"Standards and Biodiversity"

Wie integrieren Standardinitiativen biologische Vielfalt? Zu dieser Frage veröffentlichen die State of Sustainability Initiatives (SSI) und das International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) eine neue Studie.

"Standards and Biodiversity"

Die Studie von SSI und IISD analysierte 15 globale Nachhaltigkeitsstandards für landwirtschaftliche Produkte. Die Standards wurden daraufhin untersucht, inwiefern sie die "Biodiversity Impact Indicators for Commodity Production (BIICP)" nutzen, die durch eine Initiative des Übereinkommens über die biologische Vielfalt (CBD) entwickelt wurden.

Einige der Kernergebnisse (Auszüge aus dem Original-Text):

  • Although the standards reviewed revealed relatively broad coverage of key biodiversity-related pathways, criteria explicitly focusing on biodiversity protection are relatively rare among the initiatives surveyed, with only 40 per cent of initiatives specifying critical requirements for risk assessment of biodiversity impacts and 13 per cent requiring that agricultural practices produce no net loss of biodiversity.
  • Overall, the standards reviewed focus on the protection of environmental systems rather than the measurement and monitoring or restoration of such systems. Similarly, the vast majority of requirements focus on farm-level practices rather than actual outcomes. […] leaving a vacuum of data and evidence with respect to actual impacts.
  • The requirements specified by voluntary standards prioritize protection against habitat loss, historically the single most important driver of agriculturally caused biodiversity loss. Voluntary sustainability standards are less well prepared to deal with impending drivers of biodiversity loss such as climate change.
  • Notwithstanding the significant market growth of voluntary standards across select agricultural sectors, standards remain a marginal force across global agricultural production as a whole. […] If voluntary standards are to play a major role in reducing the impacts of agriculture on biodiversity loss, they will have to, at a minimum, establish a significant presence among other crops—most notably, staple crops such as wheat, maize and rice.
  • The current and ongoing focus of voluntary standards on practice-based requirements through farm-specific interventions potentially limits their ability in bringing about broader landscape or regional changes.
  • The potential for voluntary standards to adapt to the needs of specific stakeholders may be both their greatest strength and their greatest weakness.

Die volständige Studie finden Sie hier.