Turning Cyber Risk Into Boardroom Metrics That Matter
Cybersecurity has always come with a translation problem. Technical teams speak in terms of vulnerabilities and threats, while boards want to understand risk in dollars and business impact. As attacks become more costly and regulatory scrutiny grows, however, the gap between technical risk and business accountability is shrinking fast.
The Boardroom Is Asking New Questions
Boards and executives increasingly want to know: How much risk are we taking on, in real financial terms? Are cybersecurity investments justified? Are we actually reducing exposure—or just reacting to the latest crisis?
All fair and valid questions.
The pressure to answer these questions isn't just external. Internally, organizations are moving away from blank-check security budgets. Leaders expect to see risk—and progress—quantified in business language: dollars, business impact, and return on investment.
From Jargon to Dollars
It is an eternal struggle. For most companies cybersecurity is a cost center, not a revenue-generating function. The better cybersecurity is at achieving its stated objectives, the less necessary it seems—if there are no successful attacks, why spend so much money on defending against them?
Cyber risk quantification is quickly gaining ground as a bridge between IT and the C-suite that addresses this challenge. The promise is simple: turn technical scenarios into dollar-based outcomes so everyone is on the same page. CRQ platforms don't just talk about possible vulnerabilities—they show what a breach could really cost, how an investment reduces exposure, and where risk is shifting across the organization.
This approach is becoming the new standard as boards and regulators demand clear evidence of measurable progress.
A New Player in the US Market
The changing landscape is driving international players to expand their presence. Squalify, a Munich-based cyber risk quantification provider, just announced its U.S. entry, launching with a Bay Area healthcare customer. The company's platform, backed by Munich Re's cyber loss data, aims to help organizations move from reactive, compliance-based security toward proactive, ROI-driven strategies.
Asdrúbal Pichardo, CEO of Squalify, told me that the timing is no accident. 'We're entering the U.S. market at a critical inflection point for cybersecurity leadership. There's a growing mandate—from regulators, boards, and shareholders—for CISOs to connect cybersecurity decisions with business performance. That means moving beyond technical jargon and translating cyber risk into financial terms,' he explained.
Squalify's platform is designed to help organizations model risk across subsidiaries, run simulations on the impact of new controls, and deliver concise, visual board reporting. Pichardo emphasized the importance of aligning security and business outcomes: 'We help leaders go beyond checklists and into financial strategy by giving them the ability to express cyber risk in the same terms used by the CFO and board: dollars, probabilities, and business impact.'
Henry Meds, Squalify's first U.S. customer, uses these insights to align security investments with business continuity, patient trust, and regulatory expectations—demonstrating measurable progress to their board. As Brian Cook, senior IT & security manager at Henry Meds, puts it: 'It's the first time I've been able to show my Executive Board, with confidence, that we're focused on the right threats and making measurable progress.'
Features That Matter to the C-Suite
Multi-entity risk management lets large organizations assess and compare risk across subsidiaries—key for groups operating in highly regulated sectors. Decision simulations allow CISOs to model how new investments or business moves might alter the company's risk profile. Executive dashboards translate complex technical data into clear, actionable insights for leadership.
For many security leaders, this ability to speak the same language as finance and risk teams is a potential game-changer. It makes cybersecurity not just a technical requirement, but a strategic lever.
Security as a Business Function
This shift is happening as industries from healthcare to manufacturing face greater regulatory and operational risk.
Boards now expect transparency, defensible metrics, and ROI-driven decisions—not just technical assurances. As Pichardo puts it, 'Compliance is necessary, but it's not sufficient. We help CISOs shift from being viewed as a cost center to being recognized as a business enabler.'
Accountability and ROI
The U.S. market is especially primed for this shift. High-profile breaches and increasing regulatory demands are pushing organizations to show that security spending delivers real value. The rise of financial metrics doesn't eliminate risk—but it makes it easier to justify, prioritize, and manage across all levels of leadership.
