YEREVAN, Oct. 25 (Xinhua) -- A ribbon blending 23 colors forms a butterfly, with each hue representing one of the 23 targets of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (KMGBF), adopted in 2022.

At the ongoing 17th meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the United Nations (UN) Convention on Biological Diversity (COP17) in Yerevan, the emblem appears on conference walls, delegates' lapel pins and the accreditation badges.

Yet the real butterfly is nowhere to be seen.

Polyommatus eriwanensis, a butterfly species endemic to Armenia, produces a single generation each year, with adults flying from mid-June to mid-July before disappearing from the country's limestone grasslands at elevations of 1,200-2,200 meters.

By October, when representatives of the Convention on Biological Diversity's 196 Parties gather in the Armenian capital for COP17, its brief flying season is long over. But the little-known insect has become a fitting symbol for a conference grappling with difficult questions about protecting nature -- who has the resources to do it, how to measure progress, and how to act when so much about nature remains unknown.

Disagreements are part of the negotiations. At the opening plenary, Senegal, speaking for the African Group, called on developed countries to honor their financial commitments, while Jamaica stressed the importance of mobilizing adequate resources.

Fewer than half of the national targets assessed by the parties are on track. Yet the same butterfly appears across delegations, serving as a visual reminder of a shared commitment that transcends national boundaries and needs no negotiation.

Its 23 blended colors represent the KMGBF's 23 targets, which are grouped into three thematic areas: reducing threats to biodiversity, meeting people's needs through sustainable use and benefit-sharing, and providing tools and solutions for implementation.

Its designers also drew on the butterfly's metamorphosis as a symbol of the transformation needed to protect nature.

The butterfly spends only about a month each year as a flying adult. For the rest of its life cycle, it develops through less visible stages as an egg, caterpillar and chrysalis.

Biodiversity diplomacy follows a similar pattern. A COP meeting brings two weeks of speeches, photographs and declarations. The work that determines whether those promises lead to change takes place largely out of the spotlight -- passing laws, allocating budgets, reforming harmful subsidies and enforcing conservation measures.

With four years remaining before the framework's 2030 deadline, governments are conducting the first global review of collective progress, drawing on national reports, targets and indicators to assess what has been achieved and where more action is needed.

Yet this process depends on reliable monitoring data, which remain difficult to obtain. The butterfly illustrates the challenge -- despite its prominence at COP17, scientists still do not know which plant its caterpillars feed on.

Difficult to identify in the wild, the butterfly is also hard to monitor, leaving scientists with limited information about its population trends and the threats it faces.

If tracking a single species presents such challenges, monitoring biodiversity across vast, remote forests, deep oceans and wetlands is an even greater undertaking.

The butterfly also brings to mind the butterfly effect. In 1972, meteorologist Edward Lorenz posed a now-famous question: Could the flap of a butterfly's wings in Brazil set off a tornado in Texas?

His point was that even tiny disturbances in complex systems can change the course of events, sometimes with consequences that are difficult to predict.

Though Lorenz was discussing the atmosphere, not ecosystems, the limits of prediction offer a useful parallel with nature.

Species and habitats are connected in ways scientists do not yet fully understand. For Polyommatus eriwanensis, whose caterpillars' host plant remains unknown, what consequences might follow if the butterfly disappears from Armenia's limestone grasslands?

There may be no reliable way to know in advance.

That uncertainty is not a reason to delay conservation. Rather, it strengthens the case for protecting ecosystems before the damage becomes irreversible.

As Lorenz noted, if the flap of a butterfly's wings can help trigger a tornado, it can just as well help prevent one.

Perhaps that offers another way to understand the butterfly at COP17: The delegates cannot know precisely what consequences their decisions will have for nature in the years ahead, but they can still take action to reduce further biodiversity loss.