Biodiversity and ecosystems

TNFD: C5.0, A5.0

Note that this metric may be derived from Ecosystem asset condition accounts (see Ecosystem assets tab). Additional analysis may be required to determine the spatial scope of ecosystems attributable to the reporting entity, e.g. through an assessment of ownership, control or influence. Variants of this metric include TNFD core disclosure placeholder metric C5.0: “Level of ecosystem condition by type of ecosystem and business activity” and additional disclosure metric A5.0: “Level of ecosystem condition by type of ecosystem and business activity – refer to TNFD additional guidance on state of nature measurement in Annex 2 of the LEAP approach.”

TNFD: A3.4, A5.1, C1.0

Note that this metric may be derived from Ecosystem asset extent accounts (see Ecosystem assets tab). Additional analysis may be required to determine the spatial scope attributable to the reporting entity, e.g. through an assessment of ownership, control or influence. Variants of this metric include TNFD core disclosure metric C1.0: “Total spatial footprint (km²) (sum of):

• Total surface area controlled/managed by the organisation, where the organisation has control (km²);
• Total disturbed area (km²); and
• Total rehabilitated/restored area (km²).

When disclosing on ecosystem types, refer to the International Union for Conservation of Nature Global Ecosystem Typology (IUCN-GET) and additional disclosure metrics A3.4: “Area (km²) that the organisation controls and/ or manages that is used for the production of natural commodities from land/ocean/freshwater ecosystems, by type of ecosystem.” and A5.1: “Quantitative measure of ecosystem extent, e.g. change in habitat cover (km²).”

Note that while ecosystem extent is a ‘state’ metric, these TNFD metrics could also be regarded as proxy impact drivers, as the impact of a reporting entity on nature is often related to the spatial extent of its influence. TNFD metric C1.0 is classified by the TNFD under the impact driver ‘Land/freshwater/ocean-use change’ and A3.4 under the impact driver ‘Resource use/replenishment’, while metric A5.1 is classified under ‘State of nature’.

TNFD: A4.0

Note that this metric may be derived from Ecosystem asset accounts (see Ecosystem assets tab). Additional analysis may be required to determine the extent to which measured change in extent of introduced/invasive/weed/pest species, varieties or strains has been caused by the reporting entity.

‘Affected by’ could be defined more specifically as the flow of ecosystem services depended on by the reporting entity are significantly reduced (remain above levels required to meet objectives), and/or management of this issue entails significant cost (above expectations).

Extensive information on weed species of relevance to Victoria is available at Victorian Resources Online – Invasive Plants.

Variants of this metric include TNFD additional disclosure metric A4.0: “Number/extent of unintentionally introduced species, varieties or strains in areas owned, operated, used or financed in priority areas (absolute, presence/absence and/or number removed).”

Pests and diseases can mean many different things, so reporting should clarify which specific pest species/diseases are covered, and what they principally affect (e.g. humans, livestock, crops, wildlife, etc.). Note that while diseases are often associated with specific microbes, viruses and fungi, they may also be caused by interactions with a wide variety of plants, animals and/or environmental conditions. Also note that the causal relationship between the reporting entity and the observed extent of a pest/disease may be complex and/or uncertain, and the basis for assessing the reporting entity’s causal contribution should be made clear. There may be overlaps between this category of impacts and other categories, such as weeds or animal welfare, which should also be made clear.
‘Affected by’ could be defined more specifically as the flow of ecosystem services depended on by the reporting entity are significantly reduced (remain above levels required to meet objectives), and/or management of this issue entails significant cost (above expectations).

TNFD: A1.0, A2.0, C1.1

Note that land/freshwater/ocean-use change may be derived from Land accounts (see Environmental assets tab). For example, land conservation or restoration may involve a change from a more intensive use (e.g. class 1.1 Agriculture) to a less intensive use (e.g. class 1.5 Land used for maintenance and restoration of environmental functions, or class 1.7 Land not in use). Additional analysis may be required to determine the extent to which measured change has been caused by the reporting entity.

Variants of this metric include TNFD core disclosure metric C1.1: “Extent of land/freshwater/ocean ecosystem use change (km²) by:
• Type of ecosystem; and
• Type of business activity.

Extent of land/freshwater/ocean ecosystem conserved or restored (km²), split into:
• Voluntary; and
• Required by statutes or regulations.

Extent of land/freshwater/ocean ecosystem that is sustainably managed (km²) by:
• Type of ecosystem; and
• Type of business activity.

and additional disclosure metric A1.0: “Land-use intensity (tonnes or litres of output/km²). This will vary by sector context; for example, crop yield (tonnes/km²) for the agriculture sector.”

