Natural infrastructure is a cost-effective solution to meeting Canada’s infrastructure needs that simultaneously addresses our climate, biodiversity, and other environmental, social, and economic priorities. There is an urgent need to design and implement more natural infrastructure projects in both urban and rural environments in Canada and increase funding for natural infrastructure.

This analysis estimated the amount of public grant funding directed toward natural infrastructure in Canada generally and across the Prairie provinces (Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba). It found the following:

• There is public grant funding available in Canada and the Prairies for ecosystem conservation, restoration, and engineered ecosystems, with one fund—the Natural Infrastructure Fund (NIF)—specially targeting natural infrastructure and hybrid infrastructure to create resilient and sustainable communities.
• 16 funds with a national scope analyzed in this study provide an estimated total of CAD 346.6 million annually toward natural infrastructure in Canada, with an estimated CAD 69.3 million reaching the Prairies.
• In addition, nine provincially funded programs in the Prairies were estimated to contribute CAD 29.1 million annually toward natural infrastructure projects, for a combined total of CAD 98.4 million consisting of both federal and provincial funding.
• Four of the largest funds—the Green Municipal Fund (GMF), the Investing in Canada Infrastructure Program (ICIP) and the ICIP COVID-19 Resilience stream, and the Disaster Mitigation and Adaptation Fund (DMAF)—allocated 0.4%, 0.4%, 13.2%, and 8.7% of their funding toward natural infrastructure respectively, with only a fraction of this funding (between 10% and 30%) directed to the Prairies. However, their impact on natural infrastructure funding in the Prairies remains significant due to their large size.
• From looking at how much funding is directed by these four largest funding programs toward different types of natural infrastructure projects, restored ecosystems represent the largest portion of funding at just over 57%, followed by engineered systems at 41.1%. Conserved ecosystems represented only a small percentage (1.7%) of all natural infrastructure funding, in part because of the lower costs of conservation compared to ecosystem restoration or engineered ecosystems.
• As interest in natural infrastructure grows and more natural infrastructure projects are considered and implemented, increased dedicated public funding streams that ensure natural infrastructure is distributed equitably across communities in need will be essential.