Cuba

Translated from Spanish

This NBSAP was submitted before the adoption of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (December 2022). Target mappings are inferred and were not part of the document's original scope.

1. Overview

Cuba's current biodiversity planning instrument is the National Programme on Biological Diversity 2016–2020 (Programa Nacional sobre la Diversidad Biológica), prepared under the Ministry of Science, Technology and the Environment (CITMA — Ministerio de Ciencia, Tecnología y Medio Ambiente), which identifies the loss of biological diversity as "the principal environmental problem in the country" [§2]. The Programme is the fourth document in an unusually long Cuban planning lineage: the 1998 National Study on Biological Diversity; the 1999 National Strategy on Biological Diversity (ENBIO — Estrategia Nacional sobre la Diversidad Biológica) and its Action Plan; a 2006–2010 revision comprising 91 actions evaluated biannually; and a 2011–2015 programmatic document that pre-dated the national adaptation of the Aichi Biodiversity Targets [§2]. The current Programme carries forward ENBIO's three founding pillars — conservation, knowledge, and sustainable use of Cuban biological diversity resources [§2].

The Programme organises its pledges as five lettered general strategic objectives (Objectives A–E) rather than numbered targets, each operationalised through a set of nested national goals in an action matrix with a uniform 2020 deadline.*This page uses "national commitment" (KMGBF canonical term) for both Cuba's lettered strategic objectives (headline pledges) and the nested national goals (operational pledges). Cuba's Programme does not use the word "target" at the national level. Every national goal is cross-referenced both to an Aichi Biodiversity Target and to the numbered Guidelines of the VI Congress of the Communist Party of Cuba (Lineamientos de la VI Congreso del Partido Comunista de Cuba)†The VI Party Congress Guidelines are Cuba's top-level development-policy instrument; goals in the Programme cite specific Guideline numbers (e.g., 78, 112, 133, 145) alongside Aichi Target numbers. — a deliberate architectural choice to embed biodiversity action in Cuba's apex development-policy instrument. The Programme also lists six guiding principles that frame delivery but are not themselves commitments.‡ Because the Programme covers 2016–2020, its target alignment is to the Aichi Targets, not to the 23 GBF Targets adopted in 2022; any mapping shown here to specific GBF Targets is an external analytical overlay, not a Cuban pledge.

‡Principles are framing, not commitments — they should not be counted alongside Objectives A–E.

Cuba frames its 2016–2020 Programme as continuity, not reinvention — a fourth-generation plan built on ENBIO's three founding pillars and mapped to the Aichi Targets. Every national goal is dual-referenced to a numbered Communist Party Congress Guideline, tying biodiversity to the country's apex development-planning framework. The Programme contains no quantitative thresholds, no budget, and no successor document is referenced in the material available.

Sources:

• §2 — 1. Introduction

2. Ecological Context

The Programme's framing of Cuba's ecological situation is concise in the material available. The Introduction identifies biodiversity loss as the country's principal environmental problem and states that biological diversity underpins ecosystem functioning and the provision of services essential for food security, human health, clean air and drinking water, livelihoods, and economic development [§2]. The guiding principles name three priority threats explicitly: fragmentation and disturbance of landscapes, ecosystems, and habitats; invasive alien species; and climate change [§8, Principle VI]. A parallel operational grouping in the priority spheres of action pairs fragmentation with pollution and forest fires as threats requiring special attention [§3].

The Programme's ecological priorities are repeatedly coupled with climate adaptation. Ecosystem rehabilitation and restoration are framed as dual-purpose for biodiversity resilience and for adaptation and mitigation of climate change and extreme events [§3]; adaptation and mitigation strategies for vulnerable ecosystems and populations of threatened and endemic species are treated as a standing priority [§3]. Ocean acidification is not discussed in the material available, despite Cuba's extensive marine context [§3, §8].

