Sustainable Insurance Forum

Assessing Insurance Regulators' Integration of Nature-Related Risks and Concepts ↓

The intersection of nature and insurance presents a significant opportunity to drive sustainability and resilience. The insurance sector plays a crucial role in funding ecosystem restoration, enhancing community resilience, and supporting biodiversity investments. By protecting assets, reducing liabilities, and attracting capital from financial markets, insurance can help mitigate environmental risks while fostering long-term sustainability. This connection is essential for reducing financial risks associated with nature loss and ensuring a more resilient future.

Survey on Nature-related risks

In order to understand the baseline awareness, knowledge, and capacity of insurance regulators and supervisors regarding nature-related risks, the Sustainable Insurance Forum (SIF) has launched a survey in collaboration with UNDP Biodiversity Finance and the Taskforce on Nature-related Financial Disclosures (TNFD) Secretariat. Building on insights from the NGFS/FSB survey on nature-related financial risks, this initiative seeks to assess how supervisors perceive and integrate nature-related risks into regulatory frameworks, identify existing gaps, and determine capacity-building needs. The findings will help shape targeted training programs, inform policy recommendations, and support the development of regulatory approaches that enhance the insurance sector’s resilience to nature and biodiversity-related financial risks.

Results

Regulators' and supervisors' self-assessed understanding of Nature-related risks

Regulators’ and supervisors’ perception of insurance firms’ understanding of Nature-related risks under their jurisdiction

Incorporation of Nature & Biodiversity

63%

63% of respondents have broadly incorporated nature-related risk into internal work programmes.

26%

Only a small minority define nature-related risks using NGFS, IPBES and EU Taxonomy definitions.

Definition of Nature-risks

Assessment of Nature as a relevant financial risk

59% of participants have not yet undertaken any work to assess whether nature-related risks pose a relevant financial risk, nor do they have plans to do so in the future.

 

The primary reasons cited for this include:

 Metrics For tracking Nature-related risks
Only 15% of participants have metrics to monitor nature-related risks, using tools like Mean Species Abundance, ENCORE and the Global Biodiversity Score.
0 %
 Climate-Nature financial risk nexus
33% of participants have examined the interaction between climate-related and nature-related financial risks.
0 %
 Issuance of Nature-related risk guidance
26% of respondents have issued or are planning to issue guidance on identifying, assessing, managing or disclosing nature-related risks.
0 %
Stress testing and scenario analysis on Nature impact
19% of participants have conducted or are planning to conduct stress testing or scenario analysis on nature-related impacts
0 %

Key challenges in advancing Nature-related work

Challenges most cited by respondents

1

Lack of available nature-related data and information

2

Lack of understanding on nature-related tools and methods to use to inform work

3

Lack of awareness and understanding of nature-related risks

4

Lack of internal technical capacity and skills on nature

5

Nature-related risks are given lower priority compared to climate risks or other emerging risks

6

Lack of external examples of regulatory/supervisory guidance or requirements on nature-related risks

7

Challenges in balancing the management of nature-related risks
with other priorities

8

Lack of mandate/buy-in from Senior Management

9

Other

Only five regulators or supervisors had staff dedicated to Nature work

Percentage of regulators undertaking capacity building activities

This is done through collaboration with entities such as TNFD or WWF. Others have cited engagements through working groups via the NAIC, EIOPA or the NGFS.

0 %

Among these, one has a full-time, dedicated hire, while the others have nature or biodiversity responsibilities formally incorporated into their portfolios that also include other duties, such as climate-related tasks. The remaining organisation s address nature-related issues on an ad hoc basis or delegate them to sustainability or climate change units.

Percentage of regulators perceived understanding and familiarity with global frameworks related to Nature

TNFD LEAP approach

NGFS conceptual framework for Nature-related financial risks

Key recommendations for enhancing TNFD engagement and adoption

Strengthen collaboration with BCBS, IAIS and NGFS.

Provide industry-specific guidance with practical examples.

Offer training sessions and adapt recommendations for local contexts.

Use clear communication tools like infographics and case studies.

Collaborate with regulators to align with existing frameworks.

Acknowledgements

Photos courtesy of UNDP  •  Special thanks to the SIF members for their valuable participation in the survey  •  For inquiries, please contact the SIF Secretariat at sif.secretariat@undp.org