Topic 32: Environmental Treaties & Conventions — II

The biodiversity & chemicals/waste half of global environmental diplomacy — the densest matching block in the paper. Scoring core: the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and its Cartagena & Nagoya Protocols, the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, CITES on wildlife trade, CMS (Bonn) on migratory species, the chemicals-and-waste cluster (Basel, Rotterdam, Stockholm POPs), the Minamata mercury convention, and the funding bodies (GEF, GCF, IUCN, IPBES). Built convention-to-latest-COP with dated current affairs.

UPSC Prelims · Mains GS-III CBD · CITES ~22 min read Treaties · Protocols Very High Weight · Static + Current

1.Mapping the Biodiversity & Chemical Treaties
2.Convention on Biological Diversity 1992
3.Cartagena & Nagoya Protocols
4.Aichi Targets & Kunming-Montreal GBF
5.CITES 1973
6.CMS / Bonn Convention 1979
7.Basel, Rotterdam & Stockholm (POPs)
8.Minamata Convention (Mercury)
9.Funds & Bodies: GEF, GCF, IUCN, IPBES
10.Current Affairs Link (2024–2026)
11.Prelims PYQ Practice
12.Mains PYQ Practice
★15-Minute Revision Box

Conceptual Clarity — Why this Topic Matters

Biodiversity and chemical-waste treaties are a Prelims goldmine because they are so easy to confuse — UPSC exploits exactly that. Three patterns recur:

Definitional / static: year of a convention, its subject, its parent body (e.g. Nagoya = ABS under CBD, CITES = wildlife trade, Minamata = mercury). Pure recall — a convention↔year↔subject table settles it.
Statement-elimination (2–4 statements): matching convention↔protocol↔mechanism — e.g. Cartagena = biosafety/LMOs, Nagoya = access & benefit-sharing, Basel = hazardous-waste movement. One wrong pairing sinks the option.
Applied / current: newest outcomes (Kunming-Montreal GBF “30×30,” High Seas/BBNJ Treaty), India’s ratifications & NBSAP updates. Mains uses these for biodiversity-governance answers.

Highest-frequency themes: CBD↔Cartagena↔Nagoya chain · Aichi → Kunming-Montreal GBF (30×30) · CITES appendices · CMS/Bonn · Basel-Rotterdam-Stockholm chemical trio · Minamata mercury · GEF as funding mechanism.

1. Mapping the Biodiversity & Chemical Treaties

Topic 31 covered the climate–atmosphere–land–water cluster (UNFCCC, Kyoto, Paris, Ozone, UNCCD, Ramsar). Topic 32 completes the map with the biodiversity cluster (CBD family + CITES + CMS) and the chemicals & waste cluster (Basel–Rotterdam–Stockholm + Minamata). Together the two topics cover every Multilateral Environmental Agreement (MEA) UPSC has ever asked.

The two families at a glance

Cluster	Core convention	Protocols / offshoots	Example / hook
Biodiversity — conservation & use	CBD 1992 (Rio)	Cartagena 2000, Nagoya 2010, Kunming-Montreal GBF 2022	“3 objectives: conserve, use sustainably, share benefits”
Biodiversity — trade & movement	CITES 1973, CMS/Bonn 1979	CITES Appendices I/II/III; CMS daughter agreements (e.g. AEWA)	CITES = trade in species; CMS = migration across borders
Chemicals & hazardous waste	Basel 1989	Rotterdam 1998 (PIC), Stockholm 2001 (POPs)	“BRS trio” share one joint Secretariat in Geneva
Heavy metals	Minamata 2013	—	Mercury — named after Japan’s Minamata disease

Why the split matters for Prelims: examiners love to mis-pair a convention with the wrong subject — e.g. “Nagoya Protocol deals with biosafety” (wrong; that is Cartagena) or “Basel Convention deals with mercury” (wrong; that is Minamata). Lock the convention↔subject map below and these traps disappear.

