International panel reveals extended biodiversity credits survey results

Published 14:13 on April 9, 2024  /  Last updated at 14:13 on April 9, 2024  / Giada Ferraglioni /  Biodiversity, International

A UK-France led biodiversity credits panel has published a more detailed version of its call for views on biodiversity credits, as the initiative prepares to launch a second consultation that will also engage Indigenous Peoples and local communities.

A UK-France led biodiversity credits panel has published a more detailed version of its call for views on biodiversity credits, as the initiative prepares to launch a second consultation that will also engage Indigenous Peoples and local communities.

The International Advisory Panel on Biodiversity Credits’ (IAPB) analysis was based on the views of 70 respondents, mostly from NGOs and nature-monitoring initiatives, followed by specialists and corporations.

It gathered opinions on measurement – including metrics and methodologies underpinning biodiversity credits – demand, supply, stewardship, and governance.

Twenty-eight respondents out of 63 said they were interested in biodiversity credits for “commercial/financial” reasons. Out of these, 11 respondents from organisations involved in certification, monitoring, or verification.

There was also significant interest in “project development” that mainly came from the same group, but also from NGOs and professional services organisations.

As IAPB previously spotlighted in February, during the UNEA-6 summit, conservation and restoration were both considered “important” for the generation of the units (90% of respondents).

Notably, 75% of respondents believed credits should be calculated not only on outcome-based metrics, but also on a list of activities undertaken.

International alignment, transparency, and accountability mechanisms are considered crucial to scaling markets effectively, with respondents hoping for a combination of voluntary and compliance-based credits.

The call for views also surveyed what “success” would look like for biodiversity credits, with respondents proposing “Indigenous Peoples and local communities-related credits”.

Obtaining free, prior, and informed consent was considered a necessary safeguard to protecting the rights of Indigenous Peoples and local communities by just 15 respondents (out of 56).

Twenty respondents expressed their support for their involvement in measurement, reporting, and verification as a means of learning from carbon markets – emphasising the importance of engagement and participation in these processes to ensure they are not just seen as a tick box exercise.

NEXT ROUND

The next round of surveys will explore “possible market models for biodiversity credits and seek feedback on key features that could influence their success”, IAPB said.

It will involve specific stakeholder groups, including Indigenous Peoples and local communities, in a bid to “increase opportunities to engage”.

The panel’s process is watched with great interest in the lead-up to the UN biodiversity summit taking place in Cali, Colombia, from Oct. 21 to Nov. 1, when IAPB is expected to disclose its framework for the emerging market.

During the report launch event in February, the panel stressed that biodiversity credit markets can support global nature finance goals, though “considerable challenges” with increasing supply and demand remain.

As several players told Carbon Pulse earlier this week, most companies are still reluctant to translate their interest in nature preservation into transactions.

Last month, the Community Advisory Panel (CAP) of the UN-backed Biodiversity Credit Alliance (BCA) proposed a separate set of recommendations for shaping the market. It warned that biodiversity credits might be incompatible with their priorities, since market-based solutions have often fallen short of “including and ensuring” respect for their rights.

By Giada Ferraglioni – giada@carbon-pulse.com

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