Unsustainable finance in the blue economy : where does the money come from? : recommendations report.
Date: 2020-11-18
Institutions: Executive Agency for Small and Medium-sized Enterprises
Subjects: degradation of the environment, economic activity, economic growth, environmental impact, environmental policy, financing method, integrated maritime policy, investment policy, investment promotion, maritime economy, report, sustainable development

Unsustainable Finance in the 
Blue Economy: Where Does 
the Money Come From? 
Recommendations Report 

Written  by: Ecorys, Finance for Impact, Pescares and Habile 
September 2020 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EUROPEAN  COMMISSION 

Ex e cutive Agency for Sm all and Medium-sized Enterprises (EASME) 
Unit A3 — European Maritime and Fisheries Fund 

E-mail:  EASME-EMFF@ec.europa.eu   

European  Commission 
B-1049 Brussels 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Unsustainable Finance in the 
Blue Economy: Where Does 
the Money Come From? 
Recommendations Report 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Europe Direct is a service to help you find answers  
to your questions about the European Union. 

Freephone number (*): 

00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11 

(*) 

The  information given is free, as are most calls (though some operators, phone  

box es or hotels may charge you). 

LEGAL NOTICE 

This document has been prepared for the European Commission howe ver it re flects the vie ws only of the 
authors, and the Commission cannot be held re sponsible for any use which m ay be made of the  information 
contained therein. 

More  information on the European Union is available on the Internet (http://www.e uropa.eu). 

Lux embourg: Publications O ffice  of the European Union, 2020 

ISBN 978-92-9460-268-8 
doi: 10.2826/506535 

© Europe an Union, 2020 

Executive Agency for Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (EASME)  
European Maritime  and Fisheries Fund 

2020 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
RECOMMENDATIONS REPORT

UNSUSTAINABLE FINANCE  
IN THE BLUE ECONOMY: 
WHERE DOES THE MONEY 
COME FROM?

PROJECT: UFBE

COUNTRY: EU

CONTRACTOR: ASAP

INVEST: 2 500  M €

BANK: PUBLIC

SUSTAINABILITY: 7/10

RENTABILITY: 1.25

B L U E   E C O N O M Y

UNSUSTAINABLE FINANCE IN THE BLUE ECONOMY: WHERE DOES THE MONEY COME FROM?

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1	

2	

3	

4	

List	of	abbreviations	

Abstract	

Disclaimer	

Acknowledgements	

PART 1
Introduction:	context	and	definitions	adopted	

1.1	

1.2	

1.3	

1.4	

1.5	

Supporting	a	shift	of	finance	away	from	unsustainable	blue	economy	

The	‘blue	economy’	concept	and	its	main	implications	

Approach	proposed	to	define	‘unsustainable	financing’	

Unsustainable	financing	practices	in	the	blue	economy	

Results	of	unsustainable	financing:	‘unsustainable	practices’	and	‘missed	opportunities’	

PART 2
Who:	mechanisms	and	main	actors	involved	in	unsustainable	finance	in	the	blue	economy	

2.1	

2.2	

2.3	

An	array	of	mechanisms	and	actors	are	available	to	finance	the	blue	economy	

General	trends	in	(un)sustainable	finance	and	possible	relation	with	the	blue	economy	

Specific	patterns	across	actors	engaged	in	unsustainable	finance	

PART 3
Why:	main	reasons	behind	the	persistence	of	unsustainable	financing	in	the	blue	economy	

3.1	

3.2	

3.3	

3.4	

Four	main	factors	behind	unsustainable	finance	in	the	blue	economy	

Context	level	factors	influencing	sustainable	financing	decisions	

Financing	level	factors	influencing	sustainable	financing	decisions	

Addressing	unsustainable	financing	practices:	getting	the	sequencing	of	factors	right	

PART 4
How	much	and	where:	unsustainable	financing	practices	across	oceans	and	global	regions	

4.1	

4.2	

A	simulation	on	potential	unsustainable	investments	in	the	blue	economy	

Patterns	in	unsustainable	financing	for	the	blue	economy	in	regions	across	the	world	

PART 5
Wrap-up:	supporting	a	shift	away	from	unsustainable	finance	for	the	blue	economy	

5.1	

5.2	

5.3	

Actions	to	support	a	transition	towards	a	sustainable	financing	in	the	blue	economy		

Approaches	to	support	financial	institutions	financing	a	sustainable	blue	economy	

Finance-related	policy	measures/incentives	for	sustainable	blue	economy	activities	

PART 6
Way	forward:	gaps	in	current	initiatives	and	recommendations	for	an	effective	global	action	

Gaps	in	current	measures	based	on	the	main	needs	discussed	in	this	study		

General	recommendations	for	regulators	and	investors	(and	joint	actions)	

Specific	recommendations:	‘game	changers’	to	boost	sustainable	blue	economy	finance	

6.1	

6.2	

6.3	

Bibliography	

3

5

6

6

8

8

9

10

12

14

16

16

21

26

30

30

31

36

42

46

46

49

56

56

58

61

66

66

70

81

85

1  List of abbreviations

ABNJ

Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction

ADB

Asian	Development	Bank

AfDB

African	Development	Bank

B2B

B2C

BBP

CSIS

Business-to-Business

Business-to-Consumer

Blue	Bond	Principles

Center for Strategic  
and International Studies

DG	DEVCO

DG	NEAR

Directorate-General	for	International	
Cooperation	and	Development

Directorate-General	for	Neighbourhood	
and Enlargement Negotiations

E&S

Environmental and Social

EASME

EBRD

Executive Agency for Small  
and	Medium-sized	Enterprises

European	Bank	for	Reconstruction	 
and	Development

EC

European	Commission

ECA

EEZ

EIB

EIF

Export	Credit	Agencies

Exclusive Economic Zone

European	Investment	Bank

European	Investment	Fund

EMODnet

European	Marine	Observation	 
and	Data	Network

IDB

IFC

IFIs

Inter-American	Development	Bank

International	Finance	Corporation

International Financial Institution

IPAs

Investment Promotion Agencies

IUCN

IUU

International Union for Conservation  
of Nature

Illegal,	Unreported	 
and	Unregulated	fishing

MDBs

Multilateral	Development	Banks

NCAs

National Credit Agencies

NOAA

National Oceanic  
and	Atmospheric	Administration

ODA

Official	Development	Assistance

OECD

Organisation for Economic  
Co-operation	and	Development

OpCo

Operating	Company

PES

PPP

SDG

SME

SRI

TCFD

Payment for Ecosystem Services

Public–Private	Partnerships

Sustainable	Development	Goal

Small	and	Medium-sized	Enterprises

Socially	Responsible	Investing

Task	Force	on	Climate-related	 
Financial Disclosures

UN

United Nations

ESG

Environmental,	Social	and	Governance

UNCLOS

ESIA

Environmental	and	Social	Impact	
Assessments

EU

European	Union

Food	and	Agriculture	Organization	 
of the United Nations

Foreign Direct Investment

UNCTAD

UNEP FI

UNIDO

Gross	Domestic	Product

UNPRI or PRI

FAO

FDI

GDP

GVA

Gross	Value	Added

HLEG

High-Level	Forum	Expert	Group

United Nations Convention  
on the Law Of the Sea

United Nations Conference  
on	Trade	And	Development

United Nations Environment Programme 
Finance Initiative

United Nations Industrial  
Development	Organization

United	Nations	Principles	 
for	Responsible	Investment

WRI

World Resources Institute

WWF

World Wide Fund for Nature

3

“The  challenge  of  climate  change  only  exacerbates 

the  existing  pressures  coming  from  marine  pollution, 

unsustainable resource use or illicit activities. At the same 

time, the blue economy offers opportunities for sustainable 

economic  development.  So,  I  am  convinced  that  we  can 

restore our marine environment while also bringing benefits 

to our coastal communities, and the economy at large.”

Commissioner	Virginijus	Sinkevičius	speech	 
at	Ocean	Governance	Stakeholder	Forum,	 
Brussels	22	April	2020

4

2  Abstract

excessive	

The  blue  economy  covers  a  range  of 
traditional and emerging sectors that are 
essential  sources  of  food,  energy,  health 
and leisure for people throughout the world. 
The  blue  economy  is  growing  fast  and 
attracting investment worldwide. However, 
businesses  often  remain  unsustainable. 
tourism,	
Illegal	 fishing,	
polluting	 shipping	 and	 poorly	 designed	
port	activities, are examples that threaten 
marine  eco-systems  and 
jeopardise 
the  biodiversity  that  is  essential  to  the 
prosperity of the planet. By 2030, one third 
of investments in the blue economy could 
be unsustainable – i.e., at least 250 billion 
euros invested in activities harmful to the 
oceans and ultimately the planet. Why is 
money  flowing  into  damaging  activities?  

This study found many reasons, including 
a focus on short-term profits, inadequate 
impact  assessments,  weak  regulatory 
inability 
frameworks  and  businesses’ 
to  attract  impact  investments.  How  can 
investments  worldwide  shift  to  activities 
that preserve the ocean and ensure long-
term  prosperity?  While  development 
banks  are  leading  the  change,  they  are 
unable to make significant changes alone. 
All  financial  players  should  be  involved, 
including  private  equity  funds,  impact 
investors and policymakers. A sustainable 
blue  economy  is  a  global  challenge  that 
requires  swift  and  coordinated  global 
action.  With  this  in  mind,  this  report 
includes  insights  and  recommendations 
for policymakers and investors.

5

3  Disclaimer

The information and views set out in this 
study  are  those  of  the  author(s)  and  do 
not  necessarily  reflect  the  official  opinion 
of  EASME  or  of  the  Commission.  Neither 
EASME, nor the Commission can guarantee 
the  accuracy  of  the  data  included  in  this 

study. Neither EASME, nor the Commission 
or any person acting on their behalf may 
be held responsible for the use which may 
be  made  of  the  information  contained 
therein.

4  Acknowledgements

This  study  was  implemented  between 
August  2019  and  July  2020  by  Ecorys, 
Finance  for  Impact,  Pescares  and  Habile. 
Main  contributors  were:  Matteo  Bocci 
(Ecorys associate), Diletta Zonta (Ecorys), 
Jan  Maarten  de  Vet  (Ecorys),  Amélie 
Girard  (Ecorys),  Vilma  Kuuliala  (Ecorys), 
Thierry  Senechal  (Finance  for  Impact), 
Impact), 
Herve  Solignac 
Marie Sudreau (Finance for Impact), Anna 
Urgeghe  (Pescares),  Henri  Le  Forestier 
(Habile) and Hugo Perez-Sappia (Habile).

(Finance  for 

The  study  team  would  like  to  thank  all 
those  who  contributed  to  the  study: 
Aboubacar  Fall  (Fall  Partners  Law),  Alex 
Benkenstein  (South  African  Institute  of 
International  Affairs),  Amine  Berraoui 
(E10),  Andrew  Prag 
(OECD),  Anthony 
Cox  (OECD),  Ben  Caldecott  (University 
(IUCN),  
of  Oxford),  Carla  Denelutti 

t’Kint 

(European 

Clara  van  den  Berg  (Ecorys),  Frannie 
Leautier  (Trade  &  Development  Bank), 
Gemma James (UNPRI), Jack Dyers (Blue 
Economy  Future),  Jonathan  Williams 
(Marine  South  East),  Katia  Karousakis 
(OECD),  Marc  Naidoo  (McGuireWoods), 
Mauro  Randone  (WWF),  Michael  Jones 
(TMA  BlueTech  and  TMA  Foundation), 
Finance 
Michel 
Consultancy  Services),  Raymond  Saner 
(Centre  for  Socio-Economic  Development 
-ICTSD), 
(Ecorys), 
Stephen  Miller 
(Ecorys),  Torsten 
Tamas  Kiss-Galfalvi 
Thiele  (London  School  of  Economics), 
as  well  as  representatives  from  the 
Investment  Bank,  Europol, 
European 
Nordic  Investment  Bank,  PEXE  (Les  Éco-
Enterprises  de  France),  Swedish  Capital 
Market Authority (Finansinspektionen) and 
European Network of Maritime Clusters.

6

7

PART 1

INTRODUCTION: CONTEXT AND DEFINITIONS ADOPTED

1.1  Supporting a shift of finance away from unsustainable blue economy

The  European  Commission’s  Directorate-
General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries 
seeks  to  support  a  shift  in  finance  away 
from unsustainable marine and maritime 
activities to investments in the sustainable 
blue  economy.  In  order  to  do  so,  it  is 
necessary  to  identify  and  characterise 
current  financial  flows 
into  the  blue 
economy, and to develop a set of criteria 
for  clearly  defining  the  (un)sustainable 
financing activities.1

the 

awareness 

The  current  study  is  a  step  towards 
and 
the 
increasing 
transparency  of 
features  and 
characteristics of unsustainable financing 
in the blue economy. It also contributes to 
the  European  Commission’s  initiative  on 
investment in the blue economy. Building 
on  current  global  trends  and  practices, 
this study discusses a number of relevant 
actions aimed at addressing unsustainable 
financing  practices  and  fostering  fully 
sustainable ones.

8

Overall, this study therefore aims to:

Identify  and  describe  the  financial  practices  in  the  blue  economy  that  support  unsustainable 
activities,  particularly  those  which  harm  the  ocean  environment  and  local  communities,  and 
which expose companies, financial institutions and private and public sector investors to stranded 
assets, reputational risks and economic losses.

Contribute to bringing together international and national public and private financial institutions 
around a joint agenda and common principles for sustainable funding and investment in the blue 
economy.

Encourage the alignment of financial flows with a pathway towards a fully circular, low-carbon 
and climate-resilient economy, which would also allow for full societal benefits in line with the 
UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

The study is structured as follows:

Chapters 2, 3 and 4 examine the main features in global funding and investment sources leading 
to unsustainable outcomes in relation to oceans – specifically, who is involved and how (Chapter 
2),  what  are  the  main  reasons  and  drivers  behind  such  practices  (Chapter  3)  and  how  those 
practices are distributed across different global regions and what are the potential volumes of 
such unsustainable transactions (Chapter 4).

Chapters 5 and 6 assess the areas to be addressed to support a shift away from unsustainable 
financing (Chapter 5) and outline the persisting gaps in the current policy framework (Chapter 6).

Chapter 6.2 and 6.3 provide a set of recommendations including specific actions to be implemented 
(‘game changers’) for investors and policy makers, to help shift blue economy investments away 
from such unsustainable activities and to foster the responsible economic development of the 
blue economy worldwide.

1.2  The ‘blue economy’ concept and its main implications

The  origins  of  the  blue  economy  concept 
can  be  traced  back  to  the  2012  UN  Rio+ 
conference and the report on ‘Green Economy 
in a Blue World’.2 Building on a growing global 
consensus  on  the  socio-economic  relevance 
of  the  concept  and  its  related  activities,  the 
term  ocean  economy  was  more  recently 
adopted  by  international  bodies  such  as  the 
for  Economic  Co-operation 
Organisation 

and  Development  (OECD),3  United  Nations 
(UN)4  and  World  Bank.5  While  the  term  ocean 
economy  often  implies  a  focus  on  ‘in-water’ 
activities,  this  study  believes  that  both  ‘fresh 
water’ and, importantly, ‘inland-water’6 should 
also  be  addressed  as  essential  dimensions 
of  the  sector  –  especially  when  assessing 
the  financing  of  sustainable  blue  economy  in 
developing  and  emerging  economies  globally.

9

The  ‘blue	 economy’	 concept	 defined	 by	 the	
EU	 is	 adopted	 as	 the	 basis	 for	 this	 report,7 
as  it  allows  for  the  inclusion  of  relevant 
inland,  port,  and  river/water  human-related 
activities  when  assessing  the  sustainability 
of  blue  economy  investments.  This  definition 
recognises  the  relevance  of  some  more 
‘traditionally’  established  economic  activities 
to  the  blue  economy,  such  as  extraction  and 
commercialisation  of  marine  living  resources, 
shipping and maritime transport, ports activities, 
shipbuilding and repairs, coastal and maritime 
coastal  tourism,  etc.  Further,  the  definition 
also encompasses a number of emerging but 
equally  relevant  innovative  activities,  such  as 
maritime  energy  (offshore  wind  and  ocean 
energy),  blue  biotechnology,  desalination,  etc.

ocean 

Importantly, the concept also includes several 
ecosystem  services8  that  are  essential  to 
secure,  protect  and  respect  coastal  and 
marine  ecosystems  (i.e.  the  natural  capital)9
and  related  policy  activities  (maritime  spatial 
planning, 
governance,  maritime 
surveillance,  safety  and  security,  etc.)  Beyond 
these,  ecosystem  services  are  essential 
assets  for  other  blue  economy  activities 
to  flourish10  and  also  a  potential  source 
of  economic  and  financial  returns  on  their 
own.11  Overall,  they  can  contribute  towards 
a  healthy  planet  and  human  well-being.12 

Criteria  for  a  sustainable  blue  economy 
have  been  elaborated  in  a  parallel  study 
the  Blue 
on 
Economy’,13  an  EU  supported  study  for  a 
framework.
blue 

economy  development 

‘Sustainability  criteria 

for 

1.3  Approach proposed to define ‘unsustainable financing’

to 

the  EU  High-Level  Expert 
According 
Group  on  Sustainable  Finance 
(HLEG),14
“sustainable  finance  is  about  a  joined-up 
approach  to  the  development  of  financial 
services  that  integrates  the  environmental, 
social  and  governance 
(ESG)  dimensions 
across  market  practices,  products  and  policy 
frameworks.’ It will involve reallocating large-
scale  investments  to  close  the  sustainable 
development  financing  gap.”15  Sustainable 
finance highlights two imperatives: ‘to improve 
the contribution of finance to sustainable and 
inclusive  growth  as  well  as  the  mitigation  of 
climate  change;  and  to  strengthen  financial 
stability by incorporating environmental, social 
and governance (ESG) factors into investment 
decision-making.’16 The first imperative reflects 
the  sustainability  of  the  ultimate  impacts  of 
the investment being made, while the second 
relates  to  the  policies  in  place  in  financial 
institutions that ensure sustainable practices.17

Additionally, consistent with the above definition, 
in the EU's policy context sustainable finance is 

defined as “finance to support economic growth 
while  reducing  pressures  on  the  environment 
and taking into account social and governance 
aspects. Sustainable finance also encompasses 
transparency  on  risks  related  to  ESG  factors 
that may impact the financial system, and the 
mitigation of such risks through the appropriate 
governance of financial and corporate actors.”18 

In  line  with  such  an  approach,  this  study 
considers  unsustainable  financing  as  any 
financing  practice  (public  and  private)  that  is 
inconsistent  with 
international  sustainable 
financing  standards  (where  ESG  factors  are 
taken  into  account)19  and  global  definitions 
of  a  sustainable  financing  taxonomy.20  These 
aspects  are  particularly  complex  given  the 
many  and  diverse  sectors  that  comprise  the 
ocean economy, and the fact that sustainability 
can  mean  very  different  things  within  each. 
In this study we do not explore the details of 
these  ongoing  processes  and  the  pros  and 
cons  of  the  existing  approaches  –  these  are 
further  discussed  in  a  recent  OECD  report.21 

10

it 

is  worth  noting 

However, 
the  above  definitions  have  been  consolidated  
in  the  so-called  ‘Taxonomy  Regulation’,  which  provides  criteria  for  environmentally  sustainable 
economic activities. According to Article 3 of the Regulation, “an economic activity shall qualify as 
environmentally sustainable where that economic activity:

that 

A)  contributes  substantially  to  one  or  more  of  the  environmental  objectives  [climate 
change  mitigation;  climate  change  adaptation;  the  sustainable  use  and  protection 
of  water  and  marine  resources;  the  transition  to  a  circular  economy;  pollution 
prevention  and  control;  the  protection  and  restoration  of  biodiversity  and  ecosystems];

B)  does not significantly harm any of the environmental objectives; 

C) 

is carried out in compliance with the minimum safeguards laid down in Article 18; and

D)  complies with technical screening criteria that have been established by the Commission 

[…].”22

The 
latest  report  of  the  HLEG  provides 
information on the design of the taxonomy, as 
well as guidance on how taxonomy users may 
develop  taxonomy  disclosures.  It  includes  an 
overview  of  the  economic  activities  to  which 
the technical screening criteria apply.23

Due  to  the  lack  of  a  common  understanding 
of  which  activities  can  be  considered  as 
sustainable  across  the  sectors  of  the  ocean 
economy,24 we assume a number of criteria25 for 
the identification of an unsustainable financing 
practice. In essence, we consider whether any 
financing  practice  (both  public  and  private) 
underpinning blue economy activities:

Results  in  local  negative  impacts,  therefore 
destroying valuable natural, human, social or 
physical capital;

Is  unable  to  sustain  positive  returns  over 
time,  for  current  and/or  future  generations; 
and

Does not allow for the development of local 
capacity  towards  financial  independency  of 
supported practice(s). 

Some  aspects  which  are  essential  for  our 
definition and understanding of unsustainable 
financing are briefly illustrated below.

11

1.4  Unsustainable financing practices in the blue economy

Although  certain  activities  are  unquestionably 
unsustainable, for example intrusive deep-sea 
mining and/or natural resources and minerals 
extraction,  the  approach  proposed  in  this 
study  deliberately  focuses  on  the  financing 
practice itself rather than the type of activities 
which  are  financed.  The  rationale  behind  this 
approach  is  driven  by  our  belief  that  it  can 
help identify remedies and potentially steer a 
greater volume of public and private resources 
towards fully sustainable investments.

We  are  aware  of  the  ongoing  effort  in 
the  definition  of  a  common  taxonomy  for 
sustainable  investments.  We  believe  that  our 
approach avoids any duplication of efforts and 
builds  on  the  results  of  the  process.26  For  a 
specific analysis of the indicators to be selected 
in assessing the sustainability of the different 
blue economy activities, the reader can refer to 
the parallel study on ‘Sustainability criteria for 
the Blue Economy’27 supported by the European 
Commission,  and  to  the  broader  discussion 
currently  ongoing  with  respect  to  the  blue 
economy in the context of the EU assessment 
of a sustainable taxonomy.28 

important  consequence  of 

Another 
the 
approach adopted in this study is that trade-
offs	amongst	impacts	of	financing	practices 
(intended and unintended)29 should always be 
assessed in order to maximise overall benefits. 
In  the  case  of  unsustainable  financing,  such 
trade-offs may tend to favour direct financial 
returns to investors over broader environmental 
and societal benefits (or damages). Investments 
in  oil  and  gas  operations,  for  example,  may 
emphasise  certain  economic  and  social 
returns  (e.g.  access  to  energy  and  heating 
for  a  country)  while  disregarding  relevant 
additional consequences (e.g. impact on marine 
ecosystems and/or local communities affected 
by the financed activities). By the same token, 
investments  in  touristic / cruising  operations 
may benefit economic returns while neglecting 
social or environmental externalities.

Apart  from  deliberate  criminal  activities,  such 
trade-offs  might  be  the  result  of  suboptimal 
decisions resulting from limited information on 
the  operations,  which  may  prevent  investors 
from financing activities with uncertain results 
and  high  financial  risks.  These  aspects  are 
discussed further in Chapter 3 of this study.

The	 expected	 timeframe	 of	 the	 returns	
investments  made 
foreseen  from 
the 
(short-term  vs. 
long-term)  are  also  an 
essential  element  of  sustainability.  Despite 
the presence of positive impacts in the short-
imply 
term,  unsustainable  financing  may 
a  lack  of  assessment  of  the  longer-term 
impacts  of  the  investment  being  made.  Even 
if  short-term  impacts  are  positive,  these 
may  be  neutralised  by  negative  longer-term 
impacts,  resulting  in  structural  concerns  for 
the  affected  communities  and  ecosystems. 
For example, investment in renewable marine 
energy  may  not  consider  the  management /
deterioration  of  infrastructure  through  time, 
with  substantial  longer  term  impacts  for  the 
ecosystem  in  which  they  operate.  Similarly, 
while  aquaculture  practices  may  provide 
positive short-term returns (e.g. jobs and local 
revenues), if investments are not well designed, 
polluting chemicals may spill out through time 
and destroy nearby ecosystems (with negative 
impacts on the environment, local fisheries and 
local  communities).  Similar  examples  can  be 
shown for other maritime activities.

Again,  the  lack  of  assessment  of  the  longer 
term impacts of investments being made may 
be the consequence of a variety of reasons and 
factors,  including  actors  with  good  intentions. 
A reflection on the reasons and drivers behind 
is  also 
such  unsustainable 
provided in Chapter 3.

investments 

12

Broader	‘transformational’	potential	for	blue	
economy  investments  should  be  considered 
when assessing sustainability. The impacts of 
investments  for  local  communities  in  terms 
of project ownership and the ability to ensure 
financial  self-sufficiency  (e.g.  through  further 
generation  of  local  revenues)  are  essential 
factors  to  be  considered  when  assessing 
any  financing  practice.  An  investment  with 
positive  impacts  for  local  communities  in  the 
short and longer term may still be considered 
unsustainable  if  it  creates  dependency  on 
external  sources  of  financing  over  time. 
Indeed,  ensuring  that  the  business  model  of 
the  company  is  economically  sustainable  is 
essential  for  the  local  communities  involved. 
A  company  can  be  deemed  sustainable  if 
it  is  able  to  obtain  the  necessary  economic 
resources to make future investments in order 
to ensure the company's continuity over time. 

A  company  is  sustainable  in  the  medium  and 
long term if it has the ability to make sufficient 
profit  to  finance  future  investments,  or  if  it 
has  access  to  external  funding  sources  that 
enable it to access these resources (e.g. credit/
debt  financing).  In  this  sense,  dependency  on 
a  single  source  of  external  financing  may  be 
a  risk  factor,  which  could  cause  a  mission 
drift  or,  in  the  context  of  the  blue  economy, 
negatively  impact  local  communities  and  the 
environment.30  When  assessing  sustainable 
financing practices, it is therefore not sufficient 
to just ensure they do ‘no harm’, comply with 
the  minimum  safeguards  or  contribute  to 
environmental  objectives  –  it  should  also  be 
questioned whether they allow for the (future) 
generation  of  local  sources  of  revenues,  tax 
returns and endogenous financing, beyond the 
external (public or private) support provided.

13

1.5  Results of unsustainable financing: ‘unsustainable practices’  

and ‘missed opportunities’

When assessing the impacts of unsustainable financing in the blue economy,  
it is also essential to address both:

Unsustainable	 practices  (financial  returns 
for 
investors  achieved  while  supporting 
locally harmful practices), which may range 
from 
intended  and  particularly  harmful 
(black)  investments  (e.g.  practices  explicitly 
infringing human rights and destroying local 
communities and ecosystems), to unintended 
and  less  harmful,  but  still  negative,  (grey) 
investments (e.g. where negative effects are 
the  result  of  a  lack  of  full  analysis  and/or 
mismanagement).

(neglected 

Missed	 opportunities 
local 
investment needs, assessed as unprofitable 
for  investors)  that  are  the  result  of  failing 
to  acknowledge  and  address  the  specific 
financing  needs  of  the  sector31  –  e.g.  to  be 
able to: 

Diversify  existing  value  chains  through 
new  products / services  that  appeal  to 
ever-changing demand;

Adopt  smart  technologies  (infrastructure) 
to  reduce  environmental  impacts  and 
address climate change;

Promote 
innovative  business  models 
that  capture  high  economic  value  while 
respecting local assets;

Foster  the  adoption  of  innovative  circular 
blue  economy  practices  towards  zero 
waste;

Support talent and provide organisational 
approaches 
that  encourage  constant 
innovation and learning;

local, 

Promote 
regional  and  global 
practices (clusters, accelerators, etc.) that 
address new ideas and needs;

Preserve  ecosystems  while  accessing 
valuable ecosystem services.32

An overview of the economic performance of the 
various blue economy activities, as well as the 
challenges, highlighting potential unsustainable 
practices and missed opportunities, is provided 
as Annex II.33 

14

 
15

PART 2

WHO: MECHANISMS AND MAIN ACTORS INVOLVED  
IN UNSUSTAINABLE FINANCE IN THE BLUE ECONOMY

2.1  An array of mechanisms and actors are available to finance the blue economy

Financial  mechanisms  are  often  defined 
as  methods  or  sources  through  which 
funding  is  made  available34  and,  more 
broadly,  ways  through  which  a  specific 
business,  organisation,  or  programme 
receives the funding necessary to support 
its operations.35 It is therefore important to 
assess  the  main  features  and  roles  that 

such  mechanisms  play,  as  well  as  the 
actors fostering (un)sustainable financing 
in  the  blue  economy.  In  this  analysis  we 
also  include  public  funding  instruments, 
which  can  be  part  of  the  broader  range 
of mechanisms identified to support blue 
economy activities (e.g. directly or through 
public-private / blending mechanisms).

16

TABLE	2.1

Overview	of	main	financial	bodies:	regional	focus	 
and	overall	financial	products	available

FINANCIAL BODIES
(PRIVATE	SECTOR	/	
COMMERCIAL	BANKS	/	
PUBLIC	FUNDS)

FINANCIAL MARKETS
(STATUS / TRENDS)

FINANCIAL PRODUCTS
(POTENTIALLY AVAILABLE  
FOR THE BLUE ECONOMY)

TAILORED OFFERS
(SPECIFICALLY ADDRESSING  
SUSTAINABILITY AND / OR 
BLUE ECONOMY ISSUES)

“Private-finance”	based	mechanisms	(actors	and	instruments	involved)

Private	Sector	
Investment	/	
Commercial	Banks

Global	Developed	
markets	driven	 
Consolidation  
in	process

Structuring & funding of loans: 
corporate,	project	finance	-based,	
trade	finance	guarantees	&	loans,	
money	market,	arrangement,	
underwriting	&	trading	of	equity	
capital	markets,	fixed	income,	
asset-backed	securities

Asset	Managers,	
Wealth	Management	/
Family	Office

Global	Critical	size	
issue	/	Consolidation

Mutual funds, exchange trade 
funds,	private	debt,	investment	
advisory

Global	Anglo-Saxon	
dominant

Impact-first	funds,	giving	funds

Green,	social,	
sustainability, blue bonds
green	loans,	ESGs

ESG	/	socially	responsible	
investing	(SRI)	/	impact	
funds	very	long-term	
investments

Socially & environmentally 
screened funds, “direct 
impact”	/	custom	
investments

Global	Strong	
development	 
in	emerging	markets

Supply	chain	finance,	receivables	
finance,	asset-backed	lending,	
construction	finance

Green	or	energy-efficient	
leasing

Foundations,	
Philanthropic	
Organisations

Specialized	Financial	
Institutions	
(Factoring	companies,	
operational	Leasing	
firms,	Real	Estate	
lenders)

Private	Equity	Funds,	
Infrastructure	
Funds,	Hedge	Funds

Global	Steady	
development	 
in	emerging	markets

Private	equity	funds:	investments	
in	companies,	project	operating	
company	(OpCos)	e.g.	public-private	
partnerships	(PPPs),	properties	
hedge funds: tradeable instruments 
(stocks,	bonds,	derivatives	
commodities)

Insurance	Companies	/	
Pension	Funds

Global	More	limited	
scope	/	specialized	 
in	Emerging	Markets

Direct investments for insurance 
long	term	funds,	insurance	policies	
considering	‘sustainability	risks’

Export	Credit	
Agencies36	

National focus – Strong 
in	developed	markets

Government-backed	loans,	
guarantees and insurance to 
facilitate	exporting	contracts,	
providing	overseas	working	capital

Green	infrastructure	
projects,	equity	in	green	
companies

Investments in green 
bonds, long term 
infrastructure,  
ESG-referenced	insurance	
policy	underwriting

No	specific	ESG	screening,	
Funding	driven	by	export	
focus 

17

TABLE	2.1

Overview	of	main	financial	bodies:	regional	focus	 
and	overall	financial	products	available	(suite)

FINANCIAL BODIES
(PRIVATE	SECTOR	/	
COMMERCIAL	BANKS	/	
PUBLIC	FUNDS)

FINANCIAL MARKETS
(STATUS / TRENDS)

FINANCIAL PRODUCTS
(POTENTIALLY AVAILABLE  
FOR THE BLUE ECONOMY)

TAILORED OFFERS
(SPECIFICALLY ADDRESSING  
SUSTAINABILITY AND/OR 
BLUE ECONOMY ISSUES)

“Public-finance”	based	mechanisms	(actors	and	instruments	involved)

National	Promotional	
Banks,	Public	Banks

National focus
Strong	in	developed	
markets

Public	investment	/	financing	
programmes,	“patient	capital”,	
senior	/	junior	loans

Active	ESG	project	
screening, green bonds, 
social bonds, green loans

Public	Funds	
(Sovereign	Wealth	
Funds,	Sector	Funds,	
Regional	/	City	Funds,	
etc.)

Multilateral	/
National	
Development	Banks	 
&	Institutions

Global	strong	in	
Developed	Markets

Investments	in	public	/	private	bonds
Impact-driven	Investment	doctrines

ESG-dedicated	funds
investments in green 
bonds, social bonds,  
blue bonds 

Global	Regional	focus

Funding	programmes,	concessional	
lending,	risk	sharing	instruments

Green	project	financing,	
green investments

is	 a	 great	 variety	 of	 financial	
There	
involved  actors  –  as 
mechanisms  and 
illustrated  in  the  table  above.  Each  type  of 
financial  body  has  a  multitude  of  financial 
products  that  can  potentially  serve  activities /
projects / businesses 
in  the  blue  economy. 
In  order  to  understand  the  extent  to  which 
unsustainable  financing  practices  persist,  it  is 
important  to  have  a  better  understanding  of 
the main actors engaged in the global financing 
market.

