OCE-B.16.C - Biodiversity Loss Halt and Reversal Progress
Does the company report progress on halting and reversing biodiversity loss?
About the data
The WBA Ocean Benchmark measures and ranks the world's most influential companies on their efforts to halt and reverse nature loss in marine ecosystems, tracking how companies manage their impacts on ocean biodiversity, marine habitats, and the communities and workers dependent on healthy seas. The 2026 edition is WBA's first Ocean Benchmark, assessing 125 companies across key sectors dependent on oceans, including seafood, maritime transport, offshore wind energy, shipbuilding, port operations, apparel, and chemicals. Companies are assessed on 47 indicators across four measurement areas: governance, ecosystems and biodiversity, social responsibility, and core social indicators. The benchmark builds on WBA's Nature Benchmark and the former Seafood Stewardship Index, and its methodology was developed with input from more than 50 stakeholders including ocean communities, companies, scientists and civil society, with human rights and social impacts kept at its core alongside nature-specific concerns. More information can be found here.
Methodology
The Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services
(IPBES) Global Assessment Report (2019) has estimated that 1 million animal and plant species are
threatened with extinction. The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) finds that more
than a quarter of all assessed species are threatened. There is thus an ever-growing need for
companies to report progress on halting biodiversity loss, despite the challenges of measuring
biodiversity impacts.
Research Guidance:
Companies must:
Report quantitative progress on halting biodiversity loss, and
Disclose positive change(s) on at least one biodiversity-related metric since the last reporting period (or in its absence, a stated baseline).
Progress can relate to:
a)Species-specific metrics
b)Connectivity metrics
c)Area-based metrics
d)Ecosystem service metrics
e)Other biodiversity-related restoration metrics
Given that this topic is comparatively less mature than others, in this iteration of the Benchmark we will accept disclosure on specific projects (even if these do not cover the entirety of the company's operations), as long as the methods used are robust and transparent.
To meet this element, at least two measurements are needed in order to demonstrate an improvement (e.g. a baseline and a subsequent measurement). Year on year metrics are not strictly mandatory as progress on biodiversity may take several years to be measurable. For example:
**Pollinator diversity** might be monitored every 2 to 3 years, balancing the need for timely data with the natural variability in populations.
**Species abundance** is typically evaluated every 3 to 5 years, allowing enough time to observe meaningful trends and the impact of conservation efforts.
**The connectivity of ecosystems** is generally assessed every 5 years to gauge long-term ecological landscape changes.
**Genetic diversity **within key species, reflecting complex and slow-changing dynamics, may require a longer interval, such as every 5 to 10 years.
**Invasive species coverage** can be monitored annually, as those metrics are crucial for tracking rapid changes and adjusting management strategies promptly.
Restoration metrics will only count for this element when they are clearly biodiversity-related (e.g. to protect a species).
(IPBES) Global Assessment Report (2019) has estimated that 1 million animal and plant species are
threatened with extinction. The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) finds that more
than a quarter of all assessed species are threatened. There is thus an ever-growing need for
companies to report progress on halting biodiversity loss, despite the challenges of measuring
biodiversity impacts.
Research Guidance:
Companies must:
Report quantitative progress on halting biodiversity loss, and
Disclose positive change(s) on at least one biodiversity-related metric since the last reporting period (or in its absence, a stated baseline).
Progress can relate to:
a)Species-specific metrics
b)Connectivity metrics
c)Area-based metrics
d)Ecosystem service metrics
e)Other biodiversity-related restoration metrics
Given that this topic is comparatively less mature than others, in this iteration of the Benchmark we will accept disclosure on specific projects (even if these do not cover the entirety of the company's operations), as long as the methods used are robust and transparent.
To meet this element, at least two measurements are needed in order to demonstrate an improvement (e.g. a baseline and a subsequent measurement). Year on year metrics are not strictly mandatory as progress on biodiversity may take several years to be measurable. For example:
**Pollinator diversity** might be monitored every 2 to 3 years, balancing the need for timely data with the natural variability in populations.
**Species abundance** is typically evaluated every 3 to 5 years, allowing enough time to observe meaningful trends and the impact of conservation efforts.
**The connectivity of ecosystems** is generally assessed every 5 years to gauge long-term ecological landscape changes.
**Genetic diversity **within key species, reflecting complex and slow-changing dynamics, may require a longer interval, such as every 5 to 10 years.
**Invasive species coverage** can be monitored annually, as those metrics are crucial for tracking rapid changes and adjusting management strategies promptly.
Restoration metrics will only count for this element when they are clearly biodiversity-related (e.g. to protect a species).
License
Topics
Framework Mappings
Value Type
Category
Options
Yes
No
Assessment
Steward Assessed
Report Type
Aggregate Data Report