Expert predictions of changes in vegetation condition reveal perceived risks in biodiversity offsetting.

Biodiversity offsetting typically involves the trade of certain losses of habitat with uncertain future conservation benefits. Predicting the latter requires estimates of two outcomes; the biodiversity losses without conservation management (averted loss), and the biodiversity gains with conservatio...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Josh Dorrough, Steve J Sinclair, Ian Oliver
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2019-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0216703
id doaj-78a72b2bf3824afea7af989fa999dc5c
record_format Article
spelling doaj-78a72b2bf3824afea7af989fa999dc5c2021-03-03T20:41:39ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032019-01-01145e021670310.1371/journal.pone.0216703Expert predictions of changes in vegetation condition reveal perceived risks in biodiversity offsetting.Josh DorroughSteve J SinclairIan OliverBiodiversity offsetting typically involves the trade of certain losses of habitat with uncertain future conservation benefits. Predicting the latter requires estimates of two outcomes; the biodiversity losses without conservation management (averted loss), and the biodiversity gains with conservation management (management gain). However, because empirical data to inform these estimates are limited, they are normally guided by expert opinion, often derived via unstructured methods without consideration of uncertainty. Here we used a structured elicitation with 29 experts to gather estimates of averted loss and management gain at offset sites. We used two methods; (i) experts estimated change in an aggregate biodiversity value (vegetation condition) and; (ii) experts provided probabilistic estimates of change for individual vegetation condition attributes, such as the richness and cover of plant growth forms. On average, experts predicted there would be only modest improvements with conservation management, yet uncertainty and variation among experts was large; in some cases, conservation benefits were not predicted. Estimates of change in vegetation condition suggested that benefits were from both averted loss and management gains and were thought to most likely arise in cases where starting condition was low to moderate. Similar patterns were observed for individual vegetation condition attributes, with management gains, relative to a reference, tending to be negatively correlated with starting value. Our study finds that: (i) on average, gains at offset sites are expected to be small, (ii) at many sites, experts do not believe gains can be obtained, and (iii) experts' opinions can be divergent resulting in elevated levels of uncertainty. The potential for losses under conservation management highlights the need to: identify those components of biodiversity most likely to benefit from conservation management; better understand those situations when offset obligations are most likely to be met and conversely those situations with higher risk; and further develop offset mechanisms that encourage early or prior gains. These findings together with the global proliferation of biodiversity offsetting, provide a strong imperative to improve empirical data and investment in long-term, site-based monitoring of biodiversity outcomes at offset sites.https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0216703
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Josh Dorrough
Steve J Sinclair
Ian Oliver
spellingShingle Josh Dorrough
Steve J Sinclair
Ian Oliver
Expert predictions of changes in vegetation condition reveal perceived risks in biodiversity offsetting.
PLoS ONE
author_facet Josh Dorrough
Steve J Sinclair
Ian Oliver
author_sort Josh Dorrough
title Expert predictions of changes in vegetation condition reveal perceived risks in biodiversity offsetting.
title_short Expert predictions of changes in vegetation condition reveal perceived risks in biodiversity offsetting.
title_full Expert predictions of changes in vegetation condition reveal perceived risks in biodiversity offsetting.
title_fullStr Expert predictions of changes in vegetation condition reveal perceived risks in biodiversity offsetting.
title_full_unstemmed Expert predictions of changes in vegetation condition reveal perceived risks in biodiversity offsetting.
title_sort expert predictions of changes in vegetation condition reveal perceived risks in biodiversity offsetting.
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
series PLoS ONE
issn 1932-6203
publishDate 2019-01-01
description Biodiversity offsetting typically involves the trade of certain losses of habitat with uncertain future conservation benefits. Predicting the latter requires estimates of two outcomes; the biodiversity losses without conservation management (averted loss), and the biodiversity gains with conservation management (management gain). However, because empirical data to inform these estimates are limited, they are normally guided by expert opinion, often derived via unstructured methods without consideration of uncertainty. Here we used a structured elicitation with 29 experts to gather estimates of averted loss and management gain at offset sites. We used two methods; (i) experts estimated change in an aggregate biodiversity value (vegetation condition) and; (ii) experts provided probabilistic estimates of change for individual vegetation condition attributes, such as the richness and cover of plant growth forms. On average, experts predicted there would be only modest improvements with conservation management, yet uncertainty and variation among experts was large; in some cases, conservation benefits were not predicted. Estimates of change in vegetation condition suggested that benefits were from both averted loss and management gains and were thought to most likely arise in cases where starting condition was low to moderate. Similar patterns were observed for individual vegetation condition attributes, with management gains, relative to a reference, tending to be negatively correlated with starting value. Our study finds that: (i) on average, gains at offset sites are expected to be small, (ii) at many sites, experts do not believe gains can be obtained, and (iii) experts' opinions can be divergent resulting in elevated levels of uncertainty. The potential for losses under conservation management highlights the need to: identify those components of biodiversity most likely to benefit from conservation management; better understand those situations when offset obligations are most likely to be met and conversely those situations with higher risk; and further develop offset mechanisms that encourage early or prior gains. These findings together with the global proliferation of biodiversity offsetting, provide a strong imperative to improve empirical data and investment in long-term, site-based monitoring of biodiversity outcomes at offset sites.
url https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0216703
work_keys_str_mv AT joshdorrough expertpredictionsofchangesinvegetationconditionrevealperceivedrisksinbiodiversityoffsetting
AT stevejsinclair expertpredictionsofchangesinvegetationconditionrevealperceivedrisksinbiodiversityoffsetting
AT ianoliver expertpredictionsofchangesinvegetationconditionrevealperceivedrisksinbiodiversityoffsetting
_version_ 1714821038407155712