2009Cambridge University Press eBooksRequires access

Interpretation of biodiversity

Roel Slootweg

Open publisher page 8 citations

Abstract

Introduction A multitude of tools and techniques are currently used by companies, governments, certifying agencies, and the like, to predict, measure, or report on the human impacts on biodiversity. Environmental impact assessment (EIA) and strategic environmental assessment (SEA) are the focus of attention in this book, but other instruments exist, such as environmental audits, sustainability reporting, and certification schemes. These instruments are not always based on an unambiguous interpretation of biodiversity (Slootweg, 2005). A rapid comparison of the objectives of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) with a number of biodiversity-related methods for certification and assessment shows that no one instrument addresses all aspects of biodiversity as defined by the CBD. General omissions include: (i) a partial focus on only one level of diversity, mostly the species level and often ecosystem level, but hardly ever the genetic level of diversity; (ii) a focus on either conservation of biodiversity, and sometimes on sustainable use, but largely overlooking the third objective of the CBD on equitable sharing of revenues obtained from biodiversity, and never including all three objectives simultaneously; (iii) a general lack of identification and involvement of stakeholders; and finally, (iv) a lack of attention to the potential positive effects of human activities on biodiversity (opportunities for enhancement) (Slootweg et al. , 2003).

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Introduction A multitude of tools and techniques are currently used by companies, governments, certifying agencies, and the like, to predict, measure, or report on the human impacts on biodiversity. Environmental impact assessment (EIA) and strategic environmental assessment (SEA) are the focus of attention in this book, but other instruments exist, such as environmental audits, sustainability reporting, and certification schemes. These instruments are not always based on an unambiguous interpretation of biodiversity (Slootweg, 2005). A rapid comparison of the objectives of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) with a number of biodiversity-related methods for certification and assessment shows that no one instrument addresses all aspects of biodiversity as defined by the CBD. General omissions include: (i) a partial focus on only one level of diversity, mostly the species level and often ecosystem level, but hardly ever the genetic level of diversity; (ii) a focus on either conservation of biodiversity, and sometimes on sustainable use, but largely overlooking the third objective of the CBD on equitable sharing of revenues obtained from biodiversity, and never including all three objectives simultaneously; (iii) a general lack of identification and involvement of stakeholders; and finally, (iv) a lack of attention to the potential positive effects of human activities on biodiversity (opportunities for enhancement) (Slootweg et al. , 2003).

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 8 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Introduction A multitude of tools and techniques are currently used by companies, governments, certifying agencies, and the like, to predict, measure, or report on the human impacts on biodiversity. Environmental impact assessment (EIA) and strategic environmental assessment (SEA) are the focus of attention in this book, but other instruments exist, such as environmental audits, sustainability reporting, and certification schemes. These instruments are not always based on an unambiguous interpretation of biodiversity (Slootweg, 2005). A rapid comparison of the objectives of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) with a number of biodiversity-related methods for certification and assessment shows that no one instrument addresses all aspects of biodiversity as defined by the CBD. General omissions include: (i) a partial focus on only one level of diversity, mostly the species level and often ecosystem level, but hardly ever the genetic level of diversity; (ii) a focus on either conservation of biodiversity, and sometimes on sustainable use, but largely overlooking the third objective of the CBD on equitable sharing of revenues obtained from biodiversity, and never including all three objectives simultaneously; (iii) a general lack of identification and involvement of stakeholders; and finally, (iv) a lack of attention to the potential positive effects of human activities on biodiversity (opportunities for enhancement) (Slootweg et al. , 2003).

Key concepts: Convention on Biological Diversity, Biodiversity, Measurement of biodiversity, Environmental resource management, Sustainability, Certification, Environmental planning, Business

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Interpretation of biodiversity — Research Paper | ScholarLens