens technical and material capacities of PNB stakeholders, including young people and decision-makers, and regular PNB meetings ensure coherence. Sustainable financing is secured through integration of the PNB into national and regional programmes and identification of innovative financing mechanisms.
Marshall Islands		Sub-target 3.21 calls for biodiversity information available and accessible to stakeholders and decision makers to guide action, delivered through SOE reporting and Reimaanlok Step 7 (Monitor and Adapt) at the national and local pathway levels. Headline indicator 21.1 (Biodiversity Information) is designated, with RMI EPA as data lead. This indicator covers the availability, amount, coverage, and quality of information used to report on each biodiversity indicator, evaluation of how many targets incorporate traditional knowledge, and enumeration of biodiversity monitoring schemes based on FAIR and CARE principles. Sub-target 3.21 is the most frequently referenced sub-target across the NBSAP's actions, appearing in virtually every numbered action. Action 122 directs RMI EPA to compile, retain, and integrate data, tools, lessons learned, and governance outputs from completed and ongoing biodiversity-related projects into national biodiversity monitoring systems and NBSAP reporting processes. Sub-action 122a calls for establishing and maintaining a centralized national repository or coordinated system for biodiversity project data, geospatial outputs, monitoring results, and technical reports. Action 5.vi calls for strengthening integration and long-term management of national biodiversity information systems, including consolidation of spatial, ecological, monitoring, and reporting data.
Mauritania — National Biodiversity Strategy 2022–2030		The NBSAP dedicates its fifth strategic axis (Axis E) to optimising environmental data for biodiversity monitoring and evaluation, responding to what it identifies as a crucial obstacle: the lack of data, studies, and publications on biodiversity. The strategy notes that 82% of respondents in the national stakeholder survey cited this data gap as a barrier. Action E.1.1 commits to developing a centralised database bringing together data on terrestrial and marine ecosystems and species by 2026. Action E.2.1 targets 1,000 users registered on the database by 2028. Action E.2.2 calls for 15 partnerships with academic and private sectors for data sharing, including at least 10 at Wilaya level, by 2028. Action E.3.1 establishes a centralised monitoring and evaluation mechanism for biodiversity actions by 2026. Action E.3.2 develops a training programme for 200 decision-makers (150 at Wilaya level) on NBS monitoring and evaluation by 2028. The recommendations section also calls for establishing a robust M&E system with specific indicators and key milestones.
Malta	By 2030, quality data and information is collected and made accessible to decision makers and public for the effective management of biodiversity.	National Target 19 commits that by 2030, quality data and information is collected and made accessible to decision makers and the public for the effective management of biodiversity. Action 19.3 commits to maintaining and updating Malta's Clearing-House Mechanism (CHM) as a one-stop shop for access to biological information on species and habitats. As part of the CHM, a National Biodiversity Database incorporating updated red data lists and serving as a mechanism for maintaining and organising data on biodiversity is to be launched by 2027. Action 13.3 commits to developing biodiversity indicators by 2027, including indicators to enable the integration of biodiversity in wellbeing and quality of life indices and assessments.
Malaysia		Malaysia's NPBD does not contain a stand-alone data/information target but addresses KMGBF Target 21 across multiple instruments. Action 2.5 commits to strengthen research efforts to address knowledge gaps; communicate scientific findings regularly in synthesised, easily understood form to stakeholders; establish partnerships between the private sector, local communities, and academia; strengthen the national Clearing-House Mechanism (CHM) as a platform for sharing information between researchers, resource managers, and other stakeholders; establish a network of specimen and record depositories through collaboration between the Natural History Museum and the Malaysia Biodiversity Centre; and support a local journalism network to disseminate academic research as public-friendly information. The Key Indicator for this action states: by 2030, at least 30% of research is effectively translated and implemented into policy papers. Action 4.3 strengthens biodiversity assessment and monitoring processes during project development planning; Action 5.3 leverages remote-sensing data for forest monitoring; Action 11.1 enhances collaboration to monitor and share data on threatened species populations; and Action 14.2 integrates traditional knowledge associated with the utilisation of biological resources into the National CHM. The Implementation Framework establishes an online monitoring system to track the Policy's targets and indicators, reported every four years to the CBD, and an annual National Biodiversity Conference. The policy does not explicitly name an open-data policy or free-access commitment for biodiversity data.
