It is easy to think of humans as existing separately from nature. However, the greatest threats to humanity come from crises affecting nature, not least climate change, biodiversity loss and rampant pollution. We cannot address any of these until we stop taking nature for granted and start investing more in it.
“Nature-positive” investments in marine conservation, sustainable land management, water security and afforestation could deliver around 30 percent of the emissions abatement needed to limit global warming to 1.5°C — the target enshrined in the Paris climate agreement. Moreover, such investments not only improve our resilience to climate change, but they also would help to prevent future pandemics.
Ahead of the 16th UN Biodiversity Conference of the Parties (COP16) in Cali, Colombia, this month, we must remember that the crises affecting nature also pose structural risks to the global economy, our collective well-being and prosperity, and the UN Sustainable Development Goals. About 55 percent of global GDP is highly or moderately dependent on nature.
Illustration: Yusha
In Cali, delegates from nearly 200 countries would discuss how to accelerate action to protect 30 percent of the planet’s land and maritime areas, reduce pollution and restore degraded ecosystems by 2030. One of the key obstacles to meeting these ambitious targets is financing. Not only do we invest far too much in activities that harm nature and make our problems worse, but we also invest only one-third of what is needed to meet the 2030 targets for climate, biodiversity and land degradation.
INVESTMENT PRIORITIES
To scale up nature-positive investment, we need to do four things.
First, we must build more effective public-private partnerships between countries and public development banks, as well as with nature organizations, companies and private-sector financial institutions. This would help de-risk investments, prepare projects, and deliver impact at scale for climate, nature and inclusive economic development.
Second, we need to revive and mainstream regenerative practices and stewardship of biodiversity, particularly in the agriculture, forestry and fishing sectors.
Third, we need common principles, standards and disclosure mechanisms to track nature-positive finance and its impact, and to disclose more information on the nature-related footprints, dependencies, and risk exposure of companies and financial institutions.
Finally, to take nature into consideration in all policies and investment decisions, we must decrease the flow of financing to activities that are harmful to nature.
Multilateral development banks would play a key role in scaling up green investments. Institutions such as the European Investment Bank (EIB) are already stepping up support for the protection, restoration and sustainable use of nature with the launch of common principles for tracking nature-positive finance. Such information is essential for measuring and incorporating nature into multilateral lenders’ operations, as well as informing other investors about what constitutes a nature-positive investment. Partnerships and joint efforts to put these principles into practice are ongoing.
At the European level, the EIB is working closely with the European Commission to support the implementation of the EU’s 2030 Biodiversity Strategy worldwide. We strive to ensure that all the projects we finance cause “no loss” of biodiversity, and we are factoring biodiversity and ecosystem considerations into all our activities.
Moreover, because one of the biggest challenges in scaling up nature-positive investments lies in structuring projects, we are providing advisory services to help nature-restoration and biodiversity initiatives get off the ground.
FINANCIAL MOBILIZATION
In Morocco, the EIB advised and lent 100 million euros (US$109 million) to preserve and restore more than 600,000 hectares of forest.
In Ivory Coast, we are gearing up to support sustainable cocoa farming, in which forests are preserved rather than cut down. To support marine conservation, we are working with partner institutions on the very successful Clean Oceans Initiative, which is ahead of schedule in providing 4 billion euros for projects to limit plastic waste.
Innovative financial instruments that transfer risk could help mobilize more public and private finance for such investments. The EIB-financed Land Degradation Neutrality Fund, for example, provides finance and technical assistance for sustainable agriculture and forestry around the world, and the EcoEnterprises Fund supports pro-biodiversity businesses in Latin America.
The EIB is also exploring a new investment in a fund that supports afforestation, forest management and conservation projects in the region. At COP16, we hope to build on such initiatives to scale up financing for nature.
We urgently need to reduce the flow of finance to activities that harm nature. Doing so is central to overcoming the triple planetary crisis of climate change, pollution and biodiversity loss.
Ambroise Fayolle is vice president of the European Investment Bank.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS