Who gains from saving nature
Ledger 1 : 33 — For each dollar financing nature-based solutions in 2023, about $33 financed activities harmful to nature. (UNEP)
Cases / Protected area / relocation · Bhutan · 2008

Bhutan constitutional forest rule and Bhutan for Life

Nature's voice · report
No measurement of the harm done to me here is on record.
Did nature suffer? Not measured.
Not on record
  • The record does not name which of my species, waters, soils or forests were harmed.
What the record lacks: 1 none on record · 7 insufficient · 1 not measured · 3 disputed See the gaps

Bhutan's 2008 Constitution requires at least 60% of the country to stay under forest, and in 2017 the Green Climate Fund and WWF launched a US$43 million conservation partnership. The sources reviewed record who bore local costs and note that the 'carbon negative' figures vary between sources.

at least 60%Constitutional minimum forest cover
Rule set by the 2008 Constitution. Protected areas covered 51% of the country when the Bhutan for Life partnership was announced in November 2017.

Status Rule in place per the sources reviewed; figures on crop loss, forest cover and the carbon balance remain unverified.

What?
A constitutional rule fixing a minimum forest share and an international conservation partnership built on Bhutan's protected-area system. Green Climate Fund
Where?
Bhutan; partnership announced in Thimphu. Green Climate Fund
When?
Constitution 2008; partnership announced 11 November 2017. Green Climate Fund
Who?
Gained
  • WWF and the Green Climate Fund — Partners in the announced US$43 million partnership. Green Climate Fund
Lost
  • Farmers living alongside forest and wildlife — Crop and livestock losses reported (survey figures unverified); compensation fund in eight village blocks only.
Harmed
None on record
Why?
The Constitution requires forest cover to be kept in perpetuity; the partnership was described as serving a carbon-neutral commitment. Green Climate Fund
How?
A binding constitutional minimum plus donor-funded protected-area management.
6 of 6 questions answered from the record

What happened

The record, in order.

Bhutan's 2008 Constitution requires that at least 60% of the country remain under forest cover in perpetuity. The country presents itself as 'carbon negative', meaning that its forests absorb more carbon than its economy emits.

On 11 November 2017 in Thimphu the Green Climate Fund announced the 'Bhutan for Life' partnership with WWF. The announcement gave the total as US$43 million, of which the Fund's share was US$26.6 million, and stated that protected areas covered 51% of the country. The announcement described the project as serving Bhutan's commitment to remain carbon neutral.

Material reviewed on the local side of the arrangement reports that farmers living alongside forest and wildlife bore costs from wildlife damage. A compensation fund for livestock losses was set up in only eight village blocks (gewogs), and the official livestock-loss data cover compensation claims only. Survey figures on crop loss exist but come and are listed as unverified.

The sources reviewed say that the forest rule remains in place. Reported new pressures include hydropower, roads and housing, and a state investment company's use of surplus electricity for Bitcoin mining; these items are likewise and unverified. The sources reviewed give no independent assessment of forest area cleared for hydropower or mining.

  1. 2008Constitution requires at least 60% of the country to stay under forest
  2. 2017Green Climate Fund and WWF announce the US$43 million Bhutan for Life partnership (11 November, Thimphu)

What was said

Claims, in the words of those who made them.

Where accounts differ

Each party's account, side by side, with its source. The record does not settle these points; it shows them.

Is Bhutan 'carbon negative'?
Government and regulators
Bhutan (national presentation)

The country describes itself as carbon negative: its forests absorb more carbon than its economy emits.

Press and investigations
Harvard International Review and others

Reported figures vary between sources, units of carbon and carbon dioxide are mixed, and the export offset is a projection.

Harvard International Review

How it looked

What was shown, beside what was recorded.

Shown

  • Bhutan is a 'carbon negative' country.
    Bhutan's national presentation, as described in the sources reviewed
  • The Bhutan for Life partnership serves the project's commitment to remain carbon neutral.
    Green Climate Fund announcement (paraphrase) · Green Climate Fund

Recorded

  • Protected areas covered 51% of the country in November 2017.
    Green Climate Fund
  • The partnership was announced at US$43 million, including US$26.6 million from the Green Climate Fund.
    Green Climate Fund
  • A wildlife-damage compensation fund was set up in only eight village blocks (gewogs); the official livestock-loss data cover compensation claims only. The 2004 figure was 788 animals.
  • Emission and sink figures for Bhutan's 'carbon negative' claim differ between sources, and carbon and carbon-dioxide units are mixed.
    Harvard International Review

Who gained

Money that reached nature, beside money that stayed elsewhere.

