This factsheet series describes the available sources of funding for the Trans-European Nature Network (TEN-N) and characterises their relevance to the costs involved in setting up the network. Each factsheet outlines the relative strengths and limitations of each source of funding or finance in relation to protected areas and connectivity projects. The review looks at both public funding through EU sources and private finance options.
Public funding opportunities are available for ecological connectivity, but lack of post-project funding as well as protected area under-resourcing are key challenges. EU funds are often still underdelivering on funding for biodiversity and there are bottlenecks to access to some EU funding opportunities. The suggestions for private finance instruments vary from proven mechanisms such as the “user pays-principle" applied to protected areas, to conceptual instruments in initial stages of development such as resilience bonds. Even though private finance is still in its early stages, it has the potential to considerably scale-up the finance available for nature in Europe. Land management tools, such as strategic and targeted use of conservation easements, land banks, habitat banks, and legal compensation obligations, can be used to repurpose land for nature goals, including the creation of ecological corridors. These tools are being increasingly used for ecological connectivity, but the current small-scale and fragmented initiatives should increase.

CAP Common Agricultural Policy, CF Cohesion Fund, EAGF European Agricultural Guarantee Fund, EAFRD European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development, EMFAF European Maritime Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund, LIFE, TEN-N Trans-European Nature Network, EU funding, private finance, biodiversity funding, costs, eligibility, strengths, limitations, access to funding, green infrastructure, ecological connectivity