Search

As global biodiversity is being lost at an alarming rate, urban green infrastructures can potentially play a beneficial role in biodiversity conservation. Such infrastructures are produced and managed by practitioners. Analogous to engineering inspection, the ecological performance of such infrastructures also needs to be evaluated: not only for assessing benefits against added costs but also for generating valuable lessons to improve future practices. The practitioners, however, are often not equipped with knowledge background and tools to evaluate biodiversity. This paper bridges the knowledge gap of practitioners in assessing the biodiversity of urban green infrastructures. Research methods include literature review and synthesis, interviews with experts, and case studies. The outcomes of the study include a methodological framework for streamlining biodiversity assessment by practitioners, a recommended list of species for monitoring, simple yet scientifically sound survey methods, and a decision table. Case studies indicate that the research outcomes are useful in evaluating the biodiversity of the studied sites. Overall, this paper provides a systematic and straightforward approach to evaluating the biodiversity of urban green infrastructures from the perspective of practitioners.

Biodiversity conservation is increasingly integrated into the environmental management practices of organizations. Nevertheless, the literature has overlooked the analysis of the general motivations for and the organizational implications underlying corporate commitment to biodiversity. In order to fulfil this gap, the objective of this article is to contribute to this under-researched issue by shedding light on the drivers for biodiversity conservation of mining and forestry companies whose operations pose high risks to biodiversity. For this purpose, a systematic analysis was carried out on more than 4650 passages on biodiversity management extracted from 430 sustainability reports using the framework of the Global Reporting Initiative. Drawing on theories of self-regulation and social exchange, the paper shows that initiatives for biodiversity management are motivated by the quest for social legitimacy and the external recognition of organizations with high environmental impacts.

The need to ensure environmental sustainability is a critical challenge for humanity. The forces driving increased environmental pressure are world population growth, economic growth, and increasing urbanization. As a result, demand for base metals, such as iron and copper, used for producing industrial products and infrastructure has been rising. At the same time, biodiversity has ascended the global agenda because of its bearing on sustainability. Industry needs to take into account its impact on biodiversity in terms of product life cycles, from raw material extraction to product retirement. Despite the need to evaluate the influence of industry on biodiversity, a quantitative and practical biodiversity evaluation index has yet to be established. In this study, we focus on base metals that affect biodiversity through mining. This paper presents a new quantitative index, MiBiDTM, which is based on the geographic relationship among land cover, protected areas, and mining operations. Using available global databases, we developed the MiBiD intensity database, which covers over 700 mines of iron, copper, bauxite (aluminum), zinc, and lead around the world. Some findings achieved using the database are shown, such as that the MiBiD intensity of copper is much larger than that of any other mineral on average. Through comparison with existing indices, advantages and disadvantages of MiBiD are discussed. MiBiD is significant because it is the first site-specific global index of the pressure of mining on biodiversity, and it can provide new information for corporate management.

New Zealand has seen a significant change in attitude and behaviour toward sustainable business practices since the late 1980s when the introduction of cleaner production marked the beginning of a change in the way the relationship between business and the environment was perceived. The context of this change is important. New Zealand is unique in terms of its relative geographic isolation and as a consequence human settlers encountered a unique ecosystem, dominated by avian species and without mammalian predators. Subsequent anthropogenic activity has seriously impacted New Zealand's biodiversity and sustainability is seen by many as a way of restoring, or at least conserving the remnant of that unique ecosystem. The country's natural environment and resources, the shape of business and the health of the economy all colour the way and rate at which sustainability is adopted. This paper charts that change and provides a perspective on relevant policy, research and intervention initiatives over the last 15 years or so and discusses the challenges that face New Zealand in a global market.

The importance of land use evaluation has recently been recognised in Life Cycle Assessment (LCA). Even so, there is still a considerable lack of definition, particularly concerning what parameters should be considered and – as a result – what particular methodology should be used. This paper presents a review of the different methods proposed for assessing the environmental impact of land use. The methodology is specially developed for assessing endpoint categories such as biodiversity and life support systems. We evaluated the environmental impact associated with protected horticulture and compared it with other forms of human activity. The study was carried out in the area of El Maresme. This has traditionally been an agricultural area, although it is now under heavy pressure from urban and industrial developments due to its proximity to Barcelona. On the basis of the results obtained in the case study, it was demonstrated that agricultural uses ranked at the same level or slightly below those of urban uses, and that both uses clearly scored lower than forest uses, from the point of view of biodiversity. When a productivity indicator was used, agricultural use registered a smaller environmental impact than urban use, but larger than for forestry. Finally, we discuss the problems and limitations encountered when these methods were applied in our case study.