By Will McCarry
February 19, 2026
What on Earth is ‘nature finance’?
CLIMATEOCEANSBIODIVERSITY
8 min
Editor’s note: From “climate adaptation” to “ecosystem services,” environmental jargon is everywhere these days. Conservation International looks to make sense of it in an explainer series called “What on Earth?”
In this installment, we break down “conservation finance” — the creative funding that makes nature protection possible.
Protecting nature costs money — but how much exactly?
That doesn’t sound too—
Per year.
Ah. So not couch cushion change.
Uh, yeah. But it gets worse. US$ 700 billion isn’t the total cost — it’s the gap. It’s how much more the world needs to spend each year to protect and restore nature, on top of the roughly US$ 100 billion we’re already investing.
But why do we need to pay to protect nature in the first place?
But if nature is so valuable, why isn’t conservation always the obvious choice?
Well, protecting nature isn’t always the easiest — or most profitable — option for the people who live closest to it.
Take a forest, for example. Keeping it standing means clean air, carbon storage, wildlife habitat and water for nearby communities. But cutting it down can bring quick income — from crops, cattle or timber.
So, it’s not just an environmental issue — it’s an economic one.
Exactly. In many places, people depend directly on nature to live: the food they grow and the firewood they use to cook; the crops or fish they sell to earn a living.
I’ll let Bjorn Stauch, finance expert at Conservation International, explain: “Many communities who live closest to nature are struggling with extreme poverty. They can’t possibly focus on conservation when their children have hungry bellies.”
What we really need to do is make it possible for people to earn a living and protect nature.
Now you’re getting it.
We’ve got to redirect money away from activities that harm nature and toward real alternatives that help people and nature thrive, together. That means jobs that restore ecosystems, programs that help communities thrive without cutting down forests or draining wetlands, and initiatives that make clean water and healthy soil part of everyday life.
Here's Stauch again: “When people have their basic needs met, they are more likely to support conservation efforts because they no longer see nature as something that competes with their survival. Instead, they see nature as an asset that can improve their lives.”
Women planting seagrass off the coast of Kenya.
Right. That’s why it costs money to protect nature — we’re quantifying the economic value that’s always been there, hiding in plain sight.
When we say nature finance, we’re talking about all of the financial tools we have to make that possible: donations, taxes, carbon credits, investments, debt-for-nature swaps, green bonds—
Whoa, whoa, slow down. What were all those tools you just mentioned?
Right, let’s unpack them. Some are obvious — like governments directly funding conservation programs and policies. Easy enough.
Get creative how?
Well, arguably, this whole conversation started with the debt-for-nature swap. Conservation International helped pioneer the approach back in 1987, where a country’s debt is reduced in exchange for commitments to protect nature.
Wow, debt-for-nature swaps started with one wild idea. What’s next?
You know, some of the best ideas come from crisis. Climate change, biodiversity loss and rising human pressures are pushing innovators to find ways for money to flow to nature and people at the same time.
Take carbon credits — a way for companies or governments to offset fossil fuel emissions by funding projects that protect or restore ecosystems that store carbon.
And that’s just one forest — imagine if we multiplied this kind of investment across the world.
Indigenous Maasai guides in the grasslands of Chyulu Hills.
It sounds like even small investments can really add up.
You bet. When you zoom in on specific places, modest investments can have really tangible impact.
In Brazil’s Cerrado, one of the most threatened ecosystems on Earth, a timber operator has committed to protecting and restoring half of their total investment as natural ecosystem, recognizing that doing so actually increases the long-term value of their tree farms.
With all these ideas, can we really close the gap?
Look. hitting that $700-billion-a-year target isn’t going to be a breeze. But here’s the encouraging part: every innovative idea and every small, targeted investment chips away at that number.
That said, we won’t get there by innovation alone. Governments and institutions need to shift more funding toward protecting nature, rather than subsidizing activities that harm it. Only then can these tools reach their full potential.
The takeaway? Even in the face of a massive challenge, smart ideas and well-placed investments are already making a difference. And when you add them all up, they’re showing us a path toward a future where people and nature thrive together.
Stay close to the work
