Biodiversity Disclosure
Raja Ampat
Locally Managed Marine Area
World Database on Protected Areas
1. Introduction to IBAT for Disclosures, Standards and Frameworks.
The Integrated Biodiversity Assessment Tool (IBAT) supports biodiversity disclosure requirements by providing critical, high-quality data from three of the world's most authoritative data sources - the IUCN Red List, the World Database on Protected Areas (WDPA), and the World database of Key Biodiversity Areas (WDKBA).
By integrating these trusted datasets, biodiversity impacts can be assessed and support a suite of reporting needs including Global Reporting Initiative (GRI), Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD), Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation (SFDR) and Taskforce for Nature-related Financial Disclosures (TNFD).
This science-based, data-driven approach helps identify potential biodiversity risk, streamline reporting processes, and demonstrate commitment to sustainable development through timely and accurate biodiversity impact assessments.
Introducing IBAT's Disclosure Preparation Report
The IBAT Disclosure Preparation Report (DPR) is designed to support the identification and prioritization of sites with potential biodiversity impacts. The report assesses the proximity of operational sites to sensitive areas, such as Key Biodiversity Areas (KBAs) and protected regions, and evaluates biodiversity risk based on Species Threat Abatement and Restoration (STAR) scores. By highlighting and prioritizing these sensitive locations, the report enables the management and mitigation of biodiversity impacts and supports sustainability commitments.
The IBAT DPR report uses a 2-stage approach to assess the sensitivity of sites.
Stage 1:
As a first step, sites are defined as sensitive or not sensitive. This categorisation is based on a site's overlap with significant biodiversity features in the IBAT datasets. The WDPA, WDKBA and IUCN Red List (in the form of the derived STAR metric) are used to assess if a site is sensitive.
Sites are defined as sensitive if:
- The area of influence (site and buffer) overlaps with a protected area or KBA.
- The area of influence (site and buffer) has STAR Threat Abatement and/or STAR Restoration scores exceeding the global median values of 0.01 and 0.003, respectively.
An important point to note here is that sites found not to be sensitive in this report may be shown to be sensitive based on datasets found outside of IBAT. IBAT always recommends that other tools and datasets are used in conjunction with IBAT to complete a holistic map of sensitivity.
Stage 2:
A significance score is assigned to sensitive sites. Sites that are assessed as sensitive in stage 1 are assigned a significance score to aid the prioritisation of sites. Scores of high, medium, and low risk are presented. These are based on the proximity of the site to a KBA or protected area relative to the appropriate buffer size based on the type of operation or, are based on the maximum STAR Threat Abatement and STAR Restoration scores found within the Area of influence (site + buffer). You can find more information about STAR here.
Table 1. Criteria used to assess the biodiversity significance of each site based on the proximity of the site to a KBA or protected area relative to the appropriate buffer size according to the type of operation.
| Buffer Distance | Type(s) of operation | Biodiversity Significance | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| None | Low | Medium | High | ||
| 5 km | Offices, Warehouses, Low-input agriculture | > 5 km | 1.5 - 5 km | 0.5 - < 1.5 km | < 0.5 km |
| 10 km | High-input agriculture, Onshore wind, Construction, Oil and gas (terrestrial) | > 10 km | 3 - 10 km | 1 - < 3 km | < 1 km |
| 20 km | Offshore wind, Oil and gas (marine), Hydropower | > 20 km | 6 - 20 km | 2 - < 6 km | < 2 km |
| 50 km | Mining | > 50 km | 15 - 50 km | 5 - < 15 km | < 5 km |
Tables 1 and 2 detail the criteria for biodiversity significance.
Table 2. Criteria used to assess the biodiversity significance of each site based on the maximum STAR Threat Abatement and STAR Restoration scores found within the Area of influence (site + buffer).
| Biodiversity Significance | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Low | Medium | High | ||
| STAR Threat Abatement | Max STAR Threat Abatement value is < 0.05 | Max STAR Threat Abatement value is between 0.05 – 0.15 | Max STAR Threat Abatement value is > 0.15 | |
| STAR Restoration | Max STAR Restoration value is < 0.02 | Max STAR Restoration value is between 0.02 – 0.05 | Max STAR Restoration value is > 0.05 | |
Table 3. Buffer distances assigned to different operation types.
