Message Amplification Interview – Rimba Collective, Nature Stage, LCAW 2026

Michal brings over 25 years of experience across conservation, biodiversity and corporate sustainability, working in Asia, Africa, Europe and Latin America, from field implementation to engagement at the corporate level. He leads Lestari Capital’s strategy for the sustainable commodities sector, driving the development and implementation of conservation finance mechanisms that connect corporate investment with landscape-level outcomes. Michal is an invited expert and representative on several technical and governance bodies for certification systems, including the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil and the Forest Stewardship Council, among others.

How is the role of nature evolving within corporate sustainability and business strategy today? 

There has been a clear shift in how companies view nature. It is no longer seen only through the lens of sustainability commitments, but increasingly as a factor that directly affects supply continuity, operational stability and long-term business performance.

Climate variability, ecosystem degradation and regulatory developments are reshaping how risks are assessed across supply chains. As a result, nature-related considerations are moving closer to core business decisions.

The focus is gradually shifting from “what are our commitments?” to “how do we embed nature into sourcing, procurement and investment decisions over time?”. This is not just a shift in targets, it is a fundamental restructuring of company strategy which understands that protection of natural capital is critical for protection of shareholder value.

Why is a water and supply shed approach becoming more relevant to addressing supply chain risk?

Many of the risks companies are exposed to do not sit at the level of an individual supplier or site. They emerge at the water and supply shed level, where ecosystem dynamics, climate impacts and land-use pressures interact — ultimately shaping production stability.

A supply shed-level approach allows companies to engage with these dynamics more directly. Rather than focusing on isolated interventions, it connects investment to the broader system that underpins sourcing regions.

In practice, this means working across ecosystems, communities and value chains in a more integrated way, reflecting how these systems function in reality.

How does the Rimba Collective model translate this approach into practice? 

The Rimba Collective was designed to operationalise a water and supply shed-level approach by linking corporate capital with conservation and restoration activities in sourcing regions. It brings together companies with shared exposure to similar commodities and channels long-term investment into programmes that aim to maintain ecosystem health and support local communities.

What distinguishes this model is its focus on both scale and duration. Rather than short-term projects, it is structured around sustained engagement in priority landscapes, recognising that environmental and production systems evolve over longer timeframes. It also reflects the importance of collective action, as many of these challenges cannot be addressed effectively by individual actors alone.

What is driving internal decision-making when companies invest in these types of approaches? 

The business case is becoming clearer, but it is not framed as an “additional” cost. Increasingly, these investments are understood in the context of risk management and value protection.

Companies are looking at how ecosystem degradation may affect supply availability, price stability and long-term sourcing viability, and what level of engagement is required to maintain resilience over time. At the same time, challenges remain, particularly when it comes to linking investment to outcomes and business value across complex landscapes. Strengthening consistency and clarity in how these are assessed will be important going forward.

What will it take to scale these models in the coming years? 

Scaling these approaches will require stronger collaboration across value chains, as well as continued evolution in how they are financed. No single company can address watershed or supply shed-level challenges in isolation.

There is also a need for alignment between corporate priorities, financial mechanisms and on-the-ground implementation. As these elements come together, there is an opportunity to move from early adoption to broader scale.

Ultimately, achieving supply chain resilience will depend not only on setting commitments, but on sustained investment in the landscapes that underpin production systems.