This session will present evidence of these impacts across multiple scales, bringing together researchers, industry, policymakers, and Indigenous and local knowledge holders to explore transformative mitigation strategies. We will also explore how mining companies can address their nature-related dependencies, impacts, risks, and opportunities. We invite submissions covering the full mining lifecycle, from impact assessment and large-scale mapping to the development of quantification tools that reduce habitat loss and pollution, and rehabilitation methods to restore or enhance biodiversity. Studies on energy transition materials (metals, aggregates) and the legacy impacts of coal are encouraged.
We aim to foster dialogue on the biodiversity-climate nexus at the heart of the energy transition. By bringing together diverse stakeholders, we will identify pathways that reconcile mineral demand with global biodiversity targets. Ultimately, we will produce key recommendations for science, policy, and practice to ensure mining supports a nature-positive future.
Global biodiversity is increasingly threatened by climate change and land use pressures, including mining. Achieving net zero emissions by 2050 requires a transition from fossil fuel extraction to sourcing the minerals necessary for renewable energy production. Although material use will probably decline in a low carbon economy, the intensity, location and ecological footprint of extraction are expected to shift. In this Review, we assess how evolving mineral demands affect biodiversity and social conflicts. We examine the minerals required for renewable energy technologies and infrastructure, and outline the pathways through which mining affects biodiversity from site to global scales. Drawing on cases from the Global Atlas of Environmental Justice, we also explore how these impacts intersect with environmental justice conflicts, including triggers, concerns and outcomes related to energy transition minerals. Although critical minerals dominate policy discourse, construction materials account for the largest share of demand by volume, approximately 70 percent, and they are often neglected in research and policy analysis. Shifting demand away from drilling and coal mining toward a diverse range of extraction methods and minerals needed for renewable energy technology and infrastructure will reshape both how and where mining impacts occur. Overall, the shift in mineral demand suggests that although a substantial portion of extraction may remain concentrated in known mining regions, the intensity and nature of mining activities and impacts are likely to change. These changes may involve the development of new mines or the expansion of existing ones. Yet the full spectrum of materials required for both renewable energy technologies and infrastructure must be included in material footprint assessments, biodiversity assessments and social conflict analysis. Despite future demand projections and expanding research, crucial gaps remain in biodiversity and social risk assessments, comprehensive mineral demand projections and spatial data on the extraction of construction materials. Building a comprehensive understanding of mineral requirements and associated risks is essential for decarbonization strategies that are socially and environmentally responsible.
How to cite: Aska, B., Sonter, L. J., zu Ermgassen, S. O. S. E., Franks, D. M., Mingorria, S., Iniesta-Arandia, I., Lloyd, T. J., and Torres, A.: Mining, biodiversity and social conflict in the renewable energy transition, World Biodiversity Forum 2026, Davos, Switzerland, 14–19 Jun 2026, WBF2026-423, https://doi.org/10.5194/wbf2026-423, 2026.
The United Nations has committed to halting and reversing biodiversity loss by 2030, yet mining remains a major driver of biodiversity decline, particularly in conservation priority zones and areas with high species extinction risk. The accelerating clean energy transition intensifies this conflict, as demand for critical minerals essential for renewable technologies creates unprecedented pressures on biodiversity hotspots. Despite growing awareness, the full spatial extent of current and future mining threats to biodiversity remains inadequately quantified, limiting the effectiveness of global conservation strategies and sustainable development pathways.
Here, we provide the first comprehensive, spatially explicit assessment of mining threats to biodiversity by compiling 145,000 km² of current mining footprints and analyzing their overlap with conservation priority zones (CPZs) and species extinction risks across 14 biomes globally. We find that 34% of current mining areas overlap with CPZs, threatening over 2,300 species, including many classified as critically endangered, endangered, or vulnerable. These threats disproportionately affect fragile ecosystems such as Mangroves and Mediterranean biomes. Critically, our analysis reveals that minerals essential for the clean energy transition, including lithium, cobalt, nickel, and rare earth elements, show the highest overlap with CPZs and areas of elevated extinction risk compared to fossil fuels, creating a direct conflict between climate mitigation and biodiversity conservation goals.
Future projections demonstrate that without proactive spatial planning, an additional 43% (11.7 million km²) of areas potentially exploitable for metals, 29% (2.2 million km²) for non-metals, and 36% (387,000 km²) for coal overlap with CPZs, highlighting heightened risks from mining expansion. Our buffer analysis shows that inadequate spatial containment could escalate biodiversity threats by 4-54 times for CPZs and 7-562 times for extinction risks.
