This article is part of
a series in which OECD
experts and thought
leaders — from
around the world and all parts of
society — address
the COVID-19 crisis, discussing and developing solutions now and
for the future.
Ten million hectares of forest are destroyed each year. Live
coral has declined by about 4% per decade since 1990. And one
million plant and animal species—one quarter of all species—are now
threatened with extinction. The past decade has not yielded the
biodiversity outcomes that many hoped for when the 2011-2020
Strategic Plan for Biodiversity was adopted, under the auspices of
the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). As a result,
biodiversity loss continues to accelerate, posing significant risks to our
economy and the well-being of current and future
generations.
The 15th Conference of the Parties to the CBD (CBD
COP15)—where a post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework is due to be
agreed—is critical. It is our chance to take stock of lessons
learned, and to design a better, more effective framework for the
next decade. A framework that includes specific actions countries
can take to address the pressures on biodiversity, whether it
is land and sea-use change, over-exploitation, pollution, climate
change or invasive alien species.
What role for economic instruments in the post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework?
Many issues are being discussed and negotiated in the lead up to
CBD COP15. One issue that is not receiving the attention it should
is the role of economic instruments—or positive incentives—in
driving the changes needed to halt and reverse biodiversity loss.
What are these economic instruments? They include
biodiversity-relevant taxes, fees and charges, tradable permits,
environmentally-motivated subsidies, payments for ecosystem
services and biodiversity offsets. Environmental economists prefer
these to more traditional command-and-control instruments because
they can, in theory, achieve a given environmental objective at a
lower total economic cost. In other words, they are more
cost-effective. You get a bigger bang for your buck.
These instruments can be applied to pretty much any sector to
help address the key pressures driving biodiversity and ecosystem
services loss. Pesticide taxes in agriculture, fees on fishing and
hunting licenses, tradable permits to limit extraction of
groundwater, payments for blue carbon in the ocean, biodiversity
offsets to address the adverse impacts of development. Economic
instruments make activities that harm biodiversity more expensive
and activities that benefit biodiversity economically attractive.
By helping to reflect the true value of nature or biodiversity in
economic activities, economic instruments are a key tool to
mainstream biodiversity across sectors.
Are countries using economic instruments to address the biodiversity crisis?
Yes, though there is substantial scope to scale up both their
use and ambition. OECD data on these instruments,
to which more than 120 countries are currently contributing, show a
plateau in their uptake since around 2010 (Figure 1). This is
despite the CBD 2011-2020 Aichi Target 3 on positive
incentives that called for their application but, as the Global
Biodiversity Outlook 5 highlights, was not fully achieved.
Figure 1: Number of
countries with biodiversity-relevant economic
instruments
Source: OECD (2021),Tracking Economic
Instruments and Finance for Biodiversity – 2021
The data suggest that the ambition of the existing instruments
in place has also not increased over time. For example, the revenue
generated from biodiversity-relevant taxes in OECD countries
amounts to USD 7.7 billion annually, and has remained stable for a
number of years now. And while this may not be a trivial amount, it
is less than 1% of the revenue generated by other
environmentally-relevant taxes. Revenues from
environmentally-relevant taxes themselves account for just 5% of
all tax revenues.
We must increase the use of economic instruments for
biodiversity, and ramp up their ambition. This is a key ingredient
for the post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework—and if we are to
bend the curve of biodiversity and put our economies on a more
sustainable, nature-positive future.
For the latest OECD report,
see Biodiversity, natural capital and
the economy, A policy guide for finance, economic and environment
ministers