Cyber risk quantification isn't a silver bullet. But as companies look to move from checklists to strategy, and from compliance to confidence, quantifying cyber risk in dollars may finally allow boards and security leaders to have the same conversation.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Forbes
17 minutes ago
- Forbes
How CEOs Can Reduce Their Vulnerability And Improve Safety
What are the three things most likely to boost a company's revenue? Forbes Research found that while it may have something to do with its industry, size and track record, there's much more to consider. The annual CxO Growth Survey revealed three common leadership strategies among businesses that achieved revenue growth of at least 10% in the last fiscal year, representing about 24% of the more than 1,000 global executives polled as part of the survey. The first strategy is working toward a happier, healthier workforce. This is achieved through programs designed to prevent burnout—about half of CHROs in high-growth companies are working to tackle this issue—by improving the employee experience, investing in employee mental health and well-being, and constantly upskilling the existing workforce. High-growth C-suite leaders are also likely to be accelerating AI adoption, with 57% of CIOs at these companies working to deploy AI and machine learning platforms across the enterprise. They're also investing more in AI this year. Finally, they're also investing in sustainability and environmental and social governance programs. More than a third of high-growth CEOs view sustainability and ESG as business opportunities—tallying about 9% more than their lower-growth counterparts. And 37% are planning to strengthen their sustainability efforts over the next two years. Almost two in five CFOs from high-growth companies are planning more funding toward ESG in the next year as a growth measure. In short, the executives who are doing the best are investing in their company's future through prioritizing employees, using technology to become more efficient and effective, and challenging themselves to make an impact on the world. Overall, the survey showed that nine in 10 executives are confident about their growth in the next three years, agreeing that their company should be in a much stronger position—though many executives said that issues including tariffs, inflation and the general economic uncertainty put that future in question. However, the three strategies identified in the research can be done to some extent regardless of the economic situation—and companies may be more likely to assure their future success if they start there. In today's world, executives can be targeted through information easily found online, which has led to tragic outcomes. Human risk management company Nisos released a report that shows just how exposed many executives are: 98% have property linked to their names, while about a fifth revealed sensitive information on social media. I talked to Nisos CEO Ryan LaSalle about what details executives have exposed and how they can protect themselves. An excerpt from our conversation is later in this newsletter. Until next time. ECONOMIC INDICATORSDespite widespread uncertainty and falling levels of confidence from both consumers and executives, the stock market had continued to climb. Last week, however, news hit that was jarring enough to pull optimistic investors down. On Friday, the Bureau of Labor Statistics released data showing that the job market has been slowing down for months. Unemployment was up to 4.2%, with just 73,000 nonfarm jobs added in the month. But it wasn't just July with weak employment numbers. Job growth in May and June was revised downward—from a projected 144,000 jobs to an actual 19,000, and from a projected 147,000 in June to an actual 14,000. President Donald Trump's reaction to the report? He fired Bureau of Labor Statistics Commissioner Erika McEntarfer. McEntarfer had been appointed by former President Joe Biden, but she had a long career in the executive branch under various administrations. She had previously worked at the Census Bureau's Center for Economic Studies, the Treasury Department's Office of Tax Policy and the White House Council of Economic Advisers, according to the AP. She was confirmed with a bipartisan 86-8 Senate vote in January 2024, and was widely recommended by economists and people from various government departments. To explain his action, Trump said in a Truth Social post, 'In my opinion, today's Jobs Numbers were RIGGED in order to make the Republicans, and ME, look bad,' and vowed to replace McEntarfer with someone 'much more competent and qualified.' But firing the statistician for delivering numbers not to the president's liking—no matter how truthful and accurate they may be—is a move that may do more harm than good. Businesses and investors depend on government data about jobs, inflation and the economy. If the jobs of the professionals who put the numbers together rely on how well Trump likes them, it undermines the accuracy of any report. But data outside of the government also points to an incredibly slow job market. A new report