Giving Compass' Take:
- Anila Jacob, Jessica Deichmann, and Sara Carlson discuss how conservation organizations can emphasize impacts of harm to the environment on human well-being to fill funding gaps.
- What are the root causes of conservation funding gaps? What might it look like for conservation to emphasize human well-being and reliance on larger ecosystems?
- Learn more about key climate justice issues and how you can help.
- Search our Guide to Good for nonprofits focused on climate justice in your area.
What is Giving Compass?
We connect donors to learning resources and ways to support community-led solutions. Learn more about us.
Conservation is facing a crisis, fueled by myriad factors including cuts in funding, weakening support from governments, and disinformation. A significant driver of this crisis is a lack of understanding among many decision-makers and the public of nature’s vital role in food and water security, health, and climate change adaptation and mitigation. To combat the perception that conserving nature is primarily an environmental issue, it is imperative for the conservation sector to be more deliberate in demonstrating its impacts on people, emphasizing human well-being.
The acceleration of ecological decline presents an urgent threat to humanity and our collective future. In the World Economic Forum’s 2025 annual list of the top 10 global risks, five of the longer term (10-year) risks are environmental, ranging from extreme weather events to biodiversity loss, ecosystem collapse and pollution. Yet, biodiversity conservation remains vastly underfunded for the value it provides.
For decades, the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) was a leader in recognizing the crucial role of healthy ecosystems as a foundation for human well-being, championing the phrase “conservation is development” to embody its perspective. The agency invested more than $385 million in biodiversity programs in fiscal year 2023 alone on approaches including forest conservation, sustainable fisheries management and conservation enterprises to benefit local communities and ecosystems.
USAID was particularly innovative in supporting projects that blended funding from different sectors to reach common goals. For instance, the agency’s Health, Ecosystems, and Agriculture for Resilient, Thriving Societies (HEARTH) program combined resources from the food security, global health and biodiversity conservation sectors, among others, to support 17 projects across 10 countries that promoted practices like agroforestry, regenerative agriculture and responsible aquaculture that benefit both people and the planet, helping to emphasize human well-being.
USAID’s recent dismantling has led to a significant decrease in conservation financing and the loss of the agency’s leadership in promoting nature conservation as a crucial component of global development. In this vacuum, the conservation sector has an opportunity to address the current crisis by learning from and expanding on USAID’s efforts.
Read the full article about conservation emphasizing human well-being by Anila Jacob, Jessica Deichmann, and Sara Carlson at Mongabay.