Laboratório de Ecologia da Paisagem e Conservação, Departamento de Ecologia, Instituto de Biociências, Universidade de São Paulo, Rua do Matão, 321, Travessa 14, São Paulo, SP, 05508-900, Brazil.
Escola Politécnica, University of São Paulo (USP), Av. Prof. Mello Moraes, 2373, São Paulo, 05508-900, Brazil.
Environ Manage. 2023 Oct;72(4):727-740. doi: 10.1007/s00267-023-01858-1. Epub 2023 Jul 21.
Biodiversity offsets are commonly used to compensate for environmental impacts, but their effectiveness is often questioned. Estimations of expected losses and gains often rely on what we called condition metrics, which measure a site's quality or condition using certain ecological attributes. Condition metrics are central to most offset policies, but their attributes and calculations vary substantially. We reviewed the academic literature to draw a profile of existing condition metrics used in the offsetting context. We found 17 metrics that differed in how they included attributes from the three "dimensions of equivalence": biodiversity (present in 15 metrics), landscape (in 10 metrics) and ecosystem services (in 5 metrics). Most metrics included many ecological attributes and required fieldwork and GIS data to be calculated, but few used modeling and expert opinion. Generally, metrics aggregated the attributes into a single final value and were created in Global North countries. To favor more transparent and ecologically equivalent offset trades worldwide, we suggest condition metrics should include the three dimensions of equivalence in a disaggregated way, i.e. measurements done separately and analyzed in parallel. The use of modeling, expert opinion and GIS may facilitate the inclusion of the dimensions and reduce the need for intensive (and expensive) fieldwork. Testing synergies and trade-offs among attributes could indicate if metrics can be simplified without losing information. Finally, development of fit-for-purpose condition metrics is especially important in Global South countries, where few such metrics exist.
生物多样性补偿通常用于补偿环境影响,但它们的有效性经常受到质疑。预期损失和收益的估计通常依赖于我们所谓的条件指标,这些指标使用某些生态属性来衡量一个地点的质量或状况。条件指标是大多数补偿政策的核心,但它们的属性和计算方法有很大的不同。我们查阅了学术文献,以绘制在补偿背景下使用的现有条件指标的概况。我们发现了 17 种不同的指标,它们在如何包含三个“等效维度”的属性方面存在差异:生物多样性(在 15 种指标中)、景观(在 10 种指标中)和生态系统服务(在 5 种指标中)。大多数指标包含许多生态属性,并需要实地工作和 GIS 数据来计算,但很少使用建模和专家意见。一般来说,指标将属性汇总为一个单一的最终值,并在北美国家创建。为了在全球范围内促进更透明和生态等效的补偿交易,我们建议条件指标应以离散的方式包含三个等效维度,即分别进行测量并并行分析。建模、专家意见和 GIS 的使用可能有助于包含这些维度,并减少对密集(和昂贵)实地工作的需求。测试属性之间的协同作用和权衡,可以表明在不丢失信息的情况下,指标是否可以简化。最后,在生物多样性丰富的国家,特别是在南方国家,制定适合用途的条件指标尤为重要,因为这些国家几乎没有这样的指标。