Introduction: The Nature Risk Profile ................................................................. 5Context .............................................................................................................................. 5Key features ....................................................................................................................... 5

Definitions, Scope, and General Approach ........................................................ 7
Definition of nature and the concept of ecosystem integrity .............................................. 7
Scope ................................................................................................................................. 9General approach ............................................................................................................ 10

Input Data, Data Availability and Harmonisation ............................................. 12
Overall approach ............................................................................................................. 12
Tier 1 approach: Country and sector-level data .............................................................. 12
Tier 2 approach: Asset-level data .................................................................................... 14Assessing Nature Dependencies ...................................................................... 18
Definition of dependency risk .......................................................................................... 18
Reliance risk score: definition and calculation ................................................................. 19
Resilience risk score: definition and calculation .............................................................. 24
Composite dependency risk score: definition and calculation ......................................... 26
Aggregated dependency risk scores: definition and calculation ..................................... 27

Assessing Nature Impacts ................................................................................ 30
Definition of impact risk ................................................................................................... 30
Magnitude: definition and calculation .............................................................................. 31
Significance: definition and calculation ............................................................................ 34
Ecosystem Footprint: definition and calculation .............................................................. 42
Additional contextual significance indicators ................................................................... 43

Aggregating Impacts and Risks to the Company Level .................................. 46
Dependency metrics aggregation .................................................................................... 46

2

Impact metrics aggregation ............................................................................................. 47
Tier 1 versus Tier 2 method ............................................................................................. 49

Limitations.......................................................................................................... 51
References ......................................................................................................... 53
Appendix 1: The Ecosystem Integrity Index .................................................... 54
Appendix 2: Calculating a Footprint on EII ...................................................... 56
Appendix 3: Ecosystem Services and Their Definitions ................................. 57
Appendix 4: Ecosystem Services and How They Are Treated in theMethodology ...................................................................................................... 61Appendix 5: Methods and Inputs for the Calculation of Dependency Metrics
63
Version History .................................................................................................. 67
S&P Global Sustainable1 Disclaimer ................................................................ 68

3

Table 1: Key questions answered by the main building blocks indicators ... 10
Table 2: Asset data input hierarchy .................................................................. 15
Table 3: S&P Global Sustainable1‘s Nature & Biodiversity Risk dataset: Assetlevel data coverage and sources .............................................................. 15
Table 4: Materiality ratings logic and their corresponding numerical scores 20
Table 5: Example for Integrated Oil and Gas ................................................... 21
Table 6: Example Assumed Asset Values per Asset Type.............................. 47

Figure 1: Ecosystem Integrity Index ................................................................... 9Figure 2: Key elements forming the building blocks of the methodology forprofiling nature-related risks ..................................................................... 10
Figure 3: Maps of GDP layers for Europe and Asia ......................................... 13
Figure 4: Global land use map .......................................................................... 14
Figure 5: S&P Global’s Nature and Biodiversity Risk Dataset Coverage
Summary..................................................................................................... 16
Figure 6: Pillars of Dependency Risk Assessment in S&P Global Sustainable
1 Nature & Biodiversity Risk Assessment ................................................ 19
Figure 7: Dependency scores aggregating function ....................................... 27
Figure 8: Profile of sigmoid transformation of ecosystem dependency scores,
compared to a linear application............................................................... 28
Figure 9: Aggregated dependency risk scores: Interquartile distribution byGICS Sector (Core Plus Universe) ............................................................ 29
Figure 10: Modelled EII layer (left) and Satellite image (right) of sample coalmines ........................................................................................................ 33
Figure 11: Ecosystem Integrity Impact Index: Interquartile distribution by GICS
Sector (Core Plus Universe) ...................................................................... 34
Figure 12: Map of critical natural assets for local Nature Contributions toPeople (NCP) .............................................................................................. 38
Figure 13: Ecosystem significance index layer ............................................... 40
Figure 14: Ecosystem Significance Index: Interquartile distribution by GICS
Sector (Core Plus Universe) ...................................................................... 41
Figure 15: Selected mining assets and KBAs in Mexico ................................. 45

••••
•

5

•

6

•
•

7

--

8

-

9

•

•

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

•
•

18

19

20

21

•

•

22

𝑛𝑅𝑒𝑙𝑖𝑎𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝑠𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑒𝑖 = √𝑀𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑙𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝑠𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑒𝑖 ∗ 𝑅𝑒𝑙𝑒𝑣𝑎𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝑠𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑒𝑖

23

24

•
•

•

25

𝐷𝑒𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑦 𝑠𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑒𝑖 = 𝑛√ 𝑅𝑒𝑙𝑖𝑎𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝑠𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑒𝑖 ∗ 𝑅𝑒𝑠𝑖𝑙𝑖𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝑠𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑒𝑖

