If implausibility is stacked upon implausibility, it is logical to investigate power motives.
We know that most nations signed up for Agenda21 in 1992. It's an agenda that covers the whole of the 21st century - quite the ambitious central planning project. Under communism, 5 year plans were the standard. Agenda21 is a 100 year plan.
The Agenda2030 goals are not likely to be accepted voluntarily by the public and there is very little public support for it:
Individual carbon allowances, reduction and eventually elimination of cars and air travel for the general public, reduction of meat consumption, ESG policies that function as a social credit system for companies, inevitable energy rationing as a logical result of shutting down functional nuclear plants while increasing the number of electric vehicles on the road. And so on.
This is just the tip of the iceberg and most people will rightly reject these policies. As a result, every government that implements Agenda2030 must have in mind to apply some form of herding. Most people will pick one of the choices presented to them, preferably the least harmful. By limiting the available choices, governments can thereby herd a population into a smaller world with less freedoms and more restrictions.
Agenda2030 can only be achieved by its deadline in 2030 via social credit score systems. These in turn rely on CBDC's and movement licenses, which require digital ID's. All of these are to be expected by nations who have signed Agenda21 and Agenda2030.
Since we know that most governments will be hell-bent on implementing all of this before 2030, then we should assume that any policy that overlaps with these goals is likely more than a mere coincidence. It's a deadline with 7 years to go at this point. Windows of opportunity as the saying goes.