Lessons from South Africa: using tax incentives for protected areas and getting a well deserved award

I was delighted to hear that Candice Stevens (from BirdLife South Africa) and the South African Government have received (as shown in the image below) a Special Commendation in the UNDP‘s inaugural global Pathfinder Award for their unique Fiscal Benefits Project. The award ceremony was held yesterday during  the Convention on Biological Diversity Conference of the Parties (CBD COP 14) in Egypt.

South Africa is recognised as one of the world’s 17 mega-diverse countries and has identified protected area expansion as a key tool to safeguarding its incredible biodiversity and ecosystems essential for people and the economy. Approximately 75% of South Africa is held in private ownership so landowners bear the responsibility of managing protected areas and often face heavy financial commitments as a result. The Fiscal Benefits Project was launched in 2015 to test biodiversity tax incentives as a financial benefit for landowners declaring protected areas. This began with the introduction of a new tax incentive into legislation and the impact of this incentive was tested at pilot sites across the country. One such site was the Kaingo Private Game Reserve which is full of endemic plants and home to the “Big Five”. Without effective management protected areas fail to achieve what they were created for, so by paying less tax the landowner was able to mobilise additional resources to better managed the reserve, benefiting both South Africa’s biodiversity and its economy. The scheme is hugely innovative and the complex process required support and collaboration from numerous stakeholders including government, protected area implementers, landowners and communities.

It's inspiring to see such creativity and innovation in conservation.  We can learn a lot from this experience.  In the UK we have, thankfully, moved away from most of the environmentally perverse grants and tax incentives that accelerated habitat loss for example those that supported planting trees on precious peatlands or those championing fossil fuels.  In recent years fiscal tools have been used a little more to support the environment with new carbon taxes, the landfill tax and the popular single use plastic bag levy.  This is a good start but there is scope for much more ambitious green fiscal reforms to deal with pollution (e.g. pesticides), incentivise conservation action (e.g. inheritance tax reliefs, conservation covenants) and to compensate for biodiversity lost to development through the concept of ‘net gain’.  Additionally the principle of providing government subsidy payments for the delivery of public goods, if applied properly, could transform the environmental performance of UK agriculture.    I know my colleagues here will take inspiration from the great work and success of Candice and her colleagues at Birdlife South Africa, in turning some of these evolving ideas into reality.