TY - JOUR
T1 - Mitigating the impacts of development corridors on biodiversity
T2 - a global review
AU - Juffe-Bignoli, Diego
AU - Burgess, Neil
AU - Hobbs, Jonathan
AU - Smith, Robert J.
AU - Tam, Christine
AU - Thorn, Jessica P. R.
AU - Bull, Joseph W.
N1 - DJ-B, JH, JT, and NB acknowledge funding from the UK Research and Innovation’s Global Challenges Research Fund (UKRI GCRF) through the Development Corridors Partnership project (Project No. ES/P011500/1).
PY - 2021/7/26
Y1 - 2021/7/26
N2 - Development corridors are extensive, often transnational and linear,
geographical areas targeted for investment to help achieve sustainable
development. They often comprise the creation of hard infrastructure
(i.e., physical structures) and soft infrastructure (i.e., policies,
plans, and programmes) involving a variety of actors. They are globally
widespread, and likely to be a significant driver of habitat loss. Here,
we describe the development corridors phenomenon from a biodiversity
perspective and identify the elements of best practice in biodiversity
impact mitigation. We use these to carry out a review of the peer
reviewed literature on corridors to respond to three questions: (i) how
impacts on biodiversity and ecosystem services are assessed; (ii) what
mitigation measures are discussed to manage these impacts; and (iii) to
what extent do these measures approximate to best practice. We found
that of 271 publications on development corridors across all continents
(except for Antarctica) mentioning biodiversity or ecosystem services,
only 100 (37%) assessed impacts on biodiversity and 7 (3%) on ecosystem
services. Importantly, only half of these (52, 19% of the total 271
articles) discussed mitigation measures to manage these impacts. These
measures focused on avoidance and minimisation and there was scant
mention of restoration or ecological compensation illustrating a
deficient application of the mitigation hierarchy. We conclude that the
academic literature on corridors does not give sufficient consideration
to comprehensive mitigation of biodiversity impacts. To change this,
impact assessment research needs to acknowledge the complexity of such
multi-project and multi-stakeholder initiatives, quantify biodiversity
losses due to the full suite of their potential direct, indirect and
cumulative impacts, and follow all the steps of the mitigation hierarchy
impact framework. We suggest a series of research avenues and policy
recommendations to improve impact assessments of corridors towards
achieving better biodiversity outcomes.
AB - Development corridors are extensive, often transnational and linear,
geographical areas targeted for investment to help achieve sustainable
development. They often comprise the creation of hard infrastructure
(i.e., physical structures) and soft infrastructure (i.e., policies,
plans, and programmes) involving a variety of actors. They are globally
widespread, and likely to be a significant driver of habitat loss. Here,
we describe the development corridors phenomenon from a biodiversity
perspective and identify the elements of best practice in biodiversity
impact mitigation. We use these to carry out a review of the peer
reviewed literature on corridors to respond to three questions: (i) how
impacts on biodiversity and ecosystem services are assessed; (ii) what
mitigation measures are discussed to manage these impacts; and (iii) to
what extent do these measures approximate to best practice. We found
that of 271 publications on development corridors across all continents
(except for Antarctica) mentioning biodiversity or ecosystem services,
only 100 (37%) assessed impacts on biodiversity and 7 (3%) on ecosystem
services. Importantly, only half of these (52, 19% of the total 271
articles) discussed mitigation measures to manage these impacts. These
measures focused on avoidance and minimisation and there was scant
mention of restoration or ecological compensation illustrating a
deficient application of the mitigation hierarchy. We conclude that the
academic literature on corridors does not give sufficient consideration
to comprehensive mitigation of biodiversity impacts. To change this,
impact assessment research needs to acknowledge the complexity of such
multi-project and multi-stakeholder initiatives, quantify biodiversity
losses due to the full suite of their potential direct, indirect and
cumulative impacts, and follow all the steps of the mitigation hierarchy
impact framework. We suggest a series of research avenues and policy
recommendations to improve impact assessments of corridors towards
achieving better biodiversity outcomes.
KW - Strategic environmental assessment
KW - Environmental impact assessement
KW - Development corridors
KW - Infrastructure corridors
KW - Mitigation hierarchy
KW - Economic corridors
KW - Biodiversity mitigation
KW - Impact assesment
U2 - 10.3389/fevo.2021.683949
DO - 10.3389/fevo.2021.683949
M3 - Review article
SN - 2296-701X
VL - 9
JO - Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution
JF - Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution
M1 - 683949
ER -