Fig 32.1 — The CBD family tree: one parent convention (1992) with two legally-binding protocols (Cartagena, Nagoya) and a rolling targets track (Aichi → Kunming-Montreal GBF).

2. Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), 1992

The CBD is the umbrella biodiversity treaty — one of the three “Rio Conventions” opened for signature at the 1992 Earth Summit (alongside UNFCCC and UNCCD). It is legally binding but framed as an enabling convention: specifics come through its protocols and COP decisions.

The three objectives (memorise verbatim)

Objective	Meaning	Delivered through
1. Conservation of biological diversity	Protect genes, species and ecosystems	Protected areas, in-situ & ex-situ measures
2. Sustainable use of its components	Use resources without long-term depletion	National Biodiversity Strategies (NBSAPs)
3. Fair & equitable sharing of benefits from genetic resources	Benefit-sharing with resource/knowledge holders	Nagoya Protocol (ABS)

Membership: near-universal — the USA has signed but not ratified (a favourite Prelims fact, mirroring its Kyoto/CBD non-ratification pattern).
Secretariat: Montreal, Canada. Supreme body = Conference of the Parties (COP), meeting biennially.
India’s enabling law: the Biological Diversity Act, 2002 (NBA–SBB–BMC three-tier structure) domesticates CBD & Nagoya.

check for latest update or data India’s updated NBSAP was released to align national biodiversity targets with the Kunming-Montreal GBF — verify the latest version & target figures before the exam.

3. Cartagena Protocol (2000) & Nagoya Protocol (2010)

The CBD’s two binding protocols are the single most-confused pair in the syllabus. One governs living modified organisms; the other governs who profits from genetic resources.

Feature	Cartagena Protocol	Nagoya Protocol
Adopted / in force	2000 / 2003	2010 / 2014
Subject	Biosafety — safe transfer, handling & use of Living Modified Organisms (LMOs/GMOs)	Access & Benefit-Sharing (ABS) of genetic resources & associated traditional knowledge
Core mechanism	Advance Informed Agreement (AIA) before first trans-boundary LMO movement; precautionary principle	Prior Informed Consent (PIC) + Mutually Agreed Terms (MAT); ABS Clearing-House
Supplement	Nagoya–Kuala Lumpur Supplementary Protocol on Liability & Redress (2010)	—
Hook	“CartaGena = GMO safety”	“NagoYA = sharing the benefits”

Both are protocols under the CBD — only CBD parties can join.
India ratified both. Nagoya feeds directly into India’s Biological Diversity Act, 2002 (benefit-sharing via NBA).
Cartagena’s guiding idea is the precautionary principle — lack of full scientific certainty is no reason to allow a risky LMO.

One-line separator: Cartagena = biosafety (keep dangerous LMOs out); Nagoya = biofairness (share the money from genetic resources).

4. Aichi Targets & the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF), 2022

The CBD sets time-bound targets under a rolling “Strategic Plan.” The 2010–2020 plan carried the 20 Aichi Biodiversity Targets; its successor is the Kunming-Montreal GBF, adopted at CBD COP15 (2022) — the biodiversity world’s answer to the Paris Agreement.

Aichi Targets (2010–2020) — the predecessor

Adopted at CBD COP10 in Nagoya, Japan (2010) — 20 targets under 5 Strategic Goals (A–E).
None was fully achieved globally by 2020 (a key evaluative fact) — only partial progress on 6.
Aichi Target 11 (17% terrestrial / 10% marine protected) is the direct ancestor of GBF’s “30×30.”

Kunming-Montreal GBF (2022) — the current framework

Element	Detail	Exam hook
Adoption	CBD COP15, presidency China (Kunming), hosted in Montreal, Dec 2022	“Kunming names it, Montreal hosts it”
Headline “30×30”	Protect 30% of land, inland water, coastal & marine areas by 2030	Target 3 — the flagship
Restoration	Restore 30% of degraded ecosystems by 2030	Target 2
Finance	Mobilise US$200 bn/yr by 2030; US$30 bn/yr international flows to developing nations	Target 19
Structure	4 long-term Goals (2050) + 23 action-oriented Targets (2030)	“4 goals, 23 targets”

check for latest update or data A dedicated GBF Fund was established under the GEF to finance implementation. Track India’s revised national targets & latest COP16 (Cali, 2024 / resumed 2025) decisions before the exam.

