Details

Autor(en) / Beteiligte

• Zwieten, Nowella Anyango-van

Titel

Networks and Flows of Conservation Finance: The Case of World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF)

Ort / Verlag

ProQuest Dissertations Publishing

Erscheinungsjahr

2020

Link zum Volltext

• ProQuest

Quelle

ProQuest Dissertations & Theses A&I

Beschreibungen/Notizen

• We are entering a turning point in the conservation of global biodiversity. The 2019 Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) Global Assessment Report proves that, except through transformative change, the sharp increase of species extinction rates in the past 50 years will continue into 2050 and beyond. The curtain is closing in on the 2011-2020 United Nations Decade on Biodiversity and ushering in a post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework. Conservation efforts to combat species decline require significant increments in financing, a recurring issue that has been in discussion in all UN Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) forums since its inception in 1992. We have lived through a period marked by a paradox: against the background of overall decline and inadequacy of funding for nature conservation, the budgets of the five largest nature conservation organisations have been growing significantly since the 1990s to command over 50% of globally available conservation funding. Several attempts have been made to estimate the ‘funding gap’ between globally available funds and conservation needs, and to close it through innovative financial mechanisms. This has led to intensive societal and scientific debates with efficiency-oriented scholars taking an instrumental view on conservation NGOs with a focus on efficiency and the critical social science scholars perceiving conservation NGO’s as integral to a “conservationist mode” of production that intertwines wildlife and biodiversity with capitalism. This thesis contributes to these debates through an alternative way of investigating conservation finance using the sociology of networks and flows theory of Manuel Castells. It focusses on World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) to show how large nature conservation organisations maintain and expand funding for global biodiversity conservation. The central research question is therefore: How does WWF, as an example of large nature conservation organisations, maintain and expand funding for global biodiversity conservation? This question is addressed through the methodology of triangulation that included a thematic review, single case study (Yin, 2018), participant observation, document analysis and interviews. Chapter 2 begins exploratorily with a thematic review of 64 peer-reviewed articles, published in the period 2010 - 2016, to find dominant themes recurring around the topic of biodiversity financing. Academic research on conservation finance is typically narrowed down to specific topics of interest and few studies provide broader overviews. As we approach the end of this UN Decade of Biodiversity there is great need to take stock of where we have come from so we can find inspiration for the future of conservation. This chapter contributes to this, also with the intention of finding an alternative sociological perspective of investigating conservation finance. It addresses the first research subquestion: What major themes on funding for biodiversity conservation are covered by academic literature published since 2010? The findings highlight three dominant themes recurring around the topic of biodiversity financing: underfunding, funding distribution and innovative financial mechanisms. These themes are interlinked so that the main challenge in biodiversity financing is not only inadequate funding, but that quite often available funds do not go where they are most needed. Instead conservation networks between dominant economic, political and social players play a crucial role in directing financial flows. A key finding was the importance of networks in conservation financing and this informed the choice for a new way of studying funding of large nature conservation organisations that would take cognisance of the complex social and political networks that determine how and where finances flow. I therefore turned to Manuel Castells network theory to develop and answer research sub-questions 2 and 3. Specifically, I make use of two key concepts of network-making power: programming and switching. Chapter 3 focusses on public sector funding. The public sector is an important source of funding for biodiversity conservation. WWF’s public sector funding constitutes about a fifth of the organisation’s income and has great influence on the institutions that drive change. The research sub-question addressed in this chapter is: How does WWF use networking to maintain and expand funding from public sources? The findings show that WWF’s public sector work has involved constant restructuring and re-strategising from an inwardly oriented focus on increasing its own income to the ambitious goal of increasing income for all of global biodiversity by influencing public policy. This meant widening its scope to broader government engagement (through environmental mainstreaming) which translated to deeper private sector engagement. But WWF’s public finance network was also influenced to reconfigure itself and its switching tactics by diminishing Official Development Assistance (ODA) funds, the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness (revised in Accra 2008), the rise of emerging economies (Brazil, China, Russia, India) and graduated low middle income economies, transition of Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) into Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and pressure from some of its funding partners. Some of WWF’s Programme Offices in developing countries gained new relevance in the organisation’s network. WWF also forged new internal focal point coalitions and external connections in the following sectors: Development, Climate Change, ‘Security’-based issues and Emerging Economies. WWF’s programme increasingly incorporated a businesslike discourse and development/SDG jargon, it worked at converting former ‘enemies’ into friends and formed internal forums to create ‘bankable projects’ and opportunities that would be attractive for businesses. This deeper private sector engagement coincided with growth in financing from the public sector at the average rate of 7.5% per annum. This suggests that adopting private sector discourse was productive in increasing public sector funding. WWF has to be in the “right networks”, speak the “right language”, and connect to “relevant flows”. The conclusion is that large nature conservation organisations have to be malleable in their networking endeavours so that they are not only “switchers”, but when necessary should be pliable to being “switched” by others. Chapter 4 turns to private sector funding. The research sub-question addressed is: What is the extent of corporate sector income into WWF and how does WWF maintain and expand it? Conservation organisations, spearheaded by WWF, have voiced the necessity to give priority to the pursuit of private sector funding. Few studies have made attempts at estimating the sum of global private funds that go into nature conservation. But to my knowledge, no studies have been done to find how much private financing goes to a specific large nature conservation organisation. Existing studies show that funds that come from market sources are minimal, predominantly ad hoc and mostly philanthropic. However, these studies confine their analysis to market-based income as a stand-alone category. In this fourth chapter the main argument is that market-based approaches cannot be separated from other financial networks and flows. I therefore situated corporate sector financing within the broader context of funding from other public and private sources to demonstrate its comparable contribution and found WWF’s income from the corporate sector contributed an average 11% p.a. to total donated income between 2007-2017. In comparison, income from the public sector contributed an average 19% p.a. in the same period. The combination of income from all private sources, including the corporate sector, contributed an average 81% p.a. of WWF’s total donated income. Individuals made the highest contributions to WWF (average 60% p.a.). WWF had approximately 2500 active corporate engagements between 2008-2018 but only 24% of these were involved in philanthropic activities. In this period WWF’s corporate sector income grew by about €20m. In absolute terms corporate sector donations were highest in Europe but in terms of growth, grew fastest between 2012-2015 in Latin America/Caribbean. However, by the time of this study ,WWF’s experimentation with market-based approaches through ‘bankable’ projects has not yet generated any financial income. The main challenges in finding bankable projects are lack of scale, problems with finding investors at the risky start-up phase, lack of track record, and inadequate financial expertise, including poor knowledge of the investment industry by NGOs. These challenges are exacerbated by the following WWF-specific impediments: legal dilemma with a non-profit organisation receiving for-profit returns, strict organisational guidelines on engaging with corporations and internal diverging views on the ethics of market-based approaches. WWF’s three main activities that target financing from the corporate sector are impact investing, leveraging with public sector financing institutions and Project Finance for Permanence (PFPs). I turn to the last activity to investigate how WWF circumnavigated its challenges by analysing its hallmark PFP project, ARPA (The Amazon Region Protected Areas) for life. ARPA for life attracted US$215 million in blended finance through strategic programming and switching. ARPA exemplified how networking opens up increased private and public sector funding and results in long-term nature conservation. This shows that programming should be accompanied by switching for it to be productive in materialising into financial flows. The conclusion is therefore that the future of innovative conservation financing largely depends on the dexterity with which nature conservationists are able to switch into the