Going beyond market-based mechanisms to finance nature-based solutions and foster sustainable futures

Failure to address the climate and biodiversity crises is undermining human well-being and increasing global inequality. Given their potential for addressing these societal challenges, there is growing attention on scaling-up nature-based solutions (NbS). However, there are concerns that in its use, the NbS concept is dissociated with the social and economic drivers of these societal challenges, including the pervasive focus on market-based mechanisms and the economic growth imperative, promoting the risk of greenwashing. In this perspective, we draw on recent research on the effectiveness, governance, and practice of NbS to highlight key limitations and pitfalls of a narrow focus on natural capital markets to finance their scaling up. We discuss the need for a simultaneous push for complementary funding mechanisms and examine how financial instruments and market-based mechanisms, while important to bridge the biodiversity funding gap and reduce reliance on public funding, are not a panacea for scaling NbS. Moreover, market-based mechanisms present significant governance challenges, and risk further entrenching power asymmetries. We propose four key recommendations to ensure finance mechanisms for biodiversity and NbS foster more just, equitable, and environmentally sustainable pathways in support of the CBD’s (Convention on Biological Diversity) 2050 vision of “living in harmony with nature”. We stress that NbS must not be used to distract attention away from reducing emissions associated with fossil fuel use or to promote an agenda for perpetual economic growth and call on government policy makers to decenter GDP growth as a core economic and political target, refocusing instead on human and ecological well-being

Evaluating artisanal fishing of globally threatened sharks and rays in the Bay of Bengal, Bangladesh

Sharks and rays are at risk of extinction globally. This reflects low resilience to increasing fishing pressure, exacerbated by habitat loss, climate change, increasing value in a trade and inadequate information leading to limited conservation actions. Artisanal fisheries in the Bay of Bengal of Bangladesh contribute to the high levels of global fishing pressure on elasmobranchs. However, it is one of the most data-poor regions of the world, and the diversity, occurrence and conservation needs of elasmobranchs in this region have not been adequately assessed. This study evaluated elasmobranch diversity, species composition, catch and trade within the artisanal fisheries to address this critical knowledge gap. Findings show that elasmobranch diversity in Bangladesh has previously been underestimated. In this study, over 160000 individual elasmobranchs were recorded through landing site monitoring, comprising 88 species (30 sharks and 58 rays) within 20 families and 35 genera. Of these, 54 are globally threatened according to the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species, with ten species listed as Critically Endangered and 22 species listed as Endangered. Almost 98% juvenile catch (69–99% for different species) for large species sand a decline in numbers of large individuals were documented, indicating unsustainable fisheries. Several previously common species were rarely landed, indicating potential population declines. The catch pattern showed seasonality and, in some cases, gear specificity. Overall, Bangladesh was found to be a significant contributor to shark and ray catches and trade in the Bay of Bengal region. Effective monitoring was not observed at the landing sites or processing centres, despite 29 species of elasmobranchs being protected by law, many of which were frequently landed. On this basis, a series of recommendations were provided for improving the conservation status of the elasmobranchs in this region. These include the need for improved taxonomic research, enhanced monitoring of elasmobranch stocks, and the highest protection level for threatened taxa. Alongside political will, enhancing national capacity to manage and rebuild elasmobranch stocks, coordinated regional management measures are essential

Ecological Drivers of Song Evolution in Birds: Disentangling the Effects of Habitat and Morphology

Environmental differences influence the evolutionary divergence of mating signals through selection acting either directly on signal transmission (“sensory drive”) or because morphological adaptation to different foraging niches causes divergence in “magic traits” associated with signal production, thus indirectly driving signal evolution. Sensory drive and magic traits both contribute to variation in signal structure, yet we have limited understanding of the relative role of these direct and indirect processes during signal evolution. Using phylogenetic analyses across 276 species of ovenbirds (Aves: Furnariidae), we compared the extent to which song evolution was related to the direct influence of habitat characteristics and the indirect effect of body size and beak size, two potential magic traits in birds. We find that indirect ecological selection, via diversification in putative magic traits, explains variation in temporal, spectral, and performance features of song. Body size influences song frequency, whereas beak size limits temporal and performance components of song. In comparison, direct ecological selection has weaker and more limited effects on song structure. Our results illustrate the importance of considering multiple deterministic processes in the evolution of mating signals

Getting the Message Right on Nature‐based Solutions to Climate Change

Nature‐based solutions (NbS) - solutions to societal challenges that involve working with nature - have recently gained popularity as an integrated approach that can address climate change and biodiversity loss, while supporting sustainable development. Although well‐designed NbS can deliver multiple benefits for people and nature, much of the recent limelight has been on tree planting for carbon sequestration. There are serious concerns that this is distracting from the need to rapidly phase out use of fossil fuels and protect existing intact ecosystems. There are also concerns that the expansion of forestry framed as a climate change mitigation solution is coming at the cost of carbon rich and biodiverse native ecosystems and local resource rights. Here, we discuss the promise and pitfalls of the NbS framing and its current political traction, and we present recommendations on how to get the message right. We urge policymakers, practitioners and researchers to consider the synergies and trade‐offs associated with NbS and to follow four guiding principles to enable NbS to provide sustainable benefits to society: (1) NbS are not a substitute for the rapid phase out of fossil fuels; (2) NbS involve a wide range of ecosystems on land and in the sea, not just forests; (3) NbS are implemented with the full engagement and consent of Indigenous Peoples and local communities in a way that respects their cultural and ecological rights; and (4) NbS should be explicitly designed to provide measurable benefits for biodiversity. Only by following these guidelines will we design robust and resilient NbS that address the urgent challenges of climate change and biodiversity loss, sustaining nature and people together, now and into the future

Time to integrate global climate change and biodiversity science‐policy agendas

Funder: Research EnglandFunder: Bertarelli FoundationAbstract: There is an increasing recognition that, although the climate change and biodiversity crises are fundamentally connected, they have been primarily addressed independently and a more integrated global approach is essential to tackle these two global challenges. Nature‐based Solutions (NbS) are hailed as a pathway for promoting synergies between the climate change and biodiversity agendas. There are, however, uncertainties and difficulties associated with the implementation of NbS, while the evidence regarding their benefits for biodiversity remains limited. We identify five key research areas where incomplete or poor information hinders the development of integrated biodiversity and climate solutions. These relate to refining our understanding of how climate change mitigation and adaptation approaches benefit biodiversity conservation; enhancing our ability to track and predict ecosystems on the move and/or facing collapse; improving our capacity to predict the impacts of climate change on the effectiveness of NbS; developing solutions that match the temporal, spatial and functional scale of the challenges; and developing a comprehensive and practical framework for assessing, and mitigating against, the risks posed by the implementation of NbS. Policy implications. The Conference of the Parties (COP) for the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (COP26) and the Convention on Biological Diversity (COP15) present a clear policy window for developing coherent policy frameworks that align targets across the nexus of biodiversity and climate change. This window should (a) address the substantial and chronic underfunding of global biodiversity conservation, (b) remove financial incentives that negatively impact biodiversity and/or climate change, (c) develop higher levels of integration between the biodiversity and climate change agendas, (d) agree on a monitoring framework that enables the standardised quantification and comparison of biodiversity gains associated with NbS across ecosystems and over time and (e) rethink environmental legislation to better support biodiversity conservation in times of rapid climatic change