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

Thinking 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, which is often included in ESG policies, remains a blind spot in terms of proving the reality of the announced impacts.

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) to a logic of measurable contribution to ecosystem resilience.

Measuring ecological performance: a legal and strategic requirement

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

Effinature: a structuring response

Effinature certification, supported by IRICE, provides a prescriptive framework for objectifying a project's actual ecological performance. The Biodiversity Performance Score (BPS), the cornerstone of this approach, translates the actual contribution to biodiversity according to comparable and verifiable indicators.

• An independent third-party certifier
• An audited method, applicable to both new and renovation projects
• Documented traceability compatible with SFDR transparency obligations

Impact: a common language

Certification enables investment funds to secure their impact initiatives. It avoids vague claims and strengthens credibility with investors, partners and authorities.

Because sustainability cannot be decreed. It has to be demonstrated.