Institutional capture via language: what do UNDP, ECB, OECD, EU Commission & an environmentally minded MEP have in common? They all endorsed consciously or not a contested reconceptualisation of #nature & human life at last week' #beyondgrowth event beyond-growth-2023.eu/lecture/focus-…… 1/11
@spietikainen started the panel by stating: "let's assume (..) that we all agree already that GDP is flawed and not the right measure and that we need a new metering system that includes the planetary boundaries, the #naturalcapital and the social wellbeing of humans." 2/11
While we know Sirpa and do not doubt her intentions, the reference to #naturalcapital - a simplistic and contested reconceptualisation of #nature - is extremely problematic and shows the level of linguistic capture on the issue of conservation. 3/11
For many, the term has become interchangeable with biodiversity protection without realising that they are absolutely not the same. 4/11
The next speaker @pedrotconceicao from UNDP also highlighted natural capital, the contested Dasgupta Review and World Bank's Inclusive Wealth framework among the list of beyond gdp indicators. 5/11
Dr Romina Boarini director of the OECD WISE Centre went on to promote natural and human and social capital. 6/11
European Commission @DrollPeter followed, including the concepts of natural, human and social capital, as part of the Commission's future beyond GDP indicators.
ECB @FrankElderson mentioned "ecosystems services" and SEEA-EA, UN's accounting framework for #naturalcapital. 7/11
As asked by the brilliant next panelist @CatriceJany from University of Lille: "which language should we speak when elaborating these new indicators? (...) Should monetary valuation be extended to non market assets?" 8/11
@CatriceJany went on: "indicators are always political objects, they always embark with them visions of what is good." "The production of alternative indicators has become a real battlefield."
We could not agree more, hence the crucial importance of using the right words.. 9/11
...and not debunked neoliberal concepts such as #naturalcapital, unless you support their underlying vision of a world where conservation must be privatized & made profitable and investable at the cost of its environmental integrity, in order to protect EU's way of life. 10/11
Nature's financialisation lobby latest disingenuous narratives and tactics involve pushing governments to help create demand for #biodiversity#offset markets, and dropping the #offset claim in appearance only, in order to reduce legal liability: 1/11 uploads-ssl.webflow.com/623a362e6b1a3e…
The latest report from the taskforce on nature markets lobby group openly advocates for the "imposition of a nature / #biodiversity tax and trading system" as a "potential legal enablers for scaling biodiversity credit #markets." 2/11
"The proceeds from the tax could then be applied by the government to fund the purchase of biodiversity credits from projects in accordance with government priorities. This approach would serve as an incentive for corporates to reduce their negative impacts on nature... 3/11
1/14 BREAKING -The European Commission just published a draft #taxonomy's delegated act for biodiversity - i.e. its list of the economic activities that fight biodiversity loss in the EU - that includes debunked #biodiversity#offsetting
2/14 The list includes so far 2 activities, with more to come in the future: 1. Conservation and restoration of habitats, ecosystems and species; 2. The provision of short-term tourism accommodation
3/14 We first note that the conservation & restoration activity does not prioritize curbing destruction over restoration, thereby implicitly favouring the latter, despite its uncertain & delayed results and weak track record
Beware the disingenuous narrative from #biodiversity financiers ahead of #COP15. It goes like this: 1. We need to integrate #nature into our economies to protect it (except no one has ever demonstrated that we do, & history of conservation shows that we don’t) 1/6
2. Markets on nature are happening anyway, we just need to ensure good governance (they are not happening anyway, private lobbies are actively promoting them, and their conceptual issues go way beyond governance) 2/6 greenfinanceobservatory.org/wp-content/upl…
In fact, off the record most financiers, environmental & policy experts agree that they will most probably be an environmental failure and a political success, just like carbon offsets, i.e. they will buy time to continue maximising growth 3/6
"I look forward to working with the Coalition to make these markets a reality" said British MP Helen Whately, exchequer secretary to the Treasury. The UK govt has indeed committed to working with this coalition to scale up environmental mkts in the UK carbon-pulse.com/162013/?utm_so… 2/6
This news follows the recent UK government announcement of the creation of a wetland ‘super reserve’ in the south west of England containing 11 Mt of #carbon in storage 3/6
Under this approach, the destruction of a habitat for flamingos in Spain could be considered to be offset by the restoration of a habitat for bats in Greece, as long as you claim that it is "better." 2/11
Beyond its obvious lack of environmental integrity, this approach will also enable the financialisation of biodiversity destruction through the creation of a related #offset market, and shift the conversation away from the need to curb destruction: 3/11
1/5 New @IPBES@IPCC report promotes #NatureBasedSolutions, carbon and biodiversity #offsetting and #InclusiveWealth, the new neoliberal metric putting a price on nature and human life, but framed as a sustainable metric complementing GDP.
2/5 "Where #NatureBasedSolutions are used as
carbon #offsets, they are most effective when applied
subject to strict conditions and exclusions"
=> In case anyone had any doubt left that #NatureBasedSolutions included offsetting
3/5 "For #biodiversity, the concept of #offsets, the substitutability among a slate of possible actions, can introduce the flexibility required to achieve multiple competing objectives at regional scale, if applied subject to strict conditions & exclusions"