Armenia's Environmental Record Under Scrutiny as COP17 Convenes in Yerevan

The 17th meeting of the Conference of the Parties (COP 17) to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) has commenced in the Armenian capital, Yerevan. The summit, hosted for the first time by a former Soviet republic, was inaugurated with a lavish ceremony. The Armenian government has heralded this occasion as a chance to position the nation as a leader in environmental protection. However, Armenia's own environmental performance raises significant questions regarding its suitability for this role.

When Yerevan was selected to host COP17 in 2024, Armenian authorities celebrated it as a testament to the country's environmental aspirations. Despite this, Armenia has grappled for decades with developing effective conservation policies, and its record remains weak in several critical areas. In Yale University's 2026 Environmental Performance Index, Armenia ranked 75th out of 177 countries, a stark contrast to Estonia, another former Soviet republic, which secured the top position. Armenia's performance is particularly concerning in waste management, where it ranks 164th, and wastewater treatment, ranking 165th, indicating substantial deficiencies in fundamental environmental safeguards.

This disparity prompts a critical question: why was a nation facing such profound environmental challenges chosen to host a pivotal global biodiversity conference? While the selection could have served as a catalyst for change, there is scant evidence that Armenian authorities have utilized this opportunity to address the country's persistent environmental issues.

A primary impediment is the structure of Armenia's economy, where mining holds a significant position, alongside aging industrial facilities and insufficient environmental regulations. The nation's major mining operations, including the Zangezur, Agarak, and Teghut copper-molybdenum mines, employ open-pit methods that generate vast amounts of waste and present considerable pollution risks. The World Bank has identified mining as a substantial contributor to environmental pollution in Armenia. Open-pit gold mining has also been permitted at Meghrasar, on land that initially overlapped with Arevik National Park before the government reduced the park's boundaries in 2015. The Artsvanik tailings reservoir, which stores millions of tonnes of mining waste, has been implicated in heavy-metal contamination of nearby water bodies.

Armenia's environmental challenges extend beyond mining. Forests constitute only 11.1 percent of the country's landmass, and in Yerevan, harmful fine particle air pollution levels are approximately five times the World Health Organization's recommended limit. Armenia's reliance on Russian-linked businesses in key industrial sectors further complicates efforts to enhance environmental regulations. These companies are not only major investors and employers but also significant contributors to the state budget, providing the government with a strong economic incentive to safeguard their operations. Russian-linked investors hold a controlling interest in the Zangezur copper-molybdenum complex, which was Armenia's largest taxpayer in the first half of 2026.

This conflict between economic interests and environmental protection was evident just days before COP17, with the inauguration of the controversial Amulsar gold mine. Environmental organizations, including the Global Forest Coalition and various Armenian civil society groups, have denounced this decision, asserting that it disregards long-standing environmental concerns and recommendations under the Bern Convention. Human rights organizations have documented instances of intimidation and lawsuits targeting activists campaigning against the Amulsar project. Armenia's Economy Minister has defended the project on economic grounds, citing its potential to contribute between 1.5 and 2 percent of the country's GDP and generate approximately $130 million annually in taxes and other state budget payments. These projected revenues highlight the contradiction between the government's drive to expand mining and its ambition to portray Armenia as a global leader in biodiversity protection.

These competing priorities are particularly relevant as Armenia pursues closer ties with the European Union and seeks to reduce its reliance on Moscow. The EU–Armenia Strategic Agenda emphasizes the need for more robust implementation of environmental impact assessment legislation, improvements in waste management, and enhanced actions on air quality, water protection, and industrial emissions. Progress on these commitments should be a central factor in the EU's evaluation of Armenia's efforts toward closer integration.

At COP17, governments are assessing progress under the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, which aims to halt and reverse nature loss by 2030. The summit is anticipated to finalize a “Yerevan Pathway” to expedite the achievement of its targets. However, the outlook appears challenging. The State of Biodiversity Action report, released prior to the summit, indicated that fewer than half of assessed national targets are on track. Financing remains a significant hurdle. Developed countries have provided approximately $16 billion annually in international biodiversity finance, falling short of the $20 billion target for 2025. Concurrently, the Cali Fund, established with the objective of collecting $1 billion in annual contributions from companies profiting from genetic data derived from nature, has received a mere $6,000. These financial shortfalls underscore the difficulties governments face in translating their biodiversity commitments into tangible actions.

As the host of COP17, Armenia should be prepared to demonstrate that the commitments being discussed in Yerevan extend to its own mining industry, environmental regulations, and the treatment of conservation activists. Participating governments should leverage the summit to urge Armenian authorities to strengthen environmental protections, enforce pollution controls, ensure credible environmental impact assessments, and address the concerns raised by civil society regarding projects like Amulsar.