Biodiversity Footprint Research Articles

Footprint assessments on organic farming to improve ecological safety in the water source areas of the South-to-North Water Diversion project

In recent decades, conventional intensive agricultural practices have led to serious non-point-source pollution in China and have imposed serious ecological threats to agroecosystems, especially in ecologically sensitive areas. The Middle Line of the South-to-North Water Diversion project, which covers one of the largest ecologically sensitive areas in China, began in December 2014. In the study area around the Danjiangkou Reservoir belonging to the Middle Line of the South-to-North Water Diversion project, organic farming has been encouraged instead of conventional farming. This study aimed to measure the difference in ecological safety between conventional and organic farming based on the ecological footprint combined with life cycle assessment, which integrated the assessments of carbon footprint (CF), water footprint (WF) and nitrogen footprint (NF). This paper hypothesized that the ecological footprint of organic farming in the target area would be lower than that of conventional farming because of the reduced chemical inputs. The results showed that, as expected, first, organic farming had a lower footprint with a higher ecological remainder than conventional farming in 2015, indicating that organic farming practices made greater contributions to regional ecological safety in the study area. Second, in conventional farming, the total grey water footprint (nitrogen, phosphorus pentoxide and potassium oxide) was much higher than that of the farms in which only nitrogen fertilizer were used, indicating that both phosphorus pentoxide and potassium oxide also play indispensable roles in water footprint evaluation. Third, the energy-related nitrogen footprint was greatest in organic farming, caused by higher diesel oil consumption due to greater farm size for mechanical operation. Finally, the methods of calculating the amount of ecological compensation were improved. According to reduced ecological footprints, an extra payment (CF = 115.17 CNY ha−1; WF = 0.09 CNY ha−1; NF = 102.20 CNY ha−1) for organic farming should be seriously considered by different stakeholders, due to its benefit to greater ecological safety. From the perspective of ecological footprints, ecological compensation policies for organic farming might effectively promote ecological safety in the South-to-North Water Diversion watershed in the future. Footprint, as an accounting tool, offers great potential in assessment of ecological safety and ecological compensation worldwide and needs to be further explored in more dimensions such as phosphorus footprint, biodiversity footprint and so on.

Quantifying Europe's biodiversity footprints and the role of urbanization and income

Non-technical abstract Biodiversity footprinting links consumers to the biodiversity pressure their consumption induces, thereby informing choices and enabling participation in remediation measures. In order for countries, cities and households to reduce their impacts it is useful to know more precisely what the various drivers of their footprints are. Here we ask: do urban or rural areas in Europe exert higher biodiversity footprints? And how strongly coupled are income and biodiversity losses? Studying urban versus rural households at the country level in Europe, we found both have generally similar footprints, but that higher income households clearly drive higher footprints.

The influence of the global electric power system on terrestrial biodiversity

Given its total contribution to greenhouse gas emissions, the global electric power sector will be required to undergo a fundamental transformation over the next decades to limit anthropogenic climate change to below 2 °C. Implications for biodiversity of projected structural changes in the global electric power sector are rarely considered beyond those explicitly linked to climate change. This study uses a spatially explicit consumption-based accounting framework to examine the impact of demand for electric power on terrestrial vertebrate biodiversity globally. We demonstrate that the biodiversity footprint of the electric power sector is primarily within the territory where final demand for electric power resides, although there are substantial regional differences, with Europe displacing its biodiversity threat along international supply chains. The relationship between size of individual components of the electric power sector and threat to biodiversity indicates that a shift to nonfossil sources, such as solar and wind, could reduce pressures on biodiversity both within the territory where demand for power resides and along international supply chains. However, given the current levels of deployment of nonfossil sources of power, there is considerable uncertainty as to how the impacts of structural changes in the global electric power system will scale. Given the strong territorial link between demand and associated biodiversity impacts, development of strong national governance around the electric power sector represents a clear route to mitigate threats to biodiversity associated with efforts to decarbonize society over the coming century.

