Ning Lee, Fabiola Salman, & Alexandre Cheval

Unsustainable land use is a defining challenge of our time, cutting across multiple global priorities: the climate crisis, food insecurity, clean energy needs, and protection of Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities (IPLCs).

Land use is defined here as the human use of land for economic, agricultural, industrial, and mining uses, excluding residential and recreational uses. Despite efforts from philanthropies, multilateral organizations, and international funders to address land use challenges, several issues remain underfunded: protecting and restoration natural resources, and forests in particular; protecting biodiversity; managing natural resources such as water; and advancing sustainable agriculture practices that can pay living wages.

In this article, we showcase four underfunded land use issues, which will require significant support in the coming years from funders. Each of these are high-impact, no-regret opportunities that can significantly move the needle in the next few years on some of the most important issues of our time.

We also highlight two approaches philanthropy can take to advance progress against these issues. Both approaches will be critical to successfully addressing land use challenges and are complementary.

Scale restoration

The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations estimates that 10 million hectares of forest were cut down each year between 2015 and 2020, an area roughly equal to twice the size of France[1]. Slash-and-burn agriculture and natural resource extraction have driven large-scale deforestation and land degradation globally. The land is only fertile for a few years, after which farmers repeat the process elsewhere. As a result, much of the deforested land is left abandoned.

Additionally, conventional agriculture has depleted soils in many parts of the world. In Kenya, more than 30% of land mass is degraded[2] and 75% of soils fall below sustainable thresholds of organic carbon which are critical to maintaining healthy soil ecosystems[3].

Promoting approaches that can restore degraded land is therefore essential. Across regions, many governments have made high-level commitments for restoration, with development institutions, international NGOs, and local community organizations piloting restorative business models. Solutions exist, with many being community-based, in the form of farmer field schools providing knowledge transfer, technical assistance, business incubation, and farmer aggregation. However, some larger scale initiatives and financially sustainable business models are emerging and growing quickly. For example, Imaflora has made large strides in promoting forest management practices amongst producers in the Amazon Basin while helping design and implement certification systems (e.g., Forest Stewardship Council Certification, Rainforest Alliance Agricultural Certification), ensuring sustainable livelihoods and business models for local communities.

Philanthropy has several opportunities to advance soil and forest restoration. On the forestry side, funders can help identify scalable, innovative business models by continuing to pilot and scale restorative models across key value chains, directly addressing the needs of smallholder farmers and IPLCs. On the agriculture side, philanthropy can also support demand for non-conventional agriculture such as agroecology and regenerative agriculture and help farmers transition away from chemical fertilizers, by both making bioinputs more commonly available and building long-term demand for sustainable products. There is also an opportunity to stimulate South-South learning, taking lessons from regions with more advanced interventions (e.g., Brazil) and applying them in areas where restorative business models remain nascent.

Accelerate the transition to sustainable food systems through innovative financing mechanisms

The transition to restorative practices, such as regenerative agriculture and agroforestry, often requires smallholder farmers and IPLCs to adopt new business models. Despite the long-term gains of restorative practices, farmers may incur temporary yield decline or income decreases in the initial years, directly impacting their livelihoods. Yet smallholder farmers are often unable to access financing needed for new inputs and practices. Traditional financiers tend to remain risk-averse, offering rigid repayment terms poorly aligned with agricultural cycles and requiring collateral that many farmers and IPLCs cannot provide. As a result, few stakeholders are willing to shoulder these short-term transition risks, leaving a significant funding gap for sustainable and restorative practices.

Innovative financing mechanisms are emerging, with existing efforts in blended finance and community funds having seen some early success. Fairventures Agroforestry, which uses blended finance to scale agroforestry in Indonesia, creates sustainable income for local communities alongside returns to investors. There has also been increased global momentum in restoration funding, with large-scale, multi-country funding mechanisms such as the Tropical Forest Forever Facility on the horizon. However, current levels of funding are still insufficient—an additional US$430B per year will be needed over the next decade for the global regenerative food system transition alone.

Philanthropy has three main roles to play to accelerate funding flows for sustainable food systems. First, catalytic capital can encourage more investments into specific businesses. Second, it can encourage the development of collectively owned transformation roadmaps to identify priority interventions and enable coordination around specific solutions across multiple implementers, financiers, etc. This can help launch and scale innovative financing solutions, while catalyzing larger amounts of private and development finance for restoration. Third, philanthropy can act as a demand driver, helping build long-term demand that will in turn allow investments into businesses, farmer cooperatives, and other organizations that can meet this demand.

Accelerate the shift to sustainable global supply chains

Demand for commodities such as palm oil or soy for livestock feed is a major driver of deforestation and intensive monoculture. Yet increasing the transparency in the procurement of such commodities can be daunting in global supply chains where consumer goods manufacturers rarely procure directly from farmers. Corporations thus face challenges in controlling their supply chain sustainability. While emerging regulations such as the European Union Deforestation Regulation (EUDR) have laid out regulations mandating sustainable sourcing, its implementation has been delayed[4], and its costly requirements risk shutting out some of the most vulnerable farmers from European markets.

