When we think about endangered wildlife, pandas, tigers, and sea turtles often come to mind. But what about the species that rarely capture our attention? As biodiversity loss accelerates, an important question emerges: are we protecting nature according to its needs, or according to what captures our interest?
Not All Species Get the Same Attention
Public interest plays a significant role in conservation. Charismatic animals often become symbols of environmental campaigns, attracting donations and media coverage, while less recognizable species receive considerably less attention. A 2017 study published in Biological Conservation, titled “Human preferences for species conservation: Animal charisma trumps endangered status,” analyzed the choices of 10,066 participants in a zoo animal-adoption program. Researchers found that participants were more likely to choose charismatic animals than to prioritize species based on their endangered status. The findings highlight a challenge for conservation efforts: public affection can generate support, but it does not necessarily direct resources toward the species most in need.
This issue takes on particular significance at the 17th Conference of the Parties (COP17) to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), taking place in Yerevan, Armenia, from October 19 to 30, 2026. The conference will mark the first global review of collective progress toward implementing the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, adopted in 2022. With ambitious goals to halt and reverse biodiversity loss by 2030, the meeting represents a crucial opportunity to assess whether international commitments are translating into meaningful action.
Charismatic Wildlife vs. Overlooked Species
The issue is not simply about which animal receives the most attention. Species exist within interconnected ecosystems, where the decline of one organism can affect countless others. Insects pollinate plants, fungi help cycle nutrients, and amphibians can serve as indicators of environmental change. Focusing exclusively on individual animals risks overlooking the habitats and ecological relationships that sustain them.
The Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework reflects this broader perspective through targets addressing ecosystem restoration, species extinction, pollution, climate change, and the sustainable use of natural resources. Conservation cannot succeed if it protects a few recognizable animals while allowing the systems they depend on to deteriorate.
Who Pays for Conservation and Who Pays the Price?
Deciding what to protect also means deciding where funding goes, which economic activities are restricted, and whose interests shape environmental policy. Governments must balance conservation with pressures from agriculture, mining, infrastructure, and other industries, while countries differ in their financial resources and capacity to protect biodiversity.
COP17’s first global review offers an opportunity to examine whether countries are providing the funding, policies, and practical measures needed to meet their commitments. The challenge extends beyond creating protected areas: it also involves addressing the economic incentives and destructive practices that continue to drive biodiversity loss.
These decisions must also account for the people who live closest to the ecosystems being protected. Indigenous peoples and local communities possess knowledge and practices that can contribute significantly to biodiversity conservation, yet their rights and participation cannot be treated as secondary considerations. The Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) recognizes the importance of Indigenous and local knowledge in the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity. Meaningful conservation therefore requires more than decisions made by governments and international institutions. It requires community participation, respect for their rights, and fair consideration of the costs and benefits of environmental policies.
Beyond Saving Individual Species: What Should Success Look Like?
COP17 arrives at a critical point in the timeline established by the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework. Its first global review will assess collective progress toward the framework’s 23 targets, helping identify achievements, implementation gaps, and areas where action must accelerate. The question is not whether governments have made promises, but whether those promises are producing measurable improvements for nature.
Ultimately, the fight over which species we save is also a fight over how we define the value of the natural world. Conservation should not depend solely on an animal’s popularity, its economic usefulness, or its ability to inspire an emotional response. Public attention can be a powerful starting point, but scientific evidence, ecosystem health, adequate funding, and the rights of local communities must guide the decisions that follow. As delegates gather at COP17, the real test will be whether global biodiversity commitments can move beyond declarations and deliver meaningful protection for the extraordinary range of life on Earth – including the species most of us have never noticed.
————————————-
The article above was edited by Elisa Nuñez.
Liked this type of content? Check Her Campus Cásper Líbero home page for more!