Corporates, investors, governments and politicians are pledging and promising a nature positive future. Despite being in the midst of the sixth mass extinction, when 25,000 hectares of threatened species habitat was approved for land clearing in 2024 in Australia alone (more than double what was approved for 2023) and when 41 new flora and fauna species were added to Australia’s threatened species list in January, the shift to a nature positive future is approaching in all directions rapidly.

The platitudes sound nice and look good in press releases and sustainability documents. From time immemorial right up to the recent 2024 Biodiversity COP and never-to-be-forgotten Global Nature Positive Summit (remember that one?), action on conserving the remaining wild places, preserving environments from harmful human activities and the work of re-wilding, regenerating ecosystems and repairing the damage done has faced one major problem - funding. It has always been easier and more suitable to the (some) human extractive mindsets and theories of economics that the natural world is more valuable when it’s commoditised, financialised or liquified. Lumber, lobster, cattle, coal, sugar, soy. On and on.

To repair nature we need to fund nature.

To re-awaken landscapes we need to fund nature.

To regenerate ecosystems we need to fund nature.

Fund nature? Placing a condition of such significance on a nature positive future seems like a buzzkill though. Suddenly commitments and a joy of bushwalking are worthless in a context of collapsing ecosystems in Australia and around the world, all while seven of nine planetary boundaries have been crossed.

So how to fund nature? What are the precedents? What are the models? What are the approaches and structures and ways of re-thinking and re-working risk management in both the government and financial sectors?

In this session we will be joined by special guests and experts in nature finance Colin Finn, Chris Andrew, Nadya Hutagalung & Rebecca Blurton who will help us chart a path of what could be possible. What lessons can be learnt from places like Singapore and Costa Rica at a time when close to US $7 trillion is invested annually in activities that have a direct negative impact on nature? What exists now that can be leveraged and expanded?

We need to erode and end funding that degrades and devastates nature.

We need to fund activities that result in positive changes for nature in any and all forms.

This isn’t easy but it’s where the work must be if we are to begin to slow, reverse and ultimately channel the capabilities and assets of the Australian and global financial system to securing and sustaining a natural world it and we all depend upon.

As always, food comes from the brilliant Gus_tronomy, and we'll have all of your thirst requirements covered.