We provide actionable solutions for navigating this nexus: spatial exclusion of mining from high-priority biodiversity areas, strengthened governance and community co-management, advanced restoration technologies, and circular economy strategies to reduce mineral demand. Our spatially explicit findings offer critical guidance for policymakers and industries to align mining practices with the Global Biodiversity Framework and Sustainable Development Goals, demonstrating pathways to reconcile resource extraction with biodiversity conservation in the clean energy era.
How to cite: Pan, K., Raes, N., Le Lann, W., Marshall, L., Feijoo Quezada, A., Barbarossa, V., Moens, M., Kleijn, R., and C. Biesmeijer, J.: Post-2020 conservation priorities are threatened by global mining, World Biodiversity Forum 2026, Davos, Switzerland, 14–19 Jun 2026, WBF2026-57, https://doi.org/10.5194/wbf2026-57, 2026.
The escalating demand for minerals and metals due to digitalization, infrastructure growth, and the renewable energy transition is driving an ever-increasing expansion of mining activities. To support the effective consideration of biodiversity commitments of governments and to ensure that the implications for biodiversity are included in any planning, there is an urgent need for decision-relevant, comprehensive spatial information. Here, we present a framework that integrates global mining land-use data with a spatially explicit biodiversity assessment. The assessment approach addresses both local and global biodiversity consequences of mining-driven land use and pinpoints specific species and locations most strongly affected. Using multiregional input-output analysis, we trace these mining-related biodiversity footprints along global supply chains. Our results show that biodiversity loss impacts associated with global mining land use are nearly twice as high as previously estimated. Hotspots in Indonesia, New Caledonia, Australia, Brazil, and Peru account for 57% of global mining-related biodiversity impacts. Coal, precious metals, nickel, iron, and copper extraction together contribute 82% of the total impacts. Due to international trade, 77% of mining-related biodiversity footprints occur outside the countries of final consumption. Demands from China, Europe, Japan, and the USA, primarily in construction, services, machinery, and electronics, account for 58% of mining-related biodiversity footprints. Together, these findings provide a global baseline of current mining-related biodiversity pressures, against which future mining development and biodiversity outcomes can be evaluated.
Building on our current baseline assessment, we link future mining land-use trajectories with species-level biodiversity outcomes under alternative pathways representing different exploration intensities. We combine exploration activity maps with historical land-use data to infer future spatial patterns of mineral extraction. For over 80,000 terrestrial vertebrates and tree species, we quantify changes in habitat-suitable ranges and attribute pixel-level habitat gains or losses to projected mining land conversion. The resulting regionalized biodiversity response will enable spatially explicit projections of species extinction risk under alternative mining land-use scenarios. In combination, these findings can provide a continuous picture of how mining, from current operations to future expansion, affects biodiversity, offering key insights for reconciling mineral supply planning with global conservation and sustainability goals.
How to cite: Yu, Y., Jetz, W., Schenker, V., Maus, V., and Pfister, S.: From extraction to extinction: mapping the biodiversity loss of global mining expansion, World Biodiversity Forum 2026, Davos, Switzerland, 14–19 Jun 2026, WBF2026-319, https://doi.org/10.5194/wbf2026-319, 2026.
Demand for minerals sourced from sub-Saharan Africa is expanding rapidly, driven partly by the global shift towards renewable energy heightening demand for key energy transition minerals such as cobalt and copper. Combining a dataset of post-deforestation land-use across sub-Saharan Africa with verified data on the commodities extracted by specific mines, we assessed the spatiotemporal footprint of mining-driven deforestation on the continent across the last 20 years. We find 187,000 hectares of direct mining-driven deforestation across 16,627 mines between 2001 and 2020, and that the annual forest area directly lost to mining is increasing in >70% of countries. Leveraging recent methodological advances, we apply a quasi-experimental design and heterogeneity robust difference-in-differences models to specifically ask how much additional off-site deforestation is triggered by mine establishment. At the continental scale, we find mining triggers an 8.0 percentage point increase in deforestation within 1 km of a mine versus unmined areas, with elevated deforestation (+1.1pp) persisting up to 20 km from mines even after 10 years. At the national level, we detected increased levels of deforestation up to 5 km from mining sites for the majority of countries after 10 years. For every hectare of direct deforestation due to the mine footprint, mining triggers, on average, 34 hectares of additional offsite loss through ancillary activities (e.g. agriculture or settlements). This varied nationally, rising to 58 additional hectares per single hectare of mining footprint in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Mines extracting cobalt and copper, both key energy transition minerals, caused the highest additional total deforestation across the continent. Iron, gold and silver mines had the largest area of effect, driving increased deforestation up to 10 km from mining sites. Embedding robust environmental impact assessments in national policy to track off-site leakage is essential to reducing future forest losses in sub-Saharan Africa and transitioning towards transparent zero-deforestation supply chains.
