As we reflect on environmental stewardship this week, the accelerating loss of biodiversity remains one of the most critical challenges facing our planet. Healthy ecosystems provide essential services – clean air and water, pollination, climate regulation, and more – underpinning human well-being and economic stability. While international efforts aim to address this crisis, action within the United States increasingly relies on state-level leadership and legal innovation.
Globally, the primary framework for conservation is the UN Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). In 2022, parties to the CBD adopted the landmark Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF), setting ambitious targets, including the widely discussed “30×30” goal – conserving at least 30 percent of the planet’s land and water by 2030. Subsequent meetings, like COP16 held last year in Cali, Colombia, focused on refining implementation strategies and addressing key issues like financing conservation efforts and ensuring equitable benefit-sharing from genetic resources.
However, the United States holds a unique position: it is one of the few nations that has not ratified the CBD. While the United States participates actively in CBD meetings and often aligns with its goals through domestic policy, its official “observer” status limits its formal role in treaty decisions. This reality places a greater emphasis on the actions taken by individual states to drive biodiversity conservation within U.S. borders.
Without comprehensive, binding federal legislation driven by CBD ratification, states have developed a diverse array of legal and policy tools to protect species and habitats:
- State Endangered Species Acts (ESAs): Many states have their own ESAs, predating or complementing the federal ESA. These laws allow states to list species facing threats within their borders, designate critical habitats, and implement recovery plans tailored to local conditions. The effectiveness and scope of these acts vary, but they represent a crucial layer of protection.
- Habitat Conservation and Connectivity: Recognizing that species survival depends on intact and connected habitats, states are increasingly focused on landscape-scale conservation. This includes initiatives like establishing wildlife corridors to allow species movement between fragmented habitats (seen in states like California and Alaska), acquiring critical lands for conservation through state park systems or wildlife management areas, and utilizing conservation easements on private lands. Funding often comes from state bond acts, dedicated real estate transfer taxes, or specialized environmental funds.
- State “30×30” Goals: Inspired by the global target, several states have formally adopted their own 30×30 goals through legislation or executive orders. California, for example, has been a leader in developing strategies to achieve this ambitious conservation target, mapping key biodiversity areas and coordinating across state agencies. These state-level commitments provide clear policy direction and help mobilize resources.
- Agency Modernization and Funding Innovation: Effective conservation requires well-equipped and modern wildlife agencies. Some states are updating their agency structures and mandates. For instance, a recent bipartisan bill in New Mexico aimed to modernize its state wildlife agency and enhance species protection. States also employ various funding mechanisms, from hunting and fishing license fees to dedicated portions of sales taxes or lottery revenues, to support conservation programs.
- Integrating Biodiversity into Planning: States are exploring ways to better incorporate biodiversity considerations into broader environmental and land-use planning. This can involve strengthening biodiversity components in state environmental policy act (SEPA) reviews or developing guidance for local governments on incorporating habitat protection into zoning and development decisions.
The recent focus at COP16 on financing mechanisms – including discussions around the Cali Fund for benefit-sharing and establishing a permanent GBF funding mechanism – underscores the critical need for resources. State-level funding innovations and commitments, while operating on a different scale, reflect this global understanding that conservation requires dedicated and sustainable financial support. Furthermore, state efforts to conserve habitat, protect threatened species, and promote connectivity directly contribute to the overarching goals of the GBF, demonstrating how subnational action can align with international targets even without formal national ratification.
As we celebrate Earth Day, the leadership demonstrated by U.S. states offers a vital pathway for conserving biodiversity. From enacting robust state ESAs to pioneering landscape-scale habitat initiatives and adopting ambitious 30×30 goals, states are utilizing a growing toolkit of legal and policy instruments. While challenges remain, particularly around funding and coordinating across jurisdictions, the ongoing innovation at the state level provides a crucial – and increasingly important – foundation for protecting America’s natural heritage in line with global conservation imperatives.
