Australian insights
CER approved stacking of ENVOMARK method with ACCUs(Opens in a new tab/window)
Eco-Markets has announced(Opens in a new tab/window) that the Clean Energy Regulator (CER) has approved the stacking of the ENVOMARK Grazing Land Management (GLM) Methodology under both Australasian Catchment Water Improvement Standard and Reef Credits, with the Australian Carbon Credit Soil Carbon Methodology. This marks the second ENVOMARK Methodology, alongside the ENVOMARK Rainforest Replanting Methodology, approved to stack with the Australian Carbon Credit Unit (ACCU) Scheme. The CER endorses these project types being ‘stacked’ where all relevant scheme requirements are satisfied.
In the case where a project has ENVOMARK GLM stacked with Soil Carbon ACCUs, fine sediment reductions improving water quality are credited by Eco-Markets alongside, but independent of, the corresponding soil organic carbon sequestration credited with ACCUs.
Consultation on the Climate Active program(Opens in a new tab/window)
The Australian Government is closing the Climate Active certification program. Strong policy action from government, including setting ambitious but achievable climate targets, is driving corporate decarbonisation and superseding the need for Climate Active. New mandatory climate disclosure requirements are helping to keep large Australian corporations publicly accountable for their climate action.
Ending Climate Active certification will also see an end to Climate Active trademarks and use of the term ‘carbon neutral’. To best support businesses through the transition away from certification, the Australian Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water is seeking feedback(Opens in a new tab/window) from Australian businesses and stakeholders on whether to close the program fully or retain some voluntary standards and select guidance. Submit your feedback by 18 September 2026. A final decision is expected to be announced before the end of 2026.
Taxonomy Pilot Case Studies(Opens in a new tab/window)
The Australian Sustainable Finance Institute has published(Opens in a new tab/window) case studies to share early insights from organisations that participated in the sustainable finance Taxonomy Pilot Implementation Program. ANZ shared how the Australian Taxonomy can support banking sector due diligence, customer conversations and confidence in green finance. HESTA shared how it used the Australian Taxonomy to assess labelled bonds, support engagement and inform climate-related investment reporting. Rest Super shared insights from testing the Australian Taxonomy as a classification tool for real assets and investment analysis.
Green Sheep Project(Opens in a new tab/window)
Sheep Producers Australia will partner with Natural Resource Management organisations and supply chain representatives to provide producers with user-friendly tools for recording environmental performance, improving grazing and pasture management, tracking natural capital and making data-driven decisions. By 2028, the Green Sheep Project(Opens in a new tab/window) will demonstrate how production systems can increase productivity, profitability, lower emissions, and increase on-farm biodiversity.
International insights
Second Global Nature Positive Summit – Kumamoto Declaration(Opens in a new tab/window)
The Nature Positive Initiative has released(Opens in a new tab/window) a roundup of the second Global Nature Positive Summit, held in Kumamoto, Japan. The Summit welcomed 2,725 leaders and delegates, with sessions focusing on scaling the implementation of nature ambitions. At the Summit, 85 organisations adopted the Kumamoto Declaration, which calls for greater alignment around science-based, practical approaches to measuring, managing and reporting on nature, to strengthen implementation of the Global Biodiversity Framework. Approximately half of the declaration’s signatories are private sector organisations. The Summit ended with the announcement that the third Global Nature Positive Summit will be hosted in India in October 2027.
TNFD-aligned assessment methodology for the forest products sector(Opens in a new tab/window)
Pollination has published(Opens in a new tab/window) a methodology for companies in the forest products sector, as well as other land use sectors, seeking to understand, report and integrate nature-related risks and opportunities into their business strategies. The methodology is aligned with guidance from the Taskforce on Nature-related Financial Disclosures (TNFD) and is based on the experience of West Fraser, a Canadian forestry company, in applying the TNFD guidance.
UNEP FI’s Sector Impact Matrix(Opens in a new tab/window)
The United Nations Environment Programme Finance Initiative (UNEP FI) has released(Opens in a new tab/window) the Sector Impact Matrix, an iteration of its Sector Mapping. The Sector Impact Matrix, developed in collaboration with partners from the Impact Management Platform, identifies the most likely positive and negative sustainability impacts across economic sectors and activities.
Designed to support impact-informed decision-making, the Matrix provides a practical foundation to understanding how sector activities interact with environmental, social and economic outcomes. It incorporates value-chain considerations and highlights key sustainability-related risks and opportunities, enabling organisations to better assess and manage their impacts. An accompanying user guide provides detailed information on the methodology, data sources and interoperability of the Matrix.
Practical guide for designing insurance for nature(Opens in a new tab/window)
The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) Biodiversity Finance Initiative (BIOFIN) and the UNDP Insurance and Risk Finance Facility (IRFF) have published(Opens in a new tab/window) a practical guide for designing insurance for nature. This report seeks to support countries and stakeholders in understanding and applying insurance as part of broader efforts to address nature-related risks. Insurance is emerging as an important but underexplored tool for managing nature-related risks and supporting biodiversity outcomes.
