Puzzles, Tensions, and the Research Agenda for Biodiversity Finance

ABSTRACT Biodiversity loss is a systemic financial risk whose channels are more complex and less analytically tractable than climate change. Where climate finance has agreed on standardized measures, disclosure regimes, and, increasingly, on climate risk's role in the pricing of assets, biodiversity finance remains conceptually fragile and empirically under‐identified. This paper distills the issues of this emerging field into four recurring tensions that block intellectual and practical progress: (i) measurement and taxonomy, (ii) pricing and transmission, (iii) systemic and corporate finance, and (iv) policy, disclosure, and market infrastructure. We frame each as a puzzle, articulate the contradictions, and end with eight consolidated and high‐priority Research Questions (RQs) . We tabulate the questions based on impact (the extent to which an answer would meaningfully advance understanding or policy relevance) and tractability (the degree to which current data and methods make an answer feasible), along with concise commentary. The throughline is clear: until measurement can join markets, biodiversity finance will remain hobbled.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Financial Review
Published
2025-11-04
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/fire.70039
Primary Topic
Environmental Conservation and Management
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Puzzles, Tensions, and the Research Agenda for Biodiversity Finance

Brian M. Lucey, Samuel A. Vigne
Financial Review
Environmental Conservation and Management
article

Puzzles, Tensions, and the Research Agenda for Biodiversity Finance

Brian M. Lucey, Samuel A. Vigne
article en

Abstract

ABSTRACT Biodiversity loss is a systemic financial risk whose channels are more complex and less analytically tractable than climate change. Where climate finance has agreed on standardized measures, disclosure regimes, and, increasingly, on climate risk's role in the pricing of assets, biodiversity finance remains conceptually fragile and empirically under‐identified. This paper distills the issues of this emerging field into four recurring tensions that block intellectual and practical progress: (i) measurement and taxonomy, (ii) pricing and transmission, (iii) systemic and corporate finance, and (iv) policy, disclosure, and market infrastructure. We frame each as a puzzle, articulate the contradictions, and end with eight consolidated and high‐priority Research Questions (RQs) . We tabulate the questions based on impact (the extent to which an answer would meaningfully advance understanding or policy relevance) and tractability (the degree to which current data and methods make an answer feasible), along with concise commentary. The throughline is clear: until measurement can join markets, biodiversity finance will remain hobbled.

Financial Review
Shanghai Lixin University of Accounting and Finance (CN), Trinity College Dublin (IE), Libera Università Internazionale degli Studi Sociali Guido Carli (IT)
Openalex Percentile: Top 57%
Environmental Conservation and Management
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.