In the final part of this series of posts, I look at the rational economic case for funding overseas.
The economic argument
Under 3% of UK philanthropic spending goes to environmental causes. As we’ve seen, this means that only around 1% goes to international environmental causes, which is, as we’ve also seen, where the greatest needs are. Yet conservation is cheaper – often by many orders of magnitude – in developing countries.
Conservation costs vary geographically and are cheapest in developing countries meaning that we can save the most biodiversity for the least amount of money in these places.
From ending deforestation in the Amazon (achievable in our lifetimes) to restoring fish stocks (alleviating food insecurity across the developing world), to protecting vast areas of the Pacific, there are some huge opportunities out there for international conservation. So why are they not being taken?
The simple answer is: it’s difficult, which is why Synchronicity Earth is developing its own due diligence process. In so doing, we hope lower the barriers for people who want to give but are concerned about accountability and success. We also hope to raise awareness of the need and highlight important gaps in conservation.