Q&A with Gavin Edwards

Global Coordinator, Nature & People, WWF International

“More than half of global GDP depends on natural resources, and therefore, it is in the best long-term interest of companies to safeguard nature.”

What are Nature-based Solutions? How do they benefit people?

Nature-based solutions are initiatives that protect, restore and sustainably manage land and ocean ecosystems such as forests, peatlands, wetlands, savannahs, coral reefs and mangroves, while simultaneously addressing other societal challenges. It’s estimated that they could provide up to 30% of the climate change mitigation needed to achieve the goals of the Paris Agreement.

Nature-based solutions benefit people because by undertaking interventions which maintain or enhance natural habitats, we can help maintain ecosystem services that are of benefit to society such as crop pollination, water regulation and hazard attenuation.

Nature-based solutions are people-centered approaches that are led by local communities and may draw from traditional and local knowledge. In fact indigenous Peoples have been undertaking nature-based solutions for milenia.

Nature-based solutions must be inclusive and transparent and should therefore be developed with respect to land rights, respect to local communities, and with the benefits fairly distributed among all the stakeholders.

Why is it good for business to invest in NbS?

Nature-based solutions provide many co-benefits that guarantee the sustainable use of nature services. According to the World Economic Forum, more than half of global GDP depends on natural resources, and therefore, it is in the best long-term interest of companies to safeguard nature.

There are also reputational benefits to businesses, with many consumers expecting them to be leaders in carbon reduction and reversing environmental degradation.

However, before investing in nature-based solutions, businesses must first ensure that they have reduced their carbon emissions on-site. Nature-based solutions must never be permitted to undermine decarbonization efforts or unnecessarily prolong the use of fossil fuels.

Are companies doing enough? What’s holding them back?

While some companies are embarking on a path to re-orientate themselves to contribute to rather than undermine efforts to achieve a net zero emissions and a nature-positive world, many are not, and there is a general recognition in the private sector that more is needed. There has been too much focus on offsetting unsustainable practices and not enough on more fundamentally realigning business impact and the impact of supply chains. This in turn has created a dissonance with some in civil society and the wider public who rightly point to a gap between the communications of many in the private sector versus their actions.

Ambitious, holitistic plans are needed which embrace high-quality nature-based solutions and their three core components: interventions must address a societal challenge, ensure biodiversity net gains, and provide co-benefits for people.

What is also holding some companies back is that decarbonization which is not sector-wide can lead to higher up-front costs for first movers. Companies will therefore be more tempted to opt for the lowest-cost options available, investing in low-standard projects. In addition, there are other sectors where their activities cannot be in line with a 1.5C degree future and therefore they need to either transform or see their competitiveness reduced. More investment is needed to align businesses with the targets set out in the Paris Climate Agreement.

How can the private sector get more involved?

Nature-based solutions can make an important contribution to carbon emission reductions. Companies can take action to mitigate carbon emissions beyond their value chains by implementing nature-based solutions that improve ecosystems or reduce the drivers of biodiversity loss (e.g. improve soil management, restore peatlands, forests and mangroves, etc.). Companies who wish to employ nature-based solutions as a carbon absorption tool, such as through afforestation to neutralise carbon emissions must proceed cautiously. As previously stated, Nature-based solutions must never be permitted to undermine decarbonization efforts or unnecessarily prolong the use of fossil fuels. Companies must first reduce their emissions locally and follow the mitigation hierarchy. We recommend companies align with the Science-based Target initiative (SBTi) and with the new SBTi Corporate Net Zero Standard. In addition, the International Union for Conservation of Nature has launched the Nature-based Solutions Global Standard which aims to assist companies in designing, implementing and verifying the outcome of their interventions. Safeguards must be adhered to so as to ensure that such interventions contribute to a nature-positive and net zero emissions world as well as promoting equitability.

Businesses can also get involved and support nature-based interventions taking place near their premises which could help bring direct or indirect benefits to the neighbourhood or wider region. For example, a company downstream supports restoration of the upper watershed to ensure water availability, or a company protecting floodplains to prevent urban flooding.

What kinds of investments are businesses making in NbS? Are they effective? Why or why not?

