DOCSLIB.ORG

Building Biodiversity Business

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Building Biodiversity Business Joshua Bishop, Sachin Kapila, Frank Hicks, Paul Mitchell and Francis Vorhies 1. One of the 73 frog species found in the 1 Gamba Complex, Gabon © Carlton Ward Jr. 2. A water lily in Jacana, Botswana IUCN Photo Library © IUCN / Sue Mainka 3. Masked butterflyfish in the Red Sea, Egypt IUCN Photo Library © Christian Laufenberg 2 3 4. Chameleo dilepis © Carlton Ward Jr. 5. Alcedo leucogaster © Carlton Ward Jr. 6. Forest in the Garajonay National Park, Spain IUCN Photo Library © Jim Thorsell Carlton Ward Jr. is an environmental photojournalist from Florida, 4 5 6 USA with graduate training in ecology and anthropology. Through his photographs, he aims to promote conservation of natural environments and cultural legacies. Building Biodiversity Business Joshua Bishop1, Sachin Kapila2, Frank Hicks3, Paul Mitchell4 and Francis Vorhies5 2008 1 IUCN (International Union for Conservation of Nature) 2 Shell International Limited 3 Forest Trends 4 Green Horizons Environmental Consultants Limited 5 Earthmind Publication Data Bishop, J., Kapila, S., Hicks, F., Mitchell, P. and Vorhies, F. 2008. Building Biodiversity Business. Shell International Limited and the International Union for Conservation of Nature: London, UK, and Gland, Switzerland. 164 pp. © Shell International Limited, International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources and the authors 2008 ISBN: 978-2-8317-1019-8 Reproduction of this publication for educational or other non-commercial purposes is authorised without prior written permission from the copyright holder provided the source is fully acknowledged. Reproduction of this publication for resale or other commercial purposes is prohibited without prior written permission of the copyright holder. In this report the collective expression “Shell” is sometimes used for convenience in contexts where reference is made to the companies of the Royal Dutch / Shell Group in general or where no useful purpose is served by identifying a particular company or companies. The findings, interpretations and conclusions expressed here are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of Shell, IUCN or those interviewed. Any errors are purely the responsibility of the authors. All economic values are as noted in quoted source materials and have not been converted to the equivalent value in 2008 terms. This review should not be used as the basis for investments or related actions and activities. Cover design by 3R Communications Ltd. Graphic design by Shell Visual Media Services. Contents Contents Acknowledgments 6 Author information 7 Preface 8 Executive summary 10 Chapter 1. Introduction 14 Chapter 2. Context: the biodiversity challenge 16 2.1 Biodiversity, ecosystem services and conservation 16 2.2 Funding biodiversity conservation 20 Chapter 3. Rationale: why biodiversity business? 24 3.1 The business case for biodiversity 25 3.2 The conservation case for biodiversity business 27 3.3 The development case for biodiversity business 28 Chapter 4. The biodiversity business landscape 30 4.1 The spectrum of biodiversity business 31 4.2 Agriculture 33 4.2.1 What is ‘biodiversity-friendly’ agriculture? 33 4.2.2 Agriculture – status and trends 34 4.2.3 Agriculture – what is working / not working 37 4.2.4 Agriculture – gaps and business investment opportunities 40 4.3 Forestry 41 4.3.1 What is sustainable forestry? 41 4.3.2 Forestry – status and trends 42 4.3.3 Forestry – what is working / not working 43 4.3.4 Forestry – gaps and business investment opportunities 45 4.4 Non-timber forest products 46 4.4.1 What are NTFP? 46 4.4.2 NTFP – status and trends 47 4.4.3 NTFP – what is working / not working 48 4.4.4 NTFP – gaps and business investment opportunities 51 4.5 Fisheries and aquaculture 52 4.5.1 What are sustainable fisheries? 52 4.5.2 Fisheries and aquaculture – status and trends 53 4.5.3 Fisheries and aquaculture – what is working / not working 55 4.5.4 Fisheries and aquaculture – gaps and business investment opportunities 57 1 Building Biodiversity Business 4.6 Biocarbon 58 4.6.1 What is biocarbon? 58 4.6.2 Biocarbon – status and trends 59 4.6.3 Biocarbon – gaps and business investment opportunities 63 4.7 Payments for watershed protection 64 4.7.1 What is watershed protection? 64 4.7.2 Payments for watershed protection – status and trends 65 4.7.3 Payments for watershed protection – gaps and business investment opportunities 65 4.8 Bioprospecting 68 4.8.1 What is bioprospecting? 68 4.8.2 Bioprospecting – status and trends 69 4.8.3 Bioprospecting – what is working / not working? 71 4.8.4 Bioprospecting – gaps and business investment opportunities 73 4.9 Biodiversity offsets 75 4.9.1 What are biodiversity offsets? 75 4.9.2 Biodiversity offsets – status and trends 76 4.9.3 Biodiversity offsets – gaps and business investment opportunities 78 4.10 Biodiversity management services 80 4.10.1 What are biodiversity management services? 