Assessing Nature and Climate Risk Across a Global Infrastructure Portfolio:

In partnership with Foresight Group

Funded by UK Space Agency

Sector-level screening can tell you which industries are most likely to have significant dependencies on nature or exposure to climate hazards. It cannot tell you which specific assets within a portfolio are most at risk, or why, based on their physical location.

To find out, Frontierra partnered with Foresight Group, a global investment management firm, to conduct an integrated nature and climate risk assessment across approximately 500 infrastructure assets spanning multiple geographies and sectors. The assessment demonstrated that location-specific analysis at portfolio scale is not only achievable, it is what responsible investment management increasingly demands

Find out how Frontierra's nature risk and opportunity assessment works.

The Challenge: Moving Beyond Sector Screening

Industry screening flags sectors most likely to have either impacts, or dependencies, on nature. But screening criteria are not specific to the locations of assets within a portfolio, which means risks and opportunities are routinely missed or underestimated. With an estimated 60% of global biodiversity loss attributed to development of infrastructure and land use change, that is a critical gap. Used alone, sector-level approaches also carry a genuine risk of greenwashing through sustainability claims that are not grounded in location-specific evidence.

Foresight sought to address this directly, working with Frontierra to assess nature and climate-related risks across the infrastructure portfolio concurrently, within a single framework, using the same asset location data for both workstreams.

The Approach: Integrated Nature and Climate Assessment

Foresight's portfolio came with a comprehensive, up-to-date geospatial database. Precise asset boundaries and locations meant the initial data collection phase was significantly streamlined, providing an accurate basis for analysis from the outset. This is not always the case, and the availability of robust location data is itself a meaningful indicator of portfolio management maturity.

The assessment was structured around two parallel workstreams, both delivered through Frontierra's Climate and Nature Intelligence Platform.

Nature-related risks and opportunities

For the nature assessment, Frontierra identified and collated the most current open-source datasets relevant to each asset location, aligned with the sensitive and priority location definitions within the TNFD framework, including:

• Areas of importance for biodiversity, including biodiversity hotspots and high ecosystem integrity

• Areas experiencing rapid decline in ecosystem integrity, such as deforestation fronts

• Areas of high physical water risk

• Areas important for ecosystem service provision, including Indigenous areas

Location is not just a data input, but is instead the determinant of risk. The same infrastructure activity can have fundamentally different impacts depending on where it sits in the landscape. A wind farm adjacent to a protected area raises very different concerns to one in a previously disturbed, low-biodiversity setting.

To make this actionable at portfolio scale, Frontierra applied two proprietary classification scores. The ENRI score (Exposure to Nature-Related Issues) rates each asset from Low to Very High based on intersecting nature-sensitive datasets, weighted against Foresight's existing Double Materiality Assessment. The ONPP score (Opportunity for Nature-Positive Practices) identifies where investment in protection, restoration, or habitat improvement can deliver measurable environmental benefit. Both scores can be aggregated at portfolio, geography, or sector level.

Physical climate hazards

Concurrently, Frontierra assessed 35 physical climate hazards across the portfolio using the EU Taxonomy's classification framework, aligning the assessment with ISSB requirements for climate scenario analysis. Hazards were modelled across SSP1-2.6, SSP2-4.5, and SSP5-8.5 pathways to the end of the 21st century. Where direct scenario data was not available, Frontierra applied a logic-based approach combining observational data with proximity analysis. Hazards with no direct pathway to impact a given asset type were excluded.

Hazard is the magnitude of change projected at a location, meanwhile risk is determined by how that hazard interacts with the specific thresholds of the asset and its infrastructure. The platform identifies and prioritises significant hazards so that asset managers, technical advisors and service providers can determine the level of risk and the appropriate response.

What the Assessment Delivered

Across nature and climate, the platform delivered location-specific intelligence that sector-level screening could not have produced. The ENRI and ONPP scores gave Foresight a triage-ready view of which assets warrant attention and where nature-positive investment can deliver the most impact. The climate hazard ratings identified assets most exposed to physical risks under different warming scenarios, providing a credible evidence base for risk management and subsequent disclosure.

Critically, nature and climate were assessed together. The platform identified, for example, assets located in high water stress regions where climate change is projected to exacerbate conditions already affecting surrounding ecosystems. This kind of integrated insight supports more informed decision-making than siloed assessments allow.

For each material risk identified, the platform generated clear, actionable recommendations, so Foresight knows not only which assets require attention but what steps to take next. For organisations with complex global supply chains, Frontierra's value chain mapping service extends this analysis upstream, identifying where climate and nature risks are concentrated across sourcing regions and supplier networks.

Key Lessons

Five conclusions from this project are relevant to any organisation planning a similar assessment.

• The importance of location based data. Sector screening cannot meet the granularity demanded by frameworks such as TNFD, ISSB, or the EU Taxonomy. Asset-level location data is foundational.

• Nature and climate should be assessed together. The risks interact, and assessing them concurrently produces a more complete picture of environmental exposure.

• Scalable tools are needed for ongoing management. Pre-investment due diligence, ongoing monitoring, and regulatory reporting all require tools that can flex to the task.

• Stakeholder engagement improves outcomes. Including investment managers, ESG specialists, legal advisors, and technical experts leads to more robust and actionable findings.

• New assessments should integrate with existing systems. Nature and climate insights do not require significant resource expansion when delivered in formats that work with existing workflows.

Frontierra continues to evolve the platform as nature and climate data, methodologies, and regulatory requirements advance.