5. CITES, 1973 — Trade in Endangered Species

CITES (Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora), signed in Washington DC in 1973 (a.k.a. the Washington Convention), regulates cross-border trade in wildlife so that trade does not threaten survival. It does not ban domestic use — only international movement.

The three Appendices (the heart of every CITES question)

Appendix	Level of threat	Trade rule	Example species
I	Most endangered; threatened with extinction	Commercial trade banned (permitted only in exceptional cases with export + import permits)	Tiger, Asian elephant, Great Indian Bustard, gharial
II	Not now threatened but may become so without control	Trade allowed but regulated (export permit; no import permit needed)	Corals, many reptiles, mahogany
III	Protected in at least one country asking others for help	Trade regulated only in the listing country’s specimens	Species listed unilaterally by a member

Legally binding, but implemented through national legislation — in India via the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 & Foreign Trade rules.
Appendix I & II changes need a two-thirds vote at the Conference of the Parties; Appendix III can be amended unilaterally.
Secretariat administered by UNEP, based in Geneva.

Fig 32.2 — CITES appendices pyramid: strictness falls from Appendix I (trade banned) down to Appendix III (single-country listing); species count rises going down.

6. CMS / Bonn Convention, 1979 — Migratory Species

The Convention on Migratory Species (CMS), adopted in Bonn, Germany (1979), protects migratory wild animals — species that cross national boundaries — through international cooperation across their entire range.

Feature	Detail
Appendix I	Migratory species threatened with extinction — range states must strictly protect them (e.g. Siberian crane, dugong).
Appendix II	Species with unfavourable status needing international agreements — basis for daughter agreements (e.g. AEWA for waterbirds; MoUs on dugongs, sharks, raptors).
India’s role	India is a party; hosted CMS COP13 in Gandhinagar (Feb 2020) — logo the Great Indian Bustard, mascot “Gibi.” Theme: “Migratory species connect the planet and we welcome them home.”
Nickname	The Bonn Convention; often called an “umbrella/framework” convention for its daughter agreements.

CITES vs CMS one-liner: CITES stops harmful trade in species; CMS secures safe migration routes for species that move across borders. Different problems, different treaties.

Fig 32.3 — The chemicals & waste trio (Basel–Rotterdam–Stockholm) share one Geneva secretariat; Minamata (mercury, 2013) is a separate stand-alone convention.

7. The Chemicals & Waste Trio: Basel, Rotterdam, Stockholm

Three sister conventions govern hazardous chemicals and waste across their life-cycle — movement, trade and elimination. They share a joint Geneva secretariat (the “BRS synergies” process), which is why they are examined as a set.

Convention	Year	Focus	Core mechanism
Basel	1989	Trans-boundary movement & disposal of hazardous wastes	Prior Informed Consent for waste exports; Ban Amendment bars OECD→non-OECD hazardous-waste exports
Rotterdam	1998 (in force 2004)	Trade in hazardous chemicals & pesticides	Prior Informed Consent (PIC) procedure — importers must consent before shipment
Stockholm	2001 (in force 2004)	Elimination of Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs)	Ban/restrict the “dirty dozen” POPs (e.g. DDT, PCBs, dioxins); precautionary principle

Hook chain: Basel = waste movement · Rotterdam = chemical trade consent · Stockholm = POP elimination. Chronology 1989 → 1998 → 2001.
DDT nuance: Stockholm restricts DDT but allows its limited use for disease-vector (malaria) control — a classic statement-based trap.
India is a party to all three; POPs are regulated domestically under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 framework.

