A1 Journal article (refereed)
Precision, Applicability, and Economic Implications : A Comparison of Alternative Biodiversity Offset Indexes (2021)

Kangas, J., Kullberg, P., Pekkonen, M., Kotiaho, J. S., & Ollikainen, M. (2021). Precision, Applicability, and Economic Implications : A Comparison of Alternative Biodiversity Offset Indexes. Environmental Management, 68(2), 170-183. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-021-01488-5

JYU authors or editors

Publication details

All authors or editors: Kangas, Johanna; Kullberg, Peter; Pekkonen, Minna; Kotiaho, Janne S.; Ollikainen, Markku

Journal or series: Environmental Management

ISSN: 0364-152X

eISSN: 1432-1009

Publication year: 2021

Publication date: 07/06/2021

Volume: 68

Issue number: 2

Pages range: 170-183

Publisher: Springer Science+Business Media

Publication country: United States

Publication language: English

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-021-01488-5

Publication open access: Openly available

Publication channel open access: Partially open access channel

Publication is parallel published (JYX): https://jyx.jyu.fi/handle/123456789/76952


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.

Keywords: ecological compensation; biodiversity; natural diversity; cost effectiveness; calculation models

Free keywords: Biodiversity offsetting; No net loss; Trade ratio; Biodiversity calculation method

Contributing organizations

Ministry reporting: Yes

Reporting Year: 2021

JUFO rating: 1

Last updated on 2022-20-09 at 14:30