African protected and conserved areas received highest funding for biodiversity conservation between 2014 and 2024: Report

Biodiversity, the variety of life on Earth, is fundamental to human well-being, providing essential ecosystem services like clean air, water, pollination, and climate regulation. The recent report highlighting that African protected and conserved areas received 47% of all global funding for biodiversity conservation between 2014 and 2024, yet remain 'grossly underfunded,' presents a critical paradox with far-reaching implications. This situation underscores the immense scale of the challenge in safeguarding the planet's natural heritage, particularly in regions rich in biodiversity but often constrained by economic and developmental pressures.

**Background Context and Historical Perspective:**

Africa is a continent of extraordinary biodiversity, home to iconic wildlife, vast forests, and unique ecosystems. Many of the world's biodiversity hotspots, areas with high concentrations of endemic species facing significant habitat loss, are located in Africa. The global recognition of the need for biodiversity conservation gained significant momentum with the 1992 Rio Earth Summit, which led to the creation of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). The CBD, which India is a signatory to, established global targets for biodiversity conservation, including the Aichi Biodiversity Targets (2010-2020) and the more recent Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (adopted in December 2022). These frameworks emphasize the establishment and effective management of protected areas (PAs) and other effective area-based conservation measures (OECMs) as cornerstones of conservation efforts. The period of 2014-2024 falls within the ambit of these global commitments, making the funding trends highly relevant.

**The Funding Paradox: What Happened?**

The report indicates that African protected and conserved areas attracted nearly half of all global biodiversity conservation funding over the past decade. This seemingly large share, however, masks a deeper issue: the sheer magnitude of financial resources required to effectively manage and protect these vast and often threatened ecosystems. The 'grossly underfunded' status suggests that the costs associated with patrolling against poaching, habitat restoration, community engagement, scientific research, infrastructure development, and climate change adaptation far outstrip the available funds. This funding gap is exacerbated by various factors, including persistent poverty, political instability in some regions, and the increasing pressures from human population growth, agricultural expansion, and illegal wildlife trade.

**Key Stakeholders Involved:**

Several key stakeholders are involved in this complex funding landscape. **African national governments** are primary custodians, responsible for policy formulation, legal frameworks, and on-the-ground management of protected areas. **International organizations** like the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), and the Global Environment Facility (GEF) play crucial roles in channeling funds, providing technical assistance, and setting global agendas. **Donor countries and philanthropic organizations** provide significant financial contributions, often through bilateral aid or multilateral funds. **Non-governmental organizations (NGOs)**, both international (e.g., WWF, Conservation International) and local, are vital for implementing conservation projects, advocacy, and community outreach. Finally, **local communities** living around protected areas are indispensable stakeholders; their livelihoods are often intertwined with these ecosystems, and their participation is critical for the long-term success of conservation initiatives.

**Significance for India:**

This report holds significant relevance for India, a megadiverse country that faces similar challenges in biodiversity conservation. India, with its rich array of wildlife and ecosystems, including 4 biodiversity hotspots (Himalaya, Indo-Burma, Western Ghats, Sundaland), also struggles with adequate funding for its extensive network of national parks, wildlife sanctuaries, and tiger reserves. India is a signatory to numerous international conventions, including the CBD, CITES (Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora), and the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands. The findings from Africa highlight that even substantial global funding might be insufficient if not aligned with the actual needs on the ground. This provides a crucial lesson for India to rigorously assess its own conservation funding gaps and explore diverse financing mechanisms. Furthermore, the report underscores the importance of South-South cooperation, where India can share its experiences and learn from African nations in areas like anti-poaching strategies, community-based conservation, and sustainable tourism.

**Constitutional and Policy References in India:**

India has a robust legal and constitutional framework for environmental protection and biodiversity conservation. **Article 48A** of the Directive Principles of State Policy mandates that "the State shall endeavour to protect and improve the environment and to safeguard the forests and wild life of the country." Furthermore, **Article 51A(g)**, a Fundamental Duty, states that it shall be the duty of every citizen of India "to protect and improve the natural environment including forests, lakes, rivers and wild life, and to have compassion for living creatures." Key legislative instruments include the **Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972**, which provides for the protection of wild animals, birds, and plants and the establishment of a network of protected areas. The **Biological Diversity Act, 2002**, enacted to give effect to the CBD, focuses on conservation of biological diversity, sustainable use of its components, and fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from the use of biological resources. India also has a National Biodiversity Authority (NBA) and various National Wildlife Action Plans to guide conservation efforts.

**Future Implications:**

The continued underfunding of biodiversity conservation in Africa, despite significant inflows, has dire future implications. It risks undermining global efforts to halt biodiversity loss, achieve the targets of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, and meet several Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly SDG 15 (Life on Land). Future strategies must focus on innovative financing mechanisms, such as debt-for-nature swaps, green bonds, carbon credits, and increased private sector engagement. There is a need for greater transparency and efficiency in fund utilization, coupled with capacity building for local institutions. Integrating conservation with sustainable development goals, ensuring benefit-sharing with local communities, and addressing the root causes of biodiversity loss (like poverty and unsustainable resource use) are crucial. The global community must recognize that investing in biodiversity is not just an environmental imperative but an economic and social necessity, essential for global stability and resilience in the face of climate change and other planetary crises. This report serves as a stark reminder that more concerted and strategic efforts are required to bridge the persistent funding gap and secure the future of Earth's biodiversity.