The Blue Economy Gap: why value doesn’t equal investment

In the last piece, we explored how the Ocean is becoming increasingly visible in economic terms.

From offshore wind and aquaculture to global data infrastructure, the Ocean is part of how economies grow and function. We also know, what becomes visible in economic terms tends to attract attention and funding, which of course leads to action. BUT…just because something is valuable doesn’t mean money will flow towards protecting it.

The assumption we don’t question

There’s a common line you’ll hear in sustainability and finance: ‘nature is worth trillions.’ or ‘more than half of global GDP depends on nature.’ Both are true, and both are useful in getting attention. So, if nature is that valuable, investment will follow, right? Erm, not quite, this is where things start to break down - because in financial systems, value on its own isn’t enough.

What finance looks for

For money to move, especially at scale, something very specific needs to exist, and unfortunately for the Ocean, it’s not importance, impact, or urgency. Finance looks for a clear source of income, that can be measured, predicted, and, importantly, paid. In other words, a revenue stream and this is where it becomes a bit more difficult for the Ocean.

The Ocean doesn’t send invoices

As we know the Ocean regulates climate, absorbs heat, protects coastlines, supports food security, but most of that work doesn’t show up as something you can bill for. There’s no invoice for a mangrove reducing storm damage, no monthly payment for a coral reef breaking wave energy, no direct transaction for stabilising a fishery over time. The benefits and value are undisputed, but that doesn’t make it easy for finance to engage with. The benefits and values are shared, diffuse and often long-term, and therefore difficult to turn into something investable.

So, what happens instead?

Investment tends to flow towards the parts of the blue economy that do generate revenue - seafood production, offshore energy, tourism. These are easier to finance because they produce something that can be sold, but there’s a gap, because those sectors depend on Ocean and ecosystem health.  

This is the real blue economy challenge

We often talk about scaling investment in the Ocean, but the issue isn’t just how much capital is available, it’s whether the things that need protecting are set up in a way that capital can engage with.

Right now, there’s a mismatch:

• the Ocean delivers value in ways that are complex and shared

• finance requires value to show up as clear, predictable income

Can this be fixed?

There are ways to bridge this gap, and these are being used in policies that require biodiversity gains from development (e.g. BNG) and carbon markets that put a price on emissions (e.g. EU emissions trading scheme; EU ETS) and outcome-based finance, where payments are linked to environmental results.

All of these are attempts to answer the question: who pays for the benefits nature provides?

Because once there is a payer, and a clear way of structuring that payment, investment becomes possible. Renewable energy didn’t scale just because it was important, it scaled because systems were put in place that made it financially viable: contracts, subsidies, pricing mechanisms.

The same kind of thinking is now being applied to nature, but we are early in this, and we need to get it right for risk and opportunity to balance.

There’s another layer to this

Even when payment mechanisms begin to appear, another challenge sits underneath.

Clarity on what, exactly, is being financed. Financial systems rely on definitions: what an asset is, what can be owned, what can generate returns. Nature is dynamic, interconnected and it doesn’t always fit easily into those definitions, and this makes it harder to translate into something that fits neatly on a balance sheet.

What this means for leaders

This is a technical challenge for financial markets, and it shows up in everyday decisions across organisations.

Leaders are already making choices about supply chains, investment, infrastructure and risk exposure. All choices are dependent on a healthy Ocean, but that is not being considered in the process.

If the value of the Ocean doesn’t translate cleanly into financials, it also doesn’t always show up clearly in strategy.

Which means organisations can be exposed to risks they don’t fully see:

• disruptions to marine-based supply chains

• shifts in fisheries and food security

• changing coastal and climate dynamics

• longer-term instability in ecosystems that underpin economic activity

So where does this leave us?

The blue economy has great potential, but if we’re serious about a regenerative future and evolving away from extractive use of the Ocean, we need to be clear about the limits and how to balance risk and opportunity.

A different starting point

Before we ask how to scale investment, there’s a more fundamental question: Do we understand the system we’re trying to invest in? Because if we don’t, there’s a risk of building solutions that look right on paper, but don’t hold up in practice. This is where Ocean Literacy comes in - it helps people see the full picture: understand the Ocean, how value is created, and how decisions shape outcomes. Once you can see the system more clearly, different questions start to emerge, and better decisions tend to follow.

Explore this further

If this raises questions about how the Ocean relates to your organisation, risk profile, or sector, this is exactly what we explore in our executive education programmes on Ocean Systems Literacy.

Through executive briefings, strategic workshops, and leadership intensives, we work with organisations to make sense of how the Ocean influences climate risk, supply chains, and long-term resilience, as well as what that means for decision-making.