Search

This story about what audiences need from the news is part of The Solutions Effect, a monthly newsletter covering the best of solutions journalism in the sustainability and social impact space. If you aren't already getting this newsletter, you can sign up here.

Most people feel the news industry helps them stay up to date with what’s going on, but the steady stream of stories is also relentless. A growing group of news consumers (39 percent) feel “worn out” by the sheer amount of news. Many say stories about wars, disasters, and politics are squeezing out other topics. 

While the media is doing a good job of addressing the two needs most cited by audiences — updating and educating them — it’s lagging on two other things the majority of people find important: providing different perspectives on issues and offering more hope and optimism. 

At least that’s the consensus of the 95,000 people from 47 countries surveyed for this year’s Digital News Report from the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism at Oxford University. The report is the biggest ongoing study of news consumption in the world. It breaks down digital news audiences' consumption habits and behaviors each year. And for over a decade, Nic Newman, lead author and senior research associate at the Reuters Institute, has made sense of it all. 

This year’s report devoted a section to the user needs model, a concept more news organizations are turning to in the face of declining readership, loss of trust and a flooded news market. 

“Academics and social scientists have talked about user needs for quite a long time in different ways,” Newman said. “People, in traditional news consumption, used to quite often not read the news, flick over it, and go to the sports or what was happening in their local community … In recent years, because of the struggle of engaging, various user needs models have been popularized.”

Originally coined by the BBC and since evolved by many other organizations and journalists, the model focuses on structuring content in a way that satisfies the basic things people want from the news and recognizing that those wants can be more than just providing pure facts without subjectivity or nuance, which was once considered the gold standard of journalism. 

“What [the BBC] broadly found when they looked at the data was that people were not paying as much attention to the updating function but were paying more attention if you [entertained] people or inspired people, particularly around difficult stories like climate change,” Newman said. “The data tells you that, if you take the doomsday scenario approach, people just kind of turn away. So publishers are really looking to use this model to find more uplifting or constructive ways of telling stories that engage people.”

The report found that people want stories with diverse perspectives, stories they haven’t heard of before and stories that give them hope, Newman said. But they aren’t finding enough of them. 

“If you just read newspapers, you really would think the world was without any hope. It’s this constant bombardment of negative stuff, and it's not actually like that. It's not a true reflection of what's going on in the world,” Newman said. “There's a lot of really interesting stuff going on, a lot of progress in loads of areas. And that tends to get squeezed out.”

While coverage of extreme weather events and missed climate targets informs, stories of people who devote their lives to making progress can inspire.

“I think that's really critical, to cover these huge stories that don't necessarily have a top to them, that don't always have that immediate hook, and bring them to life and make them relevant,” Newman said. “But in a rounded, 360-degree way. That is what audiences want. They don't want to just have the difficult stuff, but they don't want to not have difficult stuff. They want to have a better balance.” 

Readers also don’t want the news to be less rigorous or downplayed, a common misconception of some approaches newsrooms take to meet user needs, like solutions journalism and constructive journalism, Newman said. Also a solutions-focused approach, constructive journalism emphasizes delving into the nuance of a topic and promoting democratic conversation to leave audiences feeling hopeful and motivated. It’s particularly popular in Europe. 

These solutions-oriented approaches can address the areas where audiences feel newsrooms are lacking. Both solutions and constructive journalism shift the narrative from emphasizing the negatives to emphasizing action and hope. In that pursuit, journalists often cover unique stories that bring new perspectives forward, because that’s prioritized in the practice and because it’s simply not the norm to report that way. 

Only about 35 percent of those who avoid the news are interested in the latest updates on the big daily stories, according to last year’s Digital News Report. Yet 55 percent are interested in positive stories, and 46 percent are interested in stories about solutions. 

But it remains to be seen whether these new approaches will influence industry-wide change. 

“A lot of great solutions journalism is just looking at difficult stories in a different way,” Newman said. “Whether that actually moves the dial and sufficiently changes the vast majority of journalism — which continues to be negative because negative stuff attracts your attention — or is it just a drop in the ocean? That's what we're trying to work out.”

Nevertheless, newsrooms are taking these ideas seriously, Newman said. In a time of decreasing trust in the media and ever-increasing options for where to find information, they recognize it’s important to put effort into engaging people and building trust. Over the past few years, concepts like user needs and solutions-focused coverage moved away from the fringe and toward the heart of the conversation.

To me, this is all about reconsidering what we think of as “good” journalism. That doesn’t mean tossing out everything and starting over, but why not evolve parts of the traditional news model to make it more relevant to what today’s audiences need? Can it still be the gold standard if swaths of people actively avoid it? We write for them, after all. 

“Good journalism is lots of different things, but it's absolutely about the fundamentals,” Newman said. “Many of those things shouldn't change and haven't changed. It's about holding rich and powerful people to account. It's about casting light in areas where otherwise there would be darkness. It's also about taking a balanced view and putting together a package of things that means that people pay attention, that they have a range of things to talk about. It's partly about how we curate what's going on, and what's important in the world.”

All the talk about declining interest in the news and the need to rethink the norms embedded in the foundation of journalism can be daunting and disheartening. But there’s reason for hope in this story, too. 

“The way I look at it is, it has never been more interesting or more exciting. There are so many possibilities now to tell stories in different ways: more cheaply, more effectively, to engage people, to connect with people,” Newman said. “These to me, are all opportunities to make journalism better. Obviously, there are challenges around funding, sustainability, engagement. But overall, I'm optimistic. People always need news.”

I couldn’t agree more. 

Cities worldwide are grappling with the profound challenges posed by climate change. Rising sea levels, extreme weather events, wildfires, and drought are not only threatening public health but also damaging infrastructure, stranding assets and exacerbating social inequities. One critical, often overlooked aspect is how climate change is challenging the financial resilience and stability of municipalities.

Climate change is straining public budgets unprepared for the impacts of climate change. For example, New York City faces an estimated $10 billion in potential losses from sea-level rise and flooding over the next decade due to recovery costs, business interruptions and property devaluations. And the 2018 Camp Fire in California resulted in over $16.5 billion in damages, significantly impacting local governments.

Moreover, the financial impact of extreme weather events driven by climate change is set to increase dramatically. Between 2011 and 2020, global losses from such events totaled approximately $2.5 trillion, marking a nearly 50 percent increase from the previous decade. 

Further, the municipal bond market is increasingly recognizing the importance of climate-related disclosures. S&P Global expects issuance of green, social, sustainability, and sustainability-linked bonds to approach $1 trillion in 2024. Credit rating agencies like Moody’s are now assessing debt issuer’s credit exposure to environmental risks.  

Speaking at the 2023 National Association of Bond Lawyers' conference, David Sanchez, the director of the United States Securities and Exchange Commission Office of Municipal Securities, highlighted the need for municipal issuers to disclose climate-related risks to investors.

