The Global Real Estate Sustainability Benchmark (GRESB) released its 2026 standard updates in late 2025, introducing scoring changes for embodied carbon, net-zero targets and tenant engagement. Commercial real estate teams now have the complete technical specifications to prepare for the 2026 submission cycle.
But amid all the changes to carbon measurement and energy reporting, one topic remains conspicuously absent from the scoring framework.
Nature and biodiversity still don’t count
Despite growing momentum around nature-related financial disclosure, GRESB 2026 does not introduce a biodiversity or nature-related performance indicator. More importantly, it does not score nature risk management yet.
The RM7 indicator titled “Nature and Biodiversity” remains optional and unscored in the 2026 standard. This means real estate owners earn zero GRESB points for assessing nature-related risks, tracking biodiversity baselines, implementing nature-based solutions, monitoring ecosystem health or restoring habitat on or around buildings.
While GRESB strengthened requirements for embodied carbon measurement, enhanced net-zero target credibility and increased tenant collaboration scoring, nature continues to be treated as an emerging topic rather than a performance category.
The message is clear. GRESB recognizes nature as material but not material enough yet to impact scoring or ratings.
What GRESB did change in 2026
GRESB introduced several scored updates affecting benchmarking results. The complete 2026 standard updates provide full technical specifications.
| Update Category | Key Change | Scoring Impact |
| Embodied carbon | New 5-point indicator (DMA2) for Development Component; Performance Component increases tenant fit-out scoring from 1.5 to 2.5 points | Development: -8 to 0 points (avg -5.3); Performance: minimal impact |
| Net-zero targets | Single comprehensive target required with asset-level flagging; short-term (pre-2030), medium-term (2030-2040) and long-term (2050) reductions | No immediate scoring impact; enhanced credibility requirements |
| Tenant engagement | Green lease and fit-out program scoring increases from 1.5 to 2.5 points each | +1 point potential per indicator |
| GHG scope | Landlord-controlled tenant space emissions reclassified from Scope 3 to Scopes 1-2 | -2 to +2 points for affected assets (3% of portfolio) |
| Nature & biodiversity | RM7 remains unscored experimental indicator | Zero scoring impact |
The table reveals the strategic gap. While GRESB scores embodied carbon and tenant collaboration, nature-based interventions earn zero points despite growing regulatory requirements. Understanding how GRESB measures up to leading green building standards helps contextualize why this gap matters for properties pursuing multiple certifications.
Why the nature gap matters for commercial real estate
The regulatory environment is moving faster than GRESB on nature and biodiversity.
The Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) requires nature disclosures starting 2025-2026 for large companies operating in Europe. The Taskforce for Nature-related Financial Disclosure (TNFD) is becoming the global reference for nature risk assessment.
Investors, especially in Europe and Canada, increasingly expect asset-level nature metrics. Cities across North America are introducing biodiversity requirements in planning approvals covering green roofs, native plants and pollinator support. Research from BOMA International, JLL and CBRE shows nature-positive features contribute to tenant satisfaction and property differentiation, even without GRESB scoring.
Strategic implications for portfolios
This is the last window before nature becomes part of the scorecard. GRESB introduced RM7 as unscored in 2025, signaling future scoring even if not implemented in 2026.
Portfolios measuring nature impacts now will lead when GRESB makes biodiversity scored. This includes establishing biodiversity baselines, assessing ecosystem service dependencies, evaluating nature-related risks and implementing measurable interventions. Properties can strengthen reporting by leveraging TNFD frameworks to excel in GRESB reporting, creating dual value for both regulatory compliance and benchmark preparation.
Properties with urban beekeeping programs, green infrastructure or habitat restoration should document these through nature-risk frameworks. This creates GRESB readiness while delivering current value through tenant engagement and ESG amenity programs.
Building certifications timeline extended to 2028
GRESB revised criteria for building certification schemes but pushed implementation to 2028. No changes affect 2025-2026 standards. Major certifications including LEED and WELL Building Standard continue under current criteria.
Preparing for 2026 submission
GRESB provides 2026 Simulated Score reports to help assess portfolio exposure to scoring changes. Priority preparation areas include embodied carbon measurement for development projects, net-zero target documentation with asset-level flagging, and enhanced tenant engagement programs. For organizations evaluating sustainability investments, reviewing the ROI of GRESB in commercial real estate helps justify preparation budgets and resource allocation.
The gap between regulation and recognition
GRESB 2026 continues prioritizing carbon, energy, water and waste metrics. However, the gap between regulatory nature disclosure requirements and GRESB scoring creates strategic tension. Organizations must decide whether to invest in nature measurement now despite zero GRESB impact, or wait for scoring implementation.
Evidence favors early movers. When GRESB introduced embodied carbon as unscored in 2025 before full scoring in 2026, organizations with established protocols managed the transition smoothly. The same pattern likely applies to nature and biodiversity as TNFD, CSRD and investor expectations create external pressure independent of GRESB.
Conclusion
GRESB 2026 strengthens embodied carbon, net-zero targets and tenant collaboration while maintaining scoring stability. Nature and biodiversity remain outside the scoring framework despite regulatory momentum and investor interest. This creates both a current gap and future opportunity for portfolios establishing measurement capabilities before scored requirements arrive.
The question is whether to lead the transition or follow it. Early investment in nature measurement delivers regulatory compliance, investor reporting and tenant engagement value that extends beyond any single benchmark.