Namibia	Biodiversity data, information and knowledge are accessible to decision-makers, practitioners and communities to support informed, equitable and participatory biodiversity governance, management, monitoring and reporting.	National Target 21 commits that biodiversity data, information and knowledge are accessible to decision-makers, practitioners and communities to support informed, equitable and participatory biodiversity governance, management, monitoring and reporting. Programme 32 — Strengthening inclusive access to biodiversity information and participatory decision-making — strengthens national and regional biodiversity information systems to ensure data are accessible, understandable and usable. It builds on participatory monitoring systems implemented by CBNRM structures and support organisations such as NACSO and its member NGOs, aligning participatory and community-based monitoring with national biodiversity monitoring frameworks and the KMGBF reporting requirements. The programme promotes culturally appropriate integration of local and traditional knowledge with scientific biodiversity data, with safeguards for knowledge sharing and recognition of IPLC rights. Implementation instruments include the NBSAP 3 monitoring framework and national reporting systems for the CBD. NBSAP 2 review explicitly diagnosed data deficiencies: datasets are often sector-specific and project-based, not consolidated into a comprehensive national biodiversity monitoring framework, and stakeholders reported lack of accessible data at regional and local levels. Programme 1 commits to an open-access national biodiversity database across all taxa, and Programme 6 commits to expand the Community-Based Monitoring and Information System (CBMIS).
Nigeria		The NBSAP contains an extensive monitoring and information management framework. The National Clearing House Mechanism (CHM, www.chm-cbd.com.ng) is established for biodiversity information sharing, with translations in Igbo, Hausa, and Yoruba. A transparent information sharing network coordinated through the CHM is to be sustained, giving the public, civil society, corporate organizations, and communities access to monitoring and evaluation assessment reports. The National Biodiversity Monitoring and Evaluation Coordination Unit (NBMECU) is established under the Federal Ministry of Environment (Biodiversity Conservation Unit of the Federal Department of Forestry) to lead and coordinate monitoring and evaluation of NBSAP implementation. A Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical, and Technological Advice is tasked with developing a common set of biodiversity indicators. The monitoring plan (§94–97) provides a detailed matrix covering all 14 national targets with impact indicators, responsible bodies, baseline values, target values, data gathering methods, means of verification, and reporting frequencies. The lessons learned from the earlier NBSAP explicitly note the absence of a CHM, performance indicators, and an M&E framework in the first NBSAP as key failings that the revised NBSAP addresses. Periodic Assessment Platforms are to be created for monitoring of habitats, species, benefit sharing, collaborative management, and physical environment.
Netherlands		The NBSAP addresses biodiversity data, information, and knowledge through a combination of digital platforms, knowledge-translation programmes, and monitoring infrastructure. The Ministry of LVVN supports digital platforms to disseminate knowledge and connect different knowledge sources, including Green Knowledge Net (Groen Kennisnet) and OBN Nature Knowledge (OBN Natuurkennis). Knowledge to Measure (Kennis op Maat), under the top sectors scheme, translates existing knowledge to the practical environment of SMEs and green education. The NBSAP lists several programmes that promote practice knowledge, local knowledge, practical applications, and indigenous and historical knowledge. These include the Heritage Deal (stimulating pilot projects in heritage, landscape, and nature improvement); the Cultural Heritage Agency of the Netherlands (making cultural-historical knowledge on landscape and nature management accessible); NWO-NWA living labs; the Nature-Inclusive Agenda, which provides nature and sustainability education throughout the country with five lines of ambition and action for education described for the period 2024-2026; the National Science Agenda; and the Landscape Monitor, which maps changes in the Dutch landscape. The Dutch National Research Agenda (NWA) aims to ensure new knowledge flows from researcher to user and that questions from practice and society find their way into new research. Governments can annually submit themes and policy questions for research. Named research programmes include Living Labs for the Recovery of Biodiversity in the Rural Area, Biodiversity in the Amazon Region, and Knowledge Development for Transition to Nature-Inclusive Municipal Policy for Biodiversity Recovery in Built-Up Areas. On global data infrastructure, the Netherlands participates in GBIF and operates NLBIF (also discussed under Target 20), and maintains the CBD Clearing House Mechanism focal point through biodiversiteit.nl. The annex notes that non-state actors such as nature conservation organisations, animal welfare organisations, hunters, fishers, volunteers, and scientific institutions contribute to data collection that identifies and monitors endangered species. The NMBP for Caribbean Netherlands proposes a monitoring framework based on OECD criteria and principles, with work underway to elaborate indicators and align with the GBF monitoring framework. Each island (Bonaire, Sint Eustatius, and Saba) maintains its own programme monitor.
Norway		The KMGBF monitoring framework — headline, binary, component and complementary indicators, supplemented by national indicators — is to be finalised for 7th and 8th national reports. Nationally, monitoring programmes include Norwegian nesting birds and area-representative nature monitoring (ANO); both are being expanded to better cover wetlands from 2025, with ANO also extending into open lowlands and semi-natural land. The Nature Index for Norway will be updated for all ecosystems in 2025. Work on the Norwegian assessment system for ecological condition aims to complete ecosystem condition assessments for all terrestrial ecosystems by 2026 through new indicators and data for wetlands, open lowlands and semi-natural land. Norway's National Forest Inventory (launched 1919) provides long-running statistics on land and forest resources and biodiversity in Norwegian forests. Skogportalen i Kilden is the public insight solution for localised forest environmental data, operated by NIBIO; forests with stand age over 100 years have been mapped and made accessible. The Ministry of Climate and Environment has commissioned a publicly available map of natural forests (not clear-felled since approximately 1940) by end of 2024. Environmental data infrastructure priorities include digitalisation, analytical capacity, Geonorge (Norwegian Mapping Authority), shared research infrastructure, and application of FAIR and open-data principles, as recommended by the Data Infrastructure Commission and Nature Risk Commission. OECM data must be mapped and managed with transparency, with data searchable, available, reusable and possible to collate with other data per CBD guidance. Internationally, NICFI supports free satellite-data access and analytical tools via FAO and Global Forest Watch.
