IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/wireae/v4y2015i1p26-50.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How do sustainability standards consider biodiversity?

Author

Listed:
  • Oskar Englund
  • Göran Berndes

Abstract

Sustainability certification schemes and standards are meant to prevent a range of unacceptable socioeconomic and environmental consequences, such as threats to biodiversity. While there is wide support for conserving biodiversity, operationalizing this support in the form of guiding principles, criteria/indicators, and legislation is complicated. This study investigates how and to what extent 26 sustainability standards (eleven for forest management, nine for agriculture and six biofuel‐related) consider biodiversity, by assessing how they seek to prevent actions that can threaten biodiversity as well as how they support actions aimed at biodiversity conservation. For this purpose, a benchmark standard was developed, meant to represent a case with very high ambitions concerning biodiversity conservation. Of the assessed standards, the biofuel‐related standards demonstrated the highest level of compliance with the benchmark. On average, they complied with 72% of the benchmark's component criteria, compared to 61% for the agricultural standards and 60% for the forestry standards. Fairtrade, Sustainable Agriculture Network/Rainforest Alliance (SAN/RA), Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO), and Roundtable on Responsible Soy (RTRS) were particularly stringent, while Green Gold Label S5 (GGLS5), PEOLG, Global Partnership for Good Agricultural Practices (GLOBALGAP), European Union Organic (EU Organic), National Organic Program (NOP), Green Gold Label S2 (GGLS2), and International Sustainability & Carbon Certification (ISCC) were particularly unstringent. All eleven forestry standards, six of the nine agricultural standards, and all six biofuel‐related standards addressed ecosystem conversion, ranging from requiring that high conservation value areas be identified and preserved to requiring full protection. Finally, key barriers to, and challenges for, certification schemes are discussed and recommendations are made for further development of sustainability standards. WIREs Energy Environ 2015, 4:26–50. doi: 10.1002/wene.118 This article is categorized under: Bioenergy > Economics and Policy Bioenergy > Climate and Environment