“When there is a weather event and damage to a city, people are saying, 'What did the issuer say before?’" Sanchez said. "There’s very public information about flood risks, sea level rising that affect specific areas ... you can’t stick your head in the sand.” 

In response to climate change, cities are developing proactive plans to combat climate risks, as seen through the proliferation of municipal-level Climate Action Plans and international initiatives like the United Nation’s Race to Resilience and Race to Zero. However, there is a significant gap between planning and execution. Securing the necessary capital for implementation remains a persistent challenge. In 2023 alone, U.S. cities reported a need for over $51 billion to support climate-related projects.

Climate resilience and financial resilience are inextricably linked. Effective climate strategies protect communities from climate change impacts and safeguard their economic health. By proactively investing in climate resilience, cities can reduce disaster recovery costs, lower insurance premiums and attract long-term investments. This dual focus ensures that cities are better equipped to handle the economic shocks of climate change to continue providing essential services.

How cities are grappling with the dual challenge

Evidence suggests that climate projects are good investments. Every $1 invested in climate adaptation can save up to $13 through avoided future expenditures or increased cost savings. Energy efficiency and renewable energy projects can lower operating costs and lock in competitive energy prices. Investment in climate resilience can increase investor confidence, lowering municipal bond financing costs. Cities at the forefront of climate action are highlighting this financial bonus when pursuing sustainable infrastructure projects. 

Take Atlanta, for example. The city set ambitious climate goals including achieving 100 percent clean energy use by 2030. Chandra Farley, chief sustainability officer for Atlanta, knows that strategic fiscal planning will be imperative to achieve their goals while mitigating future financial risks.

“As residents rates go up, the city’s rates go up," Farley said during an Atlanta City Council Utilities Committee meeting. "We saw that in the budget presentation, an about 4 to 5 percent increase on our utility [bills]. Investing in energy efficiency with shorter paybacks now for the city [and] procuring more renewable energy continues to be critically important.”  

To meet these targets, the Atlanta's Mayor's Office of Sustainability and Resilience collaborates closely with the Department of Finance to explore innovative financing models. The partnership includes Sustainable Capital Advisors (SCA) involvement in developing the city's federal sustainable infrastructure funding and financing strategy. This includes conducting a landscape analysis of funding opportunities, and leveraging tax incentives to realize cost savings from sustainable investments. By adopting a comprehensive approach, Atlanta is positioning itself to advance critical projects in a resource-constrained environment, benefiting the city’s financial resilience.

Historic levels of grant funding present unprecedented opportunities for cities to secure the capital needed for essential climate action projects without overburdening their budgets through programs like the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund, Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and Inflation Reduction Act.

A notable example of leveraging this funding is SCA’s ongoing partnership with the Philadelphia Green Capital Corp., the green bank affiliate of the Philadelphia Energy Authority. SCA recently supported the organizations as a coalition member for Pennsylvania’s state application for the Solar for All competition, successfully securing $156 million to expand equitable green energy development across Pennsylvania.

Emily Schapira, president and CEO of the Philadelphia Energy Authority, recognizes the importance of tapping into this historic moment.

“[The Philadelphia Energy Authority] is experiencing rapid participation growth across our clean energy programs," Schapira said in the organization's annual progress report. "With limited resources, we are truly leveraging every available dollar — including once-in-a-generation federal funding and a growing wave of private investment. Our reliance on city funding represents only a relatively small share of our programs’ overall budget, delivering $132 in benefits for every $1 invested by the city." 

By bringing together multiple stakeholders, exploring grants, innovative financing and public-private partnerships, the authority is able to stretch financial resources to achieve goals and advance regional resilience.

The climate financial risk and resiliency toolkit

Examples like these illustrate a path forward. Cities can achieve both climate and financial resilience by following a structured approach. SCA developed a three-step framework based on the analysis of over 300 municipal climate action plans, case study research of best practices, and over a decade of strategic consulting and financial advisory services. It's designed to support municipalities in proactively managing climate-related financial risks and seizing opportunities for sustainable growth during this historic moment in climate funding. 

1. Develop a robust understanding of climate-related financial risks

The late Peter Drucker, a leader in management consulting, famously said, “What gets measured gets managed.” Climate-related financial risks are no exception. In a landmark 2017 study, the Government Accountability Office recommended the federal government to use available information on the potential economic impacts of climate change to identify significant risks and craft appropriate responses, including guiding federal investments to enhance resilience against future disasters. State and local authorities should follow this recommendation to identify, prioritize and address significant risks. 

The first step for cities is to comprehensively assess the financial impacts of climate change within their remit. This involves evaluating potential physical and transition-related risks associated with various climate scenarios, and their impact on economic indicators, potential expenditures and revenue loss.

For example, flood-prone communities could examine potential property tax revenue loss due to the devaluation of chronically flooded homes. Cities susceptible to climate-driven natural disasters should analyze historical recovery costs and project future expenditures. Municipalities dependent on fossil fuel industries could evaluate potential employment changes due to the clean energy transition.

Importantly, cities must consider how these risks may exacerbate existing inequities, particularly for low-income and marginalized populations. Each municipality must define the most critical factors to assess based on their unique physical, social and economic context.

By quantifying these risks, cities can prioritize investments and interventions that mitigate potential financial losses and enhance overall community resilience. This process builds a compelling business case for investing in climate resilience, aligns financial and sustainability teams towards common objectives, demonstrates proactive risk management to future investors, and establishes a baseline to evaluate progress.

2. Leverage diverse funding sources for urgently needed priority projects

With a nuanced understanding of climate-related financial risks, cities should develop a strategic roadmap to efficiently deploy capital towards priority projects that enhance climate and financial resilience. This roadmap should integrate diverse funding sources — including federal grants, budget allocations, public-private partnerships and municipal bond financing — connecting them directly to specific climate-related projects.

Initiatives could include upgrading infrastructure for resilience against extreme weather events, implementing sustainable energy solutions, enhancing water management systems, or constructing climate-resilient affordable housing.

Identifying clear funding pathways clarifies the requirements to secure capital. By determining which projects are grant-eligible, cities can proactively assemble collaborative teams and reference successful proposals from past winners, allowing them to seize funding opportunities swiftly.

Projects eligible for novel financial structures — such as direct-pay rebates, Power Purchase Agreements or energy efficiency upgrades — can be prioritized and savings earmarked for reinvestment. Larger projects requiring bond financing can be flagged for additional support from financial teams. By mapping projects to potential funding sources early on, municipalities can create project specific strategies that ease barriers to implementation.

3. Align long-term investments with climate goals

Finally, cities must integrate climate considerations into their long-term financial planning processes. This entails collaboration across municipal departments, guided by budgeting offices, to ensure that financial resources are efficiently allocated towards resilience-building initiatives.