Panama		The NBSAP commits to an integrated Monitoring, Reporting and Verification (MRV) system within the National Climate Transparency Platform (PNTC), which brings together progress on climate, biodiversity and land agendas using common indicators, periodic reports and independent verification. The system is designed to make information accessible to all stakeholders, strengthen inter-institutional coordination and enable evidence-based decision-making. The MRV is linked to the NDC, National Adaptation Plan, National Biodiversity Strategy and Land Degradation Neutrality Strategy. The NBSAP also reports that the strategic use of technology and environmental traceability has improved transparency and the application of environmental law. The National Mapathon provides participatory geospatial data on forest cover and land use.
State of Palestine		The NBSAP commits to building data and information systems for biodiversity governance. Activity 7 of the NBSAP process developed monitoring-and-evaluation mechanisms, dynamic and interactive indicator sheets, and a monitoring approach for CBD implementation, including provisions for reporting and indicators to track progress towards national targets. The strategy commits to developing a centralised research hub linked to the Clearing-House Mechanism (CHM), to encourage MoA to utilise the EQA's CHM, and to upload PAN data to the CBD website. The mainstreaming-methods section reports the production and dissemination of a key-stakeholders list (to be uploaded to the CHM) and the operation of a 400+ stakeholder mailing list ([email protected]). The M&E section adopts the UN Global Indicator Framework (234 indicators across 17 SDGs and 169 targets), commits to leading M&E through the national Biodiversity Committee chaired by EQA (meeting at least bimonthly), to a full review in 2026 and full reviews and revisions in 2030 then every five years to 2050, and to financial monitoring of NBSAP. Recommendations include improving global collection of spatial biodiversity data, mapping spatial threat data, and providing funding mechanisms to fill knowledge gaps. Lindenmeyer et al.'s eight points are adopted, including coordinating monitoring programmes, improving objective-setting, developing data-collection protocols and standards, and improving data storage, accessibility and registers. Section 5.4 commits to compiling a database of environmental-justice issues in partnership with Al-Haq and PMNH.
Paraguay	By 2030, Paraguay shall have a strengthened and accessible knowledge management system that centralises and ensures the effective use of information generated on biodiversity and its threats.	National Target 26 commits that by 2030 Paraguay shall have a strengthened and accessible knowledge management system on biodiversity that centralises information and facilitates its use in research, planning and decision-making. Indicators set a target of 60,000 persons visiting the SIAM (Environmental Information System) public portal (baseline 0), 20% of users reporting or using the information for specific purposes (baseline 0), and an improved Biodiversity Information Indicator for monitoring the GBF (Headline). Scheduled actions include a diagnosis of the current system (2026), development of SIAM improvements (2026–2030), guidelines for uploading, validation and use of information (2026–2030), training for key institutions and users including 100% of MADES officials (2026–2030), and promotion of system use for research, planning and policy (2027–2030). National Target 27 commits that by 2030 a national strategy shall guarantee public and effective access to updated data, information and knowledge on biodiversity for indigenous peoples and local communities, with indicators including the strategy itself (not met to met), 50% implementation, and 5 dissemination spaces and channels. Chapter 4 establishes monitoring mechanisms including the SIAM platform, indicators, annual targets, national reports and intermediate and final evaluations, with SIAM aligned to KMGBF indicators. Socioeconomic valuation and monitoring tools (§220) identify wellbeing indices linked to conservation, natural resource use indicators and Payment for Ecosystem Services schemes.
Rwanda	By 2030, (i) ensure that biodiversity-related data, information, and knowledge are readily available, accessible, and utilised to inform and guide biodiversity conservation and sustainable use.	The NBSAP sets National Target 21 to ensure that biodiversity-related data, information, and knowledge are readily available, accessible, and utilised to inform conservation and sustainable use by 2030. Headline indicators include availability of a biodiversity information system for data sharing and monitoring. Component indicators relate to mainstreaming global citizenship education and education for sustainable development into national education policies, curricula, teacher education, and student assessments. The baseline identifies the Rwanda Biodiversity Information System (RBIS) as an accessible web platform using open-source software to support land-use planning and monitoring of biodiversity and ecosystem functioning. Past research investments have produced an economic valuation of ecosystem services, a management plan for invasive species, integrated study of wastewater treatment, a national list of threatened terrestrial ecosystems and species, and mapping of biodiversity hubs. However, the previous NBSAP period identified data deficiency and limited monitoring as a key challenge, with a lack of comprehensive and up-to-date data hindering tracking of biodiversity trends. Strategic actions include enhancing biodiversity monitoring through innovative technologies for data collection, creating awareness of RBIS and its utility, establishing a national IUCN Red List, ensuring biodiversity data and resources are accessible to public agencies through communication materials and training, creating programs for sharing information aligned with research and technological advancements, and regularly updating CHM Rwanda with stakeholder engagement. The financial mobilisation plan includes ensuring adequate M&E funding and strengthening the national biodiversity database (RBIS) while creating a national gene bank. The costing allocates USD 1.3 million.
