Biodiversity Application Guidance Single Disclaimer
Biodiversity Application Guidance Single Disclaimer
Biodiversity Application Guidance Single Disclaimer
Application
guidance for
biodiversity-related
disclosures
November 2021
cdsb.net/biodiversity
About the
Climate Disclosure
Standards Board
3 CDSB Framework | Application guidance for biodiversity-related disclosures
The Climate Disclosure Standards Board Recognising that information about natural,
(CDSB) is an international consortium of social and financial capital is equally essential
business and environmental NGOs. We are for an understanding of corporate
committed to advancing and aligning the performance, our work builds trust and
global mainstream corporate reporting model transparency needed to foster resilient capital
to equate natural and social capital with markets. Collectively, we aim to contribute to
financial capital. more sustainable economic, social and
environmental systems.
We do this by offering companies a
framework for reporting environmental and social For more information, visit cdsb.net, follow us
information with the same rigour as financial on Twitter, LinkedIn and YouTube and subscribe
information. In turn this helps them to provide to our newsletter. Visit the TCFD Knowledge
investors with decision-useful environmental Hub for free e-learning online courses.
information via the mainstream corporate report,
enhancing the efficient allocation of capital. We welcome your input and discussions.
Regulators have also benefited from CDSB’s If you would like to comment on this document,
compliance-ready materials. please contact us at [email protected].
Copyright © 2021 Climate Disclosure Standards Board (CDSB) and CDP Worldwide.
All rights reserved.
Dissemination of the contents of this report is encouraged. Please give full acknowledgement of the
source when reproducing extracts in other published work. All information in this report is provided
without warranty of any kind, express or implied. The authors disclaim any responsibility for the
information or conclusions in this report. The authors accept no liability for any loss arising from any
action taken or refrained from being taken as a result of information contained in this report.
4 CDSB Framework | Application guidance for biodiversity-related disclosures
CDSB would like to thank the members • Linda Lowson, Esq., Global ESG Financial
of the CDSB Technical Working Group Regulatory Institute
on Biodiversity-related disclosures for their
• Thomas Maddox, CDP
guidance and feedback on the content
of this publication. • Nadine McCormick, WBCSD
• Samantha McCraine, Science Based Targets
• Robert Adamczyk, European Bank for Network
Reconstruction and Development (EBRD)
• Emily McKenzie, Independent Dasgupta
• Jonas Aechter, WWF Review team
• Louise Amand, Capitals Coalition • Rebecca Nohl, PhD. SYSTEMIQ
• Alexandra Antsuga, European Bank for • Amy O’Dwyer, Davy
Reconstruction and Development (EBRD)
• Matt Orsagh , CFA Institute
• Simon Armstrong, Simon Armstrong and
• Ellen Osborne, Rio ESG
Associates
• Jo Paisley, Global Association of Risk
• Faye Bennett-Hart, Rio ESG Professionals
• Scarlett Benson, SYSTEMIQ/Food and Land • Rajat Panwar, PhD, Appalachian State
Use Coalition University
• Sam Bower, Balfour Beatty • Nicole Pasricha, Deep Science Ventures
• Lyndall Bull, PhD, Independent • Tim Polaszek, Capitals Coalition
• Maria Ana Campos, WBCSD • Juliette Pugliesi, Science Based Targets
• Rodrigo Cassola, UNEP-WCMC Network
Chapter 1
About this guidance
1. Structure of the Biodiversity Application Guidance 08
2. The CDSB Framework and background to the Biodiversity Application Guidance 09
2.1 CDSB Framework 09
2.2 Background to the Biodiversity Application Guidance 09
3. Mainstreaming biodiversity reporting 10
Chapter 2
Biodiversity and business
1. The importance of biodiversity to business and society 14
2. Business and biodiversity interactions 17
2.1 Impact and dependencies 17
2.2 Risks and opportunities 18
3. Key Characteristics 20
Chapter 3
Application guidance for biodiversity-related disclosures
1. Reporting expectations and important considerations 24
1.1 Applying materiality 24
1.2 Providing contextualised and business-specific
biodiversity-related information 25
1.3 Disclosing information in a changing landscape 26
1.4 Reporting boundaries and period 26
1.5 Using existing disclosures and resources, and ensuring connectivity 27
2. Roadmap and checklist for biodiversity-related disclosures 27
3. Biodiversity Application Guidance 30
REQ-01 Governance 30
1. Governance arrangements and rationale 30
2. Information flows and oversight 30
3. Stakeholder engagement and cooperation 31
4. Incentivisation 32
5. Specificity of bioversity governance 32
REQ-02 Management’s environmental policies, strategy and targets 33
1. Providing the context for biodiversity policy, strategy, and targets 33
2. Policies and strategies 39
3. Management responses 40
4. Targets and timelines 43
5. Resourcing 44
REQ-03 Risks and opportunities 48
1. Detailing risks and opportunities 52
2. Quantification of financial risks and opportunities 53
3. Connecting information 54
REQ-04 Sources of environmental impact 57
1. Indicators and metrics 57
2. Contextualising biodiversity-related metrics 64
3. Decision-useful information 64
4. Disaggregation and categorisation 64
5. Rationale of selection and methodological details 65
REQ-05 Performance and comparative analysis 68
REQ-06 Outlook 71
1. Scenario analysis 72
2. Methods, assumptions and uncertainties 72
3. Iteration and learning 73
4. Basis for conclusions 74
Chapter 4
Appendices
1. CDSB Framework – Guiding principles and reporting requirements 76
2. CDSB materiality approach 77
3. Mapping the CDSB requirements to TCFD and biodiversity reporting standards 79
4. Definitions 80
5. Key CDSB resources 82
6. Common examples of biodiversity impacts drivers and changes
to the state of biodiversity 83
7. Key initiatives 84
8. Tools, models and frameworks supporting the assessment
and quantification of biodiversity impacts 86
9. Databases that may be useful for identifying risk areas (REQ-03),
measuring impact (REQ-04) or monitoring performance (REQ-05) 88
10. Mapping the Pathway approach and DPSIR framework 88
Chapter 1
About this
guidance
8 CDSB Framework | Application guidance for biodiversity-related disclosures
The CDSB Framework application guidance for • Explained examples of good practice in
biodiversity-related disclosures (the Biodiversity mainstream biodiversity reporting.
Application Guidance) has been produced by
CDSB to assist companies in the disclosure of the In addition, the Biodiversity Application Guidance
material information about the risks and provides an overview of the significance of
opportunities that biodiversity presents to an biodiversity to business, explaining the importance
organisation’s strategy, financial performance and of biodiversity-related business risks and
condition within the mainstream report opportunities, and highlighting the key
(biodiversity-related financial disclosure).i It is characteristics of biodiversity and their importance
designed to supplement the CDSB Framework for to corporate reporting (see Business and
reporting environmental and climate change Biodiversity).
information to investors (CDSB Framework)1
(see Appendix 1). To ensure connectedness and coherence between
the Biodiversity Application Guidance and existing
reporting frameworks and standards, it is
1. Structure of the Biodiversity important to align to widely accepted definitions
Application Guidance for key concepts and terms. The following
definitions apply throughout the Guidance:
The Biodiversity Application Guidance
is designed around the first six reporting • Biodiversity: The diversity of life in all its forms,
requirements of the CDSB Framework (App. 1): including the diversity of species, genetic
variations within species, and of ecosystems.2
• REQ-01 Governance
• Species: A group of individuals that actually or
• REQ-02 Management’s environmental policies, potentially interbreed and produce fertile
strategies and targets offspring.3
• REQ-05 Performance and comparative analysis • Ecosystem services: The flows of benefits
ecosystems provide to people.5 See Box 1 for
• REQ-06 Outlook further discussion of the definition of ecosystem
services, including final ecosystem services.
The first six reporting requirements set out the key
content elements for reporting material • Natural Capital: The stock of renewable and
environmental information in the mainstream non-renewable natural resources (e.g. plants,
report. For each of the reporting requirements, the animals, air, water, soils, minerals) that combine to
Biodiversity Application Guidance provides: yield a flow of benefits to people (ecosystem
services).6
• A checklist including suggestions for effective
biodiversity-related disclosures; • Biodiversity impact: a change in the diversity of
ecosystems and/or species that may take place
• Detailed reporting suggestions and guidance in because of business activities. Changes to the
relation to biodiversity-related issues to state of ecosystems (e.g. extent and condition/
complement the CDSB reporting requirements; integrity) and species (e.g. habitat, population size)
can be used to signal changes in biodiversity.
• A selection of external resources to assist
companies in developing their mainstream • Biodiversity dependency: a reliance on or use of
biodiversity reporting (see Useful Resources under biodiversity, including biological resources (e.g.
each requirement and Appendices 5-9); and materials, liquids, genetic resources) from both
species and interactions with various ecosystem revised CDSB Framework currently under
processes and services (e.g. pollination, water consultation does not substantively amend the
filtration, crop pest/disease control or water reporting principles and requirements and nor is
flow regulation).7 it expected the final version will. This application
guidance should therefore remain wholly
• Value chain: An organisation’s direct operations, complementary with any potential amendments
upstream activities and downstream activities. to the CDSB Framework.
Direct operations cover activities over which the
organisation has direct control, upstream activities The CDSB Framework represented one of the
cover the activities of suppliers and downstream main resources from which the
activities are those linked to the purchase, use, recommendations of the Task Force on
re-use, recovery, recycling and final disposal of the Climate-related Financial Disclosure (TCFD),8
organisation’s products and services.ii published in 2017, were drawn. Therefore, the
CDSB Framework and its reporting principles
Appendix 4 contains the full list of definitions of and requirements (Appendix 1) are aligned with
the key terms used throughout the Biodiversity the TCFD recommendations (Appendix 3).
Application Guidance. TCFD has advanced the narrative on
organisational board-level financial and risk
The Biodiversity Application Guidance considers management considerations of environmental
terrestrial and aquatic biodiversity at the speciesiii impacts to the business, particularly those likely
and ecosystem levels, as well as the ecosystem to result from climate change.
services underpinned by biodiversity.
2.2 Background to the Biodiversity
Application Guidance
The Biodiversity Application Guidance is part of
2. The CDSB Framework and a series of CDSB Framework application
background to the Biodiversity guidance, which aims to extend the TCFD
recommendations and its core elements to
Application Guidance nature. It is designed to support the intended
users in applying the CDSB Framework to the
2.1 CDSB Framework natural capital elements of climate change,
The CDSB Framework is focused on reporting water, and biodiversity. Following the guidance
material environmental information (see on climate-related and water-related
Appendix 2) in mainstream reports to investors. disclosures, the Biodiversity Application
This builds directly on the International Guidance is the third CDSB Framework
Accounting Standard Board’s (IASB’s) supplementary application guidance document
Conceptual Framework, applying financial that is designed to enhance the quality of
reporting principles to environmental and disclosures for such significant matters.
climate change information. CDSB’s Framework Working in conjunction with the reporting
has evolved over time, with the first version, the principles and requirements of the CDSB
Climate Change Reporting Framework, released Framework, each application guidance assists
in 2010, focused on the risks and opportunities companies to develop clear, concise, consistent,
that climate change presents to an organisation’s and comparable (inter-period comparability of
strategy, financial performance, and condition. In the same entity and inter-entity comparability)
2013, CDSB’s Board agreed to expand the scope disclosures, enhancing the decision-usefulness
of the Framework beyond climate change and of their mainstream reporting on sustainability-
Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions to encompass related financial matters to investors. Given the
environmental information and natural capital, interconnected nature of environmental topics,
with this revision published in 2015. At the time the application guidance documents are
of writing, CDSB is working to further expand complementary with some overlapping sub-
the scope of the Framework to cover both topics (Figure 1).
environmental and social information. The
The objective of the Biodiversity Application (Appendix 2) needed for effective capital
Guidance is to support organisations in preparing allocation, the Biodiversity Application Guidance
high-quality disclosures that enable users of aims to assist in driving the transition to a
mainstream reports to assess material sustainable and resilient economy. The intended
biodiversity-related financial information. users are organisations, both single companies
By ensuring that investors are receiving the and corporate groups, and those responsible for
material biodiversity-related information financial, governance and sustainability reporting.
CDSB
Framework
Climate-water nexus
(e.g. physical risks - water scarcity and sea level rise)
Figure 1. The relationship of the CDSB Framework for reporting environmental and climate change information, the Biodiversity Application
Guidance and other guidance in the series. The dashed lines between Application Guidance documents illustrate their interconnected nature
and the presence of overlapping topics.
on nature and the goods and services it compared to 100% for GHG emissions, and
provides and over 2.1 billion jobs relying on 90% for water. Similar analyses have echoed
effective management and sustainability of these findings,27, 28 for example, KPMG’s 2020
ecosystems.12, 13 For example, the documented survey of sustainability reporting found that
decline in insect populations puts at risk the less than one quarter of “at-risk” companies
USD 235 – 577 billion of crop production that is worldwide report risks from the loss of
dependent on pollination;14 and deforestation biodiversity.29
and land degradation cost as much as USD 6.3
trillion a year through their impact on forest and Biodiversity-related corporate reporting is a
agricultural productivity.15 As the Dasgupta fast-moving, developing area, and there is
Review on the Economics of Biodiversity makes ongoing work to create harmonisation,
clear, all human activity ultimately depends on particularly related to measurement and
ecosystems; our economies are embedded in disclosure. For example, the Science Based
nature, not external to it.16 Targets Network (SBTN) has issued initial
guidance for nature prior to publishing
The finance sector is indirectly exposed to integrated science based targets for all aspects
business biodiversity-related risks through of nature, including biodiversity (expected in
loans, investments, and underwriting 2022), the Align project aims to support
activities,17, 18 yet it also plays a key and growing businesses and other stakeholders in
role in achieving biodiversity targets through developing a standardised approach to
catalysing behaviour changes and influencing biodiversity measurement and the Transparent
economic pathways, business models and project is developing a standardised natural
practices.19 Reacting to this, investors are capital accounting and valuation methodology.
increasingly engaging with investees on The Taskforce on Nature-related Financial
biodiversity-related risks.20, 21 For example, Disclosures (TNFD) seeks to provide specific
many banks have enhanced due diligence sector agnostic recommendations for
processes when financing assets located in mainstream reports like the TCFD
protected or sensitive areas, financial recommendations do for climate-related
institutions are exploring how to measure the financial risks and opportunities but is not due
biodiversity impact of their portfolios22, 23, 24, 25 to be published until 2023. The International
and rating agencies increasingly consider Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS)
environmental concerns and companies’ risk Foundation, in November 2021, announced the
management capabilities. As a result, corporate formation of a new International Sustainability
biodiversity reporting is necessary to monitor Standards Board (ISSB) to develop a
performance and demonstrate ecological comprehensive global baseline of high-quality
credentials to investors. disclosure standards, on climate and other
sustainability issues, to meet investors’
It has been demonstrated that disclosure on information needs, building on the work of
biodiversity is currently far less prevalent than existing investor-focused reporting initiatives. In
other environmental topics, most notably light of this announcement we expect increased
climate. CDSB’s review of 50 large European focus by the IFRS Foundation and its
companies’ reporting in 2020 under the constituent boards on driving complete,
European Union (EU) Non-Financial Reporting consistent and comprehensive disclosure of
Directive (NFRD)26 found that 46% of material sustainability-related information
companies provided some information on across the mainstream report, including the
biodiversity in their reports, as compared to financial statements.
100% of companies for climate change. Where
disclosures were provided, they often lacked Positive steps are being made by businesses,
the relative specificity and maturity of climate- with leading organisations increasingly
related disclosure, containing generic committing to integrating biodiversity into their
management approaches and high-level decision-making and operations,30 integrating
commitments. Additionally, only 10% of disclosures on significant biodiversity issues into
companies reported metrics on biodiversity, their reportingv and convening to demonstrate
and share ambition.vi However, more work is element and increasing standardised
needed to ensure that reporting on material assessment and reporting.31
information about biodiversity-related issues in
mainstream reports is of sufficient quality and This Guidance aims to fill the current information
detail to support decision-making by investors gap and assist in preparing companies for new
and other stakeholders, as the TCFD regulations and investor demands. By illustrating
recommendations illustrate for climate. how the CDSB Framework can be applied to
Additionally, given ongoing policy, stakeholder biodiversity-related reporting in mainstream
and industry initiatives on the interactions reports through the integration of elements from
between business and natural capital and the existing biodiversity reporting standards and
required related corporate disclosure,vii there is frameworks (Appendix 3) and alignment with the
clear momentum for an increase in policy TCFD recommendations, it is envisioned that this
response in the shape of mandatory corporate guidance will contribute to the work of the IFRS
disclosure, including biodiversity as a core Foundation via the establishment of the ISSB.
vi For example, the more than 900 businesses of the Business for Nature
initiative (with combined revenue of $4.3 trillion) are urging governments
to adopt policies on how to reverse nature loss in this decade. See: https://
www.businessfornature.org/advocate
vii For example: International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB) of
the IFRS Foundation, EU Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive and
EU sustainability reporting standards, TNFD, and Science-Based Target
Network.
Chapter 2
Biodiversity
and business
14 CDSB Framework | Application guidance for biodiversity-related disclosures
FLOWS
STOCKS
Ecosystem and
Natural Capital
abiotic services
VALUE
Benefits to
business & society
Figure 2. Relationship between biodiversity and natural capital stocks, flows, and values. Adapted from Capitals Coalition and Cambridge
Conservation Initiative. 2020. Integrating biodiversity in natural capital assessments. Available from: https://capitalscoalition.org/wp-content/
uploads/2020/10/Biodiversity-Guidance_COMBINED_single-page.pdf
15 CDSB Framework | Application guidance for biodiversity-related disclosures
Despite the critical role played by biodiversity, (measured in biomass) declining by 82%
drivers from human activities (including from compared to historical records,58 being
businesses) are causing an unprecedented and described by scientists as a “biological
accelerating loss on a global scale.56 This annihilation” amounting to the sixth mass
includes the rate of species extinction of plants, extinction.59 In addition, the world’s ecosystems
mammals, fish, and others being approximately have declined in size and condition by 47%
1,000 times higher than background extinction compared to estimated baselines, for example,
rates57 and the total numbers of wild mammals over 85% of wetland habitats had been lost by
the year 2000 compared to 1700.60, 61 change) and biodiversity loss has been ranked
Reflecting this, the planetary boundary of as the second most impactful and third most
“biosphere integrity” is deemed to have been likely risk for the next decade.62, 63 Box 2
breached (meaning there is a high risk of contains an overview of the drivers of
deleterious or catastrophic environmental biodiversity loss.
Figure 3. Drivers of biodiversity loss (see Box 2). Adapted from SBTN Initial Guidance and IPBES Global assessment report on biodiversity
and ecosystem services of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. Available from: https://
sciencebasedtargetsnetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/SBTN-initial-guidance-for-business.pdf and https://ipbes.net/global-
assessment
17 CDSB Framework | Application guidance for biodiversity-related disclosures
(Box 2 continued)
Organisations contribute to these drivers through their direct operations as well as upstream and
downstream value chain activities, with impacts including (1) decline in ecosystem extent and
condition, (2) species extinction risk, (3) changes to ecological communities (e.g. loss of naturally
abundant species), (4) changes to biomass and species abundance and (5) deterioration of the
elements of nature for indigenous peoples and communities. Businesses can also positively
contribute to the mitigation of nature/biodiversity loss and degradation, and to the conservation
and restoration of natural ecosystems and biodiversity through sustainable business practices and
directing funds to/participating in nature-positive projects.
References:
• IPBES (2019). Global assessment report on biodiversity and ecosystem services of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy
Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. Available from: https://ipbes.net/global-assessment
• Science-based targets for nature (2020). Initial Guidance for Business. Available from: https://sciencebasedtargetsnetwork.
org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/SBTN-initial-guidance-for-business.pdf
• IUCN French Committee (2014). Corporate biodiversity reporting and indicators. Situation analysis and recommendations.