| Buffer distance | Type(s) of operation | Justification | References |
|---|---|---|---|
| 5 km | Offices, Warehouses, Low-input agriculture. | A 5 km buffer is recommended as the minimum buffer size to be used. Low-input agriculture is placed here as the degree of freshwater pollution is expected to be lower (see 10 km buffer justification). | UNEP-WCMC, The Area of Influence of site-based operations – Direct Impacts (2021). UNEP-WCMC, The Area of Influence of site-based operations – Indirect Impacts (2022). |
| 10 km | High-input agriculture, Onshore wind, Construction, Oil and gas (terrestrial) | A 10 km buffer is suggested as being likely to cover the impacts from most pressures (Amec Foster Wheeler 2015; UNEP-WCMC 2021). Freshwater pollution impacts are likely to be experienced at larger distances (e.g., average of 13.4 km for mines and oil and gas operations (UNEP-WCMC 2021)). As agriculture is one of the main contributors to eutrophication and pollution globally (Poore & Nemecek 2018) it is deemed that a 10 km buffer is most relevant. | Amec Foster Wheeler (2015) Habitats Regulations Assessment:14th Onshore Oil and Gas Licensing Round (No. Doc Ref. 33917rr008i2). Oil and Gas Authority. UNEP-WCMC, The Area of Influence of site-based operations – Direct Impacts (2021). J. Poore, T. Nemecek, Reducing food’s environmental impacts through producers and consumers. Science. 360, 987–992 (2018). |
| 20 km | Offshore wind, Oil and gas (marine), Hydropower | Marine operations have the potential to have larger areas of influence when compared to terrestrial, especially if noise is excessive. UNEP-WCMC suggested a buffer size of 20 km for marine oil and gas operations (UNEP-WCMC 2021) and a 20 km buffer is also likely to be sufficient to account for a majority of wide-ranging species (Weaver J 2020). | UNEP-WCMC, The Area of Influence of site-based operations – Direct Impacts (2021). Weaver J, “WALES NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK - Habitats Regulations Assessment” (Sefydliad Materion Cymreig | Institute of Welsh Affairs, 2020). |
| 50 km | Mining | Mining has been observed to contribute to deforestation effects up to 50 km away (Sonter et al. 2017; Maddox et al. 2019). | L. J. Sonter, D. Herrera, D. J. Barrett, G. L. Galford, C. J. Moran, B. S. Soares-Filho, Mining drives extensive deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon. Nature Communications. 8, 1013 (2017). T. Maddox, P. Howard, J. Knox, N. Jenner, Forest-Smart Mining: Identifying Factors Associated with the Impacts of Large-Scale Mining on Forests (World Bank, 2019). |
Buffers
To assess the potential risks posed to biodiversity at each location, appropriate buffer sizes need to be used. While TNFD and GRI currently do not specify distance thresholds they use the terms “in the area of influence” or “in or near to” and this is where insights to distance can be useful. IBAT's DPR report automatically applies different buffers to different operation types to effectively incorporate the area of influence of each location guided by available literature and expert knowledge. These buffers are also designed to account for potential inaccuracies in the global datasets (e.g., IUCN Species Ranges). A “default” buffer size of 20 km is applied to operations which cannot be categorised under the types of operations outlined in table 3. It should be noted that this buffer size is a guide and may not accurately reflect the real-world risks posed to biodiversity features, which could be greater or lower than the risks reported.
You can download a sample Disclosure Preparation Report here.
How the DPR supports your disclosures
The 'Locate' Phase
TNFD requires that organisations disclose the sites of assets and/or activities in the organisation's direct operations and, where possible, upstream, and downstream value chain(s) that meet the criteria for sensitive sites. TNFD defines priority sites as material and/or sensitive sites:
- Material sites: Sites where an organisation has identified material nature- related dependencies, impacts, risks and opportunities in its direct operations and upstream and downstream value chain(s); and/or
- Sensitive Sites:
- Areas important for biodiversity; and/or
- Areas of high ecological integrity; and/or
- Areas of rapid decline in ecosystem integrity; and/or
- Areas of high physical water risks; and/or
- Areas of importance for ecosystem service provision, including benefits to Indigenous Peoples, Local Communities, and stakeholders.
This report provides an assessment of whether each site is a sensitive site based on the presence of protected areas, KBAs, and threatened species in and around each site. A site is identified sensitive if: any protected area or KBA falls entirely or partly within the site or buffered area or; The STAR Threat Abatement and/or STAR Restoration scores exceeds the global median value.
Protected area, KBA and species lists are provided in a separate pdf that contain details about all the sites which are identified as sensitive. Important note: This report currently only assesses sensitive sites that are important for biodiversity. It is important to consider the other TNFD criteria when determining whether a site is a sensitive site, and therefore potentially a priority site.
Under the TNFD Strategy D disclosure requirement on priority sites, companies are expected not only to disclose the full list of the sensitive sites but also to provide “a description of how the organisation has defined sensitive sites, with reference to the tools, data sources and indicators and metrics used” and “a description of the process followed to identify priority sites for disclosure”. Table 4 outlines how this report can be used to respond to Strategy Disclosure D.
