UNEP panel maps circularity’s biodiversity and job stakes

Businesses and the systems that provide food, energy, transport and housing drive more than 95% of biodiversity loss, according to the International Resource Panel, which the UN Environment Programme established to examine sustainability and natural resource use. Businesses and those systems also account for up to 60% of climate emissions and nearly 40% of environmental health impacts from particulate matter.

Biodiversity is declining faster than at any other time in human history as resource extraction has increased dramatically in recent decades. About half of Earth’s forests have disappeared over the past 50 years. Recorded populations of mammals, birds, fish, amphibians and reptiles have fallen by more than two-thirds.

Nature’s decline carries an operating risk as well as an environmental cost. An estimated 1.2 billion jobs depend on ecosystem management and sustainability, while agriculture needs functioning pollination and fertile soils to sustain food systems.

What does circularity change for business risk?

The IRP’s new paper, Taking Action for Nature: the Role of Business and the Circular Economy, argues that resource efficiency can reduce environmental pressures while improving resilience, profitability and long-term sustainability. It contrasts circular systems with the “take, make, use, dispose” model, which relies on virgin inputs and discards value after use.

For businesses, the immediate risks include supply-chain disruption, reduced raw-material availability and tighter sustainability regulation. Lower virgin-material demand, greater resource recovery and less waste can mitigate those exposures, open new revenue streams, strengthen corporate reputation and create jobs.

A 2025 report from the International Labour Organization, World Bank Group and Circle Economy estimated that 121–142 million people already work in the circular economy, more than 5% of global employment. The figure establishes an existing market base rather than a future opportunity created by policy alone.

Which material priorities does the IRP set?

The IRP organizes its recommendations around six interventions that move responsibility upstream, before material reaches a disposal site.

• Reduce demand for virgin materials. Businesses can map supply chains, innovate to lower raw-material requirements and rethink systems built around material consumption. The paper also calls for lower-impact substitutes, more durable product design and stronger systems to recover, reuse and recycle materials already in the economy.
• Plan land use around biodiversity. The panel urges businesses to work with governments, communities and civil society on integrated land-use planning that limits conflict over land rights and improves environmental outcomes. Agricultural expansion caused almost 90% of global deforestation between 2000 and 2018.
• Eliminate waste and pollution. Packaging redesign and better collection can keep plastic from leaking into nature, while businesses can avoid chemicals that harm human health and ecosystem integrity. Cutting food loss and reducing nutrient pollution, including excess nitrogen and phosphorus, also supports biodiversity.

How should biological resources remain within ecological limits?

The fourth recommendation keeps the bioeconomy within ecological limits. Using renewable natural resources to produce food, energy and industrial goods can support ecosystem regeneration, but the source material itself must remain within ecological capacity.

The IRP says this requires more than simply substituting biological for non-biological materials. Businesses must reduce avoidable demand, use biomass at its highest value for as long as possible, protect the ecosystems that produce it, promote regenerative agriculture and maintain soil health.

Government action forms the fifth recommendation because current incentives favor linear resource use. Public subsidies, procurement rules, financial risk models and tax systems can reinforce that model, while targeted regulation can shift them. The panel calls for more investment in circularity infrastructure, including recycling, and public procurement that creates demand for circular materials and services.

What will regulators and financiers require next?

The sixth recommendation makes measurement a prerequisite for credible action. Businesses need to track where materials originate, how ecosystems are affected and which interventions actually reduce resource demand. Better data can improve access to finance and give investors a clearer view of exposure and credibility.

What does this change for businesses? It shifts performance measurement from end-of-pipe waste to material demand, land use and ecosystem effects across the value chain. Companies also need routes into land-use planning, supplier redesign, recovery infrastructure and public procurement rather than relying on voluntary recycling pledges alone.

The decisive milestone is regulatory: whether governments redirect subsidies, tax treatment, risk models and procurement toward circular materials and recovery infrastructure. The paper sets no implementation deadline, so those decisions will determine whether circular business models materially reduce resource extraction and ecosystem pressure.