Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

hatrack

(65,145 posts)
Tue May 19, 2026, 06:34 AM 12 hrs ago

Australia's Federal Biodiversity Funding Falling To 0.04% Of Budget; "Nature Markets" Flop, W. 1 Project Listed

EDIT

Environmental funding is set to decline from an already paltry 0.06% of the federal budget for on-ground nature programs to less than 0.04% in 2028-29. Even as it retunes its environment policy settings to favour business imperatives, the government is seeking to further absolve itself of its legal and moral environmental responsibilities by doubling down on a highly contentious and unproven nature repair market.

EDIT

Nature markets have been touted as a solution for environmental protection and repair. But despite decades of grand advertised claims, there is precious little evidence they are effective at halting and reversing environmental degradation and biodiversity loss.Threatened species and nationally and internationally significant places we love exist in specific locations and have specific requirements. Australia is protecting more land than ever but still failing to protect our (growing) list of threatened species and communities because their habitats are not protected. Market-driven nature repair projects will not help address this deficit.

After spending tens of millions on policy development, the biodiversity market register now shows one listed project with no biodiversity certificates issued against it. A “green Wall Street” is failing to launch. Despite this lacklustre track record and dim prospects of meaningfully contributing to urgent conservation management, a further $36.9m has been allocated in the budget for the nature repair market and biodiversity offsets.

Enthusiastic optimism about such markets, including from Ken Henry, the Australian Climate and Biodiversity Foundation and others, is premature given that they are prone to poor governance and outcomes and risk giving governments an excuse sidesteppng their obligations to conserve nature and delaying urgent action.

EDIT

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2026/may/18/australias-green-wall-street-is-failing-to-launch-threatened-species-deserve-better-than-the-nature-repair-market

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»Australia's Federal Biodi...