Why it matters how biodiversity is measured in environmental valuation studies compared to conservation science

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

Standard

Why it matters how biodiversity is measured in environmental valuation studies compared to conservation science. / Strange, Niels; Ermgassen, Sophus Zu; Marshall, Erica; Bull, Joseph W.; Jacobsen, Jette Bredahl.

In: Biological Conservation, Vol. 292, 110546, 2024.

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

Harvard

Strange, N, Ermgassen, SZ, Marshall, E, Bull, JW & Jacobsen, JB 2024, 'Why it matters how biodiversity is measured in environmental valuation studies compared to conservation science', Biological Conservation, vol. 292, 110546. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2024.110546

APA

Strange, N., Ermgassen, S. Z., Marshall, E., Bull, J. W., & Jacobsen, J. B. (2024). Why it matters how biodiversity is measured in environmental valuation studies compared to conservation science. Biological Conservation, 292, [110546]. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2024.110546

Vancouver

Strange N, Ermgassen SZ, Marshall E, Bull JW, Jacobsen JB. Why it matters how biodiversity is measured in environmental valuation studies compared to conservation science. Biological Conservation. 2024;292. 110546. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2024.110546

Author

Strange, Niels ; Ermgassen, Sophus Zu ; Marshall, Erica ; Bull, Joseph W. ; Jacobsen, Jette Bredahl. / Why it matters how biodiversity is measured in environmental valuation studies compared to conservation science. In: Biological Conservation. 2024 ; Vol. 292.

Bibtex

@article{e256a410d8b840ee9a3ca7b4c62c269e,
title = "Why it matters how biodiversity is measured in environmental valuation studies compared to conservation science",
abstract = "The undervaluation of biodiversity in decision-making is a critical issue that contributes to continued biodiversity declines and loss of environment. This issue is exacerbated in environmental economics by the need to keep measures of biodiversity simple for communication to the public due to limited background knowledge and cognitive limitations. Therefore, there is a clear need to improve the biodiversity metrics used in biodiversity valuation and environmental economics, without using overly complex measures. However, it is unclear how much overlap exists in the metrics currently used in these fields as compared to those being used in more biodiversity focused disciplines such as conservation and ecology. Here, we use a rapid evidence assessment approach to categorise the measures and attributes used in environmental valuation studies into broad groups of biodiversity metrics. We compare this to previous research categorising biodiversity metrics used in conservation and ecology to determine how well environmental valuation studies are capturing the values important for measuring biodiversity in practice. We find a high degree of overlap in the broad biodiversity metrics used in environmental valuation compared to conservation and ecology. However, the overlap mostly consistent of simplistic easy to measure habitat attributes and species occurrence measures. The measures generally fail to capture the ecosystem processes driving biodiversity persistence and therefore may not capture the ecosystem services or welfare attributes important to people. We discuss the implications of these areas of mismatch, and point towards future directions in stated preference research and technological advances, which might allow for the valuation of more complete and complex dimensions of biodiversity.",
author = "Niels Strange and Ermgassen, {Sophus Zu} and Erica Marshall and Bull, {Joseph W.} and Jacobsen, {Jette Bredahl}",
year = "2024",
doi = "10.1016/j.biocon.2024.110546",
language = "English",
volume = "292",
journal = "Biological Conservation",
issn = "0006-3207",
publisher = "Elsevier",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Why it matters how biodiversity is measured in environmental valuation studies compared to conservation science

AU - Strange, Niels

AU - Ermgassen, Sophus Zu

AU - Marshall, Erica

AU - Bull, Joseph W.

AU - Jacobsen, Jette Bredahl

PY - 2024

Y1 - 2024

N2 - The undervaluation of biodiversity in decision-making is a critical issue that contributes to continued biodiversity declines and loss of environment. This issue is exacerbated in environmental economics by the need to keep measures of biodiversity simple for communication to the public due to limited background knowledge and cognitive limitations. Therefore, there is a clear need to improve the biodiversity metrics used in biodiversity valuation and environmental economics, without using overly complex measures. However, it is unclear how much overlap exists in the metrics currently used in these fields as compared to those being used in more biodiversity focused disciplines such as conservation and ecology. Here, we use a rapid evidence assessment approach to categorise the measures and attributes used in environmental valuation studies into broad groups of biodiversity metrics. We compare this to previous research categorising biodiversity metrics used in conservation and ecology to determine how well environmental valuation studies are capturing the values important for measuring biodiversity in practice. We find a high degree of overlap in the broad biodiversity metrics used in environmental valuation compared to conservation and ecology. However, the overlap mostly consistent of simplistic easy to measure habitat attributes and species occurrence measures. The measures generally fail to capture the ecosystem processes driving biodiversity persistence and therefore may not capture the ecosystem services or welfare attributes important to people. We discuss the implications of these areas of mismatch, and point towards future directions in stated preference research and technological advances, which might allow for the valuation of more complete and complex dimensions of biodiversity.

AB - The undervaluation of biodiversity in decision-making is a critical issue that contributes to continued biodiversity declines and loss of environment. This issue is exacerbated in environmental economics by the need to keep measures of biodiversity simple for communication to the public due to limited background knowledge and cognitive limitations. Therefore, there is a clear need to improve the biodiversity metrics used in biodiversity valuation and environmental economics, without using overly complex measures. However, it is unclear how much overlap exists in the metrics currently used in these fields as compared to those being used in more biodiversity focused disciplines such as conservation and ecology. Here, we use a rapid evidence assessment approach to categorise the measures and attributes used in environmental valuation studies into broad groups of biodiversity metrics. We compare this to previous research categorising biodiversity metrics used in conservation and ecology to determine how well environmental valuation studies are capturing the values important for measuring biodiversity in practice. We find a high degree of overlap in the broad biodiversity metrics used in environmental valuation compared to conservation and ecology. However, the overlap mostly consistent of simplistic easy to measure habitat attributes and species occurrence measures. The measures generally fail to capture the ecosystem processes driving biodiversity persistence and therefore may not capture the ecosystem services or welfare attributes important to people. We discuss the implications of these areas of mismatch, and point towards future directions in stated preference research and technological advances, which might allow for the valuation of more complete and complex dimensions of biodiversity.

U2 - 10.1016/j.biocon.2024.110546

DO - 10.1016/j.biocon.2024.110546

M3 - Journal article

VL - 292

JO - Biological Conservation

JF - Biological Conservation

SN - 0006-3207

M1 - 110546

ER -

ID: 385691262