When Nature Governs: Translating CBD Decisions into Natural Rights–Led Governance

A Turning Point in Global Biodiversity Thinking

Biodiversity represents the full spectrum of life-genes, species, and ecosystems, and the intricate web of interactions that sustains Earth’s productivity, resilience, and capacity to adapt. Its value extends far beyond species counts or economic metrics; it is the living infrastructure that purifies air and water, stabilizes climate, and nurtures human and ecological wellbeing. The true worth of ecosystems lies in their self-regulating balance and their role as rightful custodians of life itself.  

However, the global community is at a crossroads at a time when the biodiversity loss is increasing rapidly, and the ecosystems are nearing irreversible turning points. The 27th session of the Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical and Technological Advice (SBSTTA 27) and the 1st session of the Subsidiary Body on Article 8(j) (SB8j 1) under the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) might not have headline stories but their implications are far reaching. 

These gatherings are not a mere procedural milestone; they are an indication of a philosophical and ethical renaissance of the biodiversity of discourse in the world. This is the first time that the discussion borders a vision of the planet that has been long held by intellectuals and political movements like M. Zakir Hossain Khan, one in which governance is directed by the rights of nature itself. 

His framework, known as Natural Rights Led Governance (NRLG), imagines a future where nature is not an object of policy but a subject of law; a living, breathing entity endowed with inherent rights to exist, thrive, and regenerate. Within the framework of Natural Rights Led Governance, biodiversity and ecosystems are not commodities but life-bearing entities whose protection defines the moral and material foundation of prosperity. Within this perspective, humans are not proprietors of the environment, but custodians, who have a moral and ecological obligation to act according to the restraints of natural law. 

From Management to Co-Governance 

Convention on Biological Diversity - CBD’s (cbd.int/) recent decisions open a space for a radical shift from managing nature to co-governing with nature. Many of its new directions echo the pillars of NRLG, offering entry points for countries ready to translate these ideals into practice.

The current global biodiversity governance framework remains limited by its lack of rights-based orientation, where conservation and sustainable use are prioritized without recognizing the legal personhood of nature. This gap keeps nature’s voice procedural rather than legal, hindering real transformation. Additionally, the participation of Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities (IPLCs) is often symbolic rather than structural, with FPIC and Traditional Knowledge protections under-implemented. At the national level, fragmented policy coherence with biodiversity, climate, and development plans operating in isolation further weakens outcomes. The absence of measurable indicators for natural rights means ecosystem integrity and custodianship remain untracked, while legal and financial instruments for community stewardship are still underdeveloped. Finally, the precautionary and restorative principles central to NRLG are missing from biosafety and invasive species management, leaving restoration efforts without a justice-based foundation. 

The Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) demands multi-stakeholder discussions. NRLG expands that idea into multi-rights-holder governance, where ecosystems, communities, and future generations share the moral table. Instead of reviewing biodiversity through economic or conservation metrics alone, an NRLG approach would assess it through “ecosystem integrity and justice indicators” how well we protect the regenerative rights of rivers, forests, and soils.

The Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) also embraces what NRLG has long argued for the fusion of science and Indigenous wisdom. This in nations such as Bangladesh can be in the form of community science unions where farmers, fishers and indigenous peoples co-create information on biodiversity and climate-resilience.

Even the CBD’s work on Ecosystem Based Adaptation (EBA) and disaster risk reduction (DRR) aligns closely with NRLG. When we acknowledge that mangroves, haors, and forests act as natural shields, we are already recognizing nature’s protective agency. Declaring these places as Natural Rights Protection Zones (NRPZs) could be the next step, turning ecological function into legal recognition. 

Bangladesh and the Promise of Natural Rights 

Bangladesh, one of the world’s most climate vulnerable nations, also holds the potential to lead this transformation. The country’s deep cultural connection to its rivers and wetlands provides fertile ground for NRLG principles to take root.

NRLG principles can easily find ground in the country because the nation has a strong cultural attachment to the rivers and wetlands. The incorporation of NRLG into national strategies, including the National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (NBSAP), the Delta Plan 2100, and the National Adaptation Plan may bring the biodiversity governance to a new level, i.e. that of justice. 

Imagine if local communities were supported through Natural Rights Stewardship Funds, Change Initiative came up with this revolutionary innovation, empowering them to protect wetlands, forests, or coastal ecosystems as living rights-holders. Legal reforms could go further by amending environmental and biosafety laws to recognize the legal standing of nature and embedding Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC) into every development process. 

These changes would not only be a respect to ecological justice but also the reinstatement of the moral equilibrium between people and planets that have been lost over time by extractive economies. 

From the Global Table to the Local Riverbank 

The CBD decisions, though not explicitly about the “Rights of Nature,” open critical doorways. They invite governments to translate procedural commitments into ethical transformations. The upcoming UNFCCC led COP30 will be the time when LDCs, with Bangladesh on the lead, should promote an NRLG Implementation Track a global platform where natural rights are not only seen but also implemented. 

This would represent more than another international negotiation; it would mark the rise of a new governance philosophy where the voice of nature enters the room. 

For centuries, humanity has governed nature. NRLG imagines what it means to govern nature. It is both a return and an evolution, a rediscovery of an ancient truth now backed by law, science, and moral necessity. 

A Future Where Nature Has Standing 

If the CBD continues this trajectory, we may soon live in a world where biodiversity related decisions are not just about saving species, but about respecting sovereignty of rivers, forests, mountains, oceans and soils.

The NRLG framework reminds us that this transformation begins not in negotiation rooms, but in the moral imagination of governance itself. The question is no longer whether we can afford to protect nature, but whether governance can survive without recognizing its rights. 

Ultimately, it is not just biodiversity but rather the renegotiation of the contract of civilization with life by implementing NRLG. Countries should intensely talk about this new beginning not with their riches or authority, but with wisdom that is based on justice.