That gap is closing fast. TNFD adoption is outpacing early carbon disclosure timelines, GRESB now includes explicit biodiversity monitoring requirements, and CSRD mandates nature-related disclosures for companies operating in the EU. This guide covers what biodiversity data CRE teams are missing, why it matters for sustainability reporting, and how to close the gap before investors and regulators start asking harder questions.
What is sustainability reporting
Sustainability reporting is the disclosure of data about a company's environmental impact, social responsibility, and corporate governance. It gives investors, regulators, and other stakeholders a window into how an organization manages risks and opportunities that traditional financial statements do not capture.
The environmental pillar covers topics like greenhouse gas emissions, energy consumption, water use, and biodiversity. The social component addresses how a company treats employees, suppliers, customers, and communities. Governance focuses on leadership structure, executive pay, ethics policies, and transparency in decision-making.
For commercial real estate teams, sustainability reporting has moved from a voluntary exercise to a competitive requirement. Investors now screen portfolios using sustainability data, and new regulations in the EU require detailed disclosures from companies operating there. Yet most sustainability reporting frameworks were designed around carbon and energy. Biodiversity, despite growing investor interest, often gets overlooked entirely.
Why biodiversity is now a sustainability reporting priority
Nature-related risk is becoming as financially material as carbon. The Taskforce on Nature-related Financial Disclosures (TNFD) framework launched in 2023 and has been adopted faster than early carbon disclosure standards were. Investors and regulators are paying close attention.
GRESB, the leading sustainability benchmark for real estate, now includes explicit biodiversity monitoring requirements. The 2024 assessment introduced indicator RM7, which asks asset managers to describe how they identify, assess, and manage biodiversity-related risks. RM7 is not a simple checkbox. It requires evidence of systematic monitoring and a clear response plan.
Here is where many CRE portfolios stumble: the gap between "doing" biodiversity work and "reporting" biodiversity outcomes. A rooftop garden or urban beekeeping program generates goodwill and employee engagement, but without framework-aligned data, that program may not appear in a GRESB submission or investor disclosure. The activity exists, yet the reporting value does not.
Key sustainability reporting frameworks for commercial real estate
Several frameworks now shape how CRE teams approach sustainability disclosure. Each has a different focus, and many portfolios report against more than one.
The challenge for sustainability teams is that none of these frameworks share a common data format. A single biodiversity program may need to be translated into five different reporting languages. Without a unified approach, the process becomes manual and time-consuming.
The core challenges facing sustainability and facilities leaders
Nature programs without framework-aligned data
Many CRE portfolios have invested in nature-based amenities: pollinator gardens, green roofs, urban beekeeping, native plantings. These programs often generate strong engagement. We have seen Earth Month events draw hundreds of employees, with visible excitement and long lines to participate.
Yet engagement alone does not translate to sustainability reporting credit. If a program does not produce quantifiable metrics tied to a recognized framework, leadership may view it as peripheral rather than strategic.
This dynamic creates what one sustainability manager described as the "cost center trap." Sustainability teams often find themselves fighting for budget, needing to justify every dollar with data that demonstrates impact. Without framework-aligned outputs, even popular programs become vulnerable during cost optimization cycles.
Fragmented frameworks and limited bandwidth
TNFD, CSRD, GRESB, LEED, BREEAM, Fitwel: each framework has different requirements, different metrics, and different reporting timelines. No universal crosswalk maps a single data point to all relevant disclosures.
Meanwhile, the people responsible for sustainability reporting are often stretched thin. One-person teams managing multi-site portfolios are common in commercial real estate. Manual follow-up with vendors, inconsistent data formats, and siloed systems drain capacity. The result is that biodiversity data, even when it exists, may not make it into the final report.
Real estate transitions and program continuity
Commercial real estate portfolios are dynamic. Redevelopments, acquisitions, and campus consolidations create uncertainty about where and how nature programs will be hosted. A beekeeping program at one building may need to relocate when that asset is sold or renovated.
This is not just a logistical challenge. It is a data continuity challenge. If biodiversity metrics are tied to a specific site rather than a portfolio-wide strategy, transitions can erase years of progress. Sustainability leaders benefit from location-agnostic data strategies that survive building moves and ownership changes.
What good sustainability reporting on biodiversity looks like
The desired future state is straightforward: standardized biodiversity metrics that plug directly into sustainability reports with minimal manual effort.