Paris, France. ONCFS, 2011. Les vertébrés terrestres introduits en outre-mer et leurs impacts: Guide illustré des principales
espèces envahissantes. Available from: https://www.iucn.org/content/corporate-biodiversity-reporting-and-indicators-
situation-analysis-recommendations
Loss of biodiversity creates significant risks Yet, businesses can play a pivotal role in
for the private sector (see Risks and mitigating biodiversity-related risks by directing
opportunities)65, 66 and businesses are actions through their operations and/or supply
increasingly experiencing significant financial chains and fostering improvement through their
impacts associated with those risks.67, 68 corporate biodiversity strategies and policies.
ix Referred to within the context of ecosystems, species and the final x Commodities such as timber, palm oil, cattle products, soy, cocoa,
ecosystem services underpinned by biodiversity. coffee, rubber are among the major causes of the loss of natural
ecosystems like forests.
xi Polluting emissions (e.g. use of pesticides or fertilisers) and waste cause
degradation of natural ecosystems and consequently affect biodiversity.
18 CDSB Framework | Application guidance for biodiversity-related disclosures
particular species of fish (dependency), yet if the Additionally, organisations may have financial
organisation fishes at unsustainable fishing rates, implications linked to the transition to a
the population of the species may reduce biodiversity-positive economy including:
(biodiversity impact) causing loss of operational increased regulation regarding biodiversity
productivity and related income and/or increased protection and conservation (regulatory), shifts
costs. Business biodiversity dependencies and in market preferences (market), shifts in
impacts vary according to sector, value chain and stakeholders’ perceptions of an organisation’s
geographic location, for example, sectors that impact on biodiversity and natural ecosystems
rely heavily on natural resources, such as (reputational), and the impact of new
agriculture, forestry and fishing sectors will have technologies (technological). See Table 3 for
significant direct impacts whereas tertiary sectors examples of financial risks.
are more likely to have indirect interactions
through their supply chains.69 Biodiversity-related opportunities and related
financial benefits are often linked to, for example,
Both dependencies and impacts generate improved efficiency, development of new
economic costs and benefits for businesses products and services, access to new funding
and society, which consequently result in streams, operational cost-savings through
business risks and opportunities that can nature-based solutions and the engagement of
affect the present and/or future financial and collaboration with stakeholders.
position and financial performance of the
organisation (see Figure 4). Biodiversity-related risks and opportunities can
be caused by both (1) the organisation’s
specific business sector and activities,
Financial implications include clean-up and/or including the activities within the value chain
remediation costs, sanctions, development and/or (2) or by the geographic context70 in
of plans to mitigate or remediate negative which its activities are located, for example,
ecological impacts, loss of revenue resulting risks related to biodiversity/ecosystem
from reputational damage associated with poor mismanagement by other stakeholders,
biodiversity management, or agricultural supply including organisations, and to socio-economic
chain disruption due to declines in populations conditions in the areas of operations, such as
of species that the organisation depends on lack of biodiversity governance or political
(e.g. pollinators). instability. They are connected to other
changes to natural capital (sharing common
2.2 Risks and opportunities drivers) (see Key Characteristics). For example,
Organisations can experience different types of changes to biodiversity, such as changes in
biodiversity-related financial risks and species seasonal patterns, distribution and
opportunities, such as: physical (biological, abundance, and ecosystem distribution,
ecological, chemical etc.), reputational, policy and composition and function71 can be associated
legal (or regulatory), technological, and market.xii with the prolonged droughts, desertification,
coastal erosion, and sea level rise72 associated
Physical risks are linked to changes to with climate change.73 Additionally, biodiversity
biodiversity, ecosystems and its related plays a key role in the mitigation of and
functioning, including risks posed to businesses adaptation to climate change since it ensures
from biodiversity impacts. Physical risks the resilience of major carbon sinks such as
therefore encapsulate financial implications oceans and forests. Considering such
related to ecosystem and biodiversity loss and aggregated risks, including interlinkages
degradation, and the related consequences, between biodiversity and socio-economic risks,
such as reduction in soil fertility, reduction in is critical to drive business continuity and
pollination for crop production, reduced resilience to future scenarios.
availability of fish stocks, as well as the increased
likelihood and severity of extreme weather Risks and opportunities may be directly related
events e.g. due to erosion of coastal ecosystems to business operations or be indirectly
(see REQ-03 for additional details and examples generated through feedback cycles resulting
of types of biodiversity-related physical, from the costs/benefits experienced by
biological, chemical and other related risks). society.74, 75 Therefore, achieving a complete
xii These risk categories are aligned to the TCFD risk categories.
19 CDSB Framework | Application guidance for biodiversity-related disclosures
s
d arie
o un
B
Function
(e.g. slow passage of water or biomass)
External Factors
(e.g. natural disasters,
Final Ecosystem Service pollutants emitted by
(e.g. flood protection or provision of fish stocks) other stakeholders)
impacts
on nature
Dependencies Impacts
i n es s A c tiviti e s
Risks Opportunities
Physical • Acute
Risks* • Chronic
• Resource Efficiency
• Products / services
Transition
• Policy and Legal • Markets
Risks
• Technology • Resilience
Bus
Strategic Planning
Risk Management
Financial Impact
Cash Flow
Income Statement Balance Sheet
Statement
Figure 4. Business impacts and dependencies on biodiversity and final ecosystem services are sources of risks and opportunities for the organisation’s
future financial position and financial performance (adapted from Recommendations of the TCFD and the Dasgupta review). *Physical risks (and
opportunities) within this document includes not only physical risks (and opportunities) but also biological, ecological, chemical and other risks and
opportunities (see REQ-03 for additional details and examples).
20 CDSB Framework | Application guidance for biodiversity-related disclosures
understanding of the short- and long-term 2. Time dimension: Biodiversity impacts and
financial risks and opportunities associated with drivers of loss resulting from business activities
biodiversity requires considering, not only how vary both within and across years (e.g.
nature may (positively or negatively) impact the seasonality of natural processes vs. seasonality of
organisation’s immediate financial performance agricultural processes, species migrations, etc.).
(“outside in”), but also current and future Future drivers and impacts can be hard to predict
significant impacts to society resulting from and can experience time-lags. For example, there
business activities (“inside out”).76, 77 may be a lag between the loss of biodiversity
For example, lowered availability of final resulting from business activities and the
ecosystem services resulting from business consequent loss of final ecosystem services.
activities (e.g. water usage, deforestation) Equally, management efforts may take time to
may have implications for local stakeholders achieve outcomes. It is therefore important to
(e.g. water/timber shortages), which may lead monitor changes in the state of biodiversity over
to business risks (e.g. reputational costs, loss time. Therefore, consideration is required when
of social licence to operate), and ultimately applying accounting timeframes to these
affect the organisation’s business model and biodiversity concepts, for example, when setting
ability to execute its strategy. targets, determining appropriate measurement
intervals for key performance indicators (KPIs)
and determining appropriate intervals for
3. Key Characteristics comparative analysis.
The interactions between biodiversity and 3. Multi-faceted qualities: Biodiversity has varied
business are characterised by key characteristics dimensions, geographical scales and impact
(Figure 5) that are important for organisations to groups which need to be considered. Varied
consider during the process of preparing dimensions include genetic diversity within
biodiversity-related disclosures. species, diversity between species and the
diversity of ecosystems. The Dasgupta Review
1. Spatial dimension: Biodiversity dependencies, distinguishes three features of diversity that are
impacts, risks and opportunities are location- significant: richness (the number of unique life
specific. The biodiversity-related geographic forms); the flatness of the distribution of life forms
context in a given location concerns not only the (evenness); and dissimilarities in the life forms
biodiversity status of the area, in terms of existing (heterogeneity).80 Geographical scales include
ecosystems and species, protected area status biodiversity within a site, between sites and
and biodiversity value, but also in terms of among sites in a landscape. Varied impact groups
(1) infrastructures; (2) social conditions, including include, but are not limited to, risk of species
community traditions and livelihoods; extinction, loss of ecological integrity, ecosystem
(3) economic conditions, such as nature-related loss and fragmentation, loss of genetic diversity,
productivity, employment, and income; changes in migration timing and routes, and
(4) governance and regulation; (5) geopolitical ecosystem degradation.
dimensions (e.g. in transboundary locations); and
(6) ongoing cooperation initiatives. For example, 4. Interconnectivity: Biodiversity loss is highly
the risks associated with overfishing in an area are interconnected with other natural capital
specific to the level of local employment and changes and socio-economic issues. Natural
income that is dependent on that ecosystem, as capital changes such as land degradation, water
well the community traditions, fishing degradation and climate change share common
infrastructure and techniques, regulations and drivers with biodiversity loss, including changes in
cooperation initiatives (e.g. among fishing land-use (e.g. deforestation and urbanisation),
companies) that are in place. freshwater-use and sea-use, resource
consumption and pollution. Biodiversity loss is
Areas impacted by business activities may be inherently connected to the climate change crisis,
large and extend beyond the immediate vicinity which is contributing to rapid, broad-scale
of activities due to, for example, ecological ecosystem system changes and exacerbating
linkages and migratory or wide-ranging species. drivers of biodiversity loss.81 However, biodiverse
Areas impacted also differ depending on the ecosystems can also contribute to being a
driver of biodiversity loss (e.g. GHG emissions potential solution to climate change (e.g.
have a global effect whilst exploitation of ecosystems provide climate adaptation services
organisms may be localised).78, 79 such as protection from storm damage).82
21 CDSB Framework | Application guidance for biodiversity-related disclosures
SPATIAL DIMENSION
location specificity, e.g. proximity to areas with high biodiversity value
TIME DIMENSION
impacts and dependencies vary with natural dynamics within and across years
MULTI-FACETED QUALITIES
varied dimensions, geographic scales and impact groups
INTERCONNECTIVITY
e.g. link with climate change, water and land degradation
METHODOLOGIES
need for different methods to cover multi-faceted qualities, methodological development
and data accessibility/accuracy
Figure 5. The biodiversity key characteristics to be considered when preparing information for the mainstream report
Biodiversity is also integral to other global issues management within value chains.86, 87, 88
such as societal well-being and economic welfare. This increases the importance of including
Consequently, both the Intergovernmental Panel the value chain in biodiversity assessments
on Climate Change (IPCC) and IPBES promote and strategies.89, 90
the need for holistic multi-outcome, multi-action
and multi-actor environmental solutions,83 Stakeholders may have specific dependencies
as opposed to solutions which maximise on biodiversity, including local and indigenous
the outcome for a single issue at the expense communities, local farmers/fishers, regulators,
of others. Developing effective and resilient financial institutions, and civil societies/experts.91
biodiversity strategies therefore requires As biodiversity is “shared” with local stakeholders
companies to consider many dynamic and in a given area, with actions of one party having
interconnecting systems.xiii impacts for other local parties, single actions at
the operational level (e.g. to increase biodiversity
The interconnected nature of biodiversity loss by restoring part of a wetland/forest or reduce
with other natural capital changes creates risks negative impacts by reducing polluting
around reporting accuracy and double counting. emissions) do not improve the status of
For example, depending on how benefits are biodiversity if others within the same
measured, management activities such as the geographical location are degrading the
purchase of carbon offsets to mitigate emissions ecosystems, and/or regulators are not
may also have collateral effects on biodiversity implementing biodiversity plans or regulating
through activities such as reforestation or land biodiversity impacts. Therefore, engagement with
restoration.84, 85 stakeholders, both at the operational and value
chain level (particularly in areas with high
5. Engagement and collaboration: Given the biodiversity value), and participation in
globalised nature of value chains, trade and collaborative actions is fundamental for effective
economic flows, biodiversity dependencies and biodiversity management.
impacts are often most significant outside the
organisation’s direct operations, resulting from 6. Methodologies: Due to the complexity of
upstream activities (e.g. land-use conversion for biodiversity impacts and dependencies,
agricultural commodities) or downstream multiple measurement techniques may be
activities (e.g. water pollution from use of personal required to fully capture the various possible
care and household goods, or management of changes. Whilst many biodiversity measurement
plastic waste from packaging). As a result, methodologies exist, some of which are widely
institutional investors are increasingly asking used (e.g. surface area metrics adjusted by
detailed questions about biodiversity ecosystem condition/integrity), this is a
xiii The IPCC and IPBES both support holistic, multi-outcome and multi-
action solutions, for example, balancing climate and nature solutions that
also consider spatial and social contexts.
22 CDSB Framework | Application guidance for biodiversity-related disclosures
developing and rapidly expanding area. guidance can be referred toxvi and work is
Approaches to measuring some areas may ongoing to create market harmonisation in this
currently not be fully developed or standardised, area, including through initiatives such as the
for example, assessing dependencies is currently Align project,95 Transparent project96 and TNFD.97
particularly challenging due to the indirect The monetary valuation of biodiversity and final
nature of benefits generated by biodiversity.xiv In ecosystem services may also be useful in this
addition, whilst many measurement regard, using monetary units as common units
methodologies exist, there is currently only one that can be compared/benchmarked (albeit,
accounting approach available.92 dependent on consistent valuation techniques
being applied, the same economic/monetary
Selecting methodologies and metrics requires conversion figures being used and recognising
consideration of data accessibility, availability, that the full value of biodiversity may be hidden
and accuracy. Traditional biodiversity metrics or missing as a result of valuation challenges,98
quantifying information, e.g. via ‘proxy see Box 7 for additional details on valuation).
approaches’ using databases or estimates from
models to assess the effect on biodiversity, can An additional element related to biodiversity
be helpful to calculate biodiversity impacts and measurement that needs to be considered is
performance based on drivers of biodiversity ecological equivalency (i.e. the notion of equity,
loss. However, they are not always fit for purpose like-for-like) which is integral to measuring
and may not be as accurate as direct impact, biodiversity footprint assessments,
measurement of the state of biodiversity at a biodiversity accounting, forming offsetting
business’s operating locations. Yet, access to strategies and biodiversity management
primary data may be constrained due to being activities. Due to variability in biogeography
costly and time consuming to collect. Accessing and types/intensities of activities, biodiversity
data within the value chain may also be patterns vary significantly between different
challenging due to the limited control of many species/ecosystems and locations. Therefore,
companies over their supply chains. aggregation (during the process of impact
assessments) should consist of the same types
The developing and complex nature of of ecosystems (e.g. boreal forests, mangroves)
biodiversity measurement and accounting or species (e.g. koala, cayote) as far as possible
creates challenges for benchmarking and and care should be taken to achieve ecological
comparing performance both within and across equivalency as far as possible for the purposes
organisations.xv, 93, 94 However, existing tools and of biodiversity offsetting.xvii, xviii
xiv Other examples include considering certain sector specificities, xvi For example, the Dasgupta review, BSI standard, WCMC ENCORE
assessing value-chain interactions, measuring impacts to genetic tool and the development of Science-Based Targets for Nature
resources, mapping marine biodiversity (and human impacts on it), xvii For further details on ecological equivalency, please refer to the
understanding positive impacts as well as negative and spatial mapping. Biological Diversity Protocol, the BBOP Guidance Notes to the Standard
xv The accounting framework provided by the Biological Diversity on Biodiversity Offsets, DEFRA Biodiversity metrics 3.0 – User Guide.
protocol aimed to overcome this by enabling benchmarking and xviii Biodiversity offsetting should follow mitigation hierarchy principles.
performance comparison. See: Endangered Wildlife Trust (2020). The See REQ-02 for further details on mitigation hierarchy.
Biological Diversity Protocol (BD Protocol). Available from: https://www.
nbbnbdp.org/uploads/1/3/1/4/131498886/biological_diversity_protocol__
bd_protocol_.pdf
Chapter 3
Application
guidance for
biodiversity-
related disclosures
24 CDSB Framework | Application guidance for biodiversity-related disclosures
This chapter represents the core element of the biodiversity, and the location-specificity
Biodiversity Application Guidance. Firstly, it sets and multifaceted qualities of biodiversity.
out reporting expectations and important Materiality assessments should:
considerations for organisations whilst selecting
1. Support the understanding of biodiversity-
and preparing biodiversity-related information
related risks and opportunities;
to be included in the mainstream report.
This includes the application of materiality 2. Support the effective selection and
to the aspects within the reporting requirements. prioritisation of biodiversity-related information;
Secondly, it provides a checklist and roadmap
3. Be scientifically robust;
for organisations to support the process
of integrating biodiversity-related information 4. Aim to keep biodiversity disclosures concise,
in mainstream reports. Thirdly, following CDSB connected and decision-useful; and
reporting requirements from one to six, it 5. Ensure that the results effectively support the
provides guidance, resources and examples of management of biodiversity-related financial
practices from mainstream reports. risks and opportunities that have implications
for the business (i.e. operations, value chain,
business model and financial results).
1. Reporting expectations and
important considerations When approaching the materiality assessment, an
organisation should focus on biodiversity-related
The following section illustrates the application information that can affect the business model and
of the first six reporting requirements of the execution of its strategy as a result of the risks and
CDSB Framework to biodiversity-related opportunities identified (considering different
disclosures. A number of clarifications on the categories of risks, see Table 3), as well as how the
reporting expectations and related outcomes, organisation’s business model and strategy may
and considerations regarding the guiding contribute to the risks and opportunities identified.
principles and remaining reporting requirements A prerequisite step is an assessment of the
of the CDSB Framework are provided below. organisation’s biodiversity dependencies and
impacts (see Assessing biodiversity dependencies
1.1 Applying materiality and impacts in REQ-02). This assessment allows for
Biodiversity information should be disclosed consequent exploration of biodiversity-related risks
when deemed material by the organisation (e.g. exposure or liability due to its negative impacts)
(see Principle 1 in the CDSB Framework and and opportunities (e.g. access to biodiversity-
Appendix 2 for additional details). This means related funds and loans resulting from potential
that, in practice, only the reporting practices contributions to local, national or international
within the Biodiversity Application Guidance biodiversity targets).
that relate to information deemed to be
material by the organisation should be The materiality assessment should focus on the
considered for inclusion in the mainstream areas that are most relevant to the organisation
report. When preparing such information, (e.g. to business continuity). For example, when
report preparers should consider also assessing ecosystems, an organisation should
(1) the organisation’s impacts on society and consider the loss of functionality to business
the environment that affect the company’s operations if an ecosystem were to become lost/
cash flow over the short-, medium- and long- degraded and/or its final ecosystem service
term (also referred to as circularity), and disrupted. When assessing species,
(2) the dynamic nature of materiality for the focus should be on species that (1) have
sustainability information, i.e. information that a the potential to disrupt business operations,
company assesses to be material can rapidly (2) are legally protected under laws and
change in response to drivers such as conventions (e.g. listed by the Convention on
stakeholder pressure, consumer and investor International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild
expectations, regulation, evolution of science Fauna and Flora) therefore being potential
and understanding (see Appendix 2 for sources of fines, and (3) play a significant cultural
additional details).99 or economic role for stakeholders and can cause
reputational risks (e.g. hunting, harvesting,
Assessing the materiality of biodiversity to a pollinating services, educational and recreational
specific organisation can be difficult due to the services). Considering societal value can shed light
complex links between business and on risks linked to potential greater regulation,
25 CDSB Framework | Application guidance for biodiversity-related disclosures
xix For example, the Technical Annexes of the SBTN Initial Guidance xx Aligned with: UNEP-WCMC, Conservational International and Fauna & Flora
(available at: https://sciencebasedtargetsnetwork.org/resources/) provide International (2020). Biodiversity Indicators for Site- based Impacts. Cambridge,
guiding questions for the materiality assessment considering sector, UK. Available from: https://www.unep-wcmc.org/system/comfy/cms/files/
value chain and company’s specificities and the SBTN’s sector-specific files/000/001/902/original/202102_Biodiversity_Indicators_Report_06.pdf
materiality tool and guidance will be publicly available by March 2022.