Product Biodiversity Footprint – A novel approach to compare the impact of products on biodiversity combining Life Cycle Assessment and Ecology

Product impacts on ecosystem quality have long been addressed by the topdown approach known as Life Cycle Assessment (LCA). Impacts are most of the time assessed within the “biodiversity loss” damage category indicator. However, LCA methods do not cover the 5 drivers of biodiversity loss as identified by (Millenium Ecosystem Assessment, 2005) (MEA): only land occupation and transformation, pollution, and climate change are covered, while species overexploitation and invasive species are not. Besides, ecologists work on the ground to measure concrete impacts from given practices on biodiversity in specific areas for some parts of the value chain of the product (e.g. production of agricultural biomaterial).The Product Biodiversity Footprint (PBF) approach aims at bridging the gap between LCA and ecology. Its objective is to allow comparison of variants of a given product to support eco-design, addressing the five drivers of MEA. The methodology combines LCA and ecology current knowledge and organizes them towards practical indicators and representations for business decision.PBF has been tested in three business case studies. The one for L’Oréal presented herewith shows that the integration of ecological data enables to refine and complement LCA results. This method at product level is, to our knowledge, the first to address the five MEA drivers on biodiversity along the value chain, with a combination of quantitative and semi-quantitative indicators. Stemming from an LCA global framework and approach, ecology knowledge adds refinements that enable to distinguish between different anthropogenic practices and better informed decision making.

A framework to estimate biodiversity loss and associated costs due to nitrogen emissions from single power plants

Abstract Environmental reporting by companies is becoming increasingly important for measuring sustainability performance, but biodiversity impacts are still largely unaccounted for due to the complexity of assessing such impacts. Energy production by power plants causes nitrogen emissions that may affect nature areas. To assess the impact of power plants on the biodiversity of Natura 2000 areas and to estimate compensation costs, we developed an analytical framework and applied it to four single power plants in the Netherlands. These plants differed according to production capacity and fuel source (natural gas and biomass). The plants affected between 77 and 537 km2 of Natura 2000 nature areas. To estimate cost of biodiversity loss and compensation, three approaches were applied: costs of restoration, ‘insetting’ costs incurred by creating new nature areas within the current Natura 2000 network, and offsetting costs, including land purchase of former agricultural land. Depending on the nitrogen exceedance levels of vegetation, compensation areas ranged between 6.5 and 23.6 ha. The estimated total cost per power plant varied from € 38,430 to € 1,753,261 annually. Depending on the cost method applied, biodiversity cost of energy production by single power plants ranged from 0.06 €.MWh−1 to 1.65 €.MWh−1. This cost largely depends on the type and location of the vegetation affected, which indicates that a spatial analysis is needed to measure the biodiversity footprint of business operations in environmental reporting.

Mitigating the biodiversity footprint of energy crops – A case study on arthropod diversity

Rising demand for renewable resources has increased silage maize (Zea mays L.) production characterized by intensive soil management, high fertilizer and pesticide inputs as well as simplified crop rotations. Advantages of renewable biomass production may thus be cancelled out by adverse environmental effects. Perennial crops, like cup plant (Silphium perfoliatum L.), are said to benefit arthropods. Substituting silage maize could hence increase biodiversity and foster ecosystem services.This study aimed at comparing the attractiveness of both crops to arthropods, which are either flower-visiting or active in the crop canopy. Further, results were scaled to the landscape level to optimize crop partitioning concerning yields and species diversity.A field experiment with conventionally tilled annual and perennial no-tilled crops was established in 2015 near Munich (Germany). The crops chosen were insect-pollinated cup plant and wind-pollinated maize. Arthropods were sampled between June and September 2016. Four replicated UV-active pan traps, consisting of three bowls each, were used to catch arthropods at the actual crop height on five sampling dates. The collected arthropods were counted and taxonomically determined.In total 3810 individuals (Arachnida: 52; Insecta: 3758) from 9 orders (115 taxonomic groups) were collected. Silage maize mostly showed lower diversity values, indicating higher biodiversity in cup plant. However, the differences were small. Nevertheless, cup plant harbored more pollinators and parasitoids. Finding an optimal combination of both crops based on diversity gains is thus not straightforward. However, integrating cup plant to silage maize production systems allows increasing arthropod diversity by means of moderate yield reduction.

