Search

Based on an extensive model intercomparison, we assessed trends in biodiversity and ecosystem services from historical reconstructions and future scenarios of land-use and climate change. During the 20th century, biodiversity declined globally by 2 to 11%, as estimated by a range of indicators. Provisioning ecosystem services increased several fold, and regulating services decreased moderately. Going forward, policies toward sustainability have the potential to slow biodiversity loss resulting from land-use change and the demand for provisioning services while reducing or reversing declines in regulating services. However, negative impacts on biodiversity due to climate change appear poised to increase, particularly in the higher-emissions scenarios. Our assessment identifies remaining modeling uncertainties but also robustly shows that renewed policy efforts are needed to meet the goals of the Convention on Biological Diversity.

Increased efforts are required to prevent further losses to terrestrial biodiversity and the ecosystem services that it  provides 1,2 . Ambitious targets have been proposed, such as reversing the declining trends in biodiversity 3 ; however, just feeding the growing human population will make this a challenge 4 . Here we use an ensemble of land-use and biodiversity models to assess whether-and how-humanity can reverse the declines in terrestrial biodiversity caused by habitat conversion, which is a major threat to biodiversity 5 . We show that immediate efforts, consistent with the broader sustainability agenda but of unprecedented ambition and coordination, could enable the provision of food for the growing human population while reversing the global terrestrial biodiversity trends caused by habitat conversion. If we decide to increase the extent of land under conservation management, restore degraded land and generalize landscape-level conservation planning, biodiversity trends from habitat conversion could become positive by the mid-twenty-first century on average across models (confidence interval, 2042-2061), but this was not the case for all models. Food prices could increase and, on average across models, almost half (confidence interval, 34-50%) of the future biodiversity losses could not be avoided. However, additionally tackling the drivers of land-use change could avoid conflict with affordable food provision and reduces the environmental effects of the food-provision system. Through further sustainable intensification and trade, reduced food waste and more plant-based human diets, more than two thirds of future biodiversity losses are avoided and the biodiversity trends from habitat conversion are reversed by 2050 for almost all of the models. Although limiting further loss will remain challenging in several biodiversity-rich regions, and other threats-such as climate change-must be addressed to truly reverse the declines in biodiversity, our results show that ambitious conservation efforts and food system transformation are central to an effective post-2020 biodiversity strategy.

Because the biosphere is highly heterogeneous, species diversity impacts are typically assessed at local or regional scales. Because regional species richness impact metrics refer to different species compositions, they cannot be easily compared or aggregated to global impacts. Translating regional species richness impacts into global impacts allows for comparisons between impacts and facilitates the estimation of global species extinctions. This requires a conversion (or weighting) factor that takes into account the characteristics of regionally specific species compositions. We developed a methodology for deriving such conversion factors based on species' habitat ranges, International Union for Conservation of Nature threat levels, and species richness. We call these conversion factors global extinction probabilities (GEPs) of the reference location or region. The proposed methodology allows for the calculation of GEPs for any spatial unit and species group for which data on spatial distribution are available and can be implemented in methodologies like life cycle impact assessment. Furthermore, the GEPs can be used for the identification of conservation hot spots. The results of the proposed GEPs (for various taxonomic groups) show that the risk that regional species loss may result in global species extinctions significantly differs per region and informs where irreversible biodiversity impacts are more likely to occur.

