Across everything it does, an organization should find where it could harm biodiversity and ecosystem services and act to remove or reduce that harm. It should also: where feasible, take part in market mechanisms that bring the cost of its environmental impacts onto its own books and generate economic value from protecting ecosystem services; put avoiding the loss of natural ecosystems first, restoring ecosystems second, and only then compensating for losses through actions that, over time, leave ecosystem services better off overall; adopt a joined-up strategy for managing land, water and ecosystems that fosters conservation and sustainable use fairly across society; safeguard any threatened, endangered or endemic species or habitat it could affect; keep the environmental effects of its land use decisions, including farming and urban development, as low as possible; build protection of natural habitats, wetlands, forests, wildlife corridors, protected areas and farmland into its buildings and construction; use sustainable farming, fishing and forestry methods, animal welfare included, as leading standards and certification schemes define them; buy more and more from suppliers using sustainable technologies and processes; value and protect wild animals and their habitats and consider their welfare; and avoid practices that endanger the survival of species, drive them to extinction or spread invasive species.
This control maps to 1 controls across 1 other frameworks. If you already hold one of them, the evidence you collected for it is the starting point here rather than new work.
Every mapping shown was judged rather than inferred from wording similarity, and the ones that failed review are published too. See the coverage reports and what was rejected.
The graph holds this control, the 1 it maps to, and the evidence behind each claim, over MCP and REST.