LLast month, the coronation of Jeff Bezos and his partner Lauren Sanchez as environmental royalty was completed. The couple were recognized for the Bezos Earth Fund’s financial contributions to the natural world at Conservation International’s glitzy annual gala in New York, with Harrison Ford, Jacinda Ardern and Shailene Woodley among others. and won the Global Visionary Award.
“Jeff and Lauren are making history not only in the total amount of their investments in nature, but also in the speed with which they do so,” said Dr. M. Sanjayan, CEO of Conservation International. $20 million grant from Bezos in 2021 For activities in the tropical Andes.
The Bezos Earth Fund, launched by the skeleton team in February 2020, will pledge $10bn (£7.9bn) of the Amazon founder’s $200bn personal fortune to fight the climate crisis and biodiversity loss by the end of the decade. We aim to donate to the cause. So far, we have published 230+ grants Worth $2 billion, funding initiatives ranging from AI environmental solutions to clean energy for underprivileged communities.
Along the way, the Bezos Earth Fund has become one of the most influential voices in the field of climate and biodiversity, and its fellows, advisors, and directors have become prominent figures in international negotiations. Its members include former British Environment Secretary Zac Goldsmith, Africa’s leading environmental activist Wanjira Mathai, and former Barack Obama adviser Paul Bodnar. Millions of dollars in grants from this foundation support dozens of leading NGOs and initiatives.
But in the climate and biodiversity arena, the atmosphere surrounding the Bezos Earth Fund has privately turned to one of growing unease. Researchers, climate policy advisors, and NGO staffers expressed concern about the level of influence the organization wields over key environmental institutions working to halt climate change and biodiversity loss. Many of them now count the Bezos Earth Fund among their largest donors. Some did not want to be named for fear of the impact on their own funds.
“We’ve seen millions of dollars being paid to conservation organizations and climate change organizations. So many people are receiving money from the Bezos Earth Fund that I think it’s really “We find this alarming. There is clearly a risk of conflict of interest,” said Holger Hofmann Riem of the Swiss NGO Go for Impact. “The reliability of the system depends on its independence.”
One climate policy expert said on condition of anonymity: “In the years since the Bezos Earth Fund began distributing large sums of money for climate change and conservation, it has established a number of major initiatives and influence over its board members.
“At this point, the Bezos Earth Fund’s huge presence in the climate and conservation space looks less like a philanthropic endeavor and more like an attempt to hijack the corporate governance system for its own benefit and purposes. start.”
Dr. Stephen Singer, Senior Advisor on Global Energy Policy at Climate Action Network International, said: “Philanthropic organizations like the Bezos Earth Fund are of fundamental importance to civil society around the world, funding interventions on major environmental and climate issues. But there are big questions when it comes to political influence.
“The Bezos Fund’s projects do not address the important issue of the fundamental climate crisis we face. They are great, but unfortunately superficial.”
A spokesperson for the Bezos Earth Fund said there was no conflict of interest and that its grants solely promote the public interest. They said the comments sought to damage the reputation of Bezos Earth Fund and its staff and that they take the accusations seriously.
MWhen intense internal conflict erupted this year at the Science-Based Targets Initiative (SBTi), one of the world’s most important climate change certifiers, everyone in the conservation and climate change world knew that their concerns had been put into practice. It is said that it has become SBTi, Received $18 million grant from Bezos is the organization responsible for assessing whether some of the world’s largest companies are decarbonizing in line with the Paris Agreement.
In April, the SBTi board unexpectedly announced plans to enable companies to meet climate targets using carbon offsets from the unregulated, voluntary indirect emissions carbon market. The move caused internal outrage. Staff and technical advisers said they had not been consulted about the announcement and warned it could open the door to greenwashing.
They say science-based processes are sidelined, large polluters are allowed to buy offsets instead of reducing their emissions, and more business-friendly policies with weaker standards are favored. He expressed concern that this may be the case. In an internal letter, dozens of SBTi staff called for the resignation of CEO Luis Fernando de Amaral and board members, including Bezos associate Iván Duque.
