The Data: Biodiversity Metrics by Paris Asset Class
Understanding a building's ecological impact requires looking beyond a single number. Aura evaluates sites using four primary indicators: Natural Cover, MSA Land Use (ecosystem intactness), Protected Area Sensitivity, and Threatened Species Total. These figures represent the average raw values and scores derived from over 1,000 Paris property assessments.
The table below breaks down the average performance of Paris’s primary asset classes across these specific metrics
| Asset Class |
Avg. Overall Score |
Avg. Natural Cover (%) |
Avg. MSA Land Use |
Avg. PASI (Sensitivity) |
Avg. Threatened Species |
| MultiFamily |
51.4 |
11.1% |
0.158 |
0.128 |
3.7 |
| Hospitality |
48.9 |
10.4% |
0.152 |
0.138 |
3.7 |
| Industrial |
48.3 |
7.8% |
0.127 |
0.137 |
3.2 |
| Office |
42.9 |
7.3% |
0.121 |
0.163 |
3.2 |
Data Source: Aura Biodiversity Intelligence (Based on ESA, GBIF, and WDPA datasets)
Use the free tool below to see how your own asset compares to these city-wide averages.
Key Findings: Metric-Level Variation
1. The Natural Cover Disparity
The most significant disparity between asset classes is found in Natural Cover. MultiFamily assets average 11.1% natural cover within a 500m radius, reflecting their location near residential courtyards or established green pockets. In contrast, Office assets average just 7.3%, highlighting their concentration in highly mineralized business districts where artificial surfaces dominate.
2. Ecosystem Intactness (MSA Land Use)
MultiFamily and Hospitality sectors maintain higher MSA Land Use values (0.158 and 0.152 respectively) compared to Industrial and Office assets. This indicates that residential and leisure developments are more frequently situated near established green spaces that support higher ecosystem intactness than the artificial environments surrounding high-density office blocks or industrial zones.
3. Protected Area Sensitivity and Boundary Risk
The Office sector reports the highest average Protected Area Sensitivity Index (0.163). While these areas often have the least onsite green space, their proximity to sensitive urban zones or historic protected sites increases their nature-related risk exposure. For an asset manager, high sensitivity in a low-natural-cover area indicates high management complexity, requiring careful oversight during building maintenance or renovations to avoid negative impacts on neighboring ecosystems.
Strategic Implications for Real Estate Teams
The variation in these metrics demonstrates why a mixed-use portfolio requires a tailored nature strategy:
- For Office Portfolios: The focus is on restoration. Urban greening interventions, such as biodiversity-focused green roofs or permeable surfacing, can improve Natural Cover from its currently low baseline.
- For MultiFamily & Hospitality: The priority is preservation. With higher existing scores and an average of 3.7 threatened species nearby, these assets must be protected from operational degradation to maintain value and satisfy institutional investor reporting.
Institutional investors are moving quickly on this data. Groups like Allianz and Oxford Properties are already utilizing location-based intelligence to align with the TNFD LEAP framework, using these exact metric variances to prioritize action across their global holdings.
Benchmark Your Asset
Is your building an outperformer or a laggard within its class? Use the Aura tool in this article to find your address, view your specific percentiles, and see how you stack up against the Paris averages.