Saudi Arabia	Developing the knowledge base and biodiversity databases and making them available to all through approved platforms to support policies and decision-making processes.	The NBSAP provides extensive coverage of data, information, and monitoring systems. National Target 20 aims to develop the knowledge base and biodiversity databases and make them available to all through approved platforms to support policies and decision-making. The NBSAP links this to GBF Target 21. A separate detailed monitoring, evaluation, reporting, and review framework covers institutional arrangements, principles, indicators, reporting mechanisms, and evaluation procedures. Key elements include: A Central Monitoring and Evaluation Management Unit within the National Centre for Wildlife Development, responsible for developing the monitoring plan, collecting and verifying data, managing national biodiversity information platforms, and building partner capacities. The National Coordinating Committee for Biodiversity adopts annual performance reports, recommends strategic decisions, and reviews national reports before submission to the CBD. The National Platform for Marine Biodiversity (eSpecia) has been established as a database for archiving marine biodiversity data integrated with GIS. Plans call for establishing and developing databases and platforms for biodiversity information on ecosystems, species, and important areas, governed by a data management plan. Reporting products include digital dashboards on official websites, annual performance reports, national biodiversity reports for the CBD, and policy briefs for decision-makers. All progress reports and non-sensitive datasets are to be published on a national electronic portal accessible to the public. The national monitoring framework will align with GBF monitoring indicators, Vision 2030 indicators, and the National Environmental Performance Index, using specific, smart, cost-efficient indicators. A mid-term evaluation is planned for 2027–2028 and a final evaluation in 2030, conducted by external independent bodies. Governing principles include: transparency and accountable monitoring, broad and inclusive participation (including civil society, communities, private sector, women, and youth), scientific evidence-based approach, adaptability and flexibility, and efficiency and integration.
Sudan	Ensure that the best available data, information and knowledge, are accessible to decision makers, practitioners and the public to guide effective and equitable governance, integrated and participatory management of biodiversity in Sudan, and to strengthen communication, awareness raising, education, monitoring, research and knowledge management and, also in this context, the traditional knowledge, innovations and practices of indigenous peoples and local communities relevant for the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity, and their customary use of biological resources, are respected, and should only be accessed with their free, prior and informed consent in accordance with national legislation.	National Target 21 commits Sudan to ensuring the best available data, information and knowledge are accessible to decision makers, practitioners and the public, to guide effective and equitable governance, and to strengthen communication, awareness raising, education, monitoring, research and knowledge management, including the traditional knowledge of IPLCs, which should only be accessed with free, prior and informed consent. A monitoring framework (Chapter 14) has been developed and adopted during 2024 as part of the Early Action project, with headline, binary, component, and complementary indicators, plus national indicators at the action level. The total monitoring budget is US$2,355,000. The rangeland component target (§232) ensures that best available data on range plants and farm animals are accessible for decision makers and the public. Budget allocations under Goal A include US$700,000 for inland waters (2 actions for Target 21) and US$2,100,000 for climate change (3 actions). Under Goal D, large allocations include US$7,950,000 for forests (2 actions), US$1,950,000 for inland waters (5 actions), US$950,000 for insects (5 actions), US$600,000 for wildlife (3 actions), US$1,100,000 for pollution (2 actions), US$500,000 for ABS (1 action), US$150,000 for biosafety (1 action), and US$120,000 for cultivated plants (2 actions). The monitoring framework tracks availability of data and knowledge on biodiversity at national level, website operation, number and type of awareness raising and education activities, existence of databases and information platforms, biosafety platform and clearing house, level of indigenous knowledge documented, and rehabilitation of databases.
Sweden		The NBSAP addresses target 21 primarily through the Sámi and other traditional knowledge chapter and through investments in reporting, monitoring and data infrastructure. Measures in the traditional-knowledge chapter are stated to contribute primarily to target 21 on best available knowledge and target 22 on participation. The Sámi Parliament acts as national focal point for implementation of CBD Articles 8(j) and 10(c), promoting the use of and knowledge about traditional knowledge and sustainable customary use; the Swedish Biodiversity Centre (CBM) at the Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences supports this work. A programme board of approximately forty authorities, universities and interest organizations anchors implementation. On protected-area data, SEPA reports annually to the EEA; OECM reporting is being developed. Digital geographical knowledge on nature and cultural heritage values in forests is being developed by the Forest Agency and SEPA (assignment N2022/01391, to be reported jointly by 30 June 2027). For invasive alien species, IT-based reporting systems based on citizen-science principles have been developed and monitoring of results is emphasized, with additional funds allocated for monitoring. Sida support is cited as contributing to targets including 21. The principle of free, prior and informed consent is referenced in both the Act (2022:66) on consultation preparatory materials and the text of target 21.