Basel ≠ Bamako: the Bamako Convention (1991) is a stricter African regional treaty banning hazardous-waste imports into Africa — sometimes offered as a distractor. Basel is the global one.

8. Minamata Convention on Mercury, 2013

The Minamata Convention (adopted 2013, in force 2017) is the global treaty to protect human health and the environment from anthropogenic emissions and releases of mercury. It is named after Japan’s Minamata disease — mercury poisoning from industrial effluent in Minamata Bay.

Feature	Detail
Coverage	Controls mercury across its life-cycle — mining, use in products & processes, emissions, storage & waste.
Bans / phase-outs	Phase-out of many mercury-added products (some batteries, thermometers, certain lamps) by target dates; controls on Artisanal & Small-scale Gold Mining (ASGM), a major release source.
India	Ratified in 2018; secured flexibility on phasing out mercury-based thermal power & products.
Secretariat	UNEP, Geneva.

Mercury = Minamata. If a question mentions mercury, the answer is Minamata — never Basel (waste), Stockholm (organic pollutants) or Rotterdam (chemical trade).

9. Funds & Scientific Bodies Behind the Conventions

MEAs need money and science. A cluster of financial mechanisms and expert bodies serve the biodiversity & chemical conventions — UPSC pairs them frequently with their parent treaties.

Body	Role	Serves
GEF (Global Environment Facility, 1991)	Chief financial mechanism for MEAs; funds projects	CBD, UNFCCC, UNCCD, Stockholm, Minamata + GBF Fund
GCF (Green Climate Fund, 2010)	Climate finance for mitigation & adaptation	UNFCCC / Paris (climate, not biodiversity)
IUCN (1948)	Publishes the Red List of Threatened Species (the global conservation-status standard)	Advisory to CITES, CMS, CBD; a hybrid govt–NGO union
IPBES (2012)	Intergovernmental science-policy platform — the “IPCC for biodiversity”	Assessments for CBD & policymakers

GEF vs GCF trap: GEF is the multi-convention financial mechanism (including biodiversity & chemicals); GCF is climate-specific under the UNFCCC.
IUCN Red List categories (recall order): Extinct → Extinct in the Wild → Critically Endangered → Endangered → Vulnerable → Near Threatened → Least Concern (plus Data Deficient / Not Evaluated).
IPBES is not a UN body per se — it is an independent intergovernmental body, established 2012, secretariat in Bonn.

10. Current Affairs & Recent Developments

Biodiversity & chemical governance is fast-moving. Anchor these dated developments and refresh the tagged figures right before the exam.

Date	Development	Why it matters
Dec 2022	Kunming-Montreal GBF adopted at CBD COP15 (Montreal)	New “30×30” global biodiversity targets; GBF Fund created under GEF
Jun 2023	High Seas / BBNJ Treaty adopted at the UN (Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction)	First treaty to protect marine biodiversity in the high seas; enables marine protected areas beyond EEZs — supports the 30×30 marine goal
Oct–Nov 2024	CBD COP16 (Cali, Colombia; resumed 2025)	Negotiated GBF implementation, monitoring framework & benefit-sharing from Digital Sequence Information (DSI) — the “Cali Fund.”
Ongoing	India’s updated NBSAP aligned to GBF; expansion of Ramsar & protected-area network	Domesticating 30×30 — links to Biological Diversity (Amendment) Act, 2023

check for latest update or data BBNJ ratifications: the High Seas Treaty needs 60 ratifications to enter into force — verify the current count & India’s status.

check for latest update or data DSI / Cali Fund: track the latest decisions on benefit-sharing from digital sequence information on genetic resources — a live, high-probability current-affairs theme.

check for latest update or data India Nagoya cases: refresh recent NBA benefit-sharing notices & the latest NBSAP national targets before the exam.

11. 11. Prelims PYQs

UPSC Prelims 2016

Q: The Cartagena Protocol is associated with which of the following?