Sources:

• §2 — 1. Introduction
• §3 — National circumstances
• §8 — Guiding principles

3. National Commitments and GBF Alignment

The Programme's five lettered strategic objectives structure the plan [§9]. Each is a directional aspiration: the Programme states intent and direction but does not attach quantitative thresholds. National goals nested under each objective carry a uniform 2020 deadline, but the indicators recorded in the matrix are activity counts (numbers of dissemination actions, numbers of training participants, percentages of protected areas covered by management projects) rather than baseline-referenced numerical targets [§10]. No commitment on this page is classified as measurable.

Objective A — Underlying causes of biodiversity loss

The Programme commits to addressing the underlying causes of the loss of biological diversity [§9], operationalised through national goals on awareness-raising of the value of biological diversity and its ecosystem services (cross-referenced to Aichi Target 1 and Guidelines 78, 80, 133, 138, 145, 152, 172, 200, 204) and on mainstreaming biodiversity into sectoral policies and decision-making at all levels [§10, §3]. Primary GBF Target mapping: GBF Target 14 (mainstreaming), with connections to Targets 20 and 21 (capacity, data). Measurability: directional aspiration. Indicators recorded include counts of dissemination actions on biological diversity and of training participants by target group [§10].

Objective B — Control of principal threats and sustainable use

The Programme commits to controlling the principal threats to biological diversity and promoting sustainable use [§9]. Underlying national goals address pollution reduction to levels not detrimental to ecosystem function and human health (Aichi Target 8; Guidelines 117, 131, 134, 135, 218), control of invasive alien species that directly affect biological diversity (Guidelines 133, 134, 204), and measures for the safe use of living modified organisms (Guideline 133) [§10]. Operational priorities attached to this objective include continued effort on invasive alien species; recovery of fishery resources through replacement of environmentally incompatible fishing practices; and special attention to fragmentation, pollution, and forest fires [§3]. Primary GBF Target mapping: GBF Targets 5, 6, 7, and 17. Measurability: directional aspiration. Indicators recorded include baseline inventories of point-source industrial discharges and counts of implemented actions under named sub-programmes [§10].

Objective C — Conservation of ecosystems, habitats, species, and genes

The Programme commits to promoting the conservation of ecosystems, habitats, species, and genes [§9]. Supporting priorities include strengthening and maintaining living and preserved biological collections as ex situ conservation and intangible heritage, and formulating adaptation and mitigation strategies for climate-change effects on vulnerable ecosystems and populations of threatened and endemic species [§3]. The Programme is stated to be founded, in part, on the pre-existing National System of Protected Areas Plan as one of its strategic-framework inputs (see Delivery Architecture) [§5]. Primary GBF Target mapping: GBF Targets 3 and 4, with a connection to Target 8. Measurability: directional aspiration. No coverage percentage, species list, extinction-risk metric, or recovery plan is recorded in the material available.

Objective D — Restoration of ecosystems providing essential services

The Programme commits to favouring the restoration and conservation of ecosystems that provide essential services for all [§9]. The flagship operational priority is rehabilitation and restoration of ecosystems to prevent fragmentation, increase resilience and connectivity, and contribute to adaptation and mitigation of climate change and extreme events [§3]. A parallel priority commits to increased reforestation with native species, paired with improving the effectiveness of forest fire prevention and control [§3]. A further priority names studies on the economic valuation of ecosystem services [§3]. Primary GBF Target mapping: GBF Targets 2 and 11, with a connection to Target 10 via native-species reforestation. Measurability: directional aspiration — no area figure, percentage, or numerical restoration commitment is attached.

Objective E — National capacities for CBD implementation

The Programme commits to improving national capacities for the implementation of the Convention on Biological Diversity [§9]. Supporting national goals include mobilising financial resources from diverse sources to implement the Programme (Aichi Target 20; Guideline 112); intensifying the development of effective biodiversity indicators and monitoring processes; encouraging the training of professionals related to biological diversity; conducting studies on invertebrates and marine species; and developing a national legal framework prioritising access to genetic resources, information, and biological collections [§10, §3]. Primary GBF Target mapping: GBF Targets 19, 20, 21, and 13. Measurability: directional aspiration. Indicators recorded include completion of diagnostic studies, numbers of training participants, and documented research and dissemination outputs [§10].