from career services firm Challenger, Gray & Christmas found that July's job losses—an estimated 62,000 positions cut among government and private employers—puts the number of lost jobs so far in 2025 over the total number of jobs lost in all of 2024. The leading sector for job cuts this year is the government, which has slashed 292.294 positions so far. Before Friday's release of the new employment data, the Federal Reserve's Open Market Committee voted on Wednesday to keep interest rates steady. Trump has been using a variety of avenues to pressure Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell to bring them down—including insults on social media and in press conferences and attempts at public humiliation—but the board did not budge. However, two of the 11 governors who voted on Wednesday were against the consensus decision, calling for a quarter-point rate cut. Powell said Wednesday that the U.S. economy is in a 'solid position,' citing stronger-than-expected GDP growth of 3% in the second quarter. TARIFFS Shipping containers stacked at the Port of Oakland in Oakland, doubled down on tariffs last week, initially saying that he would keep the start date for most of them firm on August 1, but then backtracked on Friday, resetting the deadline for this Thursday. However, his order resetting the date (again) included tariff rates for 67 countries, the EU and Taiwan. These rates range from 10% to 41%, and those not included in the executive order will face 10% tariffs. On Friday, as investors realized the White House TACO buffet may be coming to an end, and as they saw the weak job numbers and the firing of Erika McEntarfer, there was a huge sell-off. Many recent market gains were erased. The Nasdaq composite dropped 2.2%, the S&P 500 fell 1.6% and the Dow Jones Industrial Average was down about 1.5%. Markets are rebounding a bit so far on Monday. In addition to the tariff deals—and not-quite-good-deals—from last week, the president signed an executive order ending the 'de minimis' trade exemption from tariffs. This loophole, which Chinese companies including Temu and Shein had exploited, allowed companies to skip tariffs when shipping goods valued under $800 directly to the U.S. Customs and Border Patrol estimated 4 million packages valued at the de minimis limit are processed in the U.S. every day, accounting for 92% of all cargo arriving in the country. The exemption allows Chinese companies to sell extremely cheap goods to Americans. According to the executive order, the loophole is closing on August 29. FROM THE HEADLINES Tesla CEO Elon Musk. FREDERIC J. BROWN/AFP via Getty Images The world's richest man is getting richer. Tesla approved a stock award worth $29 billion to founder and CEO Elon Musk, according to an SEC filing on Monday. The company's special board committee said on X—the social network Musk owns—that the stock award was a 'good faith' payment. A longer-term CEO compensation strategy, the post said, will come up for a shareholder vote at the Nov. 6 annual meeting. 'We are confident that this award will incentivize Elon to remain at Tesla and focus his unmatched leadership abilities on further creating shareholder value for Tesla shareholders and attracting and retaining talent at Tesla,' the X post states. A similar pay package for Musk, worth $56 billion, had been struck down by the Delaware Chancery Court last year. The ruling said the package was unfair to investors. Musk appealed, and the case is currently pending. Following news of the deal, Tesla's stock initially spiked about 2.7%, but has since slowed—though the automaker's stock is still up more than 0.5% today. TOMORROW'S TRENDS How Executives Can Reduce Their Vulnerability Nisos CEO Ryan LaSalle. Nisos, Getty Many business executives have likely felt potential dangers to their security growing over recent years, but last year's murder of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson as he walked to the company's investor day in New York City, and last week's fatal shooting in a Park Avenue office tower crystallized just how serious potential threats are. Human risk management company Nisos took a close look at where executives are exposed and released an eye-opening report : 100% have had personal email addresses and telephone numbers exposed via data breaches. About 92% have exterior images of their personal property publicly available. And close to a third have someone in their family publicly sharing geolocation information. I spoke with Nisos CEO Ryan LaSalle about these threats and how to mitigate them. This conversation has been edited for length, clarity and continuity. What are some of today's bigger risks and problems you see with executives' privacy protection? LaSalle: There are two different lines of thinking. One is: What are you or your family putting out there that gives people a sense of how to figure out where you're going to be at any given time? We call it pattern of life. Information that's geotagged, like your exercise routes. Or when people are posting geotag pictures to social media about where they are, or even saying, 'We're checking into this vacation resort right