80 4.10.2 Biodiversity management services – status and trends 83 4.10.3 Biodiversity management services – gaps and business investment opportunities 83 4.11 Ecotourism 84 4.11.1 What is ecotourism? 84 4.11.2 Ecotourism – status and trends 86 4.11.3 Tools for managing impacts 87 4.11.4 Ecotourism contributions to conservation 88 4.11.5 Ecotourism – what is working / not working 89 4.11.6 Ecotourism – gaps and business investment opportunities 90 4.12 Recreational hunting and sportfishing 92 4.12.1 Hunting and sportfishing – status and trends 92 4.12.2 Hunting and sportfishing – what is working / not working 94 4.12.3 Hunting and sportfishing – gaps and business investment opportunities 95 4.13 Conclusions on the biodiversity business landscape 96 4.13.1 Enabling environment 97 4.13.2 Business development services 98 4.13.3 Investment opportunities 99 Chapter 5 Review of biodiversity business promotion mechanisms 102 5.1 Mechanisms to promote biodiversity business 102 5.1.1 Enabling environment 103 5.1.2 Business tools 104 5.1.3 Financing instruments 105 2 Contents 5.2 Review of mechanisms 105 5.2.1 Creating an enabling environment for biodiversity business 106 5.2.2 Mandatory policy 107 5.2.3 International laws and regulations 107 5.2.4 Local and national policy and institutions 109 5.2.5 Voluntary policies 113 5.2.6 Key lessons / challenges and opportunities 116 5.3 Biodiversity business tools 118 5.3.1 Introduction 118 5.3.2 A typology of biodiversity business tools 118 5.3.3 Key lessons / challenges and opportunities 121 5.4 Financing instruments 123 5.4.1 Financing instruments – the range 123 5.4.2 Key lessons / challenges and opportunities 127 5.5 Conclusions on business promotion mechanisms 128 Chapter 6. Conclusions 130 6.1 Key findings and opportunities 130 6.2 Critical success factors 133 6.3 Towards a Biodiversity Business Facility 134 6.3.1 What exactly would a Biodiversity Business Facility do? 138 6.3.2 How to develop a Biodiversity Business Facility 138 6.4 Closing remarks 139 Appendix A. Overview of selected biodiversity funds 142 Appendix B. Overview of selected think-tanks and business incubators 148 Glossary and list of acronyms 150 Glossary 150 Acronyms 153 Index 156 3 Building Biodiversity Business List of figures Figure 1. Extinctions per thousand species per millennium 18 Figure 2. Growth of global protected areas over time 19 Figure 3. The Red List Index for birds in different ecosystems 20 Figure 4. Regional variation in the percentage of the overall cost of effective reserve networks that are met 21 Figure 5. Biodiversity in development finance: tapping new sources 22 Figure 6. Area of organic agriculture and wild harvested plants worldwide 38 Figure 7. Certified forest area worldwide 43 Figure 8. Aquaculture production in developed and developing countries 54 Figure 9. Growth of the global carbon market (value of carbon contracts) 60 Figure 10. Orders of magnitude in drug discovery 69 Figure 11. Biodiversity offsets and net positive impact 76 Figure 12. The growth of international tourist arrivals 86 Figure 13. The ‘playing fields’ of interest 103 Figure 14. General screening process 131 Figure 15. Overview of a Biodiversity Business Facility 134 Figure 16. What would a Biodiversity Business Facility do? An illustration for NTFP 139 List of tables Table 1. Status of the USA mitigation market 77 Table 2. Biodiversity management services offered by different providers 82 Table 3. A tourism typology 85 Table 4. Selected ecosystem markets and their potential for growth 96 Table 5. Global subsidies 1994–1998 (US$ billion per annum) 112 Table 6. Certification strengths and weaknesses: the case of coffee 116 Table 7. BioTools for biodiversity business 119 Table 8. The financing spectrum 124 Table 9. Biodiversity Business Facility – SWOT analysis 136 Table 10. Attributes of a Biodiversity Business Facility 137 List of boxes Box 1. Biofuels and biodiversity 34 Box 2. Combining rural development and biodiversity conservation 36 Box 3. UNCTAD BioTrade principles and criteria 39 Box 4. Promoting certified timber markets in Central America 44 Box 5. High Conservation Value Network launched 44 Box 6. The value of wild plants, animals and freshwater fisheries in Senegal 46 Box 7. Bamboo and rattan – facts and figures 47 Box 8. The sustainability of the bushmeat trade 48 Box 9. Linking conservation and local economic development at Flower Valley, South Africa 48 Box 10. PhytoTrade Africaa 50 Box 11. The Marine Stewardship Council and certification of fisheries 56 Box 12. ForTuna by WWF and TRAFFIC 57 Box 13. A selection of biocarbon initiatives 60 Box 14. The potential of avoided deforestation 62 Box 15. The Climate, Community and Biodiversity Standards 63 4 Contents Box 16. Payments for watershed protection in Costa Rica 65 Box 17.
Recommended publications
  • Banking Nature? the Spectacular Financialisation of Environmental Conservation

