The following blog has been written by Claire Cummins, the Guest Editor of Volume 4 of the ISEP Sustainable Finance Insight Journal: Biodiversity and Nature Finance.
Welcome to Volume 4 of the Sustainable Finance Outlook Journal, a dedicated issue that brings together a compelling collection of articles exploring the role of finance in managing, protecting and restoring biodiversity. With biodiversity loss continuing to rank among the most pressing global risks, this volume takes a close look at the tools, frameworks and financial mechanisms that are emerging to help bridge the substantial biodiversity funding gap and support the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF).
The scale of the challenge is enormous. According to the GBF, an estimated $700 billion per year is needed between now and 2030 to effectively halt and reverse nature loss. Finance from both public and private sectors must be mobilised, and innovative approaches are essential. This volume provides concrete examples of how blended finance and insurance instruments are being used in real-world contexts, alongside guidance for measuring biodiversity impact and insights into how local knowledge and scientific evidence can underpin effective and responsible financial decision-making.
We start by delving into some practical examples of blended finance and insurance instruments being deployed in the UK, Latin America, and Europe. The first article, by Gabriela Weber de Morais and co-authors from Natura Cosmetics S.A., VERT Securitization and the Brazilian Biodiversity Fund (FUNBIO) introduces the Living Amazon Mechanism. This blended finance instrument is designed to strengthen socio-biodiversity supplier communities by combining a credit vehicle with a technical assistance facility. The goal is to direct resources towards overcoming the structural barriers hindering biodiversity-based supply chains.
Next, Nicole Pasricha and Catalina Mejia of ALMA examine the Sunbird 2X financing facility, a $63 million blended finance model aimed at mobilising private capital for nature-based solutions. With a strong emphasis on gender equality and women’s empowerment, the facility demonstrates the potential for collaborative funding models to deliver both ecological and social outcomes.
Turning to the African continent, Hannah Young of Signature Agri Investments highlights the often-overlooked habitat reservoirs found across agricultural land. These small but vital ecosystems contribute to climate adaptation and mitigation, yet face barriers to investment. Young discusses the potential of carbon credits and other financing tools, emphasising the importance of blended finance as a bridging mechanism for unlocking conservation investment.
In an insightful article on the role of insurance in conservation, Alistair Donohew and colleagues from Crawford & Company explore how insurance examine the role of insurance as a key tool for ecosystem protection and restoration by unlocking long-term capital. Their article demonstrates - with the use of a case study of mangrove protection in the Philippines - how insurance products help to transform conservation from a financial risk into a strategic investment.
Guidance for investors is also advancing. Irina Likhachova of the International Finance Corporation (IFC) introduces two recent publications: the Biodiversity Finance Reference Guide and the Biodiversity Finance Metrics for Impact Reporting. These tools provide investors with the clarity needed to track, measure and report on the contribution of their biodiversity-related investments in meeting impact targets such as those defined by the GBF.
Hamza Butt of the UNEP World Conservation Monitoring Centre focuses on the value of accurate, accessible biodiversity data in assessing ecological and social risks—particularly in infrastructure development. His article points to tools such as the Integrated Biodiversity Assessment Tool (IBAT) and frameworks like the Taskforce for Nature-related Financial Disclosures (TNFD) as critical enablers of responsible investment.
Recognising the limits of data-driven approaches alone, Rob Selwyn and Jason Hartley of Earth Active highlight the importance of embracing community knowledge, power and governance. They argue that addressing ecological and social uncertainties requires bridging the gap between rigid, data-driven risk frameworks and adaptive, participatory models of decision-making.
Finally, Julie Rode and Paul LeFebvre of AXA Climate reflect on the challenges of valuing ecosystem services within project finance. Their article highlights certain biases inherent to a reductionist approach to ecosystem valuation and calls for valuation methodologies that reflect complexity, interdependence and resilience, advocating for a territory-based approach that fully captures the long-term value of nature.
The GBF recognises the critical need to leverage private finance, promote blended finance and encourage the private sector to invest in biodiversity. A recent PwC report revealed that 55% of global GDP—equivalent to approximately US$58 trillion—is moderately or highly dependent on nature. The OECD reports that despite this, global biodiversity finance remains just 0.1% of global GDP. Mobilising the $700 billion needed annually will require repurposing harmful subsidies, as well as engaging private capital at scale.
Ultimately, a whole-of-government and whole-of-society approach is needed to halt and reverse biodiversity loss. To this end, mobilising and committing capital for biodiversity protection and restoration will play an increasingly central role. This volume offers compelling insights into innovative financing mechanisms, along with some essential tools, guidance and frameworks to deliver on this ambition.
Download your copy here.
Please note: the views expressed in this blog are those of the individual contributing member and are not necessarily representative of the views of ISEP or any professional institutions with which ISEP is associated.
