Aligning Biodiversity Measures for Business Sub-group 3B Metrics and midpoint characterisation factors Webinar 11 July 2019
Agenda ❑ Introduction of participants and reminder of the objectives and context of the Aligning Biodiversity Measures for Business initiative ❑ Reminder of the objectives and terms of reference of the sub-group and of the webinar ❑ Review of the SG3B working paper and preparation of the position paper ▪ Common framework (definition, time integration) ▪ Differences between metrics ▪ Brief discussion on bridges between metrics ( and rest of the discussion left for the 2nd webinar ) ▪ Links between midpoint-based approaches and site-level approaches ❑ Other discussion questions ❑ Choice of dates for the next two webinars
Reminder of the objectives and context of the Aligning Biodiversity Measures for Business initiative
Reminder of the objectives of the sub-group and of the webinar
Mentimeter ❑ Go to www.menti.com and use the code 62 20 58 ❑ What is this session about?
Objectives of the sub-group 1. Explore the differences between metrics and midpoint calculations across different measurement approaches and the reasons for the current divergence. 2. Propose bridges between metrics (e.g. conversion factors or translation of characterisation factors in different metrics) and propose common midpoint characterisation factors . 3. Identify how to disaggregate footprinting metrics and aggregate site level metrics , creating complementarity between the two. 4. Other expectations
Potential outcome of the sub-groups 3A and 3B: a (partial) harmonisation of inputs and midpoints facilitating conversions between metrics Inputs (activity, pressure- Midpoints Impacts related data…) Initiative 1 Initiative 2 Initiative 3 Corporate data Midpoint input sub- sub-group group #3A #3B Initiative 1 Initiative 2 Initiative 3 PAGE 7
Expected outputs of the sub-group 1. Analysis of differences between metrics and midpoint calculations and reason for divergence 2. Mapping of the language of the LCA community with language used to describe a more direct measurement of biodiversity . This mapping will comprise language used by LCA practitioners, EIA practitioners, biodiversity specialists and natural capital accounting and assessment (Natural Capital Protocol) 3. Exploration of linkages between the different metrics and the different mid-point characterisation factors ▪ This includes determining how site based and portfolio approaches can link and complement each other. 4. Other required outcomes?
Linkage of the sub-group with sub-group 31 on corporate data inputs
Objectives of the webinar 1. Clarify the collaboration process . 2. Review the SG3B working paper and provide feedback to transform it into a SG3B position paper (input to the Brazil workshop). 3. Plan the next webinar .
Mentimeter ❑ Go to www.menti.com and use the code 62 20 58 ❑ Questions? ➔ add them to the parking lot
Review of the SG3B working paper and preparation of the position paper
REVIEW - Introduction
SG3B working paper ❑ aligning_biodiversity_measures_SG3B-metrics- midpoints_V03_20190708.docx ❑ Sent by Julie Dimitrijevic on 8 th July ❑ Objective : have comments and edit proposals in track changes by SG3B members in July and August to build into a position paper open for suggestions for all ABMB members in September.