Organizations such as IDH and TechnoServe have been engaging corporations on sustainable sourcing initiatives, especially for large MNCs, while non-profits have been tackling corporate lobbying and subsidies via research and policy advocacy, especially in Brazil. Efforts have also been made in supply chain transparency, with new platforms such as TraceMark using AI and technology for monitoring and traceability. However, existing supply chain programs tend to implement partial solutions that focus on living incomes, with sustainability as a secondary priority. Recent instances of corporate backsliding on ESG commitments[5], though not representative of all corporations which have generally kept their pledges[6], could further impede progress.

Philanthropy can play a key role in building sustainable supply chains globally. For example, funders could support sustainable sourcing programs, working with traditional communities, smallholder farmers, and corporations to jointly design new approaches that can help reach sustainability goals while also providing living wages and protecting natural resources. Philanthropy could also support policy shifts by encouraging a shift of government support and incentives (e.g., subsidies) towards smaller, regenerative businesses.

Build sustainable just transition mineral supply chains

The clean energy transition has drastically increased the demand for critical minerals, expected to triple by 2030 to achieve net-zero emissions. However, mining and mineral processing often leads to deforestation, water and environmental pollution, human rights violations, and land tenure conflicts[7]. Artisanal and illegal mining persist, driven by the limited ability of some governments to enforce regulatory frameworks, and few economically viable livelihood options for local communities.

Sustainable and safe mining is an emerging issue that is gaining quick traction with philanthropy across the globe. Efforts such as planetGOLD have supported artisanal miners in practising cleaner mining and obtaining fairer market access, and organizations such as the Alliance for Responsible Mining have developed standards and certification systems for mining companies. Organizations like the World Wide Fund for Nature and the World Bank have also supported government agencies in developing and implementing policies that improve environmental and social sustainability in the mining sector. These efforts remain nascent, with room for greater funding and scale, given the potential for drastic increase in critical minerals demand in the next few years.

Philanthropy has an opportunity to support less environmentally harmful minerals extraction and to protect the communities that stand the most to lose from an expansion of transition minerals extraction. For example, funders can support initiatives that engage artisanal miners and connect them with ore processors that uphold higher extraction standards, while supporting efforts for improved regulation in the mining sector. Stronger implementation of IPLC land rights is also crucial to ensure that mineral extraction does not cause harm to communities living nearby.

Plugging the gap: How can philanthropy come in?

With these various issues on the horizon, how can a funder decide which issue to address? Given the differing agendas, risk appetites, and experience of philanthropic funders, two distinct but complementary approaches emerge.

Catalytic First Movers: Land use is still an issue that requires a high level of risk-taking, given its global scale, the many interrelated sub-issues that need to be addressed, and the diverse approaches that can be taken. First-mover philanthropic actors are crucial in testing and piloting solutions, especially in regions or topics where there are fewer funders, drawing lessons from these and sharing them with the broader ecosystem to help scale the solutions that work. This could include supporting new business models, knowledge generation for topics less researched on, and supporting policy advocacy. Areas that require greater support from philanthropic first-movers include:
– Addressing supply chain sustainability and safety in critical minerals extraction, focusing on small-scale and illegal mining
– Addressing corporate supply chain deforestation that is smallholder-driven, connecting smallholders and corporations to advance sustainable practices and ensure living incomes across global supply chains
– Establishing new models for agroforestry and regenerative agriculture, empowering local communities to develop business models focused on restoration
– Building civil society capacity by providing unrestricted funding to strengthen organizational capacity, while supporting civil society alliances and coalitions to foster and enhance collaboration

Scalers: Once solutions have been tested and proven, funders with a lower risk appetite still have a crucial role to play in scaling and sustaining these solutions. By supporting solutions until they have clear, demonstrable impact, balanced builders can encourage other stakeholders to get involved, be it private financiers for financing restoration, corporations for improving their supply chain sustainability, or governments for policy change. Emerging opportunities for funders looking to advance proven solutions include:
– Transforming fertilizer subsidies and accelerating bioinputs production
– Working on forest protection and restoration, where there are multiple restorative models and financing mechanisms that have potential to be further scaled
– Getting involved in landscape-level roadmaps such as the Regenerative & Agroecological Food Systems Transitions (RAFT), or global funding platforms such as the upcoming Tropical Forest Forever Facility

Looking ahead

While philanthropic funders are active in addressing land use issues, there is fertile ground for more to come in. To fully maximize the potential of philanthropy, we need to recognize that these issues do not exist in isolation, and funders must embrace integrated strategies. Philanthropy has the flexibility and risk tolerance to build bridges across issues. By funding strategically across complementary topics and translating on-the-ground realities to systemic change, funders can maximize their role in sustainable and equitable land use.

[1] https://www.fao.org/state-of-forests/en/

[2] https://www.wri.org/insights/farmers-restore-greater-rift-valley-kenya

[3] https://ke.boell.org/en/2025/02/27/soil-degradation-silent-crisis-east-africa

[4] https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/climate-energy/eu-will-delay-anti-deforestation-law-by-another-year-commissioner-says-2025-09-23/

[5] https://www.theguardian.com/business/2024/apr/19/unilever-to-scale-back-environmental-and-social-pledges

[6] https://hbr.org/2025/09/are-companies-actually-scaling-back-their-climate-commitments

[7] https://www.oxfam.org.au/what-we-do/economic-inequality/mining/