Financing is fundamental in accelerating sustainable development. Governments and organizations have made commitments to allocate funding for sustainable projects, yet the numbers still show otherwise. So, improving finance for nature is vital to safeguard societal resilience and environmental wellbeing.

The Negative Finance

A plethora of things we use daily come from nature—medicine, food, drinking water, clothes, and others. Global economies also rely on the trade and distribution of said nature-derived goods. In short, our economic and societal wellbeing depends profoundly on healthy and resilient ecosystems. 

But in a world ridden by overconsumption, funding continues to flow toward nature-negative activities. The State of Finance for Nature 2026 report by the UN Environment Programme reveals that in 2023, 7.3 trillion USD went into projects that negatively impact nature. 

From that number, two-thirds could be attributed to private-sector funding. The funding supported high-impact sectors like utilities (1.6 trillion USD), industrials (1.4 trillion USD), and energy (0.7 trillion USD). Meanwhile, the majority of public finance flows went into fossil fuel subsidies (1.1 trillion USD).

Investments Required

The investments in nature-based solutions (NbS) paled in comparison, amounting to only 220 billion USD. It means over a 30:1 ratio with the ‘negative’ dwarfing the ‘positive’. Public sectors accounted for the majority of this investment (197 billion). Meanwhile, the private sector’s contribution remained modest at 23.4 billion.

Yet by 2030, the finance for nature must reach 571 billion USD to address the interlinked issues of climate change, biodiversity, and desertification under the Rio Convention. At the same time, financial flows to harmful projects must be phased out and repurposed.

Of the additional investment needs, the largest goes to ecosystem restoration (181 billion), sustainable land management (101 billion), and ecosystem protection (68 billion). While ecosystem protection seems lower in the priority than it needs to be, the report notes that this is due to lower cost compared to the former two. 

Still, whenever possible, protection should be a priority. According to the report, protection-related NbS represent around 80% of the additional land area needed for NbS, while absorbing only 20% of the additional finance.

Prioritizing Finance for Nature

Thus, this is where stakeholders must move and prioritize finance for nature. Governments, businesses, investors, and consumers have the power to redirect flows, unlock resilience, and safeguard environmental wellbeing.

Governments should take the lead. Budget-wise, they must undertake systemic reform of harmful subsidies and align their financial plans with the Rio Convention goals. Scaling government investment in NbS is also crucial, as is establishing enabling regulations and incentives to encourage private-sector contributions. This enabling environment includes mandatory disclosure of nature-related risks and impacts.

This transition will require political commitment, tangible actions, and coordination across governments, financial institutions, and businesses. Safeguarding the planet is a non-negotiable aspect in strengthening economic and societal resilience and wellbeing for all.

Editor: Nazalea Kusuma

Co-create positive impact for people and the planet.

Amidst today’s increasingly complex global challenges, equipping yourself, team, and communities with interdisciplinary and cross-sectoral insights on sustainability-related issues and sustainable development is no longer optional — it is a strategic necessity to stay ahead and stay relevant.

Join Membership Partner with Us