(a) Access and benefit-sharing of genetic resources
(b) Biosafety and trans-boundary movement of living modified organisms
(c) Trade in endangered species of wild fauna and flora
(d) Elimination of persistent organic pollutants

Ans: (b) — Cartagena (2000), under the CBD, governs biosafety and LMOs. ABS is Nagoya; trade is CITES; POPs is Stockholm.

UPSC Prelims 2019

Q: Consider the following pairs: 1. Nagoya Protocol — Access and Benefit-Sharing 2. Kigali Amendment — Hydrofluorocarbons 3. Minamata Convention — Mercury. Which of the pairs is/are correctly matched?

(a) 1 and 2 only
(b) 3 only
(c) 1 and 3 only
(d) 1, 2 and 3

Ans: (d) — All three are correct — Nagoya (ABS under CBD), Kigali (HFC phase-down under the Montreal Protocol), Minamata (mercury).

UPSC Prelims 2015

Q: With reference to CITES, which statement is correct?

(a) It bans all forms of domestic use of listed species.
(b) Appendix I species face the strictest control, with commercial international trade generally prohibited.
(c) It is a non-binding voluntary code.
(d) Appendix III listings require a two-thirds vote of the Conference of the Parties.

Ans: (b) — Appendix I = strictest, commercial trade banned. CITES regulates international trade (not domestic use), is legally binding, and Appendix III can be amended unilaterally.

UPSC Prelims 2023

Q: The “30×30” target — protecting 30% of land and sea by 2030 — is the flagship of which framework?

(a) The Aichi Biodiversity Targets
(b) The Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework
(c) The Paris Agreement
(d) The Sendai Framework

Ans: (b) — “30×30” (Target 3) is the flagship of the Kunming-Montreal GBF adopted at CBD COP15 (2022). Aichi was its predecessor (2010–2020).

UPSC Prelims 2014

Q: The Convention on Migratory Species (CMS) is also known as the:

(a) Washington Convention
(b) Bonn Convention
(c) Ramsar Convention
(d) Rotterdam Convention

Ans: (b) — CMS = Bonn Convention (1979). Washington = CITES; Ramsar = wetlands; Rotterdam = hazardous chemical trade (PIC).

UPSC Prelims 2018

Q: Consider the following statements about the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm Conventions: 1. They share a joint secretariat. 2. The Stockholm Convention deals with persistent organic pollutants. 3. The Rotterdam Convention operates a Prior Informed Consent procedure. Which is/are correct?

(a) 2 only
(b) 1 and 2 only
(c) 2 and 3 only
(d) 1, 2 and 3

Ans: (d) — All three are correct. The BRS conventions share a Geneva secretariat; Stockholm = POPs; Rotterdam = PIC.

UPSC Prelims 2020

Q: The Global Environment Facility (GEF) serves as a financial mechanism for which of the following?

(a) Only the UNFCCC
(b) Only the CBD
(c) Multiple conventions including the CBD, UNCCD, Stockholm and Minamata
(d) Only climate-adaptation projects under the Green Climate Fund

Ans: (c) — GEF is the multi-convention financial mechanism. The GCF is the climate-specific fund under the UNFCCC.

UPSC Prelims 2024

Q: The High Seas Treaty (BBNJ), adopted in 2023, primarily aims to:

(a) Regulate deep-sea mineral mining royalties
(b) Conserve and sustainably use marine biodiversity in areas beyond national jurisdiction
(c) Set binding fishing quotas within Exclusive Economic Zones
(d) Replace the CBD for coastal waters

Ans: (b) — BBNJ enables marine protected areas and biodiversity conservation on the high seas — beyond EEZs — supporting the 30×30 marine goal.

Prelims 2026 — anticipated themes

Likely: Newest biodiversity/chemicals developments — DSI “Cali Fund” (CBD COP16), BBNJ ratification progress, Kunming-Montreal GBF target mapping, or the Minamata / BRS convention-to-pollutant pairing tested as statement-match. check for latest update or data

12. 12. Mains PYQs + Model Answers

Questions below are original, exam-style formulations built from real UPSC GS-III themes — paraphrased to be copyright-safe. Each framework = intro angle → structured body → way-forward, with examples to quote.

