Strengthening synergies across the climate-biodiversity-ocean nexus has the potential to be transformational. When countries develop separate strategies for climate (NDCs) and biodiversity (NBSAPs), they miss opportunities for reinforcing actions and risk creating conflicting objectives.
We are now less than 6 months away from the 30th meeting of the Conference of the Parties (COP30), to be held in Belem, Brazil, and halfway through the year where countries are expected to be submitting their updated or new nationally determined contribution (NDC) and enhancing their climate ambition to bring us closer to our goal of limiting global warming.
As the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) crucially highlighted in their 2025 Ocean Climate Dialogue statement,
“[…] the science is clear that collective efforts to limit global average temperature rise to below 1.5 degrees continues to fall short of what is required, and we are now perilously close to overshooting this critical limit”
Against this urgent backdrop, governments met in Bonn from 17-18 June for the 2025 UNFCCC Ocean Climate Dialogue to discuss priorities for how to enhance ocean-based climate action, promote greater alignment with biodiversity protection and shift from ambition-setting to implementation.
To inform these critical discussions and support countries in their NDC development including its alignment with National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs), UNSW CSDR published an Interim Analysis of Ocean Based Climate Actions Communicated in New and Updated NDCs and NBSAPs.
In parallel with the key themes from the 2025 Ocean Climate Dialogue, we will reflect on what this means for countries who have yet to prepare their new or updated NDC pursuant to the Paris Agreement and their new or updated NBSAPs pursuant to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD).
The Dialogue, Co-chaired by Belgium and Brazil, emerged with three priority areas to shape ocean-based climate action:
Of the three priority areas, strengthening synergies across the climate-biodiversity-ocean nexus emerged as the most transformational. This isn’t simply about coordination – it's about recognising that the climate crisis, biodiversity loss and ocean degradation are interconnected challenges requiring integrated solutions.
The dialogue’s emphasis on synergies reflects a growing understanding that siloed approaches are insufficient. When countries develop separate strategies for climate (NDCs) and biodiversity (NBSAPs), they miss opportunities for mutually reinforcing actions and risk creating conflicting objectives.
Conversely, when properly aligned, these solutions create powerful synergies. Marine protected areas can simultaneously conserve biodiversity, sequester carbon and build coastal resilience. Blue carbon ecosystems can deliver climate mitigation while supporting fisheries and coastal protection. This convergence creates unprecedented opportunities for efficient resource use and amplified impact – exactly what is needed to address our proximity to overshooting 1.5°C.
Countries and negotiating blocs like Australia, Canada, and AOSIS called for better alignment between various multilateral environmental agreements like UNFCCC, CBD, BBNJ, SDGs and regional frameworks – moving beyond rhetoric to practical coordination mechanisms. This includes harmonising reporting obligations, sharing technical guidance across UN agencies, and utilising cross-cutting tools like ocean accounts and integrated monitoring systems.
New research published by CSDR in advance of the Dialogue, analysed the 28 NDCs that have been communicated by countries so far [i] and the corresponding NBSAPs communicated by these countries.
The analysis found that 20 countries included at least one ocean-based action, with a total of 131 district actions identified across all NDCs analysed.
Small Island Developing States (SIDS) demonstrate significant engagement and leadership in ocean-based climate action, with five SIDS providing new or updated NDCs, and their committed actions accounted for 41.2% of all identified ocean-based actions.
Following this, in terms of funding, only 23.7% of ocean-based climate actions were assessed as not reliant on external funding, demonstrating the key importance of international climate financing to achieve these ocean-climate goals.
Moreover, the findings reveal encouraging opportunities for alignment between NDCs and NBSAPs for countries that have not yet prepared and submitted them.
First, the paper reveals the strong potential for synergies in implementing national climate and biodiversity targets in the ocean space. Among the five countries that submitted both new NDCs and NBSAPs, 74% of interactions between climate and biodiversity commitments are either reinforcing or enabling, validating the dialogue's emphasis on integrated approaches. Specifically, 5% show reinforcing interactions where one commitment directly creates conditions for achieving another, representing valuable entry points for scaling up integrated solutions.
Second, the paper highlights the potential for impacts or trade-offs in key areas. While 4% of commitments show potential for the relationship between actions or targets to constrain the achievement of others (e.g. expansion of offshore wind and biodiversity protection and/or MPA designation to deliver on Target 2 and 3 of the GBF) - our analysis demonstrates these tensions can be mitigated through careful policy design. For instance, offshore wind expansion goals can be aligned with marine biodiversity protection through strategic siting and environmental safeguards.
As countries continue to prepare and communicate new and updated NDCs and revised NBSAPs this year, several key opportunities emerge to operationalize the dialogue's vision:
Prioritize Integrated Planning Mechanisms: Countries should establish cross-sectoral coordination structures that align climate and biodiversity planning from the outset. This includes utilizing ocean accounts to monitor ecosystem health and climate impacts simultaneously and ensuring NDC and NBSAP development processes are coordinated rather than siloed.
Enhance Specificity and Measurability: Too many ocean commitments remain vague policy statements. New NDCs and NBSAPs should include quantifiable targets with clear timeframes and robust monitoring frameworks. For example, specific area-based conservation targets that deliver both biodiversity and carbon benefits, emission reduction goals for shipping, or renewable energy capacity targets with biodiversity safeguards.
Leverage Financing Synergies: Countries should actively pursue integrated financing approaches that deliver on both climate and biodiversity goals. This includes developing joint proposals to climate and biodiversity funds, exploring innovative financing mechanisms like blue bonds, and utilizing national biodiversity finance plans as vehicles for climate co-benefits.
Mainstream Nature-Based Solutions: Building on the dialogue's emphasis, countries should mainstream marine protected areas, blue carbon restoration, and integrated coastal management as climate solutions that deliver biodiversity co-benefits, moving beyond treating these as separate sectoral approaches.
The challenge now shifts from recognition to implementation. The convergence between climate and biodiversity frameworks creates an unprecedented opportunity to address interconnected crises through mutually reinforcing solutions. Our paper demonstrates that the building blocks for integration already exist, what we need now is institutional coordination to turn this potential into scaled action.
We cannot afford the inefficiencies of siloed approaches. The ocean has always been humanity's greatest ally in regulating climate and supporting biodiversity, it's time our policies reflected that interconnected reality with the integration, urgency, and scale this critical decade demands.
[i] between 1st January 2024 and 21st of May 2025