Content uploaded by Patrick Bigger
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Patrick Bigger on May 12, 2021
Content may be subject to copyright.
A preview of the PDF is not available
Beyond The Gap: Placing Biodiversity Finance in the Global Economy
Abstract and Figures
Governments and conservation organisations often point to a large gap between existing financial resources and the resources needed to achieve biodiversity objectives. But the gap is almost always presented without context, as though biodiversity loss will be resolved through increased funding alone. To illuminate crucial pathways for transformative change, this report examines the political and economic dimensions of biodiversity loss. “Beyond the gap: placing biodiversity finance in the global economy” addresses two questions: how does the organization of the global economy drive biodiversity loss, and how has existing biodiversity finance performed? Trade, investment and financial regulation (or lack thereof), global economic pressures that push biodiverse countries into debt, and inequality across racialized, gender, class and colonial lines, all drive biodiversity loss and require urgent attention. Instead of transformation, a series of voluntary measures and market-based mechanisms such as payments for ecosystem services or blended finance schemes have been presented as tools to span the resource gap. This report shows that these efforts are marginal at best, and, at worst, entrench the power of rich world governments and non-state institutions like banks, large international NGOs, and supranationals. It is apparent that we must move “beyond the gap”. Only by placing biodiversity loss in the global economy will it be possible to realize transformative, inclusive and equitable change. The authors offer concrete recommendations for negotiators, civil society organizations, and activist groups to push questions of biodiversity finance beyond the gap.
Figures - uploaded by Patrick Bigger
Author content
All figure content in this area was uploaded by Patrick Bigger
Content may be subject to copyright.
... While calls to recognize the impacts of inequity in restoration are not new, implementation has lagged (Chazdon and Brancalion, 2019;Fischer et al., 2020). To achieve its goals, the Decade on Ecosystem Restoration must address both environmental damage and social inequities while catalyzing broader systemic transformations (Basnett et al., 2019;Wyborn et al., 2020;Scheidel and Gingrich, 2020;Dempsey et al., 2021). ...
... Funding sources should be equitable and commensurate with the scale of the problem and include mandatory commitments for countries of the Global North and multilateral institutions that have historically promoted an environmentally destructive development model. Countries of the Global South are owed an ecological debt for the centuries of colonial plunder and extractive forms of development (Martinez-Alier, 2003;Roberts and Parks, 2009;Dempsey et al., 2021). They are also owed fairer prices for their labor and resources given the unequal ecological exchange that has allowed the Global North to appropriate resources and wealth at the expense of Global South countries through a history of unfair trade relations (Dorninger et al., 2021). ...
The urgency of restoring ecosystems to improve human wellbeing and mitigate climate and biodiversity crises is attracting global attention. The UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration (2021–2030) is a global call to action to support the restoration of degraded ecosystems. And yet, many forest restoration efforts, for instance, have failed to meet restoration goals; indeed, they worsened social precarities and ecological conditions. By merely focusing on symptoms of forest loss and degradation, these interventions have neglected the underlying issues of equity and justice driving forest decline. To address these root causes, thus creating socially just and sustainable solutions, we develop the Political Ecology Playbook for Ecosystem Restoration. We outline a set of ten principles for achieving long-lasting, resilient, and equitable ecosystem restoration. These principles are guided by political ecology, a framework that addresses environmental concerns from a broadly political economic perspective, attending to power, politics, and equity within specific geographic and historical contexts. Drawing on the chain of explanation, this multi-scale, cross-landscapes Playbook aims to produce healthy relationships between people and nature that are ecologically, socially, and economically just – and thus sustainable and resilient – while recognizing the political nature of such relationships. We argue that the Political Ecology Playbook should guide ecosystem restoration worldwide.
... Challenges that arise with the mobilisation of debt swaps include the composition of creditors (where the heterogeneous composition of sovereign credit transactions can make it difficult to make enough actors agree on the terms and conditions of debt swaps). As is often symptomatic of debt-swap deals [53], another challenge is the size of the deal. As a country develops and creditors become more confident of a country's ability to repay their loans, the creditors become less willing to sell the loans at a discount, debt being swapped at lower valuations and thus resulting in smaller deals. ...