Mains GS-III — style 2019 15 marks · 250 words

Q: “The Convention on Biological Diversity and its protocols form an integrated regime for conserving and equitably using the planet’s genetic wealth.” Discuss.

Model Answer Framework

Introduction: Define CBD (1992, Rio) and its three objectives — conservation, sustainable use, benefit-sharing.
The integrated regime:
- CBD as the umbrella framework convention.
- Cartagena Protocol (biosafety/LMOs) — safeguards the “conserve” goal.
- Nagoya Protocol (ABS) — operationalises “equitable sharing.”
- Kunming-Montreal GBF (30×30) — time-bound targets.
India’s domestication: Biological Diversity Act 2002 (NBA–SBB–BMC), 2023 Amendment, updated NBSAP.
Gaps: weak Aichi delivery, finance shortfalls, DSI benefit-sharing unresolved.
Conclusion: An integrated but under-implemented regime; success hinges on finance & national target-setting.

Mains GS-III — style 2020 15 marks · 250 words

Q: Distinguish between CITES and the Convention on Migratory Species. How do they complement India’s domestic wildlife-protection framework?

Model Answer Framework

Introduction: Both are global species-protection treaties addressing different threats — trade vs migration.
CITES (1973): regulates international trade; three appendices; implemented via the Wildlife (Protection) Act 1972.
CMS/Bonn (1979): protects migratory species across range states; Appendices I/II; daughter agreements; India hosted COP13 (Gandhinagar 2020).
Complementarity with India: WPA schedules, protected areas, Great Indian Bustard/Siberian crane conservation, flyway protection.
Conclusion: Trade control + migratory-route security together plug India’s cross-border conservation gaps.

Mains GS-III — style 2018 15 marks · 250 words

Q: Evaluate the effectiveness of the Basel–Rotterdam–Stockholm regime in curbing the global movement of hazardous chemicals and waste.

Model Answer Framework

Introduction: Three sister conventions covering waste (Basel), chemical trade (Rotterdam), and POPs (Stockholm), with a joint secretariat.
Strengths: PIC procedures, Basel Ban Amendment, POP phase-outs, synergies process reducing duplication.
Weaknesses: illegal e-waste & plastic-waste dumping, weak enforcement, non-ratification of the Ban Amendment by some states, DDT exemptions.
India context: e-waste & hazardous-waste rules under EPA 1986; import-control challenges.
Conclusion: A robust normative architecture undermined by enforcement gaps; needs stronger monitoring & producer responsibility.

Mains GS-III — style 2023 15 marks · 250 words

Q: “The Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework is to biodiversity what the Paris Agreement is to climate.” Critically examine.

Model Answer Framework

Introduction: GBF (2022) as the successor to the failed Aichi Targets; the “Paris moment” for nature.
Parallels: global goals + national targets (like NDCs), finance mobilisation, monitoring framework, 2030/2050 horizons.
Flagship targets: 30×30, restoration of 30% degraded ecosystems, US$200 bn/yr, GBF Fund.
Critique: voluntary national targets, finance shortfalls, DSI unresolved, measurement difficulties, Aichi’s failure as a warning.
Conclusion: Ambitious and Paris-like in design, but delivery depends on national follow-through & predictable finance.

Mains GS-III — style 2016 10 marks · 150 words

Q: Discuss the role of financial mechanisms and scientific bodies (GEF, GCF, IUCN, IPBES) in strengthening global biodiversity governance.

Model Answer Framework

Introduction: Effective MEAs need money and science — hence a supporting ecosystem of funds and expert bodies.
Finance: GEF (multi-convention mechanism + GBF Fund); GCF (climate, complementary).
Science: IUCN Red List (conservation-status standard); IPBES (science-policy assessments, the “IPCC for nature”).
Synergy: data → targets → funded projects → monitored outcomes.
Conclusion: Their coordination determines whether GBF targets translate into results on the ground.