Sources:

• §3 — National circumstances (priority spheres of action)
• §9 — General strategic objectives
• §10 — 5. Goals and actions of the National Programme on Biological Diversity 2016–2020

Anchored to the VI Party Congress Guidelines

Cuba's Programme has a structural feature that a reader comparing it to other Latin American or Caribbean NBSAPs would want to know up front: every national goal in the 2016–2020 action matrix is dual-referenced to both an Aichi Biodiversity Target and one or more numbered Guidelines of the VI Congress of the Communist Party of Cuba (Lineamientos de la VI Congreso del Partido Comunista de Cuba) [§10]. The VI Congress Guidelines are Cuba's top-level development-policy instrument; tying each biodiversity goal to specific numbered Guidelines embeds the Programme in the country's apex planning framework rather than running it as a parallel sectoral track.

The dual-referencing runs through the matrix. The goal on awareness-raising of the value of biological diversity cites Aichi Target 1 alongside Guidelines 78, 80, 133, 138, 145, 152, 172, 200, and 204. The goal on pollution reduction to non-detrimental levels cites Aichi Target 8 alongside Guidelines 117, 131, 134, 135, and 218. The goal on invasive-alien-species control cites Guidelines 133, 134, and 204; the goal on safe use of living modified organisms cites Guideline 133; the goal on resource mobilisation cites Aichi Target 20 alongside Guideline 112 [§10].

The architectural implication — visible across §10 and the §2 framing — is that the Programme treats biodiversity policy as a subset of Cuba's wider development-planning system. The Programme also states in its Introduction that the existing science–policy interface for biodiversity and ecosystem services already encompasses "a fairly broad number of programmes, organisations, mechanisms, and national and international processes", and that emphasis has been placed on "strengthening coordination among existing structures and establishing synergies" rather than creating new institutional mechanisms [§2].

Sources:

• §2 — 1. Introduction
• §10 — 5. Goals and actions of the National Programme on Biological Diversity 2016–2020

4. Delivery Architecture

The Programme does not create new delivery mechanisms; it coordinates a set of pre-existing strategic frameworks. The Programme is stated to be "essentially founded" on four upstream instruments: the National Environmental Strategy (referenced in its 2007–2010 and 2011–2015 editions, whose implementation experience informs the current Programme), the National Forestry Programme, the National System of Protected Areas Plan, and the National Biosafety Action Plan [§5]. It is also situated in relation to the national Economic Plan and to Cuba's 5th National Report to the Convention on Biological Diversity, developed in 2014 [§5].

Institutional leadership sits with CITMA and the family of specialised institutions it parents. The Programme was developed by the coordinating team of the GEF/UNDP project National Biodiversity Plan to support the implementation of the Strategic Plan of the Convention on Biological Diversity 2011–2020 in the Republic of Cuba, co-directed by the Institute of Ecology and Systematics (IES — Instituto de Ecología y Sistemática) and the Directorate of the Environment (DMA — Dirección de Medio Ambiente), with participation from the National Centre for Protected Areas (CNAP — Centro Nacional de Áreas Protegidas), the Environment Agency (AMA — Agencia de Medio Ambiente), the Institute of Oceanology (IdO — Instituto de Oceanología), and the National Centre for Biological Safety (CSB — Centro Nacional de Seguridad Biológica) [§2].

Sector ministries and specialised bodies appear in the action matrix as leads or participants for thematically aligned actions: the Ministry of Agriculture (Minag), the Ministry of the Food Industry (Minal), the Ministry of Communications (Mincom), the Ministry of Energy and Mines (MINEM), the National Institute of Hydraulic Resources (INRH — Instituto Nacional de Recursos Hidráulicos), the Institute of Physical Planning (IPF — Instituto de Planificación Física), and the General Customs of the Republic (GCRC — Aduana General de la República), among others [§10]. Several matrix entries are tied to strengthening or harmonisation of the regulatory framework, including revision of legal and conventional frameworks on biodiversity and biosafety, and implementation of Resolution 160/2011 on environmental licensing [§10].

