You are on page 1of 32

Guidance Note 6

Biodiversity Conservation and the Sustainable Management of


Ecosystem Services and Living Resources
May 19, 2010

Guidance Note 6 corresponds to Performance Standard 6. Please also refer to Performance


Standards 1–5 and 7–8 as well as their corresponding Guidance Notes for additional
information. Bibliographical information on all referenced materials appearing in the text of this
Guidance Note can be found in the References section at the end.

Introduction
1. Performance Standard 6 recognizes that protecting and conserving biodiversity, the
maintenance of ecosystem services, and the sustainable management of natural resources
are fundamental to sustainable development. Biodiversity, as defined in the Convention on
Biological Diversity, is the variability among living organisms from all sources including,
terrestrial, marine, and other aquatic ecosystems and the ecological complexes of which
they are a part. This includes diversity within species, between species, and of ecosystems.
This Performance Standard reflects the objectives of the Convention on Biological Diversity
to conserve biological diversity and promote the use of renewable natural resources in a
sustainable manner. This Performance Standard addresses how clients can avoid, reduce,
restore, and offset impacts on biodiversity arising from their operations as well as
1
sustainably manage renewable natural resources and ecosystem services.
_____________________
1
Ecosystem services are defined as provisioning services (such as food, freshwater, shelter, and timber),
regulating services (such as surface water purification, carbon storage and sequestration, climate regulation,
and protection from natural hazards), and natural cultural services (such as cultural heritage and sacred sites),
which are linked to biodiversity.

G1. Biological diversity or biodiversity is recognized as an integrating concept that includes


the ecosystems within which the people of the world live, as well as the multitude of species that
are used by humankind for food, fiber, medicines, clothing and shelter. Protecting this global
biodiversity from damage and conserving it for future generations is recognized as being vitally
important in the Convention on Biological Diversity.

G2. In pursuing these aims, IFC is guided by and supports the implementation of applicable
international law and conventions including:
 Convention on Biological Diversity and its protocols.
 Convention on Wetlands of International Importance Especially as Waterfowl Habitat.
 Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (Bonn
Convention).

G3. Ecosystem services are the benefits that people obtain from ecosystems, and include
provisioning services (such as food, fiber, fresh water, fuel wood, biochemicals, genetic
resources); regulating services (such as climate regulation, disease regulation, water regulation,
water purification, degradation of pollutants, carbon sequestration and storage, nutrient cycling);
and cultural services (spiritual and religious aspects, recreation and ecotourism, aesthetics,
inspiration, educational values, sense of place, cultural heritage). G13-G24 of this Guidance
Notes provides further information on ecosystem services.

Objectives
 To protect and conserve biodiversity
 To ensure the continuance of benefits arising from ecosystem services

125
Guidance Note 6
Biodiversity Conservation and the Sustainable Management of
Ecosystem Services and Living Resources
May 19, 2010

 To promote the sustainable management of natural resources through the adoption of


practices that integrate conservation needs and development priorities

G4. The objectives of Performance Standard 6 are derived from elements of the Convention
on Biological Diversity and the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment and the recognition of the
important role that the private sector can play in protecting and conserving biodiversity for future
generations and promoting the sustainable management of living natural resources. The
sustainable management of living resources by the private sector should be achieved by
balancing conservation and development priorities, and recognizing that this may require trade-
offs on each side.

Scope of Application
2. The applicability of this Performance Standard is established during the social and
environmental risks and impacts identification process, while the implementation of the
actions necessary to meet the requirements of this Performance Standard is managed
through the client’s social and environmental management system. The assessment and
management system requirements are outlined in Performance Standard 1.

