Best nature-related disclosures judged in CSRD Awards 2025 

The results are in for the biodiversity category of the awards, with three companies shortlisted

Ahold Delhaize and Fortum have been declared joint winners in the Biodiversity category of Real Economy Progress’s CSRD Awards 2025.  

Bavarian Nordic’s sustainability statement was also recognised in the category, which was judged by a panel of experts comprising:  

• Thomas Viegas, group nature lead at Aviva and member of the Office for Environmental Protection’s College of Experts and the A4S Nature Advisory Group. Thomas spent many years working for the Bank of England & HM Treasury.
• Joy Williams, who leads nature-related opportunities for the Taskforce on Nature-related Financial Disclosures (TNFD). Before that, she was the executive director for financial institution transition planning at the Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero; and
• Johan Floren, the chief ESG and communications officer at $90bn Swedish pension fund AP7. Johan is also a member of the TNFD, and he’s former chair of Sweden’s sustainable investment forum.

As well as possessing considerable expertise on biodiversity-related corporate performance and transparency, the judges represent the financial, civil society and standard-setting audiences CSRD reporting is designed to inform.   

Their comments have been anonymised, because some of the judges are not permitted to opine publicly on individual companies.   

Ahold Delhaize

Ahold Delhaize’s sustainability statement was described as “very good and highly accessible” when it came to its nature-related disclosures.  

“It explained its approach along with the complex elements very clearly and concisely, providing the right balance of information and direction,” said one judge. 

Another praised the Dutch-Belgian food retailer for having “systemically inventoried, analysed and presented” its impacts, risks and opportunities “in a concise and comprehensive manner”. 

He noted that more work could be done to link its analysis with its ultimate sustainability objectives, through strategies and action plans. 

“Given the scale and complexity of the company, this is no small task, but not impossible with a thorough materiality analysis.” 

A third judge said Ahold Delhaize’s report “gives enough data to really dive into their biodiversity actions,” adding that its credibility was bolstered by the inclusion of “detailed methodologies and multiple targets”. 

Fortum 

Fortum’s biodiversity information was “generally ambitious, straight-forward and transparent, and makes a no-nonsense impression” according to one judge. 

The Nordic energy company was praised for its “very good transparency”, including being honest about its nature-related risks and the things it doesn’t know yet; and for clearly identifying its four significant negative impacts. 

“Detailed data, thorough analysis, ambitious goals and concrete action plans, along with an openness about methodological limitations make their reporting stand out as an example for others to follow,” said one judge.  

“Targets and action plans are presented in a coherent and concise manner, which adds to its credibility”. 

Another said it was “good on all levels, to some degree” but felt biodiversity “took a real back seat” to climate. 

“That’s a missed opportunity considering Fortum’s hydro and renewables segments,” they continued, although the company was commended for recognising the links between the two issues. 

Bavarian Nordic

One judge said Bavarian Nordic had “made a convincing effort to identify dependencies and impacts, as well as risks and opportunities in its core business” through its biodiversity disclosures. 

The Danish biotechnology company was praised, for example, for clearly idenfying its reliance on horseshoe crabs to develop medicine as a top issue.

But not all agreed, with another saying it was “difficult to fully understand what the dependencies and impacts (and therefore the risks) of their business was on biodiversity”. 

One judge noted with concern that the firm had explained it hadn’t implemented anything to mitigate its impacts on biodiversity, or incorporated local knowledge. 

“Transparent, but still…”

Biodiversity-related scenario analysis, clearer discussion about time horizons, and more transparency around value chains would all have been valued, according to the judges. 

“But the presentation is clear, easy to understand and to-the-point,” said one. “This is an excellent example of the kind of process and results that all companies should be able to do.”  

Real Economy Progress would like to congratulate all three companies for being shortlisted, and thank them for providing best practice examples for other firms around the world to follow.  

We would also like to extend our heartfelt gratitude to our judges for lending their expertise to this process, and truly engaging with the content and purpose of these reports.   

And finally, thanks to all the regulators, consultants, lawyers, journalists, NGOs and companies who submitted nominations to this year’s CSRD Awards.  

Important notes  

The judges were chosen as topic experts, and their decisions do not represent the views of their employers.  

The awards are a celebration of good disclosure, not sustainability performance, and the outcome should not be seen as an endorsement of any company – either by the judges, their organisations, or Real Economy Progress. 

The category shortlists were compiled by Real Economy Progress journalists from public nominations. The judges were then asked to decide, individually, which ones were most effective in helping them understand the relevant risks, impacts and opportunities of the business.