Slovenia	The research and monitoring of BD status will improve by 2030.	The NEAP 2020–2030 establishes a system of over 180 environmental indicators for monitoring progress, divided into topic groups covering environmental components, issues and sectoral integration. Table 16 specifies indicators across all NEAP areas including biodiversity (populations of bird species, endangered species, habitat types, invasive species, protected areas, Natura 2000), soil, water, air, and others. Progress monitoring occurs at two levels: biannual reviews and two progress reports during the programming period (2023 and 2027). The Strategic Plan's National Objective 4 commits to improving research and monitoring of biodiversity status by 2030, with Guideline 4.3 on centrally coordinating records and transparently providing data. Measures include establishing and maintaining a public central database collecting all data on publicly funded surveys and researches (4.3.1), designing a level of the central database allowing public data entry (4.3.2), and promptly including monitoring data in amendments to regulations, spatial planning and climate change research (4.3.3). Table 1 includes dedicated database and information system measures: editing, upgrading and maintaining the database on biodiversity, valuable natural features and landscape characteristics (Measure 30), establishing a system for regular database updating (Measure 31), and linking geo-referenced data on spatial use and activities with species and habitat type status by 2025 (Measure 32). National Objective 6 includes improving the clearing-house mechanism for public information on biodiversity.
Senegal	Strengthen national systems for the collection, management and use of biodiversity data at the national level through mechanisms involving local communities	The NBSAP defines national target (21) as strengthening national systems for the collection, management and use of biodiversity data at the national level through mechanisms involving local communities. The results framework prescribes two priority actions: implementation of the United Nations Framework for the Development of Environmental Statistics (FDES) (indicator: compendium of environmental statistics), and integration of nature into national accounting (indicator: number of accounts developed). The monitoring and evaluation section details the data infrastructure. Reporting is coordinated by the DPN, producing periodic national reports in accordance with KMGBF requirements. A mid-term review is scheduled for 2028, as a prelude to the final evaluation of the 2030 Strategic Plan. The framework relies on a digital biodiversity monitoring platform, spatial monitoring using satellite imagery and GIS (CSE, research institutes, ISRA/CRODT), and a participatory monitoring mechanism involving eco-guards, village committees, and CBOs as frontline data collectors. ANSD and technical partners including national and international NGOs and sub-regional organisations (ECOWAS, WAEMU, CILSS, RAMPAO, PRCM) are to be mobilised for data harmonisation. The SWOT analysis acknowledges a knowledge deficit: genetic diversity and the fungal kingdom are under-explored, and invertebrates, fungi, and microorganisms are virtually absent from national databases. The UN SEEA Biodiversity Framework has not yet been deployed in Senegal.
Suriname	4.4 Increased Surinamese scientific research, including community-based research, is published, linked to national databases, and contributes to credible and legitimate knowledge on Suriname's biodiversity in the broadest sense.	National Target 4.4 commits Suriname to increased Surinamese scientific research, including community-based research, that is published, linked to national databases and contributes to credible and legitimate knowledge on Suriname's biodiversity in the broadest sense; the financial overview budgets it at $6,435,090, the largest line in Pathway 4. The Pathway 4 narrative describes the development of the Suriname Environmental Information Network with planned activities to develop institutional databases, infrastructure, workflows and protocols, and references the national chapter of the Association for Biodiversity in the Guiana Shield (VBGSS) as a potential platform. Existing biodiversity-related work — the National Land Monitoring System with near-real-time forest monitoring and biennial national land use and land cover maps, the National Mangrove Inventory and Monitoring — is cited as foundation. Section 3 sets out a structured M&E framework with nine components per target (baseline, progress indicators, achieved outcomes, level of significance, contributing activities, obstacles, key actors, GBF headline/component/complementary indicators) for annual evaluation.
El Salvador — NBSAP Country Page	By 2030, the country will have updated data and information, based on scientific, technical and community evidence, including traditional knowledge, capable of supporting sectoral and national decision-making through inclusive and timely access, promoting respect for different worldviews on the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity, recognising its impact on national development.	The NBSAP establishes National Target 9: biodiversity knowledge management. By 2030, the country will have updated data and information based on scientific, technical and community evidence, including traditional knowledge, capable of supporting sectoral and national decision-making through inclusive and timely access. Two strategic actions are defined: (9.1) promote the updating and availability of data, information and scientific, technical, community and traditional knowledge on biodiversity, including valuation of its contributions to development; and (9.2) strengthen knowledge generation, education and awareness-raising about biodiversity, considering the different worldviews of people, especially local communities and indigenous peoples. The indicator framework tracks the number of open and public mechanisms established for dissemination of biodiversity information and data, and the number of publications on biodiversity, aligned with KMGBF headline indicator 21.1 (biodiversity-related information for monitoring). The monitoring mechanism establishes a Reporting and Verification Mechanism (MRV) to be designed as a priority in the first year of NBSAP implementation. The CBD Focal Point (DEB-MARN) will develop information collection instruments, train reporting officials, and produce annual follow-up reports as well as Country Reports to the CBD in 2026 and 2029. An information collection, storage, processing and validation cycle is specified across seven activities. The estimated cost for knowledge management is $2,930,000, covering data generation and systematisation, open data access platforms, publications and educational programmes.