Source : Finance for Impact (2019) 

the 

It  is  quite  challenging  to  establish  a  clear 
taxonomy  of 
type  of  mechanisms 
specifically  targeting  the  blue  economy  and 
those with a broader scope (which may or may 
not  include  the  blue  economy).  For  example, 
some  of 
the  above-mentioned  products 
are  clearly  labelled  as  ‘sustainable’,  ‘green/
blue’  and / or  explicitly  respect  social  and 
environmental  norms  (ESGs).37  Such  products 
are generally found in mature financial markets 
in  which  clients’  access  to  and  awareness  of 
financial products are high and where financial 
international norms and standards are usually 
respected.  Notwithstanding  the  maturity  of 
these  markets,  sustainable  investments  only 
constitute a portion of much larger investments 
–  as  discussed  in  the  next  section  of  this 
chapter.

18

With regard to financial	actors	in	the	private	
important  dynamic  underlying 
sector,  an 
their  decision  to  invest  in  certain  markets  is 
the  current  trend  towards  increasing  overall 
reducing  client  acquisition 
efficiency  and 
costs.  Investments  may  come  from  a  range 
of  sources,  and  our  research  has  not  pointed 
to specific streams of investments being more 
recurrent  (e.g.  mergers  and  acquisitions,  debt 
and  credit,  or  equity).  Interviews  suggest  that 
the  (equity-based)  financing  of  sustainable 
projects  in  parts  of  the  world  where  the  cost 
of  acquiring  new  clients  is  high  constitutes  a 
major  obstacle  for  most  financial  actors.  The 
high level of financial risks is a challenge which 
may be common to different forms of financing 
and is reinforced by the relatively poor presence 
of  insurance  systems  in  parts  of  the  world 
where  financial  inclusion  is  a  challenge,38  and 
specifically  with  respect  to  the  risk  related  to 
the blue economy.39

Public  bodies40	 also	 play	 a	 pivotal	 role, 
particularly in large infrastructure investments, 
the intangible support provided to early stages 
of  research  and  innovation,  including  support 
to skills, and capacity and knowledge transfer. 
However,  public  funding  alone  cannot  ensure 
long-term  sustainable  financial  support,  and 
the transition from public to private financing 
requires  efforts  that  project  owners  and 
financial actors are not always ready to make. 
In addition to direct funding, public bodies play 
an essential role in steering the private sector 
towards  sustainability,  by  setting  the  right 
regulation and policy framework for the sector 
– as discussed in Chapter 3.

An  interesting  mapping  of  different  financing 
models  across 
the  blue  economy  has 
recently  been  provided  by  The  Ocean  Finance 
Handbook.41 The map suggests different levels 
of  fit  between  various  financing  models  and 
sectors  in  the  blue  economy,  for  an  average 
compatibility  of  scale,  risk  and  risk  tolerance, 
and return potential. It is presented here as a 
good  overview  of  the  relevance  and  potential 
of  various  financing  streams  for  the  blue 
economy.42 

19

H
C
T
A
M
K
A
E
W

H
C
T
A
M
G
N
O
R
T
S

y
m
o
n
o
c
e

e
u
l
b

e
h
t

i

n
h
t
i
w
s
e
i
t
i
v
i
t
c
a

t
n
e
r
e
ff
d

i

d
n
a

s
l
e
d
o
m
g
n
i
c
n
a
n
fi

i

f
o
w
e
v
r
e
v
O

1
2

.

E
R
U
G

I
F

Y
T
I
U
Q
E

T
B
E
D

Y
L
N
O
-
T
C
A
P
M

I

t
n
e
m
t
s
e
v
n

i

d
w
o
r
C

s
p
a
w
s

t
p
e
D

g
n

i
c
n
a
n

i
f

d
e
e
S

t
n
e
m
t
s
e
v
n

t
c
a
p
m

I

i

,

s
n
a
o
l

k
n
a
b

g

i
b

n
g

i
e
r
e
v
o
S

s
d
n
o
b

s
t
c
e
j
o
r
P

s
d
n
o
b

n
o

i
t
a
s
r
e
v
n
o
C

s
d
n
o
b

t
c
a
p
m

i

,

s
n
a
o
l

l
l
a
m
s

k
n
a
B

g
n

i

v
l
o
v
e
R

s
d
n
u
f

n
a
o
l

e
c
n
a
n
i
f
o
r
c
i
M

n
a
o
l

t
n
e
m
t
s
e
v
n

i

r
s
C

t
n
a
r
G

n
o
i
t
a
r
o
t
s
e
r

s
d
n
a
l
t
e
W

.

g
e

.

e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
a
r
f
n

i

l
a
r
u
t
a
N

s
e
c
i

v
r
e
s
m
e
t
s
y
s
o
c
E

e
v
o
r
g
n
a
M

.

g
e

.

n
o
i
t
a
r
o
t
s
e
r

NATURAL  
CAPITAL

l
a

i
r
t
s
u
d
n

i

s
e
i
r
e
h
s
i

F

e
s
a
h
c
r
u
P

.

g
e

.

s
l
e
s
s
e
v
w
e
n

r
a
m
o
i
l
e
M

.

g
e

.

e
l
a
c
s

-
l
l
a
m
s

s
e
i
r
e
h
s
i

F

t
n
e
m
t
s
e
v
n

i

n
o
i
s
n
a
p
x
e
m
r
a
F

.

g
e

.

e
r
u
t
l
u
c
a
u
q
A

g
n

i
t
c
e
p
s
o
r
p
o

i
b

e
n

i
r
a
M

a
m
r
a
h
p

e
f
i
l

a
e
S

.

g
e

.

e
n

i
r
a
m
d
n
a

l
a
t
s
a
o
C

m
s
i
r
u
o
t
o
c
e

l
e
t
o
h
o
c
E

.

g
e

.

t
fi
o
r
t
e
r

l
e
s
s
e
V

.

g
e

.

n
o

i
t
a
t
r
o
p
s
n
a
r
t

e
m
i
t
i
r
a
M

m
r
a
f

i

d
n
w
E
D
O
G

.

g
e

.

i

d
n
w
-

s
e
l
b
a
w
e
n
e
R

e
r
u
t
c
u
r
t
s
a
r
f
n

i

r
o
t
o
m
d
n
a
S

.

g
e

.

d
e
s
a
b
-
e
r
u
t
a
N

l
a
d

i
t

-

s
e
l
b
a
w
e
n
e
R

p
u
t
r
a
t
S

.

g
e

.

n
o
i
t
a

l
l

a
t
s
n

i

e
v
a
w
-

s
e
l
b
a
w
e
n
e
R

O
P
I

y
n
a
p
m
o
C

.

g
e

.

r
a
l
o
s

g
n

i
t
a
o
l
f

-

s
e
l
b
a
w
e
n
e
R

COMMODITIES

MARINE AND COASTAL DEVELOPMENT

t
n
e
m
t
s
e
v
n

i

h
c
e
t
d
e
e
S

.

g
e

.

)
0
2
0
2
(

k
o
o
b
d
n
a
H
e
c
n
a
n
F
n
a
e
c
O

i

:

e
c
r
u
o
S

t
n
e
m
e
g
a
n
a
m
e
t
s
a
W

g
n
i
l
c
y
c
e
R

.

g
e

.

n
o
i
t
a
v
o
n
n

i

20

	
	
 
 
 
	
 
	
 
 
 
	
 
 
 
 
 
	
	
 
 
	
 
 
 
	
 
 
 
	
 
 
 
	
	
	
 
 
	
 
 
 
	
	
 
 
 
 
	
	
 
 
 
	
	
 
 
 
	
	
 
	
 
 
 
 
	
 
 
 
 
	
 
	
 
	
 
	
	
	
	
	
	
	
	
	
	
	
	
	
	
	
	
	
 
	
 
	
	
 
	
 
	
	
 
	
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
2.2  General trends in (un)sustainable finance and possible relation  

with the blue economy

and through ex-ante assessments of expected 
positive  social  and  environmental  returns  on 
investments (e.g. conservation finance, impact 
investing, sustainable investing or responsible 
investing).  Large  global  corporations 
(e.g. 
Walmart,  Danone  etc.)  are  also  integrating 
sustainability  principles  and  standards  (e.g. 
ESGs) into their financing practices.

While not directly targeting the blue economy, 
such  a  trend  shows  the  positive  response  of 
the  financial  sector  in  addressing  growing 
sustainability  concerns  of  global  investments. 
Specifying  this  trend  for  the  blue  economy  is 
hampered by the limited visibility of the sector 
to  global  investors.  This  was  confirmed  by 
interviewees, who said that the blue economy 
concept  is  ‘too  vague’  and  ‘too  recent’  to  be 
clearly understood by all actors. Such a lack of 
visibility,  though  mostly  for  private  investors, 
remains one of the most significant obstacles 
in  the  full  shift  towards  sustainable  financing 
of the blue economy – see Chapter 3.

Investments	specifically	addressing	pressing	
global  challenges45  have  also  increased, 
with the level of private equity or debt capital 
invested  in  relevant  impact  areas  rising  by 
32 % over the 2013-2018 period. The issuance 
of green bonds growing to $ 500 billion in 2018 
is in line with this positive sustainable trend.46 
This movement is being driven by a shift in the 
perception  of  investors  and  corporations  who 
increasingly  believe  that  ESGs  are  important 
not  only  for  their  reputation  as  law / norm 
abiding  entities,  but  also  for  ensuring  their 
financial returns and ability to pay dividends.

The  financial  actors  described  in  the  previous 
section  have  all  (to  some  extent)  adopted 
strategies to ensure more sustainable financing 
practices, including in the blue economy. Despite 
this,  the	 substantial	 lack	 of	 available	 data	
about	private	investments	directed	to	sectors	
of	 the	 blue	 economy	 makes	 it	 impossible	
to	 detail	 the	 flows	 and	 actors	 involved	 in	
sustainable	 and	 unsustainable	 financing	 in	
the blue economy. This is a core bottleneck for 
any in-depth understanding of the challenges 
and opportunities faced by international actors, 
such as the EC, who are committed to steering 
financing  away  from  unsustainable  practices 
towards  fully  sustainable  blue  economy 
activities throughout the world.

It  is  therefore  pivotal  to  improve  the  tracking 
of  such  flows,  as  further  discussed  in  our 
recommendations  (Chapter  6).  Some  relevant 
initial  attempts  are  already  being  made  by 
the  OECD  tracking  of  Official  Development 
Assistance  (ODA)  for  the  Ocean  Sustainable 
Economy.43  Given  such  an  essential  gap,  it  is 
important  for  this  study  to  understand  the 
extent  to  which  investments  trends  could 
be  reflected  in  current  and  future  financing 
flows  targeting  the  various  activities  in  the 
blue  economy.  General  trends  are  therefore 
described  here  as  a  proxy,  to  understand  the 
possible  consequences  for  financing  flows  in 
the blue economy.

increasingly 

While  financial  flows  throughout  the  world 
integrating  sustainability 
are 
standards,44  the  relevance  of  sustainability 
standards  in  addressing  investments  in 
the  blue  economy  remains  uncertain  –  and 
the  adoption  is  often  on  a  voluntary  basis.  It 
remains a fact that over the past few decades 
the financing sector has become more cautious, 
both with respect to supporting specific assets 
identified as sustainable on the basis of ratings, 

21

 
Positive	 trends	 include	 efforts	 to	 develop	
sound	lending	practices	in	the	blue	economy.	
This  is  the  case  with  the  Poseidon  Principles 
developed  by  the  shipping  industry  to  ensure 
the  sustainability  of  its  financing  processes,47 
as  well  as  the  Blue  Economy  Sustainable 
Financing  Principles  promoted  by  the  EU  and 
WWF in 2019.

However,	 over	 70	%	 of	 investments	 (see	
figure	 below)	 are	 made	 without	 assessing	
sustainability  criteria  –  potentially  providing 
access to unsustainable finance. As illustrated 
in  the  figure  below,  the  investment  pyramid 
is based on a solid 2 / 3 of global (traditional) 
investments 
potentially 
unsustainable.

remain 

that 

FIGURE	2.2

Conservation	finance	and	impact,	sustainable	and	responsible	investing

Active	approach	 
to	ESG	impact

IMPACT INVESTING
USD 502 billion

Intented, measurable 
social	/	environmental	
impact	alongside	
financial	return	

RESPONSIBLE INVESTING
USD 89.6 trillion

Signatories	in	the	UN	Responsible	
Investment	Principles	 
ESG	disclosures	incorporated	in	
investment decisions 

Passive	approach	 
to	ESG	impact

CONSERVATION FINANCE
USD 53 billion

Subset	of	impact	investing	related	
to the funding of conservation 
project	which	deliver	a	financial	
return

SUSTAINABLE INVESTING
USD 30.7 trillion (AUM)

Adoption	of	progessive	ESG	pratices	
to	enhance	financial	return

TRADITIONAL INVESTING
USD 300 trillion

No	integration	of	any	ESG	concern

Source : Finance Watch (2018), adapted from City of London, Specialist Sources of Capital48 

In addition, with respect to other global sectors, 
the	financial	resources	dedicated	to	the	blue	
economy remain limited, leaving marine and 
maritime economic activities with poor overall 
access to finance. If we look at the most recent 
available  data,49  the  blue  economy  covers  a 
limited portion of the whole investment portfolio 
in the venture capital market, both currently and 
into the future. Due to a lack of specific data, 
it is not possible to enter details on the various 
types of financial support, and whether issues 
differ  between  debt  or  equity.  Nevertheless, 
evidence collected through interviews suggests 
access  to  both  types  of  financing  is  equally 
problematic.  Further,  although  the  Ocean 
Finance Handbook ‘demystifies’ the concept of 
the blue economy, it still needs to be ‘sold’ as 
an investable concept to the private sector. 

Thus,  taken  together,  the  interest  in  investing 
in  the  blue  economy  remains  limited  –  as 
illustrated  in  the  figure  below.  Moreover,  the 
type  of  investment  in  blue  economy  projects 
depends  on  the  specific  sector.  For  instance, 
offshore  wind  is  financed  via  established 
equity and debt investment consortia. Most of 
the financial resources spent on offshore wind 
come from private investment – as commercial 
and  technology  readiness  levels  are  already 
high.  Indeed,  mature  projects  draw  on  banks 
and  lending  institutions.50  In  the  aquaculture 
sector, there is a pent-up demand for mergers 
and  acquisitions. 
In  2018,  mergers  and 
acquisitions  amounted  to  € 3.46  billion,  more 
than  2017  (€ 1.50  billion)  and  2016  ($ 1.67 
billion) combined.51 

22

FIGURE	2.3

Likelihood	for	portfolio	to	include	an	investee	in	specific	EU	industries	 
–	current	vs.	future	portfolio,	2018

0 % 10 % 20 % 30 % 40 % 50 % 60 % 70 % 80 %90 %

Artificial	intelligence	/	machine	learning

E-commerce

Digital health

Fintech

Deep	tecnology

Energy	efficiency	/	renewable	energy

Cybersecurity

Social economy

Agriculture	/	bio-economy

Blockchain	technology

Dual technology

Blue	economy	/	sustainable	use	of	maritime	resources	

Space

Current	portfolio	includes	an	investee	in	…

Future	portfolio	(highly)	likely	to	include	an	investee	in	…

largely  SME-based 

Given that many sectors of the blue economy 
are 
(e.g.  tourism)  or 
still  have  limited  return  potential  (e.g.  blue 
biotechnology,  offshore  wind),  they  do  not 
attract  large  amounts  of  private  equity.  Still, 
equity  may  be  essential  in  boosting  some 

Source: European Investment Fund (EIF) (2019)52 

activities  at  full  speed,  and  targeted  public 
funds  are  essential  to  raise  the  visibility  and 
financial  appeal  for  private  investors.  Some 
examples have emerged in the case studies – 
see the extract below.

BOX	2.1

Case	study	extract:	Complexities	surrounding	offshore	wind	investments	 
in the North Sea basin

Mobilisation	of	private	investments	is	an	essential	element	for	the	sustainable	financing	of	maritime	
technologies	 such	 as	 offshore	 wind	 platforms.	 Although	 the	 technologies	 are	 relatively	 mature	 and	
the	potential	returns	of	such	investments	in	the	mid	to	longer	term	are	high,	the	full	phasing	out	of	
traditional	energy	sources	and	the	transition	to	renewables	remains	a	complex	process.	Ensuring	strong	
commitments	from	private	investors	requires	the	transparent	and	relevant	involvement	from	a	range	
of	other	stakeholders,	including	policymakers,	regulators,	and	businesses	active	in	the	maritime	energy	
sector.	For	example,	while	several	North	Sea	countries	have	been	investing	in	offshore	renewables	as	
a	part	of	their	decarbonisation	strategies,	private	investments	in	the	sector	remain	limited	as	they	are	
still	deemed	too	risky.	Traditionally,	oil	and	gas	have	been	major	sources	of	energy	and	income	to	some	
of	these	countries,	and	a	number	of	persisting	factors	remain	relevant	obstacles	to	full-scale	private	
investment	in	sustainable	sources	of	marine	energy	in	the	region.	A	specific	case	study	is	provided	to	
illustrate	the	complexity	in	the	transition	from	more	traditional	to	innovative	sources	of	marine	energy	
on	the	North	Sea.	Further	details	are	provided	in	the	case	study.

Source: Case Study (North Sea Region: the complex transition towards investing in marine offshore wind)

23

An  alternative  to  private  equity  is  of  course 
debt  finance.  However,  reliance  on  debt  may 
equally pose other sustainability issues to blue 
economy  enterprises.  For  example,  economic 
lack  the  track  record  and 
actors  might 
credentials needed to access private credit and 
therefore may have to rely on public subsidies. 
This is a recurring practice in some large and 
SME-rich  sectors,  such  as  that  of  coastal 
tourism, where public subsidies are offered to 
sustain local jobs – thus creating a dependency 
on  public  support  without  much  incentive  to 

innovate.  It  therefore  exposes  businesses  in 
the  blue  economy  to  higher  bankruptcy  risk, 
not only in the transition economies where the 
solvency of enterprises is low and the banking 
offer is threatened by financial stability, but also 
in  developed  economies  that  are  increasingly 
threatened  by  regular  financial  crises,  as  has 
been  the  case  in  recent  years.  These  trends 
are  likely  to  be  further  exacerbated  in  the 
aftermath of the COVID-19 crisis, as illustrated 
in box below.53 

BOX	2.2

Impact	of	recent	financial	crisis	cycles	and	the	post-COVID	effects	 
for the blue economy

Assessments	of	the	potential	impact	of	the	COVID-19	crisis	and	its	recovery	on	the	blue	economy	have	
multiplied	in	the	recent	weeks	and	months.	A	range	of	challenges	have	been	outlined,	specifically	for	
the	blue	economy	as	a	whole.	Maritime	shipping	has	seen	COVID-19-associated	drops	in	activity	of	up	
to	30	%	in	some	regions.	Lockdowns	and	reduced	demand	for	seafood	have	seen	fishing	activity	fall	by	
as	much	as	80	%	in	China	and	West	Africa.	Entire	nations	dependent	on	ocean	and	beach	associated	
tourism	have	seem	their	borders	shut.	Globally,	COVID-19's	impact	on	tourism	may	amount	to	a	$	7.4	
billion	loss	and	could	put	75	million	jobs	at	risk.54

The	pandemic	is	also	expected	to	exacerbate	the	offshore	law	enforcement	gap,	as	coastguards	and	
navies	look	inward	to	manage	domestic	crises	rather	than	police	the	seas.	As	law	enforcement	on	the	
ocean	is	expected	to	decline	in	the	coming	months,	it	will	be	worth	watching	data	from	vessel	automatic	
identification	 systems	 and	 satellites	 to	 determine	 whether	 signals	 of	 illicit	 fishing	 increase.	 Legal	
industrial	fishing	operations	are	likely	to	decline,	especially	over	the	near	term,	through	a	combination	
of	the	risk	of	being	at	sea	in	a	pandemic	and	supply	chain	complications	caused	by	market	closures.55

Coastal	areas	have	also	been	severely	affected	by	confinement	measures,	as	production	has	often	been	
reduced	or	stopped	and	their	livelihood	often	depends	on	a	limited	set	of	local,	marine	based	activities.	
And	yet	the	impact	amongst	blue	economy	sectors	and	across	oceans	and	coastal	areas	is	uneven,	as	
the	level	of	restrictiveness	and	the	type	of	measures	taken	varies	across	affected	countries	in	terms	of	
depth,	the	activities	involved	and	the	timing	of	measures	put	in	place.	While	some	blue	economy	sectors	
might	 be	 subject	 to	 closure	 across	 many	 global	 regions	 (e.g.	 coastal	 and	 maritime	 tourism),	 others	
may	be	reduced	but	may	continue	to	deliver	essential	goods	and	services	to	at	least	some	extent	(e.g.	
fisheries,	marine	transport).56

Importantly,	there	are	also	opportunities	that	may	arise	from	the	current	crisis.	A	reduction	in	shipping	
activity	 during	 COVID-19	 provides	 a	 valuable	 opportunity	 to	 contribute	 to	 environmental	 objectives,	
e.g.	protection	of	the	biodiversity	and	reduction	of	gas	emissions.	Quiescent	vessels	can	be	fitted	with	
upgrades	 to	 increase	 fuel	 efficiency	 and	 reduce	 emissions.	 Quieter	 shipyards	 can	 retool	 and	 secure	
political	support	to	prepare	for	future	demand	to	be	met	with	zero-emission	vessels.	Furthermore,	due	
to	 COVID-19,	 shipping	 activities	 and	 global	 demand	 for	 fish	 and	 seafood	 has	 decreased	 around	 the	
world.	This	will	allow	for	the	recovery	of	fish	stocks	and	has	positive	impacts	on	the	marine	environment.	
Unlike	 other	 investments,	 living	 ocean	 resources	 grow	 during	 downturns	 and	 fisheries	 science	 could	
design	intelligent	harvest-yield	protocols	that	maximize	the	long-term	benefit	of	any	possible	COVID-19	
gains.	 Another	 way	 to	 fast-track	 the	 reopening	 of	 the	 blue	 economy	 is	 to	 direct	 stimulus	 investing	
towards	marine	technologies	that	can	help	more	efficiently	and	effectively	observe	and	understand	the	
oceans.57

The	current	health	crisis	has	exposed	the	substantial	shortcomings	of	our	current	economic	model	–	and	
questioned	a	range	of	unsustainable	economic	activities.	Investments	in	science	and	R&I	will	be	essential	
to boost innovation and foster transformation – also in the blue economy, and to ensure sustainable 
long-term	benefits	to	the	sector	while	fully	protecting	local	communities	and	ocean	biodiversity.	These	
are	lessons	to	be	duly	reflected	upon	when	re-thinking	sustainable	financing	for	the	blue	economy	in	
the	COVID-19	recovery.58	

Source: United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) (April 2020), World Economic Forum (May 2020), 
Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) (April 2020), Seas at Risk (April 2020)

24

As  a  result,  a  substantial  lack  of  access  to 
finance  in  future  years  can  be  predicted  in 
regions where the banking offer is insufficient 
(for instance, in some emerging markets) and 
in  developed  countries  where  the  banking 
systems  are  threatened  by  the  recurrence 
of  financial  crises.  A  solution  for  this  lack  of 
access  to  finance  for  certain  activities  within 
the blue economy is the creation of policy (and 

tax) incentives that increase the appeal of such 
sectors to international investors. Nevertheless, 
the lack of capacity of local actors to fully assess 
the quality and sustainability of an investment 
may potentially accelerate the exposure of the 
blue  economy  to  unsustainable  investments. 
This is again a risk that has emerged in some 
case  studies  –  an  example  is  provided  in  the 
box below.

BOX	2.3

Case study extract: Challenges in ensuring sustainable investments  
in coastal and maritime tourism

Coastal  and  maritime  tourism  is  an  essential  driver  for  local  sustainable  growth  in  many  coastal 
regions	 globally.	 A	 trend	 for	 public	 policies	 is	 to	 foster	 a	 better	 business	 environment	 in	 the	 sector	
and	to	attract	private	investment	in	those	essential	activities.	Policymakers	and	sectoral	stakeholders	
should	 nevertheless	 act	 carefully	 and	 seek	 to	 detect	 unsustainable	 investments	 that	 could	 result	 in	
severe	pressure	on	natural	resources	and	the	environment.	Indeed,	unsustainable	finance	threatens	the	
coastal	and	maritime	tourism	sector	by	putting	at	risk	the	very	assets	that	attract	tourists.	Negative	
environmental	impacts	of	unsustainable	investments	in	coastal	and	maritime	tourism	operations	include	
waste	disposal	(sewage	and	solid	waste),	marine	litter	and	pollution,	physical	alteration	of	coastlines	
and	 landscapes,	 coastal	 erosion	 and	 the	 disruption	 in	 the	 balance	 of	 land-sea	 connections	 (such	 as	
waste	 water	 flows).	 As	 such,	 there	 is	 a	 need	 for	 better	 screening	 and	 control	 of	 the	 investments	 to	
ensure	their	sustainability.	A	specific	case	study	is	provided	to	illustrate	the	potential	risks	of	attracting	
private	investment	through	innovative	public	policies	and	sectoral	regulations	without	clear	strategies	
and	procedures	in	place	to	scrutinise	their	actual	sustainability.	Further	details	are	provided	in	the	case	
study.

Source: Case study (Unsustainable investments threaten Montenegro and Albania’s fragile ecosystems)

25

2.3  Specific patterns across actors engaged in unsustainable finance

room 

Commercial	 banks’	 lending	 and	 governance	
practices	 are	 becoming	 more	 sustainable,	
with  an  increase  in  general  disclosure  (e.g. 
on climate related policy engagement). A study 
conducted  by  the  World  Resource  Institute59 
on the world’s 50 largest private sector banks 
shows  that  only  half  of  them  currently  have 
sustainable finance targets, thereby indicating 
substantial 
improvement.  The 
for 
commitments  made  towards  sustainability: 
(i)  define  sustainability  precisely;  (ii)  identify 
financial services included; (iii) provide specific 
timelines; (iii) disclose accounting methodology; 
and (iv) include endorsement by chief executive 
officer or the board chair.60 Yet, this trend has 
not accelerated the rate of decarbonisation 
lending	 and	 investment	 portfolios,	 nor	 has	
it	broadened	the	strategic	adoption	of	low-
carbon	and	green	products	and	services.61 So 
far,  less  than  half  of  the  banks  have  publicly 
defined  ’low-carbon’  or  ‘green’  products  – 
although this trend may change.62

Insurance	companies	can	play	an	important	
role  in  the  enhancement  of  sustainability 
in	 the	 blue	 economy.  As  casualty  risk 
managers  and  insurers,  they  are  responsible 
for  covering  the  physical  damages  caused 
by  unsustainable  practice  –  either  directly 
or  indirectly:  it  is  widely  recognised  that  the 
insurance industry is exposed to risks resulting 
from the increasing frequency and intensity of 
extreme weather events, as well as the global 
transition towards a low-carbon economy. The 
expected  value  of  damages  resulting  from  a 
2°C  warming  is  $ 64  trillion  by  210063  (e.g.  in 
2017,  the  United  States  faced  major  natural 
disasters and incurred insured losses of $ 138 
billion).64 To reduce their claims ratios, insurers 
have therefore engaged on a path to integrate 
ESGs  in  their  risk  assessments  of  corporate 
activities. According to BlackRock’s 2018 Global 
Insurance  Survey,  59 %  of  North  American 

insurers have already adopted ESG investment 
policies.65 Specific initiatives, such as UNEP FI’s 
Principles for Sustainable Insurance, which has 
been  endorsed  by  65  insurers  globally,  show 
that the industry is increasingly responsive to 
sustainability concerns. Nevertheless, the	path	
of	 change	 may	 not	 be	 sufficient	 to	 address	
the	 volumes	 of	 sustainable	 finance	 needed 
to ensure a sustainable blue economy globally.

blue 

economy 

As	 of	 late,	 Multilateral	 Development	 Banks	
(MDBs)	 have	 become	 active	 in	 supporting	
sustainable 
activities 
worldwide.	 This  trend  could  potentially  have 
a  strong  effect  in  leveraging  private  lenders’ 
behaviour  towards  an  even  greater  shift  in 
sustainable  financing.  MDBs  provide  financial 
assistance,  typically  in  the  form  of  loans  and 
grants,  to  developing  countries  to  promote 
economic  and  social  development.  Such 
financing  instruments  are  used  to  further  the 
2030  agenda  for  sustainable  development. 
While  some  investments  in  the  extractive 
industries,  for  example,  remain  questionable 
as  to  their  sustainability,66  many  loans  and 
grants  undergo  strict  sustainability  screening 
processes,  including  criteria  related  to  the 
blue  economy  –  indirectly  (e.g.  biodiversity 
conservation and sustainable management of 
Living Natural Resources)67 or directly (see next 
table).

Bank 

(EIB), 

For  example,  the  World  Bank,  European 
Investment 
Inter-American 
Development  Bank  (IDB),  European  Bank  for 
Reconstruction  and  Development 
(EBRD), 
Asian  Development  Bank  (ADB)  and  African 
Development  Bank 
(AfDB)  have  already 
collectively  committed  almost  $ 237  billion 
in  climate  finance  in  the  2010-2018  period 
to  developing  and  emerging  economies.68  A 
great variation in the commitment of financial 
resources to sustainability can be noted across 

26

MDBs,  with  less  than  1 %  of  overall  MDBs-
disbursed  ODA  currently  related  to  SDGs.69   
And  yet,  many  relevant  MDBs  have  made 

important  financial  commitments  to  the  blue 
economy in recent years – see table below.

TABLE	2.2

Examples	of	financial	commitments	by	multilateral	banks	 
to a sustainable blue economy

MDBs

FINANCIAL COMMITMENT

World	Bank

PROBLUE	programme:	$	150	million	in	2018.
Active	Blue	Economy	portfolio	is	around	$	5	billion	with	a	further	$	1.65	billion	in	the	pipeline.	
PROBLUE	has	four	pillars:	(1)	Improved	Fisheries	Governance;	(2)	Marine	Litter	and	Pollution	
Management;	(3)	Blueing	Oceanic	Sectors;	(4)	Integrated	Seascapes.

IDB

EIB

EARB

ADB

AfDB

Blue	tech	Challenge	programme:	$	2	million	in	2018.70
Climate	Smart	Zone	commitment	in	the	region:	$	8	billion	commitment	in	2017.71 

The	EIB	commits	to	more	than	double	its	lending	to	sustainable	ocean	projects	 
in	the	2019-2024	period	to	€	2.5	billion.	This	is	expected	to	mobilise	at	least	€	5	billion	 
in	sustainable	blue	economy	investments.72 

Is	active	in	programmes	related	to	climate	change,	 
but	has	not	made	blue	economy	financial	commitments.

Action	Plan	for	Healthy	Oceans	and	Sustainable	Blue	Economies:	$	5	billion	from	2019-2024,	
including	co-financing	from	partners.73 

Does	not	have	an	identified	blue	economy	programme,	but	extends	lending	to	blue	economy	
projects	such	as	sustainable	fisheries	in	Malawi	($	13.2	million	in	2018).74 

Source: Finance for Impact (2019, elaborated on the basis of the various announcements made by these Multilateral Banks)

While  increasing  international  public  or  semi-
public  lending  in  the  blue  economy  should 
be  considered  as  a  positive  step  for  the 
sustainability  of  the  blue  economy,	 public	
subsidies	 may	 also	 be	 part	 of	 the	 problem:	
not	 only	 as	 they	 are	 not	 efficiently	 used	
to	 trigger	 further	 private	 resources	 into	
sustainable  activities,  but  also  as  they 
may	 still	 directly	 fund	 unsustainable	 ones. 
shipping  and  port 
Fisheries/aquaculture, 
activities  are  among  the  sectors  of  the  blue 
economy more often subsidised through state 
aid. According to the OECD, governments spend 
an estimated $ 35 billion worldwide every year 
to  support  the  fishing  sector.  This  support 
amounts  to  about  20 %  of  the  total  value  of 
all  marine  fish  caught  at  sea  and  brought  to 
port.  While  this  helps  sustain  employment  in 

the  sector,  it  is  also  conducive  to  overfishing 
and  over-exploitation  of  fishery  resources.75 
In  the  maritime  sector,  at  least  $ 3.35  billion 
per  year  is  spent  on  just  three  maritime 
subsidies  in  OECD  countries:  tonnage  taxes 
(average spending estimate: $ 1.3 billion since 
2000),  tax  exemptions  for  fuels  for  domestic 
shipping  (estimated  $ 1.3  billion  in  2016  for 
OECD countries), and fiscal measures to reduce 
wage  costs  of  seafarers.76  Subsidy  conditions 
have become more generous and the range of 
activities covered has been enlarged in reaction 
to  open  shipping  registries  in  developing 
countries (‘flags of convenience’) and subsidies 
in other developed countries.