How to cite: Morton, O., G Bousfield, C., Dégny Valé, P., Lamb, I., Maus, V., G Bryant, R., and P Edwards, D.: Mining triggers extensive additional deforestation across sub-Saharan Africa, World Biodiversity Forum 2026, Davos, Switzerland, 14–19 Jun 2026, WBF2026-121, https://doi.org/10.5194/wbf2026-121, 2026.
Mining poses significant threats to freshwater ecosystems, with impacts often enduring long after operations cease. Growing concerns suggest that mining expansion to meet global mineral demands for decarbonization may amplify cumulative risks to freshwater biodiversity. However, the biological magnitude and spatial extent of these impacts remain poorly understood, hampering our ability to meet international conservation targets. We present an integrated global assessment quantifying the severity of biodiversity impacts and mapping priority conservation areas at risk from mining activities.
We synthesize standardized biodiversity data from studies worldwide to quantify mining impacts. Although research has largely focused on terrestrial systems, our results show that freshwater biodiversity is more severely affected, with significant reductions in species richness and abundance. Yet, some taxa persist or even increase in sites affected by mining, largely due to tolerant and generalist species able to exploit disturbed environments. This pattern masks the loss of sensitive taxa and compositional turnover, rather than gain in biodiversity. Freshwater invertebrates show the largest population declines, whereas fishes exhibit greater variability, with higher-trophic taxa declining most as prey availability drops and food-web structures shift. To assess spatial patterns of impact, we applied an aggregated community metric (mean species abundance), revealing that while the intensity of impacts decreases with distance, they remain detectable far downstream.
Considering this downstream propagation, we map the global extent of freshwater biodiversity exposure to mining-related contamination and its overlap with conservation areas. We estimate that around 16% of affected rivers are located within Protected Areas and Key Biodiversity Areas. Although much of the current discourse centres on minerals essential for low-carbon technologies, we find gold and coal mining responsible for the most extensive impacts. Artisanal and small-scale operations are major contributors, likely causing disproportionate impacts due to their frequently unregulated nature.
By integrating quantitative evidence of biodiversity loss with spatial mapping of risk, we provide the first comprehensive global assessment of mining impacts on freshwater biodiversity. Our findings reveal both the most threatened taxonomic groups and conservation sites, highlighting the urgent need for hydrologically informed conservation planning and stronger environmental governance to reconcile mineral demand with global biodiversity goals.
How to cite: Braz Pires, M., Marques, A., and Barbarossa, V.: Quantifying and mapping global mining impacts on freshwater biodiversity, World Biodiversity Forum 2026, Davos, Switzerland, 14–19 Jun 2026, WBF2026-68, https://doi.org/10.5194/wbf2026-68, 2026.
Our production and consumption systems fundamentally depend on, impact, and shape ecosystem state and function. Yet, the largest economic beneficiaries tend to underreport and sparsely disclose operations' impacts on biodiversity and water. Existing practices often rely on self-reporting or lack depth, lack the integration of available spatiotemporally granular datasets, and tend to avoid the attribution of changes. If we want to be ambitious about corporate impact quantification and disclosure, we need operational protocols that leverage available high-granularity and allow for comparability across assets and portfolios.
This research seeks to advance toward developing a scalable, transparent, and operational change detection and attribution workflow using satellite Earth Observation (EO). We demonstrate our workflow for assessing coastal mining impacts on surrounding water systems, a complex but important task since mining expansion driven by energy transition has spurred operations in ecologically sensitive watersheds and biodiversity hotspots with far-reaching downstream effects.
