Razed forests, collapsing fisheries and vanishing pollinators rarely register as national security threats. Yet recognition is growing that nature loss poses serious risks to political stability. 

"Nature is a foundation of national security," authors from the UK Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) wrote in a recent assessment that draws a direct line between protecting critical ecosystems and the future stability of a country. 

Biodiversity loss threatens the water, food, clean air, and critical resources on which human societies depend. And the risk isn't just from local nature decline. The report warns that six critical ecosystem regions — including the Amazon Rainforest — could collapse by mid-century, threatening the security of the UK and other countries. 

That's because collapse of critical ecosystems even far away disrupts a delicate balance that can "drive displacement of millions, change global weather patterns, increase global food and water scarcity, and drive geopolitical competition for remaining resources," said the report.

Among the most immediate risks is food insecurity. More than a third of the world's ocean fish stocks are already overfished, while more than three-quarters of global food crops depend on pollinators that are vanishing due to intensive agriculture. As ecosystems weaken, supply shocks become more likely — and more politically destabilizing. 

The vulnerability is acute in the UK, which imports 40% of its food and does not have enough agricultural land to support the nation's current dietary patterns. In the US, between 75% to 90% of the country's seafood comes from imports. In an increasingly volatile world, disruptions abroad can translate into price spikes and shortages at home. 

"Protecting and restoring ecosystems improves food system and societal resilience to shocks," wrote the DEFRA.

Swapping stocks and shares for investing in nature

The challenge of protecting nature and mitigating security risks is financial as much as ecological. For economically vulnerable countries facing heavy debt burdens, the short-term revenue from logging and resource extraction can be difficult to resist. 

​​​The world collectively spends US$7.3 trillion (€6.2 trillion) on activities that harm nature, 30 times more money than it spends on protection, according to the United Nations Environment Program. 
 
What's needed is a dramatic inversion in spending, environmental advocates say. Enter debt-for-nature swaps, an increasingly popular financial tool aimed at unlocking new capital to protect vital ecosystems.

The idea dates back to the 1980s. A creditor and a country exchange debt for commitments to protect nature. The country gets its debt restructured or canceled on the condition that some of those savings are spent on conservation programs.

​​In the early days, the creditor was either a conservation NGO or a government, and the deals were relatively small. ​​

The first swap took place in 1987 between Conservation International and Bolivia. The nonprofit bought some of Bolivia's debt, so that the country could spend more money to protect the Beni Biosphere Reserve in the Amazon River basin.

Despite domestic concerns over sovereignty and infringement on Indigenous lands, the swap helped strengthen protection for forest reserves and spark a wave of similar debt-for-nature deals across Latin America. 

More recently, a 2021 swap in Belize helped th​​e country reduce its ballooning debt burden, ​​while funneling millions in savings into managing fisheries and marine conservation.

"If you protect certain areas of the ocean, they act as an incubator for fish stocks elsewhere," said Gaia Larsen, who oversees climate finance for developing nations at research nonprofit World Resources Institute.

As fish populations decline globally, such protections may prove essential for keeping food on plates. More than 3 billion people rely on seafood as a major source of protein.

A new era of private funding for nature protection 

For private investors, the appeal is bond-like returns. Legal & General, the UK's largest asset manager, recently pledged $1 billion to new debt-for-nature swaps, the firm told DW in an emailed statement.

"We believe these transactions offer attractive risk‑return potential while supporting communities and ecosystems that are fundamental to global economic resilience," said Senior Investment Manager Jake Harper. 

When big financial institutions, for instance, make significant investments, it's a positive signal to others considering such swaps, says Adam Tomasek, who heads the Debt for Nature Coalition of conservation NGOs and philanthropies. 

"Their commitment supercharges the ability of any of these transactions to take shape with certainty earlier on in the process," Tomasek told DW. 

And debt-for-nature swaps are just one financial tool to address the world's biodiversity collective action problem. 

A​ ​Brazilian initiative called the Tropical Forest Forever Facility aims to redirect investments from wealthier nations — similar to debt swaps — into countries that promise to protect their rainforests. 

"Foreign assistance and overseas development assistance really is directly tied to national security. And I think that in some places, you're starting to see more of a recognition of that," Tomasek said. 

Cascading threats linked to nature loss

Beyond food security, protecting critical ecosystems can set off a chain reaction, slowing climate change, reducing the pressures that drive migration and shoring up vulnerable economies.

Forests and oceans function as massive carbon sinks, absorbing greenhouse gases that would otherwise accumulate in the atmosphere. By limiting warming, they help prevent droughts, crop failures, and extreme weather that drive instability.

The human cost of nature loss is staggering. ​By 2023, more than 90 million forcibly displaced people were living in countries or territories experiencing food crises, according to the International Organization for Migration.

"You want stable countries with an ability to maintain strong economies and act as effective players in the world," Larsen said. "And not be in need of assistance or on the verge of emergency, where the countries that provide this finance would have to then step in anyway."

The UK government has been blunt about what that emergency would look like in practice, identifying a series of cascading risks from ecosystem collapse: organized crime groups attempting to exploit scarce resources, political polarization and even military escalation. 

"It's a smart investment for any government to make because you are essentially buying down the likelihood of risks having an impact on your own domestic security or your domestic agendas," Tomasek said.

Edited by: Tamsin Walker and Jennifer Collins