27

in  heavy 

Export	credit	agencies	(ECA) are the financing 
arm of export finance. They typically promote 
domestic  exports  by  providing  insurance  to 
foreign  buyers.  For  example,  they  are  mostly 
infrastructure  projects 
engaged 
related  to  shipping  and  energy  –  which  can 
negatively  affect  local  ecosystems  due  to 
water / marine  pollution.77  While  the  share  of 
OECD ECAs credit is declining (fell below $ 60 
billion  in  2017),  export  credit  to  emerging 
countries has been increasing, especially short-
term credit. In the last decade, these agencies 
have  turned  into  an  instrument  of  foreign 
diplomacy, opposing countries that have been 
using  these  agencies’  investments  as  implicit 
state subsidies to finance the development of 
their industries across the globe (e.g. China) and 
those  that  apply  stringent  competition  rules. 
The  regulations  applicable  to  ECA  financial 
services  are  very  different  in  OECD  member 
countries, where they are prevented from using 
implicit  subsidies  and  have  to  comply  with  a 
set  of  minimum  social  and  environmental 
standards  (e.g.  no  loans  to  industries  backing 
arm  exports  to  repressive  regimes),  and  in 
emerging  countries,  where  there  are  no  such 
requirements.

Initiative, 

Stock	 exchanges  are  not  financial  actors, 
strictly speaking. However, they certainly have 
a  pivotal  role  in  framing  global  investments 
and  contributing  to  providing  companies  with 
global  exposure  to  a  wide  range  of  potential 
investors.  Globally,  86  stock  exchanges 
are  already  part  of  the  Sustainable  Stock 
Exchange 
the  UN  peer-to-peer 
learning platform for exploring how exchanges 
can  enhance  corporate  transparency  and 
impact  performance.  Acting  in  collaboration 
with  investors,  regulators  and  companies, 
the  initiative  addresses  environmental,  social 
and  corporate  governance  (ESG)  issues  to 
encourage  global  sustainable  investment.78 
Stock  exchanges  are  essential  actors  to  be 
engaged  with  in  order  to  allow  for  multiplier 
effects  in  shifting  global  financial  partners 
towards  sustainable  investments.  They  can 
be  particularly  effective  intermediaries  for 
raising global interest and appetite in financing 
sustainable  blue  economy  activities  with  high 
profitability potential.

28

29

PART 3

WHY: MAIN REASONS BEHIND THE PERSISTENCE  
OF UNSUSTAINABLE FINANCING IN THE BLUE ECONOMY

3.1  Four main factors behind unsustainable finance in the blue economy

The limited availability of financial support to address the needs of a sustainable blue 
economy is driven by various factors, such as those that emerged through the case studies 
reviewed for this study and confirmed through exchanges held with financial experts and 
professionals in the blue economy. Importantly, such factors can act (and be identified) at 
two different levels in each financing practice:

At  the  context-level,  relevant  pre-
conditions are essential to allow for more 
or  less  sustainable  financing  practices 
(i.e.  the  quality  of  the  specific  policy 
framework  in  place  as  well  as  the  level 
of  capability  and  profitability  for  the 
economic  operators  involved  in  the  blue 
economy,  in  the  specific  context  where 
financing support is needed).

At the financing-level, measures should 
be in place to ensure the full assessment 
(before)  and  monitoring  (during/after)  of 
the results expected and actually achieved 
(i.e.  social,  economic  and  environmental 
outcome, besides financial returns, of the 
specific financing initiative by public and/or 
private financing bodies).

Four main (types of) factors – two at the context and two at the financing level – emerged, 
from the evidence collected for this study, as the main reasons influencing sustainable 
financial support to the blue economy.

FIGURE	3.1

Relevant	contextual	and	financing	factors	that	are	essential	 
to ensure fully sustainable investments

L
E
V
E
L
-
T
X
E
T
N
O
C

L
E
V
E
L
-
G
N
C
N
A
N
I
F

I

FACTOR 1 
Policy	Framework

Rule	of	law	/	regulations 
Good	governance 
Enforcement	capacity 
Codes of conduct

FACTOR 2 
Market	Specificities

Market	/	value	chain	analysis 
Sector	profitability 
Innovation	/	technology	uptake 
Analysis	of	potential	returns

FACTOR 3 
Public	Mechanisms

FACTOR 4 
Private	Mechanisms

Efficient	/	effective	delivery 
Transparent	public	incentives 
Warrants	for	private	leveraging 
Focus	on	relevant	opportunities	/	gaps

Commitment	to	sustainability	practices 
Transparency	and	accountability 
Assessment	of	impacts	of	financing 
Internalisation of local externalities

Source: Elaborated specifically for this study

30

3.2  Context level factors influencing sustainable financing decisions

Factor	1	–	Policy	framework: 
lack	of	regulation,	sub-optimal	policies,	
enforcements	of	regulations,	etc.

(e.g. 

coupled  with 

A first and classic set of macro-level factors79 
preventing  fully  sustainable  financing  for  the 
blue  economy  relates  to  overall  suboptimal 
regulations on the financial and real economy 
in  emerging  and  transition 
sectors 
countries), 
limited  policy 
transparency  and  enforcement  capacity  –  in 
the regions and sectors where financial support 
is needed. This is a challenge that goes beyond 
the blue economy as such, but clearly provides 
a risk to investments and a potential obstacle 
to  sustainable  financing  in  these  contexts.  In 
the  absence  of  good  regulations / rule  of  law, 
enforcement, and policy capacity, the chances 
that financial support results in unsustainable 
practices are high.

At a more general level, these factors include, for example:

Lack of overall / sectoral regulations (national 
and international), enforcement, rules of law, 
property rights, good governance;

Limited  administrative  capacity / expertise 
for policymakers to implement sound policy 
frameworks; and

Lack  of  effective  spatial  planning  and 
integrated  policies  for  relevant  sectors  at 
national and international level;

Lack of long-term policy visions and shared 
towards  a 
public-private  commitments 
sustainable blue economy;

Lack  of  sufficient  enforcement  of  relevant 
national and regional regulations, as well as 
penalties in case of non-compliance with the 
real economy sectoral regulations (including 
legally-binding 
ensure 
transparent and accountable financing;80

standards) 

to 

Weak  disclosure  obligations  leading  to  a 
loose transaction screening, as well as weak 
enforcement capacity;

Regulatory loopholes / gaps: inapplicability of 
regulations to certain sectors / geographies;

Adequate  monitoring  and  enforcement 
systems,  effective  penalties,  independent 
impact  assessments  prior  to  authorisation 
of investments, incentives for good practices 
and  mitigation / offset  actions  to  minimise 
damages.

In the absence of good regulations / rule of law, 

enforcement,  and  policy  capacity,  the  chances 

that financial support results in unsustainable 

practices are high.

31

BOX	3.1

Policy	framework-related	factors	required	to	ensure	sustainable	financing	 
in the blue economy

Examples	of	the	possible	gaps	in	blue	economy	policy	frameworks:

Sectoral	 policies	 and	 regulations	 are	 essential	 to	 provide	 a	 clear	 frame	 for	 the	 sustainability	
requirements	 in	 ‘traditional’	 sectors	 with	 high	 return	 on	 investment	 potential	 (coastal	 tourism,	
shipping,	aquaculture,	etc.);

Full	 transparency	 and	 enforcement	 mechanisms	 should	 be	 in	 place	 to	 avoid	 corruption	 in	 blue	
economy	sectors;

Effective	maritime	spatial	planning	and	coastal	zone	management	are	key	to	preserving	ecosystem	
assets	 and	 to	 allowing	 proper	 use	 of	 coastal	 and	 maritime	 space	 and	 sustainable	 sectoral	
financing	/	investments;

Presence	 of	 effective	 inter-sectoral	 governance	 bodies	 that	 can	 properly	 oversee	 and	 regulate	 
a number of blue economy activities managed through various sectoral Ministries, Local Authorities 
and	other	bodies;

An	effective	ocean	governance	is	key	to	avoid	ecosystem	damage	by	unsustainable	practices;

Specific	 sectoral	 and	 corporate	 codes	 of	 conducts	 in	 the	 blue	 economy	 are	 emerging	 but	 should	 
be	 reinforced	 to	 ensure	 full	 cross-sectoral	 commitments	 from	 public	 and	 private	 actors	 involved	 
in	the	sector;

Systems	 should	 be	 fostered	 to	 monitor	 and	 enforce	 sea-related	 infringements	 (e.g.	 for	 marine	
protected	areas);

It	is	essential	to	further	assess	the	sustainability	of	the	foreseen	impacts	for	blue	investments	prior	
to	their	authorisation;

Incentives	to	stimulate	private	investments	in	critical	technologies	are	key	(e.g.	diversify	traditional	
activities,	boost	niches).

Factor	2	–	Market	specificities:	 
poor	market	analysis	and	lack	 
of	business	cases	to	justify	
investments

A  second  essential  set  of  factors 
is  related  to  the  specificities  of 
the  blue  economy81,  including  its 
activities,  related  value  chains,  and 
operators  (businesses,  etc.),  which 
characterise  the  targets  of  financing 
mechanisms.  Lack  of  clear  market 
data,  understanding  of  potentials, 
profitability  of 
local  businesses, 
etc.  might  limit  the  appetite  for 
longer-term 
(sustainable)  private 
investments  and  prevent  public 
financing  from  being  fully  effective 
and data driven.

32

A general review of these factors includes aspects such as:

The  limited  knowledge  of  the  development 
needs  and  potential  of  targeted  businesses 
and  value  chains,  thus  limited  ability  to 
benchmark, compare and scrutinise potential 
returns of local investments;

The  fragmented  market,  with  large,  small 
and  micro  enterprises  acting  in  mature 
markets  or  emerging  niches  with  no  clear 
market  prospects 
limited 
appeal to private investors and some public 
investment banks;

resulting 

in 

The risk profile of pilots and experimentation 
initiatives, which tend to differ in mainstream 
sectors (less risky) and in other more “niche” 
sectors (riskier);

Limited revenue capacity of local businesses 
and / or  ability  to  access  and  engage  with 
local / international  investors,  even  in  areas 
with high potential returns;

Lack of market data and clear information for 
investors to evaluate the overall bankability 
investments 
and 
(transparency is inadequate and/or reporting 
requirements are weak);

returns  of  proposed 

Awareness  issues  at  the  local  level  (e.g. 
hidden unsustainability factors that financial 
players are unable to detect).

BOX	3.2

Market-related	factors	required	to	ensure	sustainable	financing	 
in the blue economy

Examples	of	the	possible	gaps	in	blue	economy	market	dynamics	include	the	following:

Blue	economy	specific	data	is	generally	lacking	at	a	disaggregated	and	local	level	–	besides	more	
emerging	analysis	across	the	EU	and	some	global	initiatives	(e.g.	OECD	2019),	the	understanding	of	
local	activities	and	value	chains	in	the	blue	economy	remain	limited	and	thus	the	ability	to	benchmark,	
compare	and	scrutinise	potential	returns	of	local	investments	is	poor;	

The	majority	of	emerging	activities	and	sub-sectors	in	the	blue	economy	are	often	characterised	by	a	
largely	fragmented	market	with	a	variety	of	small	and	micro	enterprises	that	are	acting	in	emerging	
niches	with	no	clear	market	prospects.	This	results	in	limited	appeal	for	private	investors	and	some	
public	investment	banks;

Many	established	activities	may	still	remain	highly	concentrated,	with	few	companies	accounting	for	
the	bulk	of	the	market	and	benefitting	from	the	profitability	of	investments	being	done	in	the	past.	
There are limited incentives to further invest in more sustainable business models, technologies and 
infrastructure;

Apart	 from	 some	 notable	 exceptions,82	 a	 still	 limited	 expertise	 and	 track	 record	 of	 business	
cases	 in	 blue	 economy	 potentials	 (technologies	 and	 value-chains)	 results	 in	 high-risk	 profiles	 for	
investments  in  highly  innovative  activities  essential  for  the  modernisation  of  traditional  sectors 
(tourism,	 aquaculture,	 shipping,	 repairing,	 etc.)	 and/or	 the	 promotion	 of	 emerging	 activities	 (blue-
biotechnologies,	offshore	renewable	energy,	etc.);

In	 some	 cases,	 limited	 capacity	 of	 the	 local	 blue	 economy	 businesses	 in	 engaging	 with	 investors	
prevents	proper	dialogue	and	effective	results	(while	some	practices	are	emerging	in	the	EU	they	are	
still	limited	globally	–	see	Chapter	6);

Novelty	and	a	lack	of	clarity	in	the	blue	economy	concept,	with	limited	market	analysis	at	the	local	
level	still	persisting	in	many	global	coastal	countries	and	regions,	result	in	a	lack	of	clear	information	
for	investors	to	evaluate	the	overall	bankability	and	returns	of	proposed	investments;	

Transparency	is	inadequate	and	/	or	reporting	requirements	weak,	e.g.	no	environmental	and	social	
impact	assessments	(ESIA),	no	public	consultations,	etc.,		and	in	turn	the	prevention	of	the	assessment	
of	fully	sustainable	investment	options.

33

Concrete	examples	of	contextual	factors	as	emerging	in	the	case	studies

The 
interplay  of  such  contextual  factors 
(policy  and  market)  is  shown  in  the  practices 
assessed as part of the case studies provided 
with this study. An illustration of some concrete 

examples is provided in the box below to show 
how  such  factors  may  result  in  bottlenecks 
preventing  fully  sustainable  financing  in  the 
blue economy.

BOX	3.3

Case	study	extracts:	contextual	factors	preventing	sustainable	financing	 
in the blue economy

The	difficulty	of	getting	it	right:	the	story	of	the	Carlsbad	Desalination	Plant	in	California

Investments	 in	 desalination	 plants	 may	 lead	 to	 unsustainable	 financing	 due	 to	 ineffective	 policy	
frameworks.	 This	 includes	 the	 poor	 regulation	 of	 the	 sector	 that	 fails	 to	 address	 and	 mitigate	 the	
negative	ecosystem	impacts	of	sectoral	investments,	and	delays	in	administrative	processes	such	as	
obtaining	environmental	permits.	Investments	are	also	held	back	by	a	wide	range	of	market	conditions.	
For	example,	there	is	a	lack	of	existing	data	and	factual	evidence	on	the	specificities	of	the	sector	that	
are	essential	to	support	sound	environmental	impact	assessments	and	to	review	the	financial	viability	
for	alternative	and	possibly	more	sustainable	models.

Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan	pipeline	development	risks:	impacts	on	local	communities

The	 geo-strategic	 importance	 for	 marine-energy	 supply	 can	 motivate	 investors	 and	 governments	 to	
downgrade	 the	 preliminary	 assessments	 needed	 to	 ensure	 the	 sustainable	 execution	 of	 a	 project.	 In	
countries with poor	law	enforcement	capacity	and	investment	transparency, this may contribute to 
the violation of existing regulation or standards and ultimately result in unsustainable investments 
being	 approved	 as	 shown	 in	 the	 “Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan	 pipeline	 development	 risks”	 case	 study.	 Also,	
mechanisms	in	place	to	support	the	local	economies	around	the	pipeline	(i.e.,	processes	of	monetary	
compensation),	became	dysfunctional	as	funds	were	embezzled	by	authorities	–	forcing	people	to	give	
up	their	land	in	order	to	avoid	paying	compensation.

Coastal	degradation	caused	by	the	development	of	tourism	infrastructure	in	Thailand

The	 models	 of	 tourism	 development	 based	 on	 massive	 influxes	 of	 visitors	 have	 been	 proven	 to	 be	
unsustainable	globally	–	both	for	local	businesses	and	employees	as	well	as	local	ecosystems.	However,	
as	many	countries	(particularly	in	emerging	and	developing	economies)	rely	heavily	on	tourism	as	a	
source	of	growth	and	jobs,	the	focus	of	private	investors	on	such	models	to	support	their	returns	on	
investments	is	often	welcomed	by	local	governments	as	a	tool	for	growth.	Such	practices	continue	in	
the  absence	 of	 clear	 policy	 frameworks	 and	 requirements	 for	 sound	 feasibility	 studies	 or	 impact	
assessments	 as	 a	 pre-condition	 for	 the	 approval	 of	 any	 investment.	 The	 case	 study	 on	 tourism	
in	Thailand	provides	a	picture	of	such	an	issue.	The	government	has	willingly	stepped	in	to	minimise	
damage,	with	effective	enforcement	measures	in	the	form	of	island	and	beach	closures.	The	closures,	
however,	 are	 not	 a	 sustainable	 solution	 in	 the	 long	 term.	 This	 situation	 sheds	 light	 on	 the	 limited 
administrative	 capacity	 and	/	or	 expertise	 of	 policymakers	 to	implement	sound	policies	and	to	set	
up	a	sustainable	investment	strategy	based	on	the	economic	resources	already	available	(i.e.	incomes	
from	mass	tourism).

Environmental	and	social	consequences	of	increased	fishmeal	production	in	Senegal

Developing	countries	rely	greatly	on	foreign	direct	investments	(FDI)	to	finance	activities	in	key	sectors	
of	their	economies	–	including	fisheries,	aquaculture	and	farm-processing.	However,	foreign	investors	
might	 not	 necessarily	 focus	 on	 sustainable,	 small-scale,	 activities	 and	 rather	 be	 interested	 in	 large	
business	ventures	that	allow	for	higher	revenue.	For	Instance,	in	Senegal,	foreign	investors	invest	in	
the	 large-scale	 production	 of	 fishmeal	 and	 fish-oil	 as	 a	 basis	 for	 global	 exports,	 which	 in	 turn	 may	
negatively	affect	the	local	market	and	decrease	local	fish	stocks.	Foreign	investments	may	therefore	
result	 in	 unsustainable	 practices,	 in	 the	 absence	 of	 a	 clear	 local	 vision,	 policy	 frameworks	 and	
transparent	 investment	 incentives	 and	 regulations.	 A	 lack	 of	 standard	 procedures	 to	 assess	
the  social  and  environmental  sustainability	 of	 potential	 investments	 contributes	 to	 unsustainable	
financing	practices.

34

BOX	3.3

Case	study	extracts:	contextual	factors	preventing	sustainable	financing	 
in the blue economy

Sustainability	challenges	of	salmon	farms	in	New	Zealand

Governments	are	rightly	tightening	their	environmental	regulations	globally	to	ensure	fully	sustainable	
economic	 activities	 (e.g.	 fish	 farming)	 while	 protecting	 coastal	 and	 marine	 areas.	 In	 the	 case	 of	 fish	
farming,  adapting	 to	 new	 rules  through  time  may  lead  to  a  considerable  loss  of  income  for  local 
businesses	 already	 operating	 in	 those	 areas,	 making	 some	 farms	 no	 longer	 commercially	 viable.	
For	 instance,	 aquaculture	 practices	 predating	 the	 environmental	 standards	 recently	 set	 up	 by	 some	
governments	allow	for	significant	revenues	at	the	costs	of	environmental	damages.	In	New	Zealand,	
complying	with	these	new	standards	would	lead	to	a	considerable	loss	of	income,	making	some	farms	
no	 longer	 commercially	 viable.	 Furthermore,	 public	 authorities	 have	 also	 been	 voluntarily	 lenient	
in	 applying	 the	 regulation,	 granting	 new	 permits,	 and	 continuing	 old	 unsustainable	 farms.	 In	 this	
respect,	the	design	of	regulation	should	take	into	consideration	the	investment	costs	of	companies	
to	support	their	adaptation	(in	this	case,	through	financial	incentives).	Moreover,	it	is	up	to	companies	
in	the	blue	economy	to	set	up	long-term	strategies	that	fully	acknowledge	the	value	and	fragility	of	
local	ecosystems	and	to	put	in	place	measures	to	prevent	such	value	from	being	‘at	risk’.	Sound	local	
policy	frameworks	and	clear	business	plans	by	local	companies	are	therefore	essential	preconditions	
for	sustainable	financing.	

Unsustainable	investments	threaten	Montenegro	and	Albania’s	fragile	ecosystems

More	and	more	often	local	governments	are	promoting	business-friendly	initiatives to attract foreign 
investments	in	strategic	sectors,	such	as	coastal	and	maritime	tourism.	As	part	of	these	policy	measures,	
ecosystem-based	 approaches	 are	not	often	fully	addressed	and	rigorous	procedures	 to	 assess	 the	
sustainability  of  investments	 remain	unacknowledged.	As	a	result,	the	increasing	flows	of	(foreign)	
investments	 may	 not	 necessarily	 result	 in	 sustainable	 activities	 and	 could	 paradoxically	 put	 local	
communities	and	ecosystems	at	risk.	For	instance,	in	Albania,	the	limited enforcement of the recent 
regulation encouraging more sustainable management of resources and the lack	of	explanation in the 
recent	strategy	toward	more	sustainable	tourism	development	do	not	allow	for	a	proper	shift	towards	
more	sustainable	projects.

Source: Case studies: The difficulty of getting it right: the story of the Carlsbad Desalination Plant in California, Baku-Tbili-
si-Ceyhan pipeline development risks: environmental degradation and impacts on local communities, Coastal degradation 
caused  by  the  development  of  tourism  infrastructure  in  Thailand,  Environmental  and  social  consequences  of  increased 
fishmeal  production  in  Senegal,  Sustainability  challenges  of  salmon  farms  in  New  Zealand,  Unsustainable  investments 
threaten Montenegro and Albania’s fragile ecosystems.

35

3.3  Financing level factors influencing sustainable financing decisions

Factor	3	–	Public	mechanisms: 
suboptimal	features	and	design	 
of	public	financing	schemes

public 

A  first  factor  at  the  level  of  specific 
financing  mechanisms83  is  related 
to  the  characteristics  in  the  public 
funds, 
investments  and 
general  subsidies  that  are  put  in 
place to support the blue economy. As 
shown by the reviewed case studies, 
ineffective  public  support  results  in 
unsustainable  activities  in  the  blue 
economy.

A general review of such factors includes the following challenges:

subsidies 

Inefficient 
perverse 
incentives that drive unsustainable behaviour 
of local/global actors;

and/or 

Limited  capacity  or  challenges  due  to 
complexities  in  providing  effective  policy 
incentives and public schemes;

Public  funding/financing  mechanisms  might 
not  always  ensure  that  money  is  spent 
where and how it was initially planned (e.g. 
mismanagement,  corruption,  or  simply  due 
to  delivery/spending  pressure),  may  focus 
on easier ways to allocate resources rather 
than  identifying  areas  with  higher  added-
value / returns, or they may lack knowledge/
competence  when  assessing  the  potential 
impacts of their financial contributions;

The  disconnect  between  public  and  private 
financing  streams,  which  prevent  smooth 
and efficient incentives for private leveraging, 
and  the  transition  from  publicly  funded 
initiatives  to  venture  capital  (resulting  in 
public  investments  which  do  not  result  in 
longer-term results/achievements);

Limited  ability  of  public  financing 
to 
effectively leverage private financing towards 
high-impact 
(for  example, 
investments 
through  efficient  blending,  public-private-
partnerships,  warrants, 
pre-commercial 
financing, etc.);

A focus on the visibility of public investment 
(or public-private agreements), to maximise 
political  returns  in  terms  of  consensus,  but 
without a clear focus on the actual results;

A  clear  view  of  where  public  money  could 
be  invested  to  ensure  private  investment 
in  areas  of  high  financial  risks  but  strong 
societal  returns  (as  incentives  to  foster  the 
interest  of  the  private  sector  to  invest  in 
areas  with  high  environmental,  social  and 
economic sustainability for local communities 
and ecosystems).

36

BOX	3.4

Public	mechanism-related	factors	required	to	ensure	sustainable	financing	
in the blue economy

Examples	of	the	possible	gaps	in	public	financing	in	the	blue	economy	include	the	following:

Ineffective	subsidies	persist	globally	in	politically	relevant	sectors,	such	as	fisheries,	transport	or	oil	
and	gas	–	for	instance,	in	the	fisheries	sector	some	subsidies	contribute	to	overfishing,	overcapacity	
and	illegal,	unreported	and	unregulated	fishing	(IUU)	fishing.84 This may be due to mismanagement and 
corruption,	but	more	often	is	a	result	of	delivery	/	spending	pressure,	or	a	lack	of	clear	understanding	
of	the	specific	areas	of	clear	added-value/returns	for	public	financing.	

Public	funding	/	financing	mechanisms	are	not	always	based	on	sound	evidence	and	as	a	result	might	
not	always	ensure	that	the	money	is	spent	where	and	how	it	was	initially	planned;

Focus	may	be	given	to	the	visibility	of	public	investment	(or	public-private	agreements),	to	maximise	
political	returns	in	terms	of	consensus,	but	without	a	clear	understanding	/	monitoring	of	the	actual	
results	achieved;

Public	 resources	 towards	 the	 blue	 economy	 may	 not	 always	 be	 well-designed	 to	 function	 as	 a	
leverage	 for	 the	 private	 sector	 towards	 areas	 of	 greater	 sustainability	 for	 local	 communities	 and	
ecosystems	 (e.g.	 by	 targeting	 areas	 of	 high	 financial	 risks	 but	 strong	 societal	 returns).	 This	 may,	
hence,	prevent	smooth	and	efficient	incentives	for	private	leveraging	and	the	transition	from	publicly	
funded	initiatives	to	venture	capitalists	(the	so	called	‘valley	of	death’);

Still	insufficient	information	on	where	public	money	is	invested	globally	to	support	a	sustainable	blue	
economy	(in	any	sort	of	‘blue’	budgeting/reporting,	as	a	pre-requisite	to	assess	the	impact	of	those	
flows);

While	public	funding	support	to	the	blue	economy	may	focus	on	economic	potentials,	it	still	does	not	
always	include	efforts	to	foster	full	capacity	to	sustain	the	quality	of	ecosystem	services,	including	
through	maritime	spatial	planning,	integrated	coastal	zone	management,	impact	assessments	and	
enforcement	capacity.

37

Factor	4	–	Private	mechanisms: 
growing	 commitments	 but	 difficult	
to	assure	full	impact	assessments

A  final  set  of  factors  refers  to 
the  specific  features85  of  private 
financing  practices,  including  direct 
investments,  which  still  struggle 
to  ensure  a  full  understanding  and 
assessment of the potential impacts 
of  their  practices.  Notwithstanding 
the  growing  commitment  of  the 
sector  towards  greater  transparency 
and  impact  financing  practices,  a 
clear assessment of potential impacts 
remains a challenge.

A general review of such factors includes the following challenges:

Limited 
transparent  data  on  private 
investments  and  flows  across  sectors  and 
countries (origins/destinations);

Limited  experience  and  the  complexity  of 
taking into account external investment costs 
such as (long-term) ecosystem impacts;

Absence  of  stringent  compliance  standards 
across entire organisations;

Adherence  to  existing  market  or  internal 
standards, linked to negligence or operational 
dysfunction;

As  an  influencing  factor,  the  organisation’s 
size  (e.g.  smaller  funds  may  make  fewer 
efforts in establishing standards / disclosing 
evidence);

Accepted  risk,  whereby  institutions  may 
support  unsustainable  activities  based  on 
other stakes which override unsustainability 
factors  (external,  e.g.  project  economics / 
political 
outweighing 
unsustainability  impacts;  internal,  e.g.  client 
relationship  stakes  which  take  over  any 
impact considerations);

implications 

levels  of  granularity 

Inappropriate 
(e.g. 
Equator  Principles’86  restricted  scope  and 
high lending thresholds);

structure 

dynamics 

Transaction 
(e.g. 
syndicated  financing  creates  higher  peer 
commercial pressure, a behaviour commonly 
observed amongst Asian banking pools);

investments 

Single  vs  portfolio 
(e.g.  a 
portfolio management approach may not be 
granular enough to identify unsustainability 
risks at the individual project level);

Structure  of  equity  markets,  which  are 
focused on shareholder returns and excessive 
turnover of portfolios, preventing meaningful 
engagement with companies; and

Ensuring  transparent  assessment  of  the 
full  impacts  of  financed  activities  on  local 
communities and ecosystems.

38

BOX	3.5

Private	mechanism-related	factors	required	to	ensure	sustainable	 
financing	in	the	blue	economy

Examples	of	the	possible	gaps	in	private	financing	in	the	blue	economy	include	the	following:

Limited awareness and understanding of the blue economy as a whole, also due to its novelty, the 
presence	of	terminological	confusion	(blue,	ocean,	etc.),	and	the	different	activities	it	encompasses	
(traditional/emerging),	as	well	as	a	lack	of	transparent	and	publicly	available	data	on	global	financing/
investment	flows	in	the	blue	economy;

Current	 initiatives	 aimed	 at	 raising	 commitments	 towards	 and	 visibility	 of	 the	 sector	 for	 private	
investors	are	still	limited,	besides	recent	relevant	actions	promoted	by	the	EU	and	WWF	and	some	
recent	sectoral	alliances	(e.g.	shipping);

Lack	of	specific	focus	on	the	blue	economy	in	most	initiatives	aimed	at	setting	sustainable	financing	
standards	(including	due	to	low	awareness	of	the	sector	and	the	impacts	it	can	have	globally);

Absence	of	strong	demand	for	sustainable	blue	economy	services	(due	to	relatively	traditional	buyers	
either	public	or	private),	limits	the	availability	of	sector-specific	insurance	solutions	in	the	market	
(these	are	typical	dilemma	for	more	traditional	activities	in	the	blue	economy	and	also	discussed	in	
some	of	the	case	studies	related	to	aquaculture,	fisheries,	shipping	tourism);87

The	 complexity	 of	 providing	 full	 impact	 assessments	 in	 such	 a	 diversified	 sector	 –	 with	 strong	
interconnection	 between	 marine	 and	 in-land	 ecosystems	 and	 impacts	 that	 might	 spread	 across	
seas	to	much	broader	communities	–	makes	the	need	to	identify	way	forwards	for	incentivising	(or	
requiring)	specific	assessment	tools	and	approaches	even	more	challenging;

Limited	 monitoring	 of	 blue	 economy	 private	 investments	 and	 challenges	 to	 define	 ways	 for	 the	
monetisation	of	blue	economy	related	data	are	particularly	relevant	aspects	to	be	addressed	in	order	
to	leverage	sustainable	private	investments	in	the	sector	more	globally.

39

Concrete	examples	of	financing-level	factors	as	emerging	from	the	case	studies

The interplay between public and private financing factors emerged from the case studies 
provided with this study. As for the context-level factors, an illustration is provided in the 
box below, suggesting how they can in practice prevent fully sustainable financing across 
blue economy / sectors.

BOX	3.6

Case	study	extracts:	financing-level	factors	hindering	sustainable	 
financing	in	the	blue	economy

Few	incentives	in	East	Asia	to	promote	a	sustainable	shipbuilding	transition

Green	shipping	development	can	be	hindered	by	unsustainable	financing,	as	is	seen	in	East	Asia,	resulting	
from a mix of ineffective	public	finance	(e.g.	due	to	perverse	incentives	which	favour	economic	subsidies	
to	 ‘traditional’	 practices,	 rather	 than	 investing	 in	 innovative	 technologies	 and	 renewable	 sources	 of	
energy),	as	well	as	the	limited	 appetite	 of	 private	 mechanisms	(e.g.	a	lack	of	incentives	to	invest	in	
more	 efficient	 and	 innovative	 means	 of	 maritime	 transport	 due	 to	 high	 perceived	 risks,	 or	 the	 higher	
transaction	costs	of	more	innovative	investments).

Coral	reef	degradation	due	to	maritime	tourism	development	in	Belize

Public	 and	 private	 investments	 in	 coastal	 and	 maritime	 tourism	 aim	 at	 ensuring	 economic	 growth,	
but	do	not	always	explicitly	address	the	preservation	of	local	ecosystems	and	the	natural	capital	for	
marine and coastal areas, which are essential resources for local communities and the main assets for 
the	tourism	sector	itself.	This	is	the	case	for	the	tourism	sector	in	Belize,	where	investments  target 
economic growth without a clear focus on environmental sustainability.	This	is	also	happening	due	to	
serious	constraints	in	the	quality	and	availability	of	environmental	social	and	economic	data, which 
prevents	policymakers	and	potential	investors	from	making	more	informed	decisions.		

Environmental	and	social	impacts	of	touristic	transport	in	the	Cayman	Islands

Like	 for	 the	 case	 above,	 in	 the	 Cayman	 Islands	 public	 and	 private	 investments  focus  on  economic 
returns	and	job	support,	despite	the	potential	negative	impacts	on	the	marine	environment and the 
smaller	businesses	that	are	dependent	on	it,	as	put	forward	in	local	environmental	impact	assessments.	
This	is	often	the	case	because	smaller	 businesses	 are	 not	 as	 appealing	 to	 investors	 and	(at	times)	
policymakers	 as	 larger	 businesses	 that	 offer	 higher	 financial	 returns.	 This	 often	 happens	 in	 small	
countries	relying	heavily	on	foreign	direct	investment.

Japanese	fossil	fuel	subsidies:	negatively	impacting	sustainable	energy	transition?

In	the	aftermath	of	the	Tsunami	crisis,	Japan	supported	harmful global subsidies to ensure internal 
energy	production	and	to	contribute	to	the	continuation	of	internal	market	activities.	This	in	turn	boosted	
unsustainable	activities	in	some	traditional	blue	economy	sectors	worldwide	(e.g.	fossil	fuel	exploration	
and	exploitation).	This	is	an	example	of	national	energy	policy	that,	coupled	with	limited	transparency 
on the investments made and high internal	 political	 pressure	 to	pursue	such	investments,	made	the	
pressure	of	the	international	community	hardly	relevant	(at	least	in	the	short	term).	On	a	positive	side,	
as	the	case	suggests,	Japanese	investments	recently	started	to	turn	towards	renewables.	Additionally,	
in	 order	 to	 reduce	 the	 country’s	 reliance	 on	 nuclear	 power	 and	 foreign	 energy	 sources,	 in	 2018	 the	
government	pledged	to	boost	the	share	of	renewables	in	its	energy	mix	from	16%	to	24	%	by	2030.

