• Aucun résultat trouvé

Evolution of corporate biodiversity

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2022

Partager "Evolution of corporate biodiversity"

Copied!
10
0
0

Texte intégral

(1)

Matt Jones, Head of Business and Biodiversity

Evolution of corporate biodiversity

indicators

(2)

18/11/2018

Only 5 of 100 top companies made biodiversity

commitments that were specific,

measureable, and time bound

Addison et al 2018

Why are we here?

(3)

Trends in corporate measurement of biodiversity

There is increasing demand for credible biodiversity indicators.

▪ Investors

▪ Policy makers

▪ Businesses themselves

Progress on indicator development:

▪ A lack of a strong business case has hampered progress

▪ Focus has been on measures of process and response

▪ Current reporting on biodiversity related SDGs is weak

▪ But, significant progress has been made recently

(4)

18/11/2018

Biodiversity indicators overview

Who are they for?

▪ Many are applicable across sectors, but some are tailored to the needs of specific sectors including extractives, financial and agriculture.

How are they being used?

▪ IUCN and the University of Oxford identified 8 decision types including:

• establish corporate baseline

• monitor performance against targets;

• monitor the effectiveness of mitigation actions

• communicate progress

• identify risks across a portfolio

(5)

The landscape of corporate biodiversity indicator initiatives

Portfolio analysis - finance sector

• Lifecycle analysis

• Estimate biodiversity loss from drivers

Supply chain screening

• Based on global data sets

• Acts as risk screening tool to identify high sensitivity commodities

Site based

• Biodiversity performance

• Impact mitigation effectiveness

Product based

• Life cycle analysis based

• Uses company and external data

• Quantifies product

impact down the

supply chain

(6)

18/11/2018

The EU Business @Biodiversity Platform

Assessment of Biodiversity Accounting Approaches for Business

▪ Approaches tend to follow:

1. Scoping

2. activity > pressure 3. pressure > impact

▪ Whole value chain covered (but not by a single approach)

Initiative Target

Global Biodiversity Score All sectors Biodiversity Impact Metric All sectors Biodiversity Indicators for Extractives Extractives Sector

Product Biodiversity Footprint All sectors ASN Biodiversity Footprint Financial Institutions

Agrobiodiversity Index Agro-industry Biodiversity Footprint Calculator All sectors Impact Index + Positive Scoring All Sectors

Bioscope All sectors

Biodiversity Return on Investment All sectors

(7)

Biodiversity indicators for extractives

First Stage

Biodiversity sensitivity screening

Second Stage Applying site level

framework

Third Stage Aggregation and

reporting

Expected Output

• A final list of all sites categorised by

potential biodiversity sensitivity (low /

medium / high)

Expected Output

• A state pressure response score for each site

• A site indicator dashboard

Expected Output

• Aggregated corporate SPR scores

• Corporate-level

indicators / disclosure

(8)

18/11/2018

Efforts to coordinate

Coordination across initiatives

▪ Common ground needs to be sought

▪ “Measuring the ‘Unmeasurable’” – a new partnership

▪ Form a common view amongst key

stakeholders on measurement, monitoring and disclosure of corporate impact and dependence on biodiversity

Translation to policy context

▪ Communicated to policy makers to inform the post-2020 biodiversity policy framework

▪ And to business to inform practice and

performance

(9)

THE NEXT DAY…

Did you know, there are 15 different initiatives developing

biodiversity indicators for the private sector?

15? That’s crazy! We need one overarching initiative to bring them

all together…

Did you know, there are 16 different

initiatives…

(10)

18/11/2018

www.unep-wcmc.org

Thank You

Références

Documents relatifs

area (in km²) is computed as the sum of all crops implicit areas based on FAOSTAT annual production

In GLOBIO cause effect relationships, the terrestrial on-site biodiversity impacts of pollution are accounted 104.. for in the land use (LU) pressure through the MSA value per

data, we only use the company’s industry level mix data and rely on EXIOBASE data to split the turnover 677. between the regions

In the Mining CommoTool, impact factors for all pressures except those related to climate change are 218.. expressed in MSA.km² per tonne of pure metal, mineral

Since only the projected areas (km 2 ) of land use, and not the projected static biodiversity impacts (MSA.km 2 ), are used in default calculations, the discrepancy does not

Table 7: GHG emissions per wood item computed based on PEF output tables and dynamic biodiversity impact 577 factors related to CC and HD CC for each wood production

Leading a Biodiversity Footprint Assessment based on the Global Biodiversity Score aims at assessing the footprint of biodiversity generated directly and indirectly by the

Le Global Biodiversity Score est un outil de mesure qui donne les moyens aux entreprises et institutions financières d’inverser cette perte de biodiversité.. Le GBS se concentre