Our difference-in-differences framework compares mining site trajectories with reference areas having similar climatic, biophysical, and topographic characteristics. Counterfactuals are selected through spatial cluster analysis and satellite embedding similarity search. Using multi-sensor satellite data, we retrieve indicators covering water cycle domains, including evapotranspiration, open water surface, vegetation water content, and coastal water constituents. We quantify ecosystem displacement toward extreme multivariate values that may link to ecosystem integrity versus disruption extent and magnitude.
Our analysis reveals significant deviations in the trajectory of EO-based water indicators between impacted sites and counterfactuals. The world's largest nickel mine in Weda Bay shows a 24% shift toward more extreme values of evapotranspiration, vegetation moisture, water availability, turbidity, and total suspended matter by 2024 compared to 2018 baselines, while reference points show minimal change (4%). We discuss the framework's scalability, dissecting facility-specific impacts from regional environmental variability, and potential for benchmarking EO-derived Essential Variables. Yet, challenges remain, including (dis)agreement between BACI variants challenged by (lacking) asset data or historic imagery, spatial footprint decisions, the interpretation and comparability of relative indicators, and counterfactual search criteria. Despite these challenges, this work demonstrates advances in satellite EO-based counterfactual analyses as a scalable approach for multi-dimensional ecosystem change detection and facility-specific impact attribution.
How to cite: Hauser, L. T., Santos, M. J., and Damm, A.: Satellite-Based “Before-After Control-Intervention” Framework for Detecting and Attributing Coastal Mining Impacts on Water System Disruption, World Biodiversity Forum 2026, Davos, Switzerland, 14–19 Jun 2026, WBF2026-622, https://doi.org/10.5194/wbf2026-622, 2026.
Mineral and metal production underpins modern economies and the low-carbon transition, yet it increasingly competes with biodiversity conservation. Rising demand for minerals which is driven by renewable energy systems and infrastructure expansion—has intensified pressures on ecosystems through land transformation, CO2 emissions, and freshwater depletion. These impacts often overlap spatially, amplifying ecological risks in sensitive landscapes, but most sustainability assessments typically examine them separately. As a result, biodiversity-relevant interactions and trade-offs remain insufficiently understood.
This study applies an expanded ecological footprint (EF) framework to quantify the global environmental burden of mineral production across 5,495 mines and 34 primary commodities using average annual production data from 2000–2015. For each mine, we estimated water consumption, CO2 emissions, and land transformation using mineral-specific intensity factors from an extensive life cycle assessment (LCA) based literature review. These pressures were translated into three EF components—built-up land, carbon absorption land, and water consumption land—and spatially aggregated to watersheds to identify vulnerable ecological regions.
Results show that carbon absorption land dominates the total EF globally, reflecting the large area theoretically required to offset mining-related CO2 emissions. However, biodiversity-relevant hotspots emerge where the EF of water consumption land becomes the primary driver of ecological pressure, especially for copper and gold mines in arid and heavily exploited watersheds. In these basins, mining intensifies competition for limited freshwater resources, heightening the risks to species. Although land transformation contributes less to global totals, it is locally significant for commodities such as lithium, where surface disturbance occurs in fragile ecosystems.
The Pareto frontier analysis reveals strong trade-offs: while some mines combine high production with relatively low EF, many operations—particularly in water-scarce regions—cannot improve production efficiency without increasing biodiversity threats. By jointly evaluating land, carbon, and water impacts, this study provides a spatially explicit basis for identifying biodiversity-sensitive mining regions and supports strategies that reconcile mineral supply with planetary ecological limits.
How to cite: Islam, K., Maeno, K., and Motoshita, M.: Mapping biodiversity risks of global mineral production through an integrated ecological footprint framework , World Biodiversity Forum 2026, Davos, Switzerland, 14–19 Jun 2026, WBF2026-532, https://doi.org/10.5194/wbf2026-532, 2026.
The clean energy transition is accelerating global demand not only for critical minerals but also for aggregates—mainly sand, gravel, and crushed rock—collectively referred to as sand, the world’s most extracted solid material. While critical minerals often dominate climate–biodiversity discussions, sand resources represent an annual demand exceeding 50 billion tonnes. These resources are fundamental to infrastructure development, particularly for decarbonization initiatives, including renewable energy installations and coastal protection measures. Yet the values of sand to biodiversity and ecosystem services, as well as the biodiversity impacts, dependencies, and governance gaps associated with sand extraction, remain largely unrecognized.