North	Sea	Region:	the	complex	transition	towards	investing	in	marine	offshore	wind

When	it	comes	to	innovative	technologies,	such	as	offshore	wind	and	ocean	energy,	investment	risks due 
to	possible	changes	in	regulations	and	potentially	lower	returns	on	investment	(due	to	limited	commercial	
uptake)	 affect	 the	 decisions	 of	 investors	 who	 may	 pull	 out	 of	 potential	 financing	 in	 innovative	
areas	–	at	least	in	the	short	to	mid-term.	Such	decisions	may	be	reinforced	by	a	lack	of	confidence	and	
expertise	in	sectors	where	investors	have	limited	experience,	therefore	making	it	complex	for	them	to	
fully	 take	 into	 account	 external	 investment	 costs	 such	 as	 (long-term)	 ecosystem	 impacts.	Such	a	
situation occurs in the North Sea, where little commercial incentives exist for investment in more costly 
offshore	wind	renewables.

Integrating	mangrove	forests	and	shrimp	farms	in	Vietnam

Poorly designed local subsidies	for	aquaculture	in	developing	countries,	coupled	with	a	far	too	limited 
public	 finance	 capacity  to  boost  sectoral  reforms,  may  result  in  a  lack	 of	 incentives	 for	 private	
investments	in	innovative	and	sustainable	aquaculture	models.	This	could	lead	to	missed	opportunities	
for	the	sector,	as	a	substantial	lack	of	investments	in	sustainable	and	innovative	business	models	makes	
the	shift	towards	sustainable	management	and	the	use	of	more	eco-friendly	installations	and	equipment	
(e.g.	in	shrimp	farms)	extremely	challenging,	as	it	is	the	case	in	Vietnam.

40

BOX	3.6

Case	study	extracts:	financing-level	factors	hindering	sustainable	 
financing	in	the	blue	economy	(suite)

Ineffective	investments	in	EU	seaports

Public	financing	initiatives	are	often	essential	to	boost	sustainable	and	green	ports.	Although	investments	
contributed	to	levelling	the	playing	field	and	maximising	ports’	potential,	small	ports	may	fail in getting 
necessary	 funds	 (a	 'missed	 opportunity')	 because	 they	 are	 deemed	 financially	 unsustainable.	
Additionally,	 investments	 in	 smaller	 ports	 may	 often	 be	 ineffective	 or	 unsustainable	 due	 to	 several	
factors	(e.g.	a	lack	of	coordination	of	public	funds,	duplication	of	projects	in	the	same	region,	over-
ambitious	 projects).	This	has	been	the	case	in	Europe	where	policy	initiatives	to	create	the	European	
Single	 market	 have	 been	 critical	 for	 seaports	 and	 ultimately	 put	 ports’	 development	 plans	 under	
pressure.	

Environmental	and	social	consequences	of	increased	fishmeal	production	in	Senegal

Local	processing	and	supply	chains	in	Senegal	have	recently	been	influenced	by	foreign	investors	(mostly	
from	the	EU,	China	and	Russia)	interested	in	large-scale	production	of	fishmeal	and	fish-oil.	Consequently,	
there is an absence of strong demand for local sustainable fisheries services as buyers turn towards 
recent	and	well	established	major	actors	(i.e.,	fishmeal	factories)	and,	for	the	local	fishermen,	fishmeal	
plants	are	more	attractive	customers	than	the	locals,	as	the	plants	are	buying	in	bulk	and	paying	in	cash.	

Misuse	of	funds	dedicated	to	the	development	of	Mozambique	Tuna	Fishery  

In	 Mozambique,	 private	 banks	 backed	 up	 by	 public	 authorities	 provided	 financial	 support	 to	 large	
companies	 in	 one	 of	 the	 traditional	 sectors	 (fisheries).	 As	 such,	 less	 support	 is	 allocated	 to	 small	
sustainable	 blue	 economy	 services.	 In	 this	 specific	 case,	 the	 lack	 of	 sufficient	 monitoring	 and	
prevention	 measures,	 both	 by	 the	 banks	 and	 at	 the	 governmental	 level,	 against	 the	 misuse	 of	 both	
public	and	private	funds,	led	to	immense	fraud and bribery	that	defrauded	the	project’s	investors	and	
adversely	impacted	the	economy	of	Mozambique.	

Source: ase studies: Few incentives in East Asia to promote a sustainable shipbuilding transition, Coral reef degradation due 
to maritime tourism development in Belize, Environmental and social impacts of touristic transport in the Cayman Islands, 
Japanese fossil fuel subsidies: negatively impacting the sustainable energy transition?, North Sea Region: the complex tran-
sition towards investing in marine offshore wind, Integrating mangrove forests and shrimp farms in Vietnam, Ineffective  
investments in EU seaports, Environmental and social consequences of increased fishmeal production in Senegal, Misuse 
of funds dedicated to the development of Mozambique Tuna Fishery.

41

3.4  Addressing unsustainable financing practices: getting the sequencing  

of factors right

Unsustainable	finance	practices	do	not	merely	result	from	single	factors,	 
but	rather	their	interplay. 

activities 

economy 

The balance of positive / negative of factors at 
play  affects  the  chances  for  un / sustainable 
blue 
(or  missed 
opportunities)  being  financed.  Unsound  policy 
frameworks  and  unappealing  blue  economy 
market  conditions  result  in  potentially  high 
financial risk and limit the appeal for investors 
to  further  assess  specific  companies,  value-
chains or sectors. The ability to set-up effective 
public and private financing mechanisms with 
proper  targets,  aims  and  monitoring  systems 

affects the extent to which sustainable results 
In  further  assessing  these 
are  achieved. 
factors, and using the inspiration from the case 
studies carried out for this study, as well as the 
accompanying study on sustainability criteria,88 
we  therefore  consider  it  valuable  to  present 
the  right  sequencing  in  which  such  factors 
should  be  assessed  –  to  better  understand 
unsustainable  finance  practices  and  how  to 
properly address their root causes.

A	sound	and	transparent	blue	economy	market	(factor	2)	is	the	key	element	 
to	ensure	sustainable	investments. 

Financial sustainability therefore begins with a 
quality analysis of local investment prospects, 
as  well  as  trends  of  growth  and  expected 
returns  for  investments  in  different  economic 
activities in the sector. Greater sectoral visibility 
should  be  a  priority  for  local  blue  economy 
actors  and  relevant  institutions,  as  a  way  to 
attract  interested  global  financial  players. 
Sound  business  models  are  essential  to  take 
full account of economic, social, environmental 
local  
impacts  as  well  as  a 
strong  
considerations. 
understanding 
and 
the 
opportunities ahead for the sector in a specific 
investments 
context,  preliminary 

challenges 

range  of 

To 
of 

(public) 

ensure 

a 

are  pivotal  –  e.g.  studies,  research,  market 
analysis  and / or  demonstrations,  all  tailored 
to  a  specific  context  as  a  prerequisite  for 
the  full  sustainability  of  any  blue  economy 
investment  projects.  Focus  of  such  analysis 
should  be  both  the  need  for  reconversion  of 
large  and  traditional  activities  losing  their 
competitiveness  and  the  potential  emerging 
niches  and  their  need  for  financial  support 
in  order  to  prosper,  as  well  as  the  overall 
status  of  current  and  future  development  of 
the  sector,  vis-a-vis  the  sustainability  of  the 
impact  foreseen  for  local  communities  and 
ecosystems. 

Sustainable	financing	requires	that	the	regulatory	framework	is	predictable,	 
stable	and	transparent	(factor	1). 

To  foster  a  strong  and  sustainable  blue 
economy,  a  sound  framework  needs  to  be 
put  in  place  at  national,  regional  and  local 

level  alike.  In  the  case  of  the  blue  economy, 
(building)  permits,  licenses  and  concessions 
are key – and these tend to be issued often by 

42

 
local  governments.  Having  such  predictability, 
stability  and  transparency  allows  investors  to 
properly assess the feasibility and viability of 
their projects – in both short term and longer 
term.  Such  a  regulatory  framework  needs  to 
be  enforced  too,  so  that  a  level  playing  field 
is  created  amongst  economic  actors,  whether 
local  or  foreign.  Put  in  other  words,  these 
are  the  framework  conditions  in  which  the 
financing mechanism operates. The bigger the 
challenges/gaps  identified  in  the  regulatory 
framework,  the  higher  the  risks  for  private 
investment  and  the  chances  of  maximisation 
of short-term investment returns (rather than 
longer-term  support  to  strategic  activities). 
Moreover, poor framework conditions raise the 
chances of costly (mitigation) measures being 
needed to ensure the successful financing of a 
project, which in turn raises investment costs. 

Indeed, a sound policy framework is a crucial 
factor  in  actual  financing  practices  becoming 
sustainable.  This  is  also  an  aspect  which 
in  foreign  and 
reduces  transaction  costs 

local  financing  practices  in  the  blue  economy. 
Put  bluntly,  global  regions  with  a  stronger 
institutional and policy frameworks and overall 
rule of law (e.g. OECD countries) are expected to 
be less exposed to overall corruption, financial 
malpractices and unsustainable financing than 
emerging  and  developing  economies.  This 
makes  certain  oceans  and  seas  more  at  risk 
of  unsustainable  financing,  due  to  a  lack  of 
countervailing  powers  –  i.e.  no  administrative 
procedures  in  place  to  assess  financing  and 
(overall) administrative mismanagement, poor 
balancing  of  powers  through  democratic  and 
transparent  scrutiny  of  public  and  private 
activities by independent parties (e.g. agencies) 
and the civil society at large. It is clear that the 
risk  of  irregular  practices  including  corruption 
is higher in the absence of strong oversight and 
commitment of all actors involved in financing 
practices in the blue economy.89 This is also a 
concern for areas beyond national jurisdiction 
and  areas  which  are  not  covered  by  national 
regulations and hence exposed to international 
disputes, etc.90

Only	if	public	finance	mechanisms	(factor	3)	are	aligned	with	the	regulatory	context	 
(factor	1),	‘carrots	and	sticks’	can	effectively	add-up. 

finance  mechanisms 

Public 
(including 
subsidies,  loans,  guarantees,  etc.)  as  well  as 
public  investments  can  help  to  make  private 
investments  financially  affordable/profitable 
in  areas  with  high  potential  returns  for  local 
communities  and  ecosystems,  but  where 
investments  risks  are  high  and  financial 
returns  relatively  uncertain  for  private  actors. 
While  private  investment  strategies  aim  to 
maximise  their  financial  returns,  hence  often 
privileging  ‘easy  industries’  (i.e.  large-scale 
industries that have potentially high returns on 
investment),  public  sector  incentives  (as  well 
as public investments) are essential to attract 
greater 
investments.  
Certain public investments or support schemes 
may attract a very specific type of entrepreneurs, 

sustainable  private 

opportunistic  and  principally  concerned  with 
obtaining  short  term  advantages  from  public 
sources.  From  the  very  beginning,  these 
investments may entrust projects that are not 
necessarily  aimed  to  become  fully  profitable 
but keep relying on public funds. Therefore, the 
detailed designs of public finance mechanisms 
and  sound  public  investments  are  essential 
to  attract  the  right  ‘sustainable’  types  of 
investors  and 
investments.  Furthermore, 
such  investments  can  only  be  expected  once 
these  public  finance  mechanisms  and  public 
investments  are  fully  aligned  with  the  above 
incentives  provided  by  the  broader  regulatory 
framework. As stated above, carrots and sticks 
need to add up – and pull or push investors in 
the right direction.

43

Implementing	sustainable	investments	certainly	requires	sustainable	private	finance	
mechanisms	(factor	4)	to	be	in	place	and	working. 

It  is  vital  for  private  investors  to  ‘live  up  to 
expectations’ and to measure the performance 
of  their  investments,  for  themselves  but  also 
for  the  stakeholders  they  rely  on.  Long-term 
feasibility  and  viability  require  real  value  to 
be created, allowing for longer term economic 
development,  satisfying  investor  returns,  and 
creating  a  basis  for  satisfying  workers  and 
clients alike. But a broader set of sustainability 
criteria needs to be adhered to as well: therefore 
it  is  important  to  measure  not  only  economic 
but also environmental and social performance 
on the ground – so that all stakeholders can be 

assured that progress is made on the ground in 
driving forward a sustainable blue economy. In 
its turn, this information can be used to reinforce 
reliability  vis-à-vis  governments,  citizens, 
clients,  employees  and  other  stakeholders; 
they  provide  a  basis  to  promote  sustainable 
practices; adjust and correct business practices 
where  needed;  and  provide  more  data,  know-
how and practice for deriving future sustainable 
business  models  and  plans  –  thus  benefiting 
local businesses, communities and ecosystems 
simultaneously. 

But	an	effective	public-private	cooperation	in	the	field	of	the	blue	economy	is	also	pivotal	 
for	public	(factor	3)	and	private	(factor	4)	financing	to	reinforce	each-other. 

Public  incentives  and  private  leveraging  are 
therefore essential to ensure fully sustainable 
investments in the blue economy globally. This 
can  take  place  through  formal  or  informal 
public-private  partnerships,  but  also  through 
structured  dialogues.  Our  own  experience  in 
economic  development  shows  that  there  is 
a  level  of  ‘orchestration’  between  public  and 
private actors as well as civil society in ‘places 

that work’. Sustainable financing is unlikely to 
materialise  if  public  and  private  mechanisms 
are not integrated and well-designed, and there 
is no shared vision of the expected results to be 
monitored through a shared set of targets and 
performance  indicators  (in  terms  of  financial 
but  also  economic,  social  and  environmental 
results).

44

45

PART 4

HOW MUCH AND WHERE: UNSUSTAINABLE FINANCING 
PRACTICES ACROSS OCEANS AND GLOBAL REGIONS

4.1  A simulation on potential unsustainable investments in the blue economy

If  virtuous  versus  vicious  dynamics  are 
key to (un-)sustainable finance in the blue 
economy, then a thorough analysis of such 
dynamics is required. Unfortunately,  such 
an  analysis  is  hindered  by  a  substantial 
lack	of	consistent,	coherent	and	specific	
data	 on	 global	 financial	 flows	 and	 the	
actors  involved  –  i.e.  across  oceans 
and  value  chains.  Nevertheless,  some 
initial  proxies  can  be  used  to  attempt  to 
estimate  of  the  overall  volume  of  (un)
sustainable financing flows in the sector.91 
Aggregated  trends  on  the  performance 

of  the  blue  economy  globally  have 
existed since the publication of the OECD 
Ocean  Report  (2019),92  notably  assessed 
prior  to  the  COVID-19  pandemic,  with  a 
suggested  scenario  that  included  the 
doubling	of	gross	value	added	(GVA)	for	
the	blue	economy	between	2010	(about	
1.5	trillion)	and	2030	(about	3	trillion). 
A  breakdown  is  also  provided  based  on 
the most relevant current activities in the 
blue  economy  (figure  below),  but  without 
regional patterns.

FIGURE	4.1

Overview	of	industry-specific	value	added	(2010-2030,	billions	$)

2010

2030

USD	billion

900

800

700

600

500

400

300

200

100

0

Maritime
and 
coastal 
tourism

Offshore
oil   
and gas

Port 
activities

Maritime 
equipment

Fish 
pro-
cessing

Offshore	
wind

Water 
transport

Ship-
building 
and	repair

Industrial 
capture	
fisheries

Industrial 
marine 
aqua-
culture

Source: The Ocean Economy in 2030, OECD (2016)

46

Investments in the blue economy are expected 
to increase – more so than overall investments 
shown  in  previous  graphs  –  which  makes  the 
ocean  economy  relatively  more  important 
over  time.  Additional  sources  reinforce  this 
expectation,  while  suggesting  that  the  global 
marine biotechnology market is also expected 
to double between 2017 (3,1 billion) and 2024 
(5.75 billion).93 This is due to the rising usage 
of  marine  biotechnology  in  various  industries, 
in  drug  discovery  and  growing 
advances 

expenditure in R&D activities.94 It is not possible 
to back such bold expectations with an actual 
analysis of recent trends, as the broader range 
of  investments  for  the  different  activities  in 
the blue economy are not available. However, 
if  we  look  at  some  fragmented  evidence  – 
including the review of investments in marine 
energy, illustrated below – we note that actual 
investment	 patterns	 in	 the	 blue	 economy	
reflect	 the	 overall	 patterns discussed earlier 
in this section.

FIGURE	4.2

Investment	trends	in	ocean	energy	technology	worldwide	(2014-2018,	billions	$)

USD	billion

0.8

0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0

0.7

0.1

0.1

0

0.3

0.3

0.3

0.3

0.4

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.2

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Source: STATISTA (2020)95 

Based on the only available source of reliable 
evidence  on  the  potential  growth  of  the  blue 
economy  in  the  future  decade  (OECD,  2019), 
we  attempt  to  provide  an  indication  of  the 
amount of investments required to sustain the 
foreseen growth rates of GVA and the potential 
amount  of  unsustainable  financing  involved. 
The estimate is built on the following proxies: 
investment  on  GVA  ratio  (EU  Blue  Economy 
Report,  2019)96  and  the  unsustainable  share 
of investments (Global Alliance for Sustainable 
Investment Report, 2018)97 – see box below.

47

BOX	4.1

Estimates	of	the	share	of	unsustainable	financing	invested	 
in the blue economy

In	the	absence	of	reliable	and	structured	sectoral	data,	we	can	provide	a	proxy	for	the	possible 	
investments	mobilised	to	sustain	the	blue	economy	growth	of	about	370	billion	in	2010	to	750 	
billion	in	2030	–	based	on	OECD	data	and	the	blue	economy	investment	/	GVA	ratio.98 This amount 
may	represent	12	%	of	the	about	6.5	trillion	of	global	investment	needed	each	year	to	address	global	
development	goals	by	2030	–	as	estimated	by	recent	OECD	studies.99

If	we	apply	an	average	global	unsustainability	ratio100 – and assuming no change in the current rates 
of	unsustainable	financing	in	the	absence	of	active	policy	action	–	we	estimate total unsustainable 
financing	to	the	blue	economy	of	about	125	billion	in	2010	and	about	250	billion	in	2030.	This	
estimate assumes the average growth of the blue economy as a whole, based on the average growth 
of its various economic activities or a balance between some activities growing faster and others that 
are	not.	The	estimate	also	does	not	factor	in	the	possible	scenarios	in	the	post	COVID-19	recovery,	as	
at	this	stage	they	are	unclear	and	may	possibly	require	a	dedicated	study.

As	a	result,	such	an	estimate	is	proposed	as	a	reference	for	the	possible	magnitude	of	the	problem,	
rather	than	an	accurate	prediction	of	the	uncertain	future	ahead	of	us.	With	such	caveats	in	mind,	if	
compared	with	the	volumes	of	unsustainable	financing	estimates	for	2010	and	2030.101 the public	
finance	currently	mobilised	and	the	additional	private	flow	leveraged	through	development	banks 	
appear	extremely	limited.	They	remain	anyhow	essential	in	providing	financial	support	to	pivotal
initiatives	in	areas	of	high	financial	risks	but	strong	overall	societal	(and	ecosystem)	returns.

FIGURE	4.3

Estimates	for	sustainable	and	unsustainable	finance	 
in	the	blue	economy	(2010-2030,	€	billion)102 

€	billion

Overall	Investments

800

700

600

500

400

300

200

100

0

2010

2030

2017-2024

Sustainable	financing

Unsustainable	financing

Leveraged	private	financing

MDBs

Source: Calculations based on proxies (as declared in this box and in the footnotes)

METHODOLIGICAL DISCLAIMER: The assumptions behind the figure above are based on: A. GVA (OECD estimates 
for GVA in 2010 and 2030); B. Investments/GVA (EU estimates for the ratio of investments on GVA in the blue 
economy); C. Unsustainable/Sustainable Financing (ratio of the amount of unsustainable financing as part of 
the  global  private  financing  across  sectors  by  the  Global  Alliance  for  Sustainable  Investment).  Unsustainable 
financing in the blue economy is therefore estimated based on a formula (A * B * C). The ratio proposed by EIB 
for leveraging private financing in the blue economy (D) is also factored in, so to estimate the amount of private 
finance leveraged by (E) Development Agencies finance ( Σ E * D).

48

	
4.2  Patterns in unsustainable financing for the blue economy  

in regions across the world

The	lack	of	secondary	data	becomes	even	more	severe	 
when	looking	at	the	specificities	of	the	blue	economy.

and 

substantial 

A  limitation  of  the  analysis  is  the  lack  of 
harmonised 
secondary 
sources to assess unsustainable practices (and 
unsustainable  financing)  in  the  blue  economy 
worldwide. Also, a general reluctance to share 
bad	 practices	 and	 unawareness	 of	 regional	
patterns	 emerged	 in	 the	 interviews,  with 
limited response from the industry. A range of 
global  voluntary  frameworks  exists  of  course 

–  including  the  Principles  for  Responsible 
Investment,  the  Principles  for  Responsible 
for  Sustainable 
Banking  and  Principles 
Insurance,  the  Network  for  Greening  the 
Financial  System  and  Sustainable  Insurance 
Forum. These are further assessed in Chapter  6 
(and  detailed  in  Annex),  while  some  regional 
patterns are now illustrated.

49

 
The Atlantic	Ocean is mainly dependent on investments  
from the EU, US, Latin America and the Caribbean:

EU  investments  certainly  pave  the  way 
towards  a  (sustainable)  diversification  of 
marine and maritime economic activities at 
the global level by putting in place a range 
of strategic initiatives to finance sustainable 
blue  growth.103  It  has  strong  support  for 
a  diversified  sustainable  blue  economy 
(traditional  and  emerging  sectors)  in  its 
Blue  Growth  Strategy,104  including  through 
the  support  of  a  ‘Platform  for  sustainable 
finance’  resulting  from  the  EU  Taxonomy 
Regulation.105  EU  support  shows  a  strong 
focus on integrated maritime policy, marine 
protected  areas  and  maritime  spatial 
planning,  as  well  as  a  tailored  approach 
across  various  sea  basins.106  European 
investments 
increasingly 
supportive  of  overall  framework  conditions 

been 

have 

are 

traditionally 

United  States  investments  in  the  blue 
economy 
strongly 
focused  on  market-driven  ocean  business 
activities.  However,  more  recently,  the  US 
Government has tailored its support towards 
a sustainable blue economy.111 Its extensive 
inland 
network  of  ocean,  coastal,  and 
waterways, harbours, and seaports supports 
$ 4.6  trillion  of  economic  activity  each 
year.  The  US  is  also  the  largest  producer 
of  captured  fish,112  yet  it  maintains  a  $ 14 
billion  seafood  trade  deficit.  The  federal 
administration  is  planning  on  reducing  the 

and  the  sustainability  of  impacts  from  the 
supported  activities.  They  are  increasingly 
looking at the blue economy as an area for 
soft diplomacy. However, different dynamics 
emerge  with  respect  to  the  different	 EU	
sea basins, which are also influenced by the 
decisions of autonomous countries within and 
outside the EU. In the North Sea, for example, 
the  UK  ambiguity  in  fostering  renewable 
energy  investments  (e.g.  offshore  wind)107 
while  still  retaining  oil  &  gas  as  relevant 
sources  of  energy108  –  a  pattern  that  may 
influence  unsustainable  energy  investments 
in the region (and more globally).109 Similarly, 
investments 
in  unsustainable  practices 
persist  in  the  Mediterranean  and  Black  Sea 
(with  recent  promising  commitments),110 
including overfishing, amongst others.

deficit  through  the  2019-2022  National 
Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Administration 
(NOAA)  Fisheries  Strategic  Plan,  also  taking 
into account sustainability aspects.113 In other 
sectors such as renewable energy the US is 
well positioned, while specific investment in 
the blue energy itself are still limited – but 
with  a  positive  prospect  ahead.114  Although 
the  US  Government  is  currently  neglecting 
environmental  sustainability  measures,  the 
interest of companies and private investors 
in responsible investment grows.115

In  Latin  America,  fishing  and  aquaculture 
contribute around $  15 billion to the regions 
gross  domestic  product  (GDP)  and  employs 
around  275  million  people.116  The  region 
also invests heavily into tourism, particularly 
in  the  Caribbean.  However,  unsustainable 
increased  eutrophication,  poor 
fishing, 

treatment,  farmland 

wastewater 
runoff 
and  population  growth,  led  to  3-5  times 
the  deforestation  rate  of  the  mangroves  in 
comparison  to  terrestrial  forests.117  To  date, 
eight  Latin  American  countries  have  issued 
green bonds.118 In terms of financing the blue 
economy, the Caribbean is leading the way, 

50

with  the  Organisation  of  Eastern  Caribbean 
States  having  implemented  A  Caribbean 
Regional  Ocean  policy  in  conjunction  with 
the World Bank to facilitate cooperation for 
the transition to a blue economy.119 A number 

of  interesting  public-private  partnerships  to 
co-manage marine Caribbean areas are also 
underway and the region participates actively 
in several global blue finance initiatives.120

The Pacific	Ocean is depending on investments originating in the US and Latin America  
but also receives investments from East Asian and Pacific countries:

in 

Japanese	 and	 Korean	 investments  are 
the  blue  economy, 
heavily  supporting 
shipping121  and  marine 
especially 
biotechnologies.122 Japan and South Korea are 
considered as progressive countries when it 
comes to sustainability matters with impacts 
on  ocean  health.  Japan  has  also  launched 

the ‘Marine Initiative’ to support developing 
countries’  efforts,  including  their  capacity 
building  and  infrastructure  development  in 
waste  management  and  the  development 
of a marine litter technology in cooperation 
with other Asian countries.123

Australian  investments  are  paving  the 
way  in  terms  of  sustainable  blue  economy 
support  in  the  Pacific,  although  it  faces 
challenges coming from the shipping sector 
in which investments are needed.124 A $ 700 
million investment programme targets clean 
energy  projects  in  the  Great  Barrier  Reef 
catchment  area.125  Australia  also  has  the 

world’s third largest exclusive economic zone 
(EEZ) with access to the largest seafood and 
energy  markets.  The  Cooperative  Research 
Centre, a collaboration between 45 national 
and  international  partners  from  industry, 
research  and  federal  government,  is  tasked 
with  developing  new  offshore  aquaculture 
and renewable energies.126

51

The Indian	Ocean is mainly dependent on investment priorities  
of India and East African countries:

Indian  investments  in  the  blue  economy 
are following an interesting ‘cluster strategy’ 
in  regard  to  ports  with  a  clear  focus 
on  sustainability,  by  creating  synergies 
between sustainable research, infrastructure 
development,  renewable  energy,  coastal 

tourism  and  the  preservation  of 
local 
communities, etc.127 India has invested $ 15.8 
million  to  develop  23  port-led  communities 
integrating  all  types  of  infrastructure  (soft 
and hard) for the promotion of fisheries and 
coastal tourism.128

With  respect  to  African  investments,  weak 
fiscal structures and legislative vacuums have 
resulted  in  illicit  financial  flows  that  allow 
for  the  perpetuation  of  criminal  activities, 
such as IUU, piracy, illicit trafficking of goods 
and  people  and  environmental  crimes.129 
A  number  of  blue  economy  activities  are 
becoming  increasingly  promising  sources 
of  development  for  the  continent130  –  if  not 
well managed, these activities may increase 

rather 

local  communities, 

the  pressure  on  ecosystems  and  negatively 
impact 
than 
supporting  sustainable  growth  and  social 
inclusion. Investments are needed to improve 
capacity,  particularly  in  port  infrastructure 
and the tourism sector.131 There is also a need 
to increase awareness of the blue economy 
–  in  the  context  of  development  policy  and 
that of the green economy.132

Unbalanced  relations	 between	 developed	
and	 growing	/	emerging	 economies  also 
importantly shape the blue economy financing 
patterns  globally.  Patterns  of  (un)sustainable 
growth in the blue economy for oceans where 
developing countries are located (Indian Ocean, 
Pacific Ocean, etc.) are still largely dependent 

on  the  financing  decisions  taken  in  foreign 
countries: imports of plastics (legal and illegal), 
overfishing, energy policies and related global 
investments,  etc.  –  with  some  examples 
provided in the case studies. Ocean governance 
and international policy coherence are essential 
for sustainable financing in the blue economy.

52

The growing global	investments of Russia and China should 
 also be considered key drivers for the blue economy:

have 

investments 

been 
Chinese 
characterised  by  an  aggressive  approach 
which  aimed  at  maximising  opportunities 
for  Chinese  companies,  including  through 
national  subsidies,  often  without  a  clear 
focus on the quality and overall sustainability 
of investments.133 Chinese investments in the 
green economy (i.e. green credits policy)134 and 
in the blue economy are growing, especially 
in  the  shipping  sector,  with  a  growing 
but  still  limited  commitment  to  ensure 
sustainable  financing.135  However,  more 

recently, sustainability concerns have started 
penetrating the general Chinese investment 
sphere, as exemplified by take over plans by 
major Chinese enterprises active in the field 
of renewable energy.136 An increasingly global 
leader when it comes to investment, China is 
developing an ambitious investment agenda 
towards  the  Arctic,  Europe  (Silk  Road),137 
Africa (although mainly inland so far) and in 
Latin and Central America (e.g. by investing 
in trade and shipping).138

Russian  investments  in  the  blue  economy 
are growing in relation to the food industry 
and 
in  relation  to  the  exploitation  of 
resources in the Arctic, but with little progress 
so far on the sustainable investment front.139 
The  Arctic  interest  is  also  driving  Russia  to 
impose  administrative  barriers  with  the 
intent  of  giving  Russian  ships  the  exclusive 

right  to  transport  oil  and  gas  along  the 
Northern Sea Route.140 Russia is also planning 
to  invest  in  port  facilities  to  accommodate 
rising  sea  freight  levels,  with  several  major 
infrastructure  projects  planned.141  Recent 
agreements  also  position  Russia  as  a  key 
player in Africa.

53

Sustainable financing in transitioning	and	emerging	economies  
is essential for a fully sustainable blue economy:

African  investments  are  still  limited,  but 
recent  commitments  have  shown  the  high 
potential  in  attracting  streams  of  financing 
(internal and foreign) to boost blue economy 
development  –  for  example,  during  a 
recent blue economy side event held at the  

7th Tokyo International Conference on African 
Development,  African  governments  agreed 
to  reap  maximum  benefits  from  utilising 
seas,  oceans,  lakes,  rivers  and  other  water 
resources  for  sustainable  socio-economic 
development.142

transition  economies  are  also 
Other 
challenged  by  still 
limited  (sustainable) 
financial  support  in  the  area,  but  with  an 
increasingly  diversified  range  of  actors 
include 
potentially 
multilateral  development  agencies  such  as 
the  World  Bank,143  market  solutions  like  the 
Bond Markets or blue bonds of Seychelles,144 
local private sector in the hospitality industry 

interested. 

These 

(such  as  in  the  Caribbean  and  other  areas 
of water sports),145 as well as other domestic 
resources  as  in  ports  and  rivers  (e.g.  Tanga 
in Tanzania146 or the Caribbean).147 These are 
often  sectors  with  a  history  of  foreign  and 
local investments mobilised traditionally, but 
with an emergence of sustainable financing 
aimed  at  maximising  local  impacts  and 
sustainable returns.

Fragile  coastal  countries  including  Small 
Islands	 Developing	 States	 (SIDS)  will  also 
be  particularly  exposed  to  pressure  due  to 
the local effects of climate change; to adapt 

to  and  mitigate  such  effects  they  will  also 
increasingly need tailored financial support – 
both public and private148.

54

55

PART 5

WRAP-UP: SUPPORTING A SHIFT AWAY  
FROM UNSUSTAINABLE FINANCE FOR THE BLUE ECONOMY

5.1  Actions to support a transition towards a sustainable financing  

in the blue economy 

A number of actions should be put forwards to influence the transition towards sustainable 
financing in the blue economy. These aspects should be reflected upon when identifying 
effective recommendations for policymakers and financing actors.

Address	 the	
factors	 behind	 the	
persistence	of	unsustainable	financing	
in	the	blue	economy

Properly	engage	with	those	mechanisms	
and	 actors	 involved	 in	 unsustainable	
finance	in	the	blue	economy

As  stated  in  Chapter  3,  the  limited 
availability of financial support to address 
the needs of a sustainable blue economy is 
driven by four (main) types of factors that 
can act (and be identified) at two different 
levels in each financing practice. Notably, 
the  interplay  of  all  those  factors  results 
in  either  positive/virtuous  or  negative/
vicious  cycles  of  (un-)sustainable  finance 
practices.

A great diversity of financial mechanisms 
(and  possible 
interplays  of  financial 
products  and  actors,  both  public  and 
private)  is  in  place  globally  –  including 
those  more  specifically 
to 
sustainable  results  and  more  specifically 
to the blue economy.

targeted 

56

 
Financial  actors 
in 
the  private  sector 
Insurance  companies, 
(Commercial  Banks, 
ECA, etc.) play an important role in supporting 
investments  in  certain  markets,  although  the 
current  trend  is  to  cut  investment  costs  and 
risks  to  allow  for  greater  returns  on  their 
investments. Public funding also plays a pivotal 
role (Governments, MDBs, etc.), particularly for 
large infrastructure investments, the intangible 
support  provided  to  early  stages  of  research 
and  innovation,  including  support  to  skills, 
and  capacity  and  knowledge  transfer.  Private 
investors  and  direct  governmental  subsidies 
account  for  a  larger  part  of  global  financing 
flows,  and  as  such  are  extremely  relevant  in 
supporting  the  current  and  future  growth  of 
the  blue  economy.  Also,  insurance  companies 
are  essential  actors  to  address  issues  of 
financial risks and for strengthening the overall 
sustainability  of  private  investments  in  the 
blue economy.