Consumption-based biodiversity footprints – Do different indicators yield different results?

Land use related to human consumption patterns leads to significant loss of biodiversity. Here, the implications of using different indicators in the calculation of biodiversity footprints caused by land use were analyzed. Footprints refer to the impacts related to the net consumption in a region. We calculated biodiversity footprints for 140 regions in the world with an environmentally-extended multi-regional input-output (EEMRIO) model. The EEMRIO links economic activities from the Global Trade Analysis Project (GTAP) database with land use and four indicators of biodiversity loss. We included three alpha diversity indicators (loss of mean species abundance, relative abundance and relative species richness) and one indicator of gamma diversity (vulnerability-weighted relative species richness loss). While the three alpha diversity indicators reflect local diversity within a site, the gamma diversity indicator captures global diversity by weighting regional species richness with species’ extinction vulnerability in a region. We found that the three alpha diversity footprints show close alignment (rS > 0.93), while there was limited convergence between alpha and gamma diversity footprints (rS < 0.22). The alpha diversity indicators identified a diverse set of regions with high per capita consumption-based biodiversity footprints across the globe, while the gamma diversity indicator emphasized human consumption patterns threatening particularly tropical biodiversity. Although all footprints are positively related to rising household expenditure, this relationship was weaker and highly uncertain for the gamma diversity footprints. The alpha-based footprints also showed a negative relationship with population density, while the gamma-based footprint was not related to population density. Our results highlight the relevance of including both alpha and gamma diversity indicators in land-based biodiversity footprint calculations.

A novel maximum entropy approach to hybrid monetary-physical supply-chain modelling and its application to biodiversity impacts of palm oil embodied in consumption

The environmental and social consequences of clearing tropical forests for palm oil and soybean monoculture have been analyzed in a number of studies and are widely recognized. Some initiatives and studies have examined portions of the supply chain from the perspective of individual companies and stages in the supply chain. We complement this work by providing a consistent, detailed, global trade-linked analysis of the four major vegetable oils, connecting land use for production and its biodiversity impact, through global supply chains, to final consumers. To this end, we develop a global model by fully integrating FAO’s physical supply-utilization accounts into the environmentally extended multiregional input–output model EXIOBASE. Global supply chains are linked with the life-cycle impact assessment model LC-Impact to assess biodiversity impact of land use via global maps of oil crop cultivation. For the period 2000–2010, we find significant substitution of domestically produced oils with relatively low biodiversity impacts with Indonesian palm oil and Brazilian soybean oil for the major consuming countries, China, Europe and the US. Whereas soybean oil remains the vegetable oil with the largest impact on biodiversity at a global scale, biodiversity footprints of palm oil have grown substantially larger in the period 2000–2010, driven by demand from Europe and China. Our results suggest that demand-side policies focused on specific oils, such as palm oil, might lead to switching oils and unintended shifts of environmental impacts.

Spatially explicit LCA analysis of biodiversity losses due to different bioenergy policies in the European Union

