Many nations use ecological compensation policies to address negative impacts of development projects and achieve No Net Loss (NNL) of biodiversity and ecosystem services. Yet, failures are widely ...reported. We use spatial simulation models to quantify potential net impacts of alternative compensation policies on biodiversity (indicated by native vegetation) and two ecosystem services (carbon storage, sediment retention) across four case studies (in Australia, Brazil, Indonesia, Mozambique). No policy achieves NNL of biodiversity in any case study. Two factors limit their potential success: the land available for compensation (existing vegetation to protect or cleared land to restore), and expected counterfactual biodiversity losses (unregulated vegetation clearing). Compensation also fails to slow regional biodiversity declines because policies regulate only a subset of sectors, and expanding policy scope requires more land than is available for compensation activities. Avoidance of impacts remains essential in achieving NNL goals, particularly once opportunities for compensation are exhausted.
The rapid destruction of the planet's biodiversity has prompted the nations of the world to set a target of achieving a significant reduction in the rate of loss of biodiversity by 2010. However, we ...do not yet have an adequate way of monitoring progress towards achieving this target. Here we present a method for producing indices based on the IUCN Red List to chart the overall threat status (projected relative extinction risk) of all the world's bird species from 1988 to 2004. Red List Indices (RLIs) are based on the number of species in each Red List category, and on the number changing categories between assessments as a result of genuine improvement or deterioration in status. The RLI for all bird species shows that their overall threat status has continued to deteriorate since 1988. Disaggregated indices show that deteriorations have occurred worldwide and in all major ecosystems, but with particularly steep declines in the indices for Indo-Malayan birds (driven by intensifying deforestation of the Sundaic lowlands) and for albatrosses and petrels (driven by incidental mortality in commercial longline fisheries). RLIs complement indicators based on species population trends and habitat extent for quantifying global trends in the status of biodiversity. Their main weaknesses are that the resolution of status changes is fairly coarse and that delays may occur before some status changes are detected. Their greatest strength is that they are based on information from nearly all species in a taxonomic group worldwide, rather than a potentially biased subset. At present, suitable data are only available for birds, but indices for other taxonomic groups are in development, as is a sampled index based on a stratified sample from all major taxonomic groups.
Biodiversity Conservation: Challenges Beyond 2010 Rands, Michael R.W; Adams, William M; Bennun, Leon ...
Science (American Association for the Advancement of Science),
09/2010, Letnik:
329, Številka:
5997
Journal Article
Recenzirano
The continued growth of human populations and of per capita consumption have resulted in unsustainable exploitation of Earth's biological diversity, exacerbated by climate change, ocean ...acidification, and other anthropogenic environmental impacts. We argue that effective conservation of biodiversity is essential for human survival and the maintenance of ecosystem processes. Despite some conservation successes (especially at local scales) and increasing public and government interest in living sustainably, biodiversity continues to decline. Moving beyond 2010, successful conservation approaches need to be reinforced and adequately financed. In addition, however, more radical changes are required that recognize biodiversity as a global public good, that integrate biodiversity conservation into policies and decision frameworks for resource production and consumption, and that focus on wider institutional and societal changes to enable more effective implementation of policy.
Bird and bat turbine collision fatalities are a principal biodiversity impact at wind energy facilities. Raptors are a group at particular risk and often the focus of post-construction fatality ...monitoring programs. To estimate fatalities from detected carcasses requires correction for biases, including for carcasses that are removed or decompose before the following search. This is addressed through persistence trials, where carcasses are monitored until no longer detectable or the trial ends. Sourcing sufficient raptor carcasses for trials is challenging and surrogates that are typically used often have shorter persistence times than raptors. We collated information from raptor carcass persistence trials to evaluate consistencies between trials and assess the implications of using persistence values from other studies in wind facility fatality estimates. We compiled individual raptor carcass persistence times from published sources along with information on methods and location, estimated carcass persistence using GenEst and ran full fatality estimates using the carcass persistence estimates and mock datasets for other information. We compiled results from 22 trials from 17 sites across four terrestrial biomes, with trials lasting between 7 and 365 days and involving between 11 and 115 carcasses. Median carcass persistence was estimated at 420 days (90% confidence interval (CI) of 290 to 607 days) for the full dataset. Persistence time varied significantly between trials (trial-specific persistence estimates of 14 (5-42) days to 1,586 (816-3,084) days) but not between terrestrial biomes. We also found no significant relationship between either the number of carcasses in the trial or trial duration and estimated carcass persistence. Using a mock dataset with 12 observed fatalities, we estimated annual fatalities of 25 (16-33) or 26 (17-36) individuals using a 14- or 28-day search interval respectively using global dataset. When using trial-specific carcass persistence estimates and the same mock dataset, estimated annual fatalities ranged from 22 (14-30) to 37 (21-63) individuals for a 14-day search interval, and from 22 (15-31) to 47 (26-84) individuals for a 28-day search interval. The different raptor carcass persistence rates between trials translated to small effects on fatality estimates when using recommended search frequencies, since persistence rates were generally much longer than the search interval. When threatened raptor species, or raptors of particular concern to stakeholders are present, and no site-specific carcass persistence estimates are available, projects should use the lowest median carcass persistence estimate from this study to provide precautionary estimates of fatalities. At sites without threatened species, or where the risk of collision to raptors is low, the global median carcass persistence estimate from this review could be used to provide a plausible estimate for annual raptor fatalities.
