From Green to Blue: How the IUCN Green List Can Enable Blue Finance in Latin America

Latin America is an oceanic and coastal region by vocation and by necessity. Its marine–coastal ecosystems sustain livelihoods, protect infrastructure and communities from storms and erosion, and contribute to climate resilience. However, they continue to face growing pressures (for example, overfishing and illegal fishing, pollution, port expansion, and unplanned tourism) and, above all, a persistent gap between commitments and implementation capacity. 

In addition, climate change—global in scale but with local impacts—is one of the greatest threats to the health of marine–coastal ecosystems, affecting critical habitats and driving biodiversity loss. This erodes the ability of ecosystems to continue providing fundamental services for food security, climate stability, ocean-based value chains, and the cultural development of local communities.

That gap becomes critical when viewed through the lens of the 2030 Agenda: the Kunming–Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework states that by 2030, at least 30% of terrestrial areas, inland waters, and marine–coastal zones must be effectively conserved and managed, with connectivity and equitable governance (the 30x30 target). 

In parallel, countries’ Nationally Determined Contributions and their National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans are raising the bar: it is no longer enough to declare targets; they must be implemented and results must be demonstrated.

In this context, the International Union for Conservation of Nature Green List Standard is not a “decorative label.” It is a technical framework that strengthens the quality of protected and conserved areas through criteria on good governance, sound design and planning, effective management, and conservation outcomes. 

From a financial perspective, this matters because blue finance—public, private, and blended—is shifting toward investments with lower risk, greater traceability, and higher credibility in delivering results.

1) The real issue: it is not just “lack of money,” but lack of conditions to mobilize it

Many countries have diagnostics and clear priorities for ecosystems such as mangroves, seagrasses, coral reefs, and coastal wetlands; even so, these priorities rarely translate into coherent strategies, financial instruments, or investment-ready portfolios. Three bottlenecks repeat across the region:

• Financing gaps and dependence on public budgets: marine–coastal priorities are often under-costed and underfunded; private capital still does not move at scale.
• Fragmented governance and misaligned incentives: dispersed mandates (environment, fisheries, finance, transport, tourism, planning), harmful subsidies, and incomplete regulatory frameworks hinder sustainable investments (including blue carbon, where applicable).
• Low “bankability” of proposals: ideas and projects abound, but few have robust design, safeguards, clear governance, monitoring, reporting and verification, and risk–return structures that meet investor requirements.

In short: there is demand for financing, but the supply of financeable projects remains limited. It is essential to recognize nature-related risks and dependencies in productive sectors; a prosperous economy depends on healthy ecosystems and well-managed conservation areas. 

For financial sustainability, ideas and projects need to mature through blended finance and technical assistance; it is possible to close gaps to meet quality standards and manage financial risks to access banking and investment resources.

2) Where the Green List fits: an enabler to reduce risk and build confidence

Blue finance increasingly requires verifiable signals of governance and management capacity. The Green List provides a clear and comparable architecture: 4 components, 17 criteria, and more than 50 indicators defining what “success” means in conservation and management.

a) Verifiable governance (institutional risk)

The Green List requires evidence of legitimacy, transparency, participation, and responsiveness, helping reduce institutional risks and sustain policy and agreement continuity over time.

b) Effective management (operational risk)

The standard emphasizes planning, monitoring, threat management, and measurement of success, reducing the likelihood of operational failures—especially relevant in marine–coastal zones with high transaction and monitoring costs.

c) Demonstrable results (performance risk)

It requires showing conservation results and associated benefits, strengthening credibility and enabling future investment.

3) The Green List and the new financial conversation: traceability, MRV, nature-related disclosures, and climate-related disclosures

The financial sector is rapidly integrating nature considerations into decision-making. 

The Taskforce on Nature-related Financial Disclosures encourages companies and institutions to assess, report, and act on their dependencies, impacts, risks, and opportunities related to nature. 

The Taskforce on Climate-related Financial Disclosures guides the disclosure of climate-related risks and opportunities.

This raises demand for:

• Consistent data
• Monitoring, Reporting and Verification (MRV)
• Evidence of effective and equitable management

The Green List can serve as a bridge between the language of conservation and the language of financial risk, helping territories and agencies engage with financiers with greater clarity and credibility.

4) A concrete opportunity to meet 30x30, Nationally Determined Contributions, and National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans

The 30x30 target emphasizes effectiveness and equitable governance, not just hectares. The region has made progress in coverage, but the challenge remains: improving management quality and governance.

The Green List can add value in three areas:

•  Improving the performance of protected areas and other effective area-based conservation measures, aligning management with national biodiversity goals.
• Strengthening credibility to access climate and biodiversity finance.
• Organizing portfolios and investments, prioritizing sites with enabling conditions and a mature, verifiable pipeline.

5) Examples from South America

• Colombia: sites such as Gorgona and Malpelo are already on the Green List, sending a strong signal of robust management standards in areas of high biodiversity.
• Ecuador: the Galápagos National Park has begun its Green List journey, committing to international management standards.

Conclusion

Latin America does not face a problem of ambition, but of financeable implementation. The Green List can act as a strategic enabler: raising quality, reducing risks, and translating marine–coastal priorities into more credible conversations with financiers—contributing to 30x30, Nationally Determined Contributions, and National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans, with a focus on effectiveness.