Nature and the economy: no more “business as usual”

The Business and Biodiversity Assessment report by the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES), published in February 2026, could be summed up in one message: "No more business as usual."

This global group of scientists (79 leading experts from 35 countries and all regions of the world working closely with business and representatives of indigenous people and local community) is comparable to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and has spent three years examining the links between economic activity and the environment. Following their previous work on the “nexus” between nature, climate, food, health, and water, this new report is a landmark document. It should be taken seriously—not to induce despair, but to inspire action by exposing the flaws in our economic models.

Their findings urge us to recognize the risks—both for businesses and society—posed by the depletion of natural resources and to change our practices. The report serves as both a diagnosis and a toolkit for action.

Firstly, it reminds us of an obvious truth we often overlook: we owe much to nature (our dependencies), and human activity transforms it (our impacts). “All businesses depend on and impact biodiversity and can be agents of positive change.” We must realize that the growth of the global economy has been at the cost of immense biodiversity loss.

Next, it highlights that the dominant production model is no longer “compatible with achieving a just and sustainable future.” Instead, it “perpetuates systemic risk, threatening the economy, financial stability, and human well-being—with implications for human rights. These systemic risks arising from biodiversity decline underscore the urgent need for transformative change.”

More importantly, a cooperative, collective response is possible—and necessary—to create a new, fairer, and more sustainable environment for businesses. To achieve this, changes are needed in legal frameworks, economic and financial systems, social and cultural norms, and the use of data and technology. New skills and knowledge must also be developed.

In 2023, global public and private finance flows with direct negative impacts on nature were estimated at $7.3 trillion, while only $220 billion in public and private finance flows were directed in 2023 to activities contributing to the conservation and restoration of biodiversity.

The gravity of the imbalance demands mobilization from governments, financial institutions, businesses, and individuals—especially local communities and Indigenous peoples.

What can businesses do?

The report outlines four key actions:

• Establish corporate governance and strategic frameworks to guide actions that improve biodiversity outcomes across operations, value chains, and portfolios.
• Implement site-level actions to deliver positive biodiversity outcomes, applying the mitigation hierarchy: avoid, minimize, restore, and offset impacts.
• Address impacts and dependencies in value chains, either directly or by influencing upstream (suppliers) and downstream (distributors, retailers, consumers) partners.
• For financial institutions, shift investments away from harmful activities and toward positive impacts.

Methodologies exist to measure impacts and dependencies using data to inform decision-making. Bottom-up information—such as site-specific observations, participatory monitoring, and spatial analysis—is crucial. "Site-specific information and data generated through bottom-up approaches include location-based observations, participatory monitoring and mapping, and spatial analysis built on these data sources. Such approaches can incorporate data and metrics representing local values, knowledge, rights, and interests of other groups, including Indigenous Peoples and local communities."

Top-down decisions, such as life-cycle approaches and macro-scale environmental economic models, can complement these efforts, provided they reflect local environmental values, including the interests of Indigenous and local communities.

These methods must cover a sufficient geographic scope, fully incorporate all dependencies and impacts, and remain relevant and responsive to emerging phenomena. Ideally, measuring impacts and dependencies should combine scientific expertise with the empirical knowledge of local communities, who are often overlooked despite being the best stewards of their environments.

Reading this report is thought-provoking. The task ahead is immense: transforming our production models and even our relationship with nature. However, the benefits are substantial. With rising temperatures stressing ecosystems, preserving nature is both an ecological and moral imperative—and a business one. If nature loses its capacity to act as a carbon sink, it could worsen temperature rises, creating a vicious cycle, depriving us of water, food and wealth. We can do better.