ESRS E4 Practical guide to implementing the CSRD

The ESRS E4 standard of the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) focuses specifically on biodiversity and ecosystems and presents companies with the challenge of systematically recording their dependencies on ecosystems and their risks and opportunities.

In cooperation with numerous partners, including NABU, Deloitte, PwC and many more, the Michael Otto Environmental Foundation has developed a comprehensive practical guide that supports companies in meeting these CSRD requirements and at the same time integrating nature as a core value in strategic corporate management. This blog article highlights the ESRS E4 practical guide and clearly presents the key messages and pragmatic steps for implementing the CSRD.

Why nature and biodiversity are important for companies

The importance of nature and biodiversity for economic activities is often underestimated. Numerous companies are directly or indirectly dependent on ecosystem services – be it through access to clean water resources, fertile soils or natural climate and pollutant management. The loss of biodiversity and the associated ecological changes pose considerable risks not only to the environment, but also to companies.

For example, for physical risks

Natural disasters and resource shortages can disrupt production processes and lead to high costs.
Damage to soil fertility: Monocultures, erosion and chemical pollution cause the soil to lose its fertility, which threatens the agricultural and food industries in particular and leads to higher costs for fertilizers and alternative cultivation methods.
Pests and diseases: The destruction of natural habitats can promote the spread of invasive species and pests, affect crop yields and forest ecosystems and thus increase production costs in agriculture or forestry and the industries that depend on them.
Increase in extreme weather events: The loss of forests and wetlands weakens natural climate buffers and increases the frequency and intensity of floods, droughts and storms, disrupting infrastructure and supply chains.

At the same time, investors and consumers are increasingly demanding transparent and sustainable practices, forcing companies to strategically address their responsibility for nature and the environment.

Key messages of the ESRS E4 Practical Guide

The (European Sustainability Reporting Standard) ESRS E4 Practical Guide from the Michael Otto Environmental Foundation sets clear priorities for companies on how they can integrate ecosystems and biodiversity as strategic values in their sustainability reporting. These key messages help companies not only to meet the requirements of CSRD, but also to derive long-term benefits from them:

Reporting as a strategic opportunity: The guide emphasizes that reporting on biodiversity and ecosystems is more than just a compliance exercise. It can help companies to strengthen their resilience and identify new opportunities. By transparently disclosing nature-related risks and dependencies, companies can increase the trust of their stakeholders and position themselves as pioneers in the field of sustainable business.
Early involvement of relevant stakeholders: The effective implementation of nature-based reporting and double materiality analysis requires the involvement of stakeholders – both within the company and externally. The guidelines recommend involving environmental and sustainability teams, risk management and external experts in the process at an early stage to ensure a holistic perspective and a comprehensive understanding of nature-related dependencies.
Materiality analysis as the basis for well-founded decisions: The guide places great emphasis on a precise materiality analysis that is applied not only to the company’s own sites, but also to the entire value chain. Such an analysis helps companies to identify the most significant nature-related risks and opportunities and to take targeted measures where they have the greatest impact. The ESRS E4 Practical Guide emphasizes that this analysis should be objective and based on scientifically sound data.
Use of digital tools for site assessment: In order to meet the complex requirements of materiality analysis, the guidelines recommend the use of specialized tools. Tools such as the WWF Risk Filter or ENCORE offer data-based insights into the local conditions of sites and can help to assess nature-related risks more efficiently. The use of such tools enables companies to conduct a well-founded and resource-efficient site analysis and facilitates continuous adaptation to future requirements.
Information on these and other helpful tools for site assessment can also be found in our materiality analysis Excel template and we will show you how to implement the materiality analysis in our practice-oriented workshop.

These key messages are intended to encourage companies to view nature-based reporting not just as compliance with legal requirements, but as a strategic opportunity to secure the long-term value creation of their business and drive forward their sustainable development.

Pragmatic steps for the materiality analysis according to the ESRS E4 Practical Guide

The Environmental Foundation Michael Otto ‘s guidelines offer clear instructions for implementing the materiality analysis within the framework of ESRS E4. These pragmatic steps enable companies to carry out a structured and well-founded analysis of their dependencies and impacts on nature.

PS: We have also written a dedicated blog article with details on how to perform the double materiality analysis.

1) Preparation and definition of the scope

Before companies start the materiality analysis, they should define the scope of the material nature-related topics that are relevant to their business for example by conducting a comparison with peers. This includes relevant value chains of the company to identify the most significant nature factors.

With the help of screening tools and desk research, companies can identify industry- and region-specific natural features, such as mean species abundance (MSA), water scarcity or deforestation risks that are potentially relevant to their business.

2) Conducting the materiality analysis at location level

Companies should not only analyze their own sites, but also critical sites in the value chain. The ESRS E4 practical guide recommends using standardized metrics such as the ecological status of local biodiversity, the availability of ecosystem services and the number of protected species.