Poorly regulated sand extraction in dynamic, biodiversity-rich systems disrupts sediment flows, degrades ecosystems, and amplifies climate and livelihood vulnerabilities, with impacts spreading far beyond the mining site and compounding other pressures such as dams, sea-level rise, and land-use change. As renewable-energy expansion increases demand, emerging sand scarcity and ecosystem degradation pose material risks to infrastructure and resilience, underscoring the need to govern sand as a strategic resource with biodiversity considerations integrated across its lifecycle.
Drawing on emerging findings from UNEP’s Sand & Sustainability forthcoming 2026 report, this presentation highlights the critical yet overlooked role of sand in shaping a nature-positive energy transition. The report convened over 20 international experts across sectors to expand understanding of sand’s value to biodiversity and to put forward actionable recommendations. A new decision-support tool will accompany the report, enabling governments across jurisdictions to better align resource management, climate objectives, and biodiversity conservation.
This presentation will synthesize global evidence on the biodiversity impacts and risks associated with sand extraction, introduce valuation approaches that capture sand’s contribution to ecosystem functioning, and outline governance innovations. It will also highlight nature-positive opportunities such as secondary and recycled aggregates and standards-based, landscape-scale restoration.
Positioning sand within the broader minerals agenda reveals a critical gap in current climate policy: without recognizing sand’s strategic value, the material foundation of the energy transition risks undermining global biodiversity targets. Reframing sand as both a critical enabler of clean energy and a keystone of biodiversity-rich landscapes offers pathways to reconcile material demand with nature-positive outcomes.
How to cite: Chuah, S., Torres, A., Selby, I., Shannon, M., Long, A., Goichot, M., Strigin, N., Bide, T., Dawson, K., Van Lancker, V., Zadeh, A., Puffer, S., Sánchez, L., Yusuf, H., Raji, M., Moizer, J., Abdulghafoor, H., Guppy, R., Bach, H., and Peduzzi, P. and the 2026 Sand and Sustainability Report Team of Authors: Valuing Sand: From Overlooked Resource to a Strategic Asset for Biodiversity and the Energy Transition, World Biodiversity Forum 2026, Davos, Switzerland, 14–19 Jun 2026, WBF2026-914, https://doi.org/10.5194/wbf2026-914, 2026.
The clean energy transition is catalyzing an unprecedented surge in mineral extraction, frequently placing climate mitigation goals in direct conflict with biodiversity conservation. While ecological restoration is often cited as the primary mechanism to offset these impacts, it is rarely implemented effectively; globally, only a small fraction of mines undergo successful rehabilitation, with estimates in Australia as low as 4% for inactive sites. To effectively manage nature-related risks, we must move beyond the assumption of restoration and integrate quantitative estimates of recovery times into impact models. Without understanding the specific temporal costs required for ecosystems to return to reference conditions, we fail to account for the "added biodiversity loss" that accumulates over decades of recovery, which is crucial for biodiversity accounting in sustainable mining practices.
Here, we present quantitative estimates of restoration times derived from a meta-analysis of 51 Australian studies. We utilized multilevel meta-regression models to assess recovery trajectories for species richness, diversity, and vegetation structure (measured as canopy cover), accounting for interactions with commodity types and management interventions.
Our results reveal a distinct hierarchical recovery process. Flora richness takes approximately 13 years to reach reference levels, while vegetation structure restores after 17 years. However, faunal recovery is significantly slower, with richness requiring over 25 years and diversity estimated to take more than 40 years to match unmined systems. Broad taxonomic comparisons indicate that invertebrates recover faster than vertebrates, while sites utilizing complex active restoration techniques, combining topsoil, seeding, and planting, significantly outperform simpler methods.
Crucially, these findings largely reflect outcomes from active restoration, which is expensive and rare in practice. Moreover, while structural metrics may recover in decades, the restoration of full ecosystem complexity and functioning often spans centuries. Therefore, current restoration practices alone are likely insufficient to offset the biodiversity footprint of mineral extraction. To reconcile mineral demand with global biodiversity targets, the industry must prioritize avoidance and adopt biodiversity-inclusive mining practices rather than relying solely on post-closure remediation.
How to cite: Tierney, E., Braz Pires, M., Giest, S., and Barbarossa, V.: How long do mining impacts persist? Quantifying biodiversity recovery trajectories in post-mining landscapes, World Biodiversity Forum 2026, Davos, Switzerland, 14–19 Jun 2026, WBF2026-601, https://doi.org/10.5194/wbf2026-601, 2026.