Reached nature or the ground

Not published
No figure published.

Gained elsewhere

Not totalled
Currency: USD · Window: . All figures cover the same period. * Estimate built from cited figures.

Responses on record

  • gcf (2017-11-11): Announced the Bhutan for Life partnership as an innovative US$43 million arrangement with WWF and said it serves the project's commitment to remain carbon neutral. · Green Climate Fund

In court and with insurers

Every proceeding and every insurer decision on record.

Lawsuits and rulings

No court case on record. No court has ruled on this case.

Insurers

No insurer decision on record.

What nature saw

Outcomes measured on the ground, and nature's note.

Nature's report opens this page. Below: further outcomes measured on the ground.

Forest rule
At least 60%
Constitutional minimum since 2008; the rule remains in place
Protected areas
51%
Share of the country, per the Green Climate Fund announcement of 11 November 2017
Independent assessment of forest cleared for hydropower or mining
None found
The sources reviewed contain none

What we don't know

Undisclosed, unproven, untried: recorded as data.
No independent ecological evaluation

Nature

  • Not measured Harm to nature: No independent ecological evaluation is on record.

Figures

Accounts

Record

  • Insufficient Reported but not independently verified: forest cover of about 71% (2,730,889 ha) (AFoCO, secondary summary).
  • Insufficient Reported but not independently verified: in 2017 about 70% of farmers reported crop damage and 12% livestock loss from wildlife.
  • Disputed Reported but not independently verified: a 2023 study of 431 people in Trashiyangtse and Tsirang (2017–2019) found 98.7% and 92.2% had experienced human–wildlife conflict, and its authors wrote that crop loss led to land being left fallow.
  • Insufficient Reported but not independently verified: emissions of 1.5–2.2 million tonnes, sinks of 6–9 million tonnes and an export offset of 4.4 million tonnes (Harvard International Review and others, secondary summary).
  • Insufficient Reported but not independently verified: a 600 MW target for hydropower-fuelled Bitcoin mining since 2023 (ORF, secondary summary).
  • None on record No independent assessment of forest cleared for hydropower or mining is on record in the sources reviewed.
  • Disputed The sources reviewed state that the local cost of wildlife conflict does not appear in the national narrative.

Did the harm stop?

The forest rule remains in place in the sources reviewed; reported new pressures are unverified.

Who paid?

Farmers living alongside forest and wildlife, according to the sources reviewed; the compensation fund covered eight village blocks only.

Sources

Voices on record: — Company or project✓ Government and regulators— Courts✓ Press and investigations— Communities and civil society✓ Researchers✓ International bodies

Government and regulators

Press and investigations

Researchers

International bodies

Connected cases

Related matters, and cases linked to this one through the same organisations, with the role each played in both.
Terms used on this page

Carbon and conservation finance

Offset
Using carbon credits to balance emissions released elsewhere, so that a buyer can claim lower or zero net emissions.

Science and environment

Hectare (ha)
A unit of area equal to 10,000 square metres, about 2.5 acres. 100 hectares make one square kilometre.
Similar cases
Fishing ban · Protected area / relocation · European Union · 2017–2026
Bottom trawling in European marine protected areas
Same type: Protected area / relocationSame regionHarm to nature not measured
Fishing ban · Protected area / relocation · Kiribati · 2015–2025
Kiribati PIPA opened to fishing
Same type: Protected area / relocationSame regionHarm to nature not measured
Protected area / relocation · Fishing ban · Palau · 2015
Palau National Marine Sanctuary
Same type: Protected area / relocationSame regionHarm to nature not measured
Protected area / relocation · British Indian Ocean Territory · 2009–2015
Arbitration tribunal finds UK breached UN sea law over Chagos reserve
Same type: Protected area / relocationSame regionHarm to nature not measured
Protected area / relocation · Marshall Islands · 1946–2024
Bikini reef partly recovered after US nuclear tests; islanders still displaced
Same type: Protected area / relocationSame regionHarm to nature not measured