    Banking Nature? the Spectacular Financialisation of Environmental Conservation

    Banking Nature? The Spectacular Financialisation of Environmental Conservation Sian Sullivan Department of Geography, Environment and Development Studies, Birkbeck, University of London, London, UK; [email protected] Abstract: In this paper I emphasise the financialisation of environmental conservation as 1. the turning of financiers to conservation parameters as a new frontier for investment, and 2. the rewriting of conservation practice and nonhuman worlds in terms of banking and financial categories. I introduce financialisation as a broadly controlling impetus with relevance for environmental conservation. I then note ways in which a spectacular investment frontier in conservation is being opened. I highlight the draw of assertions of lucrative gains, combined with notions of geographical substitutability, in creating tradable indicators of environmental health and harm. I disaggregate financialisation strategies into four categories—nature finance, nature work, nature banking and nature derivatives—and assess their implications. The concluding section embraces Marx and Foucault as complementary thinkers in understanding the transforming intensifications of late capitalism in environmental conservation, and diagnosing their associated effects and costs. Keywords: financialisation, environmental conservation, frontier, primitive accumulation, environmentality, Marx, Foucault Introduction: Nature’s Growing Financial “Value” Economic growth and the natural environment are mutually compatible. Sustainable economic growth relies on services provided by the natural environment, often referred to as “ecosystem services” ... [P]rotected natural areas can yield returns many times higher than the costs of their protection. There are multi-million pound opportunities available from greener goods and services, and from markets that protect nature’s services. Too many of the benefits we derive from nature are not properly valued.
  • Evaluation of Swedish Biodiversity Research Vetenskapsrådets Rapportserie

