Private Finance Tools for Biodiversity: Unlocking Investment Opportunities

The figures in Cali were stark. More than 150 institutions controlling over $24 trillion in assets stood together to call for the Global Biodiversity Framework. That was the promise. Now in Yerevan, the hard work of building the tools to fulfill it is well underway. The architecture for financing nature is being assembled piece by piece. IPSAS 51 now gives governments a way to account for conserved natural resources. The ISSB is weaving nature into its global standards. Over a thousand organizations are using the TNFD framework to disclose their risks and impacts. This progress is real and it is measurable.

Yet a brutal gap remains between this structural progress and the actual movement of capital. For every dollar that goes toward protecting nature another thirty dollars fund its destruction. The UNEP’s 2026 report puts concrete numbers to this disconnect. In 2023 nature-negative investments totaled $7.3 trillion. Funding for nature-based solutions managed only $220 billion. The private sector’s contribution after a peak of $11.2 billion in 2021 has actually declined. You see the problem. We have built a sophisticated compass but the ship is still sailing in the wrong direction.

The public sector cannot close this gap alone. Ninety percent of current nature finance is public money drawn from balance sheets that are already under severe strain. The logical move is to use that public capital more cleverly. The goal must be to leverage the vastly larger pools of private finance. This is not about replacing public funding. It is about using it to change the direction of the entire market. Right now fiscal policy and subsidies often do the opposite. They actively encourage the private sector to degrade natural capital. Only five percent of CBD Parties have even set a target to reduce these harmful incentives. That has to change.

The private financial industry is signaling its readiness. In a 2026 UNEP survey large banks and insurers ranked nature as a higher priority than climate. But they operate in a market. They need clear rules and a level playing field to justify shifting their portfolios at the necessary scale. Without them the risks of inaction remain theoretical and the costs of action too high. To activate this capital policymakers need to focus on three concrete actions.

• Make disclosure mandatory.
• Move subsidy reform from environment ministries to finance ministries.
• Mandate a system to count the money.
• Ensure clear rules for private finance allocation.
• Track private financial flows for biodiversity.
• Bring rigor to mobilizing private finance.

First make disclosure mandatory. Voluntary frameworks like the TNFD and GRI 101 are essential foundations. They create a common language. But they do not create a common requirement. A “comply-or-explain” model similar to what the UK will implement in 2027 offers a practical path forward. It provides flexibility while establishing an expectation of accountability. Currently only 24 percent of Parties are rated highly on enabling business reporting. We cannot manage what we do not measure consistently.

Second move subsidy reform from environment ministries to finance ministries. The most damaging incentives are buried in tax codes agricultural supports and energy budgets. These are the levers of national treasuries not environmental departments. Until finance ministers own this issue the fiscal signals will continue to undermine the policy goals. A complete unified accounting of all positive and harmful incentives is a necessary first step for any government serious about alignment.

Third we must mandate a system to count the money. The CBD needs a dedicated work program to track private financial flows for biodiversity. This means measuring not just direct investments but the six primary channels through which private capital reaches nature. It also means tracking the redirection of harmful flows. You cannot claim progress in mobilizing private finance if you cannot definitively count it. A COP17 decision on this would bring much-needed rigor and attract more institutional investors who demand transparent metrics.

The midpoint review of the Global Biodiversity Framework delivered a clear message. Progress is too slow. The 2030 targets are slipping out of reach. The tools to engage the private sector at scale now exist. The frameworks are built. The question for the governments gathered here is blunt. Will they require the use of these tools? The financial architecture is ready. It is waiting for the political signal to turn it on.