生物多样性 ›› 2022, Vol. 30 ›› Issue (11): 22049.  DOI: 10.17520/biods.2022049

• 生物多样性保护对策专题 • 上一篇    下一篇

企业生物多样性信息披露: 调查、分析与建议

赵阳, 李宏涛()   

  1. 生态环境部对外合作与交流中心, 北京 100035
  • 收稿日期:2022-01-23 接受日期:2022-08-02 出版日期:2022-11-20 发布日期:2022-09-14
  • 通讯作者: 李宏涛
  • 作者简介: E-mail: li.hongtao@fecomee.org.cn

Corporate biodiversity disclosure: Investigation, analysis and recommendation

Yang Zhao, Hongtao Li()   

  1. Foreign Environmental Cooperation Center (FECO), Ministry of Ecology and Environment, Beijing, 100035
  • Received:2022-01-23 Accepted:2022-08-02 Online:2022-11-20 Published:2022-09-14
  • Contact: Hongtao Li

摘要:

近年来我国每年发布《企业社会责任报告》近2,000份, 有相当比例包含生物多样性内容。但长期以来, 披露内容的实质性与可信度严重不足, 亟需引导、规范和审核。本文探讨建立我国企业生物多样性信息公开透明机制, 旨在解决两个主要问题: 一是风险规避, 二是资源调动。本文根据《生物多样性公约》相关规定, 首先梳理企业生物多样性信息披露国内外进展, 指出存在内容碎片化, 科学指标缺失, 结果难以比较, 投入产出、同业及历史数据缺乏比对分析等不足。其次, 采用5个生物多样性指标, 进一步对《企业社会责任报告评估指数》研究发现: 不同行业差异化明显、金融机构催化作用凸显、重视纳入制度战略框架、报告内容同质化严重、定性描述多于定量分析、货币化核算方法缺失、资金投入信息披露保守、未经第三方独立审核等特点。最后, 提出提高企业透明度的4项建议: (1)加强顶层设计纳入, (2)改进环境政策指引, (3)优化金融激励措施, (4)强化公司能力建设。这将为政府和金融部门量化生态影响, 管控投资风险, 实施扩大生物多样性融资决策提供支持。

关键词: 企业生物多样性信息披露, 企业社会责任报告, 商业透明度, 2020年后全球生物多样性框架, 框架执行机制, 报告与审查机制

Abstract

Background & Aim:Nearly 2,000 corporate social responsibility (CSR) reports have been annually released in China, in many of which biodiversity related issues are depicted. Nevertheless, reporting materiality and credibility is insufficient and hence requires review and guidance. In view of the First Draft of Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework, “All businesses assess and report on their dependencies and impacts on biodiversity” (Target 15), calling for “responsibility to implement mechanisms for planning, monitoring, reporting and review.” This paper seeks to address the insufficiencies in CSR reporting and help mitigate risks arising from nature loss and mobilize resources for biodiversity.

Results: By reviewing the progress of corporate biodiversity disclosure at home and abroad identified three deficiencies: (1) A lack in mandates for materiality of report contents and standardization of report format and third-party auditing, which results in voluntary reporting by businesses that is characterized by fragmented information, missing key scientific indicators, incomparability of data and result between different entities; (2) A lack in information integrity, consistency and accuracy, as most biodiversity data sources come from a single enterprise project, rather than the overall company; (3) A lack in quantitative and monetized measurement of input efforts versus output performance, and analyses on comparing with peer data (horizontally) or with historical data (vertically). Further study of “China CSR Report Evaluation Index” revealed six major findings: (1) There is differentiation in transparency between industries and enterprises; (2) Businesses highly dependent on nature tend to integrate biodiversity into resource management strategies, e.g. in sourcing and supply chains; (3) The catalytic role of financial sector is prominent, such as responsible investment and green credit; (4) Most reports are far more qualitative than quantitative and few are third-party verified; (5) Species protection becomes the focus of corporate reports, which results in serious content homogeneity, demonstrating the need for companies to build capacity; (6) Disclosure on monetary input is relatively conservative.

Suggestions & Perspectives: In this paper, we put forward four suggestions: top-level design, policy instruction, incentive measure and capacity-building to improve the reporting deficiencies through the lens of mechanism development for corporate biodiversity disclosure in China. This is conducive to quantifying ecological impacts, managing investment risks, and implementing decisions to enlarge biodiversity financing.

Key words: corporate biodiversity disclosure, corporate social responsibility report, business transparency, Post 2020 Global Biodiversity Framework, framework implementation mechanism, reporting and review mechanism