26 CDSB Framework | Application guidance for biodiversity-related disclosures
xxi For additional information see CDSB (2014). Proposals for boundary xxii Referring to the SBTN’s value chain ‘spheres of influence’ may be
setting in mainstream reports. Available from: https://www.cdsb.net/sites/ helpful during the adoption of a value chain approach.
cdsbnet/files/proposals_for_mainstream_report_boundary_setting.pdf xxiii See The Biological Diversity Protocol for details on boundaries setting
(sections 2.1 and 2.2, pgs. 17-22) and on contractual arrangements (pg. 21)
xxiv In the Initial Guidance for Business, the SBTN suggests that target
progress should be monitored regularly, with the frequency appropriate
for each target determined in part by the indicator. For instance, quarterly
may be appropriate for some (e.g. water use or pollution discharge), annual
for others (e.g. ecosystem intactness), and every 3-5 years for others (e.g.
species abundance).
27 CDSB Framework | Application guidance for biodiversity-related disclosures
• Inform and
Materiality* assessment preparation Gather the data
receive sign-
and determine
off from the 1. Identify and assess biodiversity dependencies and impacts across business materiality*
Board and activities, the value chain, and their respective locations (REQ-02, 04).
Management
(REQ-01) 2. Assess links with overall business, including management, strategy and processes
(e.g. risks assessment, value creation opportunities, monitoring systems) (REQ-02).
• Adopt a lo-
cation-specific 3. Assess biodiversity-related current and future risks and opportunities and their
approach and business implications over time (REQ-03, 06).
engage with 4. Consider (REQ-03, Table 3):
stakeholders. • different categories of risks and opportunities;
• Adopt a • risks from operations, value chain & geographical context.
value-chain
approach,
considering
direct op- Is biodiversity material*?
erations, and
upstream and
downstream NO
activities YES
Explain why Explain which elements are/are not material, and why this is the case
Given the
dynamic
nature of
materiality, 5. Prioritise areas of strategic relevance, including identifying priority species,
materiality ecosystems, geographic areas and products/services (REQ-02). Use Table 6
assessment (Appendix 3) in
should be 6. Assess company’s biodiversity-related capacity (expertise, stakeholder engagement the Biodiversity
repeated capacity, monitoring systems) (REQ-01, REQ-03) Guidance to map
regularly your data to CDSB
7. Detail resource needs and allocation (financial and personnel) (REQ-01).
Requirements
8. Define biodiversity policies, goals, contextual targets and metrics that address the
main risks and opportunities and contribute to business goals (REQ-02).
9. Determine management responses using the mitigation hierarchy (REQ-02)
*Information 10. Monitor performance over time (REQ-04, 05) and consider likely future effects of
is material if it biodiversity risks and opportunities (REQ-06)
impacts on the
organisation’s
financial
condition and
operational Follow the CDSB Framework, Biodiversity Application Guidance and the Checklist for biodiversity-
results, and related financial disclosures to prepare the mainstream report and then check if it:
its ability to Explains the rationale behind biodiversity-related information
execute its Provides business-specific information and links with business strategy
strategy – Ensures the connectivity of information throughout the report
CDSB Provides a clear roadmap with actionable steps and measurable goals
Framework Explains how external stakeholders have been engaged and how a value-chain approach has been adopted
Check other CDSB requirements and Define clear steps to address the gaps
principles (REQ-07 to REQ-12, e.g. and to enhance disclosure including
conformance, assurance) measurable objectives and timeline
Figure 6. Roadmap to effective biodiversity-related financial disclosures. This flowchart illustrates a hypothetical roadmap for biodiversity-related financial disclosures.
The path depends on the organisation-specific maturity in and type of conducted biodiversity reporting (i.e. Global Reporting Initiative (GRI), CDP Questionnaire) and there
can be additional intermediate paths besides the two shown in the figure. Materiality assessment can occur at different stages throughout the process (this figure is indicative).
The Biodiversity Application Guidance provides additional support (e.g. suggestions and resources) for each step and references to the specific sections of the Guidance
are included in the flow chart.
29 CDSB Framework | Application guidance for biodiversity-related disclosures
The below checklist (referenced in Figure 6) the information is material for the organisation.
summarises the suggestions on how to include Companies that are still in the early stages of
material biodiversity-related information in their biodiversity reporting could take a
mainstream reports following the CDSB phased approach, reporting on elements that
requirements. The elements of the checklist are they have information for currently and setting
not to be addressed as mandatory out a plan to address additional elements in
requirements, but as desired disclosures that future periods (in line with Disclosing
should be included in the mainstream report if information in a changing landscape).
Additionally, information on how and how often decisions/capital allocations (e.g. acquisitions,
the employees (and contractors) with direct divestiture, major capital expenditures,
responsibility for biodiversity topics (e.g. annual budgets)?
employees responsible for emissions and
effluents treatment plants or land management) • Do biodiversity information systems exist, and
are consulted about the biodiversity strategy and if so, which are the organisational and value
management of the organisation would provide chain boundaries covered by biodiversity-
further helpful context on information flows. related information systems?
xxvii E.g. the Free prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) is a specific right
pertaining to indigenous peoples, recognised in the United Nations Declaration
on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), that allows them to give or
withhold consent to a project that may affect them or their territories.
32 CDSB Framework | Application guidance for biodiversity-related disclosures
is particularly important. Neglecting the value around the importance of it to business, this
chain may fail to identify and therefore manage specificity is important. When significant,
major biodiversity risks or opportunities103 companies should therefore explicitly
while also leading to a misinterpretation summarise their biodiversity-related
of the company’s actual biodiversity exposure governance as discussed in previous
or contribution to society (e.g. biodiversity paragraphs but more importantly, explain
regulations and safeguards can affect the value how it is integrated into a more connected
chain and may result in rising costs or decreasing environmental strategy, as well as in the wider
sales, even if the organisation itself is not directly business strategy.
subject to such regulations; or impacts on the
agricultural production of raw materials caused Useful Resources105
by losses of pollination services due to declining
bee populations104). 1. Step 02 of the Natural Capital Protocol
and related Biodiversity Guidance includes
Relevant information on the governance of the suggestions on methods, resources, and
value chain includes a description of existing factors to consider when mapping the
traceability system(s) to track and monitor the organisation’s stakeholders.
origin of raw materials/inputs to operations and 2. The International Petroleum Industry
level of such systems (e.g. only direct suppliers Environmental Conservation Association
or beyond), and of collaboration with suppliers (IPIECA) Sustainability reporting guidance for
to support and improve their capacity to the oil and gas industry provides both generic
comply with biodiversity-related requirements suggestions on how to map
from the reporting organisation and to manage and prioritise stakeholders, and biodiversity-
and mitigate biodiversity risks. If not in place, it specific key points to consider in the
would be useful to provide an explanation of organisation’s reporting (e.g. how are the
why this is the case and if there are plans to stakeholders’ perspectives and concerns
develop these in the future. considered in biodiversity conservation
planning and activities; including reference
4. Incentivisation to any multi-stakeholder initiatives or
Incentivising appropriate members of the board partnerships the organisation joined to
and management for meeting and fulfilling promote improved understanding of
significant biodiversity-related goals and targets biodiversity and ecosystems, or to address
is a means of fostering ownership of potential impacts to biodiversity).
performance and reporting on such
arrangements in the mainstream report 3. Some of the GRI standards provide generic
communicates that commitment. Equally suggestions on how to assess impacts on,
important is the reporting of the metrics or engage with and disclose on stakeholders. In
criteria used in incentive schemes. They should particular, GRI 308: Supplier Environmental
speak to the organisation’s most pertinent Assessment 2016 supports organisations in
biodiversity-related risks, opportunities, and the assessment of environmental impacts in
strategy. Providing ongoing disclosure around their supply chain, in understanding how to
biodiversity-related performance and progress manage these impacts, and the preparation
towards long-term biodiversity targets tied to of related disclosures. GRI 413: Local
remuneration is useful. Communities 2016, instead, provides support
in preparing disclosures that detail the
5. Specificity of biodiversity governance impacts an organisation may have on local
Organisations’ biodiversity efforts sometimes communities, and how they manage these
form part of broader, cross-cutting impacts.
environmental strategies with governance and
oversight organised around these broader,
interconnected environmental ambitions (e.g.
climate, land or forest policies). However,
different investors can focus their attention on
different environmental issues when assessing
companies and reading reports. With
biodiversity escalating up the global agenda
and understanding continuing to develop
33 CDSB Framework | Application guidance for biodiversity-related disclosures
Examples
1. Kering Universal Registration Document 2. Ørsted Sustainability Report 2020 clearly
2020 identifies the committee responsible for reports that the heads of its four Offshore
addressing biodiversity-related risks and market regions are responsible for the
opportunities, i.e. the Board Sustainability implementation of the Group’s policy on
Committee; the CEO, the Group Managing biodiversity, and are supported by
Director, and the Lead Independent environmental specialists to do so (pg. 37).
Directorate members of the committee (pg.
3. Danone Universal Registration Document
135). Kering also discloses biodiversity-related
2020 describes the board’s role in monitoring
incentives; the amount of performance shares
investments in projects that have a positive
awarded to executive corporate officers is
environmental impact, including in relation to
linked to the achievement of biodiversity-
biodiversity (pg. 224).
related targets (pg. 285).
Set out targets (which, where possible, When conducting such assessment,
should be contextual, science-based and organisations may start by identifying
time bound), timelines, and indicators for biodiversity dependencies and impacts
delivery of biodiversity policy and strategy accompanied by details on their locations.xxviii
with methods and baselines, including
progress towards targets?
Detail the resourcing of the delivery
and management of biodiversity policies xxviii For example, see Step 1 (Biodiversity risk screening) in UNEP-WCMC,
and strategies? Conservational International and Fauna & Flora International (2020).
Biodiversity Indicators for Site- based Impacts. Cambridge, UK. Available from:
https://www.unep-wcmc.org/system/comfy/cms/files/files/000/001/902/
original/202102_Biodiversity_Indicators_Report_06.pdf
34 CDSB Framework | Application guidance for biodiversity-related disclosures
Secondly, measures and quantitative Frameworks and tools can assist with this
assessments come into place: quantitative process. For example, the Natural Capital
information is added to the qualitative list Protocol (and associated Biodiversity
(i.e. inventory)xxix and metrics are calculated. Guidance)106 provides flexible measurement and
Approaches such as the pathway approach valuation guidance and the Biological Diversity
(outlined in the Natural Capital Protocol) and the Protocol107 provides a standardised accounting
Driver-Pressure-State-Impact-Response (DPSIR) framework for consolidated impact disclosure.
framework can be used to guide this process See Useful Resources for other resources and
(see Box 3), from the measurement of drivers of tools such as ENCORE,108 a web-based tool that
impacts and dependencies to valuation. supports the exploration of dependencies on
Completing a biodiversity footprint assessment nature of the economic system and of the risks
can also be useful during this step (see Box 4). for businesses caused by environmental change.
Business activities at an agri-food The land development leads to The reduction or loss of pollination
company lead to land conversion to the reduction or loss of pollinators (final ecosystem services) disrupts the
create a new agricultural area due to loss of supporting habitat productivity of pollinator-dependent
(impact driver) (change in the state crops like almonds and the related
of biodiversity) organisation’s financial performance
(impact on business)
Example 2
Business activities discharge polluting Aquatic ecosystems are Reduction of water purification
water emissions (impact driver) degraded and related biodiversity and availability of clean water (final
is impacted, e.g. due to toxic ecosystem services) affects affects
substances, reduction of oxygen financial performance of (downstream)
levels (change in the state organisations requiring clean water as
of biodiversity) input into business operations (impact
on business)
Figure 7. Impact pathway approach (based on Biodiversity Guidance of the Natural Capital Protocol)
Figure 7 illustrates how a business activity can be a biodiversity impact driver (either through
an input, such as material used, or a non-product output, such as air or water pollution).
This generates changes in biodiversity, which in turn can affect the organisation or society. 109, 110
Dependencies are often integrated into the impact pathway due to their interconnections with
impacts (e.g. feedback loops between impacts on habitats and loss of pollinators, see Figure 7).
Box 3 (continued)
Once the list of impacts and dependencies has been determined, the Biodiversity Guidance to
accompany the Natural Capital Protocol outlines three steps for using the pathway approach to
measure and value impacts and dependencies:
(1) Measure impact drivers and dependencies;
(2) Measure changes in the state of biodiversity; and
(3) Value biodiversity impacts and dependencies.
A similar, and harmonised, approach is the Driver-Pressure-State-Impact-Response framework111, 112
which assumes a chain of causal links, with economic/social drivers exerting pressure on the
environment, consequently causing changes in the state of the environment. These changes lead
to business or societal impacts that may require a response. Appendix 10 maps the Pathway
approach to the DPSIR framework.
References:
• Capitals Coalition and Cambridge Conservation Initiative (2020). Integrating Biodiversity into Natural Capital Assessments. Available
from: https://naturalcapitalcoalition.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Biodiversity-Guidance_COMBINED_single-page.pdf
• IUCN NL (2020). A compass for navigating the world of biodiversity footprinting tools: an introduction for companies and
policy makers. Available from: https://www.iucn.nl/app/uploads/2021/04/a_compass_for_navigating_biodiversity_footprint_
tools_-_final_1.pdf
• Hilton, S. and Lee, JM J. (2021). Assessing Portfolio Impacts - Tools to Measure Biodiversity and SDG Footprints of Financial
Portfolios. Gland, Switzerland: WWF. Available from: https://wwf.panda.org/?2898916/Assessing-Portfolio-Impacts
36 CDSB Framework | Application guidance for biodiversity-related disclosures
The assessment should be in the context of the final ecosystem services underpinned
organisational boundary set and of wider natural by biodiversity.
capital changes and social issues, with other
considerations including: Options for summarising dependencies and
impacts include a narrative description and/or
• Different business units and phases of the
graphical representation of the integrated
value chain (from raw material extraction to
business model. Where applicable, organisations
end-of-life of products, when applicable) in
should recognise and illustrate the
relation to their locations, thus considering
interconnected nature between impacts and
both on-site and off-site dependencies, and
dependencies, detailing how significant impacts
both those that are under and outside the
are connected to or arise as a result of
control of the organisation;xxx
dependencies (e.g. degradation of forest
• Aspects linked to the socio-economic context; ecosystem — impact — due to the use of timber
during the production process - dependency).
• Interactions between biodiversity impacts
and dependencies;
When reporting, it is recommended to
• Trends in external factors, outside the control categorise biodiversity impacts and
of the business, that may accentuate or dependencies into value chain phases (i.e. direct
moderate impacts, or result in changes to operations, downstream and upstream) and/or
business dependencies (e.g. the degradation into different impact driver categories (see Box
of a forest that currently provides flooding 2) as outlined by IPBES,117 the SBTN,118 the
protection). This may include both natural Natural Capital Protocol119 and the Transparent
forces and human activities, including project.120 To exemplify this, Appendix 6 contains
regulatory changes; a table of biodiversity impacts categorised into
• Dependencies/impacts that arise outside the impact driver categories.
reporting period timeframe. For example,
significant impacts from previous years that As biodiversity loss is interconnected to and shares
are still ongoing (despite the activity having impact drivers, such as pollution, water-use and
ceased) and future potential impacts/ land-use change, with other changes to natural
dependencies; and capital (e.g. climate change, land and water
degradation) (see Key Characteristics), it is helpful
• The need to consult with external for companies to detail their dependencies and
stakeholders to understand key biodiversity impacts on biodiversity in the context of wider
considerations. natural capital changes and social issues affecting
the business. Graphical representations may be
As organisations’ biodiversity dependencies and helpful in this respect. This contextualisation offers
impacts vary according to sector, role in the value report users the opportunity to understand:
chain and geographic location, organisations
• The position of biodiversity impacts and
should consider supplementary sector-specific
dependencies within the complex web of
and location-specific guidance where possible.
natural systems;
1.2 Reporting material information • Risks and opportunities emerging from
on dependencies and impacts interconnections and relationships between
Reporting details of the impact and dependency different changes to natural capital; and
assessment provides report users with useful
• How the reporting organisation integrates
business context regarding the selection of
learnings from interconnections into risk
biodiversity-related strategies, policies and
management, strategy and performance.
targets. Material information about biodiversity-
related dependencies and impacts should be The thinking and guidance in the Natural Capital
disclosed and related to the context of the Protocol,121 the Principles of Integrated Capitals
business model where possible, including those Assessments,122 British Standard Institute (BSI)’s
related to previous years that the organisation has standard on natural capital accounting for
continued responsibility for. This may include organisations123 and International <IR>
those related to ecosystems, species and/or the Framework,124, xxxi can support (1) the wider
xxx For practical suggestions refer to the Natural Capital Protocol (e.g. xxxi IIRC is as of 2021 is now part of The Value Reporting Foundation.
value chain in Table 3.6 and Table 5.4).
37 CDSB Framework | Application guidance for biodiversity-related disclosures
Table 1. Determining priority species, ecosystems, geographical areas and products/services - considerations and useful indicators
(Adapted from: IUCN Guidelines for planning and monitoring corporate biodiversity performance and GRI 304 on Biodiversity)
Ecosystems and • Ecosystems commonly impacted by • List of priority ecosystems and habitats
habitats business activities (e.g. mangroves or deemed to be significant that the
seagrass beds being used by marine organisation interacts with, including a
construction companies). brief explanation linked to the context of
• Level of threat to ecosystems that are the business and geographical details.xxxiii
commonly impacted by business • Level of ecosystem threat, with reference
activities. to external resources, such as the IUCN
• Habitats unique to sites the company Red List of Ecosystems or conserved or
operates in or very localised habitats (e.g. protected areas.
seamounts or coastal upwellings). • Extent of ecosystems and habitats,
where possible.
xxxii For example, species classified as Critically Endangered, xxxiii The IUCN Habitat Classification Scheme and IUCN Ecosystem
Endangered or Vulnerable on the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species or Typology are useful resources.
species known to be locally threatened (e.g. on a national Red List).
38 CDSB Framework | Application guidance for biodiversity-related disclosures
Geographical areas • Operational (or value chain) areas that • List of operational (or value chain) areas
are in or within close proximity to that are in, or within close proximity to,
important areas for biodiversity (e.g. important areas for biodiversity, including
protected areas, community reserves, (1) geographical location, (2) biodiversity
world heritage sites, key biodiversity value of areas (e.g. protected area status,
areas, critical habitats, biodiversity world heritage site status, key
hotspots). biodiversity area status, biodiversity
hotspot status), (3) description of
• Operational (or value chain) areas
operational activities in the area,
important to local stakeholders due to
including position within the value chain,
the final ecosystem services provided
and (4) level of control over the area.
(e.g. areas shared with local fisheries).
• A ‘heat map’ which informs report users
of which operational areas are the more
impactful or dependent on biodiversity
and where they are located
geographically.
• Extent of operational sites.
• Number of sites operated on that are of
importance to endangered/critically
endangered species.
• Percentage of sites located in priority
geographical areas compared to total
sites, and the corresponding contribution
to the organisation’s production and/or
revenue.
Products and/or • Products and/or services provided by the • List of priority products and/or services,
services organisation that are likely to have a including a description of the significant
significant impact on biodiversity (e.g. dependencies and/or impacts.
due to the production process or
• Description of whether the dependency
downstream disposal).
and/or impact is located within direct
• Products and/or services provided by operations, upstream, or downstream.
organisation that are dependent on
• Percentage of revenue attributed to the
biodiversity and therefore likely to be
products and/or services.
materially impacted by biodiversity loss.
