Mainstreaming Natural Capital 2025

There is a lack of alignment between public and private sector efforts in natural capital. The public sector has a critical role to play in accelerating the private sector’s adoption of natural capital approaches, improving capacity and ensuring alignment between natural capital approaches in terms of definitions, metrics and methodology. Critically, unlocking data flows between public and private sector accounts could be the most significant benefit of public-private collaboration in natural capital. However, there is a significant disconnect on natural capital data between the business community and government agencies responsible for national accounts, including national statistics offices (NSOs) and environmental agencies that are unaware of the natural capital needs of the business community.50 There are limitations in the way that public sector accounts of natural capital are created and communicated and, in many cases, businesses and financial institutions are unaware that such work has been done. Conversely, governments too can benefit from improved data flows from the business community to improve policy-making and track progress on international climate and nature targets.2.5 Lack of public-private collaboration Nature loss continues to rank low on the hierarchy of global crises among political and business leaders. Yet, mainstreaming natural capital requires sustained visibility and high-level engagement. Crises that dominate headlines – conflict, inflation, pandemics, misinformation – tend to be immediate and tangible.51,52 Nature loss, by contrast, is often perceived as slow-moving, complex and less urgent, despite the GBF beginning to elevate its profile.53 Experts warn that without stronger political commitment, efforts to value nature risk stalling in technical circles. At the same time, the transition to a nature-positive economy may generate “transition anxiety,” especially where reforms affect entrenched subsidies or externalities. Changes in pricing structures for sectors such as agriculture, energy and water could impact already-strained households and businesses. Pushback from affected industries, along with equity concerns from civil society, could slow reforms. In some cases, pricing nature may also raise geopolitical sensitivities – particularly where shared ecosystems cross national borders or where valuation tools risk reinforcing unequal power dynamics. Underlying these frictions is a deeper cultural disconnect. Centuries of industrial development have embedded a world view that prioritizes material growth over ecological balance, sidelining Indigenous and place-based knowledge systems that value stewardship. Reviving respect for these alternative paradigms – and embedding them in policy, education and finance – requires not just behavioural change but systemic reorientation. This is a generational undertaking, but changing minds, language and incentives will be as vital as developing better metrics.2.6 Political and cultural challenges While businesses face data and capacity limitations, they have additional challenges in accurately scoping the ecosystems upon which they depend and that they impact over time, both directly and via their supply chains. It is time- and resource- intensive to collect data on ecosystem services that have traditionally been “free inputs” and model this data into meaningful business metrics, especially given the lack of clear standards and methodologies in many regions and for specific sectors. They also face additional resource demands in navigating both climate-related and newer nature-related disclosures, including TNFD’s recently released recommendations, as well as standards from the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) and European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS). Moreover, leading corporates that implement natural capital approaches are not rewarded. While markets and governments have failed to effectively internalize the full value of natural capital, many first movers, as highlighted in Chapter 1, have adopted natural capital approaches as they are increasingly aware of the associated competitive advantages of incorporating nature in decision-making. This includes generating social value, maintaining a licence-to-operate or expanding access to markets. However, their performance continues to be rewarded by investors and regulators based largely on financial performance. As a result, considerations for natural capital remain on the periphery of company strategy and the limited resources devoted to natural capital approaches are at risk when finances are tight. This in turn raises uncomfortable questions around the true purpose of business models as commonly understood and whether they are fit for purpose to maximize outcomes for nature, people and investors.2.4 Unique challenges for businesses Centuries of industrial development have embedded a world view that prioritizes material growth over ecological balance, sidelining Indigenous and place-based knowledge systems that value stewardship. Mainstreaming Natural Capital: Advancing the Global Agenda to Integrate Nature in Decision-Making 12