Nature Positive: More than just a slogan

by National Campaigns Director, Amelia Young

Last week in Sydney, on Gadigal Country, the world’s first ever ‘nature positive summit’ was held.

The ICC was awash with more than 1,000 delegates from across the continent and the Pacific region, each concerned one way or another with ‘nature positivity’.

Throughout the course of the summit, one of the architects of ‘nature positive’, Marco Lambertini, emphasised that nature positive is not just a slogan. He repeated that the definition, and substance, of ‘nature positive’ really matters.

So when the nation’s environment minister, Tanya Plibersek, addressed the summit, and talked up the Albanese government’s intentions to be world-leading in legislating nature positive, it was concerning to hear her quote a definition that differs from the established and internationally accepted definition.

Under the globally recognised definition of nature positive, there are three components to nature positive: to halt and reverse nature loss, to increase the health and abundance of nature, and to recover thriving ecosystems.

The internationally recognised baseline to measure the reversal of nature loss, and the increase in diversity and resilience of species, is 2020.

And the timeline to recover nature by, so that nature continues to be the life support the planet needs, is 2050.

In her keynote speech to the Summit, Minister Plibersek defined nature positive as “an improvement in the diversity, abundance, resilience and integrity of ecosystems from a baseline.”

Worryingly, this definition, which the government is currently seeking to legislate through its nature positive bills, narrows the intent, scope, and ambition of what ‘nature positive’ actually means.

And it is out of step with internationally recognised baselines, and timelines—in fact, there currently aren’t any in the bills.

Minister Plibersek described ‘nature positive’ as a ‘rallying cry’. A resounding call for nature, she said, in the same way net zero is a ‘rallying call’ for climate.

Yet ‘nature positive’ isn’t just a slogan. And a ‘rallying cry’ that isn’t at its heart aligned with the substance of credible nature positivity risks ringing hollow.