3. Based on the risks and impacts identification process on the biodiversity and natural
resources present, the requirements of this Performance Standard are applied to projects (i)
2
located in all habitats, regardless of whether those habitats have been modified or not, or
whether they are legally protected or designated areas or not; (ii) in areas providing critical
3
ecosystem services to Affected Stakeholders and/or to the project; and (iii) whose objective
includes the extraction of natural resources (e.g., forestry, fisheries).
_____________________
2
As a general rule, modified habitat does not include urban areas, industrial, and other brownfield sites.
3
Critical ecosystem services are defined as those provisioning services necessary for sustaining the project or
the survival, sustenance, livelihood, or primary income source of Affected Stakeholders.

Requirements
General

4. In order to avoid, and if avoidance is not possible then to reduce and restore adverse
impacts to biodiversity and ecosystem services (see Performance Standard 1) the client will
assess the significance of project impacts on biodiversity and ecosystem services as an
integral part of the social and environmental risks and impacts identification process. The
risks and impacts identification process should consider direct and indirect project-related
impacts on biodiversity and ecosystem services and identify residual impacts.

5. The risks and impacts identification process will focus on the major threats to
biodiversity and priority ecosystem services, such as habitat loss, degradation and
fragmentation, invasive alien species, overexploitation, water scarcity, nutrient loading,
pollution, and climate change. The risks and impacts identification process will take into
account the differing values attached to biodiversity and ecosystem services by specific
stakeholders. Where paragraphs 14–17 of this Performance Standard are applicable, the
client will retain qualified and experienced external experts to assist in conducting the risks
and impacts identification process, which should consider project-related impacts across
the potentially affected landscape or seascape.

G5. As specified in Performance Standard 1, all projects will perform a social and
environmental risks and impacts identification process. Issues regarding biodiversity and

126
Guidance Note 6
Biodiversity Conservation and the Sustainable Management of
Ecosystem Services and Living Resources
May 19, 2010

ecosystem services form an integral part of the process. The risks and identification process
should consider project-related impacts on biodiversity and ecosystem services in the project’s
area of influence, including areas containing associated facilities or areas impacted by supply
chains or other third party relationships.

G6. Where biodiversity is a key focus, clients should refer to internationally recognized good
practice guidelines on integrating biodiversity into impact assessment, which include:

 Voluntary Guidelines on Biodiversity-inclusive Environmental Impact Assessment


(Contained in the CBD Decision VIII/28 from COP8 in 2006).
 Biodiversity in Impact Assessment–– (IAIA Special Publication Series No. 3).
 Various products of––The Energy and Biodiversity Initiative.

G7. As part of the Assessment process, the client should determine the ‘vulnerability’
(degree of threat) and ‘irreplaceablity’ (rarity or uniqueness)1 of the biodiversity attributes in
question and/or the ecosystem service. Regarding ‘vulnerability’, the client should determine if
such threats, as listed in paragraph 7 in PS6, are pre-existing and/or the extent to which the
project will exacerbate or further them. Regarding irreplaceability, the client should describe the
uniqueness of the biodiversity attribute, the ecosystem service and/or the areas in which these
resource/services occur on a regional level.

G8. Projects that are likely to have a significant impact on biodiversity and/or on ecosystem
services should be subject to more detailed assessment, analysis and/or specific studies. Such
further assessment / analysis should be undertaken by qualified and experienced professionals
and should fully account for the project’s direct and indirect impacts, including those ‘outside the
fence’ of the project’s immediate boundaries. When paragraphs 11 and 16 [natural and critical
habitats] of this Performance Standard applies, the risk and identification process should also
consider cumulative impacts, especially those on habitat connectivity and/or on downstream
catchment areas.

G9. In sectors that rely on natural resources as raw materials (such as furniture
manufacturing and food processing), the impacts on biodiversity may also occur at several
points in the supply chain. In such situations, the client should identify any impacts caused by
their commercial partners or suppliers and address them in a manner commensurate to their
degree of control and influence. Additional information regarding supply chain management is
provided in Performance Standard 1 and its accompanying Guidance Note.

G10. Assessment of biodiversity impacts can inform decisions on project alternatives.


