12. Appendix A

Maturity tiers

Category		Tier C	Tier B	Tier A
Strategy	Strategy	Biodiversity is not included in the investment strategy.	The institution has a clearly formulated strategy to mitigate negative biodiversity impacts.	The institution has a clearly formulated, well-communicated and actively used strategy to mitigate negative and achieve positive biodiversity impacts.
	EU alignment	Do not use EU’s strategy for biodiversity or EU taxonomy.	Refers to EU’s strategy for biodiversity or the EU taxonomy.	The institution’s strategy is in line with EU’s strategy for biodiversity and the institution uses the EU taxonomy.
	Investment targets	Do not have stated environmental commitments.	They have climate investment targets, and a few are developing targets for investment in nature as a component of these.	They have biodiversity investment targets.
	Biodiversity goals	Biodiversity is not included in goals.	The goal is to do no harm on biodiversity.	The goal is to have a net-positive effect on biodiversity.
Board and management	Focus and transparency	There is no focus on biodiversity.	The vision on biodiversity is not shared outside the management.	The management explicitly mentions biodiversity as a focus area for the institution.

	Decision-making	Biodiversity is not considered a factor in decision-making.	Biodiversity is sometimes considered a factor in decision-making.	Biodiversity is always considered a factor in decision-making. The management includes biodiversity experts in the decision-making process if/when they do not have sufficient competences themselves.
Systems	Investments targeted at biodiversity	Have no investments in nature.	They usually have few, if any, direct investments in nature.	Their investments in nature are still at a low level but increasing. A certain part of the portfolio is earmarked for biodiversity positive projects.
	Biodiversity safeguards	They rely on regulatory EIA processes rather than safeguard frameworks to manage risk.	They apply biodiversity safeguards (IFC’s PS6, or in their own frameworks) though with limited supporting structures or capacity.	Consistently apply biodiversity safeguards (IFC’s PS6, or in their own frameworks) with clear supporting structures and high capacity.
	Project screening	Biodiversity impacts are not included in the screening process.	Biodiversity impacts are to some extent included in the screening process under environmental impacts.	Biodiversity impacts are explicitly included in the screening process. Activities harmful for biodiversity are clearly stated in the exclusion list, and positive impact possibilities are taken into consideration.
	Risk assessment	Risk assessment does not have specific focus on biodiversity.	There is a framework to assess biodiversity risks and nature dependencies.	There is a framework to assess risks and dependencies which also includes trade-offs between different sustainability aspects.
	Project management	Biodiversity is not considered during the projects management.	Biodiversity is considered during the project management if the project has obvious effects on biodiversity.	Has procedures to continuously take biodiversity aspects into account during project management
	Project monitoring	Biodiversity is not always monitored specifically.	The project’s effects on biodiversity are always monitored during the whole project period.	Long term effects on biodiversity (min. 10 year after) are monitored

	Project evaluation	Biodiversity is not always included as a factor in the evaluation process.	Biodiversity is only considered during evaluation if the project has obvious effects on biodiversity.	All projects include biodiversity as a factor in evaluations. Evaluations are performed by external evaluators with biodiversity expertise.
	Frameworks and tools	The institution does not use specific tools or frameworks targeting biodiversity.	Sporadically makes use of own or international biodiversity frameworks for screening, management, and monitoring.	Consistently makes use of own or international biodiversity frameworks for screening, management, and monitoring.
Structure	Responsibility	There is no allocation of responsibilities regarding biodiversity.	There is an informal allocation of responsibilities regarding biodiversity.	There is a clear allocation of responsibilities regarding biodiversity.
Structure	Overview	Only the person responsible knows.	Key employees in the institution are aware of the role distribution.	Everyone in the institution is aware of the role distribution.
Employees	Education	No option for further education in biodiversity.	There are opportunities for further education within biodiversity, and these opportunities are being used in single cases.	Further education on biodiversity is systemized, and funds are allocated for this purpose.
	Competences	No one has specific knowledge on biodiversity.	All relevant employees have basic knowledge of biodiversity financing, a few employees have expert knowledge.	People working with biodiversity have expert knowledge on the topic.
	Internal knowledge sharing	There is no internal knowledge sharing.	Knowledge sharing happens sporadically.	There is structured internal knowledge-sharing from the persons with expert knowledge.
Culture	Awareness	No awareness of biodiversity.	Awareness of biodiversity is centred around certain employees or departments of the company.	Within the institution there is broad awareness of the relevance of biodiversity as a topic.
Culture	Topicality	There is no small talk on either climate or biodiversity.	Small talk and discussions are typically focused on climate issues.	Biodiversity is spoken about as a topic between employees in the institution.
Communication	External communication	No external communication regarding biodiversity.	The institution has some communication regarding biodiversity topics.	The institution clearly communicates their efforts to have a positive impact on biodiversity.
Network	International partnerships addressing the biodiversity crisis	Is not party to any international finance initiatives.	Is party to international finance initiatives that address biodiversity. Follows the development of common international frameworks for biodiversity financing.	Is party to international finance initiatives that address biodiversity. Cooperate with other institutions to develop common international frameworks for biodiversity financing.
	External knowledge sharing	The institution does not engage in knowledge-sharing activities.	The institution is somewhat engaged in knowledge sharing with other similar institutions.	The institution actively participates in knowledge sharing with other similar institutions.
	International agreements	Does not refer to international biodiversity agreements such as the CBD and the Aichi targets.	Refers to international biodiversity agreements such as the CBD and the Aichi targets.	Participates actively in the implementation of international biodiversity agreements such as the CBD and the Aichi targets.