Precision, Applicability, and Economic Implications: A Comparison of Alternative Biodiversity Offset Indexes
| Autor: | Johanna Kangas, Janne S. Kotiaho, Peter Kullberg, Markku Ollikainen, Minna Pekkonen |
|---|---|
| Přispěvatelé: | Department of Economics and Management |
| Jazyk: | angličtina |
| Rok vydání: | 2021 |
| Předmět: |
0106 biological sciences
INDICATORS Conservation of Natural Resources ekologinen kompensaatio köyhtyminen Biodiversity offsetting Offset (computer science) arviointimenetelmät Computer science CONSERVATION Biodiversity DIVERSITY 010603 evolutionary biology 01 natural sciences Outcome (game theory) Article RICHNESS Additive function Econometrics Ecosystem 1172 Environmental sciences RESTORATION Estimation Motivation Global and Planetary Change Ecology 010604 marine biology & hydrobiology Multiplicative function kustannustehokkuus Ecological compensation 15. Life on land FINLAND luonnon monimuotoisuus Pollution Biodiversity calculation method kompensointi biodiversiteetti ECOLOGICAL EQUIVALENCE INSIGHTS Habitat destruction 13. Climate action POLYPORES No net loss laskentamallit 511 Economics Trade ratio DEAD WOOD |
| Zdroj: | Environmental Management |
| Popis: | The rates of ecosystem degradation and biodiversity loss are alarming and current conservation efforts are not sufficient to stop them. The need for new tools is urgent. One approach is biodiversity offsetting: a developer causing habitat degradation provides an improvement in biodiversity so that the lost ecological value is compensated for. Accurate and ecologically meaningful measurement of losses and estimation of gains are essential in reaching the no net loss goal or any other desired outcome of biodiversity offsetting. The chosen calculation method strongly influences biodiversity outcomes. We compare a multiplicative method, which is based on a habitat condition index developed for measuring the state of ecosystems in Finland to two alternative approaches for building a calculation method: an additive function and a simpler matrix tool. We examine the different logic of each method by comparing the resulting trade ratios and examine the costs of offsetting for developers, which allows us to compare the cost-effectiveness of different types of offsets. The results show that the outcomes of the calculation methods differ in many aspects. The matrix approach is not able to consider small changes in the ecological state. The additive method gives always higher biodiversity values compared to the multiplicative method. The multiplicative method tends to require larger trade ratios than the additive method when trade ratios are larger than one. Using scoring intervals instead of using continuous components may increase the difference between the methods. In addition, the calculation methods have differences in dealing with the issue of substitutability. |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|