also check: Interesting Databases and Datasets and impact sustainability and risk metrics
types of biodiversity models
example from biodiversity model intercomparison analysis
“For the biodiversity model intercomparison analysis, three main categories of common output metrics were reported over time: extinctions as absolute change in species richness (N, number of species) or as proportional species richness change (P , % species), abundance-based intactness (I , % intactness), and mean proportional change in suitable habitat extent across species (H , % suitable habitat) (Table 4).” (Kim et al., 2018, p. 4545) (pdf)
some metrics
- MSA (Mean Species Abundance)
- does not track loss of particular species
- or their importance
- or functional diversity
- or invasive species
- does not track loss of particular species
- Potentially disappeared fraction (PDF) metric reflects the percentage of species richness that could be lost due to environmental pressures such as land use, ecotoxicity and climate change among others
- Biodiversity Intactness Index (BII) - link (removed from Planetary Boundaries)
- summarises the change in ecological communities in response to human pressures. The BII is an estimated percentage of the original number of species that remain and their abundance in any given area, despite human impacts.
- Red List Index (RLI) - measures changes in extinction risk
- Living Planet Index (LPI) measures relative changes in population abundance, in both cases aggregated across multiple species.
- Species Habitat Index (SHI), which measures the change in habitats available to species across the world.
- Planetary Boundaries approach in 2023
- Genetic diversity - extinctions per million species-years
- functional diversity - Human appropriation of Net Primary Production (NPP)
- Biodiveristy hotspot mapping
- actually the hotspots are not necessarily the ones contributing to most of the Ecosystem Services
- Talk - We need to talk about biodiversity - How to measure biodiversity impact
corporate models
- CDC Biodiversité, in collaboration with the “Businesses for Positive Biodiversity” club (Club B4B+), has - developed its Global Biodiversity Score (GBS)
- Another example is the tool developed by ASN Bank, the “Biodiversity Footprint for Financial Institutions” (BFFI) method, which uses the Potentially Disappeared Fraction of Species (PDF) unit as an indicator (PwC & WWF, 2020).
- “MSCI reported that 39 percent of MSCI ACWI Index constituents had assets in biodiversity-sensitive areas, with metals and mining companies representing a high share of assets in sensitive areas with limited practices to manage these risks. This led MSCI to introduce within its environmental metrics, two metrics concerning natural capital and in particular biodiversity and land use, based on an index taking into account two factors: Management Score and Exposure Score related to biodiversity.” (OECD, 2023, p. 24) (pdf) MSCI bd metrics?
problems with current models:
-
invasive species not accounted for
-
not resilience
-
not tail-risks
-
metrics allowing for pluralism - creating a typology of tools for different use cases for investors
- different types of decisions require different types of metrics, and then can be remixed based on the need
- we cannot hope to capture biodiversity based on only one metric
- we’ll need different ones for different types of risks
- we cannot hope to capture biodiversity based on only one metric
- different types of decisions require different types of metrics, and then can be remixed based on the need
“Absolute species richness or species abundance relates more to geography than ecosystem health – a healthy tundra forest may have fewer species and less biomass than a highly degraded tropical rainforest. This means that global spatial products that only map biodiversity or species richness are less informative than datasets that focus on ecosystem properties related to their healthy functioning or conservation value.” (Rossi et al., 2024, p. 3)