As businesses increasingly recognize the interconnectedness of nature and their operations, they are adopting biodiversity offsetting and nature-positive practices to improve their environmental impact and meet regulatory requirements. In sectors like mining, renewables, utilities, and real estate, companies are taking steps to not only mitigate their environmental impact but also improve ecological systems near their operations.
The vast majority of firms that were surveyed—96%, according to recent research by Trinity and independent research firm Verdantix—have established nature and biodiversity targets; the same percentage have established nature and biodiversity strategies. These firms are driven not only by stakeholder and regulatory expectations, but also long-term financial considerations. Organizations that operate in resource-dependent industries and rely on raw materials and natural resources
recognize the direct impact of nature and biodiversity decline on business. The World Economic Forum estimates that nature-positive models could unlock up to
$10 trillion in annual business opportunities by 2030, primarily through cost savings and new revenue streams.
Efforts to date to implement nature-positive initiatives have yielded positive results. A recent
study by the University of Oxford determined that conservation interventions, including biodiversity offsetting, improved biodiversity in 66% of cases. The authors concluded that “when conservation actions work, they really work. In other words, they often lead to outcomes for biodiversity that are not just a little bit better than doing nothing at all, but many times greater.”
The Distinction Between Biodiversity Offsetting and Nature Positivity
While biodiversity offsetting is a targeted approach to balance out specific losses, nature positivity aims for a holistic, long-term enhancement of biodiversity and ecosystem health on a broader scale. The Nature-Positive framework sets to halt the decline of biodiversity using 2020 as the baseline, reverse nature loss by 2030 to initiate recovery, and achieve full restoration of ecosystems by 2050.
Biodiversity offsetting and nature positivity are both strategies aimed at addressing environmental impacts, although they differ significantly in their scope, goals, and approach:
- Biodiversity offsetting:
- Scope: Focuses on compensating for the loss of biodiversity due to specific projects.
- Goal: To balance out the negative impacts of development, ensuring no net loss of biodiversity.
- Approach: Often project-specific and regulatory-driven, following the mitigation hierarchy: avoid, minimize, restore, and offset.
- Nature positive:
- Scope: Typically, a comprehensive and long-term strategy that integrates various conservation and restoration efforts.
- Goal: To make improvements to the environment, water, and ecology near operations.
- Approach: A broad range of actions, including reducing the amount of nature lost, restoring degraded ecosystems, and enhancing biodiversity to create a net positive impact on nature.
Putting Biodiversity Offsetting Solutions and Nature Positive Solutions into Action
Organizations are increasingly investing in water stewardship and biodiversity conservation as part of their efforts to contribute toward biodiversity offsetting and nature positive outcomes. Among them are:
- The Vancouver-Fraser Port Authority engaged Trinity’s Ecofish division to review and advise on its extensive fish and fish habitat offsetting plan as part of its proposal to build a multibillion-dollar marine container terminal in the Fraser River estuary, which supports important salmon stocks and migratory birds.
- The International Council on Mining and Metals (ICMM) has committed its members to take action to achieve outcomes that not only protect and conserve pristine natural areas but also halt and offset biodiversity loss at mining operations and restore and enhance landscapes around operations.
- The Mining Association of Canada’s Water Stewardship Protocol, which sets standards for sustainable water management, is encouraging miners to consider the broader watershed in their planning and operations. Part of the Towards Sustainable Mining (TSM) initiative, focuses on comprehensive water stewardship practices that go beyond legal compliance. The protocol includes performance indicators for water governance, operational water management, watershed-scale planning, and water performance reporting. This helps promote sustainable water management practices that contribute to the overall health and resilience of ecosystems, aligning with the broader goals of nature positivity.
A significant number of organizations are either maintaining or modestly increasing their investment across several key nature-related areas over the next three years, the Verdantix research found. Nevertheless, achieving ecological and biodiversity goals remains a challenge, as many businesses, particularly those in the mining, renewables, utilities and real estate sectors, lack the specialized knowledge and technical expertise needed to succeed. 52% of organizations surveyed by Verdantix said a lack of internal knowledge and expertise was a significant barrier. This issue is particularly significant for medium-sized organizations with annual revenues between $500 million and $1 billion, 80% of which reported it as a top challenge.
Consequently, a growing number of firms are strategically leveraging third-party consulting services to conduct projects requiring specialized nature and biodiversity expertise. 52% of organizations seek an external partner for environmental impact assessments, and 69% of organizations in the mining sector use third-party services for compliance and permitting.
The real opportunity, however, lies in expanding partnerships beyond assessments and compliance to enable continuous improvement and adaptation in biodiversity offsetting and nature positive solutions. By leveraging a partner for a wider range of services, organizations can minimize their environmental impact and contribute positively to nature conservation efforts.
