, etc., but also regulation services such as climate regulation, water purification or pollination. the deterioration of nature through deforestation, plastic and chemical pollution and overconsumption obviously alters the provision of those services. since page 2 sur 13 1970, 14 out of the 18 categories of ecosystem services have declined according to the intergovernmental science - policy platform on biodiversity and ecosystem services ( ipbes ). some of these ecosystems are critical to human life and activity : pest and disease control is an alarming example, with scientists warning of an “ era of pandemics ” if we do not tackle the biodiversity crisis. ii 2. these biodiversity losses pose significant risks to economic growth and the financial system for centuries, human societies, economic activities and finance were very much embedded in nature : loan schedules for example were indirectly shaped by the rhythm of the seasons. nowadays, the vast majority of economic agents act as if our economies were completely “ disembedded ” from nature ( dasgupta, 2021 ) : iii we even call the impacts we have on nature “ externalities ”. but facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored : our economies are deeply dependent on ecosystems. more than half of global gdp – i. e. 44 trillion usd of economic value generation – is estimated as moderately or highly dependent on ecosystem services ( wef / herweijer et al., 2020 ). iv moreover, the total value of the ecosystem services we consume almost for free may amount to more than annual global gdp ( costanza et al., 2014 ). v because financial institutions support the development of economic activity, our financial system is also clearly exposed to biodiversity loss. the joint study group ngfs - inspire thankfully released an insightful report in marchvi highlighting the financial stability implications of nature - related risks, especially those associated with biodiversity loss. biodiversity - related risks can be understood as physical and transition risks, which reminds us the schemes used to analyse climate - related risks. physical risks stem from the dependency of economic activities on ecosystem services and their vulnerability in the case of disruption ; transition risks result from the impact of these activities on biodiversity, which makes them vulnerable to transition policies. as an illustration, recent research showed that exposure to degraded land could page 3 sur 13 impact the value of listed companies in the food supply chain in brazil : the market value of farmers operating on degrading land declined by 13 per cent following extreme weather, while those on healthy soils increased by 6

would like to call for extending our scope progressively but with ambition. first, climate change, on which we must proceed as swiftly as possible ; second, biodiversity, which is at an intermediary stage ; third, other economically material nature - related risks, including air and water pollution, land use, etc. to the extent they are not already covered as we work on climate and biodiversity. i can only wish for a holistic approach someday ; but we certainly cannot wait until we know everything on all nature - related risks before we act on climate. page 6 sur 13 b. what we don ’ t know yet drawing a parallel with the progress made on climate, we face two significant challenges ahead for biodiversity issues : metrics and scenarios ( “ ipcc type ” ) and macroeconomics and finance ( “ ngfs type ” ). 1. biodiversity metrics and scenarios biodiversity – and even more so nature – is complex and multidimensional : for example, biodiversity measurement cannot be reduced to a single metric like the concentration of greenhouse gas in the atmosphere and the associated rise in temperature for climate change. we still lack understanding on, and especially awareness of, this phenomenon. thankfully, the ipbes, which we could describe as the ipcc equivalent for biodiversity, is advancing knowledge and raising awareness about biodiversity. it provides landmark assessments of biodiversity loss and ecosystem services, including work on scenarios that we could explore further as we aim for improved risk assessment by the financial sector, just like we did with ipcc scenarios. when attempting to assess risks, we are indeed confronted with numerous conceptual challenges that require adapted tools : the diversity of drivers and impacts ; uncertainty over the time horizon ( which may be relatively short for biodiversity - related risks ), the importance of tail risks and non - linearities associated with tipping points ; the limited substitutability of ecosystem services ( for instance, forests provide flood protection services that can only partially be replaced by costly infrastructure, while ignoring many other services provided by forests ), interdependencies between phenomena ( climate change, biodiversity, land use pollution and fresh water use, as mentioned earlier ), etc. a particular issue relates to the need for data and metrics, which is targeted by several initiatives. these include the global biodiversity score ( gbs ), developed by cdc biodiversite using the globio model of the netherlands environmental assessment agency ( pbl ) – hence a good example of fruitful french - dutch cooperation. this tool assess