The Natural Fix?

BENEFITS FOR BIODIVERSITY AND ECOSYSTEM SERVICES

Implementing policies that protect and restore ecosystem carbon can bring biodiversity and ecosystem service benefits too but are likely to do so only if they are designed with these aims in mind.

tenance of biodiverse areas, and enhancement of ecosystem services such as soil fertility (UNEP-WCMC 2008; Eliasch 2008; Reid and Swiderska 2008). REDD mechanisms are very likely to benefit biodiversity and can be designed to benefit local resource users at the same time. The challenge is to design regulations that do both, thereby avoiding biodiversity or livelihood trade-offs. In gen- eral mechanisms that include reduction in forest degradation are likely to have a greater positive impact on biodiversity than those confined to reducing deforestation. Reforestation activi- ties may also have positive biodiversity impacts (Strassburg 2007; Strassburg et al. 2008; TCG 2008). However, afforesta- tion may often have negative impacts on biodiversity. Various mapping tools are being developed to support site-se- lection for REDD projects by identifying areas that are rich in both carbon and biodiversity (UNEP-WCMC 2008). The Climate, Community and Biodiversity (CCB) Standards developed by the CCB Alliance are the most widely used and respected international standards for multiple benefits of land- based carbon projects (CCBA 2008). They aim to encourage the development of LULUCF projects under the Kyoto Pro- tocol with net positive impacts on biodiversity as well as so- cial and economic well-being (Taiyab 2006). Six projects have been approved already, 10 others are currently being reviewed and more than 100 projects intend to also apply the standards (CCBA 2008). Lessons learned from applying these standards could therefore serve as an important input into further policy negotiations on ecosystem carbon management measures.

Discussions about ecosystem carbon management recognise that it must offer multiple benefits to be politically acceptable. But it cannot be relied on to deliver those benefits in the ab- sence of other policies: priorities will have to be co-ordinated, and cross-cutting international and national policies as well as input from interdisciplinary research are needed (Lal 2007; Miles and Kapos 2008). Carbon management measures have great potential for offering multiple benefits, such as the main-

52