Project Context and Evaluation .1 Project Origins

The project was initiated through the recognition that businesses are seen by many nature conservation organisations as the next step for the biodiversity policy development

(Earthwatch, 2002) and that businesses have been officially invited to actively contribute to international goals for biodiversity at the eighth meeting of the Conference of the Parties (COP8) to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), held in Curitiba in March 2006 (Houdet, 2008). However, at the practitioner level, where biodiversity protections and gains will be made by businesses the limited information available to businesses on the issue of biodiversity measurement was apparent. A large amount of confusion was also being caused by the different understandings or lack of understanding of the term biodiversity at the practitioner level. Also identified was a lack of engagement of actual biodiversity work within private sector organisations. This was due partly to the lack of understanding of what biodiversity involves and also the lack of material available on the approach to measuring biodiversity.

Both the paucity of information for the layperson and the needs of business in relation to biodiversity are detailed by Armsworth et al. (2010). Armsworth et al. (2010) provide a summary of the context into which the research in this thesis sits, both in terms of academic literature and the operational needs of business.

“businesses require support from researchers in applied ecology to inform how they measure and manage their impacts on, and opportunities presented to them by, biodiversity and ecosystem services.”

(Armsworth et al., 2010).

Particularly important for this project, was the issue of complexity. Many companies and environmental professionals were reluctant to tackle the biodiversity issue because of its seeming complexity. This complexity is borne partly out of the lack of research focused specifically on practitioner-level biodiversity measurement and the abundance of scientific ecology research. The ecology purist may frown upon ‗biodiversity‘ as a toned down version of the science of ecology that includes social elements and provides snapshot

information for policy makers but without the rise of the term biodiversity, very few

companies would have engaged with the ecological component of the natural environment – instead preferring to focus on the easily quantified environmental components such as air and water pollution, energy use, raw material sourcing and waste to landfill.

As acknowledged by UNEP-WCMC (2005), the literature review revealed a lack of specific, focused information on biodiversity indicators for business and the practitioner level, despite an abundance of key documents and literature on biodiversity importance, policy making, measurements and accounting at a global and national governmental level.

Throughout the mid-stages of this research programme the Millennium Ecosystem

Assessment (2005), The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (2008), development of the Convention on Biological Diversity with Convention of the Parties (COP)

progression and national level documents including DEFRA (2007a) and DEFRA (2007b), amongst many additional academic and other papers were published. This development of the global concern for biodiversity loss and the development of the ecosystem

approach continued without support for the implementation of biodiversity measurement or advice on how to operationalise these global and national level concepts at a

practitioner level. This is explicitly expressed in the work by Armsworth et al. (2010) and discussed in more detail in Chapter 2 of this thesis. However, there is a limited amount of academic literature acknowledging the gap between the global, policy-focused

publications of biodiversity and ecosystem services, the recognition of opportunity and pressures on business to mobilise and have enormous positive impact on biodiversity and the lack of applied research providing methods to enable practitioners to measure

biodiversity.

Information in the area of biodiversity indicators in the ecological research field is growing and many studies have been completed to investigate hypotheses based on historic assumptions that, for example, breeding bird diversity is a good surrogate for overall habitat health and biodiversity. Further information and multiple examples of this research are provided in Chapter 2. In summary, through a process of measuring a potential surrogate like breeding bird diversity as well as more detailed measures of total

biodiversity, or habitat health, and then statistically analysing the relationship, judgements are made about the correlation relationship between the surrogate and total. These studies are often complex and conclusions of researchers can vary from those willing to accept low levels of correlation as a potential indicator link to others who dismiss anything but very strong positive correlation as suitable for use of the given surrogate for

measurement purposes. Unfortunately the complexity of the majority of these studies severely limits their accessibility to businesses and practitioners (Armsworth et al., 2010).

The recent (June 2011) UK Government Natural Environment White Paper – ―The Natural Choice: securing the nature of value‖, incorporates elements of an ecosystem approach and appreciation of ecosystem services with valuation of natural capital to set out the future approach to the natural environment in the UK. In relation to this thesis, businesses are specifically addressed. For example, in terms of natural capital valuation it is stated that:

“ Better accounting – by business and by government – would enable better choices, so that society can use natural capital sustainably.”

(HM Government, 2011)

In relation to biodiversity indicators for business, the limitation of current guidance for environmental measures for business is stated and an objective is set to:

“issue new guidance for businesses by 2012 on how to measure and report corporate environmental impacts.”

(HM Government, 2011)

This new guidance will follow the same approach as current systems for reporting greenhouse gas emissions to ensure consistency for all environmental aspects including waste minimisation, water use and biodiversity impacts. This concept mirrors the author‘s objective (as developed from interviews with collaborating organisations as reported in Chapter 6) for the research documented in this thesis that biodiversity should be measured and reported alongside more commonly assessed EMS aspects (e.g. water use, pollution to air etc.).