Tools for site evaluation with regard to the ESRS E4

The use of digital tools enables an efficient and data-based assessment of impacts, risks and opportunities (IROs) without the need for extensive on-site investigations. Tool examples:

ENCORE (Exploring Natural Capital Opportunities, Risks, and Exposure): Helps companies to analyze nature-related risks and dependencies. It shows how economic activities and production processes depend on and impact nature.
Kuyua: Offers an integrated AI solution for recording and evaluating the environmental status and dependencies at its own sites and in the supply chain. It identifies nature-related risks and proposes measures to promote a nature-positive corporate profile.
IBAT (Integrated Biodiversity Assessment Tool): Provides access to key biodiversity information and identifies areas of high biodiversity using global databases such as the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species.
WWF Risk Filter: This online tool helps companies to understand the risks associated with the destruction of nature and the extinction of species at the relevant locations. It identifies risk hotspots and prioritizes them for targeted nature reporting and risk mitigation through location-based analysis.
Copernicus: The EU’s Copernicus program provides comprehensive earth observation data that companies can use for environmental monitoring and risk assessment. With the help of satellite data, natural changes and environmental conditions, such as deforestation rates or soil erosion, can be analyzed in detail.
IUCN (International Union for Conservation of Nature): The IUCN provides information on biodiversity and lists endangered species in the Red List. Companies can use this data to identify locations near threatened ecosystems and species and to better manage nature-related risks.
Flood check (The insurers): The flood check of the German insurance industry enables a risk assessment of locations in Germany with regard to flood hazards.
Water Risk Atlas: The Water Risk Atlas of the World Resources Institute (WRI) provides comprehensive data on global water scarcity and risks. Companies can use the tool to identify and assess water-related risks in specific regions, especially if they operate water-intensive production processes.

Some of the tools mentioned can be used free of charge. Such ESG software solutions provide a basis for making informed decisions and managing nature-related risks on a site-specific basis.

Top tip

Before you carry out the location analysis yourself, we recommend that companies approach their insurance or reinsurance companies. They usually have complex models for assessing the various physical risks in order to calculate the policy. Ask your contacts whether you can obtain this analysis. Some insurers make this data available to their customers.

3) Stakeholder engagement and validation of results

An essential step is to consult internal and external stakeholders to review and complement the results of the materiality analysis. Stakeholders such as environmental and sustainability teams, local communities and scientific experts can provide valuable insights that contribute to a deeper and more objective assessment to determine whether the IROs, and therefore the topics, are material.

The consultation enables companies to identify potential risks and opportunities at an early stage and to develop a sustainable strategy based on comprehensive transparency and cooperation.

4) Integration of the analysis into reporting and risk management

The results of the materiality analysis can be compared with other benchmarks and should be actively integrated into the company’s risk management. This can include adapting supply chains, production processes and locations in order to minimize nature-related risks and make better use of opportunities.

As part of the CSRD reporting obligations, it is important to regularly update the findings and make them transparent in the reporting. An important step after implementing the double materiality check is the mapping of topics to the ESRS data points. The disclosure of nature-related data and measures strengthens the trust of stakeholders and positions the company as a responsible market player.

By taking these steps, companies can not only meet the regulatory requirements of ESRS E4, but also strengthen their resilience to nature-related risks. The guide shows how a well-founded materiality analysis becomes the basis for a long-term sustainable and nature-conscious corporate strategy.

Pilot projects: Experiences from the ESRS E4 Practical Guide

To facilitate the practical implementation of nature-based materiality analysis in accordance with ESRS E4, the Environmental Foundation Michael Otto’s guidelines describe various pilot projects and their results. These projects show how companies can use digital tools to systematically assess nature-related risks and dependencies and integrate them into their corporate strategy. Here are some key findings from the pilot projects:

Piloting tools for site assessments
In the pilot projects, tools such as the WWF Risk Filter and ENCORE were used to identify and assess the nature-related risks at the respective company sites. These tools helped companies to locate potential risk hotspots, such as water scarce regions or areas with high biodiversity, and prioritize their risks accordingly. Companies recognized that these digital tools provide a valuable basis for nature-based reporting by providing comprehensive data on specific site conditions.
Use of the IBAT to record biodiversity risks
Several companies used the Integrated Biodiversity Assessment Tool (IBAT) to identify protected areas and areas with threatened biodiversity in their surroundings. The tool enabled the project participants to specifically integrate biodiversity risks into their site assessments and develop appropriate measures to minimize risks. The IBAT was found to be particularly indispensable at production sites located near ecologically sensitive areas.
Efficient water risk assessment with the Aqueduct Water Risk Atlas
Companies operating in water-intensive industries used the World Resources Institute’s Aqueduct Water Risk Atlas to analyze water-related risks such as water scarcity or flooding risks. This enabled them to identify regions with an increased water risk at an early stage and develop preventive measures to avoid interruptions to production.
Findings on practical applicability
The pilot projects showed that the combination of different CSR tools enables a more comprehensive and precise materiality analysis. Companies have found that the tools help them to capture complex location data and evaluate it more efficiently, significantly reducing the resources required for analysis. At the same time, however, challenges also became clear: using the tools requires a certain level of data and methodological expertise, particularly for interpreting the results. Some companies therefore decided to work closely with external experts.

Advantages and challenges of using tools to assess the ESRS E4 standard

Advantages

The pilot projects showed that the combination of different CSR tools enables a more comprehensive and precise materiality analysis.
Companies have found that the tools help them to capture complex location data and evaluate it more efficiently, significantly reducing the resources required for analysis.

Challenges

At the same time, however, challenges also became clear:

Using the tools requires a certain level of data and methodological expertise, particularly for interpreting the results. Some companies therefore decided to work closely with external CSRD experts.
Many of the tools mentioned can be used free of charge, at least to a certain extent. However, a few of the software solutions are also subject to a charge.
There is no one perfect tool that fully supports companies in identifying and assessing the impacts, risks and opportunities with regard to the ESRS E4 standard. Each tool has its strengths and weaknesses. The Materiality Master software could be interesting as a general support for the entire materiality analysis process.

Summary of the ESRS E4 Practical Guide

The Environmental Foundation Michael Otto’s guidelines offer companies practical support for implementing nature-related reporting as part of the ESRS E4 standard. It shows that a comprehensive materiality analysis on nature and biodiversity is not only a regulatory requirement, but also brings strategic advantages. By specifically analyzing their dependencies and risks, companies can both strengthen their sustainability strategy and gain the trust of their stakeholders.