This study considers the life cycle impacts of land use on biodiversity and ecosystem services associated with the production of a ubiquitous food type: breakfast cereals. For biodiversity, the impacts on five taxonomic groups have been assessed: mammals, birds, vascular plants, amphibians and reptiles. For ecosystem services, the potential loss in the following ecosystem services of soil has been considered: biotic production, erosion resistance, groundwater regeneration, infiltration and physicochemical filtration. The findings indicate that the main hotspot for the biodiversity loss is cocoa cultivation for all taxonomic groups, with a contribution of 27-67%. Cocoa is also a major contributor (35%) to the loss of biotic production, while rice is the largest contributor to erosion (34%), reduction in groundwater replenishment (43%) and physiochemical filtration (23%). Corn is the main cause of the infiltration reduction, accounting for 44% of the impact. Unlike the biodiversity impacts, which are almost entirely caused by agricultural activities, non-agricultural land use occurring in other life cycle stages (transport, packaging and manufacturing), has significant contribution to the reductions in groundwater replenishment and infiltration. The impacts on ecosystem services are almost entirely driven by land occupation, while the biodiversity impacts are caused by both land use change and occupation. The identification of cocoa as the main hotspot is unexpected as it is used only in very small quantities (<5% by mass) in breakfast cereals. Its high contribution to the impacts is partly due to the land use change in the ecoregion of the Eastern Guinean forests, which are home to a relatively large number of endemic species. The paper also discusses the limitations of the impact assessment methods for evaluating the biodiversity and ecosystem services and highlights the need for further development of indicators and methods to assess the land use impacts in life cycle assessment., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Anthropogenic land use to produce commodities for human consumption is the major driver of global biodiversity loss. Synergistic collaboration between producers and consumers in needed to halt this trend. In this study, we calculate species loss on 5 min × 5 min grid level and per country due to global agriculture, pasture and forestry by combining high-resolution land use data with countryside species area relationship for mammals, birds, amphibians, and reptiles. Results show that pasture was the primary driver of biodiversity loss in Madagascar, China and Brazil, while forest land use contributed the most to species loss in DR Congo and Indonesia. Combined with the yield data, we quantified the biodiversity impacts of 1 m(3) of roundwood produced in 139 countries, concluding that tropical countries with low timber yield and a large presence of vulnerable species suffer the highest impact. We also calculated impacts per kg for 160 crops grown in different countries and linked it with FAO food trade data to assess the biodiversity impacts embodied in Swiss food imports. We found that more than 95% of Swiss consumption impacts rest abroad with cocoa, coffee and palm oil imports being responsible for majority of damage.

Habitat degradation and subsequent biodiversity damage often take place far from the place of consumption because of globalization and the increasing level of international trade. Informing consumers and policy makers about the biodiversity impacts "hidden" in the life cycle of imported products is an important step toward achieving sustainable consumption patterns. Spatially explicit methods are needed in life cycle assessment to accurately quantify biodiversity impacts of products and processes. We use the Countryside species-area relationship (SAR) to quantify regional species loss due to land occupation and transformation for five taxa and six land use types in 804 terrestrial ecoregions. Further, we calculate vulnerability scores for each ecoregion based on the fraction of each species' geographic range (endemic richness) hosted by the ecoregion and the IUCN assigned threat level of each species. Vulnerability scores are multiplied with SAR-predicted regional species loss to estimate potential global extinctions per unit of land use. As a case study, we assess the land use biodiversity impacts of 1 kg of bioethanol produced using six different feed stocks in different parts of the world. Results show that the regions with highest biodiversity impacts differed markedly when the vulnerability of species was included.

Addressing biodiversity impacts in life cycle assessment (LCA) has recently been significantly improved. Advances include the consideration of several taxa, consideration of vulnerability of species and ecosystems, global coverage and spatial differentiation. To allow a comparison of biodiversity impacts of different stressors (e.g., land and water use), consistent approaches for assessing and aggregating biodiversity impacts across taxa are needed. We propose four different options for aggregating impacts across taxa and stressors: equal weight for species, equal weight for taxa and two options with special consideration of species' vulnerability. We apply the aggregation options to a case study of coffee, tea and sugarcane production in Kenya for the production of 1 kg of crop. The ranking between stressors (land vs water use) within each crop and also of the overall impact between crops (coffee>sugarcane>tea) remained the same when applying the different aggregation options. Inclusion of the vulnerability of species had significant influence on the magnitude of results, and potentially also on the spatial distribution of impacts, and should be considered.

