Operational sites with developed and actively executing nature action plans

Method disclosures required

Source-edition basis: Recommendations of the Taskforce on Nature-related Financial Disclosures, September 2023.

• Define the operational-site population and organizational boundary used as the denominator.
• Define the criteria for a nature action plan to be considered developed.
• Define the criteria and evidence used to determine that a plan is actively being executed.
• Disclose the reporting date or period for plan-status assessment.
• Disaggregate or explain aggregation across geographies, priority locations, ecosystems or biomes, and business activities where material.

Record-specific limitations

• This is an optional additional TNFD metric in Annex 2, not an Annex 1 core global metric.
• The metric measures coverage of developed and actively executed plans, not plan quality, effectiveness, ecological outcome, or progress toward a nature target.
• Comparable reporting depends on clear definitions of an operational site, a nature action plan, and active execution.
• Locations with materially different natural characteristics should not be obscured through undifferentiated aggregation.

Interpret this metric with the stated reporting boundary, period convention, value shape, and unit. Results prepared with different boundaries or conventions may not be directly comparable.

Measurement evidence supports the core record-specific claims described above. Corroborative evidence can support limitations, while compatibility and status sources provide their separately labelled context. None of these cards by itself determines an organisation's legal applicability, filing readiness, assurance status, or compliance conclusion.