now.' It's often not the executive who's doing that. It is people around them, and anybody who's observing them would be able to piece together. Generally being aware of location-sensitive data that helps people understand the patterns and the places where you exist. The second is the way some of these folks engage the market and understand and listen to what's going back. Increasingly, whether it's brand and reputation, or whether it's thinking about active threats to people, there is a heightened awareness about listening—and there's still less understanding about what they can do about it. One is all about vulnerability and one is about trying to figure out what actions to take. Those both create risks for people who are not quite sure what to do. The recent past has seen devastating attacks on high-ranking business executives and politicians. Are businesses and executives doing the right things for protection? We've seen a lot of pictures being taken off websites, as well as a big bump in private security use. Different companies are going to have different responses. I couldn't possibly question the risk calculus that they were going through at that moment in time, where they were seeing a real nexus of threats. [After the December 2024 murder of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson], you saw 'Most Wanted' posters on the streets in New York with [healthcare] executives' pictures on them. There was a level of threat that was different than what generally happens every single day, and it was very targeted. Best practice, when you're not in the middle of that and you're trying to make sure that you're more prepared, would be about baseline level privacy controls. We say this with politicians, too. Politicians are supposed to be representatives of the community they live in, and suddenly they're feeling they need to recede and take their addresses down. That creates a real tension for how it should feel. But for us, when we look at it, how it should feel and how they should protect themselves are a little out of whack right now. They need to probably index more protection. I do think that generally taking a picture off a website or taking information off of your website when you're easy to find other places is not an effective strategy. The people who want to do harm, we will go pull all the different data that they can find anywhere to pull it down. You need to be more continuous and comprehensive in trying to reduce that footprint. You want to make it harder to find these people, where they're going to be, and when they're going to be there. If you look at protective details, especially in travel and event security, there's been a heightened awareness around those. That's probably the right thing today, especially with the advent of social media. Every executive wants to be not only a good steward for their company, but they want to be a personality. They want to be the face of their company and they want to be talking to potential customers or just anybody else. How do you walk the line between wanting to be out there in front and represent[ing] your company, but yet not be putting yourself at risk? Most executives today are not digitally native, where they can live out loud online and know how to handle the complexities that come back at them. I think you need to pair people who really do know how to deescalate when things get sideways. Not control the message, because those executives are usually the best authentic communicators, but control the blow back in circumstances around those things. When we look at our report, the executives themselves had very little personal exposure through their accounts. They were pretty much on message on business. But the connectedness between their business persona and their personal life and families created a different level of vulnerability. Just because you're the face of the business and you're being authentic in the way you're interacting, it doesn't mean you're not exposed. You can have that partnership, but you also need to make sure your family's on board with how to behave and connect themselves and share information appropriately. I think that's the missing piece in a lot of the strategies. What advice would you give to an executive that is starting to look at security and wants to make sure they're not exposing themselves to unnecessary risk? Realizing that if they haven't yet put their toe in the water, they can do a lot to prepare themselves better when they start. The first is looking across those data aggregators, breach data sets and things like that to figure out where you are already exposed, and how do you get control over that, because it will limit how people find you and where they show up. People show up at your door. That's not where you want them to show up. When you want to engage them digitally, you want to engage with them digitally. And when you want to shake hands with people at an event, then you want to be able to shake hands with people at an event. And you don't want those worlds to encroach on each other. Your digital hygiene—and I don't just mean in terms of data, I mean your accounts, your