新浪财经ESG评级中心提供包括资讯、报告、培训、咨询等在内的14项ESG服务，助力上市公司传播ESG理念，提升ESG可持续发展表现。点击查看【ESG评级中心服务手册】

　　新浪财经 蒋露瑶/发自乌兰巴托

　　《联合国防治荒漠化公约》第十七届缔约方大会（COP17）于8月17日至28日在蒙古乌兰巴托举行。大会期间，联合国副秘书长、《联合国防治荒漠化公约》秘书处执行秘书亚丝明·福阿德（Dr． Yasmine Fouad）对话新浪财经时指出，国家有边界，生态系统没有边界，应对土地荒漠化需要跨国、跨部门协作。而衡量COP17成败的标准，不是新通过了多少决议，而是土地有没有变好、人民有没有受益。

　　土地修复资金缺口每年2780亿美元，私人资本仅占6%

　　大规模调动资金对于应对土地退化、增强抗旱韧性和推进可持续土地管理至关重要，然而当前土地恢复与抗旱韧性面临的融资缺口依然巨大。

　　根据UNCCD此前发布的融资需求评估，2025年至2030年，全球土地恢复与抗旱韧性领域每年约需投入3550亿美元，但当前年度资金流仅约770亿美元，年融资缺口高达2780亿美元。大规模土地恢复每天需投入约10亿美元，但私人资本目前却仅占全球土地恢复融资的约6%。

　　福阿德坦言：“当今最大的障碍，不是科学或方案跟不上，而是资金无法以所需的规模和速度到位。”她指出，难点不光是要募集更多钱，更关键的是要让土地恢复变得可投资、低风险，“我们正在努力打造一条更顺畅的链条：从国家战略重点出发，形成具体项目；由项目引向投资；再由投资落到实地，产生可衡量的成效。”

　　福阿德强调，从经济账来看，投资土地恢复的理由也十分充分：“每向土地恢复投入1美元，就能带来7到30美元的回报，包括生态服务价值和避免的损失。眼下要做的，是把健康土地带来的种种好处，比如水安全、生物多样性、稳固的生计，转化成金融机构愿意支持的投资机会。”

　　公共资金无法填平资金缺口，需引入私人和机构资本

　　她认为，光靠公共资金填不平资金缺口。公共资金要巧用，要能降低风险，引入私人资本和机构资本。“混合融资、担保和其他风险分担工具可以提高土地恢复项目的可融资性，可以让恢复项目更容易获得融资，从而吸引大规模投资。公共资金和优惠资金可以发挥“药引子”作用，承担前期部分风险，让更大体量的资本敢跟进来。同时，政策、补贴和激励机制也得向可持续土地管理和抗旱韧性看齐。”

　　福阿德指出，土地恢复还需要更强大的投资可落地项目储备库，并辅以可预测的政策、可靠的数据和可信的监测。“牧场旗舰倡议”（Rangelands Flagship Initiative）是一个例子，起步规模就超过10亿美元，专注于打造一批投资条件成熟的牧场项目。截至目前，该倡议已汇集45个明确项目，估值约12亿美元。全球环境基金（GEF）通过向UNCCD COP17遗产项目投资330万美元，为牧场旗舰倡议的协调提供支持。

　　福阿德介绍，同样的逻辑适用于抗旱韧性建设。通过“抗旱韧性投资机制”（Drought Resilience Investment Facility）等工具，催化性资金和优惠资金可以降低风险，在干旱还没酿成危机之前，就把私人投资引入到预防工作中来。该机制由UNCCD与卢森堡政府共同发起，旨在调动约4亿美元，投资于可持续农业、水资源获取和基于自然的解决方案。

　　“私营部门也有自己的经济账要算，”福阿德表示，“土地退化和干旱直接威胁供应链、原材料、水源供给和业务连续性。UNCCD通过“商业促土地（Business4Land）”倡议，致力于将土地和干旱议题纳入企业的战略、投资和报告，让土地恢复从细分的环境议题，变成主流的投资考量。

　　“商业促土地（Business4Land）”倡议是UNCCD官方倡议，旨在促进私营部门参与，加强企业、投资者、政府和国际组织之间的合作。COP17期间，UNCCD与蒙古国商业委员会签署谅解备忘录，正式建立Business4Land蒙古枢纽。

