IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i15p11930-d1209542.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Synergies and Trade-Offs between Biodiversity and Carbon in Ecological Compensation

Author

Listed:
  • Eshetu Yirdaw

    (Viikki Tropical Resources Institute (VITRI), Department of Forest Sciences, University of Helsinki, P.O. Box 27, FI-00014 Helsinki, Finland)

  • Markku Kanninen

    (Viikki Tropical Resources Institute (VITRI), Department of Forest Sciences, University of Helsinki, P.O. Box 27, FI-00014 Helsinki, Finland)

  • Adrian Monge

    (Viikki Tropical Resources Institute (VITRI), Department of Forest Sciences, University of Helsinki, P.O. Box 27, FI-00014 Helsinki, Finland)

Abstract

Ecological compensation, which is widely applied, is presumed to be an important mechanism to address environmental degradation that commonly occurs due to activities related to development projects and resource use. The objectives of this review are to investigate synergies and trade-offs between biodiversity and carbon offset, the challenges in their implementation, and the potential of biodiversity and/or carbon offsets to be used as a proxy for other ecosystem functions in the implementation of ecological compensation. In comparison to carbon offsets, the implementation of biodiversity offsets are more challenging due to difficulties in biodiversity measurement, determining ecological equivalence, the relatively longer time taken, the higher level of uncertainty, the uniqueness of ecosystems, and the irreversibility of species loss. Generally, there is a positive relationship between biodiversity and carbon stocks; however, there are also cases where there are no clear or even negative relationships between biodiversity and carbon stocks. Ecosystem functions are directly or indirectly affected by environmental degradation, and ecological compensation measures usually compensate for only a few components of the ecosystem functions. Since biodiversity is interconnected and underpins ecosystem functions, it has the potential to be used solely or as one of the proxies. However, we recommend developing a sound methodology to rank the important ecosystem functions and identify the few ecosystem functions, which can be used as proxies to indicate the achievement of ecological compensation goals.