Suggested Citation

  • Oskar Englund & Göran Berndes, 2015. "How do sustainability standards consider biodiversity?," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Energy and Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 4(1), pages 26-50, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:wireae:v:4:y:2015:i:1:p:26-50
    DOI: 10.1002/wene.118
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/wene.118
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/wene.118?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Buytaert, V. & Muys, B. & Devriendt, N. & Pelkmans, L. & Kretzschmar, J.G. & Samson, R., 2011. "Towards integrated sustainability assessment for energetic use of biomass: A state of the art evaluation of assessment tools," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 15(8), pages 3918-3933.
    2. Johansson, Johanna & Lidestav, Gun, 2011. "Can voluntary standards regulate forestry? -- Assessing the environmental impacts of forest certification in Sweden," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(3), pages 191-198, March.
    3. Junginger, Martin & van Dam, Jinke & Zarrilli, Simonetta & Ali Mohamed, Fatin & Marchal, Didier & Faaij, Andre, 2011. "Opportunities and barriers for international bioenergy trade," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 2028-2042, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Inge Stupak & Jamie Joudrey & C. Tattersall Smith & Luc Pelkmans & Helena Chum & Annette Cowie & Oskar Englund & Chun Sheng Goh & Martin Junginger, 2016. "A global survey of stakeholder views and experiences for systems needed to effectively and efficiently govern sustainability of bioenergy," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Energy and Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 5(1), pages 89-118, January.
    2. Lucas Reijnders, 2022. "Defining and Operationalizing Sustainability in the Context of Energy," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(14), pages 1-9, July.
    3. Victoria A. Maguire-Rajpaul & Vinesh M. Rajpaul & Constance L. McDermott & Luís Fernando Guedes Pinto, 2020. "Coffee certification in Brazil: compliance with social standards and its implications for social equity," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 22(3), pages 2015-2044, March.
    4. de Man, Reinier & German, Laura, 2017. "Certifying the sustainability of biofuels: Promise and reality," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 871-883.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. So, Hau Wing & Lafortezza, Raffaele, 2022. "Reviewing the impacts of eco-labelling of forest products on different dimensions of sustainability in Europe," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    2. Vassilis Daioglou & Matteo Muratori & Patrick Lamers & Shinichiro Fujimori & Alban Kitous & Alexandre C. Köberle & Nico Bauer & Martin Junginger & Etsushi Kato & Florian Leblanc & Silvana Mima & Marsh, 2020. "Implications of climate change mitigation strategies on international bioenergy trade," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 163(3), pages 1639-1658, December.
    3. repec:aud:audfin:v:21:y:2019:i:50:p:75 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Ribeiro, Barbara E. & Quintanilla, Miguel A., 2015. "Transitions in biofuel technologies: An appraisal of the social impacts of cellulosic ethanol using the Delphi method," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 53-68.
    5. Kadam, Parag & Dwivedi, Puneet & Karnatz, Caroline, 2021. "Mapping convergence of sustainable forest management systems: Comparing three protocols and two certification schemes for ascertaining the trends in global forest governance," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    6. Nordén, Anna & Coria, Jessica & Jönsson, Anna Maria & Lagergren, Fredrik & Lehsten, Veiko, 2017. "Divergence in stakeholders' preferences: Evidence from a choice experiment on forest landscapes preferences in Sweden," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 179-195.
    7. Julia Hansson & Roman Hackl, 2016. "The potential influence of sustainability criteria on the European Union pellets market—the example of Sweden," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Energy and Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 5(4), pages 413-429, July.
    8. Nordén, Anna & Coria, Jessica & Villalobos, Laura, 2016. "Evaluation of the Impact of Forest Certification on Environmental Outcomes in Sweden," Working Papers in Economics 657, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
    9. Montalvo-Navarrete, Juan M. & Lasso-Palacios, Ana P., 2024. "Energy access sustainability criteria definition for Colombian rural areas," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 189(PA).
    10. Mardani, Abbas & Zavadskas, Edmundas Kazimieras & Khalifah, Zainab & Zakuan, Norhayati & Jusoh, Ahmad & Nor, Khalil Md & Khoshnoudi, Masoumeh, 2017. "A review of multi-criteria decision-making applications to solve energy management problems: Two decades from 1995 to 2015," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 216-256.
    11. Stephen Wyatt & Sara Teitelbaum, 2020. "Certifying a state forestry agency in Quebec: Complementarity and conflict around government responsibilities, indigenous rights, and certification of the state as forest manager," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(3), pages 551-567, July.
    12. Inge Stupak & Jamie Joudrey & C. Tattersall Smith & Luc Pelkmans & Helena Chum & Annette Cowie & Oskar Englund & Chun Sheng Goh & Martin Junginger, 2016. "A global survey of stakeholder views and experiences for systems needed to effectively and efficiently govern sustainability of bioenergy," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Energy and Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 5(1), pages 89-118, January.
    13. repec:wsr:ecbook:2013:i:iv-004 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Tamás Mizik, 2020. "Impacts of International Commodity Trade on Conventional Biofuels Production," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-20, March.
    15. Proskurina, Svetlana & Rimppi, Heli & Heinimö, Jussi & Hansson, Julia & Orlov, Anton & Raghu, KC & Vakkilainen, Esa, 2016. "Logistical, economic, environmental and regulatory conditions for future wood pellet transportation by sea to Europe: The case of Northwest Russian seaports," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 38-50.
    16. Chye Ing Lim & Wahidul Biswas, 2015. "An Evaluation of Holistic Sustainability Assessment Framework for Palm Oil Production in Malaysia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(12), pages 1-27, December.
    17. Sarah L. Stattman & Aarti Gupta, 2015. "Negotiating Authority in Global Biofuel Governance: Brazil and the EU in the WTO," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 15(1), pages 41-59, February.
    18. Xian, Hui & Colson, Gregory & Mei, Bin & Wetzstein, Michael E., 2015. "Co-firing coal with wood pellets for U.S. electricity generation: A real options analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 106-116.
    19. Barrette, Julie & Thiffault, Evelyne & Achim, Alexis & Junginger, Martin & Pothier, David & De Grandpré, Louis, 2017. "A financial analysis of the potential of dead trees from the boreal forest of eastern Canada to serve as feedstock for wood pellet export," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 198(C), pages 410-425.
    20. Murphy, Fionnuala & Sosa, Amanda & McDonnell, Kevin & Devlin, Ger, 2016. "Life cycle assessment of biomass-to-energy systems in Ireland modelled with biomass supply chain optimisation based on greenhouse gas emission reduction," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 1040-1055.
    21. de Barros, Marisa Maia & Szklo, Alexandre, 2015. "Petroleum refining flexibility and cost to address the risk of ethanol supply disruptions: The case of Brazil," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 20-31.
    22. Streimikiene, Dalia & Balezentis, Tomas & Krisciukaitienė, Irena & Balezentis, Alvydas, 2012. "Prioritizing sustainable electricity production technologies: MCDM approach," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 16(5), pages 3302-3311.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:wireae:v:4:y:2015:i:1:p:26-50. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=2041-8396 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.