Why Nature Risk Is Reshaping Corporate Sustainability in the USA

Nature-related financial risk is no longer just an environmental concern. It now directly affects corporate sustainability strategy, capital allocation, and long-term business resilience. Across the United States, biodiversity loss and water stress increasingly influence how investors evaluate companies.

In 2025, the World Economic Forum’s Global Risks Report continues to rank biodiversity loss and ecosystem collapse among the most severe long-term global risks. The report highlights ecosystem degradation as a direct threat to economic stability, supply chains, and food security. At the same time, the UN Convention on Biological Diversity’s Global Biodiversity Framework implementation updates warn that progress toward reversing nature loss remains too slow to meet 2030 targets. Financial institutions increasingly recognize that ecological instability creates systemic economic exposure, particularly in agriculture, infrastructure, and water-intensive industries.

For U.S. sustainability professionals, the shift is clear. Nature risk has entered the financial mainstream.

Why Nature-Related Financial Risk Matters to U.S. Businesses

More than half of global GDP depends moderately or highly on nature, according to the Principles for Responsible Investment. When ecosystems degrade, supply chains weaken, costs increase, and operational stability declines.

Water risk illustrates this clearly. The World Resources Institute estimates that 25 percent of the global population faces extremely high water stress annually. In U.S. states such as California, Arizona, and parts of Texas, water scarcity already affects agriculture, semiconductor manufacturing, energy generation, and real estate development.

Investors now ask practical questions:

• How dependent is company revenue on ecosystem services
• Are facilities located in biodiversity-sensitive areas
• How exposed is the supply chain to water stress
• How resilient are assets to ecological disruption

These questions move sustainability from reporting language into financial analysis.

The TNFD Framework and the LEAP Method

Since releasing its final recommendations in September 2023, the Taskforce on Nature-related Financial Disclosures has shifted its focus toward implementation and market adoption. In 2024 and 2025, TNFD published additional sector guidance and practical tools to help companies operationalize nature-related risk management.

The framework follows four disclosure pillars aligned with global sustainability reporting structures: governance, strategy, risk management, and metrics and targets. At its core sits the LEAP approach:

• Locate nature interfaces
• Evaluate dependencies and impacts
• Assess risks and opportunities
• Prepare to respond and report

According to TNFD’s 2024 implementation guidance, LEAP is designed as a science-based, risk management process that integrates geospatial analysis, ecosystem mapping, and value chain assessment. Companies are encouraged to identify operations located near protected areas, biodiversity hotspots, and water-stressed basins.

As of 2025, more than 400 organizations worldwide have committed to begin reporting in alignment with TNFD recommendations, signaling growing financial sector engagement.

In practice, many sustainability teams face implementation challenges. While emissions data often sits within structured carbon accounting systems, biodiversity and water risk data typically remain fragmented across procurement, operations, and environmental compliance teams. TNFD’s structured approach aims to harmonize these datasets and embed nature-related risk into enterprise risk management systems.

Corporate Signals in the U.S. Market

Several major companies already integrate biodiversity and water considerations into sustainability strategy.

Walmart has expanded regenerative agriculture commitments across millions of acres to reduce soil degradation and strengthen long-term supply chain resilience.

Microsoft has launched biodiversity initiatives aligned with becoming nature positive by 2030, incorporating ecosystem restoration into corporate sustainability planning.

Real estate developers operating in water-stressed states increasingly conduct watershed-level risk assessments before launching new projects. Financial institutions now evaluate environmental exposure as part of lending and investment due diligence.

These actions demonstrate a shift from reputational positioning to operational risk management.

From Harm Reduction to Biodiversity Gain

The sustainability conversation has evolved. Companies no longer focus solely on reducing environmental harm. They increasingly pursue measurable biodiversity gain.

The Science Based Targets Network develops methodologies that help organizations set science-based targets for nature, similar to climate targets. Biodiversity gain strategies include:

• Restoring degraded land
• Enhancing habitat connectivity
• Protecting wetlands
• Implementing regenerative land management practices

For sustainability professionals, the strategic question becomes how to connect ecological outcomes with financial performance.

For example, improved watershed management may reduce operational disruption. Regenerative sourcing can strengthen supply chain stability. Nature-positive land development can reduce regulatory delays and improve investor confidence.

Economic resilience increasingly depends on ecosystem resilience.

Integrating Nature into Sustainability Reporting

Nature-related financial risk does not exist in isolation. It intersects with climate strategy, supply chain transparency, and governance oversight.

Land use change influences Scope 3 emissions. Water scarcity amplifies physical climate risk. Biodiversity impacts affect community relationships and regulatory scrutiny.

This interconnection between climate and nature risk is increasingly recognized in guidance from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the Taskforce on Nature-related Financial Disclosures. Therefore, sustainability professionals must integrate nature into broader sustainability reporting frameworks such as GRI and industry-specific standards.

Double materiality assessments now often include biodiversity and water analysis. Leading companies evaluate not only how nature affects business performance but also how business operations affect ecosystems.

From a practical standpoint, integration requires collaboration between sustainability teams, finance departments, operations leaders, and risk managers. Without structured training, implementation can stall due to siloed data systems and unclear accountability.

Why This Trend Is Critical for U.S. Sustainability Professionals

Although U.S. regulatory requirements currently focus heavily on climate disclosures, investor expectations continue to expand. Capital markets increasingly recognize that environmental stability underpins long-term financial performance.

Sustainability professionals who understand:

• TNFD LEAP methodology
• Water stress indices
• Biodiversity impact metrics
• Nature-positive strategy development
• Financial materiality assessment

The above will play a central role in shaping corporate resilience strategies.

Those who overlook biodiversity risk may struggle to respond as investor scrutiny intensifies.

Building Capacity in Nature-Related Risk

Because nature-related financial risk directly affects investment decisions and corporate sustainability strategy, professionals need technical knowledge, not just awareness.

The Certified Sustainability Practitioner Program – Advanced Edition equips professionals with practical tools for sustainability reporting, carbon strategy alignment, and emerging materiality frameworks. The program addresses how evolving disclosure expectations influence corporate sustainability performance.

Conclusion

Nature-related financial risk has become a defining issue in corporate sustainability. Biodiversity loss, water scarcity, and ecosystem degradation now influence investment decisions, asset valuation, and long-term strategy.

Frameworks such as TNFD provide structure. Scientific institutions provide urgency. Investors provide momentum.

For U.S. sustainability professionals, this shift represents both responsibility and opportunity. By developing expertise in nature-related risk assessment, you position yourself at the forefront of sustainable business strategy.

Economic stability depends on ecological stability. Sustainability leaders who understand this connection will shape the next decade of corporate decision-making.