39 CDSB Framework | Application guidance for biodiversity-related disclosures
It may be helpful to aggregate some details for consideration of geography and time is central
simplicity. For example, details on priority when reporting on biodiversity-related policies,
ecosystems could be aggregated into types of strategies and targets. For example:
ecosystems and details on priority species could
• Biodiversity-related regulations are more likely
be aggregated into different taxonomic levels
to be introduced in one country compared to
(such as genus or family) or ecological functions.
another;
When reporting details on priority geographical
areas, it may be helpful to categorise and/or • The nature and severity of biodiversity
aggregate areas based on their level of changes, such as species loss and ecosystem
biodiversity priority (e.g. according to habitat degradation and its implications for the
quality scores or protected/key biodiversity area socio-economic conditions, will vary
status, using tools such as ENCORE,125 STAR,126 significantly;128, 129
and IBAT127 or a combination — see REQ-04
• Risks and impacts related to biodiversity and
Useful Resources for further details). An example
final ecosystem services may extend well
of a detail being aggregated is reporting the
beyond the immediate vicinity of current
percentage of land split into ownership
activities; and
categories as opposed to the level of control for
each individual priority geographic area. • Potential impacts, opportunities and management
approaches vary according to geography.
Providing an explanation of basis, criteria, or
metrics for defining and determining priority The details reported will depend on the
species, ecosystems, and geographical areas is organisational boundary set (see Reporting
helpful for report users, including the considered boundary and period). It is also useful to explain
definitions of classifications, such as protected if specific goals or targets and prioritising actions
areas or areas with high biodiversity value.xxxiv are in place in priority geographical areas and
priority products/services.
xxxvi For example, the IUCN categorisation for national protected areas, xxxv 88 countries have currently signed, committing to reversing
international protected area designations including UNESCO World Heritage biodiversity loss by 2030.
natural and cultural sites, the Ramsar Convention wetlands sites, the UNESCO
Man and Biosphere Reserves; or Key Biodiversity Areas — sites that contribute
significantly to the global persistence of biodiversity, or other national or
regional protected areas or priority sites may be relevant for the organisation.
40 CDSB Framework | Application guidance for biodiversity-related disclosures
xxxvi “No net loss” refers to the point at which project-related impacts on xxxviii Biodiversity net gain metrics (often expressed as percentages)
biodiversity are balanced by mitigation measures. “Net gain” refers to where are still under development and need optimisation.
gains are greater than losses. Reference: Refer to the Natural Capital Protocol
Biodiversity Guidance and Biological Diversity Protocol for further information.
xxxvii For example, the UK has integrated Biodiversity Net Gain into its
Environment Bill, as a requirement for new infrastructure projects.
41 CDSB Framework | Application guidance for biodiversity-related disclosures
Categorising biodiversity expenditure into levels offset biodiversity impacts (which should only be
of hierarchy and providing percentages where performed as the last option of the sequence of
possible (e.g. 40% of biodiversity expenditure was actions), organisations should provide access to
on avoiding biodiversity impacts) can also offsetting methodologies, an explanation of why
provide useful context. activities could not follow any of the other
mitigation pathways and a statement outlining
The first stage of ‘avoidance of impacts’ is the how ecological equivalency has been
most important, therefore if it is necessary for an achieved.xxxix
organisation to descend the sequence of actions,
they should demonstrate why avoidance was Examples of management responses are
not possible. When detailing activities that aim to outlined in Table 2.
Table 2. Examples of management responses to biodiversity risks and opportunities, categorised into internal (responses related to internal policies
and business operations), external (responses related to stakeholders outside the organisational boundary), value chain phases (direct operations,
upstream, downstream), level (site, corporate, product) and possible mitigation hierarchy category.
Training courses for employees and suppliers. Direct Site; Avoid; Reduce
operations; Corporate
Upstream
Measurement and monitoring procedures in light Direct Site Avoid; Reduce
of risks and opportunities described in REQ-03, operations;
including throughout the value chain. Upstream;
Downstream
Measures implemented as a result of legal Direct Site; Avoid; Reduce
proceedings or legal obligations, such as operations; Corporate;
changes to operations, processes, products or Upstream; Product
technology. Downstream
Processes used to integrate biodiversity Direct Site; Avoid; Reduce
considerations into site and product selection operations Product
and design, including the level of ecological
sensitivity and methods to minimise ecological
impacts such as soil disturbance and erosion,
storm water, waste, and wildlife habitat impacts.
Organisations should include details of how and policies in terrestrial and marine areas, and (3)
management responses relate to the policies and and the percentage of sites to which management
targets set, as well their effectiveness, linked to practices apply (if not 100%).
relevant biodiversity impact and performance
metrics (see REQ-04 and REQ-05). Quantitative 4. Targets and timelines
examples can also help to demonstrate the
effectiveness of measures, for example: Detailed and consistent disclosure and related
timelines is especially important for the reporting
• Number of species of flora or fauna transplanted;
of corporate targets to enable the measurement
• Number of (and/or percentage of) trained of performance against biodiversity policies and
employees, number of partnerships signed by strategies over time. The results of biodiversity
the company with a scientific body or nature impact and dependency assessments, ecosystem
conservation stakeholder; services assessments, biodiversity footprint
assessments, and risk assessments may be
• Costs avoided by measures to reduce impacts;
helpful to inform targets. Global biodiversity
• Reduction in number of incidents of illegal or initiatives (e.g. the SBTNxl, United Nations (UN)
unsustainable activity; and CBD post-2020 biodiversity frameworkxli, a
• Reduction in number of animal strikes Global Goal for nature and SDGs) can be helpful
(e.g. by boats or turbines). for forming targets (see Useful resources), as well
as regional, national, and subnational biodiversity
Report users should connect management strategies (e.g. NBSAPs, Subnational Biodiversity
responses to the impacts and dependencies Strategies and Action Plans, and Regional
identified, and related risks and opportunities, Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans).
ideally having a suite of linked indicators
demonstrating the effectiveness of responses. The type of target and indicator, baseline/
reference state, timeline, and scope should be
As management efforts may take time to achieve clearly described to investors and connected
their outcomes, it is necessary to outline how the with the addressed business risks and/or
effectiveness of management responses is opportunities, as well as with the overall business
monitored on an ongoing basis (for example, strategy. Biodiversity targets being developed for
carrying out biodiversity impact assessments at the CBD’s post-2020 global biodiversity
appropriate intervals). It is also helpful to detail framework have emphasised the need for
(1) where actions are voluntary and/or go beyond “Specific, Measurable, Ambitious, Realistic, and
legal obligations, (2) differences between practices Time-bound” (SMART) targets, which is also
Useful Resources:
Biodiversity impact and dependency
assessment / footprint assessment
1. The Biodiversity Guidance to accompany the 7. The Biological Diversity Protocol is currently
Natural Capital Protocol offers a decision- the only existing accounting framework for
making framework for completing a biodiversity- biodiversity footprint assessments. It offers an
inclusive natural capital assessment, allowing accounting and reporting framework that
organisations to identify, measure and value their enables organisations to produce Statements
direct and indirect impacts and dependencies of Biodiversity Position and Performance, which
on biodiversity. The Biodiversity Guidance can be used to measure performance and risk
Navigation Tool guides users through a over time.
biodiversity-inclusive natural capital assessment,
8. Among other information, the Biodiversity A
following the steps in the Natural Capital
to Z provides biodiversity-related data at the
Protocol and suggesting specific tools, resources
country level, such as recognised protected
and methodologies based on the scope/area of
areas and biodiversity designations.
the value chain a company sits.
9. Tools providing interactive maps can support
2. Stage 1 of the IUCN Guidelines for planning
the assessment of dependencies and impacts:
and monitoring corporate biodiversity
performance offers guidance around defining • ENCORE allows the exploration of
the corporate scope of biodiversity influence, dependencies (on ecosystem services) and
identifying which pressures (drivers) and impacts (on ecosystems) on nature of
dependencies are the most important for a businesses across all sectors. Additionally, the
company to tackle, based on the importance of biodiversity module allows users to assess the
each pressure and the level of control, as well as potential to reduce species extinction and
identifying priority species, habitats, areas and ecological integrity risk of portfolios (using
ecosystem services. the STAR metric).
3. The Good Practices for the Collection of • The IBAT tool provides geographic information
Biodiversity Baseline Data by the Multilateral about global biodiversity (i.e. World Database
Financing Institutions Biodiversity Working on Protected Areas, IUCN Red List of
Group & Cross Sector Biodiversity Initiative Threatened Species, and the World Database
supports the implementation of biodiversity- of Key Biodiversity Areas) that support the
inclusive impact assessments (in particular for assessment of priority areas and impact. The
Environmental and Social Impact Assessments) results of the assessment can indicate whether
and management planning, by providing a companies might contribute towards species
step-by-step approach (from the identification extinction risk, changes to species abundance,
of the area to long term monitoring) and a deterioration of indigenous peoples’ protected
useful summary and checklist. This resource is areas, also through metrics such as the
also useful for REQ-04. Biodiversity Impact Metric (which uses the
Rarity-weighted Species Richness data from
4. Bioscope provides businesses with a simple
the IUCN Red List) and the STAR Metric scores
and fast indication of the most important
per site.
impacts on biodiversity arising from their
supply chain, including the potential impact of • The Global Forest Watch is a tool for exploring
commodities purchased as well as the and monitoring forest changes and associated
upstream supply chain. biodiversity impacts in different areas through
interactive maps and country dashboard.
5. The first and the second stage of the
Biodiversity indicators for site-based impacts • The Ocean Data Viewer allows users to view
methodology support the identification of sites (and download) a range of spatial datasets
(operations) with potentially high biodiversity on marine and coastal biodiversity that are
significance. useful for informing decisions regarding
the conservation of marine and ocean
6. GRI 304 disclosure standards on biodiversity
ecosystems.
include a disclosure on operational sites owned,
leased, managed in, or adjacent to protected
areas and areas of high biodiversity value.
46 CDSB Framework | Application guidance for biodiversity-related disclosures
Useful Resources:
Policy, strategy and targets Management
10. The Finance for Biodiversity Pledge, launched 17. The Business and Biodiversity Offsets
in September 2020, is a global group of 26 Programme provides a roadmap to help users
financial institutions committing to protect and develop and apply best practice towards
restore biodiversity through finance activities and achieving no net loss and preferably a net gain
investments. Financial institutions are encouraged of biodiversity through the application of
to sign and join the collective action which mitigation hierarchy principles.
includes knowledge sharing. The group released
18. The Mitigation hierarchy guide, prepared
a guide on biodiversity measurement approaches
by the Cross Sector Biodiversity Initiative,
for financial institutions.
is a cross-sector guide, providing practical
11. Stage 2 of the IUCN Guidelines for planning guidance, innovative approaches and
and monitoring corporate biodiversity examples for supporting the implementation
performance offers guidance around developing of mitigation hierarchy.
a corporate biodiversity vision, goals and
19. The Nature Conservancy’s Achieving
objectives, generally focused on improving the
Conservation and Development offers principles
state of biodiversity or associated benefits to
for setting mitigation hierarchy commitments.
people (ecosystem services).
20. No Net Loss and Net Positive Impact
12. The Science based targets network provide
approaches for Biodiversity explores the
targets which define and promote best practice
application of these approaches in the
for businesses by accounting for the five Earth
commercial agriculture and forestry sectors.
systems: climate, freshwater, land, ocean, and
biodiversity. Initial business guidance was 21. The IUCN have published A Framework for
published in September 2020. Corporate Action on Biodiversity and Ecosystem
Services which enables users to explore
13. Nature Positive’s Global Goal for Nature
biodiversity and ecosystem services as it relates
argues for the adoption of a Nature-Positive
to their activities and corporate sustainability,
Global Goal for Nature with three measurable
with the aim of integrating them into business
objectives which can be useful for shaping
activities and engaging top management in the
corporate strategy: Zero Net Loss of Nature
development, implementation and disclosure of
from 2020, Net Positive by 2030 and Full
policies and practices.
Recovery by 2050.
14. Beyond ‘Business as Usual’: Biodiversity
Targets and Finance, by the UN Environment
Programme (UNEP) Finance Initiative and
Global Canopy, sets out an initial approach to
enable financial institutions to set evidence-
based biodiversity targets aligned with
international policy developments.
15. The Guidance on Biodiversity Target-setting,
developed by UNEP Finance Initiative and UNEP-
World Conservation Monitoring Centre (WCMC),
allows banks to take a systematic approach to
setting and achieving biodiversity targets,
presenting four case studies and a how-to guide.
16. The SDG Indicators, Biodiversity Indicators
Partnership and OECD Environmental Indicators
may be helpful for setting targets, particularly
those that outline contributions to global
biodiversity goals.
47 CDSB Framework | Application guidance for biodiversity-related disclosures
Examples
1. Repsol Integrated Management Report 2020 4. Kering Universal Registration Document 2020
describes the context around the company’s clearly summarises its biodiversity strategy.
biodiversity-related disclosures; ecosystems in It discloses its target of achieving net positive
general and biodiversity in particular are a key biodiversity impact by 2025, which is supported
component of its natural capital. The company by quantitative commitments (e.g. protect 1
discloses potential impacts on biodiversity by million hectares of essential and irreplaceable
defining relevant activities, describing related habitats outside of its supply chain) (pg. 136).
impacts and likelihood, and distinguishing Kering has joined the SBTN initiative in order to
between operation phases (pg. 75). contribute to the development of science-based
methodologies (pg. 177).
2. Iberdrola Biodiversity Report 2018-2019
describes the main biodiversity dependencies 5. Firmenich Sustainability Report 2020
and potential impacts. Relevant project stages communicates the company’s commitment to
and tools used to evaluate the impact of the CBD Post-2020 framework to reach net
activities in different project stages are also positive impact by 2030. It plans on supporting
disclosed (pgs.35-38 — linked to REQ-04). The this commitment by combining the use of natural
company describes its biodiversity policy and resources with smart developments in green
action plan (pg. 21), which includes achieving chemistry and white biotechnology (pg. 49).
“No Net Loss” of biodiversity by 2030. It
6. FrieslandCampina Annual Report 2020
describes that this target is based on the
describes the strategy it has adopted to
mitigation hierarchy principle in all activities and
address the risks resulting from flora and fauna
continual improvement of biodiversity
deteriorating in the Netherlands, threatening
protection standards. Management tools
the milk production of its dairy suppliers (linked
adopted to implement commitments are also
to REQ-03). The organisation recognises the
disclosed (e.g. Group Biodiversity Policy, BAPs,
extent to which its member dairy farmers
EIAs for new projects, etc.) (pg. 20).
influence biodiversity, and incentivises its
Biodiversity protection and conservation
protection by collaborating with farmers and
emerge as part of the Group’s overall
providing a higher price for sustainably
Environmental Management System (pg. 22).
produced milk. The report clearly recognises
3. Solvay Annual Report 2020 discloses the the shared efforts required to address
pressure points through which the company biodiversity, and states that “the financial
impacts biodiversity (15 pressures; e.g. GHG perspective needed to really invest in
emissions, freshwater eutrophication, marine biodiversity and make a real difference is still
ecotoxicity, and soil acidification) (pg.123). mostly lacking” and that “improving biodiversity
Solvay discloses its commitment to reduce its costs money and we all are responsible for this
biodiversity impact by 30% by 2030 compared cost, all of society” (pg. 61).
to the baseline year of 2018, in areas such as
climate, terrestrial acidification, water
eutrophication, and marine ecotoxicity
(calculated using the ReCiPe methodology)
(pg. 123). The target was endorsed by the
Act4Nature International coalition (pg. 124).
48 CDSB Framework | Application guidance for biodiversity-related disclosures
biological, ecological, chemical and other risks some can fall under more than one risk category
and opportunities.144, 145, 146, 147 or result from cascading effects (e.g. physical
risks linked to land and soil degradation can be
The included examples can originate from either caused by policy and legal risks, such as poor
the business (e.g. sector and/or activities) or regulations on biodiversity conservation or on
from external geographic context and drivers polluting emissions). When selecting which
(e.g. presence of biodiversity-rich areas or categories to disclose, preparers need to assess
effects of climate and land-use change), and what is significant to their organisation.
Table 3. Biodiversity-related financial risks and opportunities that may guide organisations’ risks (and opportunities) assessment. Examples are
classified with BD, when they relate to changes to biodiversity and/or ecosystems, and with FES, when they relate to the loss of final ecosystem
services. The provided examples are labelled according to the origin: business-specific risks are labelled with B , and risks that may be caused by
external geographic context and drivers are labelled with E . Additionally, links with other environmental drivers are provided: examples linked to
climate change are labelled with C , those that are linked to water changes with W , and those that are linked to land-use with L .
Market Shifting customer values or preferences to BD • Reduced demand for products and services
products (e.g. food, textile) with lower impacts FES (reduced market share)
on biodiversity and ecosystems (e.g. lower
• Increased production costs
biodiversity footprint) E
• Supply disruption
Volatility or increased costs of raw materials BD • Increased raw material or resource costs
(e.g. biodiversity-intense inputs for which FES • Loss of market access
price has raised due to ecosystem
• Smaller customer base
degradation) B E C W L
• Limited or denied access to new markets
Technology Transition to more efficient and cleaner BD • Expenditure for R&D of new
technologies (i.e. with lower impacts on and alternative technologies
biodiversity) B C W L
• Capital investments in technology
Substitution of existing products and services BD development
with lower biodiversity footprint or cleaner • Unsuccessful investments in technology
emissions options B C W L
• Increased costs of operations and raw
Lack of access to data or access to poor BD materials (e.g. higher energy use) required
quality data that hamper biodiversity-related to achieve biodiversity-related goals
assessments B E • Lack of access to technology developed
New monitoring technologies (e.g. satellite) BD by competitors resulting in higher
used by regulators E operational costs
Products, Development of less resource-intense products BD • Increased resilience due to business diversification
services, and services (e.g. adopting regenerative FES • Access to new markets due to less
and market agriculture that restore and preserve soil fertility
resource-intense products and services
with a consequent reduction in the use of
fertilisers) B E C W L • Increased insurance coverage and access
to new assets that require it
Development of green solutions (e.g. nature- BD • Access to public-sector incentives
based solutions or biodiversity-related
• Reduced costs of raw materials and inputs
insurance risk products) B E C W L
to production
• New revenue streams (e.g. carbon offsets, sale
Ability to diversify business activities BD of surplus water rights, habitat credits)
(e.g. new business units on green FES
infrastructures leveraging organisation • Faster access to permits
experience on site remediation) B • Reduced interest rate costs
• Reduced fines and regulatory compliance costs
Financial Access to biodiversity-related and/or green BD • Increased access to funds and loans
incentives funds, bonds, or loans B E C
• Access to capital for high-risk projects
Incentives for suppliers to improve their BD
biodiversity and ecosystem management B E
52 CDSB Framework | Application guidance for biodiversity-related disclosures
When conducting a risk assessment, it is important practical tools that can guide companies in their
to adopt a broad approach by ideally considering: assessment of risk and opportunities.
• Different types of potential impact drivers
(e.g. resource exploitation, land-use change,
1. Detailing risks and opportunities
contributions to climate change; see Table 8);
• Suitable spatial scales and time periods (see When disclosing material information about
Key characteristics and Reporting biodiversity-related risks and opportunities in the
expectations and important considerations); mainstream report, thoroughly describing them
by specifying their key characteristics and
• The cumulative impact over time and of all
explaining their relevance to the organisation
parties that affect a given geographic area;
offers useful information to report users. In terms
and
of characteristics for high quality reporting, it is
• Any potential thresholds or tipping points as essential to properly account for when and where
well as the multiple ways in which biodiversity the risk or opportunity may materialise, specifying
has value to different stakeholders. whether it concerns a specific business area (e.g.
priority products/services), a particular region or
Like other risks and opportunities that companies site (e.g. priority geographical areas) and time
face in the modern, interconnected era, those horizons, for instance.
related to biodiversity require careful
consideration, across all the locations of Causes and sources of risks and opportunities
operations and value chain, different time and their implications for the business (on
horizons and potential future pathways. For this operations, value chain, business model and
reason, risk management approaches, horizon financial results) should be described and linked
scanning, forecasting, sensitivity testing and to the dependencies and impacts identified in
scenario analysis, which is discussed further REQ-02, biodiversity impact metrics (REQ-04),
below in relation to REQ-06, are amongst the and performance (REQ-05) where appropriate.
