How to get Donald Trump to buy in to Natural Capital

Given his stance on climate and the environment I was stunned and disheartened to see Trump re-elected. Yet, it gave me an opportunity to examine my thesis on natural capitalism through a lens I hadn’t considered before. 

If natural capitalism is to succeed, it needs to capture the attention of people who are far outside the traditional environmental camp—and Donald Trump, with his business-first approach and focus on short-term wins, represents the ultimate test case.

Natural capitalism is built on the premise that nature should be valued as an asset, think forests, rivers, and ecosystems being valued the same way as oil, coal, or real estate. It’s about quantifying natural resources as critical parts of the economic equation. Trump, as a businessman, is pragmatic about what assets can deliver value. So, what would it take to convince someone like him that America’s natural assets hold real, financial worth?

Imagine if we valued all of America’s ecosystems—its forests, wetlands, rivers, and biodiversity—in the same way we value traditional commodities like gold or oil. If natural resources were treated as economic assets that generate returns and bolster GDP, Trump’s approach to business might just align with environmentalism. The idea isn’t to appeal to an environmental ethic, but rather to position natural assets as sources of income. Just as coal and oil represent profit and influence in the traditional economy, forests and oceans could be reimagined as high-value assets in a natural capitalist model. 

I can’t help but wonder—what would Trump Forest look like?

One possibility is creating markets around ecosystem services: assets like clean air, flood protection, and carbon sequestration that contribute tangible benefits to the economy. If Trump could see forests as “green infrastructure” that directly reduce healthcare costs and prevent billions in storm damage, or if he saw carbon credits from American lands as a high-value export, then natural capitalism might appear viable.

Currently, carbon credits are traded globally, yet they remain undervalued in the U.S. economy. Imagine if Trump backed the carbon market, made it non-voluntary, and brought in the regulation and legislation needed to make it more credible. What if he supported it with the same weight as his backing of crypto? With Trump’s endorsement and a structured, regulated carbon market, the industry could become a powerhouse of economic activity. This is just one example, but it’s actually quite an interesting analogy—crypto is essentially a made-up digital currency, while environmental assets like forests, oceans, and carbon storage are tangible, real assets that support life itself. After all, if oil and coal can be extracted and sold, why not carbon storage and biodiversity? 

If America’s natural assets could be positioned as high-value exports on par with fossil fuels, it would open the door for people like Trump to view the environment as an asset rather than a burden.

Could this approach sway someone like Trump to invest in natural capitalism? It’s hard to say. But, like I talked about in my last blog maybe it’s time to think about what it takes to engage people traditionally uninterested in climate action by framing nature in financial terms. 

This is the core of natural capitalism: making environmental preservation a business decision that aligns with profit. 

If it could work on Trump, it might just work on anyone.#

How could natural capitalism appeal to people like Trump? How would you make this vision a reality? Share your thoughts below.