The report highlights the role of insurance in protecting ecosystems, managing financial losses associated with biodiversity decline, and improving resilience through nature-based solutions. It emphasises that insurance should complement broader risk reduction, conservation and restoration measures. It uses the example of coral reef insurance, which provides funding for rapid reef repair following storm damage, but notes that it should be combined with conservation and resilience-building efforts to reduce overall risk.
Nature Positive Transition Pathways Report(Opens in a new tab/window)
The Green Finance Institute (GFI), in collaboration with WWF and the UK Centre for Ecology and Hydrology has published(Opens in a new tab/window) a report detailing the planned methodological approach for the creation and evaluation of Nature-Positive Transition Pathways (NPPs), for the agri-food, built environment and water utilities sectors in UK. NPPs guide businesses and governments in aligning with National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plans or other environmental targets. Following the UK Government’s commitment to developing NPPs for priority sectors in 2025, GFI co-authored a discussion paper in February 2026 that called for co-design of NPPs with businesses and stakeholders. Feedback informed the iterative approach presented in this report, which uses evidence and stakeholder insights to develop, test and refine flexible pathways against environmental, economic and social outcomes.
Business models for biodiversity(Opens in a new tab/window)
Academics from the University of Oxford and other universities across Europe, Africa and Australia have released(Opens in a new tab/window) a pre-print article reviewing five types of biodiversity-related business models. The five models include improving biodiversity as:
- a co-benefit of a core business activity (e.g. ecotourism operators),
- delivering direct improvements in biodiversity (e.g. biodiversity credit proponents),
- supporting biodiversity enhancement through nature technology (e.g. biodiversity monitoring businesses),
- reducing biodiversity pressures through innovation (e.g. producers of plant-based meat alternatives), or
- using biodiversity to improve asset resilience and value (e.g. real estate developers integrating living walls on urban buildings).
The article finds that while many biodiversity-focused businesses are commercially viable, evidence of positive biodiversity outcomes remains limited in many cases. The authors conclude that public policy and investment remain critical to scaling conservation outcomes.
Guide for governments on how to effectively engage businesses to deliver the GBF(Opens in a new tab/window)
Business for Nature has published(Opens in a new tab/window) guidance on how governments can engage businesses to deliver national biodiversity targets under the Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF). The guidance includes five recommendations for governments, intended to be undertaken sequentially to ultimately develop and implement a business action plan that sets out a time-bound strategy for achieving business-related targets under their National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan. The recommendations were created based on the experience of Business for Nature and its partners supporting government-business engagement processes across countries in South America, Asia and Africa.
EFRAG State of Play 2026(Opens in a new tab/window)
The European Financial Reporting Advisory Group (EFRAG) has published the 2026 State of Play Report(Opens in a new tab/window) on the implementation practices of the European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS). The study draws on a baseline of 905 assured Fiscal Year 2025 sustainability statements, assessed against a structured set of 18 questions spanning the full breadth of the ESRS cross-cutting, environmental, social, and governance standards.
The report found that sustainability is becoming more integrated into corporate strategy. Companies identified, on average, 6.4 material ESRS topics, but set measurable targets for only 3.3. The report also found that 63% link sustainability performance to executive incentive schemes.
Listen to the 14-minute webcast(Opens in a new tab/window) with the Chair of the EFRAG Sustainability Reporting Board to unpack the report's most important findings and provide insights on the emerging reporting trends.
Biodiversity is rising on the corporate agenda, but accountability is lagging(Opens in a new tab/window)
The Stockholm Resilience Centre has shared findings(Opens in a new tab/window) from a study published in One Earth(Opens in a new tab/window), which assessedthe biodiversity commitments of 180 large transnational ‘keystone’ corporations. 79 per cent of assessed companies had made at least one biodiversity commitment, but only 13 per cent reported commitments that were sufficiently detailed, transparent, and specific to allow others to assess whether targets had been met. Agriculture and farming sectors performed comparatively well, with 18 of the 23 companies having at least one robust commitment. In contrast, biodiversity commitments were sparse in sectors such as animal pharmaceuticals and oil and gas.
The study also highlights potential barriers that may make stronger commitments difficult, including commercial incentives, fear of reputational risk if targets are missed, limited guidance on biodiversity target-setting, and data gaps across complex supply chains. The researchers suggest that stronger corporate biodiversity leadership could be supported through mandatory reporting requirements, business-science collaboration, sector-wide sustainability initiatives, increased participation in voluntary frameworks, and pressure from stock exchanges, financiers, and other stakeholders.
Navigating nature investments(Opens in a new tab/window)
The Institutional Investors Group on Climate Change (IIGCC), the European-based membership body for investor collaboration on climate change with a membership exceeding 400 pension funds and asset manager, has released(Opens in a new tab/window) a paper discussing frictions arising from terminology, categorisation, and risk visibility in nature investment opportunities. The paper recommends the creation of a translation layer to enable nature investments to be described, compared and risk-flagged consistently across existing frameworks, providing investors with decision-relevant information and a faster solution than market-wide alignment on definitions. The IIGCC’s Nature Working Group is currently developing a draft approach to the translation layer, with consultation planned for late 2026.