53 CDSB Framework | Application guidance for biodiversity-related disclosures
• Operational expenses, cost savings the UNESCO Man and Biosphere Reserves;
and revenue associated with biodiversity or Key Biodiversity Areas); and
management and targets (e.g. remediation costs
• Total number of IUCN Red List species and national
or provisions in the case of accidents like polluting
conservation list species with habitats located in areas
spills, costs to obtain regulatory permits or
impacted by business operations by level of
licences, costs of staff training) and the
extinction risk (i.e. critically endangered, endangered,
implementation of the mitigation hierarchy (e.g.
vulnerable, near threatened, or least concern).
costs saved by measures taken to avoid
biodiversity impacts and revenue from The quantification of dependencies on biodiversity,
biodiversity-efficient products and services, capital often related to the final ecosystem services
and operation expenditures of offset provided/underpinned by biodiversity, is
requirements), possibly broken down per particularly useful for demonstrating the magnitude
biodiversity unit (e.g. Euro or US $/hectare (ha) of of biodiversity risks and possible implications to its
ecosystem type or taxon); financial position and performance. However, this is
• Expenses related to legal proceedings linked to a developing area with limited methodologies
non-compliance with environmental law currently available. The use of valuation
influencing biodiversity or biodiversity incidents methodologies can support this process
(e.g. fines in relation to water and soil (see REQ-04 for additional details).
contamination and/or air emissions, or court-
ordered remediation costs); and A possible approach to disclose financial information
linked to dependencies is to connect the dependent
• Transactions contingent to biodiversity-related final ecosystem services provided (which are
rights of access or use. For example, a fishing underpinned by biodiversity) to the related financial
corporation could disclose the financial value of its accounts, such as assets (e.g. fish stocks), revenues
fishing rights and the associated changes in the (e.g. sales of wild fish) and expenses. Example
state of fish stocks linked to overfishing; a forestry indicators include the income generated from sale of
company could disclose the financial value of its nature-dependent resources (e.g. fisheries or crops),
logging concession rights and the associated income generated from nature-based tourism, or
changes in the state of harvested forests; and an eco-efficiency ratings, such as tons of wild fish per
agri-business could disclose the financial value of total revenue/sales. Non-financial metrics that
its key commodities and associated changes in the measure the organisation dependencies on
state of natural capital (e.g. soils, water resources, biodiversity are also particularly useful to investors. For
as well as access-and-benefit sharing example, metrics on (1) natural resources used as
arrangements regarding genetic resources for inputs to operations/production processes, such as a
various industries such as chemistry, certain amount of water available to withdrawals,
pharmaceuticals etc.). certain agricultural area and related fertile soil, or on (2)
outputs from production, such as the amount of crops
Additionally, where organisations have trade-offs guaranteed by pollination and biological pest control.
around “natural” biodiversity in addressing
biodiversity risks (e.g. replacing natural systems with
crop plantations), valuations of the externalities 3. Connecting information
generated (benefits and costs) can be helpful. The
report user should be offered the assumptions and While the CDSB Framework does not set out
essential figures (e.g. present value of asset or specific reporting requirements, Principle 3
revenue stream affected) as well as the uncertainties encourages organisations to explain whether and to
for the financial figures, especially if the size of the risk what extent biodiversity-related issues are
or opportunity varies largely over time. connected with other information and results in the
mainstream report, with REQ-03 explaining that
Non-financial metrics are useful to report where they links should be made to the reporting of processes
provide context around the risk magnitude in relation and systems for risks and opportunities. For
to business operations. Examples of non-financial example, report users should be able to understand
metrics that may be useful to disclose include: how biodiversity-related issues have been
incorporated into existing systems of risk
• Percentage of operational sites that are
identification and prioritisation and whether the
in or near protected areas, priority sites
systems have been adapted to accommodate the
for biodiversity conservation and/or key biodiversity
characteristics of biodiversity-related issues.
areas (e.g. UNESCO World Heritage natural and
Furthermore, the systems used to identify
cultural sites, the Ramsar Convention wetlands sites,
biodiversity-related risks and opportunities will
55 CDSB Framework | Application guidance for biodiversity-related disclosures
develop in coming years with greater In addition, the mainstream report should be
understanding of the link between biodiversity and designed in a manner that allows the reader to
environmental, regulatory, socio-economic and navigate from these risks and opportunities to the
technological pathways in the different areas. policies and strategies developed, and to risk
Setting out how the organisation is developing and management systems, including an explanation
adapting these systems (also by linking to REQ-01 of how the organisation considers short-,
and REQ-02) will demonstrate responsive and medium- and long-term issues in linkage with
effective management. disclosures under REQ-02.
1. The Integrated Biodiversity Assessment Tool 3. The biodiversity module of ENCORE provides
(IBAT, see REQ-02 and REQ-04) can support insights on the portfolio exposure to species
the categorisation of locations based on risk of extinction and ecological integrity risks, and
biodiversity loss (and consequent financial related mitigation actions. These results can
risks): for a particular site, land management support the categorisation of locations based on
unit, or country/province, the STAR metric biodiversity-related risks, the alignment of
shows the potential for reducing extinction risk financial portfolios with global biodiversity
before investment activities start, or can targets, and assessment of financial risks.
measure the achieved impact of conservation
4. Trase Earth Tool maps financing and
interventions on extinction risk over time
ownership of trading companies at scale to
(ex-post measure).
assess the exposure of financial institutions to
2. The Agrobiodiversity Index measures deforestation risk.
biodiversity across nutrition, agriculture and
5. OHI+ uses the Ocean Health index to allow
genetic resources, identifying risks and
exploration of variables influencing ocean
opportunities as well as assisting with
health at small scales where management
management.
decisions can be made.
These tools represent useful ready-to-use resources, but companies should (1) understand
the assumptions and the methodology behind the selected tool(s), (2) combine different tools
when performing their risk assessment, and (3) integrate company-specific components and
information in the assessment (e.g. local regulations or risks).
Useful resources
1. UNEP-WCMC’s report Biodiversity measures 5. The report The pollination deficit - Towards
for business illustrates probable physical, supply chain resilience in the face of pollinator
transitional, and reputational biodiversity- decline supports the understanding of risks
related risks, and provides forecasts on related to loss of pollinators risk within private
expected national and regional regulations with sector (agricultural) supply chains. In particular,
biodiversity reporting obligations. the report provides examples of dependencies,
risks and potential responses, some real case
2. The report Handbook for Nature-related
studies, and a roadmap towards sustainable
Financial Risks details transmission channels
pollinator management.
that make nature loss a financial risk and
outlines a framework to identify nature-related 6. The report Indebted to nature – Exploring
financial risks. biodiversity risks for the Dutch financial sector
and the working paper A “Silent Spring” for the
3. The report Guidelines for Identifying Business
Financial System? Exploring Biodiversity-
Risks and Opportunities Arising from Ecosystem
Related Financial Risks in France explores the
Change by World Business Council for
biodiversity-related financial risks of the Dutch
Sustainable Development (WBCSD), the
and French financial system, respectively. It
Meridian Institute and World Resources Institute
covers physical (through dependencies on
(WRI), provides a structured methodology that
ecosystem services) and transition risks
helps organisations to develop strategies to
(through impacts on terrestrial and freshwater
manage business risks and opportunities arising
ecosystems).
from their company’s dependence and impact
on ecosystems (and related services). The report 7. The IFC’s Guidance Note 6: Biodiversity
also includes case studies. Conservation and Sustainable Management of
Living Natural Resources supports the risks and
4. The report The Climate-Nature Nexus:
impacts identification process. The
Implications for the Financial Sector takes a
requirements of this performance standard
practical look at where climate- and nature-related
support the assessment of projects that
risks and opportunities do and do not overlap (see
potentially impact on or are dependent on
Figure 1 on pg. 4), highlights the implications for
ecosystem services over which the organisation
investment potential of different sectors and
has direct management control or significant
solutions, and offers recommendations on how the
influence (also useful for REQ 02).
private financial sector can adapt its climate
approaches to address nature and be robust to 8. Swiss Re Institute’s Biodiversity and
nature-related risks (see Figure 2 on pg. 5, it Ecosystem Services Index analysis highlights
provides an overview of the current climate which economic sectors are most reliant on
frameworks — e.g. screening of physical risks, nature and the exposure each country has to
impact metrics — that can be adapted to capture biodiversity and ecosystems services decline.
nature risks and opportunities).
57 CDSB Framework | Application guidance for biodiversity-related disclosures
Indicator Metric
Pesticides released in
Amount (tons) of
Impact drivers proximity (<20 km) of
pesticides
protected areas
Figure 8. Examples of biodiversity metrics and indicators following a pathway approach. This table includes examples only and is not an exhaustive list.
58 CDSB Framework | Application guidance for biodiversity-related disclosures
The selection of indicators/metricsxlii included in For most indicators, an explicit baseline year
the disclosure should be aligned with the targets and/or reference state is required to enable
set by the organisation. Indicators selected report users to draw decision-useful conclusions
should be representative of the specific (see REQ-05).
organisation, such as those used in internal
biodiversity management and performance The following sections outline example biodiversity
monitoring, or illustrate biodiversity-related metrics following the pathway approach. Metrics
financial impacts to the organisation. reported should correspond to the selected
Organisations should aim to connect the indicators that organisations have chosen to
indicators with those disclosed under other measure based on their specific biodiversity
requirements (e.g. performance against targets, strategies, impacts and dependencies, and targets.
management response indicators) in order to
have a linked suite of indicators connected to the 1.1 Metrics: Sources of impacts (impact drivers)
significant impacts and dependencies identified. Table 4 contains examples of metrics that outline
sources of biodiversity impact (i.e. impact
Consideration should be given as to which drivers). The exact metrics reported will depend
metrics are most suitable to measure progress on the organisation’s impact assessment,
against indicators (see REQ-05). Ideal metrics materiality assessment and sectoral
should be consistent with industry guidelines, specifications. Organisations may find it helpful
recognised by existing reporting provisions to group impacts under the impact driver
and international initiatives, and calculated in categories outlined by IPBES,150 the SBTN151
accordance with recognised approaches, to (see Box 2), the Natural Capital Protocol152 or the
enable comparability and benchmarking. Transparent project.153 It may be helpful to
Quantitative metrics should be supplemented outline whether impact drivers impact
by qualitative details and information where biodiversity directly (i.e. immediately and
appropriate. occurring directly in response to actions from
the organisation, such as land clearing) or
Metrics can be applied at the product/service, indirectly (i.e. as a consequence of another
project or company level. Whilst the company factor, for example, GHG emissions causing
level is most likely to be appropriate for disclosure climate change which consequently causes
in the mainstream report, highlighting product/ negative changes to the state of biodiversity, or
service or project level metrics may also be illegal logging resulting from the construction of
appropriate where significant risks and impacts a road by the organisation near a forest).
vary significantly between products/services,
projects and geographic locations. Appropriate
metrics depend on both sector and (location of)
site. Therefore, while sectoral guidelines can
provide support, assessment of the main impacts
Table 4. Examples of metrics outlining sources of biodiversity impacts aligned with the impact pathway approach (Adapted from: Natural Capital
Protocol biodiversity guidance; IUCN Guidelines for planning and monitoring corporate biodiversity performance).
xliii The location of land should be provided as accompanying information. xlv Refer to Natural Capital Protocol for further details. Capitals Coalition
xliv It is recognised that the metrics suggested here are limited in assessing (2016) Natural Capital Protocol. Available from: https://naturalcapitalcoalition.
changes to marine and freshwater biodiversity. org/natural-capital-protocol/
60 CDSB Framework | Application guidance for biodiversity-related disclosures
xlvi For example, Victorian Government Department of Sustainability and xlvii See NatureMetrics – DNA-based monitoring for
Environment (2004) Vegetation Quality Assessment Manual–Guidelines for examples of environmental DNA being used in practice
applying the habitat hectares scoring method. Version 1.3.. Available from:
https://www.environment.vic.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0016/91150/
Vegetation-Quality-Assessment-Manual-Version-1.3.pdf
61 CDSB Framework | Application guidance for biodiversity-related disclosures
the species, and/or establishing the target habitat actual population sizes, management responses
size for species as a proxy (i.e. performing an to address this should be outlined.
ecological assessment). The organisation should
ensure the most suitable population target is Table 5 contains a summary of commonly used
selected.xlviii The difference between actual and metrics, split into metrics related to ecosystems
target population size is useful for demonstrating and/or species, and Appendix 8 contains a
to report users whether management responses summary of tools/frameworks that may be
are effective (linked to REQ-02 and REQ-05). helpful for the assessment and quantification of
Where target population sizes greatly differ to biodiversity impacts.
Table 5. Examples of biodiversity impact metrics (References: Natural Capital Protocol biodiversity guidance; IUCN Guidelines for planning
and monitoring corporate biodiversity performance).
Mean species abundance A metric of biodiversity intactness that considers mean Ecosystem condition/
abundance of species relative to abundance in undisturbed integrity rating
ecosystems (i.e. reference site). A value between 0 and 1 is
given, with 1 indicating an ecosystem similar to is natural
state and 0 indicating complete destruction. Mean species
abundances is often estimated using the GLOBIO model
(see Appendix 8).
The Habitat Hectare A site-based vegetation assessment method that Ecosystem condition/
measures the current condition of native vegetation integrity
against a benchmark for the same vegetation type or
Ecological Vegetation Class. It is a product of the
ecosystem extent and the condition rating.159
The Healthy Based on land-use only, this metric combines area affected Ecosystem condition/
Ecosystem Metric with the impact on quantity and quality of biodiversity, soil integrity
and water to provide the total impact on ecosystem.
Surface area equivalents Surface area equivalents express the condition/integrity- Ecosystem condition/
(such as acre equivalents, adjusted surface areas of impacted ecosystems. They are integrity
hectare equivalents, calculated by multiplying the surface area of the target
square kilometre ecosystem(s) by the ratio of its current condition/integrity
score over the maximum condition/integrity score. 160, 161
equivalents or square
mile equivalents)
Potentially disappeared Measures the decline in species richness in an area over a Ecosystem condition/
fraction of species time period (with a focus on plants). Percentage integrity
disappeared fraction of species is often estimated using
the ReCiPe model (see Appendix 8).
Potentially affected It measures the fraction of species affected in an area over Ecosystem condition/
fraction of species a time period (before they have disappeared), focusing on integrity
the species richness of plants.
Risk of extinction Measure of potential reduction of species extinction risk Species abundance
(e.g. STAR metric) resulting from removal of threats in a given area. STAR is
based on IUCN Red List data and contained within IBAT
(see Appendix 8).
Some metrics may be more suitable than others (2) delivery of final ecosystem services utilised
depending on the specific business activities, by the business and (3) contributions to wellbeing
policies and targets. Metrics may have of both internal and external stakeholders.
limitations, for example, mean species For example:l
abundance and potentially disappeared fraction
• Supply: Amount of biomass available for
of species do not capture changes to all the
fodder (tons), amount of carbon absorbed by
multi-faceted aspects of biodiversity (such as
vegetation (tons), pollinator abundance and
distinguishing different ecosystem types at the
pollination rates, amount of area that is
local/regional level), therefore their use may be
suitable for nature-based tourism (ha).
enhanced by combining them with additional
metrics and information (e.g. as seen within the • Delivery: Total production of all commercial
Biodiversity impact metric). Any limitations with crops (tons), caloric content of fish landings
metrics should be outlined and it may be (kcal), volume of timber harvested (tons),
helpful to include a clear rationale for chosen marginal contribution of soils to crop production,
metrics. The most relevant biodiversity metrics area of avoided flood damage due to regulation
and indicators vary by sector, ecosystem type by vegetation and soils (ha), nature-based
and country, therefore it is recommended to tourism visitation rates (number of visits).
look at sector/ecosystem/country specific
• Contributions to wellbeing: number of jobs
guidance where available.xlix
contributed by aquaculture, basic needs
satisfied via ecosystem service (e.g. number
1.2.3 Final ecosystem services metrics
of people with access to adequate water),
Measuring (and valuing) biodiversity can be
number of people protected from flooding
complex and challenging. Whilst our knowledge
and erosion due to coastal protection,
is constantly developing and improving, we still
marginal contribution of pest control to food
do not fully understand all the ways in which
or biofuel production, marginal contributions
organisations interact with (i.e. impact and
to income or wellbeing of visitors.
depend upon) biodiversity. Therefore, when
assessing and reporting metrics on impacts/ Depending on the definition and classification
dependencies on biodiversity, including of ecosystem services selected by the
information on the changes to the final organisation (see Box 1), it may also be helpful
ecosystem services (underpinned by biodiversity) to categorise indicators into types of services
is often a useful way to complement data directly (e.g. provisioning, regulating and cultural).
related to biodiversity itself. It can also be used to
supplement gaps in biodiversity data, where it is 1.3 Metrics: Valuation of impacts
impractical or impossible to provide that Where information about the valuation of impacts
information directly. Metrics related to final is material, reporting metrics that value the impact
ecosystem services should be used to of changes in biodiversity to the organisation (i.e.
complement biodiversity impact metrics and the related costs and benefits) can be helpful for
build a fuller picture, as opposed to an alternative. report users, demonstrating the relative worth or
importance of biodiversity impacts.
Where business activities result in significant
impacts on final ecosystem services that are Valuation metrics may be quantitative,
underpinned by biodiversity, it may be helpful to qualitative, monetary or a combination163
provide metrics that demonstrate these impacts. (see Box 7 for additional details, including why
This is a developing and challenging area162 often using a combination of valuation metrics is
requiring complex quantitative models. Useful useful). Valuation metrics should reflect the
resources identified for REQ-04 and some of the significant costs and benefits that are specific to
tools in Appendix 8 can support the assessment the organisation. As well as demonstrating the
of final ecosystem services. A possible way to significance of biodiversity impacts to the report
report metrics related to final ecosystem services user, valuation can also be useful in
is to split them into categories of (1) supply of final communicating exposure to risks or
ecosystem services available to the business, opportunities (see REQ-03).
xlix For example, WET-Health contains wetlands specific methods and l For further detail see: Brown, C., Reyers, B., Ingwall-King, L., Mapendembe,
Australia’s Integrated Ecosystem Condition Assessment Framework A., Nel, J., O’Farrell, P., Dixon, M. & Bowles-Newark, N. J. (2014). Measuring
provides country specific guidance. ecosystem services: Guidance on developing ecosystem service indicators.
UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge, UK. Available from: https://www.unep-wcmc.
org/system/dataset_file_fields/files/000/000/303/original/1850_ESI_
Guidance_A4_WEB.pdf?1424707843
63 CDSB Framework | Application guidance for biodiversity-related disclosures
Valuing the financial consequences for the should clearly specify the value perspective
business associated with biodiversity impacts they are reporting (i.e. societal value or
could include considering abatement costs, economic value), and limitations, uncertainties
costs of delay/disruption and costs associated or estimates should be disclosed to improve
with complying with legal requirements report user understandability.
(see REQ-03 for further examples).
The assessment and reporting of valuation
The context of the valuation can be business metrics related to biodiversity impacts should
(costs/benefits to the organisation) or societal include consideration of changes to the final
(costs/benefits to society). As noted in the ecosystem services underpinned by biodiversity
Biodiversity and Business section, costs and resulting from business activities. Example
benefits to wider society resulting from an (monetary) metrics include market value of
organisation’s impacts on biodiversity can affect livestock products, market value of carbon
its future financial position and financial uptake, marginal contribution of irrigation to
performance (e.g. reputational damage, fines), crop market value, avoided water treatment
therefore it is encouraged to adopt a societal costs, economic revenues derived from visits
perspective as well as an economic perspective to aesthetic areas, and marginal contribution
throughout the assessment. Organisations to real estate prices by nature-based tourism.164
Box 7: Biodiversity valuation types • Monetary valuation which uses market (i.e.
observed prices) and non-market (e.g.