This study reviews various financing solutions available for fisheries and aquaculture development in Caribbean small island developing states (SIDS) and Barbados, Grenada, and St. Vin-cent and the Grenadines. Previously identified financing needs within the fisheries and aquaculture sectors have been matched with the most suitable financing mechanisms. However, the use of blue levies is recommended and applicable in almost every scenario, as they allow these sectors to drive their own development in financing research and conservation projects to their own benefit. The use of "blue tokens" with sufficiently low repayment coupons allows development projects to gather public support for fisheries, thereby increasing the likelihood of the project being successful through community buy-in. The possibility of natural capital being traded as public equities as "Natural Asset Companies" provides the opportunity for development projects to fund themselves. The review concludes that natural capital can be leveraged as the base through which public-private partnerships (PPPs) can facilitate optimal delivery of ecosystem services, benefit multiple stakeholders, and provide numerous development opportunities. An enabling environment for debt and lending with low-interest loan repayments is also applicable to almost every scenario, as it facilitates access to capital finance for infrastructure development and the acquisition of increasingly sustainable fishing equipment. Steps towards generating an enabling environment for financing fisheries and aquaculture in the Caribbean region are also discussed. The establishment of dedicated financing institutions, PPPs, and sufficient data reporting infrastructure for the fisheries and aquaculture industry are essential for driving development in these sectors. Likely, the largest limiting factor in financing Caribbean fisheries and aquaculture industries is a lack of awareness of the range of finance and financing mechanisms available to stakeholders, as well as an enabling environment for financing blue Economy sectors. This review is thus intended to aid financing institutions, Blue Economy developers , and specifically Caribbean fisheries and aquaculture stakeholders and Caribbean governments by raising awareness of the financing mechanisms available, encourage the incorporation of their use in the fisheries and aquaculture industries in the Caribbean, and encourage policymakers to create an enabling environment for financing development in these crucial sectors. Key Contribution: Review and matching of the most suitable finance and financing solutions to previously identified development needs for the fisheries and aquaculture sectors of Caribbean Island States. Their associated implementation and necessary structures for incentivizing their use through an enabling environment are also discussed.
... Success will require all components of society, and while the CBD-COP15 centered on the development of the KM-GBF, forums on science-policy, businessbiodiversity and biodiversity and finance, cities and culture, and indigenous communities also convened to highlight key elements to a successful framework. The biodiversity-finance forum, including 150 financial institutions managing over $24 trillion, pushed for a more ambitious KM-GBF, as well as highlighting their principles for responsible investment to mediate the impacts of finance and development on biodiversity (PRI, 2022;White et al., 2023), and centering biodiversity at the heart of the global economy (Bigger et al., 2021). ...
December 2022 finally saw the historic agreement of the Kunming‐Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (KM‐GBF), a landmark framework that sets to halt and reverse global biodiversity loss by remedying the multifaceted drivers behind biodiversity declines around the planet. The KM‐GBF follows on from the Aichi targets, which aimed to prevent further biodiversity loss through a concerted effort between 2010 and 2020, but which were not successfully achieved. The KM‐GBF builds on the drivers of biodiversity losses rather than their outcomes and sets a suite of targeted and measurable actions to reconcile losses. Developing the framework faced considerable challenges, especially in the face of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, and issues were often resolved at the very last moment. Consequently, compromises had to be made, useful elements were left out, or removed from the KM‐GBF to achieve consensus, and some will need to be reflected in other ways, or incorporated into indicators. The final agreed KM‐GBF includes 4 goals and 23 targets in addition to a package of annexes including a monitoring framework to set targets and benchmark progress. Particularly challenging issues included the flagship target of ‘30 × 30’ of protecting 30% of land, freshwater, coastal, and high‐sea in a representative way by 2030, which will require both new mechanisms and funding streams to enact effectively. Digital sequence information and funding mechanisms also presented major hurdles in the agreement of the KM‐GBF. Ultimately, the success of the new GBF depends on implementation and mainstreaming. New targets can only be achieved through the inclusion of all sectors, clear communication, and effective funding mechanisms to guide change and provide the means to implement it. Furthermore, while common but differentiated responsibility is crucial to implementation, impacts of inaction are disproportionate in developing economies, and more resources and support are needed to enable them to develop sustainably and meet targets. This highlights the urgent need for action if we are to achieve the new targets and secure a future for all life on earth.
... Aquafarming development with new cutting-edge technologies such as the IoT is highly concerned with sustainability and the compatibility of multiple advantages [10][11][12][13]. Like other endeavors involving the use of public lands or resources, aquaculture development has seen an increase in interest but is subject to a complicated and frequently perplexing system of laws at the municipal and state levels [14,15]. Geographic Information Systems (GIS) and Global Positioning Systems (GPS) have been used for terrestrial applications for the last 35 to 40 years and are now also functional for the aquatic environment [16,17]. ...
The framework for aqua farming database collection and the real-time monitoring of different working functions of aqua farming are essential to enhance and digitalize aqua farming. Data collection and real-time monitoring are attained using cutting-edge technologies, and these cutting-edge technologies are useful for the conservation and advancement of traditional aquatic farming, particularly in hilly areas with sustainable development goals (SDGs). Geo-tagging and geo-mapping of the aqua resources will play an important role in monitoring the species in the aquatic environment and can track the real-time health status, movement, and location, and monitor the foraging behaviors, of aquatic species. This study proposed an architecture with the IoT to manage the aqua resource for eco-sustainability with geospatial data. This study also discussed the geo information systems (GIS)- and geo positioning system (GPS)-based web-based framework for the fisheries sector and the creation of a database for aqua resource management. In the study, the results of database generation for the aqua resource management and the results of the fishpond in the cloud server are presented in detail. Machine learning (ML) is integrated with the framework to analyze the sensor data and geo-spatial data for the identification of any degradation in the water quality. This will provide real-time information to the policymakers for their critical decisions for the further development of aquatic species for enhancing the economy of the state as well as aqua farmers.
