Purpose We investigate biodiversity reporting and management by public sector reporting entities using New Zealand regional councils as a case study. We specifically examine the nature of biodiversity reporting, the standards used to report on biodiversity, and the factors/constraints affecting biodiversity reporting and management. Design/methodology/approach We adopted a two-stage analysis model. We first used content analysis to examine the annual reports of all the 11 regional councils, from 2021 to 2024. Then, we conducted in-depth interviews with representatives from the New Zealand regional councils that are on the frontlines of biodiversity management and reporting following a stakeholder theoretical perspective. Findings The study shows that there is considerable variability in reporting due to the lack of a standardized biodiversity reporting framework for the public sector. Furthermore, while the verbal commitment and concern for biodiversity are on rise, there is a visible mismatch between verbal commitment and funding i.e., there is a consistent decline in proportionate spending on biodiversity related initiatives with a visible decline in funding from the central government. The major constraints in biodiversity management includes funding, limited engagement with broader stakeholders, as well as the lack of standardisation for reporting. While there is a consensus on the need for biodiversity reporting standards, the standards should provide flexibility and assistance, rather than being a compliance exercise. Originality/value We find a gap in biodiversity reporting between the public and private sectors, with private companies using GRI standards, the public entities like regional councils lack guidance/standards, suggesting that there is a need for a standardized framework to improve reporting, accountability and effectiveness of efforts regarding biodiversity.