From budgets to results: How Thailand is making public finance work for nature

By Kanitha Tambunlertchai, Natthida Jitsiri, Niran Nirannoot, Sornsawan Phongphao

As countries work to close the global biodiversity finance gap, a critical question emerges: is it only about mobilizing more resources, or about using existing resources more effectively?

In Thailand, the answer is increasingly clear. Through UNDP’s Biodiversity Finance Initiative (BIOFIN), the country is shifting its public finance approach from traditional activity-based budgeting to results-based budgeting (RBB), which links spending directly to outcomes for nature.

This transition is not only helping Thailand better protect its ecosystems, but also strengthening its readiness to meet international standards, including those required for OECD membership.

From finance gaps to finance effectiveness

BIOFIN supports countries through a structured methodology from a Policy and Institutional Review (PIR) and Biodiversity Expenditure Review (BER) to a Financial Needs Assessment (FNA) and the development of Biodiversity Finance Plans (BFPs), aligned with the Kunming–Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework.

In Thailand, BIOFIN works closely with government partners, including the Office of Natural Resources and Environmental Policy and Planning (ONEP), to implement the Thailand Biodiversity Finance Plan 2023–2027. The plan frames finance strategies under the National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs), helping to prioritize finance solutions and allocate budgets to protect ecosystems.

At its core, BIOFIN does not stop at “raising more money.” It is also about making existing resources work better by shifting from activity-based to results-based budgeting, and by strengthening monitoring and reporting to focus on impact.

Understanding spending before increasing it

A key step in this process is the Biodiversity Expenditure Review (BER), which assesses how much a country is already investing in biodiversity.

In Thailand, the findings revealed a concerning trend: biodiversity spending has declined relative to GDP and overall government expenditure in recent years (see Figure 1).

Figure 1. Proportion of the budget for biodiversity, FY 2016–2023

Source: Biodiversity Expenditure Review 2022–2024 for Thailand

The main agencies, the Department of National Parks, Wildlife and Plant Conservation, the Royal Forest Department, and the Department of Marine and Coastal Resources, account for 72 percent of total biodiversity spending. Yet despite strong policy frameworks, more than 60 government agencies are involved in biodiversity-related work, often facing insufficient and inconsistent funding to carry out their mandates under the 20-year National Strategy (2017–2036).

This has contributed to persistent environmental challenges.

In addition, public resources continue to be lost through harmful subsidies, misaligned policies, and investment designs that do not fully account for nature. These create “future costs” that cannot be avoided, contributing to a cumulative financing gap of more than US$1.1 billion between 2016 and 2023, as reflected in NBSAP actions.

In practice, the challenge of the BER lies not only in compiling data but in defining and classifying biodiversity expenditure. Many investments, such as water management, waste systems, or green urban spaces, have indirect but important impacts on nature and are embedded across multiple sectors.

Tracking these expenditures helps reveal both the continuity and volatility of public investment in biodiversity, underscoring the need for an outcome-linked system that shifts budget decisions from activity-based justifications to measurable performance.

Shifting from activities to outcomes

To address these challenges, Thailand is adopting results-based budgeting (RBB), a model that connects financial allocations to clearly defined environmental outcomes.

Rather than focusing on how much is spent on specific activities, RBB starts by identifying the results to be achieved, based on national biodiversity strategies and global targets and then aligns budgets, indicators, and monitoring systems accordingly.

This shift enables governments to move from tracking financial disbursements to tracking real-world results, such as improved ecosystem health, restored habitats, and reduced environmental pressures.

Making nature visible in public budgets

A key enabler of this transition is the Global Biodiversity Expenditure Taxonomy (GLOBE), developed by UNDP-BIOFIN.

The GLOBE Taxonomy provides a standardized framework to classify biodiversity-related expenditures across sectors and agencies. By assigning “biodiversity attribution rates” to different spending categories, governments can determine how much each budget line contributes to nature.

When combined with results-based budgeting, this approach creates a clear link between the “flow of money” and the “flow of results.” It also strengthens transparency, comparability, and accountability in public finance systems.

Local action: Pak Kret City Municipality

While national frameworks are essential, much of the investment in biodiversity happens at the local level, where ecosystems are directly managed, and communities are most affected.

Pak Kret City Municipality, located on the agriculturally fertile Chao Phraya River plain, offers a compelling example. The area is home to 63 native durian varieties, but faces growing pressures from urban expansion, pollution, and climate change.

With support from BIOFIN, the municipality integrated biodiversity targets into its budgeting process. Using the GLOBE Taxonomy, it classified and prioritized expenditures linked to environmental outcomes.

In 2025, Pak Kret allocated US$11 million, 17 percent of its total budget, to biodiversity-related investments, including the conservation of native durian varieties, expansion of green spaces, and improvements in air quality, water management, and waste systems.

This case demonstrates that when local governments are equipped with the right tools, they can align development planning with environmental priorities, showing that economic growth and biodiversity conservation can go hand in hand.

Photo: Pak Kret City, UNDP Thailand

Strengthening readiness for OECD standards

Thailand’s experience also has broader implications for its ambition to join the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).

Green budgeting, environmental risk management, subsidy reform, and public spending effectiveness are all key priorities within OECD frameworks. The integration of RBB, BER, and the GLOBE Taxonomy supports Thailand in meeting these standards by strengthening:

• Data and reporting systems, enabling transparent tracking of biodiversity expenditures;
• Policy alignment, ensuring budgets reflect national and international commitments;
• Evaluation mechanisms, focusing on tangible outcomes for ecosystems and communities.

Together, these elements enhance policy credibility, improve resource allocation, and increase long-term social and environmental returns.

Investing in nature for a resilient future

Thailand’s experience with results-based budgeting for biodiversity offers an important lesson for countries worldwide: closing the biodiversity finance gap is not only about mobilizing more funding, but also about ensuring that every investment delivers measurable value for nature and people.

As Niamh Collier-Smith, UNDP Resident Representative in Thailand, notes:

“Thailand deeply values its abundant nature and biodiversity. It is time to properly measure and invest in that value, including through results-based budgeting. By budgeting for nature, Thailand’s fiscal policy can drive green growth for people and planet, building a resilient economy.”

By making biodiversity visible in public budgets and linking finance to nature-positive outcomes, Thailand is demonstrating how countries can turn financial commitments into real impact, advancing both national priorities and global biodiversity goals.