Nature-adjusted capital: turning ecosystem accounts into investible cashflows
Session Description
Rebalance Earth ran this session as a role-play exercise, describing it as a close mirror of their own day-to-day investment process. Attendees split into four groups, each acting as the investment team for a billion-dollar natural capital fund, and were given a real, publicly listed Scottish nature restoration project (peatland, native woodland, river catchment, and marine) to evaluate against Rebalance Earth's four-return framework: financial, nature impact, social impact, and inspirational value. The four projects deliberately spanned very different scales and levels of maturity, from a half-million-pound peatland project with credits already being retired, to a £50-100 million marine project resting on a mechanism (marine net gain) not expected to materialize within this Parliament. Each group assessed their project's financial case, risks, and revenue mechanisms, then reported back a recommendation to invest, invest with conditions, or hold off, which Eoin and Max compared against Rebalance Earth's own internal view of the same four projects.
Speakers
Eoin Murray, CIO, Rebalance Earth
Max Welch, Technology & AI Analyst, Rebalance Earth
Watch the Session Recording
Key Takeaways
Rebalance Earth's investment committee passed on all four projects presented, while continuing to monitor them. In the room, two groups recommended investing with conditions and two recommended holding off.
The main blocker cited across projects was an unclear or unproven financial case: uncertain exit routes, immature revenue mechanisms, and buyers not yet confirmed for carbon or biodiversity credits.
The four projects ranged from a £0.5-2 million peatland project with credits already being retired, to a £50-100 million marine project dependent on marine net gain, a mechanism not expected to be in place this Parliament.
On the river catchment project, the salmon industry stood to benefit but had not yet contributed finance.
Reputational and social value (community engagement, high-profile species, corporate storytelling) was raised as a strength across projects, though no pricing model for it currently exists.
Eco-tourism was raised as a potential revenue stream but was not assessed for ROI in any group.
On the marine project, attendees asked whether a forthcoming salt marsh carbon code would affect the investment case. The response was that it could increase corporate interest, with revenue still expected 5-10+ years out. [Note: session referenced a code launch around June 16, worth verifying date/status before publishing.]
Rebalance Earth noted that current global subsidies harmful to nature are estimated at roughly £7.1 trillion, against roughly £220 billion in subsidies benefiting nature.