Chad	NO19: By 2030, knowledge, the scientific base and technologies associated with biological diversity, its values, its functioning, its status and its trends, and the consequences of its impoverishment, are improved, widely shared and transferred, and applied.	The NBSAP links Global Target 21 to NO18 (traditional knowledge of IP/LC; see Target 20) and National Objective 19 (NO19): by 2030, knowledge, the scientific base and technologies associated with biological diversity, its values, its functioning, its status and its trends, and the consequences of its impoverishment, are improved, widely shared and transferred, and applied. The 2011–2020 reference is that IP and LC are not fully involved in the conservation of biological diversity; the 2030 target is a monitoring plan including IP and LC, women, girls and young people. Measures include assessing and monitoring the status, trends, abundance and conservation potential of species; assessing and monitoring ecosystem status and trends; developing joint species-monitoring plans with IP and LC; establishing a partnership programme between research institutions and conservation organisations; strengthening research institution competencies and the transfer of new technologies into study programmes; integrating the most recent and emerging technologies into study and monitoring programmes; updating relevant guidelines and key documents in several languages; updating and applying the land tenure regime by restoring rights to local communities; and assessing the effectiveness of the land tenure regime to ensure IP/LC retain property rights. Indicators include level of participation of IP and LC, women, girls and young people in biodiversity decision-making (I1GT21) and land tenure in traditional territories of IP and LC (I2GT21).
Togo	Target 12 : Strengthen systems for the collection, management and use of biodiversity data at the national level through mechanisms involving local communities	The NBSAP designates National Target 12 under Strategic Objective 1, mapped to GBF Target 21, committing to strengthen systems for the collection, management, and use of biodiversity data at the national level through mechanisms involving local communities. The Directorate of Forest Resources, serving as the NBSAP technical secretariat, is tasked with designing data collection tools, managing the biodiversity database, and establishing a digital data collection platform from sectoral bodies. The secretariat is to organise capacity-building sessions for focal points on monitoring tools and reporting frequency, conduct quarterly quality control sessions to validate submitted information, and prepare annual reports from compiled data for the national committee. Focal points designated in all relevant structures are responsible for centralising data on target achievement and transmitting collected data quarterly to the technical secretariat. A transitional data collection template is planned during the digital platform development phase. The diagnostic analysis identifies limited knowledge of biodiversity and the need to revise the national monograph and establish national-level species conservation status as weaknesses. The capacity building plan includes training on biodiversity indicators such as the ecosystem well-being index and agrobiodiversity index.
Thailand	Target 10: Develop biodiversity data and knowledge systems, as well as promote awareness, by developing data systems to support decision-making and enhancing awareness across various sectors.	National Target 10 commits Thailand to develop biodiversity data and knowledge systems and to promote awareness, developing data systems to support decision-making and enhancing awareness across sectors. The importance-of-target section (§136) frames data as a cross-cutting issue with implications for all KMGBF goals and targets, and commits to ensure that available biodiversity data is academically validated and readily accessible to decision-makers and stakeholders. Recommended actions (§138) address: (1) improved accessibility to biodiversity data through standardisation, interoperability, digitisation, and open-access and open-data policies; (2) communication, awareness-raising, and education; (3) knowledge management, including digital technology training and formalised data-management systems; (4) monitoring with high-quality data through national biodiversity information systems and observatory centres; (5) research to address knowledge gaps and geographic/taxonomic imbalances; and (6) treatment of indigenous and local knowledge only with free, prior, and informed consent. The implementation table (§142) assigns database development to MNRE (DMCR, ONEP, DNP, RFD, BEDO), MOAC (DOA, DOF), RSPG, the Bird Conservation Society of Thailand, and educational institutions, with sub-measures covering: updating area-based biodiversity databases; developing databases for local communities, indigenous peoples, women, youth, and vulnerable groups; database systems for biodiversity surveys, genetic resources, and traditional knowledge to international standards; exchange of biodiversity data and linkage with research initiatives; and mechanisms linking reporting under various conventions. The plan also commits to a three-phase monitoring and evaluation digital platform (§160-§164): Phase 1 (2024) initiating the central information system with ONEP as coordinator; Phase 2 (2025) implementing the information system, mid-term review (2023-2025), and preparing the CBD National Report; Phase 3 (2025-2027) analysing and reporting results from the national biodiversity information system.