Alternatives may include variations in the layout of the project site, alternative engineering
processes and construction practices, the selection of different sites or routing of linear facilities,
and screening of suppliers to select those with appropriate environmental/social risk
management systems.

G11. In projects with significant biodiversity issues (e.g., sensitive habitats or endangered
species), a Biodiversity Action Plan and/or Biodiversity Management should be prepared to
highlight these issues and illustrate how they will be addressed. The Biodiversity Action Plan
should identify specific measures and timelines for addressing biodiversity issues, and disclosed

1
As paraphrased from Margules, C.R. and R. L. Pressey, Systematic Conservation Planning. Nature 405, 243-253 (11 May 2000),
irreplaceability is the extent to which the loss of the area will compromise regional conservation targets, and vulnerability is the risk
of the area being transformed by extractive uses. Areas with high values for both should receive priority for conservation action.

127
Guidance Note 6
Biodiversity Conservation and the Sustainable Management of
Ecosystem Services and Living Resources
May 19, 2010

and implemented through the client’s Social and Environmental Management system consistent
with the requirements of Performance Standard 1. Depending on the nature and scope of
project and/or on the vulnerability/irreplaceability of the biodiversity attribute in question, some
actions will likely need to be undertaken before project financing. Details on the preparation of a
Biodiversity Action Plan and a Biodiversity Management Plan are presented in Annex A.

G12. Given the importance of biodiversity in not only environmental but also economic, social,
cultural and scientific terms, the various components of biodiversity can have different values to
different stakeholders, and these different values should be clarified during consultation and
taken into account in the biodiversity Assessment.

6. Where there is a loss or diminution of an ecosystem service upon which the project
depends, or where the company’s project-related impacts are likely to negatively impact the
4
availability of an ecosystem service to Affected Stakeholders, the client will identify and
prioritize those services as part of the risks and impacts identification process. Adverse
impacts on priority ecosystem services should be avoided, and if these impacts are
unavoidable, the client will meet the following requirements:
Reduce adverse impacts and implement restoration measures that aim to maintain
the value and functionality of such services
 Where the loss or diminution of a critical provisioning service is experienced by
Affected Stakeholders as a result of project implementation, that loss/diminution will
be addressed through Performance Standards 1 and 5
 Where the loss or diminution of a critical cultural service is experienced by Affected
Stakeholders, that loss/diminution will be addressed under Performance Standard 8
_____________________
4
Security of tenure means that resettled individuals or communities are resettled to a site that they
can legally occupy and from which they are protected from the risk of eviction.

G13. PS6 has identifies how clients and projects should Assess, Manage and Monitor their
interaction with ecosystems. Ecosystems are defined as a functional unit that consists of a
dynamic complex of living organisms and their interaction with the nonliving environment.2 The
role and importance of human intervention and influence is explicit.

G14. Ecosystem services are defined as “the benefits that people obtain from ecosystems.”
Ecosystem services are grouped into four major categories:3

 Provisioning ecosystem services are those most directly associated with production
functions of private enterprises including (i) food crops, seafood and game, wild
crops and ethnobotanicals (ii) water for drinking, irrigation and hydropower
(iii) forests areas which provide the basis for many biopharmaceuticals, construction
materials, and biomass for renewable energy

 Regulating ecosystem services include functions which buffer anthropogenically-


induced stress on natural ecosystems and determine the resiliency of ecosystems to
human-induced change and include (i) climate regulation and carbon sequestration
(ii) waste decomposition and detoxification (iii) purification of water and air and
(iv) control of pests, disease and pollination

2
Millennium Ecosystems Assessment, 2005
3
See Millennium Ecosystem Assessment - see www.millenniumassessment.org

128
Guidance Note 6
Biodiversity Conservation and the Sustainable Management of
Ecosystem Services and Living Resources
May 19, 2010

 Supporting services include functions that are less frequently encountered by clients
or their projects, including (i) nutrient capture and recycling (ii) primary production
(iii) flyways, migratory corridors and (iv) pathways for genetic exchange

G15. Cultural services including (i) recreational experiences such as eco-tourism and sport
(ii) cultural and intellectual motivation (iii) scientific exploration and education.

