Introduction
There are about 33 countries that have implemented payment schemes to facilitate the conservation of biodiversity (Duchelle et al 13). For example, in Brazil, rubber tappers have engaged in an agreement with the government where there are provided with payments for their conservation efforts (Duchelle et al 14). Another example is in Guyana where the Conservation International has obtained a conservation concession from their government to promote the conservation of 20,000 acres of forest. The payment scheme as a strategy to facilitate biodiversity conservation is also currently applicable in the United States where farmers are paid for protecting land from destruction as a result of anthropogenic forces (Pirard 61).
Research shows that the loss of biodiversity occurs at a rapid rate (Alvarado-Quesada, Irene, Lars Hein, and Hans-Peter 2). Certain stakeholders have even argued that there is no indication that the trend of biodiversity loss will reverse or reduce. According to the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, there was a significant reduction in the number of vertebrates by almost a third between the years 1970’s and 2006 (Alvarado-Quesada et al 3). The rate at which vertebrate species is reducing is expected to continue experiencing a sharp decline. In a research published by the United Nations Environmental Program, one of the major causes of biodiversity loss emerges from habitat losses as well s the massive destruction of natural environment by anthropogenic forces (Alvarado-Quesada et al 4). The UNEP also asserts that the tremendous introduction of non-invasive and invasive species is another major factor that facilitates the destruction of biodiversity (Alvarado-Quesada et al 6).
The primary aim of this discussion is to present a review of real-life cases where market-based approach have been used to successfully promote protection of biodiversity across the globe. The discussion will also evaluate the efficacy of the market-based approaches regarding the conservation of bio-diversity.
Discussion
BioBanking in Australia
Australia is considered one of the pioneer nations in regard to the application of market of biodiversity to enhance conservation (Critchley et al 140). BioBanking is described as a market-oriented mechanism of biodiversity credit that was developed in New South Wales (Alvarado-Quesada et al 6). The aim of BioBanking is to enhance the protection of natural resources or facilitate biodiversity conservation. This program was introduced by the Australian government and focuses on two major facets of conservation; provide incentives for landowners across Australia so that they can accrue income as they manage their private pieces of land (Alvarado-Quesada et al 6). The other focus of BioBanking in Australia is to facilitate the assessment and management of different biodiversity offsets that were developed to counterbalance the effects of land use.
The efficacy of this market-based approach has been enhanced by introduction of the Compliance Assurance Strategy that acts as the guideline. The Australian BioBanking scheme is based on the premise that the purchase of credits by landowners across Australia promotes protection of biodiversity through conservation initiatives (Alvarado-Quesada et al 6). BioBanking has been efficient in promoting conservation across Australia because it applies a holistic approach where both ecosystem and species units are traded. The Government has also applied an effective strategy to calculate traded units per area; this strategy involves the application of an assessment methodology as well as a credit-oriented calculator. Besides, the BioBanking Scheme has been an effective strategy because it focuses on sustainability. This occurs in the sense that the Australian government and landowners have signed a binding agreement where future landowners will also have to continue with the scheme, hence, promoting conservation of biodiversity across Australia.
The use of BushBroker
This is another market of biodiversity that has been applied in Australia by the State Government of Victoria. The primary objective of this approach is to enhance or improve the quality as well as the population of native vegetation in Australia through the net gain framework (Alvarado-Quesada et al 11). The BushBroker also enhances the capacity of stakeholders across Australia to prevent the negative impacts of land use of reduce impacts that cannot be completely avoided. Furthermore, the BushBroker is considered an effective approach considering that it provides a platform for stakeholders to determine proper offset options (Alvarado-Quesada et al 11). Stakeholders also referred as Bushbrokers, are required to register and trade credits for utilization as offsets in the development processes in events that there is no suitable or appropriate sites on the property that requires protection.
The BushBrokers are not required to engage in any aspect of negotiation; although they are required to record data and prepare agreements with landowners as well as credit agreements. It is important to acknowledge that traded units include Native Vegetation Credits. Similarly, Bush Brokers are registered as native vegetation credits and are usually attached to the titles of the land, therefore, giving them a holistic approach towards biodiversity conservation. Just like the BioBanking approach, the efficacy of the BushBroker approach has been enhanced by engaging landowners in a binding agreement, ensuring that there is sustainability in biodiversity conservation. That is, the contracts are binding so that future land owners are also required to continue with conservation of biodiversity across Australia.