26

𝑙𝑜𝑔 (12 ∗ ∑21
𝑖=1 𝑆𝑖𝑔𝑆𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑒𝑖 ) + 1 ,𝐴𝑔𝑔𝑟𝑒𝑔𝑎𝑡𝑒 𝐷𝑒𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑦 𝑆𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑒𝑗𝑎 = 𝑀𝑖𝑛 [1]
2.3-

27

𝑆𝑖𝑔𝑆𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑒𝑖 = 1⁄[1 + 𝑒𝑥𝑝(−(𝑆𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑒 − 0.5) ∗ 15)]
𝑖-

28

29

•oo

•oo

30

9𝐸𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑦𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑚 𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑔𝑟𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝑓𝑜𝑜𝑡𝑝𝑟𝑖𝑛𝑡 (𝐶𝑜𝑛𝑑𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑎𝑑𝑗𝑢𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑎 𝑖𝑛 ℎ𝑎 𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑖𝑣𝑎𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑡)= 𝐿𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑈𝑠𝑒 (ℎ𝑎) ∗ 𝐸𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑦𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑚 𝐼𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑔𝑟𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝐼𝑚𝑝𝑎𝑐𝑡 𝐼𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑥= 𝐿𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑈𝑠𝑒 (ℎ𝑎) ∗ [ 1 – 𝐶ℎ𝑎𝑟𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑐 𝐸𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑦𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑚 𝐼𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑔𝑟𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝐼𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑥 ]

-

31

----

32

33

Significance:

34

-

35

36

-

-

37

38

39

40

41

𝐸𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑦𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑚 𝐹𝑜𝑜𝑡𝑝𝑟𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑖 =∑𝑛𝑗=1(𝐿𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑈𝑠𝑒 (ℎ𝑎)𝑗 ∗ 𝐸𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑦𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑚 𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑔𝑟𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝑖𝑚𝑝𝑎𝑐𝑡 𝑖𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑥𝑗 ∗ 𝐸𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑦𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑚 𝑠𝑖𝑔𝑛𝑖𝑓𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝑖𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑥𝑗 )42

----43

44

45

𝑛, 𝑚

𝑆𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑒𝑎 =∑ (𝑊𝑖,𝑗 ∗ 𝐷𝑖, 𝑗 )𝑖=1, 𝑗=146

••𝑛𝑆𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑒𝑎 = ∑(𝑊𝑖 ∗ 𝐷𝑖 )
𝑖=147

•𝑛,𝑚

𝐼𝑚𝑝𝑎𝑐𝑡 𝑎 =∑ 𝐼𝑖,𝑗𝑖=1, 𝑗=1•oo𝑛,𝑚

𝐼𝑚𝑝𝑎𝑐𝑡 𝑎 =∑ (𝑊𝑖,𝑗 ∗ 𝐼𝑖,𝑗 )
𝑖=1, 𝑗=1

48

•𝑛

𝐼𝑚𝑝𝑎𝑐𝑡 𝑎 = ∑ 𝐼𝑖
𝑖=1

•oo𝑛

𝐼𝑚𝑝𝑎𝑐𝑡 𝑎 = ∑(𝑊𝑖 ∗ 𝐼𝑖 )
𝑖=149

50

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

51

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

52

Beyer, H. V. (2020). Substantial losses in ecoregion intactness highlight urgency of globally. Conservation Letters,13(2), e12692.
Hill, S. A.-T. (2019). Measuring forest biodiversity status and changes. Frontiers in Forests and Global Change, 2,70.
Hudson, L. N. (2017). The database of the PREDICTS (projecting responses of ecological diversity in changing
terrestrial systems) project. Ecology and evolution, 7(1), pp.145-188.
Kennedy, C. O.‐M. (2019). Managing the middle: A shift in conservation. Global Change Biology, 811-826.
Nature, I. U. (2016). A Global Standard for the Identification of Key Biodiversity Areas, Version 1.0. First. Gand,
Switzerland: IUCN.
Newbold, T. H. (2016). Has land use pushed terrestrial biodiversity beyond the planetary boundary? A globalassessment. Science, 353(6296), 288-291.
Running, S. W. (2019). Daily GPP and Annual NPP (MOD17A2H/A3H) and Year-End Gap- Filled(MOD17A2HGF/A3HGF) Products. NASA Earth Observing System MODIS Land Algorithm (For Collection 6),
MODIS Land Team, Version 4.2, 35.
Samantha L.L. Hill, J. F. (2022). The Ecosystem Integrity Index: a novel measure of terrestrial ecosystem integrity
with global coverage. bioRxiv.

53

54

55

56

57

58

59

60

Animal-based energy

Fibres and other materials

Genetic materials

Ground water

Surface water

Bioremediation

Buffering and attenuation ofmass flows

Climate regulation

Dilution by atmosphere andecosystems

Disease control

61

Filtration

Flood and storm protection

Maintain nursery habitats

Massstabilisation
erosion control

andMediation of sensory impacts

Pest control

Pollination

Soil quality

Ventilation

Water flow maintenance

Water quality

62

63

64

65

66

67

68

69