The draft of the first Global Review of collective progress on the Kunming–Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework is open for comment. Built from 125 national reports, the assessment will go to COP17 in Armenia this October to take stock of where the world stands on its 2030 targets.

The review can show where the world stands. What it cannot do on its own is explain why global targets so often get stuck between high-level ambition and on-the-ground reality. At the World Biodiversity Forum in Davos, under the theme "Leading Transformation Together," the Wyss Academy for Nature brings a governance and policy lens to that gap—focusing, alongside the scientific work on metrics and indicators, on the "how": what strategies can bridge the divide between commitment and action.

The session pairs evidence with the people who must use it: a framing keynote, four talks across disciplines, and an open fishbowl discussion where the audience sits at the center. The aim is to make the work of the people who carry global targets into local practice more visible, and to ask what it would take to move from business-as-usual toward a genuine tipping point.

• Framing keynote Business-as-Usual or a Tipping Point? The Systemic Paradoxes in implementing the Global Biodiversity Framework Van Thi Hai Nguyen

• Talks Science for Society: Navigating Other Effective Conservation Measures in Practice Pablo Negret

• The corporate shift: Meaningful Business Participation in Biodiversity and Sustainability Fernando Fernandez

• Mobilizing from below: Civil society's role in delivering the global biodiversity commitments in Kenya Anastasia Mwaura

• Bridging the Gap: Knowledge Brokers as Catalysts for Transformative Change in Biodiversity Governance Mialy Rann

• Fishbowl moderation Tatjana von Steiger

The session is convened by Dr. Van Thi Hai Nguyen, Prof. Dr. Julie Zähringer, and Prof. Dr. Margaret Owuor, the Wyss Academy for Nature, with the Geneva Science-Policy Interface, the University of Bern, and the University of Geneva.

Whoever you are—researcher, policymaker, conservation scientist, or community practitioner—your perspective belongs in the circle. The review tells us where we stand; the harder, shared task is working out how to move.