passwords, your multifactor authentication, your password managers—making sure you're not having a lot of reuse and exposing yourself. People will go after you digitally if there's something interesting that you have for them. Again, training those around you that to get to you, they'll go through them, and to get to them, they'll go through you. You'll see all the things that are trying to get to your teams because you are more active and more visible. They have more to work with to turn around and target your company and your teams. COMINGS + GOINGS Consumer goods powerhouse Procter & Gamble announced that Shailesh Jejurikar will become president and chief executive officer, effective January 1. Jejurikar joined the firm in 1989 and is currently chief operating officer, and he will succeed Jon Moeller, who is set to become executive chairman. announced that will become president and chief executive officer, effective January 1. Jejurikar joined the firm in 1989 and is currently chief operating officer, and he will succeed Jon Moeller, who is set to become executive chairman. Apparel company Gap Inc. appointed Maggie Gauger as global brand president and chief executive officer of Athleta, effective August 1. Gauger most recently served as head of North America women's business at Nike, and she succeeds Chris Blakeslee. appointed as global brand president and chief executive officer of Athleta, effective August 1. Gauger most recently served as head of North America women's business at Nike, and she succeeds Chris Blakeslee. Food and beverage company Welch's selected Cees Talma as its next chief executive officer, effective July 29. Talma previously worked as CEO of Nature's Way, and he succeeds Trevor Bynum. Send us C-suite transition news at forbescsuite@ STRATEGIES + ADVICE Parents often find themselves raising their voices at their children because they've done something wrong. But when those parents are also executives, yelling at others—in person, in public appearances or on social media—shows deep leadership problems. Here are some ways you can switch your strategy, from behaving in a parent-to-child dynamic to an adult-to-adult situation. GE's corporate breakup has served as a master class in how to restructure a large company into smaller, targeted—and successful independent entities. However, some CEOs are wedded to the idea that, when it comes to a company, bigger is better. Here's how to break through that belief and unlock value by addressing unnecessary complexity in your organization. QUIZ Employees from a division of which company began striking Sunday, a week after rejecting a contract proposal? A. Boeing B. Amazon C. UPS D. United Airlines See if you got the answer right here.
Associated Press
17 minutes ago
- Associated Press
In Ecuador, environmentalists worry Noboa is unwinding nation's green reputation
BOGOTA, Colombia (AP) — When Ecuadorians voted two years ago to block oil drilling in Yasuni National Park, it was a triumph for environmentalists seeking to protect one of the most biodiverse places on Earth. And it was in character for a country that was first to enshrine the 'rights of nature' in its constitution and is home to parts of the Amazon rain forest and the Galápagos Islands. But recent moves by President Daniel Noboa have alarmed environmentalists and Indigenous leaders who say the country's green reputation — and its protections for civil society — are unraveling. Noboa's administration has moved to scrap the country's independent Environment Ministry. It's pushing legislation ostensibly aimed at choking off illegal mining, but which critics fear will devastate nonprofits. The National Assembly — pressed by Noboa — approved a law last month allowing private and foreign entities to co‑manage conservation zones that critics say weakens protections and threatens Indigenous land rights. And Ecuador just signed a new oil deal with Peru that could accelerate drilling in sensitive areas. Natalia Greene, an environmental advocate with the Global Alliance for the Rights of Nature, said Noboa's decision to fold the Environment Ministry into the Ministry of Energy and Mines will speed up mining just as Ecuador is grappling with a surge in illegal gold mining tied to organized crime. She called it 'like putting the wolf in charge of the sheep.' 'The government's intention is very clear — to be a machine gun of extractivism,' she said. Noboa has defended the ministry moves and other changes as necessary to cut costs, reduce bureaucracy and address Ecuador's financial crisis. Officials argue that consolidating ministries will make decision‑making more efficient. Neither the Ministry of Energy and Mines nor Noboa's office responded to questions from The Associated Press. Indigenous rights at risk In July, Peru and Ecuador signed a deal for Ecuador's state oil company to sell crude directly to Petroperu and link its southern Amazon reserves to Peru's Norperuano pipeline, with drilling eyed for January 2026. Environmental groups say it could fast‑track drilling in sensitive areas while skirting safeguards and Indigenous consultation. Peru's Achuar, Wampis and Chapra nations denounced the plan in a public letter, saying it would gut long-standing protections that require communities be consulted before projects move forward on their lands. They warned the pipeline already averages 146 spills a year and that expanding it would be 'a grave threat to the Amazon and to Indigenous livelihoods.' 