In practice, this means a few things:
- Presentation-ready summaries that sustainability teams can share with leadership and global colleagues without additional formatting
- Automated mapping to TNFD, GRESB, CSRD, LEED, BREEAM, and healthy building standards
- AI-assisted querying that allows sustainability managers to ask specific questions like "Does my site data meet LEED v5 biodiversity criteria?" and receive a direct answer
- Consistent data quality across domestic and international sites, even when local vendors or conditions vary
The goal is not to add more reports. It is to reduce the friction between program activity and disclosure output.
How to close the biodiversity gap in sustainability reporting
Audit current programs for data outputs
Start by mapping what data your existing nature-based programs actually produce. A pollinator garden may generate species counts, bloom periods, or habitat area measurements. An urban beekeeping program may produce honey yield, hive health metrics, or environmental DNA analysis results.
Then compare those outputs to the requirements of your target frameworks. Where are the gaps? Which metrics are missing, and which are present but not formatted for disclosure?
Identify which frameworks matter most
Not every portfolio reports against every framework. Prioritize based on investor expectations, regulatory exposure, and certification goals. A portfolio with significant EU assets may need to focus on CSRD. A U.S. portfolio seeking LEED v5 certification may prioritize ecological restoration credits instead.
Demand framework-aligned data from vendors
When evaluating nature-based amenity providers, ask how their data maps to TNFD, GRESB, CSRD, LEED, and BREEAM. Request sample reports. Look for methodology documentation that would satisfy an auditor.
Vendors who cannot answer these questions may deliver strong engagement programming but limited reporting value.
Build a crosswalk for internal stakeholders
Create a concise document that shows how your biodiversity programs contribute to each relevant framework. A simple one-page crosswalk showing "Program X contributes to GRESB RM7, LEED v5 Ecological Restoration, and TNFD LEAP assessment" can accelerate internal buy-in from leadership, finance, and investor relations teams.
How nature-based programs support sustainability reporting
The most effective biodiversity data strategies combine multiple layers of evidence.
Satellite and geospatial data provides portfolio-wide context: land use patterns, habitat cover, proximity to protected areas, and mean species abundance. This type of data is useful for screening and prioritization but lacks site-level detail.
On-the-ground monitoring fills that gap. Bioacoustic sensors can detect bird and insect species. Environmental DNA (eDNA) analysis of honey or soil samples reveals which plants and organisms are present at a specific location. Species counts and habitat assessments provide direct evidence of biodiversity outcomes.
When satellite data and ground-truth monitoring are combined, CRE teams gain a multi-resolution view of nature-related performance. The satellite layer shows where to focus attention. The on-site data proves what is actually happening.
Aura by Alvéole integrates both approaches, translating complex ecological data into dashboards and reports aligned with TNFD, GRESB, CSRD, and green building certifications. The platform includes an AI agent that answers sustainability questions in natural language, reducing the time sustainability managers spend searching through documentation.
Book a demo to see how Aura maps biodiversity data to your reporting frameworks.
Getting started with biodiversity in sustainability reporting
If you are new to biodiversity disclosure, the process does not require a background in ecology. It requires clarity about what you are measuring, why it matters to your investors, and how it connects to the frameworks your organization reports against.
Questions to ask your current or prospective nature-based amenity provider:
- What biodiversity metrics does your program produce?
- How does your data map to TNFD, GRESB, CSRD, LEED, and BREEAM?
- Can you provide audit-ready documentation?
- How do you ensure data consistency across multiple sites?
What to look for in a biodiversity data partner:
- Framework-aligned reporting as a core capability, not an afterthought
- Methodology documentation developed with recognized advisors
- Scalable support for multi-site portfolios
- AI or automation features that reduce manual workload
FAQ
Is biodiversity reporting mandatory in the United States?
Biodiversity disclosure is not yet mandatory at the federal level in the U.S. However, state-level climate laws in California and other jurisdictions are expanding. Investor-driven frameworks like GRESB effectively make biodiversity reporting a competitive requirement for institutional real estate, even without a legal mandate.
How is biodiversity different from carbon in sustainability reporting?
Carbon reporting focuses on greenhouse gas emissions, typically measured in tonnes of CO2 equivalent. Biodiversity reporting addresses the variety of life in a given area, including species diversity, habitat quality, and ecosystem health. The metrics, methodologies, and frameworks are distinct, though both fall under the environmental pillar of sustainability.
Can small portfolios benefit from biodiversity reporting?
Yes. Even portfolios with a handful of assets can use biodiversity data to differentiate themselves in investor conversations, support green building certifications, and demonstrate alignment with emerging standards. The key is choosing a data approach that scales with available resources.