Table 1. Overview of requirements for TNFD recommended disclosure Strategy D and the Locate phase of TNFD's LEAP approach that can be supported with the data provided by the IBAT
| Strategy Disclosure D Requirements | Outputs to Use from IBAT |
|---|---|
| A list and/or spatial map of the sites where the organisation has assets and/or activities: In its direct operations and upstream and downstream value chain(s), where material nature related dependencies, impacts, risks, and opportunities have been identified, and whether any of these sites meet the criteria for sensitive sites; and; In its direct operations and, where possible upstream and downstream value chain(s), that are in sensitive sites. Other sites where the organisation has potentially material nature- related dependencies, impacts, risks and opportunities. | Maps of each site are provided. Boundaries of protected areas and KBAs are overlain to illustrate proximity to important biodiversity and conservation features. Each site is assessed as either sensitive or not sensitive according to the datasets hosted within IBAT. A site is identified sensitive if any protected area or KBA fall entirely or partly within the buffered area or if the STAR Threat Abatement and/or STAR Restoration scores exceeds the global median value. |
| A description of how the organisation has defined sensitive sites, with reference to the tools, data sources and indicators and metrics used. | Reference sensitivity scoring section of methodology. Reference IBAT using reference provided. Reference data sources used by IBAT to create this report: World Database on Protected Areas World Database of Key Biodiversity Areas IUCN Red List of Threatened Species Species Threat Abatement and Restoration Metric (STAR) (References for data found in ReadMe.) |
| A description of the process followed to identify priority sites for disclosure. |
This report is also particularly relevant for the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) Disclosure 101-4 'Identification of biodiversity impacts' and Disclosure 101-5 'Sites with biodiversity impacts' within GRI 101: Biodiversity 2024.
Table 2 outlines how this report can be used to disclose against each element of disclosures 101-4 and 101-5
Table 2. Overview of requirements for Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) Disclosures 101-4 and 101-5 that can be supported with IBAT
| Disclosure 101-4 and 101-5 Requirements | Outputs to Use from IBAT |
|---|---|
| 101-4-a. explain how it has determined which of its sites and which products and services in its supply chain have the most significant actual and potential impacts on biodiversity'. This is the only disclosure under 101-4. All the rest of the disclosures in the table are under 101-5. | IBAT helps determine which sites potentially have the most significant impact on biodiversity by providing information on the ecological sensitivity of the area in and around a site. Sites assessed as sensitive are sites where direct operations are likely going to have the most significant impacts on biodiversity. (The extent to which the activities at the operational sites lead to direct drivers of biodiversity loss should also be considered). |
| 101-5-a. report the site and size in hectares of its sites with the most significant impacts on biodiversity. | The report presents the geographic site (name and coordinates) of each site assessed to be in a sensitive site. |
101-5-b. for each site reported under 101-5- a, report whether it is in or near an ecologically sensitive area, the distance to these areas, and whether these are:
|
A site is in an ecologically sensitive area when it is completely or partially located in the ecologically sensitive area. A site is near an ecologically sensitive area when the ecologically sensitive area does not overlap the site, but it falls within the area of influence or within the radius set by the organization. The organization is required to report the distance only in cases where the site is near an ecologically sensitive area. The organization should report the size in hectares of the ecologically sensitive areas within its sites. IBAT can provide information on areas of biodiversity importance. |
The CSRD mandates organizations to disclose information about their sustainability practices, particularly regarding biodiversity and ecosystems. It requires companies to assess and report on their environmental impacts, including how their operations affect biodiversity and the natural environment.
IBAT assists organizations in evaluating their biodiversity impacts and identifying risks associated with biodiversity loss, ensuring compliance with CSRD requirements for risk assessment and management. It helps companies establish measurable biodiversity targets aligned with broader sustainability goals, allowing for the tracking of progress and outcomes.
Moreover, IBAT supports the development of clear action plans to mitigate biodiversity impacts, which is a key component of CSRD reporting. It encourages stakeholder engagement by providing insights that foster collaboration with local communities and conservation organizations.
IBAT also aids organizations in integrating biodiversity considerations into their transition plans, ensuring that sustainability strategies align with long-term goals for biodiversity preservation and restoration.
The European Union's Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation (SFDR), which took effect in March 2021, mandates progressive disclosure requirements for asset managers and financial actors, with biodiversity among 43 key items. To comply, companies must significantly improve their biodiversity awareness at both the entity and product levels.
1. Biodiversity and Ecosystem Preservation Practices
The first requirement of SFDR biodiversity disclosure focuses on biodiversity preservation and ecosystem management practices. This includes revealing the percentage of investments in companies that either do not assess, monitor, or control the direct and indirect pressures contributing to biodiversity and ecosystem changes.
IBAT provides access to the STAR Metric, available as a screening report, which enables users to identify precise actions with measurable benefits for globally threatened species. By utilizing STAR, investee companies can better assess, monitor, and control their impact on biodiversity, offering investors critical insight into company compliance with SFDR requirements.
2. Natural (Threatened) Species and Protected Areas
The second aspect of SFDR biodiversity disclosure relates to natural species and protected areas. This involves disclosing the share of investments in companies whose operations affect IUCN Red List species, national conservation list species, and sites in or near protected areas or regions of high biodiversity outside protected zones. As the only commercial data provider of the IUCN Red List, the World Database on Protected Areas, and the Key Biodiversity Areas database, IBAT uniquely enables organizations to meet these disclosure needs. IBAT users can generate tailored reports for specific projects and download raw data for in-depth in-house analyses, streamlining compliance with SFDR.