In this study, the potential global loss of species directly associated with land use in the EU and due to trade with other regions is computed over time, in order to reveal differences in impacts between the considered alternatives of plausible bioenergy policies development in the EU.The spatially explicit study combines a life cycle analysis (LCA) for biodiversity impact assessment with a global high resolution economic land use model. Both impacts of domestic land use and impacts through imports were included for estimating the biodiversity footprint of the member states of the (EU28). The analyzed scenarios assumed similar biomass demand until 2020 but differed thereafter, from keeping the growth of demand for bioenergy constant (CONST), to a strong increase of bioenergy in line with the EU target of decreasing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 80% by 2050 (EMIRED) and with the baseline (BASE) scenario falling between the other two.As a general trend, the increasing demand for biomass was found to have substantial impact on biodiversity in all scenarios, while the differences between the scenarios were found to be modest. The share caused by imports was 15% of the overall biodiversity impacts detected in this study in the year 2000, and progressively increased to 24% to 26% in 2050, depending on the scenario. The most prominent future change in domestic land use in all scenarios was the expansion of perennial cultivations for energy. In the EMIRED scenario, there is a larger expansion of perennial cultivations and a smaller expansion of cropland in the EU than in the other two scenarios. As the biodiversity damage is smaller for land used for perennial cultivations than for cropland, this development decreases the internal biodiversity damage per unit of land. At the same time, however, the EMIRED scenario also features the largest outsourcing of damage, due to increased import of cropland products from outside the EU for satisfying the EU food demand. These two opposite effects even out each other, resulting in the total biodiversity damage for the EMIRED scenario being only slightly higher than the other two scenarios.The results of this study indicate that increasing cultivation of perennials for bioenergy and the consequent decrease in the availability of cropland for food production in the EU may lead to outsourcing of agricultural products supply to other regions. This development is associated with a leakage of biodiversity damages to species-rich and vulnerable regions outside the EU.In the case of a future increase in bioenergy demand, the combination of biomass supply from sustainable forest management in the EU, combined with imported wood pellets and cultivation of perennial energy crops, appears to be less detrimental to biodiversity than expansion of energy crops in the EU.

Quantifying biodiversity footprints of Dutch economic sectors: A global supply-chain analysis

Economic sectors contribute to biodiversity loss via environmental pressures, such as land use and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, directly and via their supply chains. This study is the first that systematically quantifies supply-chain-related environmental pressures and terrestrial biodiversity losses in relation to sectoral production by presenting so-called biodiversity footprints for 47 sectors in the Dutch economy. The supply chains of the food and chemical sectors were investigated in more detail, by applying a structural path analysis. Mean Species Abundance (MSA) was used as a biodiversity indicator, representing the degree of ecosystem naturalness. Our results revealed that (i) the largest supply-chain-related biodiversity losses occur in land-intensive and energy-intensive sectors; (ii) sectors that produce primary resources, such as crops and livestock, showed the largest biodiversity footprint per EUR of output; (iii) for most sectors in the Dutch economy, more than 50% of the biodiversity losses related to their supply chains were being caused abroad; and (iv) more than 45% of the supply-chain-related losses caused by the food and chemical sectors occurred upstream of the direct suppliers. Our results imply that mitigation of GHG emissions as well as land-use-related options should be considered in sectoral strategies to protect global biodiversity. The results create a clear rational for not only improving sectoral production efficiency, but also for taking supply-chain responsibility. Supply-chain-related biodiversity losses often cannot be directly influenced by the sector, or occur in other countries. Additional strategies may be needed then to reduce global biodiversity losses.

Quantifying Biodiversity Losses Due to Human Consumption: A Global-Scale Footprint Analysis.

It is increasingly recognized that human consumption leads to considerable losses of biodiversity. This study is the first to systematically quantify these losses in relation to land use and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions associated with the production and consumption of (inter)nationally traded goods and services by presenting consumption-based biodiversity losses, in short biodiversity footprint, for 45 countries and world regions globally. Our results showed that (i) the biodiversity loss per citizen shows large variations among countries, with higher values when per-capita income increases; (ii) the share of biodiversity losses due to GHG emissions in the biodiversity footprint increases with income; (iii) food consumption is the most important driver of biodiversity loss in most of the countries and regions, with a global average of 40%; (iv) more than 50% of the biodiversity loss associated with consumption in developed economies occurs outside their territorial boundaries; and (v) the biodiversity footprint per dollar consumed is lower for wealthier countries. The insights provided by our analysis might support policymakers in developing adequate responses to avert further losses of biodiversity when population and incomes increase. Both the mitigation of GHG emissions and land use related reduction options in production and consumption should be considered in strategies to protect global biodiversity.

Identifying species threat hotspots from global supply chains.