Mains GS-III — anticipated theme 15 marks · 250 words

Likely: Assess whether the newest biodiversity-finance instruments — the GBF Fund, the DSI “Cali Fund” (COP16) and the BBNJ High Seas Treaty — can close the funding gap needed to deliver the 30×30 target. check for latest update or data

15-Minute Revision Box

Must-Remember Facts — International Treaties & Conventions (II)

CBD family & species treaties

CBD 1992 (Rio): 3 objectives — conserve, sustainable use, benefit-sharing. USA signed, not ratified. Secretariat Montreal.
Cartagena 2000: biosafety / LMOs (AIA, precaution). Nagoya 2010: Access & Benefit-Sharing (PIC + MAT).
Aichi (2010–20): 20 targets, none fully met. Kunming-Montreal GBF 2022: 4 goals + 23 targets; 30×30; GBF Fund under GEF.
CITES 1973 (Washington): international trade; Appendix I (banned) > II (regulated) > III (country-specific). Implemented via WPA 1972.
CMS/Bonn 1979: migratory species; India hosted COP13 Gandhinagar 2020 (GIB “Gibi”).

Chemicals, funds & current

BRS trio: Basel 1989 (waste movement) · Rotterdam 1998 (chemical trade PIC) · Stockholm 2001 (POPs, “dirty dozen,” DDT allowed for malaria). Joint Geneva secretariat.
Minamata 2013: mercury (India ratified 2018). Mercury = Minamata, always.
Funds/science: GEF = multi-convention finance + GBF Fund; GCF = climate; IUCN = Red List; IPBES = “IPCC for biodiversity.”
Current: BBNJ / High Seas Treaty 2023 (marine, needs 60 ratifications); DSI “Cali Fund” at COP16.

Highest-frequency themes since 2014: CBD protocol identification (Cartagena=biosafety, Nagoya=ABS); CITES appendices & CMS/Bonn; BRS-trio joint secretariat; Minamata=mercury; the 30×30 GBF target; and newest developments (BBNJ, DSI Cali Fund).

App.	Protection
I	Highest — trade banned
II	Regulated trade
III	Country-requested

Convention	Year
Ramsar	1971
CITES	1973
CMS (Bonn)	1979
Basel	1989
CBD	1992
Rotterdam	1998
Cartagena	2000
Stockholm (POPs)	2001
Nagoya	2010
Minamata	2013

Convention	Covers
CBD	Biodiversity
Cartagena	Biosafety / LMOs
Nagoya	ABS
CITES	Wildlife trade
CMS	Migratory species
Basel	Hazardous waste
Stockholm	POPs
Minamata	Mercury

Topic 32: Environmental Treaties & Conventions — II

On this page

Conceptual Clarity — Why this Topic Matters

1. Mapping the Biodiversity & Chemical Treaties

The two families at a glance

2. Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), 1992

The three objectives (memorise verbatim)

3. Cartagena Protocol (2000) & Nagoya Protocol (2010)

4. Aichi Targets & the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF), 2022

Aichi Targets (2010–2020) — the predecessor

Kunming-Montreal GBF (2022) — the current framework

5. CITES, 1973 — Trade in Endangered Species

The three Appendices (the heart of every CITES question)

6. CMS / Bonn Convention, 1979 — Migratory Species

7. The Chemicals & Waste Trio: Basel, Rotterdam, Stockholm

8. Minamata Convention on Mercury, 2013

9. Funds & Scientific Bodies Behind the Conventions

10. Current Affairs & Recent Developments

11. 11. Prelims PYQs

12. 12. Mains PYQs + Model Answers

Model Answer Framework

Model Answer Framework

Model Answer Framework

Model Answer Framework

Model Answer Framework

15-Minute Revision Box

Must-Remember Facts — International Treaties & Conventions (II)