Impacts on biodiversity, and associated pressures, covered due to the endpoint characterisation factors available for each metric Endpoint characterisation factors and associated capacity to assess the impact of pressures Metric Available Land / sea Direct Invasive Pollution Climate Other [initiatives endpoint use change exploitation alien change using the characterisa- species metric] tion factors GLOBIO’s MSA Land use, Not Not Atmospheric nitrogen Climate [GBS, pressure- Fragmentatio covered covered deposition, Nutrient change BIM, BF, impact n, directly emissions, Land use LIFE relationships Encroachme change in catchment Index] nt, Hydrological disturbance, Wetland conversion PDF ReCiPe or Land Not Not Terrestrial ecotoxicity, Climate Impact’s [BFFI, LC occupation, covered covered Terrestrial acidification, change PBF] characterisati Land Marine ecotoxicity, Marine on factors transformatio eutrophication, Freshwater n, (regional) eutrophication, Freshwater Water ecotoxicity scarcity PAGE 15
Impacts on biodiversity, and associated pressures, covered due to the endpoint characterisation factors available for each metric Endpoint characterisation factors and associated capacity to assess the impact of pressures Metric Available Land / sea use Direct Invasive alien Pollution Climate Other [initiatives endpoint change exploitation species change using the characterisat metric] ion factors Risk of No Residential & Biological Invasive & Pollution Climate Geological extinction characterisat Commercial Resource Problematic Change Events unit [STAR] ion factor but Development, Use Species, assessment Agriculture & Pathogens & of the level Aquaculture, Energy Genes of pressures Production & Mining, through the Transportation & IUCN Red Service Corridors, List Human Intrusions & Disturbance, Natural System Modifications Natural No capital characterisat monetary ion factor value (e.g. EUR) [EP&L] [BIE, … ] No characterisat ion factor PAGE 16
Mentimeter ❑ Go to www.menti.com and use the code 62 20 58 ❑ What is meant by "midpoint" in this subgroup?
REVIEW - Common framework (definition, time integration)
Definitions ❑ Endpoint : an endpoint is the final element that is being assessed, corresponding to ecosystem quality (e.g. quantified with local species loss integrated over time, in species.year) , resource scarcity or human health (e.g. quantified in disability adjusted life years). ❑ Midpoint : a midpoint is an intermediary step in calculation of impacts allowing to link input data to impact results (endpoint), that is not specifically focused on what is being assessed (e.g. the assessment of the global mean temperature increase due to greenhouse gas emissions is a midpoint towards biodiversity erosion due to climate change). For example, if the endpoint is the loss in biodiversity linked to eutrophication at some point, then a midpoint could be the N concentration in a specific environment.
Example of path between inputs (in blue), midpoints (in green) and endpoints (in red) (ASN Bank, 2016) PAGE 20
Models and databases providing biodiversity-related midpoint and endpoint characterisation factors (non- exhaustive) From data inputs to From midpoints to endpoints midpoints (midpoint CF) (endpoint CF) Life cycle assessment CML (outdated) databases such as ecoinvent GLOBIO ReCiPe Environmentally extended input-output models such as LC Impact EXIOBASE IUCN mean % decline over 10 years UN Environment lifecycle USEtox initiative PAGE 21
Definitions ❑ Cf. SG3A: ▪ Indicator : “A quantitative or qualitative factor or variable that provides a simple and reliable means to measure achievement, to reflect changes connected to an intervention, or to help assess the performance of a development actor” ▪ Measure : an assessment of the amount, extent or condition, usually expressed in physical terms. Can be either qualitative or quantitative. ▪ Metric : “A system or standard of measurement”. A combination of measures or modelled elements. The Mean Species Abundance (MSA) and the Potentially Disappeared Fraction (PDF) are for instance metrics expressed as a percentage. ▪ Unit : a standard measure that is used to express amounts. For instance MSA.m 2 or PDF.yr.m 2 are units. PAGE 22
Mentimeter ❑ Go to www.menti.com and use the code 62 20 58 ❑ What is time integration about?
Illustration of the question of time-integration (CDC Biodiversité, 2019) with the example of MSA ❑ Some impacts persist over time PAGE 24
How to deal with effects persistent over time? Integrate impacts over time ➔ PDF.yr 1. 2. Distinguish between impacts over the period considered (could be called dynamic ) and the stock of past impacts (could be called static ) 3. Ignore persistent effect ❑ Proposal: SG3B recognizes the importance to take into account the persistence of impacts over time and the need for each measurement approach to clarify how it currently deals with the issue PAGE 25
Overview of current practices regarding time integration among measurement approaches Time integration approach Measurement approaches Time integration embedded in the unit used (e.g. BFFI, PBF PDF.m 2 .yr) Distinction of dynamic (integrated over the GBS assessment period) and static impacts AI, BF, BIE, BIM, EP&L, LIFE Index, No time integration STAR PAGE 26
REVIEW - Differences between metrics
Recommend
More recommend