Tunisia	Create an operational platform for sharing up-to-date information and knowledge, open to the public	The NBSAP dedicates Objective D8 to ensuring better circulation and sharing of information for decision-making, linked explicitly to KM-GBF Target 21. The national target states: "Create an operational platform for sharing up-to-date information and knowledge, open to the public." The gaps analysis identifies that biodiversity monitoring systems at the national level are highly insufficient due to lack of human and financial capacities, and that the indicators proposed in the previous NBSAP do not always show similarities with KM-GBF indicators. Current national documents on biodiversity indicators are few, with some data available through ANPE, OTEDD, and the National Observatory of Agriculture websites, and international platforms of BIODEV2030 and the Biodiversity Indicators Partnership. Main obstacles include lack of resources, insufficient stakeholder consultation, and lack of reliable data sources. Measure D8.2 proposes strengthening information exchange and dissemination through data collection, analysis, and archiving systems on biological diversity; databases on policies, strategies, and programmes; and a network of biodiversity observatories. Measure D8.3 addresses awareness-raising, communication, and education, drawing from the 2015 National Action Plan which identified 5 interventions with 10 objectives and 42 activities. Actions include creating an institutionalised national body for awareness-raising synergy between stakeholders, developing a simplified system for popularising CBD principles and KM-GBF objectives, establishing focal points within ministerial departments, and establishing a specific media system for biodiversity conservation.
Uganda		Strategic Objectives 4, 5, and 6 are all mapped to KMGBF Target 21 in Table 22. National target 5.1 explicitly corresponds to KMGBF Target 21 ("Ensure that knowledge is available and accessible to guide biodiversity action"). Headline indicator 21.1 (indicator on biodiversity information for monitoring the KMGBF) is listed among the indicators for Thematic Area 5. The NBSAP establishes a monitoring and evaluation framework with NEMA as the lead coordinating institution, supported by the Technical Committee on Biodiversity Conservation and a Technical Working Group on M&E. Responsible institutions will submit quarterly reports on indicators and targets to NEMA, which will produce an annual State of Biodiversity report. Uganda commits to using the National Biodiversity Databank and other biodiversity data sources for M&E. A mid-term evaluation is planned for 2027 and terminal evaluation for 2030. The NBSAP specifies that monitoring will use national and global indicators per CBD Decision 15/5. The implementation section calls for establishing guidelines for data collection, analysis, reporting, and a system for sharing data among stakeholders. The Clearing House Mechanism is reported as now operational and active in NEMA, having been identified as an obstacle in NBSAPII implementation.
Vanuatu		The NBSAP identifies significant data gaps as a recurring challenge — the biodiversity overview notes that Vanuatu's biodiversity 'remains poorly known' with detailed studies of only a few genera. Strategic Area 5 includes six national-level activities under Target 21: developing partnerships with the National University of Vanuatu, USP, and other research institutions to support biodiversity research, with MoUs signed for ongoing research 2026-2030 (EG.14, VUV 6,000,000, short-term); upgrading and updating national biodiversity databases to incorporate traditional knowledge and scientific data across sectors (EG.15, VUV 10,000,000, long-term); facilitating technical cooperation programs to elevate national staff knowledge of international biodiversity policies and conventions (EG.16, VUV 10,000,000, short-term); establishing leadership programs for women and youth in biodiversity conservation (EG.17, VUV 7,000,000, medium-term); establishing exchange programs with national, regional, and international institutions for conservation, knowledge sharing, and NBSAP implementation (EG.18, VUV 10,000,000, medium-term); and developing standardised monitoring and reporting templates for all biodiversity-related actions, building on existing VANGO templates for NSDP (EG.19, VUV 2,000,000, short-term, target: template developed by 2028). Provincially, Torba plans training on water supply management and fisheries/CCA ranger data collection and reporting; Penama plans awareness on coastal sand mining impacts; Malampa plans awareness on black crab protection and waste segregation in schools; Shefa commits to annual reef monitoring and planning. Target 21 is allocated VUV 45,000,000.
Yemen	By 2030, ensure an adequate scientific base, transfer traditional knowledge, enhance scientific research capabilities, monitoring capabilities, encourage innovations, and enable stakeholders to design, implement, and use advanced technology to conserve biodiversity. Ensure unrestricted access to necessary information, data, and technology for all stakeholders, including community members, involved in biodiversity management and conservation.	The NBSAP addresses data and information through National Target 18 (which combines GBF Targets 20 and 21), committing to ensure unrestricted access to necessary information, data, and technology for all stakeholders including community members involved in biodiversity management and conservation. The strategy identifies a critical data gap attributable to the decade-long armed conflict: no time-series data on species populations, no comprehensive IUCN classification, and a lack of a dedicated database for information storage and management. The M&E section specifies the need for EPA to develop a central storage facility accessible to all stakeholders for depositing data, with data to be generated for over 30 indicators. The M&E framework is detailed: results-based monitoring approach, quarterly and annual reporting, inception report, mid-term review, and terminal evaluation at the end of the NBSAP lifespan (2029). An independent audit body under the Ministry of Finance is to be established for verification and transparency. The national biosafety database/clearing house mechanism (CHM) is to receive periodic updates. Communication strategies for knowledge and information transfer are included as strategic activities.
