Why biodiversity remains the weak point of impact funds (even Article 9)

Thinking about impact: between ambition and demonstration

Article 9 of the SFDR regulation requires so-called "dark green" funds to justify their alignment with a sustainable investment objective. Biodiversity, often integrated into ESG policies on this basis, nevertheless remains a blind spot in the ability to prove the reality of the impacts announced.

The limits of declarative approaches

An environmental strategy cannot be limited to intentions or generic claims. In the case of biodiversity, this means moving away from a logic of "greening" through image (planting, landscape aesthetics) towards a logic of measurable contribution to ecosystem resilience.

Measuring ecological performance: a legal and strategic requirement

The lack of a shared method for assessing ecological performance makes comparisons impossible and exposes funds to reputational or compliance risks. This need for traceability is part of a broader regulatory trend: alignment with the EU taxonomy, articulation with CSRD reporting, and meeting the expectations of institutional investors.

Effinature: a structuring response

The Effinature certification, run by IRICE, offers a prescribable framework for objectifying the actual ecological performance of a project. The Biodiversity Performance Score (BPS), the foundation of this approach, translates the effective contribution to biodiversity into comparable, verifiable indicators.

• An independent framework (third-party certifier)
• An audited method, applicable to new builds and renovations alike
• Documented traceability compatible with SFDR transparency obligations

Impact: adopting a common language

Certification allows investment funds to secure their impact approaches. It avoids the vagueness of claims and strengthens credibility with investors, partners and authorities.

Because sustainability cannot be decreed. It must be demonstrated.