Agricultural land use is a main driver of global biodiversity loss. The assessment of land use impacts in decision-support tools such as life cycle assessment (LCA) requires spatially explicit models, but existing approaches are either not spatially differentiated or modeled at very coarse scales (e.g., biomes or ecoregions). In this paper, we develop a high-resolution (900 m) assessment method for land use impacts on biodiversity based on habitat suitability models (HSM) of mammal species. This method considers potential land use effects on individual species, and impacts are weighted by the species' conservation status and global rarity. We illustrate the method using a case study of crop production in East Africa, but the underlying HSMs developed by the Global Mammals Assessment are available globally. We calculate impacts of three major export crops and compare the results to two previously developed methods (focusing on local and regional impacts, respectively) to assess the relevance of the methodological innovations proposed in this paper. The results highlight hotspots of product-related biodiversity impacts that help characterize the links among agricultural production, consumption, and biodiversity loss.

Biodiversity offsets are seen as a policy mechanism to balance development and conservation goals. Many offset schemes employ habitat restoration in one area to recreate biodiversity value that is destroyed elsewhere, assuming that recovery is timely and predictable. Recent research has challenged these assumptions on the grounds that restoration implies long time delays and a low certainty of success. To investigate these assertions, and to assess the strength of empirical support for offset policy, we used a meta-analytic approach to analyze data from 108 comparative studies of secondary growth (SG) and old-growth (OG) habitat (a total of 1228 SG sites and 716 OG reference sites). We extracted species checklists and calculated standardized response ratios for species richness, Fisher's alpha, Sorenson similarity, and Morisita-Horn similarity. We modeled diversity change with habitat age using generalized linear models and multi-model averaging, correcting for a number of potential explanatory variables. We tested whether (1) diversity of passively and actively restored habitat converges to OG values over time, (2) active restoration significantly accelerates this process, and (3) current offset policies are appropriate to the predicted uncertainties and time lags associated with restoration. The results indicate that in the best case, species richness converges to OG reference values within a century, species similarity (Sorenson) takes about twice as long, and assemblage composition (Morisita-Horn) up to an order of magnitude longer (hundreds to thousands of years). Active restoration significantly accelerates the process for all indices, but the inherently large time lags, uncertainty, and risk of restoration failure require offset ratios that far exceed what is currently applied in practice. Restoration offset policy therefore leads to a net loss of biodiversity, and represents an inappropriate use of the otherwise valuable tool of ecosystem restoration.

In the context of climate change and food provisioning for a growing global population, the impacts of water consumption on aquatic biodiversity (e.g., river water consumption for irrigation) should be considered in Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA). A previous LCIA method quantifying the potential impacts of river water consumption on fish biodiversity, using a species-discharge relationship (SDR), constituted an essential first step. This method is however limited in terms of regionalization and taxa considered, and predicts the potential risk of local species loss only. Here, we address these shortcomings by developing region-specific SDRs for Europe at various scales (continent, country, and eco-region), and including macro-invertebrate biodiversity. SDR exponents vary from 0.06 to 0.45 between regions, underlining the importance of such regionalization. Furthermore, we provide a new regionalized method which considers the location of water consumption within a river basin, by integrating the concept of longitudinal river zonation. This involves the use of a novel measure of potential loss of species richness, standardizing local species loss to an equivalent of global extinction and reflecting species vulnerability. The new method is applied in a Swiss case-study. The consideration of the location of water consumption within a basin was found to be of high importance in the assessment: potential species loss varied between 4.22 × 10(-3) and 3.95 × 10(-1) species (2 orders of magnitude) depending on location. This work thus provides enhancements in the assessment of potential impacts of river water consumption on aquatic biodiversity and contributes to the ecological relevance of the method.

