UGC NET Questions (Paper – 1)

The GBF recognises that conserving and restoring biodiversity at scale requires both new funding and reformed economic incentives. It therefore calls for mobilising at least US$200 billion annually from public and private sources for biodiversity-related activities. Simultaneously, it urges countries to identify and reform subsidies harmful to biodiversity by at least US$500 billion per year, freeing resources for positive incentives. (Convention on Biological Diversity)

Option A:
This option correctly combines the two headline numbers on finance mobilisation and harmful subsidy reduction that appear in GBF targets.

Option B:
This option is incorrect because the framework emphasises greater support to developing countries, not withdrawal of funding.

Option C:
Increasing harmful subsidies would contradict the GBF’s explicit goal of reducing such incentives.

Option D:
The framework covers all ecosystems, including wetlands, grasslands and oceans; it is not limited to forests.

The Global Biodiversity Framework recognises that achieving its conservation and restoration targets requires large and predictable financial flows. Parties agreed to mobilise at least US$200 billion per year by 2030 from domestic, international and private sources. The framework also includes quantitative expectations for support to developing countries, reflecting equity concerns. This financial dimension is intended to back actions such as protected areas, restoration, sustainable use and community-based conservation. (Drishti IAS)

Option A:
This option correctly summarises the headline finance goal in the Kunming–Montreal Framework and acknowledges the importance of both public and private flows. It also recognises the need to direct substantial resources to developing countries, where much biodiversity is located.

Option B:
This option is incorrect because the framework explicitly calls for more, not less, support to developing countries for biodiversity. Cutting them off from funding would contradict the agreed goals.

Option C:
Restricting finance to forests alone would neglect important ecosystems such as wetlands, grasslands and oceans. The framework takes a broader, ecosystem-wide view rather than focusing only on one biome.

Option D:
Corporate donations are one potential source, but the framework clearly envisages significant public and international finance as well. Relying only on voluntary corporate giving would be inadequate and was not agreed.