The use of Conservation Banking in the United States
According to the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, this is a market oriented scheme that was developed in the US to offset the negative effects towards endangered species or vulnerable land resources. It is also aimed at protecting valuable land resources such as Wetlands et cetera. It was developed in the early 1990’s by developing the wetland banking approach; this approach was made official in 2003 by introducing Conservation Banking which provides incentives to landowners across the United States so that they can permanently protect land through selling habitat credits or species credits while ensuring that their land resources are kept intact (Alvarado-Quesada et al 13). Conservation Banking also creates an opportunity for landowners to receive tax reductions and other benefits available to landowners across the United States. The price range of Conservation Banking as applicable in the United States is between $2,500 and $300,000 (Alvarado-Quesada et al 13).
The Conservation Banking considers buyers as private or public developments that may affect vulnerable land resources or endangered species, hence, require offset mechanisms (Mann and James 75). This may involve private organizations, government agencies as well as exploration industries. The Conservation Banking approach also considers credit sellers as conservation banks that offer credits. On the other hand, sellers are organizations or government stakeholders that are in need of mitigation efforts, although research has shown that of late there have been increasing numbers of private land developers compared to government land developers participating in the Conservation Banking market of biodiversity.
The Malaysian Malua BioBank
This is another Market of Biodiversity that has been associated with tremendous success concerning the conservation of biodiversity. It is a public-private partnership market-based conservation scheme between the Malaysian governments (Government of Sabah) and provides organizations or businesses (Alvarado-Quesada et al 14). The primary reason for creating the partnership was to enhance the rehabilitation process of the Malua Forest located in the Malaysian Borneo. The program was implemented in 2008 and covers a forested area of about 34,000 hectares; this area is considered an imperative habitat for wildlife such as the Orangutans as well as other endangered species; the BioBank has been made effective by the commitment of the government to ensure that all logging activities are stopped for a period of about 50 years only in events that adequate credits are sold (Alvarado-Quesada et al 14). Moreover, the efficacy of the Malaysian BioBank has been enhanced by formulation of a Conservation Management Plan creating guidelines regarding financing and supervision of activities within the forest.
Expansion of the Malaysian Malua BioBank
Management Structure
As a market of biodiversity, the Malua BioBank is managed through a public-private partnership. That is, a partnership between the Malaysian Government and the various private organizations. As mentioned, above, the aim of this partnership is to facilitate rehabilitative activities geared towards protection as well as the conservation of the Malua Forest Reserve. The Sabah Malaysian government is directed by a commitment that focuses on preventing all logging activities within the forest for a period of not less than 50 years on a condition that adequate credit is old.
Cost Structure
Geographical Extent
The Malaysian Malua BioBank was established in 2008. It covers an area of about 34,000 hectares of forested land (Alvarado-Quesada et al 14). This area acts as an important habit for rare wildlife species such as the Orangutans as well as other endangered plant species.
Players or Stakeholders involved
As aforementioned, the players involved include; private business organizations, the Sabah Malaysian Government and any other key stakeholders interested in promoting the conservation and protection of biodiversity in the Malua Forest Reserve.
Results and Effectiveness of the Program to achieve its Goal
The goal of the Malaysian BioBank is to promote rehabilitation and protection of the Forest Reserve, that is, the Malua Forest. Regarding managerial strategy, the BioBank involves private, public and government stakeholders. This approach is effective in achieving the mentioned goal because it creates an opportunity for knowledge transfer and development. Furthermore, the BioBank provides an affordable cost/pricing structure where key stakeholders are able to buy credits from as low as $50 for the protection of a 50m2 forested land. This cost structure attracts supplayers from different economic status, ensuring that even low-income individuals or families are able to participate in the protection of the forest. Consequently, the BioBank covers a geographical area of about 34,000 hectares; the vast coverage is an effective approach creating an opportunity for the protection and conservation of myriad natural resources within the forest.
Works Cited
Alvarado-Quesada, Irene, Lars Hein, and Hans-Peter Weikard. "Market-based mechanisms for biodiversity conservation: a review of existing schemes and an outline for a global mechanism." Biodiversity and conservation 23.1 (2014): 1-21.
Critchley, Christine R., et al. "Predicting intention to biobank: a national survey." The European Journal of Public Health 22.1 (2012): 139-144.
Duchelle, Amy E., et al. "Acre’s State System of Incentives for Environmental Services (SISA), Brazil." REDD+ on the ground: A case book of subnational initiatives across the globe. Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR), Bogor, Indonesia, 2014.
Mann, Carsten, and James D. Absher. "Adjusting policy to institutional, cultural and biophysical context conditions: The case of conservation banking in California." Land Use Policy 36 (2014): 73-82.
Pirard, Romain. "Market-based instruments for biodiversity and ecosystem services: A lexicon." Environmental Science & Policy 19 (2012): 59-68.