　　“政策指明方向，金融提供手段，伙伴关系赋予能力，私营部门参与则帮我们上规模，”福阿德说，“这些不是孤立的，它们合在一起，就构成了一个正在成形的落实架构”。

　　沙尘暴影响超150国，源头防控才是治本之策

　　沙尘暴是跨越国界的挑战，波及超过150个国家。其影响远超沙源地，会危害人体健康，冲击农业、交通和基础设施，扰乱经济活动和民生。福阿德强调，沙尘暴不仅是一个环境问题，同时也是一个发展、卫生和经济问题。

　　同时她指出，沙尘是地球系统中天然且必要的一环，能把养分输送到各大洲和海洋，滋养陆地和海洋生态系统——比如撒哈拉的沙尘，就把磷元素带过大西洋，为亚马逊雨林补充养分。“我们的目标不是消灭沙尘，而是降低严重沙尘暴的风险和破坏力，尤其是那些因土地退化、不可持续的水土管理而加剧的沙尘排放”。

　　福阿德表示，这就凸显了基于生态系统的源头控制的意义：“恢复退化土地、保护土壤和植被、改良水土管理方式、增强生态系统抵御干旱和风蚀的能力，都有助于从源头减少沙尘排放。这些措施还能带来额外的好处：涵养生物多样性、保障粮食安全和水安全、改善民生。”

　　监测和预警也必不可少，但关键是要把它们转化成预防和实地行动。“更精准的数据能帮我们找准退化和沙尘源区，提高预报准确性，也能告诉我们哪里最急需恢复、可持续管理和抗旱准备”。

　　由于沙尘暴跨越国界，区域合作就格外重要。各国需要共享监测和预报信息、协调预警系统、加强科技合作。福阿德说：“区域层面的行动，可以把土地恢复、监测、预警和准备工作串联起来，而不是各管一摊”。

　　在全球层面，合作需要汇聚政府、科学家、国际组织、金融机构、私营部门和当地社区。联合国沙尘暴防治联盟就是一个重要平台，能汇聚各方专长，帮助各国强化预防、准备和提升韧性。

　　“没有一个国家或机构能独自应对这种规模的跨界风险。实施架构必须既跨边界，也跨部门。道理很简单：国家有边界，但生态系统没有。减轻沙尘暴风险，既要在源头对脆弱土地采取行动，也要跨越国界携手合作，预判风险，在危机酿成之前就出手。”

　　衡量COP17成功的关键指标是什么？

　　COP17召开正值关键时刻，各国已确立了到2030年恢复10亿公顷退化土地的承诺，现在的挑战，是把这些承诺变成行动，要快，要成规模。

　　在COP17开幕式上，福阿德反复强调“COP17必须是落实的大会”。她认为，随着高级别会议推进，我们越来越需要回答：怎么创造条件，让落实成为可能？

　　对福阿德而言，衡量COP17是否成功的关键指标是：COP17能不能创造条件，让更多资金流进来，让更多项目具备投资条件，让已经验证的解决方案铺开规模，同时确保这些投资真正落到管理土地的国家和社区手里。

　　“这就意味着要把各个环节串起来：有利的政策环境、国家主导的项目储备、科学和数据支撑、公共和优惠资金、私人资本、伙伴关系，以及最终在实地落实恢复的人们”。

　　福阿德指出，随着时间的推移，这些成果得能拿数字说话：多恢复了多少公顷土地，土壤和牧场健康了多少，抗旱韧性增强了多少，社区稳固了多少。成功不能只看乌兰巴托通过了什么决议，更要看这些决议能不能在实地带来真真切切的改变。

　　福阿德还强调，一届成功的COP17，还应该推动我们加快转变，从“等旱灾来了再应对”，转向“提前准备、主动预防、前瞻行动”。在干旱还没来的时候就投资，能保住民生、粮食生产和经济，也能避免危机爆发后花大得多的代价去救灾。“纸面上的干旱计划不能保护农民、牧民和经济体，能保护它们的，只有落实”。