Zambia		The NBSAP identifies data and information gaps as a central challenge and commits to addressing them through multiple mechanisms. The strategy acknowledges that NBSAP1 lacked an effective monitoring and evaluation framework, making it difficult to assess implementation progress without clear baselines and institutional arrangements for data collection, reporting, and archiving. The information-sharing Clearing House Mechanism (CHM) established under NBSAP1 was not utilized effectively. NBSAP2 establishes a comprehensive M&E framework with a Logical Monitoring Matrix covering all 18 national targets with key performance indicators, data gathering methods, collection frequency, and responsible parties. A functional CHM for biodiversity information sharing and knowledge management is targeted by 2017. The strategy calls for updated baselines for fish (all species by 2020), forests and lower plants (all tree species by 2018, ILUA II data), and wildlife (all large mammals by 2018). Evaluation activities include annual reviews, steering committee meetings, independent mid-term evaluation (mid-2017), 6th National Report (2018), final independent evaluation (2021), and 7th National Report (2022). The strategy promotes policy-science dialogues on environmental issues to improve information use in biodiversity management decisions.
Eritrea		The NBSAP does not have a dedicated data and information target corresponding to GBF Target 21. However, data gaps and information management are recurring themes. The NBSAP identifies the lack of a standardized approach to biodiversity data collection, coding, storage, and management as a challenge, though it notes improvements are underway. The absence of a complete inventory of forests, terrestrial and aquatic wildlife supported by field verification is described as "a serious handicap for conservation works." Several actions address data infrastructure: the National Database of Flora and Fauna is referenced as a key resource, and the NBSAP calls for promoting public access to the flora and fauna database (Action 8.3.1, 2027-2030). The monitoring and evaluation plan envisions a systematic process of continuous assessment using participatory and consultative approaches, including field visits to Zobas and biodiversity hotspots. The resource mobilization plan includes devising instruments and procedures for data collection, analysis, and reporting (Action 9.6.1). The coral monitoring programme uses 3D mapping and environmental DNA techniques at four permanent sites. However, these data and monitoring actions are distributed across other targets and the implementation framework rather than forming a cohesive data strategy.
Libya		The NBSAP identifies data gaps and commits to database creation within other targets, but does not have a standalone data and information target in the included sections. The descriptive sections repeatedly note the absence of comprehensive studies: marine mammal research is described as "very limited" with only two papers published on cetaceans; no comprehensive study of phytoplankton and zooplankton exists along the full Libyan coast; and the floral composition of plants is described as "still relatively unknown." Within the action plan, national Target 10 commits to establishing a database on agricultural biodiversity, fisheries, and a Red List of Economic Plants and Domesticated Animals. National Target 13 commits to developing national mechanisms and databases for documenting access requests for biological resources and heritage knowledge, and maintaining an inventory of national biodiversity and publicly available traditional knowledge. These data actions are embedded within other targets rather than constituting a dedicated information-sharing strategy.
Mexico — Estrategia Nacional de Biodiversidad de México (ENBioMex)		The conclusions identify Target 21 (Knowledge) as having the greatest number of ENBioMex actions contributing to its fulfilment, with 77% of the 160 actions — the highest share among all 23 targets. The direct contribution stands at 31%, also among the highest, with Axes 1, 2, and 4 contributing the most direct actions. An additional 46% of contributions are enabling. ENBioMex Axis 1 (Knowledge) is dedicated to this area, with line 1.1 covering generation, documentation, and systematisation of knowledge (contributing to 16 targets overall), line 1.2 on traditional knowledge, line 1.3 on citizen science, and line 1.4 on development of tools for access to information (contributing to 17 targets). Specific high-impact actions include information on ecosystems (1.1.1), interdisciplinary research (1.1.2), research on species (1.1.6), biodiversity information systems (1.4.4), monitoring systems for ecosystem management (1.4.5), species monitoring systems (1.4.6), IT tools (1.4.7), and mechanisms for access to information (1.4.8). The Context section notes Mexico's investment in knowledge infrastructure, including the 2006 Capital Natural de Mexico study involving 803 experts from 240 academic institutions.
Viet Nam		The NBSAP references data and information management in several places but does not articulate a dedicated data accessibility or knowledge governance framework. The Key Solutions section calls for applying information technology, remote sensing, and biology in biodiversity management, investigation, monitoring, assessment, and oversight, and for enhancing basic research and modern taxonomy techniques. A detailed monitoring and assessment indicator framework (§21) with 14 indicators tracks strategy implementation through 2025 and 2030 milestones. The Partnership Forum is intended to share information and create cooperation opportunities. Ministries and provincial authorities are required to deliver mid-term assessment reports by September 2025 and final assessment reports by September 2030 to MONRE for compilation.