The document presents a globally applicable framework to quantify the impacts of human activities on biodiversity using species-specific habitat suitability models. It links land-use changes to biodiversity outcomes, focusing on the impacts of soy expansion and other land-use changes in the Brazilian Cerrado from 2000 to 2014. The study emphasizes the need for biodiversity impact metrics that track the relationship between habitat loss drivers and biodiversity state changes.

 

Key Messages

 

• Biodiversity Impact Metrics: Improved quantification of biodiversity loss requires metrics that link human activities to biodiversity changes, considering species ecology and cumulative effects of habitat loss.
• Framework Development: A globally applicable method uses freely available datasets and habitat suitability models to assess biodiversity impacts.
• Case Study in Cerrado: Soy expansion and land-use changes in the Brazilian Cerrado significantly impacted over 2,000 species, with mammals and plants suffering the greatest habitat losses.
• Species-Specific Insights: Birds and mammals, particularly endemic species, were most affected by habitat conversion, with soy expansion having the greatest per-unit-area impact.
• Methodological Benefits: The approach improves assessments by linking human activities to biodiversity losses, incorporating species-specific needs, and accounting for cumulative habitat loss impacts.

This document offers guidance for project developers and consultants on biodiversity-inclusive Environmental and Social Impact Assessments (ESIAs). It compiles good practices for impact assessment and management planning based on reports from multi-lateral finance institutions (MFIs), government regulators, NGOs, and industry associations. While not a replacement for existing ESIA guidance, it supplements areas where biodiversity considerations are lacking. The document aligns with the mitigation hierarchy (avoid, minimize, restore, compensate) and encourages developers to adjust the level of assessment rigor to project-specific biodiversity risks.

 

Key Messages

 

• Target Audience: Designed for project developers and consultants working on ESIAs.
• Purpose: Supplements existing ESIA guidance with a focus on biodiversity impact.
• Good Practices: Based on recommendations from MFIs, regulators, NGOs, and industry bodies.
• Mitigation Hierarchy: Follows avoid, minimize, restore, and compensate framework.
• Tailored Approach: Encourages adapting assessment and management rigor to biodiversity risk levels.
• Knowledge Gaps: Acknowledges gaps in biodiversity data; stresses transparency and cautious assumptions where data is lacking.
• Iterative Process: Highlights that ESIA processes often require iterative adjustments to timelines, budgets, and planning.