　　福阿德认为，牧场是另一个衡量COP17是否成功的标准。牧场覆盖地球陆地表面的54%，支持约20亿人口，其中包括约5亿牧民，但高达一半的牧场已经退化或面临退化风险。COP17应帮助推动牧场从认知走向真金白银的投资和实实在在的行动。“而这一转变正变得更加切实——牧场正从政治表态变为项目储备、融资和伙伴关系的建立落实”。

　　如果非要挑一个具体的成果作为衡量COP17是否成功的标准，福阿德表示：“我最希望看到为各国已经做出的承诺，构建一个更切实的落实路径，把政策、可投资项目、催化性资金和伙伴关系打通，让实地行动跑起来、快起来。不是再搞一个新机构，也不是加一道流程，而是把我们已有的东西连接起来，让它们协同运转、形成规模”。

　　这样，才能让COP17的主题“恢复土地，重燃希望”不再是一句口号，不堆砌新的承诺，而是把已有的雄心，变成人民和山川大地都能感受到的成果。

　　问答实录：

　　Sina Finance： The financing gap for land restoration and drought resilience remains enormous – up to $355 billion per year， with large-scale restoration costing roughly $1 billion per day． On theFinanceDay （24 August），what innovative financing models and public-private partnership breakthroughsdo you expect to see？ How do you hope tomobilise the private sector， especially given thatfinanceministers， development banks and corporations will be gathered at that session？

　　Dr． Yasmine Fouad： The biggest obstacle today is not a lack of science or solutions， but financing at the scale and speed required． Around USD 1 billion a day is needed through 2030to achieve the Convention’s objectives， while private finance currently accounts for only around 6 per cent of global restoration finance． The challenge is therefore not only to mobilize more capital， but to make restoration more investable and less risky．

　　What we are trying to build is a stronger pathway from national priorities to projects， from projects to investment， and from investment to measurable implementation on the ground．

　　There is also a strong economic case． Every USD 1 invested in land restoration can generate USD 7–30 in benefits， including ecosystem services and avoided losses． The task is to translate the wider benefits of healthy land — including water security， biodiversity and resilient livelihoods — into investment opportunities that financial institutions can support．

　　Public finance alone cannot close the gap． It needs to be used strategically to reduce risk and mobilize private and institutional capital． Blended finance guarantees and other risk-sharing instruments can improve the bankability of restoration projects and help attract investment at scale． Public and concessional finance can play a catalytic role， absorbing part of the early risk so that larger pools of capital can participate． At the same time， policies， subsidies and incentives need to be aligned with sustainable land management and drought resilience．

　　We also need stronger pipelines of investment-ready projects， supported by predictable policies， reliable data and credible monitoring． The Rangelands Flagship Initiativeis one practical example， with an initial ambition exceeding USD 1 billionand a focus on building a pipeline of investment-ready rangeland projects．

　　The same logic applies to drought resilience． Through instruments such as the Drought Resilience Investment Facility， we are looking at how catalytic and concessional capital can reduce risk and help bring private investment into preparedness before drought becomes crisis．

　　The private sector also has a direct economic reason to act． Land degradation and drought threaten supply chains， raw materials， water availability and business continuity． Through Business4Land， UNCCD is working to bring land and drought into business strategies， investment and reporting， helping to move restoration from a niche environmental issue towards a mainstream investment consideration．

　　The goal is to create the conditions for much larger pools of private and institutional capital to participate． That means combining public finance， stronger project pipelines， enabling policies and private-sector engagement so that restoration can move from isolated projects to investment at scale．

　　Policy gives us direction． Finance gives us the means． Partnerships give us capacity． Private-sector engagement can help us reach scale． These are not separate pieces — together， they form an emerging architecture for implementation．

　　Sina Finance： Sand and dust storms are a transboundary challenge， and COP17 features a dedicated high-level event on this issue． How can ecosystem-based source control helpmitigate sand and dust storm risks， and howcan regional and global cooperationbe strengthened in this regard？

　　Dr． Yasmine Fouad： Sand and dust storms are a major transboundary challenge， affecting more than 150 countries． Their impacts extend far beyond their source areas， affecting human health， agriculture， transport and infrastructure， and disrupting economies and livelihoods． This is why they need to be addressed not only as an environmental issue， but also as a development， health and economic challenge．

