Measuring the contributions of business and finance towards the post-2020 global biodiversity framework

********** PUBLICATION À PARAÎTRE PROCHAINEMENT ***********

FOREWORD – « The fight against nature loss should be a business priority: nature is essential to global economic prosperity and individual business success. We cannot have a sustainable future for people and economies if we do not address nature, climate and people in an integrated way.

Forward-thinking businesses understand that global economic prosperity relies on a healthy natural world. And that to resolve the climate crisis and reduce inequality, we must protect and restore nature.  Many businesses understand the value of nature and are voluntarily shifting their practices towards sustainability and longer-term thinking. By doing so, they are contributing to mitigate the very real and significant risks that are posed to economies, communities and livelihoods.

However, in order to scale up and accelerate the action needed, regulatory and financial systems need to reward companies for their performance beyond financial returns – across environmental, social and governance issues.

In 2020, world leaders have a unique opportunity to forge international agreements to reverse nature loss as they did for climate change in 2015. We need businesses to call on governments to incorporate transformative and ambitious policies because safeguarding nature makes economic and financial sense. This will help create a level playing field and a stable operating environment for business. Only together will business, finance and governments be able to unlock new opportunities and drive the global systemic and transformative change for everyone and everything to live sustainably on a healthy planet.

The goals and targets set by at the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) Conference of the Parties (COP) this year need to enable and encourage business and finance to assess their impact on nature and biodiversity.  Corporate biodiversity impact measurement tools such as the Global Biodiversity Score (GBS) could play an important role in building such links. Business for Nature welcomes such developments because creating aggregated and standardized biodiversity data is a step to making sure nature is truly placed at the heart of our global economy.

Working with our partners – more than 40 leading business and conservation organizations-  Business for Nature engaged over 200 companies representing 15 sectors from around the world to articulate, strengthen and shape five high-level policy recommendations on nature which we announced in January at the World Economic Forum.

Davos was the first in a series of key events on nature and biodiversity this year.  If we want to reverse the trend of nature loss by 2030 we need urgent action in 2020.  We need to use the political and business momentum on nature we have now to provide confidence to Heads of States and governments to adopt an ambitious new deal for nature and people at the CBD COP in Kunming in 2020.

This way, we can make sure the next decade is based on ten years of action that strengthens –  rather than destroys – our relationship with nature.

Eva Zabey – Executive Director, Business for Nature coalition

Sommaire

FOREWORD – Eva Zabey, Executive Director, Business for Nature coalition

CONTEXT

  • Brief history of the GBS
  • The GBS is becoming operational
  • Post-2020 framework and the GBS
  • Reflections towards building biodiversity abatement & restoration curves

ROLE OF THE GBS IN THE BIODIVERSITY IMPACT MEASUREMENT LANDSCAPE

  • The Aligning Biodiversity Measures for Business collaboration
  • Towards a biodiversity accounting framework : the Biological Diversity Protocol
  • Update of the mapping of biodiversity footprint assessment tools
  • Core business applications covered by the GBS

UPDATE ON METHODOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENTS

  • Accounting for impacts over time
  • Compatibility of the Scope accounting framework with existing protocols
  • Overview of data imputs
  • From pressures to impacts

FAQ

  • Why do global trends expressed in MSA or with the LPI report different but similar biodiversity decline rates?
  • What is the level of uncertainties of the GBS outputs?
  • Does the GBS also offer a qualitative assessment of the biodiversity performance of companies?
  • Are regulatory compensation measures taken into account in the GBS?
  • Can the GBS integrate field survey data to verify results?

CASE STUDIES

  • AFD
  • GRTgaz
  • Mirova
  • VEDIF
LinkedIn
Share
YouTube