Many businesses are attracted to nature-based solutions for their carbon mitigation potential and their association with carbon credits. However, companies sometimes go for the cheapest available option, rather than taking a truly transformative approach. Instead they are following the compensation (offsetting) approach. For example, they might invest in planting trees, but end up causing social, environmental and economic problems. Interventions which cause such issues are not nature-based solutions. An NbS intervention cannot violate the rights of Indigenous Peoples and local communities and cannot upset the ecological conditions in ecosystems as is so often the case in tree-planting projects. Meanwhile they may not have adequately avoided emissions and instead relied on offsets, thus contributing further to climate change and prolonging the use of fossil fuels.

On top of this, many are stressing the need to identify and balance trade-offs in NbS interventions. WWF recognizes that NbS are not always a win/win scenario for everyone, especially when applied at a landscape-scale in which many diverse stakeholders are involved. For this same reason, the identification of trade-offs and the negotiation of different priorities is required for the successful implementation of high-quality NbS.

What can governments do to further incentivise investments in NbS?

While more and more governments are only just beginning to take action on nature as part of their climate commitments, yet there are still too few nature-based solutions being pursued. Given that nature could contribute up to 30% of the world’s climate solutions needed to meet the goals of the Paris Agreement and prevent runaway climate change, this has to change - and fast. There is no viable way to limit global warming to 1.5C without action on nature.

Governments can do a couple of things. Firstly, if the main source of their emissions is deforestation and land-use change, NbS can be a key approach to halt these drivers and can be included within their Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs). NDCs are the way the parties to the Paris Agreement communicate their climate plans and are critical to achieving its goal to limit global warming to 1.5°C.

Secondly, they can develop enabling conditions both for the public and private sector. Finance ministries can recognize NbS as a sector that will benefit national interests and governments can develop rules to define clear conditions to secure high-quality interventions. Some of these enabling conditions could be:

• Promote inclusive governance that guarantees legal tenure, invests in local institutions, and ensure fair distribution of benefits
• Progressive economic and financial regulation: remove pervasive subsidiaries that harm ecosystems and biodiversity, implement a natural capital accounting system, and redistribute measures that incentivize sustainable practices
• Develop a smart spatial planning system which include a people-centered approach, integrate urban and rural ecosystems, and implement climate-smart interventions

Thirdly, governments are increasingly earmarking a percentage of their climate overseas development aid specifically to nature and nature based solutions. More governments can adopt this approach.

Lastly, after COP26, governments can now oversee and closely examine claims made by companies, for example through applying the IUCN Gold Standard. This is a good opportunity to assure that interventions are credible and targets are backed by science.

What are Nature-based Solutions? How do they benefit people?

Nature-based solutions are initiatives that protect, restore and sustainably manage land and ocean ecosystems such as forests, peatlands, wetlands, savannahs, coral reefs and mangroves, while simultaneously addressing other societal challenges. It’s estimated that they could provide up to 30% of the climate change mitigation needed to achieve the goals of the Paris Agreement.

Nature-based solutions benefit people because by undertaking interventions which maintain or enhance natural habitats, we can help maintain ecosystem services that are of benefit to society such as crop pollination, water regulation and hazard attenuation.

Nature-based solutions are people-centered approaches that are led by local communities and may draw from traditional and local knowledge. In fact indigenous Peoples have been undertaking nature-based solutions for milenia.

Nature-based solutions must be inclusive and transparent and should therefore be developed with respect to land rights, respect to local communities, and with the benefits fairly distributed among all the stakeholders.

Why is it good for business to invest in NbS?

Nature-based solutions provide many co-benefits that guarantee the sustainable use of nature services. According to the World Economic Forum, more than half of global GDP depends on natural resources, and therefore, it is in the best long-term interest of companies to safeguard nature.

There are also reputational benefits to businesses, with many consumers expecting them to be leaders in carbon reduction and reversing environmental degradation.

However, before investing in nature-based solutions, businesses must first ensure that they have reduced their carbon emissions on-site. Nature-based solutions must never be permitted to undermine decarbonization efforts or unnecessarily prolong the use of fossil fuels.

Are companies doing enough? What’s holding them back?

While some companies are embarking on a path to re-orientate themselves to contribute to rather than undermine efforts to achieve a net zero emissions and a nature-positive world, many are not, and there is a general recognition in the private sector that more is needed. There has been too much focus on offsetting unsustainable practices and not enough on more fundamentally realigning business impact and the impact of supply chains. This in turn has created a dissonance with some in civil society and the wider public who rightly point to a gap between the communications of many in the private sector versus their actions.

Ambitious, holitistic plans are needed which embrace high-quality nature-based solutions and their three core components: interventions must address a societal challenge, ensure biodiversity net gains, and provide co-benefits for people.