Although a clear picture is not available due to 
substantial  lack  of  secondary  data,  anecdotal 
evidence  suggests 
that  private  financing 
mechanisms  and  public  subsidies  may 
constitute the bulk of unsustainable financing 
for  the  blue  economy.  In  this  context,  MDBs 
play  an  important  role  in  triggering  global 
investments  for  a  sustainable  blue  economy 
(as discussed in Chapter 2 and Chapter 4). This 
trend  could  potentially  have  strong  effects  in 
leveraging  private  lenders  behaviour  towards 
an even greater shift in sustainable financing.

Private 

investors  and  direct  governmental 

subsidies  account  for  a  larger  part  of  global 

financing  flows,  and  as  such  are  extremely 

relevant  in  supporting  the  current  and  future 

growth of the blue economy.

Recognise	 the	 specificities	 of	 financing	
needs	 and	 practices	 across	 global	 oceans	
and	sea-basins

Oceans  are  exposed  to  different  challenges 
depending  on  the  specifies  of  continents  and 
countries relying and exploiting their resources 
and  the  extent  these  oceans  are  subject  to 
national or international regulatory framework 
(deep-seas vs sea-basins). With respect to the 
blue economy specificities of each ocean, some 
traditional sectors might be exposed to vested 
economic  interests,  with  higher  pressures  to 
get  economic  returns  compared  to  social  and 
environmental  externalities.  Other  emerging/
embryonic  sectors  (or  emerging  sustainable/
circular technologies/models) are less visible to 
investors and hence less able to attract needed 
financial  support.  An  overview  is  provided  in 
Chapter 4.

consistent	

Promote	
coherent	
terminology,	 data	 and	 financial	 analysis	
for	the	global	blue	economy

and	

Differences  emerge  in  the  patterns  and  risks 
of  unsustainable  financing  across  sectors 
and global regions/oceans. Also, any coherent 
analysis  for  the  sector  is  hampered  by  a 
persisting  lack  of  private  investments’  data, 
clarity  and  harmonisation  across  an  existing 
definition  of  blue  economy 
(EU),  ocean 
economy (OECD, World Bank), a focus on blue 
economy  as  mainly  fisheries  and  aquaculture 
(UN-FAO) or rather a broader range of activities 
(EU,  World  Bank).  This  lack  of  harmonised 
approaches  and  concepts  does  not  favour  a 
proper  understanding  either  –  ultimately,  it 
contributes  to  the  general  unawareness  and 
misunderstanding of the sector by the financing 
sector.

57

5.2  Approaches to support financial institutions financing a sustainable blue economy

A  few  relevant  areas  for  support  to  financial  institutions  have  emerged  –  as  illustrated  in  the 
following paragraphs.

Addressing	gaps	in	the	level	of	disclosure,	
standardisation	and	independence

With  over  2,000  investors  signed  up  to  the 
Principle  for  Responsible  Investments  (PRI)149 
who  disclose  on  the  implementation  of  the 
principles annually, disclosure levels of financing 
are  improving  globally  –  including  in  relation 
to  climate  change  reporting.  Banks  and  large 
enterprises  also  made  some  commitments 
following the release of Task Force on Climate-
related Financial Disclosures (TCFD) guidelines 
in  2017,150  but  this  effort  is  concentrated  on 
a narrow segment of sustainability and is far 
from  representing  the  range  of  disclosure 
needed, particularly with respect to sustainable 
practices in financing blue economy activities.151 
Even  though  disclosure  is  intensifying,  the 
mere fact that it remains essentially based on 
voluntary  reporting  makes  standardisation  a 
necessity.

finance 

commitments 

According to the survey of the World Resource 
Institute,152  the  terms  and  definitions  of 
sustainable 
vary 
considerably  across  banks.  While  Principles 
for  Responsible  Banking153  signatories  are 
expected to report, their first year of disclosure 
will be late 2020 / 2021. A minority of the S&P 
500 banking index154 recognises an integrated 
reporting  framework.  The  Global  Reporting 
Initiative  has  developed  integrated  reporting 
standards  that  could  provide  a  good  basis 
for  a  standardised  approach  to  reporting.155 
Another concern when it comes to reporting is 
the potential lack of objectivity.156 Indeed, most 
reports  lack  external  verification  (included 
in  only  36 %  of  sustainability  reports).  These 
aspects  and  limitations  pose  relevant  doubts 
and questions with respect to the role of audit 
and  ‘lines  of  defence’  of  institutions,  in  the 
evolution  of  sustainable  financial  practices  in 
relation to the blue economy. Action should be 
taken  to  improve  global  commitments  of  the 
financing sector.

Current efforts in fostering transparency might 
also consider ways to better promote	the	role	
of	demand	and	consumption	of	sustainable	
products	 and	 services	 related	 to	 the	 blue	
economy,  as  a  leverage  to  foster  sustainable 
practices  and  sustainable  financing  in  the 
sector. In this respect, there is room for further 
support towards the adoption of ESG standards 
as  quality  labels  for  companies  to  appeal  to 
their  clients  (retails,  consumers)  as  part  of 
business-to-business 
(B2B)  and  business-
to-consumer  (B2C)    transactions.  This  is  an 
area  where  policy  actions  (regulations,  soft 
incentives) can be further investigated.

58

be	significant	in	fostering	this	practice – for 
example  by  providing  additional  resources  or 
supporting  the  higher  investment  costs  for 
private  bodies  through  additional  resources 
in  areas  of  high  public  value.  In  this  context, 
greater  focus  may  be  put  on  achieving  net 
positive  outcomes 
than  absolute 
positive impacts – to maximise trade-offs and 
gradually  move  private  investments  towards 
optimal allocation. Impact assessments could, 
for  example,  be  made  mandatory  for  private 
investments  when  leveraging  public  money  – 
as an essential incentive to reduce the risk of 
such investments.

rather 

are 

assessments 

technically 
Impact 
challenging, and few banking institutions have 
the  capacity  to  carry  out  net  positive  impact 
assessments.160  Whilst  negative  impacts  are 
typically  captured  through  environmental  and 
social  screening  processes  using  risk-based 
approaches,  positive  impact  measurement  is 
much more complex. Indeed, the latter requires 
an understanding of how much positive social 
and environmental change (or climate change 
adaptation/mitigation)  has  occurred.  Another 
difficulty,  characterising  impact  assessments 
in the blue economy, is the limited information 
available  on  the  risks  incurred  in  sectors 
impacting  the  blue  economy.  Assessing  the 
risks  of  an  investment  is  particularly  tricky 
when  it  comes  to  the  unintended  or  indirect 
consequences  of  the  project  it  finances.  To 
boost  such  essential  actions,  a  common 
understanding  of  how  to  value  the  natural 
capital	this	economy	relies	on	and	the	risks	
linked	with	a	loss	of	value	still	needs	to	be	
developed.

Addressing	 gaps	
in	 the	 quality	 of	
assessments	 of	 sustainable	 impacts	 of	
investments

While  sustainability  reporting  is  becoming 
the  norm  for  many  investors  at  the  global 
level,  greater  efforts  should  be  put  towards 
the establishment of rigorous and thorough 
practices	 in	 impact	 financing	 in	 the	 blue	
economy.  Despite  some 
relevant  global 
efforts  –  including  tools / approaches,  such 
as  those  under  the 
Impact  Management 
Project,157  Positive  Impact  Finance  Initiative158 
and Global Impact Investing Network,159 etc. – 
sustainability  impact  assessments  conducted 
by financial institutions are extremely complex 
and  difficult.  While  they  entail  putting  the 
correct  value  on  complex  assets  (e.g.  what  is 
the  value  of  coral  reef  when  assessing  the 
impact  of  a  shipping  finance  operation),  they 
are  essential	 tools	 to	 ensure	 the	 positive	
impacts	 of	 financing	 practices.  Interviewees 
explained  that  any  miscalculation  –  including 
through the negligence of valuable social and 
economic externalities – could have important 
distortive  implications  and  create  perverse 
incentives. Here, again, the impact assessments 
that are carried out by financial institutions are 
rarely  disclosed.  More  importantly,  they  vary 
from  one  institution  to  the  other  in  terms  of 
methodology,  thereby  making  it  difficult  to 
rely on existing assessments and to come to a 
conclusion on their relevance.

Poorly  conducted  impact  assessments  have 
implications  for  financial  institutions  exposed 
to  financing  positive  and  negative  activities 
in  the  blue  economy.  At  the  same  time,  the 
complexity  of  a  full  assessment  of  the  social 
and  environmental 
impacts  –  direct  and 
indirect  –  might  go  well  beyond  the  financial 
interest  of  investors  and  might  imply  their 
reluctance to invest in the sector. The role of 
public	 incentives,	 for	 example	 as	 part	 of	
public-private	 partnerships	 and	 blending	
initiatives	 by	 Development	 Agencies,	 could	

59

to 

the 

In  this  area,  it  is  certainly  important  to 
role  of  environmental 
emphasise 
sustainability,  as  an  element  to  reduce  the 
risk of long-term investments and to ensure 
those  externalities  are  considered  within 
the  decision  making  processes  of  financial 
bodies  –  a  pioneering  activity  is  being 
promoted by the WWF161 and United Nations 
Environment  Programme  Finance  Initiative 
(UNEP  FI)162 
factor  environmental 
unsustainability  as  ‘value  at  a  risk’  as  part 
of financial investment models. At the same 
time,  while  stressing  the  environmental 
and	 social	 impacts	 assessment,	 it	 is	 also	
important	to	retain	the	relevance	of	local	
economic/financial	 sustainability  (i.e.  the 
transformational elements in our definition) 
–  as  sustainable  financing  also  means 
creating local financing streams to support 
local innovation (and to avoid total external 
dependencies).  All  of  these  aspects  should 
be duly considered.

improvement.  A  net 

Considering  net	 positive	 outcomes	 of	
impact	assessments is better than focusing 
on impact targets which leave only a small 
impact 
margin  of 
approach  is  a  way  to  identify,  measure, 
value,  compare  and  set  targets  in  relation 
to  environmental,  social  and/or  economic 
impacts,  both  positive  and  negative,  that 
a  project  has  had  over  a  period  of  time. 
The  net  impact  assessment  concept  has 
become  increasingly  established  within  the 
extractive  industry,  especially  with  regard 
to biodiversity.163 Both positive and negative 
impacts of an activity are considered so as 
to  avoid  or  reduce  negative  impacts  and 
increase  positive  impacts  (on  biodiversity). 
The  result  should  be  positive  in  order  to 
make the decision to invest.

Aside  from  integrating  the  indirect  and 
consequences 
potentially  unsustainable 
of  an  investment  in  the  blue  economy  by 
acting  on  interest  rates,  the  pricing  of  an 
asset or the rate of an insurance premium, 
the  financial  sector  needs  to  share  the 
taxpayers’  burden  by  taking	 all	 measures	
necessary	to	mitigate	any	indirect	risks, in 
collaboration with governments, if possible. 
The  establishment  of  funds  dedicated 
to  mitigating  the  indirect,  unsustainable 
effects  of  investments  could  be  a  solution. 
For  instance,  investors’  interest  in  coastal 
tourism should consider the indirect risk of 
overpopulation within the concerned regions, 
including the risk of destroying ecosystems.

A  pioneering  activity  is  being  promoted  by 

the  WWF  and  United  Nations  Environment 

Programme  Finance  Initiative  (UNEP  FI)  to 

factor environmental unsustainability as ‘value 

at a risk’ as part of financial investment models.

60

5.3  Finance-related policy measures/incentives for sustainable blue economy activities

A number of relevant areas for policy support have also emerged – as illustrated in this section.

Addressing	 gaps	
in	 knowledge,	 market	
analysis	 and	 overall	 policy	 framework	
(ocean	governance)

A key role could be played by public financing 
towards a better analysis and understanding 
of	 local	 challenges,	 potentials	 and	 returns	
on  sustainable  investments  in  the  blue 
economy.  This  is  essential  to  move  away 
from  bad  practices  and  to  better  address 
emerging  opportunities  for  local  businesses 
and  other  organisations  active  across  the 
specific  value  chains  of  the  blue  economy. 
Greater	consistency	in	reference	to	the	blue	
economy	concept	should	be	fostered	at	the	
global	level.	Financial resources and technical 
assistance should be ensured to support greater 
capability  across  various  regions  and  oceans 
to  foster	 accessible	 data	 and	 knowledge	
on the blue economy in each specific context 
(e.g. different oceans, sub-regions and even at 
country levels) – including through addressing 
substantial gaps of business cases for pivotal 
technologies and new business models at the 
local levels – as an input to assess investments 
risks and potentials.

In this respect, a whole stream of support from 
public	 finance	should	allow	the	assessment	
of	 natural	 capital	 embedded	 in	 the	 blue	
economy  as  an  input  into  the  assessment  of 
‘value  at  risk’  as  part  of  public  and  private 
financial  investments.164  Such  information,  if 
available, would allow a bank or an investor to 
determine whether the business / activity to be 
financed is sustainable in regard to the natural 
capital  on  which  it  relies.  This  information 
seems  essential  for  the  financial  sector  to  be 
in a position to develop investment strategies 
that take the sustainability of the blue economy 
into  account.  While  sectoral  and  geographical 
in 
analysis  tools165  are  slowly  emerging 

the  financial  sector,  most  businesses  and 
investors  –  active  or  potentially  interested  in 
the  blue  economy  –  are  ill-equipped  to  fully 
understand  the  impact  of  their  investment 
decisions on the value chain of the sectors in 
which  they  are  working.  This  is  a  stream  of 
action that clearly requires greater support to 
local actors in showcasing their opportunities, 
but  also  in  providing  robust  socio-economic 
and  environmental  analysis  of  the  concrete 
practices, dynamics, risks and opportunities at 
the specific ocean and basin levels.

regional 

Furthermore, 
intermediation 
platforms	 (e.g.	 accelerators)	 and	 regional	
sustainable	 financing	 mechanisms	 are	
needed to allow for the intermediation of large 
amounts  of  financing  in  the  blue  economy 
(to  ensure  upstream  returns  on  investments) 
and  small-scale  local  investments  (to  ensure 
downstream  feasible  experimentation  and 
access to finance through time for local SMEs 
and  other  local  actors  involved  in  the  blue 
economy  at  the  local  level).  Some  pioneering 
initiatives are emerging, including the EU Blue 
Invest  Platform166  and  blue  economy  related 
accelerators,167  but  these  should  be  further 
supported  across  global  regions  and  oceans 
to  be  fully  effective  worldwide.  This  could 
incubators 
result 
and  innovation  platforms  which  could  reflect 
and  address  the  concrete  specificities  of  the 
blue  economy  in  each  ocean  and  even  at 
the  lower  level  (e.g.  South-East  Asia,  West 
Africa,  the  Mediterranean).  In  this  respect,  an 
opportunity is certainly provided by the existing 
bodies  (regional  clusters,  etc.)  which  could  be 
supported  with  new  skills  and  missions,  to 
avoid  a  duplication  of  existing  organisations. 
Such ‘intermediary’ organisations can manage 
sustainable  funds,  for  example  in  partnership 
with  Regional  Development  Banks,  but  also 

in  regional  accelerators, 

61

engage  with  businesses  and  actors  in  local/
regional  value-chains  to  identify  their  specific 
needs and to ensure the financial and technical 
support  needed  to  address  them  –  e.g.  small 
financing voucher attached to counselling.

In  an  effort  to  improve	 the	 quality	 of	
sustainability	
assessments	
impact	
conducted	 by	 the	 financial	 sector,  the 
taxonomy  developed  by  the  EU  in  2020  is 
helpful because it provides indicators to assess 
the  level  of  harm  done  to  the  environment, 
sufficient to exclude financial assets from what 
is  deemed  sustainable.  This  taxonomy  is  not 
yet targeting the blue economy, as it currently 
focuses  on  factors  directly  impacting  climate 
change  (like  CO2  emissions).  Nevertheless, 
this  is  just  the  first  stage  of  the  taxonomy 
development, which will be expanded to wider 
issues (e.g. biodiversity to support the transition 
to  a  circular  economy).  The  methodologies 
developed  could  therefore  be  adapted  to 
various  sectors  of  the  blue  economy.  When 
setting  the  standards  of  sustainability  impact 
assessments, policy makers should ultimately 
take a stand in favour of the environment.

Support  to  sustainable  financing  for  the  blue 
implies  fostering  a  more 
economy  also 
ambitious  global  vision  on  sustainable  blue 
economy,  and  addressing  the  challenges 
related to the broader policy dialogue on ocean 
governance – including for deep-sea, where a 
lack  of  national  regulations  and  international 
agreements  may  expose  local  ecosystems 
to  higher  risks  of  unsustainable  financing 
practices. In this context, broader international 
support  should  be  provided  towards  policy 
tools  encouraging  a  diversified  sustainable 
blue  economy,  including  soft  regulation  and  
other  non-regulatory  measures  such  as  the 
promotion  of 
integrated  maritime  policy, 
marine  protected  areas  and  maritime  spatial 
planning  at  the  local  levels.  In  this  respect, 
technical assistance can certainly be furthered, 
building on existing activities (e.g. World bank 
PROBLUE)168  and  mobilising  blue  economy 
specific	global	capacity	building	programmes 
(e.g.  DG  DEVCO / International  Partnerships) 
targeted	 to	 support	 capacity	 building	 and	
policymaking	 of	 local	 actors	 more	 globally. 
Ongoing  policy  dialogue  initiatives  at  global 
and  bilateral / regional 
levels  should  be 
strengthened  to  achieve  a  common  global 
approach,	 ambition	 and	 understanding	/
definition.

62

As discussed, it is difficult for private financing 
bodies alone to decide in regard to blue economy 
investments because these standards are still in 
the process of being defined and blue economy 
sustainability  concerns  are  not  yet  clearly 
identified  in  this  process.  Common  corporate 
disclosure procedures would allow investors to 
integrate strategic and operational information 
on the sustainability of business impacts into 
decision-making. However, corporate disclosure 
is not fully standardised at present. Therefore, 
while  it  provides  useful  information,  it  does 
not  enable  the  establishment  of  standard 
processes  for  investment  decisions.  In  areas 
with  poor  evidence  of  successful  business 
cases  and  for  which  limited  financial  returns 
are foreseen in the short-term, and high risks 
are  identified,  it  will  be  very  challenging  for 
investors  to  make  final  positive  decisions.  For 
commercial banks, there is typically less leeway 
than  for  investment  banks  in  their  choice  of 
projects  to  finance,  because  they  must  face 
the  competition  from  other  banks  willing  to 
finance  any  bankable  projects  regardless  of 
sustainability  aspects.  But  ensuring	 public	
incentives	to	certain	projects may raise their 
interest and decrease their financial risks, and 
hence may ultimately provide a valuable asset.

Rethinking	 the	 ‘sequence	 of	 capital’	 and	
the	pivotal	role	for	public	investments	and	
local	authorities

As  a  result  of  the  various  streams  of  actions 
described  so  far,  an  essential  function  of 
policymakers  is  to  support  the  rethinking  of 
the  sequence  of  capital  required  to  foster 
sustainable  investment  in  the  blue  economy. 
In this respect, the relation	between	different	
actors	and	streams	of	financing	(as	discussed	
in	 Chapter	 3.4)	 should	 be	 rethought,  so  as 
to  assess  the  specific  added  value  of  each 
actor. For example, if private investors remain 
essential for providing the volumes of financing 
required  to  achieve  the  ambitious  scenarios 
put  forward  by  the  OECD  for  2030  (Chapter 
5.1), the insurance industry (depending on their 
ability to identify actual liabilities) has a crucial 
role in defining the value of natural capital and 
estimating  the  environmental  risks  caused  by 
climate  change  and  unsustainable  practices 
in  the  blue  economy.169  And  yet,  their  active 
role  would  depend  on  their  ability  to  identify 
actual liabilities. Moreover, smart use of public 
finance is pivotal as an incentive or warrant to 
reduce the risk of private financing activities in 
areas  with  higher  long-term  societal  returns 
(jobs,  environmental  quality,  climate  change 
adaptation / mitigation). It essential that public 
finance is used to reduce the risk of investments 
that are effectively in line with sustainability, to 
maximise  the  appeal  for  private  investments 
in  strategic  areas  and  to  mobilise  additional 
private  finance 
towards  sustainable  blue 
economy development worldwide.170

63

and 

Besides a pivotal role in the sequence of capital 
required  for  triggering  sustainable  (private) 
financing  in  the  blue  economy,  there  is  a  lot 
of  work  to  be  done  on  awareness  raising, 
information	sharing	and	on	developing	tools	
to	 assist	 financial	 players	 in	 identifying	
sustainable 
risks 
unsustainability	
alternatives.  A  number  of  actors  have  a 
leading  role  to  play  in  supporting  the  proper 
assessment of local risks and potentials for the 
sustainable development of the blue economy 
globally – and as a basis for reducing the risk 
of  investment  and  maximising  areas  with 
higher  longer-term  potentials  for  sustainable 
investments. However, advancements are slow 
and the role of local actors and public finance 
can make a significant difference.

At present, the value of natural capital in the 
blue economy is far from being established and 
such information may take a long time before 
it reaches the desk of the banking industry. As 
a  result,  given  the  urgency  of  environmental 
concerns in the blue economy, there is a need 
to  be  pragmatic  about  what  can  be  achieved 
in  the  most  efficient  way  and  to  prioritise 
policy  actions.  According  to  interviewees,  the 
elaboration  of  tools  enabling  the  recognition 
by  financial  actors  of  sustainability  issues 
characterising  each  blue  economy  sector,  as 
well as alternatives to financing unsustainable 
businesses / activities,  currently  seems  to  be 

the  most  direct  way  to  achieve  sustainability 
goals. Such informative tools should then be 
integrated	 into	 the	 screening,	 proofing	 and	
other	 selection	 mechanisms	/	processes  – 
including importantly ESG integration in passive 
equity  investments,  environmental  and  social 
(E&S)  risk  assessments  in  corporate  lending, 
net  positive  impact  analysis,  etc.  –  leading  to 
fully  informed  investment  decisions.  When 
elaborating  such  tools,  the  specificities  and 
market environment of each financial industry 
should  be  considered,  as  insurers,  bankers 
and  investors  react  to  different  incentives 
(e.g.  portfolio  approach  vs.  direct  client 
relations)  when  making  financial  decisions. 
Further  insights  are  provided  in  Chapter  6 
(recommendations).

Finally,  the  role	 and	 capacity	 of	
local	
institutions	(e.g.	local	authorities)	and	quasi-
governmental  bodies 
(e.g.  concessionary 
for 
investment  permissions)  can  play  an 
essential  role  in  improving  local  regulations, 
spatial  planning  agreements,  overall  analysis, 
understanding and publication of reliable market 
data. These are all essential components which 
would require strong institutional leadership at 
the local / regional level across the globe.

64

65

PART 6

WAY FORWARD: GAPS IN CURRENT INITIATIVES AND  
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AN EFFECTIVE GLOBAL ACTION

6.1  Gaps in current measures based on the main needs discussed in this study 

Based  on  the  emerging  areas  of  support 
discussed so far, this study has reviewed 
and  assessed  a  sample  of  the  most 
relevant	 regulatory	 and	 non-regulatory	
measures,  as  well  as  the  broader 
existing	 policy	 frameworks  influencing 
investment decisions in the blue economy 
(full  definition  and  further  details  in 

the  analysis  are  provided  in  Annex  I). 
The  resulting  analysis  has  allowed  the 
identification of possible gaps and areas for 
improvements – as well as further actions 
– in order to address the main factors for 
the persistence of unsustainable financing 
in  the  blue  economy  (as  discussed  in 
Chapter 4).

66

TABLE	6.3

Overview of selected initiatives to address the most relevant factors  
–	initiatives	can	support	more	factors

FACTOR 1 

FACTOR 2

(context	level):	Lack	of	rule	of	law,	sub-optimal 	
policies	/	regulations	and	poor	codes	of	conducts

(context	level):	Poor	market	analysis	and	lack 	 
of	business	cases	to	justify	investments

Sustainable	Blue	Economy	Finance	Principles	
(European	Commission,	WWF,	Prince	of	Wales’s	
International	Sustainability	Unit,	EIB,	UNEP	FI)

Sustainable	Ocean	for	All	(OECD)

Blended	Finance	Principles	(OECD)

EU	taxonomy	for	sustainable	activities	(EC)

Guidelines	for	Establishing	the	Green	Financial	
System	(China)

Sustainable	Shipping	Finance:	the	Poseidon	
Principles	(Banks)

Principles	for	Sustainable	Insurance	(UNEP	FI)

Equator	Principles	(International	finance	
corporation	–	World	Bank	Group)

Science	Based	Targets	(CDP,	UN	Global	Compact,	
World	Resources	Institute	(WRI),	and	the	WWF,	We	
Mean	Business	Coalition)

Climate Bonds  
(Standard	and	Certification	Scheme	Climate	Bonds)

Sustainable	Shipping	Initiative	(companies,	WWF,	
NGOs	Forum	for	the	Future)

Sustainable Ocean Business Action Platform  
(UN	Global	Compact)

Coastal	Governance	Index	 
(CEA,	David	and	Lucile	Packard	Foundation)

EU	Ocean	Governance	Initiative	(EC)

Non-Financial	Reporting	Directive	 
(Directive	2014/95/EU)	(EU)

Global	Reporting	Initiative	(GRI	(Global	Strategic	
Alliances:	OECD,	UNEP,	UN	Global	Compact,	ISO)

Sustainability Accounting Standards Board 
Standards	(SABS)

EU	Taxonomy	Regulation	(2020/852/EU)

PROBLUE	(World	Bank)

Blue	Sustainable	Ocean	Strategy	(EIB)

Clean	Oceans	Initiative	(EIB)

Sustainable	Shipping	Finance:	the	Poseidon	
Principles	(Banks)

Responsible	Ship	Recycling	Standards	(Banks)

Caribbean	Climate-Smart	Accelerator	(CARICOM,	
IDB,	GFDRR,	Virgin	Unite,	ECS)

Action Plan for Healthy Oceans and Sustainable 
Blue	Economies	(ADB)

Oceans	Financing	initiative	(ADB)

Blue	Natural	Capital	Financing	Facility	(IUCN,	
Government	of	the	Grand	Duchy	of	Luxembourg,	
Government	Offices	of	Sweden,	Ministry	of	the	
Environment	and	Energy,	Total)

Blue	Natural	Capital	Positive	Impacts	Framework	
(IUCN,	Five	Oceans	Environmental	Services	LLC)

The	Partnership	Assurance	Model	(Monterey	Bay	
Aquarium	and	co)

8F	Asset	Management	Pte.	Ltd

Sustainable	Shipping	Initiative	(companies,	WWF,	
NGOs	Forum	for	the	Future)

Ocean	Investment	Platform	(World	Ocean	Council)

Blue	Carbon	Initiative	(CI,	IUCN,	IOC-UNESCO)

Investing	for	Sustainable	Global	Fisheries	
(Encourage	Capital,	Bloomberg	Philanthropies,	 
The	Rockefeller	Foundation)

EU	Ocean	Governance	Initiative	(EC)

World	Ocean	Initiative	(The	Economist)

BlueInvest	(EC)

WestMED	Initiative	(EC)

Facility	for	Blue	Growth	in	the	Black	Sea	(EC)

AquaInvest	(FAO)

European	Technology	and	Innovation	Platform	 
for	Ocean	Energy	(ETIP	Ocean)

67

TABLE	6.3

Overview of selected initiatives to address the most relevant factors  
–	initiatives	can	support	more	factors

FACTOR 3 

FACTOR 4

(financing	level):	Sub-optimal	features 	 
and	design	of	public	financing	schemes

(financing	level):	Limited	transparency	and 	
commitments	for	the	assessment	of	financial	returns

PROBLUE	(World	Bank)

Blue	Sustainable	Ocean	Strategy	(EIB)

Clean	Oceans	Initiative	(EIB)

Sustainable	Ocean	for	All	(OECD)

Sustainable Blue Economy Finance 
Principles	(European	Commission,	
WWF,	Prince	of	Wales’s	International	
Sustainability	Unit,	EIB,	UNEP	FI)

Blended	Finance	Principles	(OECD)

The	Global	Green	Finance	Index	 
(MAVA	Foundation,	Finance	Watch	 
and	Long	Finance)

Sustainable	Stock	Exchange	Initiative	
(UNCTAD,	UN	Global	Compact,	UNEP	
FI,	PRI)

Caribbean	Climate-Smart	Accelerator	
(CARICOM,	IDB,	GFDRR,	Virgin	Unite,	
ECS)

Action Plan for Healthy Oceans  
and	Sustainable	Blue	Economies	(ADB)

EU	Ocean	Governance	Initiative	(EC)

WestMED	Initiative	(EC)

Facility	for	Blue	Growth	 
in	the	Black	Sea	(EC)

AquaInvest	(FAO)

Sustainable	Blue	Economy	Finance	Principles	 
(European	Commission,	WWF,	Prince	of	Wales’s	International	
Sustainability	Unit,	EIB,	UNEP	FI)

Sustainable	Stock	Exchange	Initiative	 
(UNCTAD,	UN	Global	Compact,	UNEP	FI,	PRI

Task	Force	on	Climate-related	Financial	Disclosures	 
(Financial	Stability	Board)

Sustainable	Shipping	Finance:	the	Poseidon	Principles	(Banks)

Responsible	Ship	Recycling	Standards	(Banks)

Principles	for	Sustainable	Insurance	(UNEP	FI)

Oceans	Financing	initiative	(ADB)

Global	Trade	Finance	Programme 
(International	finance	corporation	–	World	Bank	Group)

Equator	Principles	 
(International	finance	corporation	–	World	Bank	Group)

Blue	Natural	Capital	Financing	Facility	(IUCN,	Government	 
of	the	Grand	Duchy	of	Luxembourg,	Government	Offices	 
of	Sweden,	Ministry	of	the	Environment	and	Energy,	Total)

Blue	Natural	Capital	Positive	Impacts	Framework	 
(IUCN,	Five	Oceans	Environmental	Services	LLC)

The	Partnership	Assurance	Model	 
(Monterey	Bay	Aquarium	and	co)

8F	Asset	Management	Pte.	Ltd

Climate Bonds  
(Standard	and	Certification	Scheme	Climate	Bonds)

Blue	Invest	(EC)

Global	Reporting	Initiative	(GRI	(Global	Strategic	Alliances:	
OECD,	UNEP,	UN	Global	Compact,	ISO)

Sustainability	Accounting	Standards	Board	Standards	(SABS)

68

Our mapping and review of initiatives suggests 
that  a	 number	 of	 relevant	 gaps	 still	 exist	
(both	in	the	geographical	scope	and	sectoral	
coverage),	 including	 a	 fragmentation	 of	
involved,  although  cross-
leading  actors 
references  exist  between  various  initiatives. 
All  blue  economy  sectors  are  covered  by  at 
least  one  initiative.  However,  the  mapping 
reveals  that  some	 sectors	 are	 supported	
more  than  others.  More  traditional  activities 
such as fisheries, aquaculture and shipping are, 
for  example,  often  the  focus  of  most  global 
initiatives  currently  in  place,  as  they  provide 
the bulk of current economic returns and jobs 
in the blue economy. And yet, other emerging 
activates such as off-shore wind and renewable 
energy, as well as blue-biotechnologies, would 
require  further  support  to  accelerate  their 
growth  potential  globally.  Initiatives  in  those 
areas  vary  globally  and  may  have  different 
purposes  or  scope  (see  details  in  the  Annex), 
but the definitions at the specific activities level 
generally coincide.

The  protection	 of	 the	 marine	 environment	
appears	 to	 be	 a	 common	 driver	 across	
all  initiatives,  which  are  somehow  linked 
to  regulation  or  governmental  strategies. 
Principles  and  guidelines  are  often  used  to 
back  up  regulations  or  political  strategies. 
These  aim  at  promoting  the  sustainable  use 
of oceans, while involving private actors (when 
they  are  not  the  authors  of  the  documents). 
Nevertheless,  only	 a	 few	 mapped	 initiatives		
refer  to  regulatory  measures,  which  are 
legally	 binding,	 while	 the	 majority	 are	 non-
regulatory	 measures	 and	 actions	 promoted	
by	 private	 sector	 and	 financing	 bodies.  This 
leaves  open  the  possibility  that  some  actors 
might refer to an initiative for the sake of ‘blue-
washing’ their names – i.e. making misleading 
claims  about  the  environmental  benefits  of 
their ocean ventures.

It  also  remains  challenging  to  monitor  and 
assess  the  success  of  current  measures, 
without the support of a clear framework and 
shared  set  of  monitoring  indicators  which 
would  allow  for  a  robust  and  comparable 
monitoring  and  auditing  system.  Private 
sectors are often reluctant to share information 
due  to  confidentiality  matters.  As  a  general 
reflection,  greater  coordination  and  synergies 
could  be  fostered  across  existing  initiatives 
–  including  but  not  limited  to  the  creation  of 
consistent  databases  of  similar  actions.  This 
aspect, together with the persisting	structural	
lack	of	comparable	data	on	financial	flows	in	
the blue economy and potentials for financial 
returns of such investments, makes it difficult	
for	 financing	 actors	 to	 get	 a	 clear	 view	 of	
the sector.

