Corporate biodiversity measurement approaches within the current and future global policy context Sub-group 4 Aligning Biodiversity Measures for Business initiative Chaired by Joel Houdet and UNEP-WCMC 23 rd September 2019 1
Objectives of SG4 1. To examine the current drivers and frameworks for corporate disclosure of impacts on biodiversity. 2. To review current practice on corporate biodiversity reporting and disclosure and where the gaps are for driving improved performance 3. To identify future corporate biodiversity disclosures and the possible contributions of biodiversity measurement approaches to assessing corporate progress on policy commitments, namely those related to the CBD and SDGs 2
Global Risk Register 2018 (WEF) Drivers of corporate disclosure social and legal licences to operate disrupted Reputation production Risk timely project Finance delivery 3
International frameworks Sustainable Development Goals Target 12.6 under Responsible Consumption and Production “Encourage companies to integrate sustainability information into their reporting cycle Corporate contributions to the SDGs is recognised In 2018, 89% of corporate sustainability reports acknowledged the SDGs, and 53% mapped their sustainability strategy to the SDGs and provided some evidence of activities There is little evidence of corporate biodiversity disclosures against SDG 14 and 15, life on land and below water 4
International frameworks Convention on Biological Diversity Despite relevance of corporate action, little to no reporting against Strategic Plan and its Aichi Targets Challenges around business awareness CBD decisions to encourage corporate reporting on biodiversity and production of a typology of actions to harmonise reporting and drive uptake. Little uptake at national level and mainstreaming of CBD decisions into relevant national institutions is a challenge A number of initiatives are emerging to better engage business in the development and implementation of the Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework JNCC (2018) Mainstreaming international biodiversity goals for the private sector 5
Regulatory reporting mechanisms Non-financial disclosure requirements (e.g., EU) However few examples with requirements related to biodiversity Site level monitoring related to Environmental Impact Assessments and No Net Loss (NNL) and Net Gain (NG) legislation (site / EIA) Resistance to a legislative approach at corporate level 6
Voluntary reporting mechanisms Global Reporting Initiative Sustainability Reporting Standards – includes biodiversity indicators The CDP , formerly the Carbon Disclosure Project – climate, water and forests The Task Force on Climate-Related Financial Disclosures (TCFD) – plans for Task Force on Nature Impacts Disclosures The World Benchmarking Alliance – to support reporting against the SDGs The Climate Standards Disclosure Board - framework for reporting environmental information, including natural capital 7
Current practice of corporate environmental reporting and disclosure Topics 90% of the world’s 250 largest companies with sustainability disclosures Most companies use GRI CDP participation is growing Fragmentation of the discipline 4 types of disclosures: Narratives about the company’s management approach Quantitative non-monetary information Financial information Information on externalities 8
Current practice of corporate environmental reporting and disclosure Topics Mainstream corporate sustainability reporting / disclosure currently essentially limited to management narratives and quantitative non-monetary information Non-product outputs or emissions such as greenhouse gas (e.g. GHG Protocol scopes 1 and 2 – WRI & WBCSD 200421; GRI 305 indicators - GRI 2016), hazardous waste and spills (e.g. GRI 306 indicators – GRI 2016) Amounts of material inputs such as material used (weight or volume) (e.g. GRI G4 - EN1 indicator) and water withdrawal by source (e.g. GRI G4 - EN8 indicator). 9
Current practice of corporate biodiversity reporting and disclosure Topics The current practice of corporate biodiversity reporting and disclosure is very limited E.g. study on top 100 of the 2016 Fortune 500 Global companies’ sustainability reports - 49 of the top 100 mentioned biodiversity in their reports - 31 made clear biodiversity commitments - Only 5 were specific, measurable, and time-bound - 9 companies provided quantitative indicators Between 2001 and 2016, 66 companies had made NNL/NG environmental commitments 33 making specific biodiversity commitments Only 18 companies with active NNL/NG biodiversity commitments in 2016 Lack of agreed and standardised measurement approaches and accounting frameworks to consolidate this information at corporate level. 10
Possible contributions and limitations of biodiversity measurement approaches Topics Different output data or key performance indicators Some focus on impacts on ecosystems / Provide ways of measuring changes in state habitats / land cover (e.g., BFFI, GBS, PBF) and / or condition – i.e. key gap in current while others focus on species (e.g., STAR) or disclosures monetary values (e.g. EP&L) Would enable companies to assess the scale Some approaches model or extrapolate of their impacts on biodiversity biodiversity impacts from indirect Not clear how each can contribute to various environmental pressure data (e.g., GHG global policy targets (site base approaches vs. emissions and water use) (e.g., BFFI, EP&L, modelling using indirect pressure data / GBS, PBF) while others use primary database) biodiversity data to measure actual changes in biodiversity (e.g., Biodiversity Indicators Importance of net impacts on biodiversity / for Extractives). Management actions / site-based targets 11
The Biological Diversity Protocol (draft version) Topics Net impact accounting framework Accounts for both periodic (e.g. annual) and historical (e.g. since the start of a business) performance As for financial accounting via double-entry bookkeeping Accounts for impacts on both ecosystems / habitats / land cover and species Statements of Biodiversity Position and Performance Biodiversity impact inventory based on primary, site-based biodiversity data. As some of the biodiversity measurement approaches are not based on site level data, but on globally available data, there may be limitations in their utility as part of the BD protocol. 12
Future/ potential biodiversity disclosures Based on the principles of sustainability disclosure developed by groups such as GRI and CDP required aspects are likely to include: Governance ; Disclosure boundaries and exclusions , with clear impact inventory ; Net impacts on biodiversity (i.e. changes in the state of biodiversity); Dependencies ; Risks / exposure and opportunities , including financial implications for the reporting organisation and externalities (e.g., monetary valuation of biodiversity impacts such as the loss of ecosystem services) Business policy , strategy and science-based targets ; Implementation , including management actions, procedures and expenditures; Verification / independent 3rd party audits . 13
Future/ potential biodiversity accounting & reporting principles To improve the quality of biodiversity disclosures, accounting and reporting principles would need to be adopted by reporting organisations (GHG emissions using the GHG Protocol). For example, the Biological Diversity Protocol proposes the following key principles: Relevance : Ensure the biodiversity impact inventory appropriately reflects the biodiversity impacts of the company and its value chain. Completeness : Account for and report on all biodiversity impacts within the chosen organisational and value chain boundaries. Transparency : Address all relevant issues in a factual and coherent manner, based on a clear audit trail. Equivalency : Ensure that the notion of equity in the type of biodiversity (i.e. ecological equivalency or like-for-like principle) is integral to biodiversity impact inventory development and accounting. Accuracy : Ensure that the measurement of biodiversity impacts is systematically accurate, as far as can be judged, notably by reducing uncertainties as far as is practicable. Time period assumption : Account for biodiversity impacts consistently across business reporting periods. 14
1. Linking to global policy targets Can existing measurement approaches be used to track corporate contributions to global policy targets? Is there a need for such targets to be developed with consideration of measurement approaches? 16
2. Driving uptake for better disclosure What is needed to encourage broader uptake of measurement approaches? What are the key mechanisms for this (voluntary and mandatory)? 17
3. What should be disclosed? To what extent do disclosures require tracking of both status and activities? 18
4. Role of an accounting framework Is a broadly agreed accounting framework required to support the use of the measurement approaches as a disclosure approach? Is there a need for principles for corporate disclosure? 19
Thank you 20
Recommend
More recommend