Comprehensive sensitivity analysis is a significant tool to interpret and improve life cycle assessment (LCA) models, but is rarely performed. Sensitivity analysis will increase in importance as inventory databases become regionalized, increasing the number of system parameters, and parametrized, adding complexity through variables and nonlinear formulas. We propose and implement a new two-step approach to sensitivity analysis. First, we identify parameters with high global sensitivities for further examination and analysis with a screening step, the method of elementary effects. Second, the more computationally intensive contribution to variance test is used to quantify the relative importance of these parameters. The two-step sensitivity test is illustrated on a regionalized, nonlinear case study of the biodiversity impacts from land use of cocoa production, including a worldwide cocoa products trade model. Our simplified trade model can be used for transformable commodities where one is assessing market shares that vary over time. In the case study, the highly uncertain characterization factors for the Ivory Coast and Ghana contributed more than 50% of variance for almost all countries and years examined. The two-step sensitivity test allows for the interpretation, understanding, and improvement of large, complex, and nonlinear LCA systems.

Wetlands are complex ecosystems that harbor a large diversity of species. Wetlands are among the most threatened ecosystems on our planet, due to human influences such as conversion and drainage. We assessed impacts from water consumption on the species richness of waterbirds, nonresidential birds, water-dependent mammals, reptiles and amphibians in wetlands, considering a larger number of taxa than previous life cycle impact assessment methods. Effect factors (EF) were derived for 1184 wetlands of international importance. EFs quantify the number of global species-equivalents lost per m(2) of wetland area loss. Vulnerability and range size of species were included to reflect conservation values. Further, we derived spatially explicit characterization factors (CFs) that distinguish between surface water and groundwater consumption. All relevant watershed areas that are contributing to feeding the respective wetlands were determined for CF applications. In an example of rose production, we compared damages of water consumption in Kenya and The Netherlands. In both cases, the impact was largest for waterbirds. The total impact from water consumption in Kenya was 67 times larger than in The Netherlands, due to larger species richness and species' vulnerability in Kenya, as well as more arid conditions and larger amounts of water consumed.

Global water use is dominated by agriculture and has considerable influence on people's livelihood and ecosystems, especially in semiarid and arid regions. Methods to address the impacts of water withdrawal and consumption on terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems within life cycle assessment are still sparse and very generic. Regionalized characterization factors (CFs) for a groundwater-fed wetland at the arid coast of Peru are developed for groundwater and surface water withdrawal and consumption in order to address the spatial dependency of water use related impacts. Several agricultural scenarios for 2020 were developed in a workshop with local stakeholders and used for calculating total biodiversity impacts. In contrast to assumptions used in top-down approaches (e.g., Pfister et al. Environ. Sci Technol. 2009, 43, 4098 ), irrigation with surface water leads in this specific region to benefits for the groundwater-fed wetland, due to additional groundwater recharge from surplus irrigation water. However, irrigation with groundwater leads to ecological damage to the wetland. The CFs derived from the different scenarios are similar and can thus be used as general CFs for this region, helping local decision-makers to plan future agricultural development, including irrigation technologies, crop choices, and protection of the wetland., (© 2012 American Chemical Society)

Halting current rates of biodiversity loss will be a defining challenge of the 21st century. To assess the effectiveness of strategies to achieve this goal, indicators and tools are required that monitor the driving forces of biodiversity loss, the changing state of biodiversity, and evaluate the effectiveness of policy responses. Here, we review the use of indicators and approaches to model biodiversity loss in Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), a methodology used to evaluate the cradle-to-grave environmental impacts of products. We find serious conceptual shortcomings in the way models are constructed, with scale considerations largely absent. Further, there is a disproportionate focus on indicators that reflect changes in compositional aspects of biodiversity, mainly changes in species richness. Functional and structural attributes of biodiversity are largely neglected. Taxonomic and geographic coverage remains problematic, with the majority of models restricted to one or a few taxonomic groups and geographic regions. On a more general level, three of the five drivers of biodiversity loss as identified by the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment are represented in current impact categories (habitat change, climate change and pollution), while two are missing (invasive species and overexploitation). However, methods across all drivers can be greatly improved. We discuss these issues and make recommendations for future research to better reflect biodiversity loss in LCA.