Identifying hotspots of species threat has been a successful approach for setting conservation priorities. One important challenge in conservation is that, in many hotspots, export industries continue to drive overexploitation. Conservation measures must consider not just the point of impact, but also the consumer demand that ultimately drives resource use. To understand which species threat hotspots are driven by which consumers, we have developed a new approach to link a set of biodiversity footprint accounts to the hotspots of threatened species on the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. The result is a map connecting consumption to spatially explicit hotspots driven by production on a global scale. Locating biodiversity threat hotspots driven by consumption of goods and services can help to connect conservationists, consumers, companies and governments in order to better target conservation actions.

Evaluating the impacts of wood production and trade on bird extinction risks

Biodiversity loss can be accelerated by human consumption in regions that are far removed from habitat degradation because of economic globalization, but no study has directly quantified the effects of global trade on extinction risks at a global scale with consideration for species differences. We propose a novel biodiversity footprint index based on bird extinction risks to evaluate the effects of global wood production and trade on biodiversity. Using 536 endangered bird species threatened by wood harvesting and logging, we calculated the “quasi-extinction” probabilities, that is, the probabilities that population sizes become lower than an extinction threshold after habitat loss based on initial population sizes and forest habitat loss rates. We then used bilateral wood trade data to link the biodiversity impacts in wood exporters to wood importers. We found that if recent trends in forest cover loss continue until 2100, bird species in Brazil would be the most rapidly and heavily affected by wood production and trade, followed by those in Indonesia; these two countries alone would account for about half of all global bird extinctions. Large-scale wood importers (i.e., China, Japan, and the United States) significantly elevate overseas extinction risks and, simultaneously, reduce domestic impacts, indicating a heavy responsibility of these countries for global biodiversity loss. We also conducted a scenario analysis, which showed that the total projected number of extinct species would not decrease if each country produced the amount of wood materials necessary to meet current consumption levels. This is because bird extinction risks in tropical wood importers, such as Mexico and the Philippines, as well as Japan and China will increase if these countries increase domestic wood production. Our biodiversity footprint index is useful to identify countries whose bird species are highly affected by wood production and trade, and to quantify the role of wood trade in bird species extinctions. Additional scenario analyses are needed to establish effective patterns of wood production and consumption for bird biodiversity conservation.

On the suitability of input–output analysis for calculating product-specific biodiversity footprints

Recently it has been estimated that one third of biodiversity threats are driven by consumer demand from outside the country in which the threat occurs. This occurs when the production of export goods exerts pressure on vulnerable populations. While population biologists have in cases been able to establish links between species threats and the causative industry(s), little has been done to trace this biodiversity footprint from the directly implicated industry out to final consumers, a step that would open a wider variety of policy responses. Here we investigate the suitability of multi-region input–output (MRIO) analysis for tracing out links between particular species threats, directly implicated industries, and the countries and consumer goods sectors ultimately driving these industries. Environmentally extended MRIO models are understood to provide reliable results at a macroeconomic level but uncertainty increases as the models are used to investigate individual sectors, companies, and products. In this study we examine several case studies (nickel mining in New Caledonia, coltan from the Democratic Republic of Congo, cut flowers from Kenya, and forestry in Papua New Guinea) in order to understand how and when MRIO techniques can be useful for studying biodiversity implicated supply chains. The study was conducted using the Eora global input–output database that documents >5 billion global supply chains. Calculating the biodiversity footprint at this level of detail, between specific threats, supply chains, and consumer goods, has not been done before. These case studies provide interesting insights in their own right and also serve to highlight the strengths and weaknesses of using input–output analysis techniques to calculate detailed biodiversity footprints. We conclude that MRIO analysis, while no panacea, can be useful for outlining supply chains and identifying which consumption sectors and trade and transformation steps can be subjected to closer analysis in order to enable remedial action.