Biodiversity is specifically referred to in a number of sections of the document but is incorporated into every element of the natural capital discussion as result of the authors‘

definition of the term (see Figure 11.1). A commitment to publish a new Biodiversity Strategy for England is made and key reforms are given as:

 Supporting Local Nature Partnerships;

 New Nature Improvement Areas;

 Ecologically coherent planning; and,

 Piloting biodiversity offsets.

The methodology developed in this research project may find future uses in the biodiversity offset context in addition to its intended business landholding application

because HM Government state that biodiversity benefits should be delivered in a measurable way as compensation for any losses as a result of development. The

measurement of biodiversity relies on indicators (as described in detail in Section 2.9) and it is proposed that any selection of indicators should follow a process of consideration such as the methodology presented in this thesis.

Figure 11.1 – HM Government (2011) definition of natural capital

This latest development in UK policy reinforces the need for consideration of biodiversity both as an integral part of natural capital and as an important constituent part of an ecosystem approach that includes new valuation methods. The methodology for the selection of biodiversity indicators developed in this research fits into this approach for the future years as a practitioner-level tool.

11.2.2 Project Evaluation

The project made a contribution to knowledge through the gathering of biodiversity indicator information, experiences and opinions from environmental professionals using structured interviews. The provision of real world information, opinions and views in an academic research project provides credibility to the project from both the business and the academic perspectives. The use of structured methods for interviews and the

presentation of information in an academic document provides scientific credibility that is appreciated by the business and professional community. From an academic perspective, added value is gained through the incorporation of real world perspectives and the

ongoing input of biodiversity practitioners to a process that could otherwise be entirely developed based on academic literature which currently lacks in the area of practitioner

implementation of theories and new directions relating to biodiversity and ecosystem services.

Another original factor of this research project is the combination of the real world data with academic information from journals and other published material. The combination of both types of information is considered to be an important factor of the research and indicative of the overall concept behind the research. This concept is based upon the acknowledgement that biodiversity as a topic is based somewhere on a spectrum between science and policy. This understanding of the term biodiversity and its study is explained in greater detail in Chapter 2 (Section 2.2). In summary, biodiversity is not identical to the hard scientific discipline of ecology and neither is it a meaningless

buzzword that can be replaced by another term. The development of the use of the term biodiversity (and latterly ecosystem services) has increased the engagement of policy makers with the natural environment – landscape, ecosystem, species, habitat and genetic diversity. It is a version of the study of this natural environment that takes into account human activity, needs and desires and the other aspects of sustainable development (economic and social sustainability).

This combination of information involved the author‘s amalgamation of the results to develop the biodiversity indicator selection methodology based on pre-existing conceptual frameworks such as the EEA (1999 & 2005) DPSIR model and with reference to global and national indicator sets including the UK indicators (JNCC, 2007). In relation to the DPSIR model, the methodology developed in this thesis operationalises a very similar set of stages and relationships. The DPSIR model is a general causal framework but one which is described in the EEA (1999) text in the context of national and international government. Stages are described with reference to changes in populations – population growth, lifestyle changes and the responses that can be made at a policy making level.

This has been modified to the organisation / institutional scale, using the inputs of collaborating organisations, to be applicable at a practitioner level.

The proposed biodiversity indicator selection methodology was tested by a process of implementation in a genuine business scenario. The testing of the methodology was completed at a mineral extraction site within an organisation that has multiple UK landholdings and is part of an international business (Aggregate Industries UK is owned by Holcim, which operates in 70 countries and employs 80,000 people). This shows that the research links in to the global debates on biodiversity protection and ecosystem services. It shows the importance of the practitioner level and how by addressing the gap and filling the link between the international policy making debate of biodiversity and

ecosystem service and the practitioner level will allow practitioners to effectively measure, manage , conserve and enhance biodiversity. In turn this feeds benefits and growth back up the scales to the global scale if all businesses can, and do, address biodiversity to the extent at which they currently address environmental concerns that are more easily measured and reported (e.g. energy, waste, pollution levels). This research contributes knowledge to the development of this ‗missing‘ link – to operationalise global concepts at the practitioner level.

The case study provides original information and a contribution to knowledge with both the explanation of how the biodiversity selection methodology was applied and by reporting a practitioner business perspective on biodiversity. The drivers and constraints that

influence decision making when addressing biodiversity were reported, as was the level of influence of corporate level, national and international policy on these decisions.

The development of the biodiversity indicator selection methodology that is at the centre of this thesis can be likened to the development of a process for, as an example, quality assurance or health and safety management. That is, the stages and factors of that process are based upon previously successful practices and knowledge of a particular subject area and situation. Each organisation implementing it may develop a bespoke set of these processes, based upon a generic guide or principle. The evaluation of the methodology by the implementation with Aggregate Industries illustrates this adaptation approach and describes it for future adopters.

The methods used for the research in this project are similar to those being prescribed in the biodiversity indicator selection methodology. There was an understanding that this topic is a real-world problem and only with input from practitioners could it be advanced.

