Vem bryr sig om biologisk mångfald? En analys av byggsektorns första CSRD-rapporter med utgångspunkt i biologisk mångfald och ekosystem

Sammanfattning

The loss of biodiversity is one of today's most urgent environmental challenges, while the construction sector is recognized as one of the industries with the greatest impact on ecosystems and biodiversity. At the same time biodiversity has received less attention in corporate sustainability reporting compared to issues such as climate impact and carbon emissions. With the introduction of the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) and the European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS), companies are now required to report sustainability related impacts, risks and opportunities (IRO) in a standardized manner including biodiversity and ecosystems under ESRS E4. The aim of this study is to examine whether construction companies report impacts, risks, opportunities and targets related to biodiversity and ecosystems in their first CSRD reports, and to analyse how reporting varies between companies. The study uses mixed methods approach combining a quantitative content analysis and a qualitative thematic analysis of 17 CSRD reports published in 2025. The results show that most companies identify biodiversity and ecosystems as a material issue. 14 of the 17 companies assess ESRS E4 as material, 13 report biodiversity-related impacts, 8 report risks and 6 describe opportunities. However, only 4 companies disclose quantitative and time bound targets. The analysis also reveals substantial variation in how companies motivate responsibility, present IROs and formulate biodiversity-related targets. The findings suggest that biodiversity reporting is still developing within the construction sector and that companies experience difficulties in translating biodiversity into measurable and operational sustainability management. The study further indicates that reporting practices are shaped not only by regulatory requirements but also by legitimacy-seeking strategies and the interpretative flexibility embedded in CSRD and ESRS E4. The results also indicate that biodiversity reporting primarily functions as tools for transparency and legitimacy, while the extent to which such reporting reflects or supports measurable ecological change remains uncertain.