As  a  result,  although  a  (growing)  number  of 
global  measures  exist  to  address  various 
specific issues for sustainable financing in the 
blue  economy,  such  initiatives  would  require 
some further actions to be fully effective.

69

6.2  General recommendations for regulators and investors (and joint actions)

As  discussed  throughout  this  report,  and 
considering  the  current  situation  with  respect 
to financing of blue economy activities globally, 
fostering more sustainable investments in the 
blue  economy  requires  complex  actions.  On 
the  one  hand,  ‘carrots  and  sticks’  are  to  be 
driven  forward  by  public  regulators,  including 
the  appropriate  enforcement  measures  – 
pushing  investors  towards  more  sustainable 
finance patterns. On the other hand, a stronger 
commitment and concrete actions are needed 
by  investors  who  have  an  eye  for  the  longer 
term  and  appreciate  that  short  term  gains 
sometimes  need  to  be  lower  because  it  is 
important to first create positive and virtuous 
cycles,  respecting  the  environment,  social 
impacts  and  local  communities.  Moreover, 
greater cooperation and exchanges are needed 
to  favour  joint  actions  amongst  these  two 
groups of actors (i.e. regulators and investors) 
– and to help create positive dynamics. 

In 
this  exchange  between  public  and 
private  actors,  positive  dynamics  promoting 
sustainability  must  be  created. 
Investors 
need  to:  i)  prove  the  long-term  potential  and 
profitability  of  investing  in  a  sustainable 
blue  economy;  ii)  increase  awareness  and 
demonstrate  evidence  of  this  potential;  iii) 
demonstrate  that  commercial  risk  is  real 
and  can  benefit  all  stakeholders. 
If  the 
market  does  not  generate  such  sustainable 
investment opportunities (and instead favours 
unsustainable practices), then there is a major 
role  for  public  actors  to  play.  They  then  need 
to  review  the  regulatory  framework,  revise 
the  vision  and  the  accompanying  support 
schemes (carrots and sticks), and make it more 
favourable for investors that are committed to 
promoting a sustainable blue economy.

Building on the analysis developed so far, we therefore provide some overall recommendations:

For  regulators:  including  policy,  strategic 
planning  and 
legal  measures  that  can 
provide  a  more  effective  and  transparent 
framework for sustainable finance in the blue 
economy,  while  redirecting  financial  flows 
to  support  the  sustainable  development  of 
the  blue  economy  (either  directly  through 
efficient  public  funds/subsidies,  or  indirectly 
by  ensuring  incentives  and  warrants  which 
could leverage additional sustainable private 
finance).

blue 

economy 

For  investors:  encouraging  the  recognition 
of  the  profitability  of  investing  in  fully 
sustainable 
activities, 
risk  of 
acknowledging 
investing in activities which are unsustainable 
(i.e.  with  negative  social,  environmental 
and  economic  local  impact)  and  supporting 
the  broader  development  of  Corporate 

the  commercial 

Social  Responsibility  policies  that  increase 
investment  in  sustainable  blue  economy 
activities.

For	joint	actions: encouraging further steps 
towards better measurements of impacts of 
financing practices. 

The set of recommendations has considered 
the current regulatory frameworks discussed 
in this chapter. The full set of recommendation 
is  now  presented  as  a  basis  for  comments. 
The recommendations are also aligned with 
the  current  European  Commission  Action 
Plan  on  Sustainable  Financing171  and  where 
possible it could be useful to incorporate such 
recommendations into the work currently on-
going under the Action Plan.172 On this basis, 
practical  actions  to  be  implemented  in  the 
shorter-term – i.e. ‘low hanging fruits’ – are 
then suggested (Ch. 6.3).

70

Recommendations		 
for	regulators

Generate	and	disseminate	knowledge	
and	business	cases	for	investors 
(short	to	medium-term	action)

Support  sectoral  knowledge  and  capacity 
(including  business  cases)  as  a  way  of 
raising the awareness of private investors 
on  the  blue  economy,  so  that  they  can 
make well informed decisions to invest in 
sustainable practices.

Issues	and	gaps	identified	in	our	analysis

Lack	 of	 awareness	 and	 shared	 definitions.  A  limited  awareness  of  the  blue  economy  as  a  whole  emerged 
amongst	 the	 global	 financial	 community.	 This	 is	 due	 to	 its	 novelty	 and	 is	 reinforced	 by	 some	 terminological	
confusion	(blue/ocean,	etc.).

Lack	 of	 sector-specific	 investments	 needs,	 risks	 and	 return	 potential.	 Sector-specific	 information	 on	 risks	
to	 support	 informed	 investment,	 lending	 and	 insurance	 underwriting	 decisions,	 as	 well	 as	 to	 improve	 the	
understanding	 and	 analysis	 of	 ocean-related	 risks	 and	 opportunities	 for	 investments	 in	 specific	 sectors	 and	
oceans,	are	still	limited.

Limited	access	to	reliable	data	on	investment	potential	for	emerging	niches	(technologies	and	value-chains). 
Limited	bankability	profiles	for	pilots	and	experimentation	initiatives	(e.g.	business	cases	of	emerging	practices,	
piloting	of	new	business	models,	adoption/adaptation	of	new	technologies	to	boost	emerging	value	chains).

Lack	 of	 adequate	 capacity	 and	 resources	 within	 administrations	 to	 manage	 available	 databases.  A  low 
level	of	funding	is	made	to	collect	data	in	a	systematic	manner	and	to	make	it	fully	available	to	potential	global	
investors.

Evidence	that	emerged	from	case	studies	and	interviews

Lack	of	clear	understanding	of	the	sector	has	emerged	as	one	of	the	main	factors	for	unsustainable	financing	practices	
assessed	in	the	case	studies.	For	example,	the	lack	of	reliable	profits	forecast	for	the	off-shore	wind	industry,	coupled	
with	limited	experience	in	the	sector	by	relevant	private	investors,	is	one	of	the	challenges	for	persisting	investments	
in	Oil	and	Gas	in	the	North	Sea	Region.	However,	most	of	the	assessed	practices	showed	poor	sectoral	knowledge	
as	a	main	obstacle	to	sustainable	investments,	with	a	lack	of	awareness	of	possible	alternative	investments	also	
preventing	fully	sustainable	practices	for	local	communities	and	investors	(e.g.	due	to	unsustainability	factors	that	
financial	players	are	unable	to	detect,	but	would	result	in	higher	local	pressures	and	possibly	unexpected	investment	
costs	for	financial	actors).	For	instance,	in	Belize,	the	lack	of	sectoral	data	and	longer-term	investment	potentials	
contributed	to	fostering	short-term	investments	with	limited	sustainability	for	local	communities	and	ecosystems.

Potential	actors	to	be	involved

Partnership	amongst	international	financial	institution	(IFIs)	and	International	Organisations	 
(e.g.	building	on	Sustainable	Blue	Economy	Finance	Principles).

71

Recommended	actions	for	regulators	and	policymakers

Need	 for	 leadership	 in	 creating	 and	 managing	 best	 practices	 in	 the	 blue	 economy:	 Global	institutions	need	
to	 lead	 to	 foster	 global	 consensus	 towards	 a	 knowledge	 management	 framework	 for	 the	 blue	 economy	 and	
to	 provide	 guidance	 on	 data	 collection	 and	 dissemination	 –	 European	 Marine	 Observation	 and	 Data	 Network	
(EMODnet),	the	long-term	marine	data	initiative,	could	serve	as	a	model	to	emulate.

Knowledge management cycle strengthening:	A	conceptual	knowledge	management	framework	would	need	to	
cover	the	following	issues:	knowledge	needs,	identification,	generation,	sharing,	and	use.	In	particular,	it	would	be	
important	to	strengthen	the	identification	of	knowledge	needs	by	expanding	successful	approaches	undertaken	by	
some	organisations	working	on	the	blue	economy	and	by	preparing	sector	specific	knowledge	plans	(sharing	best	
practices	in	terms	of	the	benefits	of	knowledge	sharing,	leading	to	successful	investments	in	the	blue	economy).

Develop	 systematic	 market	 intelligence	 for	 the	 blue	 economy:	 The	presence	of	sound	blue	economy	market	
analysis,	 including	 investment	 prospects	 as	 well	 as	 trends	 of	 growth	 and	 expected	 returns	 for	 investments	 in	
different	 economic	 activities,	 is	 essential	 to	 ensure	 that	 investors	 are	 incentivised	 to	 embark	 on	 sustainable	
financing	of	the	blue	economy.	For	blue	economy	business	ideas	to	be	‘bankable’	and	to	attract	large	investors,	
enterprises	would	need	to	work	on	their	potential	market	size	and	capacity	to	engage	with	investors.

Improve	 enabling	 technologies,	 particularly	 for	 knowledge	 storage,	 retrieval	 and	 sharing:  Although  some 
institutions	(EU,	OECD,	etc.)	have	invested	substantially	in	IT	infrastructure,	there	are	a	number	of	IT	gaps	that	
impede	the	smooth	generation,	sharing	and	use	of	knowledge	and	best	practices	on	the	blue	economy.

Improve	quality	and	accessibility	of	global	data	on	financing	flows	in	the	sector	 
(mid-term	action)

Collect  data  and  organise  existing  datasets 
on investment flows across the blue economy 
activities and the global oceans. For instance, 
provide reliable data to inform on investment 

gaps  in  the  blue  economy  and  to  highlight 
the  need  for  specific  investments  in  sectors 
presenting a high potential for development in 
the future.

Issues	and	gaps	identified	in	our	analysis

Fragmented and largely unavailable sectoral financing and investment data: several sources exist with data 
on	 financial	 flows	 worldwide,	 but	 they	 tend	 to	 be	 highly	 aggregated	 (by	 sector	 and/or	 region)	 without	 a	 clear	
specification	 of	 relevant	 activities	 related	 to	 the	 blue	 economy.	 When	 data	 on	 blue	 economy	 finance	 exists,	 it	
largely	fragmented	and	uncoordinated.	Datasets	may	not	be	updated	or	lack	clarity	on	how	data	was	collected.

Poor	access	of	available	information	for	non-expert	users: notwithstanding the large number of blue economy 
data	sources,	there	is	a	general	lack	of	awareness	about	available	information	for	non-expert	users	and	the	need	
to	improve	the	way	in	which	available	information	is	communicated	to	a	range	of	sectoral	actors	(not	necessarily	
experts	in	finance).

Limited	commitment	in	sharing	private	financing	flows	in	the	sector: initiatives aimed at raising commitments 
towards	and	visibility	of	the	sector	for	private	investors	are	still	limited,	besides	relevant	actions	jointly	promoted	
by the EU173	and	the	WWF,	as	well	as	alliances	in	certain	sectors	of	the	blue	economy	(e.g.	shipping174).

Evidence	that	emerged	from	case	studies	and	interviews

Several	case	studies	demonstrated	the	inability	or	unwillingness	of	investors	to	sufficiently	disclose	clear	information,	
which	 should	 be	 a	 pre-condition	 to	 assess	 the	 overall	 sustainability	 of	 the	 proposed	 investments	 (transparency	
is	 inadequate	 or	 reporting	 requirements	 are	 weak	 –	 e.g.	 no	 ESIA,	 no	 public	 consultations,	 etc.).	 In	 extreme	 cases,	
irregular	practices	may	even	lead	to	fraud,	with	the	financial	information	provided	being	ultimately	unreliable,	such	
as	in	the	case	of	state	fisheries	in	Mozambique.	This	is	also	a	consequence	of	the	limited	capacity	of	local	authorities	
to	request	clear	investment	prospects	and	information.	For	instance,	the	case	study	on	unsustainable	investments	
in	Albania	and	Montenegro	highlights	that	the	poor	level	of	enforcement	capacity	of	local	authorities	may	prevent	
competent	scrutiny	of	investment	information	and	resulting	impacts.	But	more	transparent	information	on	global	
investment	flows	may	also	improve	the	work	of	enforcing	agencies	(e.g.	Europol).

72

Potential	actors	to	be	involved

Partnerships	amongst	IFIs	and	International	Organisations	 
(e.g.	building	on	Sustainable	Blue	Economy	Finance	Principles).

Recommended	actions	for	regulators	and	policymakers

Harmonise global data and information on investments in the blue economy: extract	reliable	and	up-to-date	
information	related	to	blue	economy	finance	and	investments	from	global	datasets,	so	that	informed	decisions	
are	made.

Collect,	analyse	and	share	blue	economy	finance/investment	data	more	systematically: regional organisations 
can  create  and  maintain  a  gateway  to  a  range  of  data  archives  managed  by  local,  national  and  regional 
organisations.	 Through	 these	 gateways,	 users	 could	 have	 access	 to	 standardised	 observations,	 data	 quality	
indicators	and	processed	data	on	the	status	of	finance	and	investment	flows	across	the	blue	economy	sectors.

Involve	 intermediaries	 such	 as	 global	 stock	 exchanges:	 data  is  collected  if  information  is  used  and  sharing 
such information as a basis to assess trends in investments in the blue economy worldwide and across oceans 
could	raise	interest	in	the	sector	while	also	ensuring	that	more	accurate	and	reliable	data	are	tracked	and	publicly	
shared.

Incentivise	 investment	 in	 online	 and	 mobile	 real-time	 applications: investments in data collection should be 
made	at	the	global	level	(by	multilateral	institutions),	but	also	at	the	regional	and	local	levels.	This	would	imply	the	
access	to	dedicated	web	pages	or	mobile	applications	with	frequently	updated	information	on	all	sectors	of	the	
blue	economy	(aquaculture,	offshore	energy	potential,	tourism	resources,	emerging	innovations	in	biotechnology,	
etc.),	with	a	view	of	supporting	blue	economy	private	investments	and	sustainable	ocean	development.

Ensure	quality	of	policy	frameworks	and	enforceability	of	policy	compliance	(mid-term	action)

Support  regulators  and  policy  authorities  in 
their  ability  to  foster  consistent  visions  and 
regulatory  frameworks  for  the  blue  economy, 

including  strong  monitoring  and  compliance 
mechanism  and  cooperation  amongst  sub-
sectors.

Issues	and	gaps	identified	in	our	analysis

Poor	 policy	 frameworks	 are	 often	 at	 the	 core	 of	
finance	 practices.	 Persisting	 policy	
unsustainable	
incoherence,	 lack	 of	 clear	 visions	 for	 a	 sustainable	
blue	 economy,	 and	 legislative	 gaps	 all	 contribute	 to	
unsustainable	finance	in	the	sector.

Enforcement	capacity,	for	local	and	regional	authorities	
to	ensure	sustainable	finance,	remains	limited.	 Even in 
presence	of	sound	policy	and	regulatory	frameworks	(on	
paper),	the	limited	ability	of	local	authority	to	implement	
and	enforce	the	respect	of	such	frameworks	(in	practice)	
hinders	the	potential	for	greater	sustainable	finance	in	the	
sector.

Global	 ocean	 governance	 is	 still	 too	 fragmented	 to	
ensure	 a	 sound	 sectoral	 framework. The absence of an 
adequate	 global	 institutional	 mechanism	 or	 an	 overall	
coordinating	 body	 to	 facilitate	 regulatory	 compliance,	
e.g.	 an	 international	 institution	 such	 as	 the	 UN	 with	 a	
mandate	to	ensure	compliance,	makes	it	difficult	for	local	
and	regional	institutions	to	work	beyond	their	immediate	
mandates.	

73

Evidence	that	emerged	from	case	studies	and	interviews

The	relevance	of	sound	policy,	regulatory	and	enforcement	frameworks,	as	a	factor	to	steer	(un)sustainable	finance	
practices	in	the	blue	economy,	has	emerged	in	many	case	studies.	As	shown	in	the	fishmeal	production	case	study	
in	Senegal,	a	fragile	legislative	and	regulatory	framework,	in	which	enforcement	is	not	systematic,	facilitates	the	
attraction	of	investments	in	unsustainable	industrial-scale	production	of	processed	fish.	As	shown	in	the	case	study	
related	to	mangrove	forests	and	shrimp	farms	in	Vietnam,	an	improved	national	regulatory	framework	can,	through	
time,	foster	the	sustainable	performance	of	certain	farming	models.	But	such	policy	frameworks	depend	on	a	multi-
level	adoption	of	rules	and	policies,	making	good	global	ocean	governance	essential.

Potential	actors	to	be	involved

IFIs	like	international	finance	corporation	(IFC),	World	Bank,	EIB	and	regional	development	banks,	 
UNEP	FI	and	institutions	such	as	the	EU,	the	OECD,	etc.

Recommended	actions	for	regulators	and	policymakers

Design	 wide-encompassing	 policy	 and	 enforcement	 frameworks	 for	 the	 blue	 economy,	   with  actions  to 
sanction	 unsustainable	 activities	 either	 through	 fines	 or	 criminal	 convictions,	 or	 through	 non-financial	 ratings	
from	independent	research	institutes	or	agencies	(sponsored	by	public	authorities).

Ensure	that	progress	is	made	to	negotiate	a	new	International	Legally	Binding	Instrument	under the United 
Nations	Convention	on	the	Law	of	the	Sea	(UNCLOS)	on	conservation	and	sustainable	use	of	marine	biological	
diversity	in	areas	beyond	national	jurisdiction	(ABNJ)	–	the	instrument	will	need	to	regulate	four	areas:	i)	marine	
genetic	resources	(including	issues	of	access	and	benefit	sharing);	ii)	area-based	management	tools	(including	
marine	protected	areas);	iii)	environmental	impact	assessments;	and	iv)	capacity	building	and	transfer	of	marine	
technology.	 We	 also	 understand	 that	 there	 are	 also	 negotiations	 for	 the	 ABNJ	 Deep	 Sea	 Mining	 Code	 and	 the	
Regional	Environmental	Management	Plans	for	seabed	minerals	in	the	ABNJ	(both	under	the	aegis	of	ISA).	Such	
negotiations	will	be	important	to	find	agreements	on	these	issues.

Engage	 the	 investing	 community	 in	 the	 training	 and	 capacity	 building	 of  those  involved  in  relevant  blue 
economy	 sectors	 about	 applicable	 international	 law	 and	 legislation,	 as	 well	 as	 regional	 and	 sub-regional	
instruments	and	policies.	

74

Recommendations	 
for	investors

Increase	sustainable	investment	
capabilities	and	scale-up	overall	
financing	capacity	(mid-term	action)

International  financial  institutions  and / or 
specialised  funds  should  act  to  increase 
investment  capabilities  and  expertise  in 
the blue economy – including through the 
development  of  a  ‘blue  economy’  fixed 
income  market175  to  scale-up  long-term 
financing opportunities in the sector.

Issues	and	gaps	identified	in	our	analysis

Investments	 in	 sustainable	 and	 niche/emerging	 blue	 economy	 activities	 are	 still	 limited.  Although  some 
traditional	blue	economy	sectors	are	high	in	global	financing	priorities	(oil	and	gas,	shipping,	tourism,	etc.),	more	
innovative	 and	 sustainable	 niches	 (marine	 renewables,	 blue-biotechnologies,	 sustainable	 tourism,	 etc.)	 remain	
under-financed.

Ambitious	sustainable	blue	economy	projects	and	large-scale	investments	remain	a	challenge.	 In order to 
attract	private	investors	for	ocean	health-related	projects,	returns	on	investment	are	essential.	However,	these	
are	 currently	 unclear	 due	 to	 the	 limited	 economy	 of	 scale	 of	 sustainable	 investments	 or	 because	 emerging/
sustainable	technologies	are	not	yet	mature.

Lack	 of	 innovative	 private	 investment	 instruments	 targeting	 the	 blue	 economy. Some instruments, such as 
the	blue	bonds	or	funds,	have	a	strong	potential	if	structured	by	governments	or	development	institutions,	as	they	
provide	credit	enhancement	to	projects,	thus	allowing	market	participants	to	raise	competitive	long-term	capital	
from	the	markets.

Evidence	that	emerged	from	case	studies	and	interviews

Our	analysis	provided	evidence	that	interest	from	institutional	investors	in	the	sustainable	blue	economy	is	high,	but	
industry	capacity	and	expertise	are	low.	Despite	growing	investor	interest	in	blue	economy	opportunities,	the	ocean	
is	today	one	of	the	least	invested	in	of	all	the	UN	Sustainable	Development	Goals,	particularly	from	a	private	capital	
point	 of	 view.	 Only	 21	%	 of	 impact	 investors	 surveyed	 say	 they	 target	 SDG	 14	 –	 Life	 Below	 Water	 through	 their	
investments.176	Increased	capacity	is	needed	to	address	the	current	investment	gaps	and	to	meet	demand	in	future	
years.	For	example,	a	lack	of	incentives	to	promote	investments	for	a	sustainable	shipbuilding	transition	emerged	
in	Asian	countries.	In	this	respect,	the	Seychelles	Blue	Bond177	represents	a	clear	illustration	of	ways	to	increase	
investment	capacity	and	to	allow	for	a	reduction	in	the	price	of	the	bond	by	partially	de-risking	the	investment	for	
impact	investors.	The	blue	bond	demonstrates	the	potential	for	capital	markets	to	scale	sustainable	oceans	solutions	
that	align	marine	conservation	and	economic	opportunities.178	

Potential	actors	to	be	involved

Large	institutional	investors,	multilateral	development	banks.	In	particular,	multilateral	development	banks	can	help	
to	create	such	‘blue	funds’	and	blue	bonds	mobilising	concessional	finance	and	generating	bankable	project	pipelines.

75

Recommended	actions	for	investors	and	financial	actors

Develop	new	instruments	for	the	sustainable	blue	economy to further integrate the sustainable blue economy 
into	mainstream	finance	–	e.g.	through	the	acceleration	of	‘blue	economy	bonds’	globally.	As	the	Seychelles	blue	
bond179	 demonstrates,	 debt	 financing	 offers	 an	 appealing	 tool	 for	 investors	 to	 engage	 in	 the	 sustainable	 blue	
economy.

Widening	access	to	market-led	finance	for	the	blue	economy	to	both	large	and	small	investors.	Large issuers 
access	most	capital	markets	globally,	due	to	long-standing	harmonised	laws	and	rules	covering	various	capital	
market	funding	sources	(listed	bonds	and	equity	as	well	as	other	combined	financial	instruments).	However,	it	is	
also	important	to	open	access	to	the	blue	economy	to	regional	players	across	oceans	and	particularly	to	ensure	
wide	access	to	finance	for	small	companies,	start-ups	and	mid-size	companies	–	including	through	the	contribution	
of	potential	individual	investors.

Develop	 a	 set	 of	 best	 practices	 for	 financial	 returns	 from	 investments	 in	 the	 sustainable	 blue	 economy, 
as	it	is	important	to	showcase	that	the	transition	towards	financing	a	more	climate-secure	and	sustainable	blue	
economy	 also	 provides	 a	 sound	 investment	 opportunity.	 Specific	 actions	 should	 be	 made	 to	 attract	 investors	
towards	a	sustainable	blue	economy.

Assessing	 the	 existing	 blue	 economy	 finance	 portfolio	 is	 an	 impactful	 step	 that	 investors	 can	 already	 take	
that	reduces	financial	risk	and	improves	the	impacts	on	the	marine	environment,	beneficiary	business	and	local	
communities.	A	recent	survey180	showed	that	three	out	of	four	investors	have	not	yet	assessed	their	portfolios	for	
their	impact	on	the	ocean,	while	about	a	fifth	is	completely	unaware	of	their	ocean	exposure	and	resulting	risks	
in	an	investment	context.

Leverage	investment-grade	finance	
in	 areas	 with	 high	 sustainability	
potential	(medium-term	action)

The  sustainable  blue  economy  could 
be  advanced  significantly  by  scaling 
up  public  finance  as  incentives  and 
the  uptake 
leverage 
of  private 
in  areas 
investments 
with  high  potential  for  sustainable 
development.

to  support 

Issues	and	gaps	identified	in	our	analysis

Large-scale	investments	in	capital-intensive	sectors	require	an	effective	mix	of	public	and	private	finance.	 
The	role	of	private	investors	is	essential	to	speed	up	the	uptake	of	innovative	technologies	and	business	models	
in	critical	areas	(marine	energy,	port	infrastructure,	green	shipping).	However,	this	requires	well	designed	public	
finance	incentives.

Investments	 in	 emerging	 and	 innovative	 activities	 are	 often	 perceived	 as	 too	 risky	 by	 private	 investors.	  
A	wide	range	of	disruptive	technologies	and	business	models	should	be	fostered	through	private	investments	to	
ensure	a	fully	sustainable	blue	economy.181	However,	these	are	often	too	risky	to	be	considered	as	investment	
priorities	by	private	financing	actors.

Small	and	micro	companies	struggle	to	get	the	essential	financial	support	needed	to	innovate. SMEs in the 
sector	often	struggle	to	raise	private	investments	to	achieve	the	‘next	stage’	of	business	growth	(i.e.	once	they	
have	reached	a	certain	size	following	the	injection	of	‘seed’	money	and	are	looking	for	‘developing’	money).

Grassroots	local	funding	should	be	further	exploited.	Small	scale	artisanal	businesses	need	local,	community-
based,	financing	options	as	an	initial	first	step	in	moving	towards	more	sustainable	practices.	This	is	particularly	
important	for	remote	and/or	poor	people	who	are	looking	to	develop	sustainable	businesses,	improve	production	
line	practices	and/or	supply	lines,	including	sustainable	use	of	natural	resources.

76

Evidence	that	emerged	from	case	studies	and	interviews

The	relevant	role	of	public	finance	to	leverage	private	impact	investments	have	clearly	emerged	from	our	analysis.	
Sustainable	 and	 investment-grade	 projects	 are	 needed,	 for	 example	 to	 boost	 green	 and	 innovative	 seaport	
infrastructure	 globally.	 Massive	 external	 investments	 will	 be	 required	 in	 the	 coming	 years,	 with	 private	 sector	
resources	being	badly	needed	and	efficient	public	subsidies	playing	an	essential	role	in	leveraging	private	investment.	
The	case	study	describing	the	EU	support	in	this	area	reviews	the	results	of	the	European	Court	of	Auditors	(2016)	
finding	that	a	third	of	EU	spending	on	facilities,	including	quays,	docks	and	breakwaters,	at	EU	seaports	between	
2000	and	2013	was	ineffective	and	unsustainable.	The	case	study	on	tourism	in	Thailand	(i.e.	nearly	10	%	of	the	
Country’s	 GDP)	 offers	 another	 illustration	 of	 the	 need	 to	 develop	 investment-grade	 projects	 to	 attract	 long	 term	
investors.	While	the	country’s	government	is	striving	in	its	effort	to	allocate	adequate	resources	to	infrastructure,	
skills	and	services	to	transform	the	tourism	industry,	greater	efforts	are	needed	to	attract	private	investments.

Potential	actors	to	be	involved

Regional	Development	Banks	and	large	institutional	investors.

Recommended	actions	for	investors	and	financial	actors

Foster	 public-private	 arrangements	 to	 increase	 capacity	 and	 share	 risks.	 Cooperation	 between	 public	 and	
private-sector	 bodies	 attracts	 private	 investors	 by	 transferring	 certain	 financial	 risks	 in	 exchange	 of	 public	
warrants,	 and	 by	 specifying	 performance	 on	 outputs	 and	 broader	 outcomes	 rather	 than	 on	 inputs	 and	 pure	
financial	returns.

Develop	market	incentives	to	foster	the	uptake	of	sustainable	practices.	Creation	of	a	reputational	incentive	
system	 supported	 by	 institutional	 structures	 allowing	 the	 certification	 of	 good	 practices	 across	 sectors	 of	 the	
blue	economy.	E.g.,	by	creating	‘blue	labels’	delivered	by	public	institutions	or	independent	agencies	with	a	state	
mandate,	it	will	be	possible	for	investors	to	identify	companies	and	sectors	with	more	sustainability	potential	
than	others.

Put	in	place	efficient	financial	incentive	mixes	to	leverage	private	investments	in	strategic	areas. Economic 
instruments	such	as	taxes,	subsidies	and	fees	should	be	aimed	at	internalising	environmental	and	social	benefits,	
costs	 and	 risks	 to	 society.	 However,	 it	 should	 also	 aim	 at	 creating	 incentives	 for	 investors	 and	 businesses	 to	
engage	in	new	emerging	sectors.

Reduce	 the	 risk	 of	 liabilities	 for	 long-term	 investors	 (e.g.	 through	 guarantees).  The  asset  allocation  and 
investment	strategy	of	institutional	investors,	in	terms	of	maturity	and	risk,	are	structurally	determined	by	their	
liability	structure.	The	prudential	frameworks	applicable	to	those	institutional	investors	are	designed	to	ensure	an	
appropriate	adequacy	between	their	assets	and	their	liabilities.	Public	resources	can	be	used	to	provide	guarantees	
to such investors in exchange for investing towards sustainability – and including through Payment for Ecosystem 
Services	(PES)	schemes.182

Develop	 a	 tailored	 public	 support	 mechanism,	 e.g.	 Blue	 Economy	 Investment	 Platforms	 (BEIP)	 to	 be	 created	
for	each	ocean	or	sea-basin,	with	an	ability	to	take	into	account	the	varying	blue	economy	sectoral	needs	and	to	
support	less	mature/younger	businesses	contributing	to	sustainable	economic	sectors.

77

Promote	 the	 use	 of	 a	
coherent	 taxonomy	 for	
the	 blue	 economy	 to	
engage	 with	
investors	
(short-term	action)

on 

the 

Build 
ongoing 
process to define a coherent 
taxonomy  for  sustainable 
finance,  and  promote  a 
consistent  and  coherent 
terminology 
to  be  used 
to  engage  with  financial 
actors  when  discussing 
investments 
in  the  blue 
economy.

Issues	and	gaps	identified	in	our	analysis

Our	 analysis	 confirmed	 a	 proliferation	 of	 concepts	 and	 approaches	 that	 make	 up	 the	 blue	 economy	 landscape.	
Any	 coherent	 understanding	 of	 the	 sector	 for	 investors	 is	 therefore	 hampered	 by	 a	 persisting	 lack	 of	 clarity	 and	
harmonisation	across	the	existing	definitions	of	the	blue	economy	(EU)	or	ocean	economy	(OECD,	World	Bank),	or	
even	the	use	of	the	term	to	indicate	more	specifically	fisheries	and	aquaculture	(FAO)	or	rather	a	broader	range	of	
maritime	economic	activities	(EU,	World	Bank).

Evidence	emerged	from	case	studies	and	interviews

The	proliferation	of	terms	and	differences	in	the	understanding	of	the	blue	economy	concept	is	not	necessarily	an	
issue	on	its	own.	No	case	studies,	for	example,	addressed	or	highlighted	this	as	a	specific	challenge.	Nevertheless,	
the	lack	of	understanding	and	clarity	on	the	very	concept	of	the	blue	economy	has	clearly	emerged	as	an	immediate	
obstacle	 for	 its	 comprehension.	 Greater	 clarity	 in	 the	 use	 and	 understanding	 of	 the	 concept	 by	 global	 financing	
institutions	may	therefore	be	required	as	part	of	the	broader	effort	to	raise	the	awareness,	appeal	and	understanding	
of	the	sector	for	private	investors	worldwide.

Potential	actors	to	be	involved

OECD, EU, FAO, UNEP FI183,	Regional	Development	Banks	(building	on	Sustainable	Blue	Economy	Finance	Principles).

Recommended	actions	for	investors	and	financial	actors

Promote	the	development	of	a	consistent	and	common	understanding	about	the	blue	economy starting from 
the	definition	of	terminology,	to	be	followed	by	advocacy	in	support	of	the	global	adoption	of	a	standard	definition.	
Such	a	definition	will	also	recognise	the	need	to	balance	economic	benefits	with	the	long-term	capacity	of	the	
ocean,	with	a	view	of	protecting	the	health	and	longevity	of	marine	resources	and	ecosystems.

Achieve	a	common	understanding	of	market	structures and value chains across blue economy activities.	The	
diverse	and	fragmented	nature	of	the	sub-sectors	of	the	blue	economy	and	related	value-chains	require	some	
form	of	clarification	to	make	the	sector	as	a	whole	appealing	to	investors.

Adoption	 of	 standardised	 (or	 at	 least	 harmonised)	 terminology	–	and	the	corresponding	benefits	which	such	
adoption	would	bring	–	rest	on	the	advocacy	of	policymakers	and	regulators.	We	believe	that	such	efforts	should	
begin	with	an	official	adoption	of	the	terminology	and	a	campaign	to	recommend	these	standard	market	definitions	
for	adoption.	

78

Recommendation	for	joint	
action	by	investors	 
and	regulators

Introduce	a	measurement	approach	 
for	expected	impacts	–	impact	assessment	
(medium-term	action)

Develop  a  standardised  approach 
the 
measurement  of  negative  and  positive  impacts  in 
the  blue  economy,  and  provide  detailed  technical 
guidance and support to investors to perform such 
assessments and to authorities to enforce it.

for 

Issues	and	gaps	identified	in	our	analysis

Complexity	 and	 reluctance	 for	 financial	 actors	 to	 assess	 the	 impacts	 of	 their	 investments on the targeted 
ecosystems,	communities	and	economies.	A	recent	survey	(Credit	Suisse,	2019)	shows	that	three	in	four	investor	
respondents	have	not	assessed	their	portfolios	for	their	impact	on	the	ocean.	Furthermore,	21	%	are	completely	
unaware	of	the	risk	they	are	exposed	to	as	a	result	of	investments	in	unsustainable	activities	in	the	blue	economy.	
Almost	a	third	of	asset	owners	do	not	address	the	potential	for	sustainable	blue	economy	support	at	all		in	their	
current	investments	–	it	is	therefore	pivotal	to	better	inform	investors	of	the	importance	of	securing	a	healthy	and	
resilient	ocean	and	of	the	risks	associated	with	business-as-usual	to	both	business	and	society.