Establishing budget guidelines that prioritize investments in resilience, emission reduction, and climate-smart policies supports long-term fiscal health. By embedding climate resilience objectives into budgetary frameworks, cities can enhance their capacity to adapt to climate impacts as they evolve while promoting sustainable growth and development.

Implementation support

Climate resilience is financial resilience. By implementing this strategic framework, cities can proactively manage climate-related financial risks, leverage diverse funding sources for priority projects, and align long-term investments with climate goals. Embracing these principles positions cities to thrive amidst an ever-evolving regulatory landscape and growing climate challenges, while contributing to a sustainable future.

With the United States election mere days away, we spoke with advocates and business leaders to learn more about what they've done to prepare and what's next for them. From endorsing a candidate and taking a public stance on key issues to finding non-partisan ways to promote free and fair elections, it's not too late to be inspired by how leaders are finding their voice in this historic moment. 

Arizona business leaders take a stand for immigrant communities

Along with a heated presidential contest and key legislative elections, voters in 41 U.S. states will decide on more than 150 ballot measures, which allow the electorate to directly determine if proposed laws or policies will go forward. Many of these ballot measures, also known as referendums, are major flashpoints for debate in communities across the country. 

In Arizona, where candidates up and down the ticket have made immigration reform a central topic of discussion, Proposition 314 puts the issue directly to voters. If passed, the proposition would make it a state crime for non-citizens to enter Arizona from another country — outside of using official ports of entry — and allow state and local police to arrest undocumented people for entering illegally. 

Local First Arizona, a nonprofit coalition of privately-owned businesses, is among the groups opposing the measure. Founder and CEO Kimber Lanning, who also owns a music store in Phoenix, debated Republican state Sen. John Kavanagh on the proposition this summer on Arizona's PBS affiliate station.

"We step into conversations about immigration, and we have taken an active stance," Lanning told TriplePundit. "In this particular bill, it's an unfunded mandate. So, not only do we talk about the fact that local law enforcement does not have any budget to cover it, we also bring local law enforcement into the conversation." 

The Republican-backed proposition appears on the ballot as GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump has pledged to use wartime powers to deport millions of undocumented people if he is elected. Along with engaging local law enforcement around the issue, Local First Arizona looks to raise awareness among business leaders about the economic impacts of criminalizing immigrant communities. 

"If we were to undergo the largest mass deportation in the history of the country ... it would be the most devastating to not just the U.S. economy, but specifically to the Arizona economy," Lanning said. "If we were to do something like that, the economy would tank — and that directly relates to businesses of all kinds." 

Immigrants make up over 16 percent of Arizona’s labor force and account for more than a fifth of the state’s entrepreneurs, according to the American Immigration Council. The last time Arizona enacted strict anti-immigrant legislation, the state's GPD declined by 2 percent a year from 2008 to 2015, according to a Moody’s Analytics study for The Wall Street Journal. 

Leveraging credible research like this is core to how Local First Arizona drives the conversation around immigration and other key issues. "The way we approach it, whether it be with other business owners or elected officials, is to really just take a common-sense approach," she said. "We cite facts and statistics. If somebody comes at us and talks about an 'invasion at the border,' we bring it back down to what's actually happening at the border, and we have statistics to back that up. It's about changing the picture so that people can understand what the actual facts are and keeping them away from the drama-infused exaggeration that plays on people's fears." 

Business leaders across the country are among the leading voices opposing state-based immigration restrictions and the suggestion of mass deportations at the federal level. New American Economy, a research and advocacy organization whose board includes business leaders from both sides of the political aisle — including billionaires Michael Bloomberg and Rupert Murdoch — convened public- and private-sector coalitions to oppose strict immigration crackdowns ahead of the election. And lobbying by business coalitions such as Local First Arizona is a major reason states have failed to enact more screens on job-seekers based on immigration status. 

"[For people] to go out and vote against something, they have to understand the facts," Lanning said. "They have to be able to hear from both sides — that's important. Anything we do at Local First Arizona, we do not try to silence the other side. We simply bring facts forward, allow people to present their best case and allow viewers to make their own decisions."

As people look to their employers for answers, business leaders across the U.S. are challenged to plan for what's ahead 

People are more likely to trust their own employers than any other institution, including government, NGOs and the broader business community. Scenario planning allows leaders to understand the policy proposals being put forward in the upcoming election and how they could impact their businesses, employees and other stakeholders. BSR, a membership organization of more than 300 companies, convened monthly Election Roundtables over the course of this year where leaders discussed potential election outcomes and how to respond. 

"People will look to companies and employers, no matter the outcome, to help steady the ship. Whether companies are seeking that role or not, they need to be prepared," said Jen Stark, co-director of the Center for Business and Social Justice at BSR. "There's a real need for companies to think about the tangible implications — not just the existential threat, if you will, or the idea of business and democracy — but what this really means across their value chain, to their workers, and to the communities in which they live and work." 

BSR members outlined how the outcome of the presidential race in particular could impact issues such as climate policy, access to reproductive and LGBTQ-inclusive healthcare, corporate diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) policies, and responsible investing. As around two-thirds of U.S. voters say they're worried about political violence on Election Day and in the months after, business groups including BSR and the pro-democracy coalition Leadership Now Project are also working with leaders to plan for what they'll do after Nov. 5. 

"Post-election, there is a real risk that it takes time to finalize the results. Results could be contested in the courts. There is a risk of violence," said Daniella Ballou-Aares, founder and CEO of the Leadership Now Project. "We need Americans to know that there might be some time between the election and when we get a final result. But there's also a need for a united front from civil society, from business, and from elected officials that violence and threats are unacceptable in that process between election and inauguration — and that they will stand up against those if they happen." 

Business leaders associated with the Leadership Now Project issued a statement earlier this year calling on candidates for federal office to commit to accepting the election results, with signatories including LinkedIn co-founder Reid Hoffman, SurveyMonkey CEO Eric Johnson and former NFL Commissioner Paul Tagliabue. "We are working on making sure that leaders come out with a proactive stand before the election saying we expect the election to be respected by both parties," Ballou-Aares said. "Unfortunately the former president [Donald Trump] has not agreed to that pledge, but we're going to keep pushing." 

State-based business coalitions, including groups in key swing states like Arizona and Wisconsin, also said they will not support presidential or congressional candidates who refuse to commit to certifying the election. "As a bipartisan group of business leaders, we try to communicate to the larger business community in Milwaukee how important democracy and the rule of law are for an environment that has the predictability that any business needs to thrive," Tom Florsheim, Jr., chairman and CEO of the Milwaukee-based footwear company Weyco Group and member of Wisconsin Business Leaders For Democracy, told TriplePundit in an email. 

