U.K. pension funds are increasingly aware of biodiversity risks to their portfolios, but not many are investing in natural solutions, according to research from Pensions for Purpose released Monday.

Commissioned by alternatives asset manager Gresham House, Pensions for Purpose asked 22 asset owners and investment consultants how much they incorporate biodiversity and natural capital in investment decisions. Participants included the £25 billion ($31 billion) National Employment Savings Trust, London, £35 billion Brunel Pension Partnership, Bristol, £15 billion London CIV, £35 billion Railpen and £2.2 billion Smart Pension Master Trust.

A majority of asset owners, 54%, consider biodiversity risk equally or more crucial than climate change, but so far, only 38% have invested in natural capital solutions, Pensions for Purpose found in the report.

They were divided on whether it is their responsibility to invest in natural capital, with 38% thinking it does and an equal percentage thinking it does not, while the rest were undecided.

Those investing in it take three possible approaches: through infrastructure, real assets or property allocations, or a fixed-income instrument. One problem the report highlighted was the lack of investible solutions that meet investors’ risk, return and impact profiles.

Heather Fleming, managing director of institutional business at Gresham House, said in a release on the report that investment avoiding or reducing biodiversity loss “will be central to investment portfolios of the future, as investors realize the opportunity and the financial imperative to reverse nature loss.”

Karen Shackleton, chairwoman and founder of Pension for Purpose, said in the release that investments “based on natural capital exploitation are no longer viable: the cost of depleting our resources has become too high, both environmentally and financially.”

Read more @pionline