　　At the same time， it is important to recognize that dust is a natural and essential part of the Earth system． It transports nutrients across continents and oceans and can support terrestrial and marine ecosystems． Saharan dust， for example， carries phosphorus across the Atlantic that helps replenish nutrients in the Amazon rainforest． The objective is therefore not to eliminate dust， but to reduce the risks and damaging impacts of severe sand and dust storms， particularly where land degradation and unsustainable land and water management contribute to dust emissions．

　　This is where ecosystem-based source controlbecomes important． Restoring degraded land， protecting soils and vegetation， improving sustainable land and water management， and strengthening the resilience of landscapes to drought and wind erosion can help reduce dust emissions at source． These measures also bring wider benefits for biodiversity， food security， water security and livelihoods．

　　Monitoring and early warning are also essential， but they need to translate into prevention and action on the ground． Better data can help identify degradation and dust-source areas， improve forecasting and show where restoration， sustainable land management and drought preparedness are most needed．

　　Because sand and dust storms cross borders， regional cooperation is critical． Countries need to share monitoring and forecasting information， coordinate early-warning systems and strengthen scientific and technical cooperation． Regional action can connect land restoration， monitoring， early warning and preparedness， rather than addressing each separately．

　　At the global level， cooperation needs to bring together governments， scientists， international organizations， financial institutions， the private sector and local communities． The UN Coalition on Combating Sand and Dust Stormsprovides an important platform for pooling expertise and helping countries strengthen prevention， preparedness and resilience．

　　No single country or institution can manage a transboundary risk of this scale alone． The architecture for implementation must therefore work across borders as well as across sectors．

　　The principle is simple： countries may have borders， but ecosystems do not． Reducing sand and dust storm risks requires action on vulnerable landscapes at source， combined with cooperation across borders to anticipate risks and act before they become crises

　　Sina Finance： The theme of COP17 is “Restoring Land， Restoring Hope．” You have described land as “our most important infrastructure – underpinning food security， water， livelihoods and stability．” In your view， what would bethe key indicators of a successful COP？ Whatsingle concrete outcomewould you most like to see by the closing of the conference？

　　Dr． Yasmine Fouad： COP17 comes at a critical moment． Countries have already defined much of the ambition， including the commitment to restore one billion hectares of degraded land by 2030． The challenge now is to translate those commitments into implementation at the speed and scale required．

　　One week ago， I said that COP17 must be a COP of implementation． As we move through the High-Level Segment， the question is increasingly how we build the conditions that make that implementation possible．

　　For me， the key indicator of success is whether COP17 creates the conditions for more finance to flow， more projects to become investable and proven solutions to reach scale， while ensuring that investment reaches the countries and communities managing the land．

　　That means connecting the pieces： enabling policy， country-led project pipelines， science and data， public and concessional finance， private capital， partnerships and the people who ultimately deliver restoration on the ground．

　　Over time， those results need to become measurable： more hectares restored， healthier soils and rangelands， stronger drought resilience and more resilient communities． Success cannot be measured only by decisions taken in Ulaanbaatar， but by whether they translate into tangible improvements on the ground．

　　A successful COP should also accelerate the shift from responding to drought emergencies to preparedness， prevention and anticipatory action． Investing before drought strikes protects livelihoods， food production and economies， while reducing the much higher costs of responding once a crisis has unfolded．

　　A drought plan on paper does not protect a farmer， a pastoralist or an economy． Implementation does．

　　Rangelands are another important measure of progress． They cover 54 per cent of the Earth‘s land surface， support around two billion people， including some 500 million pastoralists， yet up to half are degraded or at risk． COP17 should help move rangelands from recognition towards stronger investment and practical action．

　　And that transition is already becoming more tangible as rangelands move from political recognition towards project pipelines， finance and partnerships for delivery．

　　If I had to identify one concrete outcome， it would be a stronger implementation pathway for the commitments countries have already made—connecting policy， investment-ready projects， catalytic finance， ， and partnerships so that delivery can accelerate on the ground．

　　This is what I mean by an architecture for implementation． Not another institution or another layer of process， but connecting the pieces we already have and making them work together at scale．

　　That would demonstrate what “Restoring Land． Restoring Hope” means in practice： not another layer of commitments but turning existing ambition into measurable results for people and landscapes．