Although it is a bipartisan group, the Leadership Now Project moved to endorse Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris last month, citing Trump's failure to recognize the results of the 2020 election as a key reason why. "Our entire system depends on trust in our electoral system, peaceful transfer of power and willingness to respect the results of elections," Ballou-Aares said. "We're seeing what happens when that doesn't work in Venezuela right now. That is an extreme example, but the undermining of elections is extremely dangerous as a precedent." 

It's not too late for business leaders to act ahead of Election Day

Even with mere days left until the election, it's not too late for business leaders to get involved, and the leaders we spoke with offered plenty of ideas on where to start. 

Share critical voting information. It may sound basic, but reminding people about the date of Election Day and how to find their local polling place can significantly impact voter participation. Around 100,000 polling places have closed since the 2022 midterms, so your employees and customers could be understandably confused about where they're supposed to vote. Whether it's an email to employees, a sign on a storefront or a post to social media, using your platform to share critical election information gives your stakeholders the tools they need to make their voices heard. "Make sure people are informed about when they can vote, where they can vote and why it's important to vote," Ballou-Aares said. 

Make sure your employees have a voting plan. Along with confusion about when and where to vote, not having transportation to the polls remains a key barrier to voter participation. Ask your employees if they have a plan to cast their ballots and if they need support. "I know of several businesses that are asking if their employees need transportation," said Lanning of Local First Arizona. Beyond the business, calling or texting friends and family to help them make a voting plan — what journalist Michael Thomas called "relational organizing" in his climate-focused Distilled newsletter — is a simple but effective way to get involved. 

Give employees time off to vote and volunteer. "Only a handful of states require employers to provide paid time off to vote," said Stark of BSR. "We certainly encourage employers, even if it's not required in their state, to offer paid time off opportunities." Over recent years, thousands of major companies pledged to give their employees paid time off to cast their ballots as part of business coalitions like the Civic Alliance and Time to Vote. Employers may also consider giving their employees the full day off to volunteer as poll workers or drive people who don't have transportation to their local polling place, Stark said. 

Maternal mortality is higher in the United States than in most developed countries and has actually increased over the past 20 years. Research shows the 2022 Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization decision, in which the U.S. Supreme Court removed federal protections for abortion, has made the country's maternal healthcare crisis even worse. Business leaders can take two steps to help resolve it: They can advocate for new federal laws guaranteeing abortion rights, and they can support holistic healthcare policies for women in all stages of maternal care. Or, they can continue not taking women’s lives seriously.

The maternal care crisis predates Dobbs

In terms of mortality outcomes for pregnant people, the U.S. has long earned a notorious reputation among its peer nations.

“The United States continues to have the highest rate of maternal deaths of any high-income nation,” according to a survey by the healthcare advocacy organization Commonwealth Fund. The report emphasized that Black women are by far the most vulnerable group in the U.S.

The survey covered 2022, the latest full year of available statistics and before the full impact of Dobbs occurred. Even without the full impact, the U.S. record on maternal mortality was abysmal. The U.S. recorded 22 maternal deaths for every 100,000 live births in 2022, while half of the other countries surveyed recorded fewer than five, according to the report. The U.S. figure was also up to three times higher than the remaining half.

Almost 66 percent of maternal deaths in the U.S. took place within the six-week period following childbirth, indicating a lethal shortfall in access to postpartum care, according to the report.

Unequal access to maternity care is also a problem

A closely related matter is access to maternity care, another problem predating the Dobbs decision. 

“Maternity care deserts are counties where there is no access to birthing hospitals, birth centers offering obstetric care or obstetric providers,” according to a report from the March of Dimes, a nonprofit focused on maternal and infant health.

The report emphasizes that “no access” literally means “not a single birthing facility or obstetric clinician” in the whole county. It identified more than 1,104 U.S. counties as maternal care deserts, covering a collective population of more than 2.3 million women of reproductive age. 

“Women living in maternity care deserts and counties with low access to care have poorer health before pregnancy, receive less prenatal care, and experience higher rates of preterm birth,” according to the report.

Texas raises a red flag on abortion rights

With the U.S. maternal care system already held together by bubble gum and baling wire, just one push was needed to send it over the edge. That is exactly what the Dobbs decision did. The Supreme Court empowered conservative state legislators to revive old abortion restrictions and invent new ones.

Texas is often held up as an example of the negative impact of Dobbs on women’s health. Though here, too, maternal care was already in crisis. As of 2022, almost half of Texas counties — 46.5 percent — were maternal care deserts, significantly higher than the national figure of 32.6 percent, according to the March of Dimes report.

In 2021, Texas lawmakers passed new abortion restrictions under Senate Bill 8 (SB8). Some business leaders responded by helping their employees in Texas seek out-of-state care, but the fallout was already in evidence. The maternal death rate in Texas rose by 56 percent from 2019 to 2022, compared to an 11 percent rise nationally, according to the Gender Equity Policy Institute. 

Infant mortality also increased far more in Texas compared to other states the year after SB8 was enacted, according to the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.

Dobbs is making it worse … for everyone

Against this backdrop, the maternal care system in Texas is feeling the full impact of both SB8 and the Dobbs decision. Over and above the lethal consequences for women and their babies in Texas, the medical workforce is also feeling the effects. That should put business leaders on high alert all over the country as Republican policymakers advocate for a national abortion ban.

In August, the leading healthcare consultancy Manatt released a survey of physicians in Texas regarding the aftermath of SB8 and Dobbs. Almost 76 percent said they “cannot practice medicine according to best practices/evidence-based medicine” under the new legislative environment.

While only 2 percent of those surveyed said they moved out of state to continue their practice, a total of 35 percent said they were thinking about moving, in the process of planning to move, or would like to move but had personal reasons for staying. An additional 20 percent reported retiring early, changing their medical field or leaving medicine entirely.

"Take our lives seriously"

With the prospects of a national abortion ban looming overhead, former First Lady Michelle Obama summed up the dire consequences for women in a passionate, widely reported speech last week. Campaigning with Vice President Kamala Harris, Obama exhorted male voters to put aside any anger they may feel regarding national or personal affairs, and cast their ballots in support of women’s health.

“If we don’t get this election right, your wife, your daughter, your mother, we as women will become collateral damage to your rage,” she said. “I am asking y’all from the core of my being to take our lives seriously.” 

That exhortation also applies to business leaders. Each of them has only one ballot to cast, but many of them have an outsized voice on politics and the national culture.

As of this writing, the outlook for a Kamala Harris administration in 2025 is improving, along with the prospects for a permanent, universal restoration of abortion rights across the U.S. But if business leaders really want to be known for taking women’s lives seriously, they need to start advocating, loudly and forcefully, for a universal health care system that actually places a priority on protecting women’s lives.

