Foundation Pledges $90 Million to Push Incentives for Conservation

The Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation said Thursday it will devote at least $90 million to use financial-market pressure to preserve natural resources, bringing together businesses, investors and environmentalists.

It has an additional $40 million in its back pocket to be used in case of unforeseen challenges caused by unpredictable markets, the grant maker noted.

Too often, environmentalists and businesses demonize each other in drawn-out courtroom battles, Harvey Fineberg, Moore’s president, said in an interview with The Chronicle. A market-based approach, in which companies are provided financial incentives to do good, allows traditional adversaries to find common ground, he said.

The new strategy follows a $100 million conservation plan, announced Monday, to create new protected zones in the Amazon and encourage the support of national parks in the region.

While Moore, which controls $6.6 billion in assets, has used market incentives in its conservation work before, the new grants signal an increased interest in the approach.

“This core strategy is an important building block for sustainable conservation into the future,” said Dr. Fineberg, who took over at Moore in October 2014. “This is a new era.”

Stoking Good Practices

The grants, most of which will be paid out over the next two years, are designed to promote changes in agriculture and aquaculture practices to reduce deforestation, and protect the oceans. The foundation will also encourage financial institutions to invest in food companies with eco-friendly methods of production. Moore will work with a different group of grantees in its agriculture, seafood, and financial markets work to provide incentives for businesses to adopt sustainable practices.

For instance, within Moore’s Conservation and Finance Markets Initiative, the grant maker will support the World Business Council for Sustainable Development, the World Wildlife Fund, and Ceres, a group that works with investors and Fortune 500 companies to commit to clean-energy policies. Moore and its grantees plan to broadcast the harmful effects of large-scale food production with the hope that customers and investors will reward companies that preserve natural habitats.

In the Forests and Agriculture Markets Initiative, Moore will work with the National Wildlife Federation, the Nature Conservancy, and the World Wildlife Fund to get multinational companies to set standards that dictate forest-conservation practices in areas where they purchase beef and soy. The goal is to use the market might of large companies to encourage good practices among smaller suppliers in the Amazon, Cerrado, and Chaco regions of South America. Similarly, FishWise, Seafood Watch, Sustainable Fisheries Partnership, World Wildlife Fund, and the New Venture Fund will work to provide financial incentives for the adoption of sustainable fishing practices.

Several other foundations have taken an interest in market-driven conservation. Among larger private grant makers, for instance, the Walton Family Foundation works to put financial pressure on fishermen who overfish. It has also urged farmers to minimize pollution run-off from their fields.

The David and Lucile Packard Foundation is working to get a large majority of U.S. and Canadian retailers to strengthen their commitment to sustainable seafood by purchasing seafood that is certified by a third party or assessed by a scientifically based rating system.

A Light Touch

Aileen Lee, who is leading the effort for Moore, said global population growth and richer, more protein-based diets have put severe stress on natural resources. Commercial agriculture, she said, causes half of all forest loss and accounts for nearly 30 percent of greenhouse-gas emissions.

Working with groups that approach the production and distribution of food from different vantage points requires a fine touch, Ms. Lee said. Sometimes it is necessary to nudge partners to do something they aren’t accustomed to, she added. Heavy-handedness can backfire.

“Collaborations won’t work well if they remain purely funder forced, and we have to be careful not to push groups,” she said.

Half of the $90 million will go to subgrantees. Also, the foundation has reserved $40 million in contingency funds, a practice several grant makers are adopting.

As a general matter, Ms. Lee said, it is important for grant makers to set aside funds for “adaptive management.”

That’s even more important with grants that depend on a market trigger, according to Ms. Lee.

“Global supply chains and commodity market dynamics can change quickly,” she said, “and we need to be in a position to allow our grantees to respond accordingly.”