Dual approach linking ecosystem and economic development

Eight years ago, the natural habitat of the Hail Haor wetland on the eastern shores of northern Bangladesh was in a poor state, with aquatic plants dying and fish and wildfowl dis­appearing.

Since then, a programme granting fishing rights to locals and training them in fisheries management has reversed the decline. But it is not only the natural environment that has benefited. Locals are enjoying a 140 per cent increase in fish catches and a 33 per cent rise in their incomes.

The success of the project, which was funded by the US Agency for International Development, demonstrates how protecting the environment and reducing poverty are inextricably linked. But if the philanthropic sector is to achieve similar results, the question is whether organisations can broaden their remit sufficiently and attract funding for programmes focused on issues that were once the preserve of others.

Many senior government and philanthropy leaders are making the correlation between human development and climate change.

Barack Obama, the US president, has argued that investing in solar and wind power and other forms of renewable energy could be a way not only to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and promote energy independence, but also to help create jobs in green or environment-related industries.

“Rather than looking at how to invest in nature for development, for many years the core strategy of environmental groups was to promote protected areas at all costs, which is very polarising,” says Janet Ranganathan, head of science and research at the World Resources Institute and lead author of a new WRI book designed to help decision makers link ecosystems and economic development.

Nevertheless, as the growing connections between the world’s problems emerges, large, progressive global non-profits and charities have recognised that protecting the environment and fostering economic development are not necessarily conflicting aims.

For Oxfam – the charity whose mission is to fight poverty and injustice around the world – combating climate change is now most prominent among its campaigns. Oxfam says the effects of unpredictable weather patterns are likely to hurt the world’s poorest people the most.

Meanwhile, the World Wildlife Fund – which was established to protect endangered species and prevent the degradation of the natural environment – is working to place the environment at the heart of economic development and demonstrate the importance of poverty reduction to conservation.

Another way for non-profits to broaden their mission is by forming alliances with other organisations that have different but complementary expertise. This is the approach being taken by the Nature Conservancy. Its Alliance for Water Stewardship is an initiative that includes a range of partners, from other non-profits to businesses and governments.

“Our forte is in the environmental aspects of water use,” says Mr Richter. “So we have sought out other partners that have expertise in the development and social issues.”

He believes that the trend towards multi-issue partnerships will increase as the complexity of dealing with the world’s problems becomes more apparent. “No one organisation is going to be fully capable of addressing all these concerns,” he says. “And you can build strength through these alliances and access different areas of expertise.”

Whether it will be through alliances between donors and non-profits or the emergence of specialised organisations, the pressure for the philanthropic community to address environmental issues and poverty together is increasing. Part of the reason is that the effects of ecosystem degradation and climate change are starting to be felt. Most prominently, the global food crisis has highlighted the fact that climate changes are likely to have a direct impact on the ability of poor nations to feed their populations.

Ms Ranganathan believes the most powerful tool in forming a bridge between the environment and development will therefore be the concept of “ecosystems services”.

“By focusing on dependencies [of humans on the environment], we will inherently start reconciling these two traditionally siloed groups,” she says. “Because if we’re going to make a compelling argument for saving ecosystems, it’s not the argument of saving them for nature’s sake, but saving them for people’s sake.”