When you think about major sources of greenhouse gas emissions, you probably think about carbon dioxide emissions resulting from energy production, or transportation. It goes without saying these are huge drivers. But you might not think about embodied emissions from the construction of the world's infrastructure. 

Embodied carbon from new infrastructure is expected to be responsible for half of the global carbon footprint between now and 2050, Savina Carluccio, executive director of the International Coalition for Sustainable Infrastructure, said in a statement. 

Embodied carbon is the emissions associated with the extraction, production, transport, and manufacturing of all building materials before on-site construction even begins. Before a piece of infrastructure is in use, carbon is already embodied in these building blocks.

With the built environment contributing so significantly to greenhouse gas emissions, accurately accounting for embodied carbon is increasingly urgent. Yet, it is historically painstaking to do and often overlooked. 

Infrastructure engineering software company Bentley Systems announced its Carbon Analysis tool earlier this month at the company’s annual Year In Infrastructure conference. The tool aims to make carbon accounting much easier, much faster, and importantly, even assist engineers in mitigating the carbon footprint of their infrastructure projects.

TriplePundit was invited to attend the event, where we spoke with Chris Bradshaw, Bentley Systems’ chief sustainability officer, about the tool and how it fits in with the company’s sustainability goals.

Bentley Systems’ software is used globally to design, operate and maintain all kinds of infrastructure projects — anything from roads, bridges, wind farms, dams and any type of building. As part of the design process, engineers build virtual models of their projects using the software and, increasingly important within the industry, create digital twins. A digital twin is an accurate virtual rendering of something in the physical world.

Digital twins are distinguished from decades-old computer-aided design or simulation software because they are linked to numerous data sources throughout the lifecycle of design, build and operational phases. So the model is continually updated in real-time. This allows for far greater accuracy, letting designers and engineers modify the digital twin to predict how any changes they make will manifest in the real world. 

Digital twins can incorporate artificial intelligence tools, as well, to further enhance their power as engineers test among different design scenarios. Important too, they provide a holistic representation, rather than keeping information in separate silos. 

Bentley Systems’ new Carbon Analysis tool dovetails with the company’s artificial intelligence-powered digital twin software, iTwin Experience. The pair simplifies carbon reporting by allowing engineers to compile carbon reports concurrently with the design process. This improves upon the traditional approach, where reporting is typically a laborious additional task that might take weeks or months to compile.

With the new Carbon Analysis tool, engineers can quickly map their project materials data to a third-party carbon calculator of their choice. And because the tool makes this simple to do, engineers can compare material and design choices for whatever they are building to see how different options increase or decrease embodied carbon in real-time.    

“Sustainable development occurs when you balance perfectly the environment, the economic and the social impact,” Bradshaw said. “We see, fundamentally, a digital twin being the mechanism to help do that.”

Bradshaw used an example from his hometown to explain how this balancing act might look. 

“We have a bridge, which goes over a small body of water,” Bradshaw said. “It is made of wood, it’s historical and people love it. But the thing’s falling apart. The county said they’re going to replace it with concrete and steel, and the community was up in arms saying, ‘No, we want another wooden bridge.’ So now you are in a conversation about what you are trading off. With a digital twin, you can scenario-optioneer to your heart’s content.” 

Let’s say the county uses Bentley Systems’ software. It could create a digital twin of each bridge option. One in concrete and steel, and another from wood. Using the new tool, it could very quickly determine the embodied carbon of either option, while simultaneously representing aesthetic and functional requirements. 

And since the tool creates a three-dimensional heat map of where concentrations of embodied carbon are found in a design, the visual rendering points to possible opportunities to mitigate embodied carbon. Three-dimensional visualization provides a secondary benefit, as well. 

“It allows non-engineers to participate in the conversation, too,” Bradshaw said. “As you can visualize in a way that everyone gets to understand.”

Of course, what actually gets built is subject to a range of factors, so the Carbon Analysis tool won’t force owners of a project to reduce the carbon footprint. And easy carbon reporting doesn’t mean owners of infrastructure projects will necessarily make carbon mitigation a focus. But as Bradshaw said, “The good news is, infrastructure owners are getting more savvy to it.” 

The company is incorporating the new tool into its digital twin product at no additional cost. 

“We took that path because we feel very strongly that this is something that the world needs to do,” Bradshaw said. “So we don’t want to create a price barrier to our users in being able to do these calculations.”  

Perhaps in the future, though, engineers won’t have a choice. Bradshaw said he thinks infrastructure engineers will increasingly have to properly account for embodied carbon. 

“All infrastructure in the world is either owned by governments or regulated by governments,” Bradshaw said. “Because of that, governments can accelerate the evolution to more sustainability and resilience through regulations or contract requirements. So far, not enough, but I think this will change on a year-to-year basis.” 

Whatever the regulatory framework looks like going forward, there are benefits to using digital tools, Mark Coates, the company’s international director of public policy and advocacy, told 3p at the event. 

He built upon the age-old maxim: measure twice, cut once. Instead, “Build digitally, two, three, four times. You make fewer mistakes, increase the chance of being on time and under budget, and you use less carbon because of reduced mistakes while promoting best practices.” 

Editor's Note: Travel and accommodations to Vancouver, Canada, were provided by Bentley Systems. Neither the author nor TriplePundit were required to write about the experience. 

The Pacific Ocean off the coasts of Central and South America is home to some of the richest concentrations of biodiversity on Earth, a haven for marine life ranging from whales, sharks, dolphins and sea turtles to vibrant corals, dense schools of pelagic fish and tiny phytoplankton.

Marine life is so abundant here that in 2004 the governments of Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador and Panama signed a declaration to establish the Eastern Tropical Pacific Marine Corridor, also known as CMAR, to connect their unique marine protected areas (MPAs) and safeguard the migratory pathways between them.

The creation of CMAR is no small accomplishment coming at a time when our ocean’s future is increasingly under threat. Today, our planet’s ocean remains in uncharted territory amid a dramatic combination of climate change, pollution, and illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing. According to the United Nations, the picture is stark: 90 percent of the planet’s big fish populations are depleted while 50 percent of coral reefs are destroyed. Marine biodiversity — and the ocean itself — has reached a tipping point.

A tipping point, however, is a far cry from a point of no return. Over the past 20 years, CMAR’s growing successes have seen it double in size, expanding from an initial five MPAs to 10 — a formidable cluster that includes renowned biodiversity hotspots such as Cocos Island and the Galápagos Islands and now spans some 2 million square kilometers of ocean.

This is a triumph for CMAR and the four Latin American nations that founded it and represents a critical step in the right direction for global marine conservation. Many peer-reviewed studies, show that creating large MPAs and ensuring wildlife can move among them has enormous benefits, not only within those areas but for nearby fisheries, as well. Research also shows that well-protected MPAs are more resilient than other areas to the effects of climate change, and that those benefits also extend beyond MPA boundaries.

