ABSTRACT The Convention on Biological Diversity’s post-2020 Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) includes targets to formally protect thirty percent of Earth by 2030 and stimulate financialization of biodiversity conservation. This paper foregrounds potential risks and limitations of the GBF in Thailand. It examines the historical context of state-run protected areas, including their role in facilitating state territorialization and dispossession, political and cultural persecution, and deleterious economic agendas. It then shows that implementation in Thailand could displace residents of more than 200 villages and supplant roughly forty percent (3,951 square kilometers) of all state-registered community forest lands, which provide various livelihood, cultural, and conservation benefits. The paper challenges three assumptions: that parties to the Convention will recognize the rights and agency of Indigenous Peoples and local communities; that state-run protected areas are managed for biodiversity conservation and not for economic growth; and that perpetual economic growth and modernization are compatible with conservation. Effective and equitable conservation in Thailand and elsewhere requires more socially and ecologically responsive community rights-based approaches that empower (rather than supersede) customary institutions and transcend unsustainable political-economic imperatives for privatization and perpetual economic growth.