Nature Positive Role of the Technology Sector 2025

3.2 Comparison of nature action leadership and feasibility Foundational Foundational, often incremental actions that are or are becoming common practiceLeading Actions adopted by several leaders that expand nature benefits and competitive advantageAspirational Ambitious, often transformative and less common practices that shape the value chain Review sites for water stress Design & operate for efficiency Extend equipment lifespan Adopt pollution & waste controls Monitor for direct GHG leaks Assess complete water footprint Closed-loop & water reuse Design for circularity/repairability Establish collection programmes Utilize gas scrubbers Invest in carbon credits Prioritize brownfield development Green roofs, native vegetation Sponsor low-carbon capacity Optimize cooling systems Dynamic process management Lower-impact chemicals, gases Lower-carbon building materials Set supply chain commitments Proactively engage policy-makersProactively engage policy-makers Restore local watersheds Embed digital circularity practices Develop repair infrastructure E-waste recycling infrastructure Invest in pollution rehabilitation Design to lower embodied carbon Assess biodiversity risk in sites Establish biodiversity baseline Invest in biodiversity offsets Lower-impact metals, minerals R&D low-impact chemicals, gasesSector-level nature benchmarksSector-level nature benchmarks 1.1 1.2 2.2 2.7 3.1 Low-carbon onsite energy or PPAs 5.1 Design power-efficient buildings 5.3 Suppliers with sustainability certificates 6.1Report nature impactsReport nature impacts 7.2 Engage community stakeholders 4.6 1.3 1.4 2.1 2.5 3.2 3.4 4.1 4.4 5.2 5.4 1.5 2.3 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.3 4.2 4.3 4.5 6.2 5.5 6.3 6.4 6.6 7.1 6.5 7.3 Water use Pollution and waste Greenhouse gas emissions Land use Electricity use Supply chain engagement Policy and external engagementTiering actions based on nature leadership FIGURE 16 Sources: See methodology in Appendix B. We can assess and compare actions based on the nature leadership they reflect from tech sector players. While each company should assess actions within the context of their operations and identify those most relevant for their nature-positive journey, the following tiering can help with planning the nature-positive transition: – Foundational actions are table stakes and, as the name suggests, increasingly common and even expected among sector players. – Leading actions are those where companies can begin to differentiate themselves; these actions offer more significant nature benefits and associated commercial, resilience and competitive advantages. – Aspirational actions are among the most transformative, but as a result are often the most challenging to implement and will likely require the most time to gain traction. The three case studies of selected priority actions below provide deeper insights into how companies have addressed some of these actions. The case studies highlight both nature and commercial benefits to emphasize how actions on the nature-positive journey can make sense for both a business and the environment. Nature Positive: Role of the Technology Sector 44