Our work at BIODIFUL on biodiversity-respectful leadership is closely connected to the wider conversation on becoming nature-positive. This blog takes a closer look at what nature-positive means and how it has been interpreted in the business context.
Nature-positive is a global initiative to turn the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework into action. The initiative aims at halting biodiversity decline by 2030 (based on a 2020 baseline) and restoring biodiversity by 2050. In simple terms, “protect what is left and improve the rest” (Nature Positive Initiative, 2023, p. 2). For businesses, becoming nature-positive means reducing negative biodiversity impacts and increasing positive contributions.
Why “nature-positive” instead of “biodiversity net gain?”
The term nature-positive was chosen over the more technical biodiversity net gain because it is easier to understand and has stronger emotional appeal (Lambertini, 2025; Milner-Gulland, 2022). While the concept focuses primarily on biodiversity, it also encompasses the other elements of nature—air and climate, marine and freshwater systems, as well as land and soil. Biodiversity is emphasized because living organisms depend on the abiotic elements; thus, biodiversity functions as a proxy for the state of nature in general. The “positive” part of the term signals a shift away from harmful, nature-negative practices toward beneficial outcomes.
Alternative views on the role of businesses
Businesses play a critical role in striving for a nature-positive future. Two different views exist on how they can redeem this. The stricter view considers a company nature-positive when all its actions combined produce more benefits than harm for biodiversity (Bull et al., 2020; Milner-Gulland, 2022). This absolute interpretation demands a net positive outcome, a condition that is difficult for most businesses to achieve and almost impossible in many extractive industries like mining or forestry. Therefore, a more permissive, relative view has gained traction. Accordingly, it is sufficient that individual actors reduce their harmful impacts and/or increase positive ones and contribute to the global goal rather than claim being net positive themselves (Baggaley et al., 2023; Balch et al., 2022). Linguistically, the word positive is suitable for both interpretations; being numerically greater than zero (absolute) and contributing toward a desired goal by taking positive action (relative, having a favourable effect). Hence, it would be more precise to express this nuance by using nature-positive or nature-friendly depending on the overall impacts.
Anyhow, the less-demanding approach seems currently more realistic with most companies being nature-positive in relative rather than absolute terms. The lower level of ambition inevitably raises fundamental questions: Is it enough to halt the decline, yet to compensate for damages already done? Can relative improvements safeguard the ecosystem services essential for human well-being and future business? If businesses continue to degrade biodiversity in the future — albeit less than earlier — who will contribute significantly enough to compensate for the residual harms caused by companies?
Transformation is essential
Given the severity of biodiversity decline, transformative, system‑wide changes are needed to bend the downward curve back up again (IPBES, 2024). For businesses this means significantly shifting mindsets, values and goals to allow major strategic and structural changes; the very foundations of business — the business model, manufacturing processes, procurement, value creation, offerings, etc. – must be redefined. Continuing business-as-usual supplemented with minor improvements reflects business adaptation, playing the same game slightly differently whereas true transformation means playing a different game altogether (cf. Zabey 2025). Similarly, the core principles that outline nature-positive biodiversity management in business are based taking a strategic approach, mainstreaming biodiversity, value-chain-wide accountability and addressing the most significant drivers of biodiversity decline instead of conducting small, detached, and one-off actions (Booth et al., 2024; White et al., 2024). Currently, the term nature-positive risks being diluted from an absolute net benefit to include any well-intentioned improvements, regardless of overall impact.
Start small, but aim high
Transformative change has been demanded for years and for a good reason; it is essential to address the current biodiversity decline. However, significant changes take time and seldom happen overnight – be it then on the level of individual people, businesses, or entire societies. Furthermore, every positive action matters. Therefore, businesses should start taking actions, even small ones, immediately. These initial steps need, however, to be scaled up and their scope to be extended to achieve meaningful impacts. If businesses settle with minor improvements without pursuing long-term transformation, their nature-positivity will remain only relative. In such a scenario, deadlines for halting biodiversity loss will keep moving from 2030 to 2035 or beyond.
References
Baggaley, S., Johnston, M., Dimitrijevic, J., Guen, C. Le, Howard, P., Murphy, L., Booth, H., & Starkey, M. (2023). Nature positive for business: Developing a common approach. 1–52.
Booth, H., Milner-Gulland, E. J., McCormick, N., & Starkey, M. (2024). Operationalizing transformative change for business in the context of Nature Positive. In One Earth (Vol. 7, Issue 7, pp. 1235–1249). Cell Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oneear.2024.06.003
Bull, J. W., Milner-Gulland, E. J., Addison, P. F. E., Arlidge, W. N. S., Baker, J., Brooks, T. M., Burgass, M. J., Hinsley, A., Maron, M., Robinson, J. G., Sekhran, N., Sinclair, S. P., Stuart, S. N., zu Ermgassen, S. O. S. E., & Watson, J. E. M. (2020). Net positive outcomes for nature. Nature Ecology and Evolution, 4(1), 4–7. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-019-1022-z
Balch, O., Zabey, E., & Ofosuhene-Wise, M. (2022). How business and finance can contribute to a nature positive future now.
Lambertini, M. (2025). The genesis of Nature Positive. In M. Lambertini, J. W. Bull, L. Little Bear, H. Locke, E. Zabey, D. Maseke, & C. M. Rodriguez (Eds.), Becoming Nature Positive – Transitioning to a safe and just future (pp. 3–11). Routledge.
Locke, H., Rockström, J., Bakker, P., Bapna, M., Gough, M., Hilty, J., Lambertini, M., Morris, J., Rodriguez, C. M., Samper, C., Sanjayan, M., & Zurita, P. (2021). A Nature-Positive World: The Global Goal for Nature.
Milner-Gulland, E. J. (2022). Don’t dilute the term Nature Positive. Nature Ecology and Evolution, 6(9), 1243–1244. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-022-01845-5
Nature Positive Initiative. (2023). The Definition of Nature Positive. https://www.naturepositive.org
Zabey, E. (2025). The role of business in a Nature-Positive economy. In M. Lambertini, J. W. Bull, L. Little Bear, H. Locke, E. Zabey, D. Maseke, & C. M. Rodriguez (Eds.), Becoming Nature Positive – Transitioning to a safe and just future (pp. 189–222). Routledge.
White, T. B., Bromwich, T., Bang, A., Bennun, L., Bull, J., Clark, M., Milner-Gulland, E. J., Prescott, G. W., Starkey, M., zu Ermgassen, S. O. S. E., & Booth, H. (2024). The “nature-positive” journey for business: A conceptual research agenda to guide contributions to societal biodiversity goals. One Earth, 7(8), 1373–1386. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oneear.2024.07.003
