ENCORE is a collaboration between Global Canopy, the UNEP Finance Initiative and the UN Environment Programme World Conservation Monitoring Centre (UNEP-WCMC). It launched in 2018 to help financial institutions and companies understand how their activities rely on nature. The tool’s functionality was extended in 2019 to additionally enable them to assess their impacts on nature. In 2024, ENCORE tool was updated again based on the research conducted under the SUSTAIN project. More information about this update can be found here.
Underpinning the ENCORE tool is the ENCORE knowledge base. This contains two ‘pathways’, one focused on dependencies and the other on impacts, which are interconnected through the ecosystem components. This allows users to explore how their impacts might be affecting their dependencies and vice versa. Both pathways were reviewed and improved during the 2024 update.
Dependency pathway
Economic activities’ dependencies on ecosystem services Literature reviews were carried out for each ecosystem service and economic activity combination using scientific journals, peer-reviewed papers, key document searches, and grey literature, with standardized search terms, and targeted website searches, including leading companies in the sector and industry initiatives. The identified dependency links were reviewed by industry experts representing different sectors of the economy. This resulted in a comprehensive assessment of which of the 25 ecosystem services each of the 271 economic activities depend upon for their production.
For each identified dependency link between an economic activity and an ecosystem service, a materiality rating was assigned. Where no link was found, the combination of the economic activity and ecosystem service was marked as either N/A (Not Applicable) or in cases of insufficient data as ND (No Data).
Ecosystem components underpinning the ecosystem services
After linking economic sectors to the ecosystem services they depend on, it is important to understand how these services are supported by different ecosystem types and components. Desk reviews of latest scientific and grey literature were used to update and refine the links between ecosystem services and ecosystem components (previously referred to as natural capital assets).
The links between ecosystem services and components are now differentiated by ecosystem types aligned with the IUCN Global Ecosystem Typology (GET) 2.0. Assessments of the relevance of different ecosystem components in the provision of ecosystem services depending on the ecosystem type have been added, with importance ratings of 1(relevant) or 0 (not relevant). This new information provides a useful structure. Future development of ENCORE could help refine the importance ratings.
A framework of Red-Amber-Green criteria was used to assess the importance of ecosystem components to ecosystem services. For more information, see the drop down below.
Criteria on the importance of ecosystem components to ecosystem service provision
| Criterion | Definition | RED | AMBER | GREEN |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nature | Nature of the relationship between the ecosystem components and service provision | Non-linear | Linear | |
| Sensitivity | Sensitivity of the ecosystem service to a change in the state of the ecosystem component | High sensitivity | Medium sensitivity | Low sensitivity |
| Reversibility | Possibility for the impact of a change in an ecosystem component on ecosystem service provision to be reversed | Not reversible in a human lifetime | Reversible impact with long-term (>1 year), active restoration | Natural, short-term (<1 year), reversible impact |
| Substitutability | Degree of dependence of the ecosystem service on the ecosystem component | Only asset able to provide the service OR highly specific asset | One of only a small number of assets able to provide the service OR a supporting asset | One of a large number of assets able to provide the service |
| Uncertainty | Degree of uncertainty in the relationship between the ecosystem component and service provision | High uncertainty | Medium uncertainty | Low uncertainty |
Impact pathway
Pressures exerted by economic activities
Similar to the above approach for dependencies, literature reviews were carried out for each pressure and economic activity combination. This included a review of scientific journals, peer-reviewed papers, key document searches, and grey literature, with standardised search terms, and targeted website searches, including leading companies in the sector and industry initiatives. The identified pressure links were reviewed by industry experts representing different sectors of the economy. The result was a comprehensive assessment of what pressures (referred to by some initiatives as “impact drivers”) are exerted by each of the 271 economic activities.
For each identified link between an economic activity and pressure, a materiality rating was assigned. Where no link was found, the combination of the economic activity and pressure was marked as either N/A (Not Applicable) or in cases of insufficient data as ND (No Data).
From pressures to impacts (changes in ecosystems and their components)
ENCORE knowledge base links pressures with different mechanisms of change in state that the pressures may exacerbate. The mechanisms of change in state are then linked to ecosystem components. Descriptive links between pressures and ecosystem components, via mechanisms of change, were developed based on a desk review of the latest scientific literature.
More information about the methodology can be found in the Explanatory Note, which is part of the supplementary documents available for download with the updated ENCORE knowledge base.