Since the announcement, Amaral has expressed regret over the confusion surrounding his comments and said the rules have not yet changed. But the turmoil has led to increased scrutiny of the lobbying efforts of the Bezos Earth Fund and other carbon market advocacy groups.
An SBTi spokesperson said the group regretted that the announcement “could have been misleading” and that any changes would be subject to a standard consultation process.
A month before the SBTi announcement, the Bezos Earth Fund held a two-day meeting in London, where the topic of discussion was the role of offsets in corporate insurance claims. Key figures from the offset industry were invited, many of whom have been calling on the SBTi to allow offsets to boost demand in a struggling sector. One forecast estimates that changes to the SBTi could be valuable if allowed. at least $19 billion Toward a voluntary carbon market. Several people interviewed by the Guardian expressed concern that the meeting influenced the board’s decisions.
“It’s hard not to see a connection between the London meeting and the SBTi board’s decision in the coming weeks,” said Juliet, a member of the SBTi Technical Advisory Group and a climate policy expert at the New Climate Institute. Mr. de Grandpre says.
“It’s very easy to replicate that the Bezos Foundation is funding a lot of carbon market advocacy in the United States.”
The Bezos Earth Fund strongly disputes this claim, saying it was not involved in the SBTi board’s announcement and that the London workshop had nothing to do with the SBTi offset statement. It added that support for carbon markets by SBTi board members predates this statement.
Dr. Andrew Steer, president and CEO of the Bezos Earth Fund, said the environmental standard-setting bodies it funds have shown great leadership and made decisions on their own. The suggestion that they don’t make decisions for themselves is clearly off the mark. ”
BAccording to the foundation’s website, Ezos has so far contributed at least $45m (£36m) to carbon market initiatives, including developing countries that are funding carbon credits to phase out coal. This includes efforts by former US climate envoy John Kerry to pay funds to
With many major companies struggling to meet ambitious net-zero targets, carbon market proponents argue that allowing companies to buy offsets in the short term would benefit biodiversity while still benefiting biodiversity. , which claims billions of dollars could be spent on efforts to protect rainforests, renewable energy and other decarbonization projects. and the local community.
Despite their claimed potential, offsetting schemes often do little to mitigate global warming and are widely known to have been the focus of a greenwashing crackdown by EU and UK regulators. It is being A confidential draft of a preliminary SBTi analysis obtained by the Guardian found that offsets have little effect in their current form. SBTi said its analysis, including interim findings, is not yet complete.
Many climate policy experts say companies should focus on the deep emissions cuts needed to meet the Paris Agreement, and worry that offsets will get in the way.
“Just a few years after its launch, the Bezos Earth Fund has become one of the most influential funders in the carbon markets space, and is critical in providing market advocacy organizations with resources to advance the role of carbon markets. He has played an important role.” There is a real risk that overly pro-market funding will drown out the more critical voices that bring the necessary balance to the debate,” said Sam van den, policy director at NGO Carbon Market Watch. Plath says.
A Bezos Earth Fund spokesperson said the organization recognizes quality issues in carbon markets and its grants are aimed at improving standards with clear benefits for indigenous peoples and local communities. The Bezos Earth Fund disputes that the funding is disproportionate.
SBTi is known for its rigorous independence and continually updates its ratings of companies’ claims. EasyJet, Microsoft and Walmart are among dozens of companies whose net-zero commitments have been delisted by the SBTi in recent months for failing to set out long-term targets.
Kaya Axelsson, a researcher at Oxford Net Zero, said: Nature magazine’s letter opposing SBTi’s announcementstate that organizational independence is essential to highlight where the real environmental work is taking place.
“SBTi plays an important role in advising companies on climate action,” she says. “Without that, or anything like it, companies may set goals that look good but fall far short of the temperature goals that will result in a safe and livable climate. Voluntary efforts such as these are vulnerable to the acquisition of special interests, and companies can choose to reject them if they find it difficult to achieve their goals. Ultimately, this should be the role of the government. be.”
An SBTi spokesperson said the group has a conflict of interest policy on its website and has multiple diverse stakeholders with different views.
Find more coverage of extinction ages and follow Biodiversity Reporter here phoebe weston and patrick greenfield For all the latest news and features, visit X