Limited	capacity	and	capabilities	of	local	authorities	to	require	and	scrutinise	the	expected	impacts	of	proposed	
investments	as	a	condition	for	their	authorisation.	The	assessment	of	expected	and	unintended	impacts	on	local	
ecosystems,	communities	and	economies	should	be	a	mandatory	requirement	prior	to	any	investment	approval.	A	
mix	of	limited	capacity,	lack	of	skills	and	urgency	in	attracting	valuable	financial	resources	makes	it	challenging	
for	local	authorities	to	enforce	their	role	in	this	respect.

There	is	a	lack	of	a	standard	and	adequate	methodology	to	be	practically	implemented	to	assess	the	impacts	
of	 investment	 and	 financial	 streams	 in	 the	 blue	 economy.	 If	 it	 is	 already	 difficult	 to	 assess	 financial	 returns	
of	 investments	 in	 complex	 environments,	 it	 is	 even	 more	 challenging	 to	 assess	 the	 broader	 impacts	 on	 local	
ecosystems	and	communities	and	almost	impossible	to	duly	assess	all	unintended	effects	in	the	short	and	mid-
terms.	 And	 yet,	 to	 ensure	 sustainable	 financing	 in	 the	 blue	 economy,	 it	 is	 imperative	 to	 identify	 and	 adopt	 a	
simple-enough	approach	to	assess	such	impacts	–	at	least	to	some	extent,	depending	on	the	available	data	for	
the	market,	targeted	activities	and	context	in	which	they	operate.

Evidence	emerged	from	case	studies	and	interviews

As	illustrated	by	the	case	study	on	Coral	Reef	in	Belize,	investments	are	too	often	prioritised	around	economic	growth	
stakes,	possibly	over	a	short-term	outlook,	with	regulations	acting	to	limit	damages	on	natural	capital	rather	than	
supporting	fully	beneficial	and	win-win	investments	–	for	both	financial	actors	and	local	communities.	This	approach	
is	commonly	found	in	many	emerging	countries,	but	are	also	possibly	emerging	in	many	developed	economies	as	well,	
where	the	regulatory	approach	is	rather	aimed	at	mitigating	damages,	rather	than	fostering	fully	virtuous	practices	
–	for	example	by	boosting	innovation	and	adaptation	of	current	practices	into	win-win	solution	for	investors,	local	
economics,	as	well	as	local	communities	and	ecosystems.	

A	similar	pattern	can	be	observed	in	the	Cayman	Island	cruise	sector	case,	where	the	project	appears	to	be	oriented	
mainly	towards	the	interests	of	private	cruise	operators,	without	a	full	screening	of	the	potential	unintended	effects	
on	the	local	environment	and	local	communities.	Such	an	approach	is	certainly	easier	to	implement	that	a	‘holistic’	
environmental,	financial	and	socio-economic	outlook	–	which	aims	to	undertake	a	wide	impact	assessment	before	
entering	into	a	project,	including	a	comprehensive	analysis	of	all	up-and-downhill	issues	(e.g.	source-to-sea),	also	
gathering	the	local	population	engagement.	And	yet	greater	efforts	in	this	direction	should	certainly	be	made	by	all	
actors	(public	and	private)	if	a	substantial	change	is	to	be	achieved

79

The	case	study	on	unsustainable	fishmeal	plants	in	Senegal	shows	that	environmental	and	social	impacts	of	large	
foreign	investments	into	the	country	would	have	demonstrated	the	negative	impacts	on	local	communities	and	the	
role	of	small	businesses	for	improving	the	livelihoods	of	vulnerable	populations.	Similarly,	the	assessment	of	Salmons	
farms	in	New	Zealand	suggests	that	a	wider	assessment	of	economic	and	environmental	impacts	on	the	Marlborough	
Sounds	region	would	have	even	benefited	investors.	The	analysis	of	investments	in	the	Carlsbad	desalination	plant	
in	California	highlights	the	impact	of	precedent	and	an	adequate	legal	framework	for	some	emerging	sectors.	It	also	
points	out	the	need	for	adequate	coordination	and	communication	between	private	and	public	investors	to	better	
understand	the	specific	features	of	projects	in	emerging	blue	economy	sectors.

Still,	some	good	market	practices	exist	that	could	possibly	be	used	as	a	reference.	For	instance,	Mirova’s	Althelia	
Sustainable  Ocean  Fund184	 aims	 at	 delivering	 sustainable	 economic	 returns	 in	 fisheries,	 aquaculture,	 associated	
seafood	supply	chains,	ocean	waste	&	recycling	and	marine	conservation.	The	fund	seeks	to	invest	in	activities	with	
the	 objective	 of	 providing	 net-positive	 impacts	 for	 communities	 and	 ecosystems.	 The	 fund	 managers	 argue	 that	
positive	environmental	outcomes	and	attractive	market-based	returns	are	not	mutually	exclusive.	To	do	so,	the	fund	
measures	impacts	across	seven	impact	themes	that	cover	environmental,	social	and	economic	benefits.

Potential	actors	to	be	involved

Multilateral	development	banks,	particularly	those	who	have	developed	robust	impact	measurement	methodologies,	
and	actors	such	as	IFC	or	IEB	–	UNEP	FI,	EU,	OECD,	etc.		(building	on	Sustainable	Blue	Economy	Finance	Principles).

Recommended	actions	for	investors	and	financial	actors

Define	an	evidence-based	approach	for	determining	if	an	investment	project	is	sustainable	–	i.e.	building	on	
the	study	on	‘Sustainability	criteria	for	the	Blue	Economy’.185	A	risk	categorisation	process	should	be	provided,	
with	all	projects	categorised	based	on	their	potential	negative	environmental	impact,	according	to	a	framework	
agreed	at	the	international	level.

Determine	 specific	 screening	 and	 proofing	 standards	 and	 requirements	 –	 i.e.	 building	 on	 the	 study	 on	
‘Sustainability	 criteria	 for	 the	 Blue	 Economy’,186	 to	 assess	 the	 various	 dimensions	 of	 the	 impact	 (economic,	
social,	environmental,	etc.)	of	financing	in	the	blue	economy.

Develop	an	evaluation	methodology	that	seeks	to	capture	the	extent	to	which	investment	assets	contribute	to	
the	SDGs	in	the	blue	economy.	This	would	address	both	materiality	(how	the	current	transitions	are	likely	to	affect	
the	economic	models	of	the	assets	financed,	whether	positively	or	negatively)	and	impact	(how	investors	can	play	
a	role	in	the	emergence	of	a	more	sustainable	economy).

Introduce	 the	 concept	 of	 transition	 into	 the	 measurement	 of	 impacts.	 For	instance,	a	well-functioning	and	
sustainable	blue	economy	could	be	characterised	by	key	transition	qualities,	i.e.	an	economy	that	is	Competitive,	
Well-governed,	Green,	Inclusive,	Resilient	and	Integrated.	For	each	blue	economy	investment,	it	would	be	important	
to	be	able	to	assess	how	an	investment	project	would	contributes	to	the	blue	economy	and	promote	a	sustainable	
transition.

Set	 a	 minimum	 of	 information	 requirements	 –	 i.e.	 building	 on	 the	 study	 on	 ‘Sustainability	 criteria	 for	 the	
Blue	Economy’,187	in	terms	of	information	criteria,	metrics	and	indicators	(“what	information	has	to	be	collected	
and	 shared"),	 so	 that	 monitoring	 systems	 would	 be:	 accurate	 and	 credible;	 balanced	 and	 objective;	 clear	 and	
accessible;	comparable	and	consistent;	and	complete	and	timely.

Make	 investors	 aware	 about	 the	 ‘value	 at	 risk’	 in	 case	 of	 non-compliance. As the laws in the blue economy 
get	tighter	on	a	global	scale,	the	costs	of	non-compliance	(including	increasing	reputation	costs),	as	information	
becomes more accessible, but also as substantial costs resulting from the deterioration of valuable ecosystem 
capital	 –	 essential	 for	 sustainable	 exploitation	 of	 the	 seas	 through	 time	 –	 will	 be	 high	 for	 unsustainable	 blue	
economy	financing	practices;

Engage	 the	 investing	 community	 in	 the	 training	 and	 capacity	 building	 so	 to	 be	 able	 to	 apply	 effective	
measurements	(ex-ante,	during,	ex-post)	of	investments	results,	as	well	as	regional	and	sub-regional	instruments	
and	policies.

Improve	 existing	 and	 mobilise	 new	 technical	 assistance	 funding	 for	 project	 identification,	 preparation	 and	
implementation	support	(note:	link	to	the	first	recommendation	for	regulators	and	policymakers).

80

6.3  Specific recommendations: ‘game changers’ to boost sustainable  

blue economy finance

accelerate 
general 

the 
of 
uptake 
To 
the 
recommendations 
provided  in  the  previous  chapter, 
we  propose  a  number  of  specific 
but  ambitious  short-term  actions. 
These  actions  allow  an  immediate 
response  to  address  the  challenges 
identified  in  this  report,  with  the 
aim  of  accelerating  the  uptake  of 
sustainable  investments  in  the  blue 
economy  across  global  oceans. 
Such  specific  recommendations  are 
intended  as  ‘game	 changers’,	 or	
quick-wins	 to	 shift	 global	 streams	
of	 financing	 towards	 a	 sustainable	
blue  economy.  To  be  effective,  such 
‘game changers’ should be promoted 
by  a  number  of  actors,  which  are 
also suggested following each action 
in  the  list  below  –  note  that  we  did 
not 
indicate  specific  civil  society 
stakeholders,  but  certainly  their  role 
should be considered as well.

(public	

1. Set-up a global forum for sustainable 

finance	
/	 private)	 and	
innovation  in  the  blue  economy,  to 
discuss and address bottlenecks to sustainable 
investments – and where entrepreneurs, private 
sector, scientists and financiers can discuss and 
pitch  new  sustainable  technologies,  products, 
and  energy  prototypes  in  need  of  funding  for 
development. Building on a common taxonomy 
and  understanding  of  the  blue  economy  and 
its  potentials  for  the  financial  community, 
this  can  be  a  platform  for  yearly  exchanges 
between  global  blue  economy  practitioners 
and  impact  investors  (MDBs,  Credit  Agencies, 
Incubators / Accelerators,  private  funds,  etc.). 
Such  platform  would  also  be  used  by  global 
regulators to discuss further opportunities and 
regulatory / policy  processes  to  accelerate  the 

uptake  of  sustainable-investment  streams  in 
the global blue economy.

This initiative should build and further expand 
the current Sustainable Blue Economy Finance 
Initiative by involving global actors such as the 
OECD,  the  Economist’s  World  Ocean  Summit, 
Davos’  Friends  of  the  Ocean  Action,188  etc.,  as 
well  as  major  investors,  multilateral  banks, 
investment networks and relevant international 
organisations.

81

 
and 

globally 

sustainable 

2.	Support 

coordinated 
capacity	 building	 programmes 
the  creation  of 
to  strengthen 
knowledge,  market 
intelligence,  and  best 
practices.  In  particular  for  local  authorities  in 
transition  economies  so  that  they  can  set-up 
effective blue economy policies and transparent 
socio-economic analysis on the current status, 
investment 
challenges 
opportunities  (as  well  as  innovation  bodies 
such  as  clusters, 
incubators,  accelerators, 
etc.).  The  programmes  should  also  allow  for 
the  promotion  of  coordinated  scientific  data 
and  monitoring  hubs  –  for  example  at  the 
Ocean / Sea-basin levels – to collect and share 
new  findings  on  the  performance  of  the  blue 
economy, its areas of technological  /innovation 
needs, as well as the actual / potential impacts 
(socio-economic,  ecosystems,  biodiversity, 
adaptation / mitigation). 
climactic 
In  this  respect,  the  capacity  for  the  adoption	
of	 a	 common	 and	 shared	 (long)	 list	 of	 key	

changes 

between	

agencies	

platform	
promotion	

3.	Promote  a  stable	 cooperation	

investment	
(IPAs),	
development	banks,	international	institutions	
and	 specialised	 law	 enforcement	 agencies 
(Europol,  Interpol,  etc.),  to  set-up  consistent 
global  cooperation  in  monitoring  irregular/
unsustainable  investment  practices  and  to 
seek to develop enforcement solutions globally. 
The  platform  should  allow  for  the  uptake  of 
a  common  ‘sustainability  scorecard  for  blue 
economy investment’ (by also building on the 
parallel study being produced on Sustainability 
criteria  for  the  Blue  Economy),190  which  would 
provide  an  overview  of  a  potential  investee’s 
social and environmental performance – e.g. by 
visually highlighting strengths and weaknesses 
of  an  investment  project  and  generating  a 

indicators should be promoted for a consistent 
global monitoring of the sector’s performance – 
as discussed in parallel study being produced on 
Sustainability criteria for the Blue Economy189.

Actors  to  be  potentially  mobilised  include  the 
current World Bank ProBlue Programme (trust 
fund  involving  EU  contributions)  and  possible 
actions for DG DEVCO / DG NEAR, EIB, EBRD, as 
well as regional Development Banks.

social investment score.191 The platform should 
also  coordinate  the  global  efforts  in  the  set-
up  of  a  'Global  Sustainable  Blue  Economy' 
Investment Index (for a shared monitoring and 
assessment of global streams of investments 
and the creation of a dataset of flows, origins, 
quality,  targeted  regions / sectors,  etc.)  and 
a  yearly  award  possibly  linked  to  a  specific 
label / certification.

Actors to be potentially mobilised include UNEP 
FI,  United  Nations  Industrial  Development 
(UNIDO),  World  Bank,  EIB, 
Organization 
EBRD,  Law  Enforcement  Agencies,  Regional 
Development  Banks,  Regional  IPAs  Networks 
and Multilateral Agencies charged with support 
programmes and / or funds to global IPAs192.

82

to	 support	

4.	Further	

innovative	
practices  by  the  financing  sector, 
to  boost  sustainable  investments 
in the blue economy. Develop a measurement 
approach  for  the  offsetting	 mechanism	 in	
the	 blue	 economy	 (including	 PES	 schemes). 
These  schemes  can  be  used  to  mitigate  the 
risks of large-scale investments while ensuring 
that a valuable proportion of the investments 
is specifically tailored to the preservation and 
management of local ecosystem. The method 
should be consistent with approaches used in 
many different regulatory and voluntary offset 
systems  worldwide.  The  practice  of  national 
credit	agencies	(NCAs)	allowing	for	reduced	
lending  to  sustainable 
interest  rates  to 
investments  in  the  blue  economy  should  be 
promoted (see the example of Credit Agricole). 
This  would  also  include  the  development	 of	
Blue	Bond	Principles	(BBP) that will build on 
established best practice and guidelines and by 
the investment bank industry (e.g. green bonds). 
Develop a standardised	process	of	E&S	risk	
categorisation  to  reflect  the  magnitude  of 
risks and impacts in large investment projects 
in  the  blue  economy.  Provide  support  and 
capacity  building  to  help  project  promoters  in 
developing their own monitoring practices and 

regional 

5.	Launch 

investments 
platforms	
to	 aggregate	 and	
accelerate	access	to	finance	in the 
most needed and critical areas for sustainable 
blue  growth  across  different  oceans.  The 
platforms should intermediate several streams 
of  investments  and  manage  large,  medium 
and even micro streams of financing based on 
the  real  needs  of  the  regions.  Ideally,  private 
investment 
infrastructure 
crowdfunding)  might  also  provide 
(e.g. 
individuals  with  intermediation  services  to 
invest  in  sustainable  blue  economy  projects 
and  encourage  entrepreneurs / businesses  to 
support their local area or community. Building 
on  the  common  agreements  to  establish 

in  digital-tech 

enhancing their effectiveness in E&S reporting.  
Build  on  the  existing  internationally  validated 
sustainable  financing  criteria/labels,  to  be 
used for certifying sustainable investments, to 
foster	a	commercial	premium	for	sustainable	
investments  in  B2B  transactions  in  the 
blue  economy  (e.g.  through  labelling  of  B2B 
sustainable products / services).

Actors  to  be  potentially  mobilised  include 
UNEP FI, OECD, Global Stock Exchanges, Rating 
Investment  Networks, 
Agencies, 
pioneering  private  banks  applying  sustainable 
principle  in  their  lending  practices  to  identify 
the most valuable approaches available.

(regional) 

an 
international  platform  for  sustainable 
investments  in  the  blue  economy,  global 
network	 of	 support	 services	 should	 be	 set	
up	 to	 provide	 technical	 assistance	 to	 blue	
economy investors (and Investment Promotion 
Agencies). It should be willing to develop a full-
scale  assessment  of  the  sustainability  of  the 
expected impacts.

Actors  to  be  potentially  mobilised  include  the 
World Bank and (regional) Development Banks, 
(regional) 
Investment  Networks,  Regional 
Cluster s / Accelerators,  as  well  as  relevant 
regional (blue) financing projects / initiatives.

83

6.	Start  a  global  targeted  media 

financial	
towards	
campaign	
institutions, to raise the visibility of 
the  sustainable  blue  economy  and  its  return 
potential for private investors. The aim of the 
campaign  should  be  to  the  raise  awareness 
and  appetite  of  impact  investors  on  the 
relevance of the sustainable blue economy as 
an area with potentially high returns for private 
investments.  The  targets/ messages  should 
be  carefully  identified  to  address  the  main 
bottlenecks  to  the  full  involvement  of  private 
investment in the blue economy. The campaign 
could be differentiated across various oceans, 

sea-basins  and  relevant  countries  and  actors 
of  financing  source / destination  –  so  as  to 
maximise  the  appeal  and  interest  across 
various investment actors and models.

This  is  an  action  which  could  build  on  the 
current  Sustainable  Blue  Economy  Finance 
Initiative,  with  additional  actors 
to  be 
potentially mobilised including the OECD, UNEP 
FI,  Global  Stock  Exchanges,  Rating  Agencies, 
(regional) 
Investment  Networks,  Financing 
Intermediators,  specialised  media  including 
The Economist, etc.

B L U E   E C O N O M Y
Recommendations	 Report
Bibliography

This	document	was	prepared	by	the	Ecorys-led	consortium	for	EASME	and	the	European	Commission	
Directorate-General	for	Maritime	Affairs	and	Fisheries.

PROJECT CONTRACTORS

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the European Council, the Council, the European Central 
Bank, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions Action Plan: Financing Sustainable 
Growth, COM/2018/097 final, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:52018DC0097&from=EN.

Blue Economy Concept Paper, UNEP, 2014, https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/2978BEconcept.pdf.

Innovation for a Sustainable Ocean Economy, OECD, http://www.oecd.org/innovation/inno/ocean-economy/; http://www.oecd.
org/innovation/inno/ocean-economy/; Ocean Economy and Developing Countries, OECD, https://www.oecd.org/ocean/topics/
developing-countries-and-the-ocean-economy/.

United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), The Oceans Economy: Opportunities and Challenges for Small 
Island Developing States, 2014, https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/2294(UNCTAD,%202014)%20
Oceans%20Economy.pdf; 
Oceans Economy and Fisheries, UNCTAD, https://unctad.org/en/Pages/DITC/Trade-and-Environment/Oceans-Economy.aspx.

Oceans, Fisheries and Coastal Economies, World Bank,  
https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/oceans-fisheries-and-coastal-economies.

OECD (forthcoming), Sustainable Ocean for All: Harnessing the benefits for developing countries.

European Commission, The EU Blue Economy Report 2019, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 2019,  
https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/676bbd4a-7dd9-11e9-9f05-01aa75ed71a1/language-en/.

85

8 

9 

Ecosystem Services, Biodiversity Information System for Europe, https://biodiversity.europa.eu/topics/ecosystem-services; OECD, 
OECD work in support of a sustainable ocean, 2020, https://www.oecd.org/ocean/OECD-work-in-support-of-a-sustainable-ocean.
pdf.

OECD, OECD work in support of a sustainable ocean, 2020, https://www.oecd.org/ocean/OECD-work-in-support-of-a-sustainable-
ocean.pdf; Townsend, Michael, Kate Davies, Nicholas Hanley, Judi E. Hewitt, Carolyn J. Lundquist and Andrew Martin Lohrern,  
The Challenge of Implementing the Marine Ecosystem Service Concept, Frontiers in Marine Science 5, 2018, https://www.
frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fmars.2018.00359/full#h12.

10  WWF, Metabolic, Value at Risk in the Blue Economy - Piloting a Systems Modeling Approach to Explore Sustainability Pressures 
and Financial Risk, 2019, https://d2ouvy59p0dg6k.cloudfront.net/downloads/metabolic_wwf_value_at_risk_in_the_blue_
economy_29112019_lr.pdf.

11 

12 

Poole, Robert, Carolin Leeshaa, and Georgie Aley, A Return on Nature – Enabling an Ecosystem Services Market, KPMG, 2019, 
https://home.kpmg/au/en/home/insights/2019/12/ecosystem-services-market-for-agriculture.html.

Government Office for Science, London Gulbenkian Ocean Initiative, Blue natural capital: towards a new economy,  
http://inhabitants-tv.org/nov2019_dsm_ep4/OCEANOS_BlueNaturalCapital_2014.pdf

13 

Ecorys et al., 2020, Sustainability criteria for the Blue Economy.

14 

15 

16 

Register of Commission Expert Groups and Other Similar Entities, High-Level Expert Group on Sustainable 
Finance (E03485), European Commission, https://ec.europa.eu/transparency/regexpert/index.cfm?do=groupDetail.
groupDetail&groupID=3485&NewSearch=1&NewSearch=1&Lang=EN.

High-Level Expert Group on Sustainable Finance, Financing a sustainable European economy, European Commission, 2018,  
https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/180131-sustainable-finance-final-report_en.pdf.

Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the European Council, the Council, the European Central 
Bank, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions Action Plan: Financing Sustainable 
Growth, COM/2018/097 final, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:52018DC0097&from=EN;  
High-Level Expert Group on Sustainable Finance, Financing a sustainable European economy, European Commission, 2018, 
https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/180131-sustainable-finance-final-report_en.pdf.

17 

Technical expert group on sustainable finance (TEG), European Commission,  
https://ec.europa.eu/info/publications/sustainable-finance-technical-expert-group_en.

18  What is sustainable finance, European Commission,  

https://ec.europa.eu/info/business-economy-euro/banking-and-finance/sustainable-finance/what-sustainable-finance_en.

19 

20 

Sustainable finance, European Commission,  
https://ec.europa.eu/info/business-economy-euro/baning-and-finance/sustainable-finance.

An overview  of economic activities assessed and classified based on their contribution to sustainability related policy objectives 
(considering SDGs). Technical Expert Group on Sustainable Finance, Taxonomy: Final report of the Technical Expert Group  
on Sustainable Finance, European Commission, 2020, https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/business_economy_euro/banking_
and_finance/documents/200309-sustainable-finance-teg-final-report-taxonomy_en.pdf; Technical Expert Group  
on Sustainable Finance, Taxonomy Report: Technical annex -  Updated methodology & Updated Technical Screening Criteria, 
European Commission 2020, https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/business_economy_euro/banking_and_finance/
documents/200309-sustainable-finance-teg-final-report-taxonomy-annexes_en.pdf.

21  OECD (forthcoming), Sustainable Ocean for All: Harnessing the benefits for developing countries.

22 

23 

Regulation (EU) 2020/852 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 June 2020 on the establishment  
of a framework to facilitate sustainable investment, and amending Regulation (EU) 2019/2088, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-
content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32020R0852.

Technical Expert Group on Sustainable Finance, Taxonomy: Final report of the Technical Expert Group on Sustainable 
Finance, European Commission, 2020, https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/business_economy_euro/banking_and_finance/
documents/200309-sustainable-finance-teg-final-report-taxonomy_en.pdf.

24 

A discussion on specific taxonomy for sustainable blue economy activities is currently ongoing.

25 

Emerged from the review of literature and exchanges with practitioners during interviews and PRG focus groups.

26 

Technical Expert Group on Sustainable Finance, Taxonomy: Final report of the Technical Expert Group on Sustainable 
Finance, European Commission, 2020, https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/business_economy_euro/banking_and_finance/
documents/200309-sustainable-finance-teg-final-report-taxonomy_en.pdf.

86

27 

Ecorys et al., 2020, Sustainability criteria for the Blue Economy

28 

29 

Technical Expert Group on Sustainable Finance, Taxonomy: Final report of the Technical Expert Group on Sustainable 
Finance, European Commission, 2020, https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/business_economy_euro/banking_and_finance/
documents/200309-sustainable-finance-teg-final-report-taxonomy_en.pdf.

This dimension builds on the notion of social/natural ‘capital accounting’ and reflects on the extent to which investments  
(public and/or private) allow for the protection and maximisation of positive returns with respect to existing local assets –  
in terms of physical capital (land, technology, infrastructure, etc.), human capital (know-how, skills, etc.), social capital (relations, 
values, behaviours, etc.), natural capital (marine and inland ecosystems, etc.), including the full respect of human rights – 
besides financial returns for investors and direct beneficiaries.

30  Maher Chi, Handbook of Research on Value Creation for Small and Micro Social Enterprises, IGI Global, United States, 2018.

31 

32 

For a further review of current trends and needs for a sustainable blue economy we again refer to the study supported  
by the EU on Sustainability criteria for the Blue Economy (Ecorys et al., 2020).

Pantzar M. and Kettunen M, A Sustainable Blue Economy: adopting the concept of ecosystem services in EU marine protected 
area management – A study of experts’ views, IEEP, 2012, https://ieep.eu/uploads/articles/attachments/5a843b4b-119a-4b2f-
847a-5c7ad3a34fd4/A%20sustainable%20blue%20economy.pdf?v=63685665017.

33 

The analysis also includes: the main players involved, the potential for market growth, and major challenges in terms of 
unsustainable practices and opportunities for disruptive technologies and potential missed opportunities.

34  What Is Financial Mechanism? Definition and Meaning, BusinessDictionary.com,  
http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/financial-mechanism.html. 

35  Wiesen, G., and Shereen Skola, What Is a Financial Mechanism?, WiseGeek, Conjecture Corporation, 2020,  

https://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-a-financial-mechanism.htm.

36 

37 

38 

39 

Technically part of public-based, ECAs are at the forehead of promoting private sector’s investments (as such are positioned  
in this table).

Tomorrow, Blue & Green, Responsible Investment Terms: What Is Norms-Based Screening?, Blue and Green Tomorrow, 2013, 
https://blueandgreentomorrow.com/features/responsible-investment-terms-what-is-norms-based-screening/.

Butch Bacani, A systemic view of the insurance industry and sustainable development: International developments  
and implications for China, UNEP Inquiry, Development Research Centre of the State Council (DRC), International Institute  
for Sustainable Development, 2015, https://unepinquiry.org/publication/china-report-a-systemic-view-of-the-insurance-industry-
and-sustainable-development/.

Besides some notable exception – e.g. AXA – global insurance companies are not yet developing specific products for the ocean /
blue economy as such. They do so for some traditional and well-established sector of course (shipping, trade, etc.). https://axaxl.
com/about-us/-/media/axaxl/files/pdfs/about-us/falk-main-report.pdf / https://www.sustainableoceansummit.org/de-risking-blue-
economy-investment-legal-and-insurance-experts-gather-at-woc-sustainable-ocean-summit-sos/.

40 

Caldecott Ben, Public Financing and Sustainability - Increasing finance for a healthy ocean, The London Institute of Banking  
& Finance, 2019, https://www.libf.ac.uk/news-and-insights/insights/detail/2020/03/30/public-financing-and-sustainability.

41  World Economic Forum (WEF), World Resource Institute (WRI), The ocean finance handbook, Friends of Ocean Action, 2020,  

http://blue-finance.org/?p=3085.

42 

Ibid.

43  OECD, OECD work in support of a sustainable ocean, 2020, https://www.oecd.org/ocean/OECD-work-in-support-of-a-sustainable-

ocean.pdf; OECD (forthcoming), Sustainable Ocean for All: Harnessing the benefits for developing countries.

44 

Ibid.

45 

As monitored by the Global Impact Investor Network (GIIN).

46 

47 

Henderson Iain, Mancini Marcos, Sustainable Finance Progress Report, UNEP Inquiry, 2019,  
https://unepinquiry.org/publication/sustainable-finance-progress-report/.

The Poseidon Principles is a framework for responsible ship finance, to support incentivising decarbonisation of shipping.  
See https://www.poseidonprinciples.org/.

87

48 

If we consider the 300 trillion in comparison to about 120 trillion of sustainable ones.

49 

50 

51 

52 

53 

54 

Acacia, CASE, Executive Agency for Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (European Commission), ICF, Metis GmbH, Panteia,  
Study to support investment for the sustainable development of the Blue Economy, European Commission, 2019, https://
webgate.ec.europa.eu/maritimeforum/en/system/files/d13_investmentplatformrecommendation_24092018.pdf.

Acacia , CASE , Executive Agency for Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (European Commission) , ICF , Metis GmbH , Panteia, 
Study to support investment for the sustainable development of the Blue Economy, European Commission, 2018, https://
webgate.ec.europa.eu/maritimeforum/en/system/files/d13_investmentplatformrecommendation_24092018.pdf.

Seaman Tom, Last year’s seafood M&A spend closes on $4bn; 2019 set to be even bigger, Undercurrent News, 2019,  
https://www.undercurrentnews.com/2019/03/14/last-years-seafood-m-2019-set-to-be-even-bigger/.

Kraemer-Eis Helmut, Botsari Antonia, Brault Julien, Lang Frank, EIF Business Angels Survey 2019 - Market sentiment, public 
intervention and EIF’s value added, European Investment Fund, 2019, https://www.eif.org/news_centre/publications/eif_working_
paper_2019_60.pdf.

UNTAC, The COVID-19 Pandemic: New challenges and prospects for recovery and resilience, UNCTAD, 2020,  
https://unctad.org/en/PublicationsLibrary/ditctedinf2020d2_en.pdf.

Saumweber Whitley, Lehr Amy K., Covid-19 at Sea: Impacts on the Blue Economy, Ocean Health, and Ocean Security,  
Center for Strategic & International Studies, 2020, https://www.csis.org/analysis/covid-19-sea-impacts-blue-economy-ocean-
health-and-ocean-security.

55 

Ibid.

56 

UNTAC, The COVID-19 Pandemic: New challenges and prospects for recovery and resilience, UNCTAD, 2020,  
https://unctad.org/en/PublicationsLibrary/ditctedinf2020d2_en.pdf.

57  McCauley Douglas, Teleki Kristian, Thienemann Gloria F., 8 ways to rebuild a stronger ocean economy after COVID-19,  

World Economic Forum, 2020, https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/05/how-to-build-a-bluer-ocean-economy-after-cobid-19/.

58 

Sea at Risk, COVID-19 crisis: the role of the ocean in safeguarding a healthier future, Sea at Risk, 2020,  
https://seas-at-risk.org/29-ocean-governance/1044-covid-19-crisis-the-role-of-the-ocean-in-safeguarding-a-healthier-future.
html.

59  World Resource Institute, 2019. How Are Banks Doing on Sustainable Finance Commitments? Not Good Enough.

60 

https://www.wri.org/finance/banks-sustainable-finance-commitments/.

61 

Compere Lauren, Banking on a Low-Carbon Future: Finance in a Time of Climate Crisis, Impact Report, Boston Commons Asset 
Management, 2019, http://news.bostoncommonasset.com/bank-report-2019/.

62 

Ibid.

63 

IPCC, Special Report - Global Warming of 1.5 ºC, IPCC, 2018, https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/.

64 

Surminski Swenja, Robins Nick, Irwin William, Where next for sustainable insurance? Five priorities for the next decade, London 
School of Economics, 2018, http://www.lse.ac.uk/GranthamInstitute/news/where-next-for-sustainable-insurance-five-priorities-
for-the-next-decade/.

65 

The Blackrock Global Insurance Report 2018, Searching for better returns, BlackRock, 2018,  
https://www.blackrock.com/institutions/en-nl/insights/investment-actions/global-insurance-2018.

66 

E.g. the World Bank financial implication in the Nigerian fossil fuel case listed in the malpractices (no 11).

67  World Bank, Environmental and Social Framework, World Bank, 2017,  

https://www.worldbank.org/en/projects-operations/environmental-and-social-framework.

68 

African Development Bank, Asian Development Bank, European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, European Investment 
Bank, Inter American Development Bank, IDB Invest; Peters, Amos, Islamic Development Bank, World Bank, Joint Report 
on Multilateral Development Banks’ Climate Finance, 2018, https://publications.iadb.org/en/2018-joint-report-multilateral-
development-banks-climate-finance.

69  ODI, A guide to Multilateral Development Banks, 2018.

70 

Inter American Development Bank, IDB launches Blue Tech Challenge with up to US$2M in funding for Blue Economy proposals, 
Inter American Development Bank, 2018, https://www.iadb.org/en/idb-launches-blue-tech-challenge-us2m-funding-blue-
economy-proposals.