These safeguards are crucial to achieving the global goal of protecting at least 30 percent of the ocean by 2030, known as the 30 by 30 target, which the 196 member countries of the Convention on Biological Diversity agreed to in December 2022.

But CMAR’s work in protecting ocean biodiversity is not only a victory for marine conservation, it is also a clarion call for the role of digital innovation in delivering sustainable ocean governance. It is one thing to pledge safeguards to ocean biodiversity and quite another to ensure them by monitoring and enforcing rules across vast swathes of open ocean.

CMAR has the right tools in its conservation toolbox to do both. Since 2022, the intergovernmental initiative has partnered with Global Fishing Watch, an international nonprofit organization working to map all human activity at sea, to strengthen its ability in effectively managing and monitoring its MPAs through cutting-edge technology and data.

By leveraging satellite imagery, machine learning, and human expertise for gathering and interpreting data, Global Fishing Watch’s Marine Manager tool is helping CMAR acquire a more complete view of commercial fishing, maritime transport and tourism activities. The tool also provides insights into critical environmental and oceanographic data that affect the MPAs in its jurisdiction.

That data includes 30 distinct layers of information on human, biological and oceanographic activity, including the movement of satellite transmitting vessels, sea surface temperature, bathymetry, oxygen concentration and salinity levels — all of which are critical for CMAR’s efforts in monitoring the health and security of its precious ocean resources.

Marine Manager is a unique and innovative tech portal that is a true boon to CMAR’s conservation efforts. Launched in 2022 by Global Fishing Watch and ocean advocate Dona Bertarelli, it supports the effective design, management and monitoring of protected areas while showing how key data changes over time, particularly following the implementation of new management measures.

Its effectiveness is also fueled by its ability to analyze data, giving CMAR management instant insight into potentially vulnerable areas of the ocean and, when combined with other Global Fishing Watch tools, showing who is behind threatening or suspicious activity.

Yet, praise for CMAR’s achievements and its application of Global Fishing Watch tools would ring hollow without results. That’s why when Costa Rican authorities announced earlier this year a drop in illegal fishing activity in the Cocos Island National Park, crediting Global Fishing Watch and Canada’s Dark Vessel Detection program with assisting officials in their monitoring and control efforts, it marked a watershed moment for technology’s role in driving forward our collective sustainability agenda.

Success, as they say, is measured by impact. And CMAR’s impact is concrete, visible and digitally driven.

The global community today is at a critical juncture with marine biodiversity, ocean protection and governance. As heads of government meet in Cali, Colombia, for the 2024 United Nations Biodiversity Conference, the future of our planet’s environmental well-being is once again in the spotlight. How we move forward has enormous implications for the future of the marine environment and the billions of people who rely on it for food, livelihoods, community and more.

What is clearer than ever is that digital platforms such as Marine Manager are increasingly critical to achieving humanity’s environmental and sustainability goals. As we close in on our 30 by 30 objective, governments must show the political will to not only define their commitment to protecting ocean biodiversity and ensuring marine conservation, but also in using technological tools to act on those commitments.

Initiatives such as CMAR are paving the way forward in leveraging these digital technologies. Now it's time for others to follow suit.

This story originally appeared as a World Economic Forum agenda article.

Lumbering giants, African elephants can reach heights of 13 feet of muscle, weathered skin and ivory tusks. Weighing twice that of a pickup truck, they can’t even jump. 

Not exactly the gazelles of the world, you’d expect them to cover little ground. Yet African elephants can travel 40 miles a day and nearly 2,500 in a year. While not all elephants migrate, certain parts of the population do.

It makes sense that wildlife corridors, which link animal populations across roads, agriculture or development, are crucial for their conservation. Recently, researchers took this a step further and discovered connectivity at multiple scales — from short to long-distance movements — is vital for elephants.

These efforts matter since African elephants have declined by 60 percent over the last 50 years and are currently endangered. By creating a blueprint of the most critical areas to protect in Southern Africa, these scientists are paving the way to preserve the world’s largest land dweller.

Landscape connectivity study

Much like their study subject, the research team — from universities, governmental agencies and nonprofit organizations such as the World Wildlife Fund, Ecoexist and Elephant Connection — went big. They assembled one of the largest datasets of GPS-collared African elephants in the Kavango-Zambezi Transfrontier Conservation Area. Spanning Angola, Botswana, Namibia, Zambia and Zimbabwe, this region is a mix of parks, formally protected areas, game reserves, communal lands and areas housing millions of people. 

“It’s an area where all of the large, charismatic, iconic African wildlife that we think of lives — your lions, elephants, rhinos, giraffes and so on,” said Robin Naidoo, a lead wildlife scientist at the World Wildlife Fund and the lead author of the study. “These are all creatures that require a lot of space to live. They don't respect national borders. Their space needs aren't defined in the same way that ours are. So the vision of this transfrontier conservation landscape is to allow those types of animals to move as freely as possible.”

Besides crossing boundaries and a matrix of land uses, large-scale fencing in the region can limit elephant movement, particularly of female elephants and their young, Naidoo said.

Maintaining connectivity is essential for wildlife. By allowing animals to move and migrate, corridors provide access to food, shelter and mates. This lets them adapt to environmental changes like development and global warming, while also improving the genetic diversity of populations. 

These corridors also benefit local residents, since healthy wildlife populations bring in tourists. For instance, travel and tourism contribute over 11 percent to the gross domestic product of both Botswana and Namibia, supporting thousands of jobs.

“The hope is that by doing conservation, we're not only benefiting nature and biodiversity but also people,” Naidoo said. “The question is: How can this vision be achieved? And to do that, one of the fundamental things that we need to understand is: Where, when, and how are these animals moving across the landscape?”

Small steps 

Despite the importance of connectivity, not all paths are the same. On the smallest scale, micro-corridors are used for quick, directed movements, often toward water. 

“Those micro-corridors are extremely important because this is a pretty dry area,” Naidoo said. “Elephants, as you can imagine, are huge animals that need to drink a lot of water. And we expect that these types of micro-corridors are only going to get more and more important as time goes on because, as we know, the climate is getting hotter. It's getting drier. And at the same time, there's more and more people out on the landscape.”

These pathways are often created in areas with a heavy human presence, making them especially useful. 

“If these areas are maintained in a pretty intact state so that animals can continue to use them, there's less likelihood that these animals will then travel through these heavily human-dominated areas and run into trouble and be dangerous to people,” Naidoo said. “It's beneficial for both the wildlife and the people to maintain these corridors intact.”

Corridors, for instance, can deter elephants from moving through fields and villages to access water. Bypassing fields could also reduce the amount of crops eaten by elephants, Naidoo said. This, in turn, lowers the chances that farmers will kill elephants or be injured by one.

