Q: “Everyone’s talking about Omnibus I, CSRD and CSDDD. What is happening?”

A: “The European Parliament agreed its position on the Omnibus I package. It wants to raise the CSRD (Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive) thresholds so that only very large companies report: more than 1,750 employees and more than 450 million euros in turnover. For the CSDDD (Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive), only companies with more than 5,000 employees and 1.5 billion euros in turnover would be in scope.

But this is not final. Parliament, Council and Commission now go into trilogue negotiations. Only once they agree and adopt a compromise text companies will really know where they stand.”

Q: “So is it still worth investing in climate and nature risk data if rules are in flux?”

A: “That depends on each institution’s strategy, risk profile and stakeholder expectations.
But wherever climate and nature risks are financially relevant – for example in real estate, infrastructure or supply-chain-heavy sectors – robust, location-based information remains essential for decision-making.

Having consistent data on hazards such as heat, flood, storm, wildfire, water stress or soil degradation helps institutions to answer very practical questions such as ‘Which locations and assets are most exposed?’, ‘How might those exposures evolve under different climate scenarios?’, and ‘Where could adaptation measures or risk transfer solutions be most effective?’

Regulation will continue to evolve. The underlying need to understand where risks sit in a portfolio is longer-term.”

Q: “What is your practical advice for decision-makers right now?”

A: “Three points:

• Stay informed, but avoid constant reinvention. Follow how Omnibus I and related initiatives develop, but try to build a data foundation that does not need to be rebuilt every time details change.
• Separate regulatory form from risk substance. The exact reporting templates may evolve. The question of where your climate and nature risks sit in your portfolio remains important for many institutions, regardless of specific thresholds.
• Design for flexibility. Tools such as Location Risk Intelligence and its Reporting Edition are meant to give you flexibility: you can adapt how you present your data, without starting from zero on how you measure risk.”

Q: “One sentence for institutions feeling a bit lost in all this change?”

A: “If the regulatory landscape feels like it is moving, anchor yourself in what you can control:  a clear, consistent view of your exposures, hazards and vulnerabilities – and the flexibility to connect that data to whichever reporting frameworks you choose to use.”