... Timely realization of these goals is an enormous challenge. However, with global biodiversity and the terrestrial carbon sink in decline and ultimately on trajectories to disappear completely [2,3], enhancing carbon storage, biodiversity and associated ecosystem services through restoration is more important and urgent now than ever before. Systematic approaches are required to guide locally appropriate landscape restoration decision-making to deliver transparent, equitable and time-sensitive solutions for people and planet. ...
... Timely realization of these goals is an enormous challenge. However, with global biodiversity and the terrestrial carbon sink in decline and ultimately on trajectories to disappear completely [2,3], enhancing carbon storage, biodiversity and associated ecosystem services through restoration is more important and urgent now than ever before. Systematic approaches are required to guide locally appropriate landscape restoration decision-making to deliver transparent, equitable and time-sensitive solutions for people and planet. ...
Effective restoration planning tools are needed to mitigate global carbon and biodiversity crises. Published spatial assessments of restoration potential are often at large scales or coarse resolutions inappropriate for local action. Using a Tanzanian case study, we introduce a systematic approach to inform landscape restoration planning, estimating spatial variation in cost-effectiveness, based on restoration method, logistics, biomass modelling and uncertainty mapping. We found potential for biomass recovery across 77.7% of a 53 000 km ² region, but with some natural spatial discontinuity in moist forest biomass, that was previously assigned to human causes. Most areas with biomass deficit (80.5%) were restorable through passive or assisted natural regeneration. However, cumulative biomass gains from planting outweighed initially high implementation costs meaning that, where applicable, this method yielded greater long-term returns on investment. Accounting for ecological, funding and other uncertainty, the top 25% consistently cost-effective sites were within protected areas and/or moderately degraded moist forest and savanna. Agro-ecological mosaics had high biomass deficit but little cost-effective restoration potential. Socio-economic research will be needed to inform action towards environmental and human development goals in these areas. Our results highlight value in long-term landscape restoration investments and separate treatment of savannas and forests. Furthermore, they contradict previously asserted low restoration potential in East Africa, emphasizing the importance of our regional approach for identifying restoration opportunities across the tropics.
This article is part of the theme issue ‘Understanding forest landscape restoration: reinforcing scientific foundations for the UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration’.
The role of philanthropic capital in biodiversity conservation is rapidly changing. Philanthropists increasingly seek to bankroll solutions to the biodiversity crisis, scaling up the size of their ambitions and gifts to help close what scientists and policymakers call the “biodiversity financing gap.” This paper interrogates the rising prominence of philanthropic capital in conservation governance, focusing on a class of actors I call “philanthro-environmentalists.” Unlike big, international NGOs and philanthrocapitalists, philanthro-environmentalists do not engage market-based, for-profit approaches to finance conservation. Rather, they engage a “dollars for policy” approach that leverages the power of their philanthropy to improve public conservation outcomes. Taking Chile as a case, I trace how a transnational network of philanthro-environmentalists is using a novel mechanism known as Project Finance for Permanence to exact substantial political and fiscal commitments from the state in exchange for substantive philanthropic support for a mega conservation initiative in Chilean Patagonia. I argue that Project Finance for Permanence targets policymaking as the primary site of philanthropic intervention, affording philanthro-environmentalists greater control over state conservation governance. Yet, I also argue that this case raises serious questions about the limits and implications of leveraging philanthropic capital to solve public environmental problems. Bridging literatures on conservation governance and conservation finance, the paper contributes new conceptual insights into the evolving dynamics of philanthropy-state relations in an age of biodiversity crisis.
This chapter outlines a historical political ecology of conservation initiatives in the Tarangire Ecosystem (TE). First, I turn to chronological history to highlight the origins and the evolution of key stages in the making and expanding of conservation initiatives in the TE. Through attention to chronological history, I show how dominant ideas about people and nature changed over time in the study area. Second, I revisit the TE as a site of contested histories to show how two environmental history narratives compete with each other – a statist narrative which is embraced by public authorities in government and conservation bureaucracies, and a people’s history which represents lived experiences and bottom-up conservation practices of human-wildlife coexistence. I argue that by dismissing and marginalizing locally meaningful narratives, experiences and representations of the TE, a statist narrative continues animating conservation conflicts in the present. Drawing on these insights from the TE’s environmental history and historical political ecology, the chapter concludes with an outlook on how people-wildlife coexistence in the region could be fostered through convivial conservation.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.