BANKS DODGY DEALS CAMPAIGNS
About BankTrack
Visit us
Organisation
Our team
Our board
Guiding principles
Team up with us
Jobs at BankTrack
Our annual reports
Funding and finances
History
BankTrack in the media
Our privacy policy
Donate
2023-03-17 00:00:00
Briefing: The role of financial institutions in decarbonising the steel sector
2023-03-09 00:00:00
Dutch bank ING supports controversial pipeline to import gas from authoritarian Azerbaijan
2023-02-23 00:00:00
Financial institutions need to address steelmaking’s coal addiction
2023-02-07 00:00:00
What COP15 means for banks: meeting the Global Biodiversity Framework requires protecting Indigenous rights and divesting from harmful industries
2023-03-20 08:50:41
Who dares to finance Eni and Exxon’s dangerous Rovuma gas plans in Mozambique?
2023-03-14 14:59:00
New ING policy could spark bank shift away from financing oil and gas infrastructure
2023-02-24 13:46:14
Pego power station conversion plans halted
2022-12-14 11:08:26
HSBC announces it will no longer finance new oil and gas fields
Connect
2022-11-22 00:00:00
Banking on Thin Ice: Two years in the heat
2022-11-17 00:00:00
BankTrack Global Human Rights Benchmark 2022
2022-10-21 00:00:00
Burning forests in the name of clean energy? How banks are failing to exclude the harmful wood biomass industry from finance
2022-06-28 00:00:00
The East African Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP): Finance Risk Update No. 3
2022-04-05 00:00:00
The BankTrack Human Rights Benchmark Asia
2022-03-30 00:00:00
Banking on Climate Chaos 2022
See all publications
Sections
Banks Dodgy Deals Campaigns
Our campaigns
Banks and Climate
Banks and Human Rights
Banks and Nature
Banks and Pandemics
Our projects
Tracking the NZBA
Banks and Putin's war in Ukraine
Tracking the Equator Principles
Tracking the PRBs
Find a Better Bank
Banks and the OECD Guidelines
Media
News Publications
Fossil Banks No Thanks StopEACOP Forests & Finance Banks & Biodiversity Drop JBS Bank of Coal Don't Buy into Occupation
BankTrack
About BankTrack Visit us Organisation Our team Our board Guiding principles Team up with us Jobs at BankTrack Our annual reports Funding and finances History BankTrack in the media Our privacy policy Donate
Successes Contact BankTrack
Donate Mailing list Facebook Twitter Login
Home › BankTrack blog ›
BankTrack News

Banks and biodiversity: are banks moving towards Kunming?

As China hosts the first part of the UN Biodiversity Conference, banks are called upon to support its goals
2021-10-14 | Nijmegen
By: BankTrack
Contact:

Marília Monteiro, Forests and Biodiversity Campaigner at BankTrack

Deforestation in Central Kalimantan, Borneo, Indonesia. Photo: IndoMet in the Heart of Borneo via Flickr (CC BY 2.0)
2021-10-14 | Nijmegen
By: BankTrack
Contact:

Marília Monteiro, Forests and Biodiversity Campaigner at BankTrack

This month and next month will see two crucial events take place which will define how we deal on a global level with the unprecedented biodiversity and climate crises we are living in. The United Nations is hosting the Conferences of the Parties to the UN Convention on Biological Diversity (“the Biodiversity COP”), with the first part being convened virtually this week in Kunming, and to the Framework Convention on Climate Change (“the Climate COP”), which follows in Glasgow in November.

These events will be crucial for spurring governments to take action on these interrelated crises. But they will also provide guidance to the financial sector for the alignment of its activities with the goals and objectives of the two conventions. The Biodiversity COP is tasked with assessing the failures and reviewing the achievements of the Convention for Biological Diversity’s Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020 and deciding on a new agreement between member states to halt and reverse the extinction rate of the planet’s animals, plant species and ecosystems, to be set out in the final draft of the Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework.

As emphasized in its first draft, the Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework includes targets that directly address the role of the financial sector in ensuring the protection of global biodiversity, such as those that aim to eliminate incentives that are harmful for biodiversity and increase financial resources from all sources, including the private sector, to support biodiversity finance planning at the national levels.

Increasing and accelerating losses of critical ecosystems, like tropical rainforests and wetlands, as well as numerous animal species, have pushed governments, businesses, and financial institutions to seek effective ways to protect and restore the remaining biodiversity of the planet’s lands and seas. But what has the banking sector done to curb extinction, and ensure that the diversity of plant and animal species are protected and that natural resources are used sustainably?

