Your business is operating on a 30:1 deficit you likely haven't accounted for. For every dollar the world spends helping nature, it spends thirty dollars harming it.
The UNEP State of Finance for Nature report just dropped the headline: $7 trillion in nature-negative finance flows annually, compared to just $200 billion in nature-based solutions (NbS). This isn't just an environmental crisis; it's the largest unmanaged financial liability in history.
the maintenance bill for planet earth
Think of nature as your company's most critical infrastructure. The report calls NbS investment the "maintenance bill" for keeping natural systems functional. Currently, we are defaulting on that bill at a massive scale.
When a utility company ignores maintenance on its grid, the result is catastrophic failure. When the global economy ignores the maintenance bill for the water cycles, soil health, and climate stability it depends on, the result is the same—just on a larger balance sheet.
why traditional finance is falling behind
The report identifies a critical gap: we have plenty of ways to track damage (insurance, offsets) but almost no mechanisms for proactive protection.
| Metric | Value | The Reality |
|---|---|---|
| Nature-Negative Finance | $7 Trillion | 140x larger than private NbS investment |
| NbS Finance | $200 Billion | 82% is still public funding |
| 2030 Investment Needed | $542 Billion | A 2.7x increase from current levels |
Private finance represents only 18% ($35 billion) of total NbS flows. Why? Because most "nature finance" instruments are built for charity or compliance, not for capital allocation.
the ensurance solution: from liability to asset
This 30:1 ratio represents the greatest market opportunity of our generation. As 730+ TNFD-adopting institutions (representing $22.4 trillion AUM) begin to disclose their nature dependencies, they will need more than just "offsets." They will need ensurance.
Ensurance fills the exact white space identified in the UNEP report: a proactive mechanism for ecosystem integrity.
- Proactive vs. Reactive: Unlike insurance that pays after the flood, ensurance funds the watershed protection that prevents the flood.
- Cost-Effectiveness: The report notes that protection is the most cost-effective intervention. Ensurance captures this efficiency by pricing protection into the asset layer.
- Verified Outcomes: By moving nature instruments onchain, we solve the integrity crisis that saw voluntary carbon markets decline by 57% in 2024.
the bottom line
The $7 trillion nature-negative flow is a signal of a system in transition. For corporations and utilities, the choice is simple: continue funding the 30:1 deficit and wait for the system to fail, or start paying the maintenance bill through proactive ensurance.