Within the Biodiversity Application Guidance,
revealed or stated preference) approaches to
valuation is defined as the process of estimating
infer the monetary value of a biodiversity
the relative importance, worth, or usefulness of
impact/dependency. Monetary values
biodiversity to people, in a particular context (e.g.
include both financial values and externalities
for an organisation).165 This involves determining
that are not reflected in the final cost or
the consequences of biodiversity impacts and
benefit.
dependencies, and their related costs and
benefits, considering that biodiversity may have Monetary valuations can also be used to
different values to different groups of people. (1) provide a common measurement unit to
compare with financial values, such as
Placing values on biodiversity is challenging and
business costs or revenues, (2) benchmark
it is more common to apply valuation techniques
performance across organisations, assuming
to the final ecosystem services that flow from
the same economic/monetary conversion
biodiversity. Types of valuation include:166
figures are used, and (3) assess and
• Qualitative valuation which is descriptive and communicate the significance and distribution
often includes subjective perceptions, of costs and benefits amongst stakeholders
ranking impacts/dependencies into high, and net impacts to society.
medium or low.
Whilst useful for decision-making, some
• Quantitative valuation which assesses the aspects of biodiversity’s value cannot be
magnitude of biodiversity impacts or captured using monetary valuations, even if
dependencies in numerical, non-monetary they potentially represent a cost or benefit,
terms (e.g. areas, mass or value). It differs therefore monetary valuations are likely to be
from quantitative measurement (i.e. metrics) partial and underestimated.167 For this reason,
as it relates to the importance, worth, or monetary valuations should be treated as a
usefulness of the impact and/or dependency, minimum value and should be supported by
often considering geographic context and qualitative/quantitative approaches in order to
impacted stakeholders. provide a more complete picture.
64 CDSB Framework | Application guidance for biodiversity-related disclosures
categories, as well as direct and indirect impacts, the same methodologies should be used for
and phases of the value chain. Other useful ecologically equivalent ecosystem types and
disaggregation options include ecosystem types, methods should be consistent over time to allow
species, species broken down into levels of comparability. When using primary data, it may
extinction riskli and geographies (regional, be helpful to outline the measures taken to
national or categorised into levels of biodiversity ensure data collected has appropriate
risk). Disaggregation categories should be clearly measurement intervals that match the ecological
defined, and care should be taken not to confuse timescale (e.g. seasonal variations) and spatial
context specific elements when aggregating/ scale of the biodiversity impact.lii Useful details
disaggregating biodiversity metrics. can cover: (1) tools used, (2) data used (primary
and/or secondary, geographical and/or
ecosystem specific), (3) use of proxies,
5. Rationale of selection and generalised relationships, and/or models,
methodological details (4) assumptions made, uncertainties
(e.g. sensitivity analysis) and limitations of the
It is useful to offer brief explanations to the methods used, and (5) unit of sampling used.
appropriateness of reporting choices for metrics.
Given that it is common for selective reporting Finally, where there are uncertainties and gaps
on corporate impact, such explanations offer in the biodiversity data, limitations with
further confidence in the data disclosed. methodologies/data or where methods and
assumptions have been amended or applied,
There are many methods used for biodiversity highlighting and offering an explanation to
measurement. For example, methods for report users for these differences can alleviate
measuring changes in the state of biodiversity confusions or misconceptions. For example:
include direct measurement methods and
• Most measurement approaches are tailored to
ecological survey methods (see Box 6),
terrestrial use and may need to be adapted
estimations, which may be high-level, and
for marine or freshwater use, therefore it is
ecological or species modelling methods which
useful to highlight any significant assumptions
use equations and input data to model impacts,
made in this context.
such as population dynamics modelling.
Clearly stating the methodologies used will • A possible limitation may be that
add to the validity and usefulness of the results. measurement approaches are largely focused
The description should provide measurement on changes in the extent and condition of
details for the metrics reported and tools and ecosystems and target/actual population/
databases used should be referenced where habitat sizes of significant taxa. Other multi-
possible. It is also helpful to outline the faceted biodiversity areas, such as genetic
organisational level the metric applies to (i.e. resources and associated ecosystem services,
global, country, region, site or project-level). may not be fully considered by metrics.
• The use of model-based metrics, and/or
The method selected should be appropriate for
metrics based on global datasets, then
its purpose considering the level of reporting
applied locally may create limitations around
detail required, management information needs,
accuracy.
geographic scope, value chain boundary and
available time and resources. Where possible, • Where data access is problematic in the value
the most generally accepted or recognised chain there may be issues around data
method within a jurisdiction should be used, availability, reliability or accuracy.
li For example, Total number of IUCN Red List species and national lii Yearly monitoring may be appropriate for measures aimed at stabilising
conservation list species with habitats in areas affected by the operations or improving species’ population numbers, whereas monthly monitoring
of the organisation, by level of extinction risk: i. Critically endangered ii. may be necessary for actions such as water quality.
Endangered iii. Vulnerable iv. Near threatened v. Least concern
66 CDSB Framework | Application guidance for biodiversity-related disclosures
Useful resources
1. The EU Business @ Biodiversity Platform have 5. The World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF)
published a series of three reports (2018, 2019, report Assessing portfolio impacts - Tools to
2021) on the Assessment of biodiversity measure biodiversity and SDG footprints of
measurement approaches for businesses and financial portfolios provides tools and
financial institutions which may be helpful for methodologies to help financial institutions
selecting a measurement approach, as well as quantify portfolio environmental impacts, with
considering data and metrics, and disclosure. a focus on biodiversity, and identify the most
Annexes in the reports include lists and short significant impact areas based on the nature,
descriptions of metrics such as mean species content, and location of their portfolios. The
abundance and potentially disappeared fraction report also provides examples of real case
of species (also indicating the initiatives using studies.
the metrics), tools and frameworks such as IBAT,
6. The SEEA Ecosystem Accounting consists
Biodiversity Footprint Financial Institutions
of an integrated ecosystem accounting system
(BFFI), and Biodiversity Footprint Calculator,
including physical terms (for the account of
and measurement approaches such as the
ecosystem extent, condition and ecosystem
Global Biodiversity Score and the Biodiversity
services flows) and monetary terms (for the
Impact Metric (see Appendix 8 and Appendix 9).
account of ecosystem services flows and
Additionally, the 2021 report introduces the
ecosystem assets). The document describes
Biodiversity Measurement Navigation Wheel
and provides suggestions and resources
— a decision framework to help businesses
for each type of account and illustrates how
select the most suitable measurement
the different accounts are interconnected
approaches for a specific business context.
and together provide a comprehensive
2. UNEP-WCMC’s report Biodiversity measures and coherent view of ecosystems.
for business discusses the rationale and current
7. The Life Cycle Initiatives of the UNEP
business practice on biodiversity measurement,
has developed regionalised factors to conduct
and the related reporting and disclosures. It
an assessment of impacts related to land-use
provides sector-specific examples of metrics
impacts on biodiversity.
and approaches.
8. eDNA is increasingly used in biodiversity-
3. Resources from the Capitals Coalition guide
related assessments in combination with
organisations in the understanding and selection
traditional survey methods and is particularly
of measurements and valuation approaches and
useful for aquatic species. The Biodiversity
tools. The Natural Capital Protocol provides
Consultancy provides a briefing note illustrating
examples of impact drivers and dependencies
the current state of eDNA approaches, therefore
(also useful for REQ-02), related indicators and
allowing practitioners (including organisations)
measurement techniques (e.g. Table 7.1 on
to identify where the application of this
valuations techniques); the related Biodiversity
technology can benefit a project and where
Guidance includes examples of biodiversity-
it will complement or enhance traditional survey
specific resources relating to measurement and
methods. Nature Metrics provides easily
valuation (Table MV.2, Figure 6.1, and Table 6.4);
accessible tools for DNA-based biodiversity
the Natural Capital Toolkit is an interactive
monitoring, which analyse biological data
database that helps businesses find the right tool
to provide insights about soil health and
to measure and value natural capital; and the
ecosystem quality.
Biodiversity Guidance Navigation Tool guides
users through a biodiversity-inclusive natural 9. The IUCN’s Tools for measuring modelling and
capital assessment, following the steps in the valuing ecosystem services provides guidance for
Natural Capital Protocol and suggesting specific practitioners on existing tools that can be applied
tools, resources and methodologies based on the to measure or model ecosystem services provided
scope/area of the value chain a company sits. by important sites for biodiversity and nature
conservation (e.g. Key Biodiversity Areas, natural
4. Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services in
World Heritage sites, and protected areas).
Impact Assessment by the International
Association for Impact Assessment, provides 10. Measuring ecosystem services: Guidance on
best practice principles that are intended to developing ecosystem service indicators by
improve impact assessment outcomes. UNEP-WCMC, besides supporting the selection
67 CDSB Framework | Application guidance for biodiversity-related disclosures
identified, and related risks and opportunities, In order to show progress across the years, a
and (2) illustrate the effectiveness/ baseline assessment should be performed for
ineffectiveness of management responses. each metric considered to assess performance.
When reporting on performance in reference to Reference to an explicit baseline year and/or
targets set for significant sources of biodiversity reference state is required to enable report
impacts, it is useful to restate the overall ambition users to draw decision-useful conclusions,
and the baseline/reference state, clarifying for the providing a starting point or state of biodiversity
reader as to whether the targets are part of a benchmark against which changes in
corporate initiative or scheme, or tied to wider biodiversity can be compared. Options include:
national or international ambitions. Example
• Comparisons to previous years (baseline year)
indicators that may be useful to report users to
or an average over previous years (e.g. the year
demonstrate progress towards targets include:
the organisation first started to operate in a
• Percentage increase in the area, connectivity specific area and completed a biodiversity-
and integrity of natural ecosystems within related assessment). This may be most useful
the organisation’s impact area; where the objective is to reduce or improve
organisation’s biodiversity impact over time.
• Percentage increase in the population of
threatened species within the impact area; • Comparisons to the state of biodiversity at
a point in time, such as a pristine baseline
• Non-compliance with biodiversity-related
where impacts are measured relative to
regulation (e.g. percentage of facilities with
biodiversity in its natural state (reference
violations);
state), or a counterfactual reference state,
• Membership of biodiversity initiatives (e.g. which is a plausible state of biodiversity that
percentage of facilities or suppliers with would occur if the business did not operate.
biodiversity-related certifications or number of A counterfactual reference state is useful as
partnerships signed with a biodiversity-related it takes into account external, non-business
scientific body, NGO, foundation or nature impacts (e.g. climate change or other
conservation stakeholder); organisations).
• Number of farms applying approved techniques;
Industry benchmarks, such as an industry
• Proportion of products from certified sources; average, may also be useful to include as they
• Value of fines and sanctions for non-compliance assist with the comparability of disclosures.liii
with biodiversity laws and regulations;
When explaining trends, companies should
• Level of investment in biodiversity; draw the reader’s attention to the impacts of
• Number of employees that attended at least one environmental initiatives and management
biodiversity training session; and actions, wider corporate developments (e.g.
changes in strategy, acquisitions or
• Percentage of entities trained in biodiversity divestments), and other drivers of change that
issues (both under and outside the control of the are internal to the organisation such as
reporting organisation e.g. suppliers, depending methodological modifications (e.g. changes in
on the reporting boundaries). targets or data coverage). For example, an
increase in biodiversity risk might be the result
Indicators can also be helpful for demonstrating of the development of new products with inputs
performance of delivery of strategies and sourced from regions with high biodiversity-
objectives. For example, a company’s objectives related risks, or a new acquisition. Other natural
can be best tracked with impact indicators (Table and human-induced factors that are outside the
4 and Table 5) whilst the strategies will require control of the organisation (e.g. regulatory
response indicators (e.g. biodiversity impact changes) can influence such trends. Such
mitigation measures or BAPs in place). Additionally, narratives should try to illustrate a more holistic
it would be beneficial to provide details on biodiversity impact, clearly describing the
performance and progress in priority geographical changes between reporting years and the
areas and for priority products/services, but also in drivers, while making connections across
areas experiencing significant changes including different aspects of the corporate report.
related to land-use (e.g. urbanisation or
deforestation), legislations, and population growth.
liii Check the work of the World Benchmarking Alliance. Available from:
https://www.worldbenchmarkingalliance.org/seafood-stewardship-index/
70 CDSB Framework | Application guidance for biodiversity-related disclosures
Useful resources
1. The 2021 report Assessment of Biodiversity 5. The Biodiversity Indicators for Site-Based
Measurement Approaches for Businesses and Impacts methodology by UNEP-WCMC,
Financial Institutions from the EU Business @ Conservation International and Fauna & Flora
Biodiversity Platform includes a summary of International sets out a methodology for
different biodiversity measurement approaches, aggregating biodiversity impact and
highlighting those that support the assessment performance data at site level to provide
of current performance and the tracking of indicators of biodiversity management
target progress (see Figure 2, pg. 17) performance at corporate level.
2. Stage 4 of the IUCN Guidelines for planning 6. The development and use of biodiversity
and monitoring corporate biodiversity indicators in business by the IUCN, introduces
performance offers guidance for choosing, a spectrum of business applications for
defining and using a small set of core indicators biodiversity indicators, illustrating their use
that can be monitored across the corporate in the decision-making process and in the
scope of biodiversity influence, to show progress measurement and tracking of biodiversity
against goals, objectives and the delivery of performance. This report also guides companies
strategies. in the selection of indicators (REQ-04).
3. The Biodiversity Indicators Partnership is a 7. Towards Nature Positive Business: The case
global initiative promoting the development and for biodiversity indicators by UNEP-WCMC,
delivery of biodiversity indicators, linked to provides guidance on how biodiversity indicators
global initiatives (i.e. CBD and other biodiversity- can be used to track biodiversity performance
related conventions, IPBES, the SDGs) that may and report progress to relevant stakeholders.
be useful for organisations when selecting and
8. The Biological Diversity Protocol offers an
developing indicators.
accounting and reporting framework that enables
4. Measuring ecosystem services: Guidance on organisations to produce Statements of Biodiversity
developing ecosystem service indicators by Position and Performance, which can be used to
UNEP-WCMC, supports the development of measure performance and risk over time. The
ecosystem service indicators at the national and protocol also provides suggestions on how to
regional level for uses including corporate accurately conduct and report on data collection.
assessment, decision-making and reporting.
Please also refer to Table 11 in Appendix 9.
71 CDSB Framework | Application guidance for biodiversity-related disclosures
used, it is beneficial for this to be highlighted within in complex environmental systems and political,
the methods and inputs. In reporting the economic and societal arenas as well as the
effectiveness and resilience of the organisation’s exposure of the organisation or assets and its
strategies to the potential business impacts of the associated vulnerabilities. The qualities and
different scenarios, report preparers should be clear dimensions of biodiversity-related risks and
about uncertainties but as precise as possible with opportunities for companies are likely to change
how the impacts of risks differ by geography and over time, whether gradually or abruptly.
time horizon. Clear articulation of the specific Therefore, using the findings of such exercises to
sensitivities to the different scenarios will allow assess corporate outlook is an important means
report users to better understand the potential of updating risk and opportunity identification
responses identified by the organisation as a result systems and refine or reformulate biodiversity-
of the exercise, whether that is no response, related policies, strategies and targets. This will
changes to financial planning and investment, or better prepare the organisation in limiting and
reimagining the business model. seizing biodiversity-related risks and
opportunities. Including such learnings and how
they have been incorporated into systems and
3. Iteration and learning ambitions in the mainstream report is a valuable
means of demonstrating effective and efficient
Biodiversity-related risks and opportunities are management of significant biodiversity-related
highly dynamic and dependent upon changes matters to investors.
Assessment Tools
As for risks, existing assessment tools can 3. IUCN’s STAR tool measures the contribution
support the assessment of future scenarios and that investments can make to reducing species
business resilience to those scenarios. extinction risk which could be used for scenario
Combining different tools and integrating analysis purposes.
organisation-specific components and
4. The current version of ENCORE allows
information is good practice and would provide
exploration of future scenarios in terms of the
a more comprehensive and robust assessment.
potential direct impacts of each commodity on
1. The Globio model allows trends in biodiversity biodiversity (available for some sectors, e.g.
and ecosystem services to be modelled under agriculture and mining). The description of
future socio-economic development scenarios, methods supports the understanding and the
as well as different policy interventions. selection of scenarios and related analysis and
provides a list of models that can be coupled
2. The Water Risk Filter by WWF includes
with ENCORE (see Table 5, pg. 40).
TCFD-aligned future scenarios that combine
climate and socioeconomic scenarios and
provides 2030 and 2050 quantitative
projections of physical risks. Despite being
focused on water, among the physical risks
the tool includes risks also linked to ecosystem
services status considering the fragmentation
status of rivers, catchment ecosystem services
degradation level, and projected impacts on
freshwater biodiversity. The Water Risk Filter
methodology includes a description of methods,
data and sources used.
74 CDSB Framework | Application guidance for biodiversity-related disclosures
Appendices
76 CDSB Framework | Application guidance for biodiversity-related disclosures
Appendix 1:
CDSB Framework –
Guiding principles and
reporting requirements
Principles
P1 Environmental information shall be
prepared applying the principles of
CDSB
relevance and materiality Framework
P2 Disclosures shall be faithfully represented for reporting environmental
& climate change information
P3 Disclosures shall be connected with Advancing and aligning disclosure
other information in the mainstream report of environmental information in
mainstream reports
P4 Disclosures shall be consistent and
comparable
P5 Disclosures shall be clear and
understandable
P6 Disclosures shall be verifiable
P7 Disclosures shall be forward looking December 2019
www.cdsb.net/framework
Reporting requirements
Sustainability reporting
via various materiality lenses
Already represented in
the financial statements
X
s Sustainability matter:
los
ity e.g. biodiversity loss
ers
iodiv
B
Figure 9. Materiality of sustainability matters is dynamic, and the three forms of sustainability reporting are nested. The CDSB Framework and
Biodiversity Application Guidance focus on sustainability matters that affect financial position and performance. This figure is an adapted version from
the publication Reporting on enterprise value by CDP, CDSB, GRI, IIRC and SASB (IIRC and SASB have merged into the Value Reporting Foundation).
