Measuring biodiversity: research into approaches

Genetic

Genetic diversity within a species, low genetic diversity can result in low resilience to environmental change. Tools evaluating genetic diversity within populations are too constrained to provide a useful means of calculating biodiversity as a whole.

Business @ Biodiversity

Abundance of priority species

Number of individuals of a priority species (e.g. red list species). For most species a complete census is not feasible, and an estimate is derived from a standardised sampling protocol. Estimates can vary, particularly for mobile species, and can show significant temporal variation. Focus on monitoring priority species can result in trade-offs between species.

Project proposal

Business @ Biodiversity

Species richness

The number of species present. This is often targeted to a particular taxon or functional group (e.g. the number of species of vascular plants or insect pollinators) and many standard protocols encompass both identifying and quantifying species. This involves using standardised methodology and data can feed into the UK biodiversity indicators. As with metrics relating to species abundance these metrics can show significant temporal variation.

Project proposal

Business @ Biodiversity

Indicator species

Here the focus is on indicator species that reflect habitat quality – indicators could be both positive or negative. For example, plant species associated with high quality species rich grasslands, or invertebrates that reflect water quality. Constraining the species list to indicator species can reduce the level of ecological expertise required in addition to time in the field.

Project proposal

Business @ Biodiversity

Ecosystem health/ function

Measurement of the health of an ecosystem and its ability to function and provide ecosystem services.

Stakeholder/

steering group workshops

Functional/or response diversity

Here information on species occurrence is integrated with information on the traits of the species present. Response diversity focusses on a wide suite of traits and measures the ability of a community to respond to environmental change. Functional diversity focusses on traits related to a particular ecosystem function (e.g. pollination services). Functionally diverse communities are perceived to promote ecosystem resilience under environmental change, ensuring the ecosystem processes in question persists. Metrics related to functional or response diversity are reliant on the existence of comprehensive trait databases which are lacking for many taxa.

Irreplaceable habitats

The occurrence of habitats of conservation concern (e.g. Annex 1 habitats) or irreplaceable habitats (e.g. Raised bog)

Stakeholder/

steering group workshops

Habitat extent

The total area of habitat/habitats. This measure is easily upscaled from site to landscape level, and could draw on spatial data derived from remote sensing. However, the value of habitats to biodiversity varies considerably depending on their condition.

Business @ Biodiversity

Natural England Biodiversity Metric 3.1

Habitat extent and condition

The total area of habitat/habitats alongside a measure of their condition (i.e. habitat quality). Condition is usually based on collection of a variety of metrics relating to habitat structure and in some instances the occurrence of key indicator species and management information. Collecting on the ground data on habitat condition provides more detailed information on the biodiversity value of habitats. However, on the ground collection of data requires more time for baseline and follow-up monitoring.

Business @ Biodiversity

Natural England Biodiversity Metric 3.1

Habitat extent, condition and distinctivene-ss

In addition to encompasses extent and condition this metric recognises that not all habitats are equal with respect to their biodiversity value. Distinctiveness of a habitat provides a measure of habitat rarity and importance and may be dependent on its rarity (at national, international level), proportion protected, and priority status (national, international level). Once underlying scores on distinctiveness have been derived, this metric would involve similar effort to metrics based on habitat extent and condition.

Business @ Biodiversity

Natural England BiodiversityMetric 3.1

Ecological connectivity

This metric takes into account the spatial arrangement of habitats in the landscape. Restoring ecological connectivity is a key priority to ensure that nature can thrive in the face of environmental change. Enhancing connectivity between habitats through the creation of corridors and stepping stones is fundamental to the Scottish government's ambitions of creating a Nature Network. In the Central Scotland Green Network area, network modelling has spatially identified opportunity areas for some habitats where the creation of new habitat will optimise connectivity. However, this mapping is geographically constrained.

Stakeholder/

steering group workshops

Accounts for current and future pressures

Allows for risks and pressures to be quantified. For example, vulnerability of a habitat to climate change/invasive species, time delay in establishing a habitat, risks associated with establishing different habitats. Many of these pressures will vary with both habitat and geographical location.

Business @ Biodiversity

Includes ongoing monitoring

Enables long-term monitoring of habitats or species. For most sectors it can be assumed that persistence and/or improvement is a desired outcome and thus ongoing monitoring is important.

Project proposal

Cost of use

Costs associated with baseline and follow-up monitoring – particularly as biodiversity outcomes may require monitoring over a long period of time – e.g. 30 years

Business @ Biodiversity

Expertise

Level of ecological or technical expertise required.

Requirement for outputs of the metric to be widely accessible to all – should this expertise reflect on the ground surveying.

Having high level of expertise gives reliability in natural capital markets but is disadvantageous where participatory monitoring is beneficial. Perhaps natural capital is not so much about expertise but this is covered in robustness of the metric below?

Invitation to tender/ Project proposal

Time requirements

Time taken to undertake baselining and subsequent monitoring

Business @ Biodiversity

Scalable spatial

Transferable across spatial scales – from field to farm to catchment (here habitat-based measures are likely to be more appropriate)

Invitation to tender

Financially viable to implement at scale, across sectors

This could include ability to use existing data (e.g. publicly available GIS data, remote sensing) for large scale projects. Potential to align monitoring with existing or forthcoming schemes

Project proposal

Open access

Tool and the data that underpins the tool is freely available

Project team

Clear, concise, and transparent

Measurements are clear and straightforward. Clear how the resultant measurements were derived on the ground and how these relate to biodiversity impacts. This reduces the likelihood of abuse.

Invitation to tender

Replicable

The measures taken are reliable and will provide consistent results – e.g. across a relevant time span or between evaluators (i.e. replicable)

Invitation to tender/ Project proposal

Scientifically robust: reflects ecosystem functions

Measurements taken provide a true reflection of biodiversity outcomes (e.g. ecosystem health, habitat quality)

Invitation to tender

Comparable

Transferable to different scenarios and to different land uses – for example monitoring the impact of a moorland restoration project or the impact of building a new housing estate.

Should this encompass trading and/or offsetting?

Invitation to tender

Saleable

Quantifiable biodiversity units are created allowing for the development of a verifiable biodiversity market. Facilitates commercialisation of Nature.

Invitation to tender/ Stakeholder/ steering group workshops

Tradeable

Changes in one habitat can be compared to and traded for changes in another (i.e. offsetting or net gain).

Stakeholder/ steering group workshops

Meaningful to all key stakeholders and scenarios they may want to use a metric

Stakeholders can clearly interpret the output of the metric with respect to biodiversity outcomes. This information can then assist stakeholders to make decisions and evaluate actions. This could be tricky – conservation bodies are likely to require more detailed means of evaluating than for example agri-environment schemes.

Invitation to tender

Aligns with monitoring (existing or future)

Aligning monitoring with existing or future action will reduce costs associated with long-term monitoring and will add bonus to existing/future monitoring (e.g. SEPA water quality, Farm Biodiversity audit).

Project proposal

Aligns with current (or future) policy objectives

Aligning with future policy objectives at the local, regional and national level. Need to encompass key strategies – 30x30 target and establishing a nature network. This should be cross sector and align with SDG additionally. This highlights the benefits of multi-functionality. Raises questions on how this could be achieved (stacking, bundling) – re additionality.

Project team

Maturity of tool

Is the tool potential, emerging or mature. How long has the tool been available and what level of adoption has it?

Business @ Biodiversity