    Evaluation of Swedish Biodiversity Research Vetenskapsrådets Rapportserie

    14:2010 Evaluation in 2001 the Swedish Government made a special allocation of funding for biodiversity research to be administered by the Swedish Research Council and the Swedish Research Council for Environment, agricultural Sciences and Spatial Planning. The research councils appointed 2010 two committees of to evaluate their investment in biodiversity research from the perspectives of the quality and strategic Sw E direction of the science (Science Committee) and the relevance of the research (relevance Committee). di S h this report outlines the analyses and findings of the two committees. biodiv E r S ity r ese arch Evaluation of SwEdiSh biodivErSity research klarabergsviadukten 82 | box 1035 | SE-101 38 Stockholm | SwEdEN | tel +46-8-546 44 000 | [email protected] | www.vr.se Ve t E – funded by the Swedish Research Council and the Swedish n S kap research Council for Environment, Agricultural Sciences and S råd E Spatial Planning 2002–2009 t s rapport the Swedish research council is a government agency that provides funding for basic research of the highest scientific quality in all disciplinary domains. besides research iSSN 1651-7350 funding, the agency works with strategy, analysis, and research communication. iSBN 978-91-7307-183-3 se ri the objective is for Sweden to be a leading research nation. E vEtEnSKAPSRÅDEtS RAPPORTSERIE 14:2010 EVALUATION OF swEdIsh bIOdIVErsITy rEsEArch – funded by the swedish research council and the swedish research council for Environment, Agricultural sciences and spatial Planning 2002–2009
  • Title: Using Carbon Investment to Grow the Biodiversity Bank

    Title: Using Carbon Investment to Grow the Biodiversity Bank

    The following submission argues for a recognition of the biodiversity A version of this submission has been accepted for publication in the journal Conservation Biology Title: Using carbon investment to grow the biodiversity bank Authors’ addresses: Sarah A. Bekessy* and Brendan A. Wintle † * School of Global Studies, Social Science and Planning, RMIT University, GPO Box 2476V, Melbourne 3001, Australia † School of Botany, University of Melbourne 3010, Australia Introduction The fervour with which carbon initiatives are being adopted (Capoor & Ambrosi 2007) presents a unique opportunity to restore biodiversity while creating new financial and marketing incentives for investors. We argue that current approaches to carbon offsetting that rely largely on investment in monoculture plantations will rapidly lose appeal as the public becomes aware of their dubious carbon benefits (Guo & Gifford 2002; Glenday 2006) and the related environmental and social harm that they may bring (Jackson et al. 2005; Lamb et al. 2005). Here we describe a scheme that is more robust to uncertainty about carbon sequestration and is guaranteed to have broad environmental benefits, including restoration of degraded natural systems and endangered species habitats. The proposed scheme provides a mechanism for investing in the worlds most threatened ecosystems that makes carbon, biodiversity, and financial sense. The idea is simple: investors should be allowed to reap the dual benefits of carbon and biodiversity credits from the one parcel of land and those credits could later be traded on the relevant markets. Current approaches place investors’ hopes in future carbon and timber values that may be risky given available evidence about the real sequestration value of short rotation plantations (Guo & Gifford 2002) and the rapid rise in monoculture plantation projects (FAO 2005) potentially leading to a reduction in demand and a slowing of the plantation timber market.
  • Kent Academic Repository Full Text Document (Pdf)

    Kent Academic Repository Full Text Document (Pdf)

    Kent Academic Repository Full text document (pdf) Citation for published version Lines, Robin Michael (2021) Connectivity at the Large Carnivore Scale: The Kafue-Zambezi Interface. Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) thesis, University of Kent,. DOI Link to record in KAR https://kar.kent.ac.uk/87199/ Document Version UNSPECIFIED Copyright & reuse Content in the Kent Academic Repository is made available for research purposes. Unless otherwise stated all content is protected by copyright and in the absence of an open licence (eg Creative Commons), permissions for further reuse of content should be sought from the publisher, author or other copyright holder. Versions of research The version in the Kent Academic Repository may differ from the final published version. Users are advised to check http://kar.kent.ac.uk for the status of the paper. Users should always cite the published version of record. Enquiries For any further enquiries regarding the licence status of this document, please contact: [email protected] If you believe this document infringes copyright then please contact the KAR admin team with the take-down information provided at http://kar.kent.ac.uk/contact.html Connectivity at the Large Carnivore Scale: The Kafue-Zambezi Interface Robin Michael Lines Durrell Institute of Conservation and Ecology School of Anthropology and Conservation University of Kent, UK Feb 2021 Thesis awarded for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Biodiversity Management Acknowledgements This thesis is long in the making. Indeed, many eyebrows will doubtless be raised when word of its completion percolates through various networks. The body of work can be traced through earlier studies of African wild dogs in Namibia pre-2010.
  • Impact of New Markets for Environmental Services on Forest Products Trade