TNFD: A5.2

There are many different ways of measuring landscape fragmentation (or its opposite, connectivity). One example, which produces larger numbers for more fragmented landscapes, is the ‘splitting index’ or ‘S’ (see Jaeger, 2000). Mathematically, it is equal to the total area squared, divided by the sum of the squares of the areas of each individual patch within the total area. Alternatively, ‘degree of coherence’ or ‘C’ represents the probability that two animals randomly placed within an area would be able to find each other, and ‘effective mesh size’ or ‘m’ represents the size of the areas when the total area is divided into S patches. These measures are all related to each other: e.g. S = 1/C and C = m/total area.

Variants of this metric include TNFD additional disclosure metric A5.2: “Quantitative measure of ecosystem connectivity, e.g. Singapore Index.
Chan, L. et al. (2021) Handbook on the Singapore Index on Cities’ Biodiversity.”

The Singapore Index is a composite index created by adding scores across 28 different indicators, including governance and management of biodiversity. Indicator 2 of the Singapore Index is based on a calculation of the degree of coherence.

TNFD: A4.0

Variants of this metric include TNFD additional disclosure metric A4.0: “Number/extent of unintentionally introduced species, varieties or strains in areas owned, operated, used or financed in priority areas (absolute, presence/absence and/or number removed).”

‘Affected by’ could be defined more specifically by reference to exceedance of animal welfare standards for the relevant industry. Refer to: Australian Animal Welfare Standards and Guidelines.

TNFD: FA.A4.0

Variants of this metric include TNFD Food and agriculture additional disclosure metric FA.A4.0: “Proportion (%) of animal production or animal protein sourced that receives 1) medically important antimicrobials and 2) not medically important antimicrobials, by animal type.”

TNFD: C4.0

Variants of this metric include TNFD placeholder core disclosure metric C4.0: “Proportion of high-risk activities operated under appropriate measures to prevent unintentional introduction of IAS, or low-risk designed activities.”

TNFD: FA.A1.1, FA.A5.1

It is up to the user to decide whether it is more relevant to measure the proportion of land area that is favourable for biodiversity (as a positive impact metric), or unfavourable (as a negative impact metric). Furthermore, whether an area is favourable or not favourable for biodiversity needs to be interpreted according to the context. For example, in intensively managed croplands, favourable areas might be considered to include field boundary strips which are not cultivated or sprayed, provided these maintain some form of appropriate species composition; whereas in grazing lands, it might include areas of native pasture or areas free from invasive weed species.

Other typical favourable areas might include riparian buffers, shelterbelts and other plantations (if planted with appropriate native species), remnant trees or other native vegetation, or invasive pest exclusion zones. Favourable/unfavourable areas could also be defined using appropriate ecosystem condition measures (e.g. Proportion of land area with decreasing species richness). When reporting against this measure, the basis for the measurement should be made clear, and it may be appropriate to report on different interpretations of the measure separately (e.g., Proportion of land area without biodiversity replantings separately to Proportion of land area without remnant native vegetation).

Variants of this metric include TNFD Food and agriculture additional disclosure metrics FA.A1.1: “Proportion (%) of supply chain area with native vegetation over sourcing areas from sensitive locations.” and FA.A5.1: “Proportion (%) of cropland controlled, managed and/or sourced from with at least 10% natural vegetation per 1 km² cultivated area. Proportion (%) of such land with more than 20% natural vegetation per 1 km² cultivated area.”

TNFD: FA.C1.0

Variants of this metric include TNFD Food and agriculture core disclosure metric FA.C1.0: “Proportion (%) of production volume from land controlled, managed or sourced from that is determined to be deforestation and conversion-free (DCF), by product.”

TNFD: C3.1

Note that this metric may be derived from Environmental asset accounts (see Environmental assets tab). Variants of this metric include TNFD core disclosure metrics C3.1: “Quantity of high-risk natural commodities (tonnes) sourced from land/ocean/freshwater, split into types, including proportion of total natural commodities.
Quantity of high-risk natural commodities (tonnes) sourced under a sustainable management plan or certification programme, including proportion of total high-risk natural commodities.
Users should refer to the Science Based Targets Network (SBTN) High Impact Commodity List (HICL) and indicate what proportion of these commodities represent threatened and CITES listed species.”

TNFD: A3.5

Note that this metric may be derived from Environmental asset accounts (see Environmental assets tab). Variants of this metric include TNFD additional disclosure metric A3.5: “Quantity of wild species (tonnes and/or number of individual specimens, by species) extracted from natural habitats for commercial purposes.”

TNFD: C5.0

Note that this metric may be derived from Ecosystem asset condition accounts (see Ecosystem assets tab). Additional analysis may be required to determine the extent to which measured change in the rate of biodiversity loss has been caused by the reporting entity. Variants of this metric include TNFD core disclosure placeholder metric C5.0: “Species extinction risk”.

Work in progress - Feedback welcome

TNFD: A5.4

Note that this metric may be derived from Other biological resources asset accounts (see Environmental assets tab). The user will need to determine what species are significant within the context under consideration. Variants of this metric include TNFD additional disclosure metric A5.4: “Quantitative measure of species population size.”