What is also holding some companies back is that decarbonization which is not sector-wide can lead to higher up-front costs for first movers. Companies will therefore be more tempted to opt for the lowest-cost options available, investing in low-standard projects. In addition, there are other sectors where their activities cannot be in line with a 1.5C degree future and therefore they need to either transform or see their competitiveness reduced. More investment is needed to align businesses with the targets set out in the Paris Climate Agreement.

How can the private sector get more involved?

Nature-based solutions can make an important contribution to carbon emission reductions. Companies can take action to mitigate carbon emissions beyond their value chains by implementing nature-based solutions that improve ecosystems or reduce the drivers of biodiversity loss (e.g. improve soil management, restore peatlands, forests and mangroves, etc.). Companies who wish to employ nature-based solutions as a carbon absorption tool, such as through afforestation to neutralise carbon emissions must proceed cautiously. As previously stated, Nature-based solutions must never be permitted to undermine decarbonization efforts or unnecessarily prolong the use of fossil fuels. Companies must first reduce their emissions locally and follow the mitigation hierarchy. We recommend companies align with the Science-based Target initiative (SBTi) and with the new SBTi Corporate Net Zero Standard. In addition, the International Union for Conservation of Nature has launched the Nature-based Solutions Global Standard which aims to assist companies in designing, implementing and verifying the outcome of their interventions. Safeguards must be adhered to so as to ensure that such interventions contribute to a nature-positive and net zero emissions world as well as promoting equitability.

Businesses can also get involved and support nature-based interventions taking place near their premises which could help bring direct or indirect benefits to the neighbourhood or wider region. For example, a company downstream supports restoration of the upper watershed to ensure water availability, or a company protecting floodplains to prevent urban flooding.

What kinds of investments are businesses making in NbS? Are they effective? Why or why not?

Many businesses are attracted to nature-based solutions for their carbon mitigation potential and their association with carbon credits. However, companies sometimes go for the cheapest available option, rather than taking a truly transformative approach. Instead they are following the compensation (offsetting) approach. For example, they might invest in planting trees, but end up causing social, environmental and economic problems. Interventions which cause such issues are not nature-based solutions. An NbS intervention cannot violate the rights of Indigenous Peoples and local communities and cannot upset the ecological conditions in ecosystems as is so often the case in tree-planting projects. Meanwhile they may not have adequately avoided emissions and instead relied on offsets, thus contributing further to climate change and prolonging the use of fossil fuels.

On top of this, many are stressing the need to identify and balance trade-offs in NbS interventions. WWF recognizes that NbS are not always a win/win scenario for everyone, especially when applied at a landscape-scale in which many diverse stakeholders are involved. For this same reason, the identification of trade-offs and the negotiation of different priorities is required for the successful implementation of high-quality NbS.

What can governments do to further incentivise investments in NbS?

While more and more governments are only just beginning to take action on nature as part of their climate commitments, yet there are still too few nature-based solutions being pursued. Given that nature could contribute up to 30% of the world’s climate solutions needed to meet the goals of the Paris Agreement and prevent runaway climate change, this has to change - and fast. There is no viable way to limit global warming to 1.5C without action on nature.

Governments can do a couple of things. Firstly, if the main source of their emissions is deforestation and land-use change, NbS can be a key approach to halt these drivers and can be included within their Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs). NDCs are the way the parties to the Paris Agreement communicate their climate plans and are critical to achieving its goal to limit global warming to 1.5°C.

Secondly, they can develop enabling conditions both for the public and private sector. Finance ministries can recognize NbS as a sector that will benefit national interests and governments can develop rules to define clear conditions to secure high-quality interventions. Some of these enabling conditions could be:

• Promote inclusive governance that guarantees legal tenure, invests in local institutions, and ensure fair distribution of benefits
• Progressive economic and financial regulation: remove pervasive subsidiaries that harm ecosystems and biodiversity, implement a natural capital accounting system, and redistribute measures that incentivize sustainable practices
• Develop a smart spatial planning system which include a people-centered approach, integrate urban and rural ecosystems, and implement climate-smart interventions

Thirdly, governments are increasingly earmarking a percentage of their climate overseas development aid specifically to nature and nature based solutions. More governments can adopt this approach.

Lastly, after COP26, governments can now oversee and closely examine claims made by companies, for example through applying the IUCN Gold Standard. This is a good opportunity to assure that interventions are credible and targets are backed by science.