A1 Alkuperäisartikkeli tieteellisessä aikakauslehdessä
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-tekijät tai -toimittajat

Julkaisun tiedot

Julkaisun kaikki tekijät tai toimittajat: Kangas, Johanna; Kullberg, Peter; Pekkonen, Minna; Kotiaho, Janne S.; Ollikainen, Markku

Lehti tai sarja: Environmental Management

ISSN: 0364-152X

eISSN: 1432-1009

Julkaisuvuosi: 2021

Ilmestymispäivä: 07.06.2021

Volyymi: 68

Lehden numero: 2

Artikkelin sivunumerot: 170-183

Kustantaja: Springer Science+Business Media

Julkaisumaa: Yhdysvallat (USA)

Julkaisun kieli: englanti

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

Julkaisun avoin saatavuus: Avoimesti saatavilla

Julkaisukanavan avoin saatavuus: Osittain avoin julkaisukanava

Julkaisu on rinnakkaistallennettu (JYX): https://jyx.jyu.fi/handle/123456789/76952

Tiivistelmä

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.

YSO-asiasanat: ekologinen kompensaatio; biodiversiteetti; luonnon monimuotoisuus; kustannustehokkuus; laskentamallit

Liittyvät organisaatiot

OKM-raportointi: Kyllä

VIRTA-lähetysvuosi: 2021

JUFO-taso: 1