This has led to the production of a methodology for use by biodiversity practitioners but with strong links, reference to and understanding of the global biodiversity and ecosystem services debates and policy developments. The global pressures on biodiversity and ecosystem services are documented in the large and well-known publications that include the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005), The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (2008) and also the collection of academic literature preceding these landmark titles (including but not limited to Daily 2000, Daily & Ellison 2002, Duelli &

Obrist 1998, 2003, Piorr, 2003). The research project itself, although engaging with business and tackling this practitioner level problem, is based on the academic investigation principles of a defined aim and objectives, a documented methodology, thorough investigation of the current state of the art and a structured and reasoned written report of activities, fully referenced and reviewed.

The research contributes to knowledge in the areas of biodiversity and ecosystem services, applied ecology, business and biodiversity, environmental management and others. The knowledge provided is a contribution to the requirement that is referred to in texts including MA (2005) where it is stated that the scientific and assessment tools required for cross-scale assessments are only beginning to be developed. This research and the knowledge it contributes is part of the development of assessment tools required.

Where the House of Commons Environmental Audit (2007) comments that non-specialists can find it difficult to access information contained in the MA reports, the knowledge contribution in this thesis will go some way to engaging the non-specialist with the concepts of operational biodiversity assessment.

The TEEB (2008) report acknowledges a need to develop performance metrics at the corporate level and states that metrics could contribute to a consumer footprint measure.

The research documented in this thesis provides a contributing to the current knowledge in the form of a methodology for the selection of biodiversity metrics at the practitioner level. These metrics will be required to develop corporate performance measures and the consumer footprints metrics. For example, the Aggregate Industries case study

biodiversity metrics will provide information which could be associated with the products of the study site, Back Lane Quarry.

11.2.2 Research Method

The use of interviews to gather information from collaborating organisations was an approach which is utilised more often by social science, where interview techniques are used extensively for insight into opinions, experiences and to build a wide picture of complex social issues. For this study the use of interviews was selected as an approach to gather information on business and biodiversity from practitioners. Interviews were selected for the benefit they provide when dealing with time-constrained professionals who otherwise may not find the time to complete paper questionnaires or other

information gathering techniques. However, the use of what is widely seen as a social science research method created some issues. During social science research, the techniques are used for slightly differing purposes to those of this research project. For this research, a very pragmatic approach was taken, methods were selected that would most efficiently and appropriately provide the information required. This information was the insight and knowledge of practicing environmental professionals, something not available in literature but vital to developing a practicable methodology for business. This contrasts to the social science studies using the same basic techniques, these studies place more emphasis on analysis of interview transcripts and the subject as the research

topic is often relating to the people in a situation, rather than the systems, methods, techniques and other factual information. For this research project this balance of focus is firmly towards the latter. The case studies and interview-based information gathering in this project were used to develop something further (the biodiversity indicator selection methodology), as opposed to being the central component and output of a research project.

Tackling a ‗real-world‘ problem is inherently more complex due to its lack of pre-determined structure compared to a ‗standard‘ scientific experiment. The above

manipulation of qualitative research methods was required to provide information needed to successfully develop a useful methodology for business, in the ‗real-world‘ / practitioner level. In order to mitigate criticism of the way these social science research techniques have been exploited to progress the project, explanations have been included (Chapters 3, 5 & 6) to describe how and why these methods have been used. Stages in the research project where researcher influence and the knowledge of the author directed the process have been documented. This acknowledgement of situations where decisions were made based upon knowledge developed from information from a variety of sources is given to assist the reader. It is also provided to ensure that possible assumptions that decisions are directly linked to data, as would be expected in a ‗traditional‘ science experiment, are not made.

Evaluating this research approach, considering alternatives and contemplating new research in this field, the information gathering approach for this project could have incorporate additional stages or different techniques. One possible approach would be to analyse corporate literature that was available in the public domain and also that literature which could be provided by the collaborating organisations that may not be public

documentation. Another approach that could have been adopted was an in-depth study of one organisation which already implements a biodiversity measurement, monitoring and management strategy that is recognised (with corporate awards etc.) as being a leader in the field. Another, very different, approach would have been the use of interview

techniques to gather much more qualitative data with full transcripts on the opinions of environmental and biodiversity practitioners about their opinions and experiences of biodiversity as an environmental aspect. This social science type study may also help fill the gap between high level, large scale debate on biodiversity and policy for an

international audience and what is required at a practitioner level to contribute to the conservation of biodiversity. However, all of these alternative approaches to the gathering of information and general research methodology for the project encounter limitations to the quality of information likely to be provided and the quality of the output of a project

based on these methods. For example, the collection of information from literature in the public domain or willingly provided by collaborating partners is likely to be limited by businesses caution to provide written accounts of negative situations and scenarios. This caution was much less apparent when having face to face discussions with individuals from collaborating organisations and conversations were often very candid.

The timescale of the project constrained the possible engagement with collaborating organisations. As discussed in Chapter 4, several representatives from potential partner businesses were ruled out of the research due to unavailability at the time of the first multiple case study. With a greater amount of time allocated to the information gathering

The timescale of the project constrained the possible engagement with collaborating organisations. As discussed in Chapter 4, several representatives from potential partner businesses were ruled out of the research due to unavailability at the time of the first multiple case study. With a greater amount of time allocated to the information gathering