Suggested Citation

  • Eshetu Yirdaw & Markku Kanninen & Adrian Monge, 2023. "Synergies and Trade-Offs between Biodiversity and Carbon in Ecological Compensation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-14, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:15:p:11930-:d:1209542
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/15/11930/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/15/11930/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wahyu Catur Adinugroho & Lilik Budi Prasetyo & Cecep Kusmana & Haruni Krisnawati & Christopher J. Weston & Liubov Volkova, 2022. "Recovery of Carbon and Vegetation Diversity 23 Years after Fire in a Tropical Dryland Forest of Indonesia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-18, June.
    2. Ola Lindroos & Malin Söderlind & Joel Jensen & Joakim Hjältén, 2021. "Cost Analysis of a Novel Method for Ecological Compensation—A Study of the Translocation of Dead Wood," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-18, May.
    3. Marie Grimm & Johann Köppel, 2019. "Biodiversity Offset Program Design and Implementation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(24), pages 1-15, December.
    4. Primmer, Eeva & Varumo, Liisa & Kotilainen, Juha M. & Raitanen, Elina & Kattainen, Matti & Pekkonen, Minna & Kuusela, Saija & Kullberg, Peter & Kangas, Johanna A.M. & Ollikainen, Markku, 2019. "Institutions for governing biodiversity offsetting: An analysis of rights and responsibilities," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 776-784.
    5. Kerchner, Charles D. & Keeton, William S., 2015. "California's regulatory forest carbon market: Viability for northeast landowners," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 70-81.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Sponagel, Christian & Bendel, Daniela & Angenendt, Elisabeth & Weber, Tobias Karl David & Gayler, Sebastian & Streck, Thilo & Bahrs, Enno, 2022. "Integrated assessment of regional approaches for biodiversity offsetting in urban-rural areas – A future based case study from Germany using arable land as an example," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 117(C).
    2. Sebastian Theis & Mark S. Poesch, 2022. "Assessing Conservation and Mitigation Banking Practices and Associated Gains and Losses in the United States," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-24, May.
    3. Khanal, Puskar N. & Grebner, Donald L. & Munn, Ian A. & Grado, Stephen C. & Grala, Robert K. & Henderson, James E., 2017. "Evaluating non-industrial private forest landowner willingness to manage for forest carbon sequestration in the southern United States," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 112-119.
    4. Bradley Hiller & Judith Fisher, 2023. "A Multifunctional ‘Scape Approach for Sustainable Management of Intact Ecosystems—A Review of Tropical Peatlands," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-23, January.
    5. Mikael Karlsson, 2022. "Biodiversity Offsetting: Ethical Views within Environmental Organisations in the European Union," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-11, September.
    6. Jagdish Poudel & Raju Pokharel, 2021. "Financial Analysis of Habitat Conservation Banking in California," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-12, November.
    7. Schulz, Tobias & Ohmura, Tamaki & Troxler, David & Lieberherr, Eva, 2024. "Forest clearances, compensatory afforestation and biodiversity offsetting in forests: Balancing flexibility and equivalency in Switzerland," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    8. Nahuel Bautista & Bruno D. V. Marino & J. William Munger, 2021. "Science to Commerce: A Commercial-Scale Protocol for Carbon Trading Applied to a 28-Year Record of Forest Carbon Monitoring at the Harvard Forest," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-22, February.
    9. Bruno D. V. Marino & Nahuel Bautista & Brandt Rousseaux, 2021. "Howland Forest, ME, USA: Multi-Gas Flux (CO 2 , CH 4 , N 2 O) Social Cost Product Underscores Limited Carbon Proxies," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-17, April.
    10. Marie Grimm, 2021. "Metrics and Equivalence in Conservation Banking," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-14, May.
    11. Parisa, Zack & Marland, Eric & Sohngen, Brent & Marland, Gregg & Jenkins, Jennifer, 2022. "The time value of carbon storage," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    12. Alisa E White & David A Lutz & Richard B Howarth & José R Soto, 2018. "Small-scale forestry and carbon offset markets: An empirical study of Vermont Current Use forest landowner willingness to accept carbon credit programs," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(8), pages 1-24, August.
    13. Chengxiang Zhang & Li Wen & Yuyu Wang & Cunqi Liu & Yan Zhou & Guangchun Lei, 2020. "Can Constructed Wetlands be Wildlife Refuges? A Review of Their Potential Biodiversity Conservation Value," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-18, February.
    14. Jayasuriya, Maneesha T. & Germain, René H. & Wagner, John E., 2020. "Protecting timberland RMZs through carbon markets: A protocol for riparian carbon offsets," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    15. Gren, Ing-Marie & Zeleke, Abenezer Aklilu, 2016. "Policy design for forest carbon sequestration: A review of the literature," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 128-136.
    16. Li Ma & Danbo Pang & Jie Gao & Wenbin Wang & Ruoxiu Sun, 2023. "Ecological Asset Assessment and Ecological Compensation Standards for Desert Nature Reserves: Evidence from Three Different Climate Zones in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-17, July.
    17. Sponagel, Christian & Angenendt, Elisabeth & Piepho, Hans-Peter & Bahrs, Enno, 2021. "Farmers’ preferences for nature conservation compensation measures with a focus on eco-accounts according to the German Nature Conservation Act," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    18. Barral, Stéphanie & Guillet, Fanny, 2023. "Preserving peri-urban land through biodiversity offsets: Between market transactions and planning regulations," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    19. Alexander Teytelboym, 2019. "Natural capital market design," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 35(1), pages 138-161.
    20. Shuai Chen & Jiameng Yang, 2023. "Environmental Pollution Liability Insurance Pricing and the Solvency of Insurance Companies in China: Based on the Black–Scholes Model," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(2), pages 1-21, January.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:15:p:11930-:d:1209542. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.