Longer jaunts

On the other end of the elephant travel options are macro-corridors, which allow long-distance dispersal and migration.

“Elephants are moving hundreds, sometimes thousands of kilometers,” Naidoo said. “The macro-corridors are really areas that permit the broadest scale and types of movements.”

For instance, during the wet season when elephants are no longer confined to permanent water sources, they disperse to seek out new vegetation, Naidoo said.

In between these two scales are pathways connecting protected areas. The transfrontier conservation area is dotted with multiple national parks and game reserves, but a single protected area may not be large enough to support all the needs of large animals like elephants, so movement between them is important.

Landscape conservation

Mapping out this network of paths — small, medium and large — ideally facilitates protection. But a few roadblocks are in the way. 

In most cases, the various types of elephant paths don’t overlap, so conservation plans would need to consider all types. And while some corridors are designated, many aren’t.

“We need to set aside these lands if we're concerned about biodiversity,” Naidoo said. “But if we set aside these lands, there's an opportunity cost to that. They can't be used for agriculture or other types of human uses.”

Despite these challenges, the study is already yielding positive results. 

“Now that we've been able to identify where those corridors are, it allows us to move into phase two,” Naidoo said. “That involves identifying these micro-corridors, getting involved in community engagement, understanding the motivations and incentives that people might have to conserve these corridors and trying to bolster those, talking to various levels of government to see if they can be formally gazetted and given some type of protection. All those types of things that will allow these applied research results to be transformed into effective conservation policy and practice.” 

For example, the micro-corridor results, along with work by land authorities and NGOs, will be used to help designate elephant corridors in an upcoming land-use project in Botswana. Though this study focused on elephants, the researchers are also studying if other species use these corridors. 

Because elephants roam over such large areas, protecting them preserves many other species. Elephants impact their environment by dispersing seeds, modifying their habitat, and influencing plant and animal diversity. 

An elephant-sized impact

Conserving such a wide-ranging species requires cooperation at multiple levels, from researchers to government officials.

“All of this collaboration happened under the auspices of a secretariat that has been empowered to manage and organize these types of transfrontier conservation efforts in this area,” Naidoo said. “Without that higher-level government cooperation amongst these five countries, I don't think this project would have happened.” 

It’s a good lesson in tackling tricky conservation problems — one step at a time.

Almost 90 percent of U.S. adults have a high school degree or General Educational Development (GED) credential. For people who are incarcerated, that number is only about 60 percent. An estimated 95 percent of those in prison will be released at some point, and the barriers they face in rebuilding their lives are vast, said Theresa Rappaport, superintendent of the Excel Center Adult High School, a free education and job training program operated by Goodwill Central Texas. 

The center operates three campuses within correctional facilities in Texas designed to help people who are incarcerated earn their high school diplomas. Called Justice Education Campuses, the programming is currently offered at Billy Moore Correctional Center, the Coleman Unit for Women in Lockhart and Diboll Correctional Center.

“There are barriers that include things like general stigma of having a background that limits job opportunities and access to resources to just being able to rebuild their life when they’re also trying to meet the stipulations of maintaining their parole,” Rappaport told TriplePundit. 

There are more than 219,000 people in prisons, jails, immigration detention, and juvenile justice facilities in Texas, according to the Prison Policy Initiative. Nearly half of the 40,000 people released from Texas state prisons annually are rearrested within three years, according to the nonpartisan public policy research and advocacy nonprofit Texas 2036.

Access to education has the potential to change that. People who participate in educational programs while they are incarcerated are 43 percent less likely to return to prison and 13 percent more likely to find employment after their release, according to an analysis by the public policy research organization Rand.

“Because of the wide variety of barriers that these individuals are facing, we come at it with a multifaceted approach,” Rappaport said. “Our entire program is designed to address the individual needs of students.”

Those enrolled in the Excel Center programs work with a student success coach who makes sure they have everything they need to successfully complete their education, Rappaport said. 

“On top of that, we want to make sure that our students who are incarcerated and who will be transitioning back to their communities also have a high level of support,” Rappaport said. “We have what we call our reentry transition coordinator, and he works with those individuals, and with the campus teams that work with those students, to help guide them through that transition. Regardless of where that individual is going to be released, he works very closely with them to make sure they are connected to those resources, whether it be that they’re in Houston, Dallas or Lubbock.”

The Excel Center’s partnerships with Management Training Corporation (MTC), one of the private prison operators in Texas, and the Windham School District, a statewide school district providing educational services to the incarcerated, are crucial, Rappaport said. 

“Our partnership with MTC has allowed us to expand into new campuses and to provide this opportunity to as many students as possible,” Rappaport said. “We work hand in hand with Windham to find new partnerships.”

Those new partnerships include working with community colleges in different areas to enable incarcerated students in the Excel Center’s high school program to earn credits that apply to both their high school diploma and a college degree, Rappaport said. 

“Then once they’ve graduated, while they’re still incarcerated, they could then go on and enroll in college and continue their education,” Rappaport said.

But the Excel Center’s efforts are constrained by limited funding, staff shortages and inconsistent support systems.

“There are other constraints when working inside a correctional facility, like accessing the internet, but our teachers and staff are very creative and have found ways to always meet our student needs,” Rappaport said. “They often tailor curriculum delivery to engage students in this non-traditional setting, utilizing project-based learning and technology where possible. Their ability to foster a supportive, growth-oriented classroom despite these challenges is key to keeping students motivated and focused on their long-term goals.”

The devastation from Hurricanes Helene and Milton and other extreme weather events makes climate resilience more critical than ever. This urgency is amplified by communities' ongoing efforts to recover from the intensifying impacts of climate change, which disrupt lives, dislocate livelihoods and cause substantial economic damages. Climate resilience, in this context, refers to the ability to prepare for, recover from and adapt to these impacts. As a pioneer in the field, I see that understanding and implementing climate resilience is gaining traction, but the pace must accelerate to keep up with the escalating frequency and severity of these events.

The impact of hurricane events and other natural disasters, along with the $28 billion disasters recorded in 2023, underscores weaknesses in infrastructure, social systems, and economies, highlighting a growing shift towards resilience measures. This shift is driven not only by the increasing visibility of vulnerabilities but also by the growing focus on federal climate-related programs, local community initiatives, and the recognition by corporate America that resilience is crucial for their bottom lines, employees and the communities they serve.

At the federal level, several programs are spearheading efforts to enhance climate resilience. The National Climate Assessment, for instance, provides a comprehensive analysis of climate change impacts across the United States, guiding policymakers to better understand and address risks. FEMA’s Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities program is another critical initiative, offering funding for pre-disaster mitigation projects and encouraging communities to invest in resilient infrastructure.