79 CDSB Framework | Application guidance for biodiversity-related disclosures
CDSB Framework
REQ-01 REQ-02 REQ-03 REQ-04 REQ-05 REQ-06
TCFD • Governance (a, b) • Governance (b) • Governance (b) • Metrics and Targets • Metrics and • Strategy (a, b, c)
• Risk Management (a, b, c) • Strategy (b) • Strategy (a, b c) (a, b) Targets (a, b) • Risk
• Risk Management (a, b, c) • Risk Management (a, b, c) Management (c)
• Metrics and Targets (a, c) • Metrics and
Targets (a)
CDP Forest Security • F4.1; F4.2; F4.3 • F0.4; F0.5 • F1.2; F1.3; F1.6 • F1.2; F1.3 F1.6 • F1.1
Questionnaire • F6.6; F6.7 • F1.1; F1.2; F1.5 • F2 • F6.4 • F1.6
• F2 • F3.1; F3.2 • F6.3; F6.5
• F4.5; F4.6 • F6.3; F6.6 • F8.1
• F5.1 • F8.1
• F6.1; F6.2; F6.3; F6.4; F6.5;
F6.7; F6.8; F6.9; F6.10; F6.11
• F8.1
GRI 303 - water and effluents • REQ. 303-1 (c, d) • REQ. 303-1 (a, b, c, d) • REQ. 303-1 (a) • REQ. 303-1 (a, b) • REQ. 303-1 (a) • REQ. 303-1 (b)
• REQ. 303-2 • REQ. 303-3
• REQ. 303-4
• REQ. 303-5
GRI 304 - • REQ 1.1 (following GRI 103) • REQ 304-1 • REQ 304-3 (a, • Rep. Reco 2.1
biodiversityliv • REQ 304-1 • REQ 304-2 c, d)
• REQ 304-2 • REQ 304-3 (a, c, d)
• REQ 304-3 (b) • REQ 304-4
IPIECA - Sustainability • 4.5 | ENV-6: C4 • 4.5 | ENV-3: A1, A2, A3, A4 • 4.5 | ENV-1: C3 • 4.5 | ENV-3: A2 • 4.5 | ENV-4: A1,
reporting guidance for the oil • 3.6 | CCE-1 • 4.5 | ENV-3: C1, C2, C3 • 4.5 | ENV-4: C1, C2 A2
and gas industry • 4.5 | ENV-4: C1, C2 • 4.5| ENV-6: C2, A1,
(Module 4) • 4.5 | ENV-4: A1 A2, A3, A4, A5, A6,
• 4.5 | ENV-6: C1, C3, C4 A7, A8
The Natural Capital Protocol • Step 02 • Step 01 • Step 01 • Step 04 • Step 06 • Step 08
• Step 02 • Step 03 • Step 05 • Step 08
• Step 03 • Step 04 • Step 06
• Step 04 • Step 05 • Step 07
• Step 05 • Step 07
• Step 09
Accountability Framework • Principle 4 (4.1, 4.2 and 4.4) • Principle 1 (1.1 and 1.2) • Principle 2 (2.1 and 2.2) • Principle 11 (11.3 and • Principle 3.2 • Principle 11.9
• Principle 10 (10.1, 10.2 and • Principle 2.1 • Principle 3 (3.1 and 3.4) 11.4) • Principle 11 (11.
10.3) • Principle 3 (3.2, 3.3 and 3.4) • Principle 5 (5.1 and 5.2) • Principle 12.1 and 11.2)
• Principle 11.9 • Principle 4 (4.2) • Principle 7 (7.1) • Principle 12
• Principle 5.1 • Principle 11.5
• Principle 6
• Principle 7
• Principle 8
• Principle 9
• Principle 10
liv Also referenced in GRI 11: Oil and Gas Sector 2021.
lv Biodiversity is generally considered under “Ecological Impacts” (but not only, e.g. in “Poultry, Meat, Dairy” it is considered under “Animal and Feed Sourcing”)
in several of the SASB sector-specific standards. Here only the “Oil and Gas – midstream” and “Home Builders” are reported as examples. Interested parties can
review the applicable industry standard(s) to identify relevant content that could support effective disclosure on biodiversity-related matters.
80 CDSB Framework | Application guidance for biodiversity-related disclosures
Appendix 4: Definitions
The definitions and associated sources for key terms used in the Biodiversity Application
Guidance are outlined below.
Table 7. Definitions of common terms used throughout the Biodiversity Application Guidance, including sources.
Biodiversity The diversity of life in all its forms — the diversity of species, of UN CBD, 1992
(or biological genetic variations within one species, and of ecosystems.
diversity)
Biodiversity A biodiversity dependency is a reliance on or use of biodiversity, Adapted from: Biological
dependency including biological resources (e.g. materials, liquids, genetic Diversity Protocol
resources) from both species and interactions with various
ecosystem processes and services (e.g. pollination, water filtration,
crop pest/disease control or water flow regulation).
Biodiversity impact A change in the diversity of ecosystems and/or species that may CDSB
take place because of business activities. This includes changes
to the state of ecosystems (e.g. extent and condition/integrity)
and species (e.g. habitat, population size) that can be used to
signal changes in biodiversity. A negative impact is a potential
loss of biodiversity (e.g. decline in species number) and a positive
impact is a potential gain in biodiversity (e.g. nature restoration).
Direct impact A change in the state of biodiversity caused by a business activity Adapted from: Biological
with a direct causal link. Diversity Protocol and
Natural Capital Protocol:
Biodiversity Guidance
Ecological The principle that for impact assessment or offsetting purposes, the Adapted from: Biological
Equivalency types of biodiversity lost or gained should be ecologically equivalent Diversity Protocol
or like-for-like (i.e. only the same types of ecosystems or taxa should
be aggregated), due to biodiversity patterns varying significantly
between different species/ecosystems and locations.
Ecological An ecological threshold is the point at which a relatively small change or Adapted from: Valuing
thresholds and disturbance to a system leads to an abrupt change in ecosystem Nature Programme and
tipping points quality, property or phenomenon. Groffman, P. et al (2006)
A tipping point is a specific type of ecological threshold, referring
to a situation where accelerating change, caused by a positive
(self-enforcing) feedback mechanism, drives an ecosystem to a
new state, with significant changes in biodiversity, natural capital
and/or ecosystem services. Changes in ecosystems that take place
once a tipping point has been reached can be long lasting, hard to
reverse or irreversible.
81 CDSB Framework | Application guidance for biodiversity-related disclosures
Ecosystem Services The flows of benefits that ecosystems make to people (e.g. timber, Adapted from: Natural
fibre, pollination, water regulation, climate regulation, recreation, Capital Protocol
mental health), enabling human activities which, include the
operation of businesses.
Final Ecosystem When an ecological end-product transitions to being either an Adapted from: Finisdore, J.,
Services economic benefit or something that can be directly used or et al. (2020), CICES and
appreciated by people. NESCS
Habitat The place or type of site where an organism or population UN CBD, 1992
naturally occurs.
Indirect impact A change in the state of biodiversity caused by a business Adapted from: Biological
activity with an indirect causal link (e.g. indirectly caused by the Diversity Protocol and
climate change GHG emissions contributed to). Natural Capital Protocol:
Biodiversity Guidance
Invasive species Plant and animal species introduced (deliberately or accidentally) From IUCN French
into a natural environment, whose acclimatisation and propagation Committee.
represent a major threat to eco-systems, habitats and native species
with negative impacts on the environment, the economy and
human health.
Land-use The human use of a specific area for a certain purpose (such as IPBES; IPCC, Special Report
residential; agriculture; recreation; industrial, etc.). Influenced by, on Climate Change and
but not synonymous with, land cover. Land-use change refers to Land, 2019
a change in the use or management of land by humans, which
may lead to a change in land cover.
Note: In the context of this guidance, the connection to climate
change will also be considered in relation to land-use, land-use
change and forestry (LULUCF), as set out by the IPCC. LULUCF
activities have an important role to play in climate mitigation,
although mitigation options can also have adverse side effects for
biodiversity and nature.
Mitigation hierarchy A sequence of actions applied to the management Adapted from: Business and
(biodiversity) of biodiversity impacts, consisting of four stages: Biodiversity Offsets
Programme (BBOP) and
1. Avoid impacts on biodiversity;
Natural Capital Protocol:
2. Reduce biodiversity impacts as far as possible; Biodiversity Guidance
3. Restore/remediate impacts that are immediately reversible; and
4. Offset residual impacts to achieve a desired net outcome (e.g.
no net loss or net gain).
Natural Capital The stock of renewable and non-renewable natural resources (e.g., Natural Capital Protocol
plants, animals, air, water, soils, minerals) that combine to yield a
flow of benefits to people (ecosystem services).
Nature-positive A world with a net positive state of nature by 2030, and full Adapted from: SBTN and
recovery of nature by 2050. Nature+Positive
Physical risks: Physical climate (and environmental) risks can be classified as Recommendations of the
acute and chronic acute when they are event driven, or chronic when they are linked TCFD
to longer-term shifts in climate (and environmental) patterns.
Protected area A clearly defined geographical space, recognised, dedicated, and IUCN definition 2008, 2013
managed, through legal or other effective means, to achieve the
long-term conservation of nature with associated ecosystem
services and cultural values.
Species A group of individuals that actually or potentially interbreed and Biological Diversity Protocol
produce fertile offspring.
Valuation The process of estimating the relative importance, worth, or Natural Capital Protocol:
usefulness of biodiversity to people, in a particular context (e.g. for Biodiversity Guidance
an organisation).
Value Chain An organisation’s direct operations, upstream activities and Adapted from: Natural
downstream activities. Direct operations cover activities over Capital Protocol; Biological
which the organisation has direct control, upstream activities cover Diversity Protocol
the activities of suppliers, leased assets, outsourcing operation and
franchises and downstream activities are those linked to the
purchase, use, re-use, recovery, recycling and final disposal of the
organisation’s products and services.
82 CDSB Framework | Application guidance for biodiversity-related disclosures
Appendix 5:
Key CDSB resourceslvi
1. CDSB (2021). Accounting for climate 6. CDSB and CDP (2020). The building blocks:
Integrating climate-related matters into financial Connecting CDP data with the CDSB Framework
reporting - Supplementary paper. Available from: to successfully fulfil the TCFD Recommendations.
https://www.cdsb.net/sites/default/files/cdsb_ Available from: https://www.cdsb.net/
climateaccountingguidance_2021_v4.pdf buildingblocks
2. CDSB (2021). The CDSB Framework 7. CDSB (2019). CDSB Framework for reporting
Application guidance for water-related environmental and climate change information.
disclosures. Available from: Available from: https://www.cdsb.net/framework
https://www.cdsb.net/water
8. CDSB (2018). Uncharted waters: How can
3. CDSB (2021). Decision-useful climate-related companies use financial accounting standards
information for investors - What, Why & How?. to deliver on the Task Force on Climate-related
Available from: Financial Disclosures’ recommendations?
https://www.cdsb.net/decision-useful Available from: https://www.cdsb.net/sites/
default/files/uncharted_waters_final.pdf
4. CDSB (2020). Accounting for climate. Available
from: https://www.cdsb.net/climateaccounting 9. CDSB (2012). Proposals for boundary setting
in mainstream reports. Available from: https://
5. CDSB (2020). Application guidance for www.cdsb.net/sites/default/files/proposals_for_
climate-related disclosures. Available from: mainstream_report_boundary_setting.pdf
https://www.cdsb.net/climateguidance
lvi These resources are mainly related to climate (and water), but they
provide technical and practical support for the preparation of sustainability-
related financial information and mainstream reports, which can be useful
also in the case of biodiversity-related financial information.
83 CDSB Framework | Application guidance for biodiversity-related disclosures
Noise/light pollution Noise or light pollution as a result of operational activities Changes to species behaviour
(e.g. construction noise, artificial light emissions). and distribution, including migration
and breeding patterns (e.g.
disruption of foraging, breeding
or social behaviour).
Waste Plastic waste or waste assimilation. Impacts on species abundance
(e.g. reduction in abundance due
to macroplastics or microplastics
along the food chain).
Soil pollution Toxic pollution resulting from the use of agrochemicals Loss of abundance or diversity
being up taken by plant species and ingested across the of species that ingest of toxic
food chain. Excessive nutrients used in agriculture pollutants (e.g. invertebrates,
entering water networks. insects) and those that feed on
them (e.g. birds). Aquatic
eutrophication resulting in
destruction of equilibrium in aquatic
ecosystems.
Water pollution Water pollutants resulting in reduced oxygen levels within Reduction in number of species
the impacted waterway (e.g. river, lake, or stream) due to the present in affected area, including
input of chemicals. both those affected by chemicals
and those that feed on them.
Air emissions Emissions of GHGs and other air pollutants. Decrease in air quality and climate
change resulting in loss of
ecosystem quality and changes to
species distribution and population
sizes.
84 CDSB Framework | Application guidance for biodiversity-related disclosures
The Food and A community of partners including SYSTEMIQ, WBCSD Harnessing the expertise of public,
Land Use and WRI, working to galvanise system change relating to private and research organisations to
Coalition food and land-use, through a series of global initiatives. enable systems thinking on food and
land-use transformation for people,
nature and climate.
EU Business A forum set up by the European Commission, running Working with and helping businesses
@ Biodiversity workstreams with EU companies and financial institutions to measure and integrate the value of
Platform to link business and biodiversity. nature into business practices.
The Global Links 21 national and regional initiatives, all working Increase the number of companies
Partnership for towards greater business engagement on biodiversity- with a significantly reduced negative
Business and related issues, so that they can share information and impact upon biodiversity (or even a
Biodiversity good practices, and cooperate on common projects. net-positive impact) and to mobilise
and enable them to act as positive
influencers upon other entities.
Act4nature An international alliance led by EpE under a multi- Aim to accelerate business action in
stakeholder steering committee. Act4nature has favour of nature and mobilise
CEO-level and SMART individual objectives for businesses companies to protect, promote and
to sign. restore biodiversity driven by
commitment from CEOs.
The Align Project Funded by the European Commission, and led by WCMC To accelerate the natural evolution of
(Aligning Europe, the Capitals Coalition, Arcadis, ICF and UNEP- natural capital accounting
accounting WCMC, the Align project supports businesses, financial approaches, from guidance to
approaches for institutions and other stakeholders in developing standardisation, by developing a
standardised natural capital accounting practices, generally accepted set of methods,
nature)
including a standardised approach to biodiversity indicators and criteria for corporate
measurement. biodiversity measurement tools and
approaches, sector specific guidance
for site based, value chain and finance
sector companies and a standardised
approach to measure corporate
impacts and dependencies on
biodiversity.
The Transparent A collaboration between The Value Balancing Alliance, To help the private sector shift
Project the Capitals Coalition and the WBCSD to develop a set of towards a more sustainable financial
environmental generally accepted accounting principles. and economic system. by developing
a standardised natural capital
accounting and valuation
methodology that businesses can use
in their decision-making and external
disclosure.
The Biodiversity Initiated at the CBD COP 11 by UNDP and the European To demonstrate how nature-positive
Finance Initiative Commission, and now present in 40 countries, BIOFIN is economies can work for people and
working with governments, civil-society, vulnerable the planet.
communities, and the private sector to catalyse
investments in nature.
86 CDSB Framework | Application guidance for biodiversity-related disclosures
Biodiversity UNEP-WCMC, Methodology that meets the needs of extractive Extractive industry
Indicators for Conservation companies in understanding their performance in
Site-Based International and mitigating their impacts on biodiversity.
Impacts Fauna and Flora
International
Biodiversity EU LIFE Food and Assesses site level supply chain biodiversity impacts by Food sector
Monitoring Biodiversity processing aggregated data sets. Includes 35 indicators
System covering the loss of biodiversity.
Bioscope PRé Sustainability, Calculates supply chain impacts on biodiversity for Cross-sectoral
Arcadis and CODE commodities and resources purchased from 170 sectors
for a range of impact drivers using the ReCiPe method.
Cool Farm Tool Cool Farm Alliance Enables organisations to calculate the biodiversity Agriculture sector
footprint of products and supply chains.
Corporate Iceberg data lab Metric of corporate biodiversity impact that reflects the Cross-sectoral
extent to which ecosystems affected by a company’s
Biodiversity
business have been degraded from their pristine natural
Footprint state. The score factors in a company’s land-use, nitrogen
deposition, GHG emissions and release of toxic compounds.
87 CDSB Framework | Application guidance for biodiversity-related disclosures
GLOBIO model PBL Netherlands Aims to assess scenarios of human-induced changes in Cross-sectoral
Environmental biodiversity, including impacts as well as benefits and
Assessment future socio-economic scenarios.
Agency
IBAT Birdlife Provides access to data from three global biodiversity Cross-sectoral
International, databases to provide assessments of the proximity of a
Conservation site to a threatened species and important conservation
International, IUCN places. Utilises the STAR method.
and UNEP-WCMC
IFC cumulative International Good practice handbook outlining a six-step process to Cross-sectoral
impact Finance assist private sector companies in emerging markets to
assessment Corporation assess potential cumulative impacts and pressures.
LIFE key Life Institute Helps organisations to identify and evaluate their Cross-sectoral
impacts and design a strategic plan to reduce, mitigate
and compensate for them, including supply chain
impacts. The LIFE Biodiversity Estimated Impact Value
calculates and evaluates impact based on five
environmental aspects.
Product I care Operates at a product level and uses lifecycle analysis Cross-sectoral
Biodiversity approaches to calculate the potential biodiversity
Footprint footprint of a product.
ReCiPe model RIVM, Radboud Life Cycle Impact Assessment methodology used to Cross-sectoral
University assess environmental impacts of economic activities
Nijmegen, Leiden (through their products and/or services) using 21
University and indicators, including biodiversity.
PRé Sustainability
Trase A partnership A supply chain mapping approach that uses publicly Cross-sectoral
between the available data to consumer markets to deforestation
Stockholm and other impacts.
Environment
Institute and
Global Canopy
88 CDSB Framework | Application guidance for biodiversity-related disclosures
IUCN Red Lists IUCN Threatened Species: A comprehensive information source on the
(Threatened Species; global extinction risk status of animal, fungus and plant species,
Ecosystems) including information on range, population size, habitat and ecology,
use and/or trade, threats and conservation actions.
Ecosystems: Evaluation of the status of ecosystems based on
scientific assessments of the risk of ecosystem collapse (i.e.
collapsed, threatened at Critically Endangered, Endangered or
Vulnerable levels, of Least Concern).
The Living Planet ZSL and WWF Holds time-series data for over 27,000 populations of mammals,
Database birds, fish, reptiles and amphibian species around the world, which
are aggregated to produce indices on the state of biodiversity. Data
can be disaggregated for analysis of trends at different scales and
for different habitats.
International Wetlands International Provides population trend data for over 800 waterbird species and
Waterbird Census 2300 biogeographic populations worldwide.
Database
Global Biodiversity Global Biodiversity Provides historical trends in the occurrence of species.
Information System Information Facility
Ocean Data Viewer UNEP-WCMC Provides a range of spatial datasets on marine and coastal
biodiversity that are useful for informing decisions regarding the
conservation of marine and ocean ecosystems.
Integrated Birdlife International, Provides geographic information about global biodiversity (i.e.
Biodiversity Conservation World Database on Protected Areas, IUCN Red List of Threatened
Assessment Tool International, IUCN and Species, and the World Database of Key Biodiversity Areas) that
UNEP-WCMC support the assessment of priority areas and impact.
REQ-06 REQ-05
REQ-06
Figure 10. Mapping of DPSIR (Driver-Pressure-State-Impact-Response) framework to Pathway approach (see Box 2) and CDSB requirements. References:
SBTN Guidance Updates, the Natural Capital Protocol and Environmental indicators: Typology and overview by the European Environmental Agency.
89 CDSB Framework | Application guidance for biodiversity-related disclosures
References
1. Climate Disclosure Standards Board (2019). CDSB 16. Ibid., 9.
Framework for reporting environmental and climate 17. Ibid., 10.
change information. Available from: https://www.
cdsb.net/framework 18. AXA & WWF (2019). Into the Wild: Integrating nature
into investment strategies. Available from: https://
2. United Nations (1992). Convention on Biological wwfint.awsassets.panda.org/downloads/report_wwf_
Diversity. Available from: https://www.cbd.int/doc/ france___axa_into_the_wild_may_2019__dv_1.pdf
legal/cbd-en.pdf
19. Capitals Coalition and Cambridge Conservation
3. Endangered Wildlife Trust (2020). The Biological Initiative (2020). Integrating Biodiversity into Natural
Diversity Protocol. Available from: https://www. Capital Assessments. Available from: https://
nbbnbdp.org/uploads/1/3/1/4/131498886/biological_ naturalcapitalcoalition.org/wp-content/
diversity_protocol__bd_protocol_.pdf uploads/2020/10/Biodiversity-Guidance_
4. Reid, W. V. (2005). Millennium ecosystem assessment. COMBINED_single-page.pdf
Available from: http://www.millenniumassessment. 20. Thamotheram, R., Stewart, O. (2016). Bee colony and
org/en/Synthesis.aspx food supply collapse: Could investors be the cavalry?
