Skip to content
DraconiticResearch
Search Sources API
203,234 studies31 sourcesUpdated 1 h ago
Peer-reviewedCC BY 4.0Environmental Research Letters

Biodiversity credits hold promise, yet credit-generating protocols require safeguards to realize potential

  • Katherine Culbertson1
  • Sarah Federman2
  • Lucia Catherine Camp1
  • Matthew D Potts3
  1. 1University of California Berkeley
  2. 2Relae
  3. 3University of California - Berkeley
Open at sourcePDFDOICite

Abstract

Given the existing gap in biodiversity funding, mobilizing private finance will be essential to achieving global biodiversity conservation goals, especially across lower- and middle-income countries with limited capacity and public finance. The emerging voluntary biodiversity market (VBM) holds promise to leverage private finance for biodiversity, but credit-generating protocols must be robust to prevent greenwashing and maximize effectiveness. In this study, the first to move beyond theoretical critiques and general market assessments of the VBM, we extracted details of program structure and crediting issuance from protocols for 13 relatively well-established biodiversity-crediting organizations. With these data, we evaluated protocols’ alignment with both conservation and restoration biology principles and lessons learned from the voluntary carbon market (VCM). We find that action must be taken to improve quantification of biodiversity impacts, especially incorporating patch size and connectivity in crediting and assessing projects on ecologically relevant timelines. Further, safeguards for additionality, leakage, risk, and verification from the VCM must be more robustly integrated in the VBM, and deep engagement and investment in local communities must be improved to ensure durable biodiversity-positive outcomes.

Related

  1. Generating blue carbon credits through conservation of Posidonia oceanica: experience from the LIFE SeaForest project
    Simone Bonamano, Simone Bonamano, Matteo Bellotta +15
    Frontiers in Marine SciencePeer-reviewedCC BYFull textOceanography & cryosphereDOAJ
  2. Biodiversity safeguards ecosystem services and functions worldwide
    Emma R. Moffett, Joel H. Gayford, Lexi Chen +7
    Nature Ecology & EvolutionPeer-reviewedCC BY 4.0Full text1 citedClimate sciencePMC
  3. Separating Faces in ARMS Metabarcoding Improves Marine Biodiversity Monitoring: A Comparison Across Protocols, Experimental Designs and Photographic Surveys
    Anne Chenuil, Elyna Bouchereau, Térence Legrand +20
    Molecular Ecology ResourcesPeer-reviewedCC BY 4.0Full text1 citedEcologyEnvironmental science & pollutionHAL
  4. Trait-based functional indices reveal contrasting carbon-storage and biodiversity-support potential across urban tree species and parks in Bogotá
    Kristian Rubiano
    EcoEvoRxivPreprintPublisher termsFull textEnvironmental science & pollutionEcoEvoRxiv
  5. Potential of different area-based governance mechanisms for achieving Global Biodiversity Framework goals
    Pablo José Negret, Víctor J. Rincón-Parra, Kendall R. Jones +9
    Nature CommunicationsPeer-reviewedCC BYFull text5 citedClimate scienceOpenAlex

Cite

BibTeXRIS
BibTeX
@article{culbertson2026biodiversity,
  title = {{Biodiversity credits hold promise, yet credit-generating protocols require safeguards to realize potential}},
  author = {Katherine Culbertson and Sarah Federman and Lucia Catherine Camp and Matthew D Potts},
  journal = {Environmental Research Letters},
  year = {2026},
  month = oct,
  doi = {10.1088/1748-9326/aebbdc},
  url = {https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/aebbdc},
  note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY  - JOUR
TI  - Biodiversity credits hold promise, yet credit-generating protocols require safeguards to realize potential
AU  - Katherine Culbertson
AU  - Sarah Federman
AU  - Lucia Catherine Camp
AU  - Matthew D Potts
PY  - 2026
DA  - 2026/10/30
JO  - Environmental Research Letters
DO  - 10.1088/1748-9326/aebbdc
UR  - https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/aebbdc
AB  - Given the existing gap in biodiversity funding, mobilizing private finance will be essential to achieving global biodiversity conservation goals, especially across lower- and middle-income countries with limited capacity and public finance. The emerging voluntary biodiversity market (VBM) holds promise to leverage private finance for biodiversity, but credit-generating protocols must be robust to prevent greenwashing and maximize effectiveness. In this study, the first to move beyond theoretical critiques and general market assessments of the VBM, we extracted details of program structure and crediting issuance from protocols for 13 relatively well-established biodiversity-crediting organizations. With these data, we evaluated protocols’ alignment with both conservation and restoration biology principles and lessons learned from the voluntary carbon market (VCM). We find that action must be taken to improve quantification of biodiversity impacts, especially incorporating patch size and connectivity in crediting and assessing projects on ecologically relevant timelines. Further, safeguards for additionality, leakage, risk, and verification from the VCM must be more robustly integrated in the VBM, and deep engagement and investment in local communities must be improved to ensure durable biodiversity-positive outcomes.
SN  - 1748-9326
ER  -