We launched the 2023 Nature Benchmark in October, using the existing methodology. The Nature Benchmark methodology is built on existing standards and best practices while also recognising developing concepts. WBA will continue to be closely involved with other organisations active in this space to ensure the most up-to-date science and knowledge is reflected in this methodology. We therefore expect rapid changes, and the methodology will be updated after all 1000 companies are benchmarked.
In addition to our benchmark partners such as the Science Based Targets Network (SBTN), Global Reporting Initiative (GRI), World Wildlife Fund (WWF), World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD) and Taskforce on Nature-related Financial Disclosures (TNFD), close to 100 organisations provided feedback for the development of the methodology. These organisations included over 30 companies, 15 financial institutions and 22 specialised nonprofit organisations.
You can read or download the Nature Benchmark Methodology at the link below.Read methodology
From driving land and sea use change to the production of harmful pollutants, economic activities from the private sector contribute to biodiversity loss in most major value chains in the global economy. It is often difficult to measure impact between industries due to the varying connections between companies’ value chains. Therefore, to truly measure the impact of the private sector on biodiversity loss, a holistic approach must be taken when selecting which industries and companies will be in scope.
The selection of the companies has been based on our methodology for identifying its SDG2000 ‘keystone companies’ across the seven transformations. As such, the Nature Benchmark’s aspiration is to measure 1,000 companies across 20 industries. This year, the benchmark assessed 350 of the world’s most influential companies in the food and agriculture industry.
In addition to their ecological footprint, these companies were selected based on five principles:
• The company dominates global production revenues and/or volumes within a particular sector.
• The company controls globally relevant segments of production and/or service provision.
• The company connects (eco)systems globally through subsidiaries and their supply chains.
• The company influences global governance processes and institutions.
• The company has a global footprint, particularly in developing countries
Approach to scoring and ranking
All 1000 companies in scope for the Nature Benchmark will be assessed on the following 25 nature indicators, in addition to the 18 core social indicators. The indicators cover three main measurement areas where stakeholders’ expectations are high: governance and strategy; social inclusion and community impact; and ecosystems and biodiversity.
Each indicator is assigned a score according to WBA’s scoring guidelines. Core social indicators will weigh 20% of the total score, and the other 80% will be equally divided among the 24 transformation indicators, with another being an indicator included for information-purpose only. For companies that are scored on all indicators, this means each indicator weighs 3.4%. Although indicators have been designed to be industry-agnostic, it is possible that, for a few companies, a limited number of indicators will not be applicable. Therefore, the weight of each indicator will be slightly higher for these companies across the remaining indicators. This approach will be tested and confirmed after a preliminary round of scoring.
Data collection process
Prior to the opening of the data collection platform and the invite for companies to input data, WBA research team conducts a pre-assessment by uploading and scoring relevant data from the companies’ publicly-available data, such as annual or sustainability reports, and information from the corporate website. Companies have the opportunity check, modify and expand on the prepopulated data to ensure that it is accurate, complete and up to date, and provide us with supporting sources. For the purposes of pre-population we only considered information that was publicly available and published in the English language.