    Impact of New Markets for Environmental Services on Forest Products Trade

    FAO Impact Assessment of Forest Products Trade in the Promotion of Sustainable Forest Management (GCP/INT/775/JPN) IMPACT OF NEW MARKETS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES ON FOREST PRODUCTS TRADE Prepared by Marko Katila and Esa Puustjärvi in collaboration with Ecosecurities Ltd. The designations employed and the presentation of material in this information product do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations concerning the legal or development status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. TABLE OF CONTENTS ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY I 1. INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 Background 1 1.2 Objectives 1 1.3 Approach and Structure of the Report 1 2. CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK AND DEFINITIONS CONCERNING TRADE IN FOREST ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 1 2.1 What is Meant by Forest Environmental Services? 1 2.2 Environmental Goods and Services in International Trade Agreements and Negotiations 1 2.3 Markets and Market Mechanisms for Forest Environmental Services 1 2.3.1 Definitions of Markets for Forest Environmental Services 1 2.3.2 Transaction Costs 1 2.3.3 Level of Markets 1 2.3.4 Market-based Mechanisms 1 2.4 Essential Attributes for Effective Market Creation: Framework for Analysis 1 3. FUTURE TRENDS, POTENTIAL AND IMPACTS OF NEW MARKETS FOR CARBON OFFSETS 1 3.1 The Kyoto Protocol and the Flexibility Mechanisms 1 3.2 Summary of Carbon Forestry Activities to Date 1 3.3 Market Trends 1
  • Society Pages

    Society Pages

    Society pages FFPS Council Members the aim of the work was to show not only how important these areas are to wildlife (and for At the FFPS Annual General Meeting in human recreation), but to be able to respond September 1985, four new members were quickly to planning proposals. Part of the work elected to fill vacancies on Council. Bob involved the design and construction of con- Stebbings had served on Council in the recent trolled environmental systems in which para- past and Ian Swingland was welcomed as a meters affecting salt marsh plant growth could be completely new member. Profiles of other new tested experimentally. As a result of the Torrey members will appear in the April issue of Oryx. Canyon disaster, research was initiated on the effects of crude oil on coastal habitats, and he became involved in the establishment of the national and local government infrastructure for dealing with coastal oil pollution. Interspersed with the coastal work, he spent two years studying the ecology of grass snakes in an area of rapidly changing habitats in south Dorset. Throughout this period, all his spare time and energy was spent doing research into bats. From the late 1950s, he recognized the harm bat re- searchers caused to the populations being studied, and by 1961 he became aware of the substantial population declines caused by various human activities. Because of people's general antipathy to bats, it was 14 years before his vigorous efforts led to his vision of a widespread and statutory concern for bats becoming a reality in the Wild Creatures and Wild Plants Act (1975).
  • Scoping Study for the Design and Use of Biodiversity Offsets in an English Context

    Scoping Study for the Design and Use of Biodiversity Offsets in an English Context

    Scoping Study for the Design and Use of Biodiversity Offsets in an English Context Scoping study for the design and use of biodiversity offsets in an English Context Final Report to Defra (Contract NE 0801) NEE 0801 Final Report: April 2009 1 Scoping Study for the Design and Use of Biodiversity Offsets in an English Context Compiled by Jo Treweek (Treweek Environmental Consultants) With contributions from: Kerry ten Kate, freelance consultant Bill Butcher, WGB Environment Orlando Venn, Treweek Environmental Consultants Lincoln Garland and Mike Wells, Biodiversity by Design Dominic Moran, Scottish Agricultural College Stewart Thompson, Oxford Brookes University Acknowledgements The authors are grateful for input from the participants at the stakeholder workshops and for advice and comments provided by several people including Roger Morris, Ian Hepburn, Riki Therivel, David Hill, Derek Wilkinson, Paul Raven, Graham Tucker. David Parkes, Michael Crowe, Anne Buchan and their colleagues at the Victoria Department of Sustainability and the Environment in Australia generously shared their experience of designing and operating a system of biodiversity offsets. The Project Steering Committee (Sarah Lucking, Pete Brotherton, Andrew Dodd, Helen Dunn, James Vause, Julian Harlow, Phil Lewis, Sarah Webster), provided valuable input and constructive criticism throughout. NEE 0801 Final Report: April 2009 2 Scoping Study for the Design and Use of Biodiversity Offsets in an English Context Executive Summary Defra commissioned a scoping study for the design and use of biodiversity offsets in an English context. The results of the study are summarised in this report and are intended to inform debate on the possible contribution of biodiversity offsets to conservation and sustainable development goals in England.
  • Regulated Destruction: How Biodiversity Offsetting Enables