The mitigation hierarchy (MH) is a prominent tool to help businesses achieve no net loss or net gain outcomes for biodiversity. Technological innovations offer benefits for business biodiversity ...management, yet the range and continued evolution of technologies creates a complex landscape that can be difficult to navigate. Using literature review, online surveys, and semi‐structured interviews, we assess technologies that can improve application of the MH. We identify six categories (mobile survey, fixed survey, remote sensing, blockchain, data analysis, and enabling technologies) with high feasibility and/or relevance to (i) aid direct implementation of mitigation measures and (ii) enhance biodiversity surveys and monitoring, which feed into the design of interventions including avoidance and minimization measures. At the interface between development and biodiversity impacts, opportunities lie in businesses investing in technologies, capitalizing on synergies between technology groups, collaborating with conservation organizations to enhance institutional capacity, and developing practical solutions suited for widespread use.
Loss of habitats or ecosystems arising from development projects (e.g., infrastructure, resource extraction, urban expansion) are frequently addressed through biodiversity offsetting. As currently ...implemented, offsetting typically requires an outcome of “no net loss” of biodiversity, but only relative to a baseline trajectory of biodiversity decline. This type of “relative” no net loss entrenches ongoing biodiversity loss, and is misaligned with biodiversity targets that require “absolute” no net loss or “net gain.” Here, we review the limitations of biodiversity offsetting, and in response, propose a new framework for compensating for biodiversity losses from development in a way that is aligned explicitly with jurisdictional biodiversity targets. In the framework, targets for particular biodiversity features are achieved via one of three pathways: Net Gain, No Net Loss, or (rarely) Managed Net Loss. We outline how to set the type (“Maintenance” or “Improvement”) and amount of ecological compensation that is appropriate for proportionately contributing to the achievement of different targets. This framework advances ecological compensation beyond a reactive, ad‐hoc response, to ensuring alignment between actions addressing residual biodiversity losses and achievement of overarching targets for biodiversity conservation.
World governments have committed to halting human-induced extinctions and safeguarding important sites for biodiversity by 2020, but the financial costs of meeting these targets are largely unknown. ...We estimate the cost of reducing the extinction risk of all globally threatened bird species (by > 1 International Union for Conservation of Nature Red List category) to be U.S. $0.875 to $1.23 billion annually over the next decade, of which 12% is currently funded. Incorporating threatened nonavian species increases this total to U.S. $3.41 to $4.76 billion annually. We estimate that protecting and effectively managing all terrestrial sites of global avian conservation significance (11,731 Important Bird Areas) would cost U.S. $ 65.1 billion annually. Adding sites for other taxa increases this to U.S. $76.1 billion annually. Meeting these targets will require conservation funding to increase by at least an order of magnitude.
Increasing exploitation of marine natural resources and expansion of energy infrastructure, shipping, and aquaculture across the oceans are placing increased pressure on marine life. Biodiversity ...offsets, as the last stage of the mitigation hierarchy, provide an opportunity to promote a more sustainable basis for development by addressing residual impacts and achieving “no net loss” for biodiversity. Despite debate around their effectiveness, biodiversity offsets are seeing increasing application on land but remain a rarely used tool in the marine environment. We assess how offsets can be applied in the marine environment to achieve better biodiversity outcomes, and identify implications for conservation policy and practice. For instance, spatial conservation planning provides opportunities to move away from a siloed, project‐by‐project, approach by pooling offsets on a regional scale. There are real differences between marine and terrestrial environments in relation to ecology, connectivity, data availability, management options, and impact perception, and marine offsets are therefore often regarded as challenging. However, fundamental offset principles, types, and approaches apply equally on land and at sea. Marine biodiversity offset approaches can build on the experience of terrestrial offsets but can also innovate to help achieve biodiversity gains and contribute toward global and national biodiversity targets.
Critical Habitat has become an increasingly important concept used by the finance sector and businesses to identify areas of high biodiversity value. The International Finance Corporation (IFC) ...defines Critical Habitat in their highly influential Performance Standard 6 (PS6), requiring projects in Critical Habitat to achieve a net gain of biodiversity. Here we present a global screening layer of Critical Habitat in the terrestrial realm, derived from global spatial datasets covering the distributions of 12 biodiversity features aligned with guidance provided by the IFC. Each biodiversity feature is categorised as 'likely' or 'potential' Critical Habitat based on: 1. Alignment between the biodiversity feature and the IFC Critical Habitat definition; and 2. Suitability of the spatial resolution for indicating a feature's presence on the ground. Following the initial screening process, Critical Habitat must then be assessed in-situ by a qualified assessor. This analysis indicates that a total of 10% and 5% of the global terrestrial environment can be considered as likely and potential Critical Habitat, respectively, while the remaining 85% did not overlap with any of the biodiversity features assessed and was classified as 'unknown'. Likely Critical Habitat was determined principally by the occurrence of Key Biodiversity Areas and Protected Areas. Potential Critical Habitat was predominantly characterised by data representing highly threatened and unique ecosystems such as ever-wet tropical forests and tropical dry forests. The areas we identified as likely or potential Critical Habitat are based on the best available global-scale data for the terrestrial realm that is aligned with IFC's Critical Habitat definition. Our results can help businesses screen potential development sites at the early project stage based on a range of biodiversity features. However, the study also demonstrates several important data gaps and highlights the need to incorporate new and improved global spatial datasets as they become available.
The Convention on Biological Diversity's 2010 Target Balmford, Andrew; Bennun, Leon; Brink, Ben ten ...
Science (American Association for the Advancement of Science),
01/2005, Letnik:
307, Številka:
5707
Journal Article
Recenzirano
Balmford et al discusses the 2002 Johannesburg World Summit's target on biological diversity for 2010. By adopting the 2010 target, governments are explicitly recognizing the value of biodiversity, ...setting goals for its conservation, and holding themselves accountable.
PDF
