ZZBIIP

Methodology & sources

Where every number comes from

A score is only useful if the person reading it can check it. Every ZBIIP engine names the methodology it implements, and every piece of evidence on a scorecard carries the source it was derived from — so a reviewer at BIOFIN, at Bankers without Boundaries, or at a bank can trace a number back to a document and disagree with it on the merits.

Four tiers of authority

Not every number in a scoring model has a published source behind it. Where a standards body has not published a weighting, someone has to choose one — and the honest thing is to say who. Every source in the register carries one of these four tiers, and the tier travels with the number into the methodology annex of every report we generate.

Primary programme

The BIOFIN / Bankers without Boundaries programme documents themselves — the readiness scorecard and the financial modelling methodology taught in its workshops. The highest authority for this cohort, because it is the instrument reviewers already use.

Published standard

External, published methodology: ICVCM Core Carbon Principles, Verra VCS and the AFOLU Non-Permanence Risk Tool, UN SEEA Ecosystem Accounting, IFRS S1 and S2, the GHG Protocol, Wallacea Trust.

National policy

Zambian instruments: the Zambia Green Finance Taxonomy published by the Ministry of Green Economy and Environment, and the Zambia Green Growth Index.

Platform default

No source publishes this number and ZBIIP chose it. Weightings where the underlying body has not published one, and modelling defaults such as a mid-range AFOLU buffer percentage. Labelled so nobody mistakes our judgement for someone else's authority.

Worked example

The programme publishes the eight dimensions of its readiness scorecard, but not the weight each one carries. ZBIIP therefore weights them equally and labels that choice a platform default, configurable per cohort — rather than presenting an invented weighting as though it came from the programme. The dimensions themselves are cited as primary programme.

Engine register

Each engine is independently versioned and returns the same standard scorecard object. This is what each one implements.

EngineGrounded inStatus
BRIP ReadinessUNDP BIOFIN / Bankers without Boundaries BRIP Readiness Scorecardlive
Financial ModelBRIP Workshop 1 — Financial Literacy & Modellinglive
Investment ReadinessComposite — ZBIIP weightinglive
ESGIndustry-standard E/S/G/Disclosure structurelive
BiodiversityHabitat/species composite — IUCN NbS alignment in progresslive
CarbonICVCM Core Carbon Principles; Verra VCS / AFOLU risk toollive
Biodiversity CreditsWallacea Trust biodiversity credit methodologylive
Green Finance TaxonomyZambia Green Finance Taxonomy (MGEE)live
Natural CapitalUN SEEA Ecosystem Accountinglive
Green GrowthZambia Green Growth Index (GGGI / MoGEE)live
IFRS S1IFRS S1 (TCFD-derived four pillars)live
IFRS S2IFRS S2; GHG Protocol Corporate Standardlive

Engines marked building are specified against a named source and scheduled, but not yet shipped. We list them here rather than quietly implying the full set is live.

Limitations

What these scores are not

A ZBIIP score is a structured readiness assessment, not an audit, a valuation, or investment advice. It tells a project where it stands against a published framework and what to fix — it does not verify that the underlying data is true.

Verification is a separate exercise. Where an engine depends on measured field data — tonnes sequestered, hectares restored, species counts — that data needs independent confirmation through the project’s own MRV arrangements before a funder should rely on it.

Materiality and connectivity judgements under IFRS S1 and S2 are not automatable and remain human calls. Where an engine cannot responsibly compute something, it reports lower confidence rather than a confident wrong answer.

ZBIIP is built inside the Zambia Biodiversity Investment Readiness Support Programme, delivered by UNDP BIOFIN Zambia and Bankers without Boundaries.

← Back to the engines