As the Environmental Industries Commission chair of the nature and biodiversity group, and Mott MacDonald’s nature services lead, and following the launch of EIC’s Nature and Biodiversity: A Guide for Development, it is inspiring to see nature moving toward the mainstream of policy and professional practice. There is clearly a growing momentum for infrastructure development to support the recovery and enhancement of nature.

The 2024 United Nations Biodiversity Conference of the Parties (widely known as COP16) which was held between 21 October and 1 November in Colombia, saw international discussion and progress on nature reach key milestones. It offered an opportune moment to consider how nature will further influence the infrastructure sector.

It’s likely COP16 was the biggest biodiversity summit of its kind yet, with 23,000 representatives and delegates from governments, NGOs and the private sector from across the globe, with the aim of discussing and agreeing vital action on biodiversity conservation and the role of local communities as stewards of nature.

What was previously a topic on the periphery has taken centre stage for industry, as shown by a much stronger presence of investors, businesses and other major infrastructure stakeholders. Over 500 multinational businesses, including major institutional investors, are voluntarily committed to the Taskforce of Nature-related Financial Disclosures’ recommendations on assessing, responding and acting on their nature-related dependencies, including across their value chain. More than ever, there is clear intent by the private sector to take action toward the recovery and enhancement of biodiversity, both in the immediate term and the longer term.

While private sector momentum at COP16 will be significant and beneficial in the infrastructure and built environment sectors, other areas of discussion had mixed results, or stalled.

The creation of universally recognised biodiversity metrics was a key topic of discussion, but no consensus was reached. What should be notable to organisations in the UK is that the discussion included the prospective launch of a global biodiversity metric for infrastructure based on England’s own recently-introduced biodiversity net gain (BNG) legislation. The expertise and leadership we show in the UK can be relevant, valuable and insightful internationally.

Where further progress is also needed is the creation of a regulated biodiversity credit market, which will enable the private sector to engage more by ensuring finance for nature is consistently and predictably governed and measured.

However, discussion toward a trusted, rigorous biodiversity credit market stalled. When investing in a biodiversity credit, the investment should be locally in the site of loss and should regulate the nature that’s been affected. So it’s a different challenge from carbon credit in terms of how biodiversity credit might work and be regulated as well as in the need for integrity to ensure that investment goes to projects that are genuinely delivering biodiversity solutions.

While there was some expectation among the conservation sector that there would be commitments from international governments about the actual funding, this was not forthcoming.

However, despite the stumbling blocks, the private sector is not waiting when it comes to mainstreaming biodiversity within developments, people are realising that this is business critical.

If you would like to discuss BNG in more detail, come along to our EIC events or contact the policy team at: policy@acenet.co.uk

An EIC member guest blog about COP29 will be out soon, watch this space!

I’d also like to take this opportunity to thank the journalists, particularly at Infrastructure Intelligence and New Civil Engineer, as well as the Emerging Professionals at ACE along with other podcasters for also shining a spotlight on my biodiversity journey.