A UK-based environmental research organisation is developing a site-based biodiversity standard, applicable to any project size in any geography.

The Botanical Gardens Conservation International (BCGI) is working with Plan Vivo Foundation, Society for Ecological Restoration, and others to develop a site-based uplift methodology, due to be released in August 2024.

The new Global Biodiversity Standard was shared in a BCGI-led webinar on Tuesday.

The Global Biodiversity Standard (GBS) is designed to certify a project that has achieved a biodiversity uplift. However, David Bartholomew, project manager for the Global Biodiversity Standard at BGCI, stressed that the methodology would not be used for providing tradable biodiversity credits to the private sector.

“We have seen the need to try to change the way nature-based solutions are done across the world, and change the belief that planting a tree at minimal cost is the solution,” said Bartholomew.

He went on to explain that the organisations are proposing four key benefits of the GBS: recognition of project contribution to biodiversity, incentives for land managers to use best practices, assurance to governments and financiers of biodiversity uplift, and an increase in the use of data to improve knowledge.

The Global Biodiversity Standard is solely focused on biodiversity, rather than capturing other aspects such as carbon. It aims to provide assurance that projects are protecting, enhancing, and restoring biodiversity based on scientific approaches from the global botanical community.

METHOD BREAKDOWN

The methodology gives scores to projects based on eight criteria that cover a range of aspects including selecting appropriate sites to enhance existing biodiversity, as well as criteria related to partnerships with local communities, tackling invasive species and implementing robust monitoring and management plans.

It focused on scoring projects highly for biodiversity uplift, where an improvement in the criteria has been demonstrated, rather than for existing biodiversity on site. The webinar hosts stated that a protected area with high biodiversity is unlikely to score highly with this methodology, but a restoration project with tangible improvements to biodiversity would do well.

The BCGI is the world’s largest plant conservation network and has been rapidly advancing work to understand plant species at risk of extinction. Its attempt to provide an extinction status for all tree species was last reported to have reached 80% coverage of the world in December. It estimated that 31% (17,500) of tree species are at risk of extinction.

The webinar also provided an in-depth explanation into the assessment process and placed high emphasis on the use of remote sensing and field surveys working in combination.

George Gann, international policy lead for the scientific NGO Society for Ecological Restoration, highlighted how remote sensing would be particularly useful for understanding reference sites and historic criteria at project sites, alongside the data collected by field staff for each project.

BCGI expects the verification to be carried out by staff at its member organisations in one of the 12 hubs across eight countries in the Global South, close to where it expects the most demand for certification.

DON’T CALL IT A CREDIT

The Plan Vivo Foundation, which recently released its PV-Nature Biodiversity Credit Standard for its second consultation, is developing Criterion 3 of 8 under the GBS, the section regarding stakeholder partnerships, knowledge generation, and benefit-sharing.

The GBS has already been tested on Plan Vivo-certified projects, and their PV-Nature credit projects are considered separate due to their tradability.

In June, BGCI released its methodology that targeted biodiversity credits focused on the 17,500 tree species at risk of extinction.

Not to be confused with the GBS, the Biodiversity Impact Credit methodology aims to drive private sector purchasing of credits that achieve an improvement in the population of tree species at risk of extinction, through restoration. Bartholomew mentioned that both standards could be used together as the GBS covers a far broader range of metrics than credit-specific projects. Eligibility for both methodologies will be project-dependent, BGCI said.

The business model and minimum required scoring for the certification are both yet to be determined. However, BGCI’s Barthomolew expects assessor training to be provided and a manual to be released within the next year, so the standard can begin certifying projects from August 2024.

By Tom Woolnough – tom@carbon-pulse.com

** Click here to sign up to our weekly biodiversity newsletter **