Significance of environmental footprints for evaluating sustainability and security of development

This contribution presents the selected categories of environmental footprints related to the planetary boundaries and threats to human security. The analysis covers the footprint family of indicators that usually consists of ecological, carbon or more precisely greenhouse gas and water footprints and also sometimes the energy footprint. The other assessed footprints that are important for ecosystem health in regard to water, health, food, and land and species security are nitrogen, phosphorus, biodiversity and land footprints, which have already transgressed the planetary boundaries and are therefore outside the safe operating space. The importance of the various footprints is discussed and the simultaneous analysis of footprints is emphasised as a major direction of research and practice. The comprehensive set of environmental impacts, e.g. set of presented footprints in this contribution, should be considered and should incorporate the burdening and unburdening concept from the life cycle perspective. Some applications of the presented environmental footprints are offered, and conclusions and remarks provided for future observation.

Comparing the ecological footprint with the biodiversity footprint of products

Abstract This study compares the ecological footprints with the biodiversity footprints of products that result from land use and carbon dioxide emissions. The biodiversity footprints were quantified using mean species abundance statistics, whereas the ecological footprint refers to the impacts on bioproductivity. We used a data set of 1340 product systems subdivided into 13 product groups, which included various types of energy generation and material production. We found that the importance of direct land use vs. carbon dioxide emissions is different for biodiversity footprints compared to ecological footprints. This difference is particularly relevant if the environmental impact of bio-based products (dominated by direct land use) is compared with the environmental impact of fossil-based products (dominated by CO 2 emissions). Our results also show that the relative importance of different drivers can change over time within the biodiversity footprint and that the relative importance of climate change significantly increased for longer time horizons. As the interpretation of the biodiversity footprint can differ from the ecological footprint, the inclusion of impacts on biodiversity should be considered in the footprint calculation of products.

International trade drives biodiversity threats in developing nations

Human activities are causing Earth's sixth major extinction event-an accelerating decline of the world's stocks of biological diversity at rates 100 to 1,000 times pre-human levels. Historically, low-impact intrusion into species habitats arose from local demands for food, fuel and living space. However, in today's increasingly globalized economy, international trade chains accelerate habitat degradation far removed from the place of consumption. Although adverse effects of economic prosperity and economic inequality have been confirmed, the importance of international trade as a driver of threats to species is poorly understood. Here we show that a significant number of species are threatened as a result of international trade along complex routes, and that, in particular, consumers in developed countries cause threats to species through their demand of commodities that are ultimately produced in developing countries. We linked 25,000 Animalia species threat records from the International Union for Conservation of Nature Red List to more than 15,000 commodities produced in 187 countries and evaluated more than 5 billion supply chains in terms of their biodiversity impacts. Excluding invasive species, we found that 30% of global species threats are due to international trade. In many developed countries, the consumption of imported coffee, tea, sugar, textiles, fish and other manufactured items causes a biodiversity footprint that is larger abroad than at home. Our results emphasize the importance of examining biodiversity loss as a global systemic phenomenon, instead of looking at the degrading or polluting producers in isolation. We anticipate that our findings will facilitate better regulation, sustainable supply-chain certification and consumer product labelling.

Mitigating the biodiversity impacts of oil palm development.

Abstract Impacts of oil palm plantation agriculture on biodiversity have proven severe, leading to increased human-wildlife conflict, homogenization of structurally and species diverse ecosystems, and destruction of habitat for globally threatened species. Growing international demand is likely to drive further expansion of this strategic commodity in producer countries. In response, a diverse set of tools and approaches with significant potential to mitigate future impacts have been developed and are being widely applied throughout Southeast Asia, the global centre of palm oil production. This paper aims to profile these mitigation tools, beginning first with a brief review of the documented biodiversity impacts of oil palm, followed by a description of conceptual frameworks for mitigation, and a critique of five emerging mitigation tools: (1) the High Conservation Value (HCV) approach, (2) land-use advocacy, (3) carbon offsets (4), biodiversity banking and (5) enhanced regulation and enforcement. A feature shared by all is the essential role played by civil society in the development and successful implementation of these tools. We conclude by highlighting further research needs and/or activist efforts most likely to yield lasting positive impacts to redirect the location, size and shape of the oil palm 'biodiversity footprint'.