Sources:

• §2 — 1. Introduction
• §5 — 4. National Programme on Biological Diversity 2016–2020
• §10 — 5. Goals and actions of the National Programme on Biological Diversity 2016–2020

5. Monitoring and Accountability

The Programme's monitoring architecture is the action matrix itself. Each national goal is mapped to specific actions, responsible entities, participating entities, monitoring criteria or indicators ("criterios de medida" / "indicadores"), and a 2020 deadline [§10]. Responsibility for implementation is distributed across a named set of institutional categories rather than concentrated in a single coordinating body. The matrix repeatedly designates Organismos de la Administración Central del Estado (OACE, central-state administrative organs), Organizaciones Superiores de Dirección Empresarial (OSDE, higher business management organisations), Órganos Locales del Poder Popular (OLPP, local organs of People's Power), and non-governmental organisations (ONG) as either responsible or participating entities [§10].

Progress is to be tracked through action-level indicators specified in the matrix, including counts of dissemination actions on biological diversity, completion of diagnostic studies, numbers of training participants by target group, percentages of protected areas covered by management projects, establishment of baseline inventories of point-source industrial discharges, numbers of implemented actions under named sub-programmes, and documented research and dissemination outputs [§10]. The Programme states that intensifying the development of effective indicators to determine the status and trends of the components of biological diversity, and implementing the necessary monitoring processes, is itself a priority sphere of action [§3] — indicating that a full monitoring framework was treated as a work item under the Programme rather than as a pre-existing asset.

The Programme identifies Cuba's 5th National Report to the Convention on Biological Diversity, developed in 2014, as part of the reporting architecture on which it is founded [§5]. Detailed provisions on national–subnational coordination mechanisms, stakeholder engagement, and the full inventory of indicators and baselines are contained within the §10 action matrix but are not further legibly extractable from the material available due to character-level fragmentation in the source table; the present description reflects what is recoverable. The Programme terminates in 2020, and no successor document is referenced in the material available.

Sources:

• §3 — National circumstances
• §5 — 4. National Programme on Biological Diversity 2016–2020
• §10 — 5. Goals and actions of the National Programme on Biological Diversity 2016–2020

6. Finance and Resource Mobilisation

The Programme contains no dedicated finance or resource mobilisation architecture in the material available. No currency amounts, budget allocations, named domestic funding instruments, cost estimates, or biodiversity finance plan are set out [§2, §8]. The only financing reference is that plan development was led by the coordinating team of the GEF/UNDP project National Biodiversity Plan to support the implementation of the Strategic Plan of the Convention on Biological Diversity 2011–2020 in the Republic of Cuba, co-directed by IES and DMA of CITMA (see Delivery Architecture) — a Global Environment Facility (GEF) / United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) envelope used for planning, not for implementation [§2].

Resource mobilisation appears in the operational priorities as a directional aspiration: mobilise resources to increase material and financial capacities for the implementation of the National Programme on Biological Diversity [§3], cross-referenced to Aichi Target 20 and Guideline 112 [§10]. The international-circumstances framing observes that mobilisation of financial resources is one of the underlying measures that will have a particularly marked influence on the achievement of the other targets [§4]. The Programme's benefit-sharing principle — the fair and equitable distribution of the costs and benefits derived from the utilisation of biological-diversity components [§8, Principle I] — is stated as an orientation, not an operational finance mechanism. No references to GBF Target 19, biodiversity-harmful subsidy reform, private finance, or quantified financing gaps appear in the material available.

Sources:

• §2 — 1. Introduction
• §3 — National circumstances
• §4 — International circumstances
• §8 — Guiding principles

7. GBF Target Coverage

The Programme was developed against the Aichi Biodiversity Targets, not the 23 GBF Targets. The per-target entries below are an external analytical overlay and do not reflect Cuban commitments made against the GBF.

GBF Target 1 — Spatial planning

Content addressing GBF Target 1 was not identified in this NBSAP.