The answer is short: not enough. Most banks are falling far short in properly addressing their role in financing the destruction of biodiversity through their lending portfolios – both due to a lack of robust policy frameworks and the continuous financing of harmful industries. This is despite recent bank-led initiatives and policy frameworks pointing to a future of “zero net loss of nature”, “no net loss” and “nature positive finance”. “Net-zero” – the alluring term also increasingly used by businesses setting up their climate goals – suggests that the loss of an ecosystem or fauna and flora species somewhere can be compensated by regenerating or protecting a similar ecosystem or that species somewhere else. It ignores, however, the implications of offset projects for biodiversity and the livelihoods of Indigenous Peoples and local communities. In turn, “nature positive finance” raises questions on whether the financial support to isolated initiatives aimed at nature regeneration would be enough to halt and reverse the global biodiversity loss – especially while financial flows continue to be directed to the major industry sectors driving nature destruction.

In May this year, five months ahead of the first part of the UN Biodiversity COP, BankTrack, together with other 23 civil society organizations, sent letters to 55 banks calling on them to adopt more robust measures to protect global biodiversity. These letters recommend banks adopt a “No Go” policy for high biodiversity areas, which has been set out in detail by the Banks and Biodiversity campaign, as well as introducing methodologies to measure and assess the impacts of their investment and financing activities on biodiversity, and safeguard the rights of Indigenous and traditional communities in formally, informally, or traditionally-held conserved areas.

Of these 55 banks, 15 responded: ABN AMRO, ANZ, Barclays, BNP Paribas, FirstRand Group, GLS, Goldman Sachs, HSBC, ING, Lloyds Banking Group, Morgan Stanley, NatWest, Rabobank, UBS, and Unicredit. Some addressed the recommendations but none of them made any concrete commitment to incorporate the recommendations in their frameworks ahead of the CBD COP 15.

Many banks have been categorically failing to take any meaningful action to ensure that their lending activities do not lead to the intensification of the biodiversity crisis. Major global banks continue to be key financiers of business sectors posing serious risks to global biodiversity. This can be through finance for massive infrastructure projects taking place in biodiversity hotspots, like dams disrupting rivers and watersheds, or roads cutting through rainforests; for industrial-style agriculture that negatively impacts both biodiversity and soil health; or for fossil fuels, metals and mineral extraction, as well as many other sectors with direct negative impacts on nature and the remaining global biodiversity.

While banks are not formal parties to the Kunming conference, they are key actors backing business activities driving biodiversity loss. They should, therefore, commit to support and align all their financial flows with the objectives and targets of the Convention.

Banks that wish to express their support for the Kunming process could choose this week to announce their adoption of ‘No Go’ policies that categorically exclude finance for harmful projects and business operations situated in global biodiversity hotspots. They could further explicitly commit to not financing activities on the territories of Indigenous Peoples, who protect at least 80% of global biodiversity, without obtaining their Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC). The time to stop talking and start acting on preserving what is left of the world’s biodiversity is now.

 

Banks

ABN AMRO

Netherlands
Active

ANZ

Australia
Active

Barclays

United Kingdom
Active

BNP Paribas

France
Active

FirstRand

South Africa
Active

GLS Bank

Germany
Active

Goldman Sachs

United States
Active

HSBC

United Kingdom
Active

ING

Netherlands
Active

Lloyds Banking Group

United Kingdom
Active

Morgan Stanley

United States
Active

NatWest Group

United Kingdom
Active

Rabobank

Netherlands
Active

UBS

Switzerland
Active

UniCredit

Italy
Active
Sections
Banks Policies Dodgy Deals Campaigns
Our campaigns
Banks and Climate Banks and Human Rights Banks and Nature Banks and Pandemics
Our projects
Tracking the NZBA Banks and Putin's war in Ukraine Tracking the Equator Principles Tracking the PRBs Find a Better Bank Banks and the OECD Guidelines
Media
News Publications
Fossil Banks No Thanks StopEACOP Forests & Finance Banks & Biodiversity Drop JBS Bank of Coal Don't Buy into Occupation
BankTrack
About BankTrack Visit us Organisation Our team Our board Guiding principles Team up with us Jobs at BankTrack Our annual reports Funding and finances History BankTrack in the media Our privacy policy Donate
Successes Contact BankTrack
Vismarkt 15
6511 VJ Nijmegen
The Netherlands
Tel: +31 24 324 9220
Contact@banktrack.org
Donate Mailing list Facebook Twitter
©2022 BankTrack
BankTrack is a registered charity in the Netherlands (ANBI) - RSIN 813874658
Find our privacy policy here

Stay up to date

Sign up now for all BankTrack's news


Make a comment

Your comment will be reviewed, before being posted