11Canopy Proprietary

RISK Methodology

Political risk for African conservation capital
RISK is Canopy's proprietary risk assessment for the countries conservation capital flows into. It answers a specific question: how safe is it to commit long-horizon conservation capital to this jurisdiction. Eight dimensions, two data tiers, transparent sourcing. We publish the full methodology below because funders and DFIs making 25-year commitments need to understand what a rating rests on.
What RISK measures

Each country is scored 1 to 5 across eight dimensions covering governance, conflict, donor environment, protected area legal durability, tenure, operator relations, capital flow freedom, and market policy. Scores combine into a composite rating and a letter grade. RISK is designed for a specific audience: the funder, family office, DFI, or coalition deciding whether to deploy conservation capital in a given country. It is not a general sovereign risk product. Moody's and S&P cover that ground. RISK answers what conservation-specific indicators say about a country.

Two tiers
Tier 1 - Data-driven
Three of eight dimensions
Governance, conflict, and donor environment are sourced from structured public data - World Bank WGI, ACLED, GEF and GCF portfolio disclosures, bilateral donor publications. Auto-scored from source values. No editorial judgement.
Tier 2 - Editorial-assisted
Five of eight dimensions
Legal durability of protected areas, tenure, operator relations, capital flow freedom, and market policy require editorial synthesis of published evidence. Sources include national law, ICNL Monitor, IMF AREAER, operator disclosures, and press reports of partnership disputes. Each score carries a short rationale and source trail. Human reviewer confirms before publish.
The eight dimensions
Dimension Tier Primary sources
Governance baseline T1 World Bank Worldwide Governance Indicators - Rule of Law, Control of Corruption, Government Effectiveness, Political Stability, most recent percentile rank
Conflict and security T1 ACLED fatalities trend, ICG Crisis Watch signal, US State Department, UK FCDO and French MEAE travel advisories
Donor environment T1 GEF STAR allocation, GCF approved projects, top bilateral donors in conservation, recent scale-ups or cuts (USAID withdrawal, EU Global Gateway, Chinese conservation investment)
PA legal durability T2 National protected area law, PADDD (protected area downgrading, downsizing, and degazettement) database, community land title case history
Tenure and concessions T2 Concession contract track record, long-term management agreement stability, community land tenure frameworks, LandMark platform
Operator-government relations T2 African Parks, Peace Parks, TNC, WCS, FZS partnership histories, ruptures and renegotiations in past decade, operator tenure length
Capital flow freedom T2 IMF AREAER annual report, ICNL Monitor civic freedom index, foreign NGO tax and registration rules, grant repatriation posture
Market policy T2 UNFCCC Article 6.2 position and agreements signed, offset moratoriums, biodiversity credit framework status, VCM integrity initiatives
Scoring logic

Each dimension is rated 1 to 5 against a published rubric, where 5 represents a low-risk posture and 1 represents severe adverse conditions. The composite score is the simple average of all eight dimensions. Where a dimension cannot be scored due to insufficient data, it is marked "insufficient data" and excluded from the composite rather than scored conservatively.

Composite grade conversion
A+4.60 - 5.00 - strong, low-risk posture across most dimensions. Capital can flow with standard safeguards.
A4.20 - 4.59 - above-average conservation capital environment with minor gaps.
B+3.80 - 4.19 - defensible, capital flows but specific mitigants required.
B3.40 - 3.79 - meaningful risks alongside meaningful strengths.
C+3.00 - 3.39 - mixed, material risks that need structural response.
C2.50 - 2.99 - significant concerns. Capital should only proceed with strong protections.
DBelow 2.50 - severely adverse. Capital should not flow absent exceptional structure.
Honest caveats
Country-level averages hide landscape-level variation. Tanzania has different conditions in the Selous than around Arusha. DRC is not the same country in Virunga as in Kinshasa. RISK scores the national context. Landscape-level diligence still required.
Scores move slowly, conditions move fast. Governance indicators refresh annually. Elections, coups, PA degazettement announcements, or sudden policy shifts all move conditions faster than scores. The last_scored date on every record flags how stale the read is. No country score older than 12 months without re-review.
Editorial judgement on Tier 2 dimensions is explicit. Five of the eight dimensions require synthesis of multiple signals. Every Tier 2 score carries a source trail and a short rationale. Canopy stands behind the read but the data is by nature less clean than Tier 1.
Coverage before opinion. All 54 African countries are now scored on all eight dimensions. In data-limited countries, dimension notes carry explicit caveats. RISK does not inflate rating quality at the cost of coverage, or coverage at the cost of quality.
RISK is not a substitute for diligence. Ratings are a public reference for comparison and early screening. They are not a licence to skip country-level due diligence, partner-level assessment, or on-ground review.
Editorial review and correction

Every published RISK score passes human review before going live. Tier 2 dimensions - where public sources are thinner and editorial synthesis is required - receive particular scrutiny. Every score carries a source trail and a scoring date, because the strongest rating is one that can be audited.

Corrections are welcomed. Governments, operators, funders, or researchers spotting a factual error should email corrections@canopy.africa. We commit to responding within 14 days. Where a correction is accepted, the change is logged and the scoring date updated. Where we disagree, we publish our reasoning.

Update cadence

RISK scores are refreshed when underlying data changes. WGI refreshes annually. ACLED is continuous. Major political events, PA legal changes, donor cycle announcements, and policy shifts all trigger review of affected dimensions. A scoring date is displayed on each country record. No country score is published older than 12 months without re-review.

Disclaimer

RISK scores are informational only. They are not investment advice, partnership recommendations, sovereign ratings, or a solicitation for any financial transaction. Canopy makes no warranty as to the accuracy or completeness of the underlying data. All philanthropic or investment decisions should be made on the basis of independent due diligence.