    Regulated Destruction: How Biodiversity Offsetting Enables

    REGULATED DESTRUCTION How biodiversity offsetting enables environmental destruction Author Jutta Kill The research for this publication was carried out between February and October 2018. Design Somerset Bean Image credits Cover, p5, p24 Community agroecology and agro-forestry project, Sungai Buri, Sarawak, Indonesia. Members of the women’s group picking vegetables. Amelia Collins/Friends of the Earth International p11 Penang Inshore Fishermen Welfare Association (PIFWA), Mangrove Education Centre, Seberang Perai Selatan, Penang, Malaysia. Amelia Collins/Friends of the Earth International p21 Community agroecology and agro-forestry project, Sungai Buri, Sarawak, Indonesia, Members of the women’s group including the two women leaders. Amelia Collins/Friends of the Earth International Friends Of The Earth International is the world’s largest grassroots environmental network with 73 member groups and over two million members and supporters around the world. Our vision is of a peaceful and sustainable world based on societies living in harmony with nature. We envision a society of interdependent people living in dignity, wholeness and fulfilment in which equity and human and peoples’ rights are realised. This will be a society built upon peoples’ sovereignty and participation. It will be founded on social, economic, gender and environmental justice and be free from all forms of domination and exploitation, such as neoliberalism, corporate globalisation, neo-colonialism and militarism. We believe that our children’s future will be better because
  • Postnote 369 'Biodiversity Offsetting'

    Postnote 369 'Biodiversity Offsetting'

    POSTNOTE Number 369 January 2011 Biodiversity Offsetting Overview Biodiversity offsetting is a market-based conservation tool that measures negative impacts on biodiversity, replacing the loss through improvements usually nearby. Offsets aim to compensate for residual biodiversity loss incurred by development projects by maintaining an equivalent amount of biodiversity elsewhere that would otherwise be lost, or by enhancing Given growing recognition of the importance of biodiversity at an alternate location. biodiversity, all sectors are looking for ways to Several countries currently implement offset mitigate the environmental costs of law and policy with different levels of development activity. Biodiversity offsetting regulation and varying success. refers to market-based schemes designed to compensate for losses of biodiversity due to Offsets aim to achieve ‘no net loss’ or a ‘net development projects. This POSTnote gain’ of biodiversity. summarises biodiversity offsetting and Offsetting remains largely undervalued, examines opportunities and risks of offsets especially with regard to undervalued or as within a UK context. yet unknown biodiversity. recognised, this strategy has proved unable to stop the Biodiversity persistent and widespread loss and degradation of Biodiversity is the genetic diversity within species, species biodiversity in almost all regions. Participants to the recent diversity within ecosystems, and ecosystem diversity across intergovernmental meeting of the 193 parties at the landscapes. It supports ecosystem
  • Economics and the Ecosystem 19 March 2019