'They are going to violate all our rights to enter our territories and extract the resources they want,' said Nemo Guiquita, a Waorani leader with the Confederation of Indigenous Nationalities of the Ecuadorian Amazon. She said Indigenous communities fear a surge of oil and mining projects across ancestral lands, threatening both ecosystems and livelihoods. 'There will be a weakening of environmental protection,' she said. 'There will be a lot of deforestation, contamination of rivers and destruction of the ecosystem, which is vital for our existence as Indigenous peoples.' Ricardo Buitrón, president of the Quito‑based environmental group Accion Ecologica, noted that the changes come just months after Ecuadorians voted to keep oil in the ground in Yasuni, a decision the government has yet to fully enforce. 'We have gone back decades,' he said. 'A development model is being prioritized that does not care about protecting ecosystems, but about extracting natural resources to the maximum.' Fears that proposed law will harm non-governmental organizationsThe proposed law that has alarmed nonprofits is formally called the Organic Law for the Control of Irregular Capital Flows. But activists call it the 'anti-NGO' law, saying it could impose heavy burdens on nonprofits and force many to close. The measure applies to more than 71,000 organizations nationwide, giving them six months to re‑register with the government, submit detailed financial records and disclose foreign funding sources. The government says the law is needed to prevent money laundering and political destabilization. Critics warn it could instead silence dissent by placing organizations under sweeping controls. Noboa submitted the bill to the National Assembly on July 29, giving lawmakers until Aug. 28 to act before it automatically becomes law. 'This has been hard for us,' Guiquita said. 'Practically, Indigenous organizations live mostly from donations and NGOs. The government is weakening us in every space.' 'It represents a threat because they could dissolve us under any pretext,' Buitrón said. 'This reminds us of what we already lived through a decade ago, when they tried to shut down some organizations in the country.' Regional and global stakes Kevin Koenig of Amazon Watch, a U.S.-based nonprofit that advocates for Indigenous rights and environmental protection in the Amazon, said the country's changes are part of a wider rollback. 'We are seeing a sweeping package of regressive reforms that are rolling back environmental protections, Indigenous rights guarantees, and threatening basic civil liberties like the freedom of speech and assembly,' he said. 'What it suggests is the massive expansion of oil and mining, particularly in the Amazon region.' Koenig said the changes send troubling signals ahead of COP30, the United Nations climate summit set for Brazil later this year. Similar trends are unfolding in Peru and El Salvador, where governments have limited environmental oversight, and in Brazil, where licensing for Amazon projects has been weakened. Mobilizing resistance Civil society groups are mobilizing against the changes. Greene said organizations have reactivated the Asamblea Nacional Socioambiental, a national coalition of environmental and social movements, and are planning legal challenges, demonstrations and appeals to international bodies. Many fear Ecuador's role as a global green pioneer is unraveling. 'Our only crime here has been protecting our territory, protecting our traditions, protecting our way of life,' Guiquita said. ___ The Associated Press' climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP's standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at
Washington Post
17 minutes ago
- Washington Post
In Ecuador, environmentalists worry Noboa is unwinding nation's green reputation
BOGOTA, Colombia — When Ecuadorians voted two years ago to block oil drilling in Yasuni National Park , it was a triumph for environmentalists seeking to protect one of the most biodiverse places on Earth. And it was in character for a country that was first to enshrine the 'rights of nature' in its constitution and is home to parts of the Amazon rain forest and the Galápagos Islands. But recent moves by President Daniel Noboa have alarmed environmentalists and Indigenous leaders who say the country's green reputation — and its protections for civil society — are unraveling. Noboa's administration has moved to scrap the country's independent Environment Ministry. It's pushing legislation ostensibly aimed at choking off illegal mining, but which critics fear will devastate nonprofits. The National Assembly — pressed by Noboa — approved a law last month allowing private and foreign entities to co‑manage conservation zones that critics say weakens protections and threatens Indigenous land rights. And Ecuador just signed a new oil deal with Peru that could accelerate drilling in sensitive areas. Natalia Greene, an environmental advocate with the Global Alliance for the Rights of Nature, said Noboa's decision to fold the Environment Ministry into the Ministry of Energy and Mines will speed up mining just as Ecuador is grappling with a surge in illegal gold mining tied to organized crime . She called it 'like putting the wolf in charge of the sheep.' 