GBF Target 2 — Ecosystem restoration

Addressed. The Programme identifies ecosystem rehabilitation and restoration as a priority sphere of action, framed around preventing fragmentation, increasing resilience and connectivity, and contributing to adaptation and mitigation of climate change and extreme events. A parallel priority calls for increased reforestation with native species and improved forest fire prevention and control. Mitigation of fragmentation and disturbance of landscapes is named in Principle VI as one of three priority threats. Restoration is framed as dual-purpose (biodiversity resilience and climate adaptation) rather than area-based; no quantified restoration figure, area, or responsible body is stated.

GBF Target 3 — Protected areas (30x30)

Mentioned. CNAP, an institution of CITMA, is named as a participating body in Programme co-direction, and the Programme is stated to be founded in part on the pre-existing National System of Protected Areas Plan (see Delivery Architecture). No coverage percentage, area figure, OECM concept, or expansion commitment is recorded.

GBF Target 4 — Species recovery

Mentioned. The Programme prioritises strengthening and maintaining living and preserved biological collections as ex situ conservation and intangible heritage, and formulating adaptation and mitigation strategies for climate-change effects on vulnerable ecosystems and populations of threatened and endemic species. Biological collections are framed as both a conservation tool and intangible heritage. No species list, recovery plan, or extinction-risk metric is stated.

GBF Target 5 — Sustainable harvest

Mentioned. The only operational entry is the priority on recovery of fishery resources through replacement of fishing practices incompatible with the environment and respect for control and management measures. No terrestrial wild-harvest or wildlife-trade language appears in the material available.

GBF Target 6 — Invasive alien species

Addressed. Invasive alien species are named in the priority spheres of action alongside fragmentation, pollution, and forest fires as principal threats, with the instruction to continue efforts regarding invasive alien species. Invasive alien species are one of three threats named in Principle VI, together with fragmentation and climate change. A national goal in the matrix addresses invasive-alien-species control that directly affects biological diversity, cross-referenced to Guidelines 133, 134, and 204. Language is continuation ("continue efforts") rather than a new commitment; no introduction-rate reduction, pathway list, or eradication figure is recorded.

GBF Target 7 — Pollution reduction

Addressed. A national goal commits to pollution reduction to levels not detrimental to ecosystem function and human health, cross-referenced to Aichi Target 8 and Guidelines 117, 131, 134, 135, and 218. Associated monitoring indicators include baseline inventories of point-source industrial discharges. Pollution appears at the strategic level as an undifferentiated threat category; the material available does not break it down into nutrient, pesticide, or plastic sub-topics.

GBF Target 8 — Climate and biodiversity

Addressed. The Programme prioritises formulation of adaptation and mitigation strategies for climate-change effects on vulnerable ecosystems and populations of threatened and endemic species, and ties ecosystem rehabilitation and restoration to climate adaptation and mitigation (see GBF Target 2). Climate change is one of three threats named in Principle VI. Ocean acidification is not mentioned in the material available despite Cuba's extensive marine context; no emissions figure, nature-based-solutions area, or timeline is recorded.

GBF Target 9 — Wild species use

Mentioned. Principle I states the sustainable use of the components of biological diversity and the fair and equitable distribution of the costs and benefits derived from their utilisation — an unusual formulation that pairs benefits with costs. The only operational instance in the material available is the fisheries-recovery priority addressed under Target 5.

GBF Target 10 — Agriculture / forestry

Addressed. Priority actions include diversifying agricultural production based on recognition of native species and traditional knowledge and practices and on the conservation of plant and animal genetic resources; increasing reforestation with native species with improved fire control; and the fisheries-recovery priority addressed under Target 5. The Programme is stated to be founded on the pre-existing National Forestry Programme (see Delivery Architecture). No area targets, productivity figures, or sector-specific timelines are recorded.

GBF Target 11 — Ecosystem services (NbS)

Addressed. Ecosystem services are framed across the Programme as the basis for national well-being. An operational priority names studies on the economic valuation of ecosystem services. Principle II grounds environmental awareness on understanding the value of biological diversity and its ecosystem services as the basis of national socio-economic development. Ecosystem rehabilitation and restoration are treated as a nature-based response bridging biodiversity, connectivity, and climate adaptation (see Target 2). No quantified ecosystem-services figure is recorded.