Similarly, the Climate Resilience Toolkit, developed by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, equips communities with resources to assess vulnerabilities and plan for resilience. And the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act marks a significant legislative milestone, dedicating over $50 billion to climate resilience investments, from upgrading infrastructure to enhancing the resilience of water systems and power grids.

Corporate America’s role in advancing climate resilience cannot be overlooked. Companies are increasingly integrating climate risk into their strategies, driven by the need for long-term sustainability. They are assessing the potential impacts of climate change on their operations, supply chains, and assets, and developing strategies to mitigate these risks.

This proactive stance is partly due to growing investor pressure demanding disclosure of climate risks and resilience strategies. Governments are also implementing regulations that push companies to address these risks, with the Securities and Exchange Commission proposing rules requiring disclosure of climate-related risks. Moreover, many businesses are embracing resilience as part of their broader corporate social responsibility efforts, investing in resilient practices to enhance their reputation, attract customers, and support their employees and communities.

Some major corporations are leading the way. Microsoft, for example, supports disaster preparedness through its AI for Earth program, while Walmart is working to make its supply chain more resilient by collaborating with suppliers to reduce emissions. And Bank of America integrated climate risk into its lending and investment decisions, ensuring that its investments align with resilience and sustainability goals.

Cities and states are also taking proactive measures to build resilience. Miami, with its vulnerability to sea-level rise and hurricanes, launched the $400 million Miami Forever Bond to fund resilience projects like upgrading stormwater systems and raising roads. Louisiana, facing unique geographic challenges, developed a Coastal Master Plan for restoring and protecting its coastline — alongside initiatives such as the Louisiana Watershed Initiative and a comprehensive Climate Action Plan.

In New York City, the OneNYC 2050 plan aims to strengthen coastal defenses, upgrade infrastructure, and improve emergency preparedness, with the East Side Coastal Resiliency Project focusing on protecting vulnerable neighborhoods. California, a state at the forefront of resilience efforts, implemented the Safeguarding California Plan, investing in wildfire prevention, water conservation and sustainable agriculture.

Other notable efforts include Norfolk, Virginia’s resilience strategy, which addresses the city’s vulnerability to sea-level rise through projects that elevate homes, improve drainage systems and create green spaces to absorb floodwaters. And Austin, Texas' focus on reducing its carbon footprint and enhancing the resilience of its water supply through its Climate Resilience Action Plan.

Despite these efforts, more attention is essential to scale up climate resilience initiatives. Public education is vital to raise awareness and garner support for resilience investments. Policymakers must advocate for resilience investments through business tax incentives and grants for infrastructure upgrades. Public-private partnerships are crucial to drive innovation and ensure comprehensive and effective resilience measures.

Engaging communities in resilience planning is equally critical. Resilience strategies must be inclusive and participatory, involving community members in decision-making processes to ensure that measures are tailored to their specific needs and contexts.

Ultimately, building resilience isn’t just a technical challenge. It’s a social imperative. It requires collaboration, innovation, and a commitment to equity and sustainability. To meet the escalating threat of extreme weather, we must accelerate our efforts to build a more resilient future.

Nature was a major focus at Climate Week in New York City last month — from the World Biodiversity Summit to the Nature Hub and the Nest Climate Campus. All for good reason: Nature action must go hand in hand with climate action for the long-term stability of the planet’s health and the resilience of the global economy. Reversing nature and biodiversity loss cannot be achieved without tackling climate change, and vice versa.

Critical mass on the need for nature action has finally been reached by investors, companies and governments alike. This reckoning will be top-of-mind as world leaders and members of the business and nonprofit communities gather in Cali, Colombia, for the U.N. Biodiversity Conference (COP16) this week to discuss progress toward ambitious goals for protecting and restoring nature and ecosystems around the globe. These three takeaways from Climate Week show signs that momentum is building in the private sector to address nature and biodiversity loss alongside climate change.

1. The business case for nature action is clear

Like climate risk, the evidence is mounting up that nature is a material financial risk. While more than half of global gross domestic product — some $44 trillion in economic value generation — is moderately to heavily reliant on nature and its services, protecting nature could prevent a global GDP decline of $2.7 trillion annually by 2030. And businesses worldwide are increasingly being held accountable for their contributions to nature’s degradation – from 3M’s $10.3 billion settlement over its contamination of water systems, to the global opposition to JBS’ plan to list on the New York Stock Exchange due to deforestation linked to the company's cattle sourcing from Brazil. 

The result? Much of the discussion at Climate Week was no longer focused on the business case for nature action, but on how the private sector can address the escalating risks posed by the nature crisis.

2. There are growing resources to support private sector action

According to estimates, private-sector investments that harm nature amounted to at least $5 trillion in 2022. That's 140 times more than private funding for nature-based solutions. A report published during Climate Week seeks to help the private sector in righting this imbalance by providing a framework for redirecting financial flows in support of global biodiversity goals.

In another recent development, the Taskforce on Nature-related Related Financial Disclosures published guidance on how its recommendations map with other leading standards, such as the International Sustainability Standards Board, Global Reporting Initiative 10: Biodiversity 2024, and the European Sustainability Reporting Standards. The disclosure recommendations aim to help companies and investors better understand and report their nature-related impacts, dependencies, and opportunities to inform their nature strategies and spur action. 

3. More companies and investors are acting on nature

With an eye toward COP16, many organizations were on the ground in New York City showcasing the growth of their nature initiatives and previewing their plans for the upcoming biodiversity summit. Marking the momentum behind its disclosure recommendations released a year ago, the Taskforce on Nature-related Related Financial Disclosures (TNFD) said it plans to announce the next cohort of early adopters at COP16. More than 440 organizations, representing over $6 trillion in market capitalization among publicly-listed companies and over $16 trillion in assets under management among asset owners and managers, are already early adopters to the TNFD framework.

Nature Action 100, the first global investor-led engagement initiative to address nature and biodiversity loss, also announced plans to reveal the results of the initiative’s first benchmark assessments of 100 companies’ progress toward key investor expectations on nature at COP16. Since kicking off direct engagement with companies following Climate Week last year, more than 230 institutional investors with nearly $30 trillion in assets under management or advice are now participating in Nature Action 100 to support greater corporate ambition and action on nature.

Business for Nature published a letter to government heads signed by over 180 businesses and financial institutions calling for renewed policy ambition to implement the Global Biodiversity Framework adopted at the COP15 summit and reverse nature loss this decade. The organization also posted a Countdown to COP16 infographic, illustrating the critical actions businesses and governments are taking to turn the tide on nature’s destruction. 

These important takeaways provide valuable insight into how the private sector is mobilizing to mitigate nature risk in tandem with climate risk ahead of COP16. And they signal why events like Climate Week and beyond will increasingly feature broader conversions about how the world can reach a climate-resilient, nature-positive, and water-secure future.