'The government's intention is very clear — to be a machine gun of extractivism,' she said. Noboa has defended the ministry moves and other changes as necessary to cut costs, reduce bureaucracy and address Ecuador's financial crisis. Officials argue that consolidating ministries will make decision‑making more efficient. Neither the Ministry of Energy and Mines nor Noboa's office responded to questions from The Associated Press. In July, Peru and Ecuador signed a deal for Ecuador's state oil company to sell crude directly to Petroperu and link its southern Amazon reserves to Peru's Norperuano pipeline, with drilling eyed for January 2026. Environmental groups say it could fast‑track drilling in sensitive areas while skirting safeguards and Indigenous consultation. Peru's Achuar, Wampis and Chapra nations denounced the plan in a public letter, saying it would gut long-standing protections that require communities be consulted before projects move forward on their lands. They warned the pipeline already averages 146 spills a year and that expanding it would be 'a grave threat to the Amazon and to Indigenous livelihoods.' 'They are going to violate all our rights to enter our territories and extract the resources they want,' said Nemo Guiquita, a Waorani leader with the Confederation of Indigenous Nationalities of the Ecuadorian Amazon. She said Indigenous communities fear a surge of oil and mining projects across ancestral lands, threatening both ecosystems and livelihoods. 'There will be a weakening of environmental protection,' she said. 'There will be a lot of deforestation, contamination of rivers and destruction of the ecosystem, which is vital for our existence as Indigenous peoples.' Ricardo Buitrón, president of the Quito‑based environmental group Accion Ecologica, noted that the changes come just months after Ecuadorians voted to keep oil in the ground in Yasuni, a decision the government has yet to fully enforce. 'We have gone back decades,' he said. 'A development model is being prioritized that does not care about protecting ecosystems, but about extracting natural resources to the maximum.' The proposed law that has alarmed nonprofits is formally called the Organic Law for the Control of Irregular Capital Flows. But activists call it the 'anti-NGO' law, saying it could impose heavy burdens on nonprofits and force many to close. The measure applies to more than 71,000 organizations nationwide, giving them six months to re‑register with the government, submit detailed financial records and disclose foreign funding sources. The government says the law is needed to prevent money laundering and political destabilization. Critics warn it could instead silence dissent by placing organizations under sweeping controls. Noboa submitted the bill to the National Assembly on July 29, giving lawmakers until Aug. 28 to act before it automatically becomes law. 'This has been hard for us,' Guiquita said. 'Practically, Indigenous organizations live mostly from donations and NGOs. The government is weakening us in every space.' 'It represents a threat because they could dissolve us under any pretext,' Buitrón said. 'This reminds us of what we already lived through a decade ago, when they tried to shut down some organizations in the country.' Kevin Koenig of Amazon Watch, a U.S.-based nonprofit that advocates for Indigenous rights and environmental protection in the Amazon, said the country's changes are part of a wider rollback. 'We are seeing a sweeping package of regressive reforms that are rolling back environmental protections, Indigenous rights guarantees, and threatening basic civil liberties like the freedom of speech and assembly,' he said. 'What it suggests is the massive expansion of oil and mining, particularly in the Amazon region.' Koenig said the changes send troubling signals ahead of COP30, the United Nations climate summit set for Brazil later this year. Similar trends are unfolding in Peru and El Salvador, where governments have limited environmental oversight, and in Brazil, where licensing for Amazon projects has been weakened. Civil society groups are mobilizing against the changes. Greene said organizations have reactivated the Asamblea Nacional Socioambiental, a national coalition of environmental and social movements, and are planning legal challenges, demonstrations and appeals to international bodies. Many fear Ecuador's role as a global green pioneer is unraveling. 'Our only crime here has been protecting our territory, protecting our traditions, protecting our way of life,' Guiquita said. ___ The Associated Press' climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP's standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at .
