Bankrolling biodiversity: The politics of philanthropic conservation finance in Chile

Abstract

The role of philanthropic capital in biodiversity conservation is rapidly changing. Philanthropists increasingly seek to bankroll solutions to the biodiversity crisis, scaling up the size of their ambitions and gifts to help close what scientists and policymakers call the “biodiversity financing gap.” This paper interrogates the rising prominence of philanthropic capital in conservation governance, focusing on a class of actors I call “philanthro-environmentalists.” Unlike big, international NGOs and philanthrocapitalists, philanthro-environmentalists do not engage market-based, for-profit approaches to finance conservation. Rather, they engage a “dollars for policy” approach that leverages the power of their philanthropy to improve public conservation outcomes. Taking Chile as a case, I trace how a transnational network of philanthro-environmentalists is using a novel mechanism known as Project Finance for Permanence to exact substantial political and fiscal commitments from the state in exchange for substantive philanthropic support for a mega conservation initiative in Chilean Patagonia. I argue that Project Finance for Permanence targets policymaking as the primary site of philanthropic intervention, affording philanthro-environmentalists greater control over state conservation governance. Yet, I also argue that this case raises serious questions about the limits and implications of leveraging philanthropic capital to solve public environmental problems. Bridging literatures on conservation governance and conservation finance, the paper contributes new conceptual insights into the evolving dynamics of philanthropy-state relations in an age of biodiversity crisis.

More than funders: The roles of philanthropic foundations in marine conservation governance

“…This research helps move the conversation around conservation philanthropy beyond binary conceptions of “good” versus “bad,” and, instead, toward deeper considerations about what foundations do within governance systems, how they engage with diverse practitioners, as well as what they can and should do (see also Breeze, 2021; Villanueva, 2021). For example, our results highlight the contradictions of the philanthropic relationship: grant relations can encourage collective action, legitimize local conservation knowledge, and empower communities, while still reflecting and reinforcing the same power and wealth asymmetries that contribute to many environmental problems in the first place (Beer, 2022; INCITE!, 2017). We argue that the way forward is to explicitly acknowledge the paradoxes of giving and collectively reflect on how to manage them.…”

“…Instead, we analyze what we found to be the primary ways that respondents spoke about Packard contributions to delivering different types of functions through complex governance roles that evolved over time. While funding may have been Packard's most obvious role, the Foundation leveraged its "more-than-financial" powers to perform additional roles-evidence of foundations' unique and dynamic relationship to the state, market, and civil sector in environmental governance (Beer, 2022).…”

Conservation philanthropy: Growing the field of research and practice

“…Though conservation philanthropy has a long history, its current pace and scale are unprecedented (Beer, 2022). Conservation pledges in the last few years dwarf historic figures, like the record‐breaking $5 billion private donors committed to advance the “30 × 30” global biodiversity targets in the Convention on Biological Diversity's 2030 Kunming‐Montreal Biodiversity Framework (Convention on Biological Diversity, 2022).…”

“…In the United States, they contribute “the overwhelming majority” of philanthropic giving (Reich, 2020, p. 10) and crowdfunding is an increasingly important conservation finance mechanism (Gallo‐Cajiao et al, 2018; Takashina et al, 2023). This surge in philanthropic spending will have ripple effects throughout the funding ‘ecosystem’ for biodiversity conservation by supplementing, catalyzing, and influencing public sector spending (Beer, 2022).…”

“…In addition to increased funding levels, conservation philanthropy is also evolving in form and function. There are new funding modes and mechanisms in what some scholars have termed “the new philanthropy” (Rogers, 2015)—from the hands‐off, “trust‐based philanthropy” model preferred by billionaire Mackenzie Scott to the “dollars for policy” approach, where international foundations leverage funding commitments to gain influence in state‐led conservation governance (Beer, 2022; Kavate, 2022). Equally notable are patterns that have remained the same.…”