GBF Target 12 — Urban biodiversity

Content addressing GBF Target 12 was not identified in this NBSAP.

GBF Target 13 — Genetic resources / ABS

Addressed. A priority action commits to developing a national legal framework prioritising access to genetic resources, information, and biological collections — grouping ABS with information access rather than isolating it. A parallel priority commits to increasing the valuation and protection of traditional knowledge and its gender component. Principle I restates fair and equitable distribution of costs and benefits. The Nagoya Protocol is not named in the material available, and no benefit-sharing mechanism or monetary instrument is attached.

GBF Target 14 — Mainstreaming

Addressed. Mainstreaming is one of the Programme's operative priorities, with separate actions on harmonising and integrating conservation and sustainable-use objectives into the country's development policies and strategies and into decision-making at all levels, and on integrating and rationalising biodiversity issues into other sectors. Principle IV grounds management on consensus, cooperation, and intersectoral coordination. The Programme self-identifies as the framework for integration rather than a standalone plan — intersectoral coordination is repeated at both the operational and principle levels. No spatial-planning instrument or quantified mainstreaming metric is recorded.

GBF Target 15 — Business disclosure

Content addressing GBF Target 15 was not identified in this NBSAP.

GBF Target 16 — Sustainable consumption

Content addressing GBF Target 16 was not identified in this NBSAP.

GBF Target 17 — Biosafety

Mentioned. CSB, an institution of CITMA, is a participating body in Programme co-direction, and the National Biosafety Action Plan is listed among the pre-existing strategic frameworks on which the Programme is founded. A national goal in the matrix addresses measures for the safe use of living modified organisms, cross-referenced to Guideline 133. No new biosafety commitment or LMO/GMO regulatory action is recorded.

GBF Target 18 — Harmful subsidies

Content addressing GBF Target 18 was not identified in this NBSAP.

GBF Target 19 — Finance mobilisation

Mentioned. Resource mobilisation is framed as a prerequisite for achieving the other targets and appears as a priority to mobilise resources to increase material and financial capacities for Programme implementation, cross-referenced to Aichi Target 20 and Guideline 112. The only named finance vehicle is the GEF/UNDP project that supported plan development, not implementation. No national biodiversity finance plan, domestic figure, or international-flow figure is recorded. See the Finance and Resource Mobilisation section.

GBF Target 20 — Capacity and technology

Addressed. Capacity-building content is distributed across priorities: training of professionals related to biological diversity; studies on invertebrates and marine species (singled out as knowledge gaps); studies on the economic valuation of ecosystem services; and intensifying the development of effective indicators and monitoring processes. Principle V directs scientific research and technological innovation towards solving biodiversity-loss problems and towards the recovery of traditional knowledge and practices — an unusual pairing. Principle III names environmental education, training, and communication at all levels as a standing principle. No technology-transfer mechanism or quantified capacity metric is recorded.

GBF Target 21 — Data and information

Addressed. Priorities include raising awareness of the significance, contributions, and interrelation of biological diversity with the different spheres of development and human well-being, and intensifying indicator development and monitoring processes (see Target 20). The Programme frames itself in science–policy-interface terms, stating that coordination among existing programmes, organisations, and mechanisms should be strengthened rather than new ones created. No open-data commitment, biodiversity information system, or stakeholder-access mechanism is named.

GBF Target 22 — Inclusive participation

Mentioned. Participation is framed at the level of society and civil organisations rather than as an IPLC-specific framework. The priority action on increasing the valuation and protection of traditional knowledge and its gender component (see Target 23) is the primary operational entry. Principle IV grounds management on consensus, cooperation, and intersectoral coordination. No youth focus, IPLC-specific rights framework, FPIC reference, or community-governance mechanism is named.

GBF Target 23 — Gender equality

Mentioned. Gender appears only as a sub-component of the priority on traditional knowledge — "increase the valuation and protection of traditional knowledge and its gender component" — rather than as a standalone gender action plan. No gender-disaggregated indicators or participation commitment for women is recorded.