saving the tropical forest, a financial bet undertaken in Brazil
In the room, applause erupts and hands are raised by the hundreds. The atmosphere in Belém, in the north of Brazil, is festive. Ahead of COP30, on Thursday November 6, 2025, Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva has officially launched the Tropical Forest Forever Facility (TFFF). A great idea from Brazilian power, in the making since 2022, this new financial tool was a priority. Quite simply, it must stop deforestation. An immense challenge since 489 million hectares were lost worldwide between 1990 and 2025, more than the area of the European Union.
The idea at the center of the system is relatively simple: to ensure that preserving the forest becomes more profitable than razing it. The TFFF thus wants to set up an incentive system which encourages States to conserve their forest areas, rather than converting them into oil or mining operations. For this, he plans to pay four euros per hectare of forest preserved. And this remuneration would be granted only to countries managing to keep the annual growth of deforestation below the threshold of 0.5%.
125 billion hoped for
To finance this fund, Brazil hoped to raise 25 billion euros from the governments present. At the end of this COP 30, the Brazilian delegation must face the facts: the score is not there yet. Five billion euros have already been collected, announced Brazilian Finance Minister Fernando Haddad. Thanks in particular to the support of Indonesia (1 billion), Colombia (250 million) and Portugal (1 billion).
France, through President Emmanuel Macron, said it was ready to grant a loan of 500 million euros, on condition that the fund is based on “science and monitoring of the evolution of the forest” and “a constant cost-benefit analysis”. It is precisely on this second point that the main questions arise.
The Brazilian plan is based on financial leverage: these 25 billion should make it possible to borrow an additional 100 billion from private investors (companies, banks or foundations). In total, an envelope of 125 billion would then be created. This sum would be placed on the markets and the idea is simple: borrow money at around 5% interest, then invest it hoping for a return of around 7.5 to 8%. The financial surplus would then be redistributed to countries capable of stemming deforestation. But this investment operation is not without risk, points out Alain Karsenty, economist specializing in forests… “If you invest in shares at 8%, it is because there is an element of hazard. Otherwise, it would be magic money… All countries would act in this way to fuel their education, military and fight against exclusion policies…”
A lack of overall consistency
Beyond the potential financial danger, another point upsets many associations and slows down the momentum of countries like Switzerland, divided over its support: the distribution of this money is not conditional on the coherence of environmental policies. “In other words, you just need to not deforest… You can open oil and coal factories, pollute the water, just a few kilometers away… As long as you keep the forests standing, you will receive your pension,” Alain Karsenty is surprised.
Brazil has always opposed the inclusion of conditions in the agreement. And for good reason, like the Democratic Republic of Congo which authorizes this type of drilling, President Lula has given his support to a vast oil exploration project in the Amazon. “We are going to reward countries at the same time signing gas, mining and oil permits in natural parks. This lacks overall coherence,” underlines Alain Karsenty…
More broadly, the introduction of TIFF raises the question of the financialization of nature. Is associating a hectare of forest with a financial valuation of four dollars the right response to climate change? Many environmental preservation associations deplore a solution which does not tackle the “real causes of deforestation”, and transforms nature “into a financial product”. Fifteen days after the enthusiasm of the beginnings of the COP in Belém, the enthusiasm has died down a little, and the applause is less urgent.
