Dependence on nature and ecosystems translates into operational and financial exposure, prompting businesses to consider how human rights and environmental due diligence can be applied to mitigate risks and strengthen long-term resilience.
These issues brought sustainability practitioners together at the Resilience Action Lab themed “Nature as Risk, Nature as Rights: Embedding Biodiversity into Business Resilience” held during the Corporate Sustainability and Environmental Rights in Asia (CSERA) Conference.
Organised by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and supported by the European Union, discussions during the two-day CSERA focused on strengthening corporate accountability, advancing responsible business practices and building more resilient supply chains.
In her presentation, United Nations Environment Programme Finance Initiative global policy co-lead Laura Canas da Costa said biodiversity and human rights are fundamentally interconnected, as nature underpins basic human rights such as right to food, water and a clean and healthy environment.
She said protecting nature therefore contributes to safeguarding human rights, while a human rights-based approach is essential for environmental protection.
“If we ignore things like access to information and indigenous people’s rights, it is going to be much harder to achieve our environmental goals.
“If human rights are not properly considered, this will result in very real financial and economic risks,” she said.
Indigenous Peoples’ Rights International executive director Joan Carling shared that indigenous people occupy 25% of the global land mass, and 42% of the land they manage are found to be in better ecological conditions than areas managed by others.
“It is also a fact that 40% of key biodiversity areas are in indigenous territories,” she said.
“This is not coincidental, right? It is because of the way we manage and relate to these resources. We maintain reciprocal relations ... We use the resources when we need them, so that we conserve the rest for the future generation,” she said.
Carling stressed the importance of engaging local communities in development projects.
Responding to a question from the audience, she said indigenous communities are open to benefit-sharing agreements that respect their rights.
She cited indigenous groups in Mexico and Guatemala that had consented to solar farms being built on parts of their unused land as an example.
“If they feel they are part of the decision, that there are benefits for them and that they are continuously part of the monitoring, I do not see any reason why they would not agree,” she said.
City Developments Limited chief sustainability officer Esther An, in her presentation, walked participants through the Singaporean developer’s three-decade journey of living out its ethos “Conserving as We Construct”.
It adopts nature-based solutions, including the use of greenery to mitigate heat. One example is a vertical garden on the west-facing wall of a 24-storey condominium.
“After one year, surveys prove that it reduced temperature by 2°C indoors. It helps residents reduce their reliance on air-conditioning,” An said.
Elaborating on GRI 101: Biodiversity, which came into effect on Jan 1 this year, Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) country manager Dr Menaka Ganeson said the human-centric standard encourages organisations to disclose the impacts of their activities on biodiversity and people who rely on the ecosystems.
The standard is interoperable with frameworks such as the Science Based Targets Network and the Taskforce on Nature-related Financial Disclosures’s (TNFD), she added.
“If you want to narrow down to human rights, one disclosure required by GRI is that you need to report on all affected communities under Disclosure 101-8, whereas in TNFD, (it requires) only stakeholders that you have engaged.
“I would say that GRI is very comprehensive. If (you look at) only those who were engaged, you might miss some of the communities.”