While mining remains a strategic sector for energy transition and technology development, its legacy includes extensive areas of degraded land that, under national and European legislation, must be restored. Increasingly, mine restoration is being reframed beyond regulatory compliance as an opportunity to recover biodiversity, restore ecological functions, and enhance ecological connectivity.
In Europe, policy frameworks such as the European Nature Restoration Regulation place ecological restoration at the core of sustainability agendas, explicitly targeting degraded habitats, including active and abandoned mining sites. However, translating these ambitions into effective, science-based restoration outcomes remains a major challenge. Restoration success is often constrained by limited integration of ecological knowledge, inconsistent technical standards, and fragmented governance throughout the mining lifecycle.
This talk presents the Mining and Quarry Restoration Network (MQRN; Red de Restauración de Minas y Canteras in Spanish), established in Spain in 2024 as a national, non-profit, multi-stakeholder platform aimed at fostering high-quality mine restoration practices. The Network brings together mining operators, consultancies, academic institutions, and public administrations to co-produce restoration approaches grounded in a multidisciplinary science while ensuring operational feasibility and regulatory alignment. Importantly, MQRN promotes a paradigm shift in mine restoration: from site-level reclamation focused on stabilization and compliance, towards landscape-scale ecological restoration that supports biodiversity recovery, ecosystem functioning, and ecological connectivity. By integrating soil functionality, native species dynamics, geochemical constraints, and long-term ecosystem trajectories, a central contribution of the Network is the development of standardized, evidence-based restoration protocols that reduce uncertainty for operators and regulators while improving ecological outcomes. These efforts are reinforced through technical working groups, training programs, and collaborative research–practice exchanges.
By fostering collaboration between administrations, industry, and universities, MQRN demonstrates how coordinated, science-driven networks can transform mandatory mine restoration into a strategic lever for biodiversity recovery and climate–nature alignment. Beyond the Spanish context, MQRN provides a transferable model that may inspire the development of similar national or international networks addressing the mining–biodiversity nexus.
How to cite: Torres, A. and Olmo, B.: The Mining and Quarry Restoration Network (MQRN), a new and necessary platform working for the improvement of mine closures, World Biodiversity Forum 2026, Davos, Switzerland, 14–19 Jun 2026, WBF2026-985, https://doi.org/10.5194/wbf2026-985, 2026.
Reaching the global goal of halting and reversing biodiversity loss will require a shift in corporate action and ambition levels. Whilst clear guidance already exists for companies to take responsibility for and mitigate biodiversity loss caused by their own operations, delivering global nature-positive outcomes requires higher ambition and extended accountability for impacts beyond companies’ direct control. This includes addressing indirect, diffuse or historical (or pre-baseline) impacts related to operations, as well as biodiversity loss caused by suppliers and consumers along upstream and downstream value chains.
As businesses look to contribute to the global nature-positive goal, they face a broad and dynamic landscape of guidance frameworks, standards and expectations, making it challenging to know which actions are proportionate and defensible, and how they best fit together as part of a comprehensive nature strategy. In this paper, we provide a typology of positive actions that businesses can take, which, when implemented together, can contribute to the global nature-positive goal. We outline key factors and considerations for selecting appropriate actions and provide a decision tree to help businesses navigate towards a coherent and defensible nature strategy.
We establish multiple influencing factors that can affect the decision-making process in a corporate nature strategy, including: i) whether actions are addressing specific negative impacts, ii) the types, timescale and locations associated with the negative impacts being addressed, iii) the equivalency of proposed biodiversity gains to losses, iv) the stage of the mitigation hierarchy, and v) the scales of action proposed. Underlying all these factors are questions around uncertainty in biodiversity losses and gains, the responsibility that a business should take for different types of impact, and the level of ambition required for meaningful nature-positive contributions. We provide examples for each action in the typology, outline key principles, and identify opportunities to overcome the challenges posed by high uncertainties and unclear responsibility.
How to cite: Bang, A., White, T., Bennun, L., Booth, H., Bromwich, T., Bull, J., Farrelly, É., Martin, R., Milner-Gulland, E., Starkey, M., and Sonter, L.: A Typology of Corporate Actions for a Nature-Positive Future, World Biodiversity Forum 2026, Davos, Switzerland, 14–19 Jun 2026, WBF2026-705, https://doi.org/10.5194/wbf2026-705, 2026.