5. Capitals Coalition (2016). Natural Capital Protocol. Chapter 9 in Atkins and Atkins, The business of bees:
Available from: https://naturalcapitalcoalition.org/ An integrated approach to bee decline and corporate
natural-capital-protocol/ responsibility. Greenleaf Publishing, Saltaire, UK, pp.
170–186. pp. 170–186. Available from: https://www.
6. Ibid.
taylorfrancis.com/chapters/
7. Ibid., 3. edit/10.4324/9781351283922-18/bee-colony-food-
supply-collapse-could-investors-cavalry-raj-
8. Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures
thamotheram-olivia-stewart-preventable-surprises-uk
(2017). Final Report: Recommendations of the Task
Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures. 21. Herron, A. (2019). Extraction and extinction: the role of
Available from: https://www.fsb-tcfd.org/wp- investors in ensuring the marine health of the planet.
content/uploads/2017/06/FINAL-2017-TCFD- Chapter 7 in Atkins and Atkins, Around the World in 80
Report-11052018.pdf Species: Exploring the Business of Extinction,
pp.146–150. Available from: https://www.taylorfrancis.
9. Dasgupta, P. (2021). The Economics of Biodiversity:
com/books/edit/10.4324/9780429437397/around-
The Dasgupta Review. (London: HM Treasury).
world-80-species-jill-atkins-barry-atkins
Available from: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.
uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/ 22. IPIECA, API and IOGP (2020). Sustainability reporting
attachment_data/file/962785/The_Economics_of_ guidance for the oil and gas industry. Available from:
Biodiversity_The_Dasgupta_Review_Full_Report.pdf https://www.ipieca.org/media/5115/ipieca_
sustainability-guide-2020.pdf
10. UN Environment Programme, UNEP Finance Initiative
and Global Canopy (2020). Beyond ‘Business as 23. IUCN (2020). A compass for navigating the world of
Usual’: Biodiversity targets and finance. Managing biodiversity footprinting tools: an introduction for
biodiversity risks across business sectors. UNEP- companies and policy makers. Available from: https://
WCMC, Cambridge, UK. Available from: https://www. www.iucn.nl/app/uploads/2021/04/a_compass_for_
unepfi.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/ navigating_biodiversity_footprint_tools_-_final_1.pdf
Beyond-Business-As-Usual-Full-Report.pdf
24. Hilton, S. and Lee, JM J. (2021). Assessing Portfolio
11. De Nederlandsche Bank, PBL Netherlands Impacts - Tools to Measure Biodiversity and SDG
Environmental Assessment Agency (2020). Indebted Footprints of Financial Portfolios. Gland, Switzerland:
to nature - Exploring biodiversity risks for the Dutch WWF. Available from: https://wwf.panda.
financial sector. Available from: https://www.dnb.nl/ org/?2898916/Assessing-Portfolio-Impacts
media/4c3fqawd/indebted-to-nature.pdf
25. The Netherlands Enterprise Agency (2021).
12. World Economic Forum (2020). Nature Risk Rising: Biodiversity Footprint for Financial Institutions -
Why the Crisis Engulfing Nature Matters for Business Exploring Biodiversity Assessment. Available from:
and the Economy, New Nature Economy series, World https://www.government.nl/documents/
Economic Forum. Available from: http://www3. reports/2021/07/29/biodiversity-footprint-for-
weforum.org/docs/WEF_New_Nature_Economy_ financial-institutions
Report_2020.pdf
26. CDSB (2021). The state of EU Environmental Disclosure
13. ILO and WWF (2020). Nature Hires: How Nature- in 2020. Available from: https://www.cdsb.net/
based Solutions can power a green jobs recovery. nfrd2020
Available from: https://wwfint.awsassets.panda.org/
27. UN-WCMC (2020). Biodiversity measures for business:
downloads/nature_hires_report_wwf_ilo.pdf
Corporate biodiversity measurement, reporting and
14. OECD (2019). Biodiversity: Finance and the Economic disclosure within the current and future global policy
and Business Case for Action (prepared by the OECD context. Available from: https://www.unep-wcmc.org/
for the French G7 Presidency and the G7 Environment system/comfy/cms/files/files/000/001/845/original/
Ministers’ Meeting). Available from: https://www.oecd. aligning_measures_corporate_reporting_disclosure_
org/environment/resources/biodiversity/G7-report- dec2020.pdf
Biodiversity-Finance-and-the-Economic-and-
28. Addison, P. F., Bull, J. W., & Milner-Gulland, E. J. (2019).
Business-Case-for-Action.pdf
Using conservation science to advance corporate
15. Ibid., 66. biodiversity accountability. Conservation Biology,
90 CDSB Framework | Application guidance for biodiversity-related disclosures
33(2), 307-318. Available from: https://conbio. Nature Education Knowledge, 3(12), 8. Available from:
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/cobi.13190 https://www.nature.com/scitable/knowledge/library/
biodiversity-and-ecosystem-services-is-it-
29. KPMG (2020) The KPMG Survey of Sustainability
the-96677163/
Reporting 2020. KPMG Impact. Available from:
https://assets.kpmg/content/dam/kpmg/xx/ 48. Ibid., 19.
pdf/2020/11/the-time-has-come.pdf
49. Tilman, D. (2000). Causes, consequences and ethics of
30. Ibid., 10. biodiversity. Nature 405, 208-211. Available from:
https://www.nature.com/articles/35012217
31. Vivid Economics and PRI (2020). The Inevitable Forest
Finance Response: Investor Opportunities. Available 50. Ives, A. R. & Carpenter, S. R. (2007). Stability and
from: https://www.unpri.org/download?ac=11981 diversity of ecosystems. Science 317, 58-62. Available
from: https://science.sciencemag.org/
32. United Nations (2015). The 17 Sustainable
content/317/5834/58.abstract?casa_token=Rs3F1E_
Development Goals. Available from: https://sdgs.un.
HMoYAAAAA:bP1Bpx20YuiY8HjptqKx3iMxxi3dsRBD
org/goals
UcBwzW0m-TAwEAwehIKjtLOHEe82LPUSY_
33. Steffen, W., Richardson, K., Rockström, J., Cornell, S. E., NUPmaIf-ht9g
Fetzer, I., Bennett, E. M., et al. (2015). Planetary
51. Brussaard, L., de Ruiter P. C., & Brown, G. G. (2007).
boundaries: Guiding human development on a
Soil biodiversity for agricultural sustainability.
changing planet. Science, 347(6223).
Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 121,
Available from: https://science.sciencemag.org/
233-244. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.
content/347/6223/1259855
com/science/article/pii/S0167880906004476?casa_
34. Ibid., 9. token=vGt-dc2LE7gAAAAA:wD0TMPTlLZXM5181ril
35. Ibid., 9. 0Q3-vVsBtAZoB0FWDwPqCo0R5sMeYwm3xyyGVZ
GWGN0Ox_TfAEDjWQg
36. Ibid., 5.
52. Nielsen, U. N., Ayres, E., Wall, D. H., & Bardgett, R. D.
37. Ibid., 23. (2011). Soil biodiversity and carbon cycling: a review
38. Ibid., 5. and synthesis of studies examining diversity–function
relationships. European Journal of Soil Science, 62(1),
39. IPBES (2019). Global assessment report on biodiversity
105-116. Available from: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/
and ecosystem services of the Intergovernmental
doi/full/10.1111/j.1365-2389.2010.01314.x?casa_token=b
Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and
yPRQ4D2mvEAAAAA%3AzVY8wuoTtvGWo66XVX
Ecosystem Services. Available from: https://ipbes.net/
WVQgsTG5Ewhg9rL0Bxagy1-RLdN8T-
global-assessment
YDRClAOhoLyAR_K1jdSUfQzPtUie2g
40. Haines-Young, R. and M.B. Potschin (2018). Common
53. Ibid., 9.
International Classification of Ecosystem Services
(CICES) V5.1 and Guidance on the Application of the 54. Ibid., 44.
Revised Structure. Available from: https://cices.eu/ 55. Ibid., 45.
content/uploads/sites/8/2018/01/
Guidance-V51-01012018.pdf 56. Ibid., 9.
41. Díaz, S., et al. (2020). RE: There is more to Nature’s 57. Pimm, S. L., et al. (2014). The biodiversity of species
Contributions to People than Ecosystem Services–A and their rates of extinction, distribution, and
response to de Groot et al.. Available from: protection. science, 344(6187). Available from:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/351984127_ https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/
There_is_more_to_Nature%27s_Contributions_to_ science.1246752?sid=3f4c15ad-79f5-4eeb-a618-
People_than_Ecosystem_Services_-_A_response_ af62e6fccef2
to_de_Groot_et_al 58. Ibid., 39.
42. Ibid., 39. 59. Ceballos, G., Ehrlich, P. and Dirzo, R. (2017). Population
43. Ibid., 41. losses and the sixth mass extinction. Proceedings of
the National Academy of Sciences. Jul 2017, 114 (30).
44. Finisdore, J., et al. (2020). The 18 benefits of using Available from: https://www.pnas.org/content/114/30/
ecosystem services classification systems. Ecosystem E6089
Services, 45, 101160. Available from:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/ 60. Ibid., 39.
S2212041620301029?casa_token=XPfVCTyH4t4AAA 61. Ibid., 10.
AA:IL9cImZshq28sQ4rLmFE2bXT805-HDF-
62. Ibid., 33.
EWY1w1rBxqhYF5ZfpUkcTa_
bQQcTmVcRO53iBi4NFw 63. World Economic Forum (2020). Global Risk Report
2020. Available from: https://www.weforum.org/
45. EPA (2015). National Ecosystem Services Classification
reports/the-global-risks-report-2020
System (NESCS): Framework Design and Policy
Application. Available from: https://www.epa.gov/ 64. Ibid., 33.
eco-research/national-ecosystem-services-
65. Ibid., 14.
classification-system-framework-design-and-policy
66. Sutton, P.C., S. Anderson, R. Costanza, and I.
46. Ibid., 9.
Kubiszewski (2016). The Ecological Economics of Land
47. Wall, D. H., & Nielsen, U. N. (2012). Biodiversity and Degradation: Impacts on Ecosystem Service Values.
ecosystem services: is it the same below ground. Ecological Economics 129: 182–192. Available from:
91 CDSB Framework | Application guidance for biodiversity-related disclosures
73. IPCC (2018). Global Warming of 1.5°C. Available from: 96. Transparent project (2021). Available from:
https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/ https://capitalscoalition.org/project/transparent/
Nations Environment. Available from: https://www. Conservation and Development. Available from:
unepfi.org/nature/exploring-natural-capital- https://www.conservationgateway.org/Documents/
opportunities-risks-and-exposure-encore-tool/ TNCApplyingTheMitigationHierarchy.pdf
109. Ibid., 3 132. Ibid., 130.
110. Ibid., 5. 133. IUCN (2017). Global database on biodiversity offset
policies launched: Preliminary analysis shows progress
111. Kristensen (2004). The DPSIR Framework.
in biodiversity-rich mining countries. Available from:
Available from: https://wwz.ifremer.fr/dce/content/
https://www.iucn.org/news/business-and-
download/69291/913220/.../DPSIR.pdf
biodiversity/201711/global-database-biodiversity-
112. European Environmental Agency (1999). offset-policies-launched-preliminary-analysis-shows-
Environmental indicators: Typology and overview progress-biodiversity-rich-mining-countries
(Technical report No 25). Available from: https://www.
134. Ibid., 130.
eea.europa.eu/publications/TEC25
135. Ibid., 3.
113. Ibid., 24.
136. Conservation Hierarchy. What is the mitigation &
114. Ibid., 24.
conservation hierarchy? Available from:
115. Ibid., 25. https://conservationhierarchy.org/what-is-
116. Gullison, R.E., J. Hardner, S. Anstee, M. Meyer. (2015). conservation-hierarchy/
Good Practices for the Collection of Biodiversity 137. Ibid.
Baseline Data - Prepared for the Multilateral Financing
138. Ibid., 118.
Institutions Biodiversity Working Group & Cross-Sector
Biodiversity Initiative. Available from: http://www.csbi. 139. OECD (2019). The post-2020 biodiversity framework:
org.uk/our-work/good-practices-for-the-collection-of- targets, indicators and measurability implications at
biodiversity-baseline-data/ the global and national level. Available from:
https://www.cbd.int/doc/c/0590/6ddd/
117. Ibid., 39.
ab6b9375338ff831dcf5541d/sbstta-23-inf-03-en.pdf
118. Science-Based Targets For Nature (2020).
140. Ibid., 118.
Initial Guidance for Business. Available from:
https://sciencebasedtargetsnetwork.org/wp- 141. Mace, G. M., et al. (2014). Approaches to defining a
content/uploads/2020/09/SBTN-initial-guidance- planetary boundary for biodiversity. Global
for-business.pdf Environmental Change, 28, 289-297. Available from:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/
119. Ibid., 19.
S0959378014001368
120. Ibid., 96.
142. Ibid., 33.
121. Ibid., 5.
143. UNCEEA (2021). System of Environmental-Economic
122. Capitals Coalition (2020). Principles of Integrated Accounting—Ecosystem Accounting: Final Draft.
Capitals Assessments. Available from: Available from: https://unstats.un.org/unsd/
https://capitalscoalition.org/principles-of-integrated- statcom/52nd-session/documents/BG-3f-SEEA-
capitals-assessments/ EA_Final_draft-E.pdf
123. Ibid., 89. 144. Rosenzweig et al. (2008). Attributing physical and
124. International Integrated Reporting Council (2013). biological impacts to anthropogenic climate change.
International Framework. Available from: https:// Nature 453.7193 (2008): 353-357. Available from:
integratedreporting.org/resource/international-ir- https://www.nature.com/articles/nature06937
framework/ 145. Lewis, J. S., Farnsworth, M. L., Burdett, C. L., Theobald,
125. Ibid., 108. D. M., Gray, M., & Miller, R. S. (2017). Biotic and abiotic
factors predicting the global distribution and
126. IUCN. Species Threat Abatement and Restoration population density of an invasive large mammal.
(STAR) metric. Available from: https://www.iucn.org/ Scientific Reports, 7(1), 1-12. Available from: https://
resources/conservation-tools/species-threat- www.nature.com/articles/srep44152?error=cookies_
abatement-and-restoration-star-metric not_supported&code=c1abf4c8-6cd6-475a-8126-
127. IBAT Alliance. Integrated Biodiversity Assessment Tool. 004a93bd828f
Available from: https://www.ibat-alliance.org/ 146. Stohlgren, T. J., & Schnase, J. L. (2006). Risk analysis for
128. Swiss Re (2020). Biodiversity and Ecosystems Services biological hazards: what we need to know about
Index: measuring the value of nature. Available from: invasive species. Risk Analysis: An International Journal,
https://www.swissre.com/publication-form. 26(1), 163-173. Available from: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.
html?t=1715&id=fa67fe8d-0f2c-49fb-b3c6- com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2006.00707.x?casa_
a2002906ab55#PublicationForm token=Fr0vYC5WyVEAAAAA%3ABpnMu0D
DU_Lanjm4z4QJyAiYqXAQR8ACBgbULWPTdfQng-
129. Ibid., 108.
KgtktJsyLc8EIUVl_j6HmPbMfrXNWmK
130. BBOP (2012). Resource Paper: No Net Loss and
147. UNDRR (2021). Hazard. Available from:
Loss-Gain Calculations in Biodiversity Offsets.
https://www.undrr.org/terminology/hazard
Available at: https://www.forest-trends.org/
publications/resource-paper-no-net-loss-and-loss- 148. CERES (2019). Investors Water Toolkit - Understanding
gain-calculations-in-biodiversity-offsets/ water risks. Available from: https://www.ceres.org/
resources/toolkits/investor-water-toolkit
131. The Nature Conservancy (2015). Achieving
93 CDSB Framework | Application guidance for biodiversity-related disclosures
149. IPBES (2016). The methodological assessment report fluxes in terrestrial ecosystems. Available from:
on scenarios and models of biodiversity and https://www.ipcc.ch/srccl/
ecosystem services. Secretariat of the
171. IPBES. Climate change and land-use impacts on
Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on
pollinators and pollination. Available from:
Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. Available from:
https://ipbes.net/policy-support/case-studies/climate-
https://ipbes.net/assessment-reports/scenarios
change-land-use-impacts-pollinators-pollination
150. Ibid., 39.
172. Hof et al. (2018). Bioenergy cropland expansion may
151. Ibid., 118. offset positive effects of climate change mitigation for
global vertebrate diversity. Proceedings of the National
152. Ibid., 19.
Academy of Sciences, 115(52), 13294-13299. Available
153. Ibid., 96. from: https://www.pnas.org/content/115/52/13294
154. Ibid., 3 173. Here an example: Schipper et al. (2020). Projecting
155. Ibid., 3 terrestrial biodiversity intactness with GLOBIO 4.
Global change biology, 26(2), 760-771.
156. Ibid., 3 Available from: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/
157. Deiner, K., Bik, H.M., Mächler, E., Seymour, M., full/10.1111/gcb.14848
Lacoursière-Roussel, A., Altermatt, F. et al. (2017). 174. GLOBIO (2021). Global biodiversity model for policy
Environmental DNA metabarcoding: Transforming support. Available from: https://www.globio.info/
how we survey animal and plant communities. what-is-globio
Molecular Ecology, 26(21): 5872- 5895. Available from:
https://doi.org/10.1111/mec.14350 175. Natural Capital Project. InVEST (Integrated Valuation
of Ecosystem Services and Tradeoffs). Available from:
158. Stephenson, P.J. and Carbone, G. (2021). Guidelines https://naturalcapitalproject.stanford.edu/software/
for planning and monitoring corporate biodiversity invest
performance. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN.
Available from: https://portals.iucn.org/library/sites/ 176. Ibid., 149.
library/files/documents/2021-009-En.pdf 177. Johnson, J.A., Baldos, U., Hertel, T., Liu, J.,
159. DELWP Victoria State (2004). Habitat Hectare Nootenboom, C., Polasky, S., and Roxburgh, T. (2020).
Assessment – Fact Sheet. Available from: Global Futures: modelling the global economic
https://www.environment.vic.gov.au/__data/assets/ impacts of environmental change to support policy-
pdf_file/0023/48542/Habitat-Hectare-Assessment- making. Technical Report, January 2020.
fact-sheet_Feb-2016.pdf Available from: https://www.wwf.org.uk/globalfutures
161. Houdet, J., Ding, H., Quétier, F., Addison, P., & 179. Ibid., 99.
Deshmukh, P. (2020). Adapting double-entry 180. Ibid., 101.
bookkeeping to renewable natural capital: An
application to corporate net biodiversity impact
accounting and disclosure. Ecosystem Services, 45,
101104. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.
com/science/article/abs/pii/
S2212041620300462?via%3Dihub
162. Brown et al. (2014). Measuring ecosystem services:
Guidance on developing ecosystem service indicators.
UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge, UK. Available from:
https://www.unep-wcmc.org/system/dataset_file_
fields/files/000/000/303/original/1850_ESI_
Guidance_A4_WEB.pdf?1424707843
163. Ibid., 5.
164. Ibid., 162.
165. Ibid., 5.
166. Ibid., 5.
167. Ibid., 9.
168. Ibid., 83.
169. Pörtner et al. (2021). IPBES-IPCC co-sponsored
workshop report on biodiversity and climate change.
Available from: https://ipbes.net/sites/default/
files/2021-06/20210609_workshop_report_
embargo_3pm_CEST_10_june_0.pdf
170. Shukla et al. (2019). IPCC, 2019: Climate Change and
Land: an IPCC special report on climate change,
desertification, land degradation, sustainable land
management, food security, and greenhouse gas
With the contribution
of the LIFE Programme
of the European Union.