    Economics and the Ecosystem 19 March 2019

    sanity, humanity and science probably the world's most read economics journal real-world economics review Please click here to support this journal and the WEA - Subscribers: 26,210 subscribe RWER Blog ISSN 1755-9472 - A journal of the World Economics Association (WEA) 14,432 members, join back issues Issue no. 87: Economics and the Ecosystem 19 March 2019 Introduction: Economics and civilization in ecological crisis 2 Jamie Morgan and Edward Fullbrook Growthism: its ecological, economic and ethical limits 9 Herman Daly Producing ecological economy 23 Katharine N. Farrell Economics 101: Dog barking, overgrazing and ecological collapse 33 Edward Fullbrook Addressing meta-externalities: investments in restoring the Earth 36 Neva Goodwin Degrowth: a theory of radical abundance 54 Jason Hickel Environmental financialization: what could go wrong? 69 Eric Kemp-Benedict and Sivan Kartha Elements of a political economy of the postgrowth era 90 Max Koch Victim of success: civilisation is at risk 106 Peter McManners Economism and the Econocene: a coevolutionary interpretation 114 Richard B. Norgaard End game: the economy as eco-catastrophe and what needs to change 132 William E. Rees An ecosocialist path to limiting global temperature rise to 1.5°C 149 Richard Smith Toward sustainable development: democracy-oriented economics 181 Peter Söderbaum Like blending chalk and cheese – the impact of standard economics in IPCC scenarios 196 Joachim H. Spangenberg and Lia Polotzek Of ecosystems and economies: re-connecting economics with reality 213 Clive L. Spash and Tone Smith How to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals within planetary boundaries by 2050 231 Per Espen Stoknes The simpler way: envisioning a sustainable society in an age of limits 247 Ted Trainer and Samuel Alexander Board of Editors, past contributors, submissions, etc.
  • Metrics and Equivalence in Conservation Banking

    Metrics and Equivalence in Conservation Banking

    land Article Metrics and Equivalence in Conservation Banking Marie Grimm Technische Universität Berlin, Environmental Assessment and Planning Research Group, EB 5, Straße des 17. Juni 135, 10623 Berlin, Germany; [email protected]; Tel.: +49-(0)30-314-27388 Abstract: Offsets are increasingly used to compensate for unavoidable development impacts on species and habitats. Many offset programs pursue no net loss, but research on the success of these programs is lacking, including research on conservation banking’s success in conserving protected species under the US Endangered Species Act. This article provides a case study analysis of two conservation banks in the state of California, comparing the conservation gains provided by banks with the losses from development impacts. It provides an analysis of credits and metrics to determine whether the gains are equal to the losses in terms of type, condition, and amount. Results do show that the gains exceed the losses in terms of acreage. However, the program uses indirect metrics (acreage), and the equivalence of the losses and gains, besides habitat type and size, is not reflected. Banks provide a baseline in their documentation and conduct monitoring of species abundance and habitat quality, but they do not use it to measure additional conservation gains. More detailed metrics and transparent indices to certify the acres in production could allow for a quantification of conservation benefits and an evaluation of program success. However, selecting standardized metrics is challenging because they need to be species-specific to reflect the goal of species recovery, and still be operational in practice. Keywords: conservation banking; biodiversity offsets; Endangered Species Act; habitat banking; species conservation; metrics; equivalence; habitat quantification tools; effectiveness Citation: Grimm, M.
  • Biodiversity Management 8 2.5 Key Biodiversity Threats and Opportunities 9

    Biodiversity Management 8 2.5 Key Biodiversity Threats and Opportunities 9

    LEADING PRACTICE SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM FOR THE MINING INDUSTRY BIODIVERSITY MANA GEMENT LEADING PRACTICE SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM FOR THE MINING INDUSTRY BIODIVERSITY MANA FEBR U GEMENT AR Y 2 00 7 Disclaimer Leading Practice Sustainable Development Program for the Mining Industry This publication has been developed by a Working Group of experts, industry, and government and non-government representatives. The effort of the members of the Working Group is gratefully acknowledged. The views and opinions expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect those of the Commonwealth Government or the Minister for Industry, Tourism and Resources. While reasonable efforts have been made to ensure that the contents of this publication are factually correct, the Commonwealth does not accept responsibility for the accuracy or completeness of the contents, and shall not be liable for any loss or damage that may be occasioned directly or indirectly through the use of, or reliance on, the contents of this publication. Users of this handbook should bear in mind that it is intended as a general reference and is not intended to replace the need for professional advice relevant to the particular circumstances of individual users. Reference to companies or products in this handbook should not be taken as Commonwealth Government endorsement of those companies or their products. Cover image: Ely Creek, Cape York, QLD, Ross Smith. © Commonwealth of Australia 2007 ISBN 0 642 72506 3 This work is copyright. Apart from any use as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, no part may be reproduced by any process without prior written permission from the Commonwealth available from the Department of Communications, Information Technology and the Arts.