88

71 

72 

73 

74 

Inter American Development, Bank Caribbean leaders launch plan to make region a “climate-smart zone,” with IDB support,  
Inter American Development Bank, 2017, https://www.iadb.org/en/news/caribbean-leaders-launch-plan-make-region-climate-
smart-zone-idb-support.

European Investment Bank, The EIB commits EUR 2.5 billion for the sustainable blue economy, European Investment Bank, 
2019, https://www.eib.org/en/press/all/2019-283-the-eib-commits-eur-25-billion-for-the-sustainable-blue-economy.

Asian Development Bank, ADB Launches $ 5 Billion Healthy Oceans Action Plan, Asian Development Bank, 2019,  
https://www.adb.org/news/adb-launches-5-billion-healthy-oceans-action-plan.

African Development Bank, Malawi: The African Development Bank approves $ 13.2 million for sustainable fisheries, aquaculture 
development and watershed management, African Development Bank, 2019, https://www.afdb.org/en/news-and-events/
press-releases/malawi-african-development-bank-approves-132-million-sustainable-fisheries-aquaculture-development-and-
watershed-management-31897.

75  Martini Roger, Many government subsidies lead to overfishing. Here's a solution, OECD, 2019,  

https://www.oecd.org/agriculture/government-subsidies-overfishing/.

76 

77 

International Transport Forum (ITF), International Transport Forum, Maritime Subsidies, Do They Provide Value for Money?, 
OECD / ITF, 2019, https://www.itf-oecd.org/maritime-subsidies-do-they-provide-value-money.

Beattie Alan, Export Credit Where it is Due, Financial Times, 2014, https://www.ft.com/content/6c833208-18a5-34a9-a84f-
885f73cf5071; Export-Import of the United States (EXIM), Report to the U.S. Congress on Global Export Credit Competition, 
EXIM, 2018, https://www.exim.gov/sites/default/files/reports/competitiveness_reports/2018/EXIM-Competitiveness-Report_
June2018.pdf.

78 

Sustainable Stock Exchanges Initiative (SEE), Stock Exchange’s Sustainability Activities, SEE, https://sseinitiative.org/.

79 

80 

81 

82 

83 

84 

85 

Directorate-General for Financial Stability, Financial Services and Capital Markets Union (European Commission) , KPMG, Report 
on the Operation of the Alternative Investment Fund Managers Directive (AIFMD) – Directive 2011/61/EU, European Commission, 
2019, https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/business_economy_euro/banking_and_finance/documents/190110-aifmd-
operation-report_en.pdf; EY Reporting, ESG information: why investors aren’t getting what they want, EY, 2017, https://www.
ey.com/en_gl/assurance/esg-information--why-investors-aren-t-getting-what-they-want; Nelson Mathew, Does your nonfinancial 
reporting tell your value creation story?, EY, 2018, https://www.ey.com/en_gl/assurance/does-nonfinancial-reporting-tell-value-
creation-story.

France for instance recently passed a piece of legislation (disposition VI de l’article 173 de la loi relative à la transition 
énergétique pour la croissance verte) which makes investors accountable for their consideration (or lack of) of ESG criteria,  
and in particluar in relation to the risks linked with climate change.

Innovation Finance Advisory, European Investment Bank Advisory Services, Access-to-finance conditions for Investments  
in Bio-Based Industries and the Blue Economy, European Investment Bank, 2017, https://www.eib.org/attachments/pj/access_to_
finance_study_on_bioeconomy_en.pdf.

For example, regions like the EU where the sector is increasingly being supported, and activities such as shipping with a high 
global profile, are certainly not particularly exposed to such challenges. And yet some specific activities in the blue economy  
in Europe, or some shipping practices in less developed economies, might still be facing similar problems.

European Commission, Advanced technologies, European Commission,  
https://ec.europa.eu/growth/industry/policy/key-enabling-technologies/eu-actions/level-playing-field_en.

Can a WTO agreement on fisheries subsidies help save the ocean?, WWF, 2017, https://ec.europa.eu/fisheries/sites/fisheries/files/
docs/wwf-consultation-amending-state-aid-guidelines-for-fisheries-and-aquaculture_en.pdf.

Acacia, CASE, Executive Agency for Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (European Commission), ICF, Metis GmbH, Panteia,  
Study to support investment for the sustainable development of the Blue Economy, European Commission, 2019, https://
webgate.ec.europa.eu/maritimeforum/en/system/files/d13_investmentplatformrecommendation_24092018.pdf; Cullen Jay,  
Mähönen Jukka, Taming Unsustainable Finance: The Perils of Modern Risk Management, University of Oslo Faculty of Law 
Research Paper No. 2019-13, 2019, https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3383419; PwC, It’s not just about  
the financials The widening variety of factors used in investment decision making, PwC, 2017, https://www.pwc.com/gx/en/
services/audit-assurance/assets/the-widening-variety-of-factors-used-in-investment-decision-making-pwc.pdf.

86 

The Equator Principles is a risk management framework for financial institutions for determining, assessing and managing 
environmental and social risk in projects. It is primarily intended to provide a minimum standard for due diligence and 
monitoring to support responsible risk decision-making. The Equator Principles (EPs), https://equator-principles.com/.

89

87 

General patterns focus on ensuring financial support for economic growth rather than win-win solution for environmental 
protection and economic sustainable solution. Concrete examples might be found in the following case studies, Environmental  
and social impacts of touristic transport in the Cayman Islands, Misuse of funds dedicated to the development of Mozambique 
Tuna Fishery, Coastal degradation caused by the growth of tourism industry in Thailand. See also, Responsible Investors’  
webinar on Bright Talk April 2020; specific reference to the PowerPoint presentation by AXA, which shows the initial work  
by insurance leaders.

88 

Ecorys et al., 2020, Sustainability criteria for the Blue Economy.

89 

90 

91 

Transparency International, Curbing illicit financial flows to unlock a sustainable future, Website 2020 (several sources) 
https://www.transparency.org/en/publications/curbing-illicit-financial-flows-to-unlock-a-sustainable-future#.

Tladi Dire, Ocean Governance: A Fragmented Regulatory Framework, A Planet for Life, 2011,  
http://regardssurlaterre.com/en/ocean-governance-fragmented-regulatory-framework.

These patterns are discussed at an aggregated level and based on some important assumptions (i.e. make it difficult to enter  
a specific level of details on sectoral investments and differences across global oceans and countries / regions).

92  OECD, The Ocean Economy in 2030, OECD Publishing, Paris, 2016, 

 https://geoblueplanet.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/OECD-ocean-economy.pdf.

93 

94 

Global Marine Biotechnology Markets Report 2019: Market is Expected to Grow from USD 3.5 Billion in 2017 to USD 6.5 Billion 
in 2024, PR Newswire, 2019, https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/global-marine-biotechnology-markets-report-2019-
market-is-expected-to-grow-from-usd-3-5-billion-in-2017-to-usd-6-5-billion-in-2024--300955538.html.

Energias Market Research, Global Marine Biotechnology Market to Witness a CAGR of 9.61 % during 2018-2024, GlobeNewswire, 
2019, https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2019/03/04/1745799/0/en/Global-Marine-Biotechnology-Market-to-
Witness-a-CAGR-of-9-61-during-2018-2024.html.

95  Wang T., Investment in marine energy worldwide from 2004 to 2018, Statista, 2019,  

https://www.statista.com/statistics/698888/global-investment-in-ocean-energy-technology/.

96 

97 

98 

European Commission, The EU Blue Economy Report 2019, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 2019,  
https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/676bbd4a-7dd9-11e9-9f05-01aa75ed71a1/language-en/.

Global Sustainable Investment Alliance (GSI-Alliance), Global Sustainable Investment Review, GSI-Alliance, 2018,  
http://www.gsi-alliance.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/GSIR_Review2018.3.28.pdf.

The EU Blue Economy Reports suggested a Net investment to GVA ratio of 29 % (2018) to 24 % (2019) – we use 25 %. 
European Commission, € 566 billion and growing: the EU blue economy is thriving, European Commission, 2018,  
https://ec.europa.eu/maritimeaffairs/content/%E2%82%AC566-billion-and-growing-eu-blue-economy-thriving_en;  
European Commission, The EU Blue Economy Report 2019, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 2019,  
https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/676bbd4a-7dd9-11e9-9f05-01aa75ed71a1/language-en/.

99  OECD, UN Environment, World Bank Group, Financing Climate Futures: Rethinking Infrastructure Policy Highlights, OECD 

Publishing, Paris, 2018, https://www.oecd.org/environment/cc/climate-futures/policy-highlights-financing-climate-futures.pdf.

100  Weighted average of values provided by the Global Alliance for Sustainable Investment Report (across regions, through years) – 

about 34 %.

101  Total amount of Sustainable Blue Economy financing identified (Chapter 3) and private financing leveraged (building on 

EIB 0.7 % rate). Innovation Finance Advisory, European Investment Bank Advisory Services, Access-to-finance conditions for 
Investments in Bio-Based Industries and the Blue Economy, European Investment Bank, 2017,  https://www.eib.org/attachments/
pj/access_to_finance_study_on_bioeconomy_en.pdf.

102  Sustainable and unsustainable financing amounts for the blue economy are presented based on GVA estimates (OECD) and 
investments/GVA ratios (EU) for 2010 and 2030. Estimates for sustainable financing for developments banks and additional 
leveraged private financing are instead based on data available for current commitments of main regional banks (Chapter 3.3) 
and leveraging factors (EIB).

103  European Commission, The EU Blue Economy Report 2019, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 2019, 
https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/676bbd4a-7dd9-11e9-9f05-01aa75ed71a1/language-en/.

104  European Commission, Blue Growth, https://ec.europa.eu/maritimeaffairs/policy/blue_growth_en.

105  European Commission, Platform on sustainable finance, https://ec.europa.eu/info/publications/sustainable-finance-platform_en.

90

106  European Commission, Sea basin regional strategies, European Commission,  

https://ec.europa.eu/maritimeaffairs/policy/sea_basins_en.

107  Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy, Policy paper: Offshore wind Sector Deal, UK Government, 2020,  

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/offshore-wind-sector-deal/offshore-wind-sector-deal/ Vaughan Adam, UK green 
energy investment halves after policy changes, The Guardian, 2018, https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/jan/16/uk-
green-energy-investment-plunges-after-policy-changes.

108  Johnny Bairstow, Domestic oil and gas production provided nearly two-thirds of UK demand in 2019, Energy Live News, 2020, 

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/jan/16/uk-green-energy-investment-plunges-after-policy-changes.

109  Carrington Damian, ‘Hypocrisy’: 90 % of UK-Africa summit’s energy deals were in fossil fuels, The Guardian, 2020,  

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/jan/24/90-pe-cent-uk-africa-energy-deals-fossil-fuels.

110  European Commission, Commission Staff Working Document, Framework for Action, Accompanying the document 

Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee 
and the Committee of the Regions, Initiative for the sustainable development of the blue economy in the western Mediterranean, 
SWD(2017) 130, final, Brussels, 2017, https://ec.europa.eu/maritimeaffairs/sites/maritimeaffairs/files/swd-2017-130_en.pdf;  
see also, Annex 1 - Common Maritime Agenda for the Black Sea, Facility for Blue Growth in the Black Sea, 2019,  
https://blackseablueconomy.eu/sites/default/files/common_maritime_agenda_for_the_black_sea_final.pdf.

111  Office of the Spokesperson, U.S. Announces $ 1.21 Billion To Support Blue Economy: Commitment Strengthens Sustainability  

of Ocean Economy, Enhances Health of Planet, and Advances Global Economic Security, U.S. Department of State, 2019,  
https://www.state.gov/u-s-announces-1-21-billion-to-support-blue-economy-commitment-strengthens-sustainability-of-ocean-
economy-enhances-health-of-planet-and-advances-global-economic-security/.

112  The United States is the third largest producer of captured fish, harvesting approximately 4.9 million metric tons annually.  

See United States Coast Guard, Maritime Commerce Strategic Outlook, U.S. Coast Guard Headquarters, Washington D.C., 2018, 
https://media.defense.gov/2018/Oct/05/2002049100/-1/-1/1/USCG%20MARITIME%20COMMERCE%20STRATEGIC%20OUTLOOK-
RELEASABLE.PDF.

113  NOAA, NOAA Fisheries Releases New Strategic Plan, NOAA, 2019,  

https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/feature-story/noaa-fisheries-releases-new-strategic-plan. 

114  Wave and tidal market could exceed USD 10 Bln by 2024, Offshore Energy, 2019,  

https://www.offshore-energy.biz/wave-and-tidal-market-could-exceed-usd-10bln-by-2024/.

115  Dreizler Sonia, Trump creates positive effect on socially responsible investing, CNBC, 2019,  

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/04/23/mother-earth-should-thank-trump-effect-for-rise-in-impact-investing.html.

116  Numbers from 2012. Watson Gregory, Katzman Julie T., A continent of oceans: Latin America’s Blue Economy, Inter American 
Development Bank, 2018, https://blogs.iadb.org/sostenibilidad/en/continent-of-oceans-latin-americas-blue-economy/.

117  https://blogs.iadb.org/sostenibilidad/en/continent-of-oceans-latin-americas-blue-economy/.

118  Watson Gregory, Katzman Julie T., A continent of oceans: Latin America’s Blue Economy, Inter American Development Bank, 

2018, http://blogs.worldbank.org/ppps/latin-american-green-bonds-are-resurging.

119  Caribbean Development Bank, Financing the Blue Economy: A Caribbean Development Opportunity, Caribbean Development 
Bank, 2018, https://www.caribank.org/publications-and-resources/resource-library/thematic-papers/financing-blue-economy-
caribbean-development-opportunity.

120  Climate Bonds Initiative, Latin America & Caribbean Green finance state of the market, Climate Bonds Initiative, 2019,  

https://www.climatebonds.net/files/reports/cbi_lac_sotm_19_web_02.pdf.

121  EU-Japan Centre, Maritime, EU-Japan Centre, https://www.eubusinessinjapan.eu/sectors/maritime. 

122  Pomeroy Ames, BioJapan 2011: Boosting Open Innovation, The Japan Journal, November 2011,  

https://www.jba.or.jp/en/top/pdf/111116BioJapan2011_Result_JJ.pdf.

123  Salsiah Alisjahbana Armida, A Call For Healthy “Blue Oceans” In Asia And The Pacific, Japan Times, 2019,  

https://www.japantimes.co.jp/opinion/2019/07/30/commentary/world-commentary/call-healthy-blue-oceans-asia-pacific/#.
XuaakEUzZPZ.

124  Australian Industry Standards, Maritime Industry 2018 Key Findings Discussion Paper, Australian Industry Standards Ltd, 2018, 
http://www.australianindustrystandards.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/Maritime-Key-Findings-Paper2018V7Web.pdf.

91

125  Clean Energy Finance Corporation (CEFC), Reef Funding Program, CEFC,  

https://www.cefc.com.au/where-we-invest/accessing-our-finance/investment-programs/reef-funding-program/.

126  Blue Economy Cooperation Research Centre, Delivering Innovation in Sustainable Seafood & Renewable Energy Production  

for a Marine Nation, Blue Economy CRC-Co Ltd, https://blueeconomycrc.com.au/.

127  Basu Pratnashere, India’s Plan to Jumpstart Its Maritime Industry, The Diplomat, 2019,  
https://thediplomat.com/2019/04/indias-plan-to-jumpstart-its-maritime-industry/.

128 

Ibid.

129 

Ibid.

130  The majority of population in Africa is living by coastlines resulting in relevant activities – port-shipping and logistics  
and cities-ports as drivers, private port development and private operated (public-private) berth. A second big trend is  
the rediscovery of rivers, with companies growing hybrid-tea for export transporting tea through rivers (combining traditional 
river transport with advanced ones). Water-sports are another trend for growth in Africa – surfing, sailing and fishing  
(e.g. Zanzibar, Maputo, Mauritius, Cape Town) as well as ecotourism (hotels reclaiming lands offering ecotourism facilities).  
Animal conservation is also an issue/opportunity (e.g. Zanzibar). Sustainability pressures on fisheries are also relevant  
and need to diversify (what if fisheries are increasing to supply food vs current decline in beef?) – as also emerging from 
interviews. African Ministerial Conference on the Environment, Advancing the sustainable blue (ocean-based) economy in Africa, 
UNEP, 2019, https://wedocs.unep.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.11822/30676/AMCEN_176.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y.

131  Pichon Eric, The African Union’s blue strategy, European Parliament, 2019,  

https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/ATAG/2019/635574/EPRS_ATA(2019)635574_EN.pdf.

132  Economic Commission for Africa, Africa’s Blue Economy: A policy handbook, United Nations Economic Commission for Africa, 

Addis Ababa, 2016, https://www.uneca.org/sites/default/files/PublicationFiles/blueeco-policy-handbook_en.pdf.

133  Garcia-Herrero Alicia, Xu Jianwei, China's Investments in Africa: What the Data Really Say, and the Implications for Europe, 

Forbes, 2019, https://www.forbes.com/sites/aliciagarciaherrero/2019/07/24/chinas-investments-in-africa-what-the-data-really-
says-and-the-implications-for-europe/#511d0275661f.

134  The Chinese government-led Green Credit initiative, is part of the country’s sustainable finance package. The initiative 

essentially restricts bank loans to projects that are harmful for the environment and increases loans to projects that benefit  
the environment.

135  Marantidou Virginia, Shipping Finance: China’s New Tool in Becoming a Global Maritime Power, Jamestown Foundation, China 
Brief Volume: 18 Issue: 2, 2018, https://jamestown.org/program/shipping-finance-chinas-new-tool-becoming-global-maritime-
power/.

136  EY, China Megers and Acquisitions Association (CMAA), China Go Abroad (8th issue) How does geopolitical dynamics affect future 

China overseas investment?, EY/CMAA, 2018, http://www.chinagoabroad.com/en/guide/how-does-geopolitical-dynamics-affect-
future-china-overseas-investment.

137  Silk Road Fund, http://www.silkroadfund.com.cn/enweb/23773/index.html?previePc=true.

138  Naidoo Anand, The Heat: China’s investments in Latin America, CGTN America, 2019,  

https://america.cgtn.com/2019/10/15/the-heat-chinas-investments-in-latin-america.

139  Astrasheuskaya Nastassia, Foy Henry, Polar powers: Russia’s bid for supremacy in the Arctic Ocean, Financial Times, 2019, 

https://www.ft.com/content/2fa82760-5c4a-11e9-939a-341f5ada9d40; Gibson Dan, Current investment ‘just the beginning’ as 
Russia sets $ 8.5 bn seafood export target, UCN, 2019, https://www.undercurrentnews.com/2019/05/15/current-investment-just-
the-beginning-as-russia-sets-8-5bn-seafood-export-target/.

140  Conley Heather A.,Rohloff Caroline, The New Ice Curtain: Russia’s Strategic Reach to the Arctic, Center for Strategic and 

International Studies, Rowman & Littlefield 2015, https://csis-website-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/legacy_files/files/
publication/150826_Conley_NewIceCurtain_Web.pdf.

141  Russia maritime freight update: smooth seas from here on out?, ITE Transport & Logistics, 2017,  

https://www.transport-exhibitions.com/Market-Insights/Russia/Russia-maritime-freight-update.

142  Africa commits to transformative actions for sustainable blue economy, UNDP Africa, 2019, https://www.africa.undp.org/content/

rba/en/home/presscenter/pressreleases/2019/africa-commits-to-transformative-actions-for-sustainable-blue-ec.html.

143  World Bank, The World Bank’s Blue Economy Program and PROBLUE: Supporting integrated and sustainable economic 

development in healthy oceans, World Bank Group, 2018, https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/environment/brief/the-world-
banks-blue-economy-program-and-problue-frequently-asked-questions.

92

144  Martin Hunter B., Financing the “blue economy”, Wärtsilä, 2019,  

https://www.wartsila.com/twentyfour7/environment/financing-the-blue-economy.

145  Caribbean Development Bank, UNDP, Financing the Blue Economy: a Caribbean Development Opportunity,  

Caribbean Development Bank, 2018, http://www.caribbeanhotelandtourism.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/CDB-Financing-
the-Blue-Economy-A-Caribbean-Development-Opportunity-2018.pdf.

146  Luhwago Rodgers, Tanzania: Massive Investments to Upgrade, Heighten Tanga Port Competitiveness, All Africa, 2019,  

https://allafrica.com/stories/201911050068.html.

147  Caribbean Development Bank, UNDP, Financing the Blue Economy: a Caribbean Development Opportunity,  

Caribbean Development Bank, 2018, http://www.caribbeanhotelandtourism.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/CDB-Financing-
the-Blue-Economy-A-Caribbean-Development-Opportunity-2018.pdf.

148  United Nations news report, website, 10 January 2020, https://news.un.org/en/story/2020/01/1055171.

149  Reporting for signatories, UN Principles for Responsible Investment, https://www.unpri.org/signatories/reporting-for-signatories.

150  Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD), Final Report: Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-related 

Financial Disclosures, TCFD, 2017, https://www.fsb-tcfd.org/publications/final-recommendations-report/.

151  Truscot ESG Analysis, Climate-Risk Disclosure Takes Investors by Storm, S&P Trucost Limited,  
https://www.trucost.com/trucost-blog/climate-risk-disclosure-takes-investors-by-storm/. 

152  Pinchot Ariel, Christianson Giulia, How Are Banks Doing on Sustainable Finance Commitments? Not Good Enough,  

World Resources Institute, 2019, https://www.wri.org/blog/2019/10/how-are-banks-doing-sustainable-finance-commitments-
not-good-enough.

153  Principles for Responsible Banking, United Nations Environment Programme - Finance Initiative,  

https://www.unepfi.org/banking/bankingprinciples/.

154  Kenton Will, S&P 500 Index – Standard & Poor's 500 Index, Investopedia, 2020,  

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/sp500.asp.

155  State of Integrated and Sustainability Reporting, Sustainable Investment Institute, 2018. https://siinstitute.org/reports.html.

156 

Ibid.

157  What is Impact Management?, Impact Management Project, https://impactmanagementproject.com.

158  The Positive Impact Initiative, United Nations Environment Programme - Finance Initiative,  

https://www.unepfi.org/positive-impact/positive-impact/.

159  Global Impact Investing Network, https://thegiin.org.

160 

Impact Identification and Assessment for Bank Portfolios Tool Portotype – Introduction Manual, UNEP FI, 2019,  
https://www.unepfi.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/PI-Impact-Identification-Manual.pdf.

161  WWF, Metabolic, Value at Risk in the Blue Economy - Piloting a Systems Modeling Approach to Explore Sustainability Pressures 
and Financial Risk, 2019, https://d2ouvy59p0dg6k.cloudfront.net/downloads/metabolic_wwf_value_at_risk_in_the_blue_
economy_29112019_lr.pdf.

162  Finance Sector Supplement, Natural Capital Coalition, VBDO, Connecting Finance and Natural Capital: A Supplement to  

the Natural Capital Protocol, UNEP FI, 2018, https://www.unepfi.org/publications/ecosystems-publications/ncfa-publications/
natural-capital-protocol-finance-sector-supplement/. 

163  Cement Sustainability Initiative, Methodology for the Net Impact Assessment of Biodiversity in the Cement Sector, World 
Business Council for Sustainable Development, 2019, https://docs.wbcsd.org/2018/12/Methodology-for-the-Net-Impact-
Assessment-of-Biodiversity-in-the-Cement-Sector.pdf.

164  WWF, Metabolic, Value at Risk in the Blue Economy - Piloting a Systems Modeling Approach to Explore Sustainability Pressures 
and Financial Risk, 2019, https://d2ouvy59p0dg6k.cloudfront.net/downloads/metabolic_wwf_value_at_risk_in_the_blue_
economy_29112019_lr.pdf; Finance Sector Supplement, Natural Capital Coalition, VBDO, Connecting Finance and Natural 
Capital: A Supplement to the Natural Capital Protocol, UNEP FI, 2018, https://www.unepfi.org/publications/ecosystems-
publications/ncfa-publications/natural-capital-protocol-finance-sector-supplement/. 

165  Canevari Laura, Comparing Existing Tools for Assessing Physical Climate Risks in the Finance Sector: Recent Outputs from the 

ClimINVEST Research Project, Acclimatise, 2019, https://www.acclimatise.uk.com/2019/04/03/comparing-existing-tools-for-
assessing-physical-climate-risks-in-the-finance-sector-recent-outputs-from-the-climinvest-research-project/.

93

166  BlueInvest, European Commission, https://webgate.ec.europa.eu/maritimeforum/en/frontpage/1451. 

167  Katapult Ocean, https://katapultocean.com/about-us/. 

168  PROBLUE: Healthy Oceans, Healthy Economies, Healthy Communities, World Bank,  

https://www.worldbank.org/en/programs/problue/overview.

169  See the work carried out by insurance companies under the UNEP FI umbrella for the past decade. For example, the report 

prepared by the Australian Advisory Committee on Insurance: UNEP FI Australasian Advisory Committee on Insurance, Risk, the 
Environment, and the Role of the Insurance Industry, UNEP FI, 2013, https://www.unepfi.org/publications/insurance-publications/
risk-the-environment-and-the-role-of-the-insurance-industry/;  
Or for more recent works on the integration of national capital in disaster risk reduction see Marchal, Roxane, Piton Guillaume, 
Lopez-Gunn Elena et al., The (Re)Insurance industry’s roles in the integration of nature-based solutions for prevention in 
disaster risk reduction. Insights from a European survey, Sustainability 11(22), 6212, 2019, https://www.mdpi.com/2071-
1050/11/22/6212; see also, Allianz SE, Allianz report: Failure to manage natural resources brings increasing interruption  
and liability risks for businesses, Allianz, 2018, https://www.allianz.com/en/press/news/studies/180612-allianz-agcs-natural-
capital-risks-report.html.

170  Blended Finance: Unlocking Commercial Finance for the Sustainable Development Goals, OECD,  
http://www.oecd.org/development/financing-sustainable-development/blended-finance-principles/.

171  Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the European Council, the Council, the European Central 
Bank, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions Action Plan: Financing Sustainable 
Growth, COM/2018/097 final, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:52018DC0097&from=EN. 
Blue Economy Concept Paper, UNEP, 2014, https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/2978BEconcept.pdf.

172  For example, sub-working groups can be activated to discuss specific blue economy aspects, taking into account the momentum 

created by the Action Plan implementation – e.g. taxonomy of sustainable activities.

173  European Commission, Sustainable Blue Economy Finance Principles, European Commission, 2018,  

https://ec.europa.eu/maritimeaffairs/befp_en.

174  Boyd Justin, Green Finance & the Shipping Industry, Mercatis Law, 2019,  

https://mercatis.law/2019/08/05/green-finance-the-shipping-industry/.

175  Chen James, What Is Fixed Income?, Investopedia, 2020, https://www.investopedia.com/terms/f/fixedincome.asp.

176  Phoenix Capital, Impact investing asset owner trend report, Phoenix Capital Group, 2019,  

https://www.phenixcapital.nl/asset-owner-trend-report.

177  World Bank, Seychelles launches World’s First Sovereign Blue Bond, World Bank, 2018,  

https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-release/2018/10/29/seychelles-launches-worlds-first-sovereign-blue-bond.

178 

In fact, green finance has already showed the way for ‘blue finance’. Green instruments aim to pool projects together  
to diversify risks and enable wider access to financing by tapping international capital markets through green equities  
and bonds. By enhancing the bankability of a project, these instruments can enable a scaling up of investments in renewable 
energy, clean transport, etc.

179  World Bank, Seychelles launches World’s First Sovereign Blue Bond, World Bank, 2018,  

https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-release/2018/10/29/seychelles-launches-worlds-first-sovereign-blue-bond.

180  Credit Suisse, Is the sustainable Blue Economy investible?, Credit Suisse Group AG London, 2020,  

https://www.credit-suisse.com/about-us-news/en/articles/media-releases/blue-economy-investible-202001.html.

181  Areas to harbour the best sustainable investment opportunities include, for example, climate change mitigation and adaptation 
(mostly via marine renewables), tackling marine plastic (and other) pollution, biotechnology, sustainable tourism services, small-
scale fisheries and aquaculture, etc.

182  European Commission, Payments for Ecosystem Services, Science for Environment Policy, DG Environment News Alert Service, 

2012, https://ec.europa.eu/environment/integration/research/newsalert/pdf/30si_en.pdf.

183  UNEP FI have announced their intention to operationalise in 2021 the Sustainable Blue Economy Finance Principles elaborated 
in 2017 as a partnership between the EC, EIB, WWF, WRI and the Prince of Wales’s Foundation. This is a strong and global 
framework to be promoted.

184  Sustainable Ocean Fund, Althelia, https://althelia.com/sustainable-ocean-fund/.Ecorys et al., 2020, Sustainability criteria for the 

Blue Economy.

94

185  Ecorys et al., 2020, Sustainability criteria for the Blue Economy.

186  Ecorys et al., 2020, Sustainability criteria for the Blue Economy.

187  Ecorys et al., 2020, Sustainability criteria for the Blue Economy.

188  Friends of Ocean Action is a coalition of over 50 ocean leaders who are fast-tracking solutions to the most pressing challenges 
facing the ocean. Its members come from business, civil society, international organisations, science and technology. Friends of 
Oceans Action, Who we are?; World Economic Forum, https://www.weforum.org/friends-of-ocean-action/who-we-are.

189  Ecorys et al., 2020, Sustainability criteria for the Blue Economy.

190  Ecorys et al., 2020, Sustainability criteria for the Blue Economy.

191  The scorecard would at the same time offer a reference for Investments Promotion Agencies (IPAs) globally charged  

with the validation of investments (in the blue economy) and could be used by them (and by any agency providing public funds 
as leverage/warranties to private investors) to require mandatory Impact Assessments (IAs) as condition for accepting  
(or co-financing) sustainable investments.

192  Africa Investment Promotion Agency Network (AfrIPANet), United Nations Industrial Development Organization,  

https://www.unido.org/our-focus/advancing-economic-competitiveness/investing-technology-and-innovation/investment-and-
technology/africa-investment-promotion-agency-network-afripanet; OECD, Mapping of Investment Promotion Agencies: Middle 
East and North Africa, OECD, 2019, https://www.oecd.org/investment/Mapping-of-Investment-Promotion-Agencies-MED.pdf; 
OECD, Inter-American Development Bank, Mapping of Investment Promotion Agencies in OECD Countries, OECD, 2018,  
http://www.oecd.org/industry/inv/investment-policy/mapping-of-investment-promotion-agencies-in-OECD-countries.pdf.

The	 photos	 in	 the	 case	 studies	 have	 been	 acquired	 from	 ©  Unsplash  and  ©  Dreamstime.	 
Where	known,	the	name	of	the	photographer	is	indicated	below.

PHOTO CREDIT

Page 1:  
Page 5:  
Page 7-8:  
Page 13:  
Page 14:  
Page 15-16:  
Page 28:  
Page 29-30:  
Page 31:  
Page 32:  
Page 37:  
Page 38:  
Page 39:  
Page 44:  
Page 45-46:  
Page 47:  
Page 49:  

© Alex Blajan
© Polina Rytova
© Dimitry Anikin
© Unknown
© Unknown
© Wladislaw Peljuchno
© Eric Chan
© Jannik Selz
© Raja Sen
© Sai Kiran Anagani
© Paul Einerhand
© Noaa
© Ishan See from the sky
© Chris King
© Random Sky
© Tobias Tullius
© Tatiana Zhukova

Page 51-52:  
Page 53:  
Page 54:  
Page 55-56:  
Page 58:  
Page 62:  
Page 64:  
Page 65-66:  
Page 68:  
Page 69:  
Page 73-74:  
Page 76:  
Page 77:  
Page 78:  
Page 81:  
Page 82:  
Page 83:  

© Sheri Hooley
© Unknown
© Rebecca Picard
© Ksenia Kudelkina
© Oliver Frsh
© Guillaume Perigois
© Linda Finkin
© Nicholas Doherty
© Adam Juman
© Unknown
© Andres Medecigo
© Unknown
© Unknown
© Dusan Smetana
© David Benes
© Hans Hillewaert
© Goh Rhy Yan

95

0
2
0
2

.
t
p
e
S

t
r
o
p
e
r

s
n
o

i
t
a
d
n
e
m
m
o
c
e
r

?

m
o
r
F

e
m
o
C

y
e
n
o
M
e
h
t

s
e
o
D

e
r
e
h
W

:

y
m
o
n
o
c
E

e
u

l

B

e
h
t

n

i

e
c
n
a
n

i

F

e
l
b
a
n

i

a
t
s
u
s
n
U

Y
M
O
N
O
C
E

E
U
L
B

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
	
 
HOW TO OBTAIN  EU PUBLICATIONS 

Free publications: 

•  one copy: 

via EU Bookshop (http://bookshop.europa.eu); 

•  more than one copy or posters/maps: 

from the European Union’s representations (http://ec.europa.eu/represent_en.htm);  
from the delegations in non-EU countries 
(http://eeas.europa.eu/delegations/index_en.htm);  
by contacting the Europe Direct service (http://europa.eu/europedirect/index_en.htm) 
or calling 00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11 (freephone number from anywhere in the EU) (*).  

(*)  The  information given is free, as are most calls (though some operators, phone boxes or hotels may 
charge  you). 

Priced publications: 

•  via EU Bookshop (http://bookshop.europa.eu). 

Priced subscriptions: 

•  via one of the sales agents of the Publications Office of the European Union 

(http://publications.europa.eu/others/agents/index_en.htm). 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
E
A
-
0
4
-
2
0
-
6
5
2
-
E
N
-
N

                           doi: 10.2826/506535