Nature-related disclosure is gathering momentum, but measurement is not keeping pace. As the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework comes under review at CBD COP17 in Yerevan, with the 23 key targets off track, CircHive has launched its Biodiversity Footprinting Guidance and Decision Tree to help organisations understand where to start.
Disclosure is rising but measurement lags behind
The Taskforce for Nature-related Financial Disclosures (TNFD) announced in its 2026 Status Report that the number of organisations reporting on nature had risen to over 1,000 in 2026 compared to 542 in 2025.
This encouraging trend demonstrates an increasing recognition of the need to assess our impact on nature. 100% of investors surveyed by TNFD expressed concern about the effects of nature loss on financial markets and 59% ranked nature among their organisation’s three most important sustainability topics.
However, there remains a gap in many organisations in understanding the best approach, effectively measuring impact, gathering reliable data, and then moving from disclosure to embedding nature in strategic decision-making.
CircHive’s guidance and Decision Tree, launched at a webinar on 7 October 2026, provides a practical resource that organisations can use to navigate biodiversity footprinting, assess the best approach to take (with a focus on Input-Output models, Life Cycle Assessment, and Natural Capital Accounting), and ultimately understand their impact on nature.
Choosing the right approach
Explaining why CircHive produced this guidance at the launch webinar, Ira Bhattarai (LUKE) noted that there was a recognition that there is a gap between incoming standards and where businesses are operating. This is exacerbated by another key challenge that they face: the availability and quality of data.
Ivan Paspaldzhiev (EY denkstatt Bulgaria) highlighted that in both the private and public sector there is often a lack of clarity over what approach is most effective for an organisation, depending on their goals, ambition, and access to data. To address this, the CircHive project team analysed over 20 approaches and methods during the creation of the guidance, with the aim of finding out which is most effective for each unique context.
The Decision Tree is tailored for this purpose. It asks users a series of questions about their progress so far and their reason for conducting biodiversity footprinting, and recommends methods based on this insight. It reflects that the right approach depends on the reason why an organisation is conducting biodiversity footprinting, and the resources and data that they have access to.
This means that businesses can better understand what is achievable in their context, enabling sustainability managers to clearly make the case for their chosen approach and the potential investment and data that a more ambitious approach might require in the future.
CircHive’s project team found that there is no one-size-fits-all approach to biodiversity footprinting and that different methods play their own unique role, while also being highly complementary.
The business perspective
CircHive partners from business, finance and the public sector have informed the creation of these new assets to ensure they address the challenges they face. At the launch webinar, Elena Romanova (Raiffeisen Bank International) provided this perspective, as a CircHive partner representing a major financial institution that is acting to address its nature impact.
Understanding what you are assessing, why you are assessing it, and the method you use is fundamental for an organisation moving towards measuring its impact on nature, Elena said. Once this has been set it is important to understand if the data and the results are plausible and then move towards using the results to inform strategy and address risk. This data can then also support regulatory compliance as new standards are introduced.
Discussing the guidance and Decision Tree, Elena added that it provides a basis from which to understand where to start and how to move forwards with the right approach. It also helps users check whether the data their organisation uses is producing plausible results, providing an opportunity to reassess the approach if it is not.
Why should you act now?
Taking action to measure, understand and address your organisation’s impact on nature is good for business. It’s not only crucial to manage risk and dependencies but also to create measurement capacity that means your organisation is ready for future reporting standards.
Lund University research published the day after the guidance launched demonstrates the need for action. It finds that of 89 Global Fortune 500 companies in the sectors with the largest biodiversity footprint, only 9% used biodiversity indicators to inform decisions. While only two of that 9% used more than one biodiversity indicator.