A Conceptual Framework for Assessing Comparability Between Corporate Biodiversity Impact Accounting Tools
提出了一个概念框架，通过输入视角（指标和方法相似性）和输出视角（结果相似性）来评估企业生物多样性影响核算工具的可比性，并分析了20种常用工具，发现5种可比性强、2种中等、3种弱，为投资者和工具开发者提供了参考。
ABSTRACT Integrating corporate biodiversity impacts into investment decisions can direct investments toward nature‐positive firms, creating a market signal. The strength of this signal is a function of how closely investments align. This alignment depends on the comparability (the degree of similarity and difference) of tools used to account for biodiversity impacts. Yet, whether and why such tools are comparable remains poorly understood. Here, we develop a framework to discern and explain comparability by introducing two analytical perspectives: an input‐based view (similarity in metrics and methods) and an output‐based view (similarity in results). Expanding on the input‐based view, we review 20 widely used tools, enabling 11 input‐comparability assessments: five showed strong comparability, two moderate, and three low, with one unable to assess because of limited information. We then demonstrate how evidence from both perspectives can be integrated, revealing opportunities for future research, and discuss the implications of comparability for users and tool quality.