Bertarelli Summer2024 FINAL - Flipbook - Page 49
ECO NO M ICS
|
RE W I L D I NG
from using the oceans and where is the money going?
We’ve had to do some sleuthing to be able to identify
the economy that’s linked to the ocean directly, to be
able to say who is using it as an operating space, or as
an input to their production. And then you start to see
whether there are “big fish” in the ocean economy, or
the blue economy as some call it. And it turns out, just
as in the global economy, we have a few key players
driving most of the economy in the ocean, too.
About 60 percent of all revenue tied to the ocean
is generated by 100 companies. So the question then
becomes, how do we tap into that capital? One way, I
think, is through better reporting and transparency to
really show these companies how dependent they are
on the ocean and that it’s in their best business interest to preserve it.
When there’s a consumer
watching you, there’s more risk
in not investing in biodiversity.
expensive than, say, putting solar panels on a building or other kinds of carbon credits. You need quick,
flexible capital to develop these projects and build the
market—and blue carbon just doesn’t have that.
Do you think that more positive marketing—the benefits of being seen to make a difference, the fear of
being seen to be a force for bad by consumers or investors—could drive more action by companies?
Verdun: It’s important to consider where the most
leverage lies. So consumer sentiment is definitely one
factor—consumers generally want to know that their
fish was sustainably caught, or that the product they are
using doesn’t somehow do damage to the ocean. And
institutional investors can also have leverage, whether
its banks setting new agreements for getting a loan
that makes ocean restoration a priority, or setting new
rules for companies trying to list on a stock exchange.
These are all pinch points that could make these companies start to think it’s a financial risk not to invest in
biodiversity.
So are biodiversity credits easier to benchmark?
Schaefer: Yes, I think because they are tangible and
more transparent than what you can achieve easily in
the carbon market. And also, they’re useful because
everyone is moved by the creatures we can see. The
sharks, the turtles, you name it—that provides an emotional connection, and that connection is what will
ultimately help drive the corporate world to invest in
restoration. It’s good marketing: You can show you are
having a real impact.
How have big data and AI innovations transformed this
space? Is that going to be key to moving the needle on
investment in biodiversity?
Schaefer: Yes I think so, because we suddenly have data
available we couldn’t have 20 years ago or even 10 years
ago. And with AI, we can screen and sort the data in seconds. We can also now monitor threats like poaching,
boats, or fishing activities remotely and in real-time,
and that really allows us to act quickly to preserve our
work. The same is true of tracking biodiversity. I believe
that in five years, we will know so much more about
biodiversity than we do now thanks to these tools.
Are there any sectors of the economy that you think are
more likely to see that reputational risk than others?
Schaefer: I think the cruise ship industry has a huge
reputational risk at stake. We’ve seen a lot of cruise liners become interested in investing part of their profits
back into conservation—and for good reason, because
they want to profit from tourists interested in visiting
beautiful coastal areas. And there’s the seafood market, where, especially in luxury seafood, there is some
reputational risk at stake. I think when there’s a consumer watching you, there’s more risk in not investing
in biodiversity.
And does that help us know who needs to pay to conserve biodiversity?
Verdun: That’s the hope. One of the things we have
been trying to figure out is who is benefitting the most
47