G16. Ecosystems services have historically been included implicitly in environmental review
procedures, often within the discussion of a project’s cumulative impacts. Improvements in
natural and social science and geographic information capabilities have made the delineation of
ecosystems and services more practical.

G17. Numerous regional ecosystem mapping efforts have been completed (e.g., academic
and governmental institutions, NGOs and intergovernmental organizations (e.g., The Nature
Conservancy, NatureServe Terrestrial Ecosystems Map for South America, Global Forest
Watch, Conservation International, FAO Forest Assessments, etc.), and many additional efforts
are currently underway (e.g., the GEO GEOSS Africa ecosystem mapping project). These
classifications and maps can be applied directly for the environmental assessment of
development projects, landscape integrity and conservation assessments, resource
development and management analyses, ecosystem services valuations, documentation and
prediction of environmental trends.

G18. Degradation of ecosystem services can pose operational, financial and reputational risks
to project sustainability. The extent of such threats, and the ecosystem’s resiliency, should be
considered during the risks and identification process.Monitoring plans should include
ecosystem services to the extent they are identified. The directness or dependence4 of the
company on the continued flow of ecosystem services should be identified.

G19. Ecosystems are increasingly recognized and protected by laws and regulations at
various levels. Several countries have included ecosystem services within recent legislation at
national and provincial levels and enforcement of legal ecosystem rights is being pursued in
many places. Thus elements of ecosystem services are increasingly important for regulatory
purposes with which the client should have demonstrated familiarity and be in possession of
current and proposed regulations which may affect their operations and reputation.

G20. Management practices which identify and mitigate ecosystem impacts are well
established in forest and agriculture. Ecosystem impacts are explicitly included in several
current and emerging voluntary standards (Natural Resources Management, below) which have
adopted the High Conservation Value Network’s designation system.

G21. IFC is particularly concerned with water use within wetland ecosystems and watersheds
where human pressure and competition for use is often extreme and increasing. The use of
ecosystem-based permissibility regulations which recognize receiving media conditions, such as
Total Maximum Daily Load factors (TMDLs5) for watersheds should be considered whenever
possible by the client.

4
The extent to which a company is dependent on ecosystem services for raw materials or security of supply and the extent to which
its operation gives rise to environmental externalities.
5
Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) is the maximum amount of pollution that a waterbody can assimilate without violating specified
water quality standards.

129
Guidance Note 6
Biodiversity Conservation and the Sustainable Management of
Ecosystem Services and Living Resources
May 19, 2010

G22. During the risks and identification process (see PS 1) the client will conduct an
Ecosystem Services Review (ESR) to:

 Review the nature and extent of ecosystem services in the project area;
 Identify the condition, trends and external (non-project) threats to such services;
 Distinguish the beneficiaries of such services within the project’s area of influence;
 Assess the extent to which the project depends upon or may impact identified
services;
 Identify the associated key operational, financial, regulatory and reputational risks;
 Identify courses of action and mitigation measures which can reduce identified risks.

G23. The conduct of an ESR complements but does not replace other Assessment
requirements. The inclusion of an ESR will improve identification of a clients dependence and
vulnerability on ecosystem services. To the extent feasible, within the limits of available
information, the ESR should be quantitative. However, the qualitative nature of the project’s
interactions with identified ecosystem services and other beneficiaries is equally important.

G24. An example TOR for an ESR is included in Annex B (Ecosystem Services Review).
Numerous toolkits for improving the assessment of ecosystem services have been developed
and consensus on combining need with practicality is emerging. Information on industry-specific
ecosystem services are available through the following publications:

 The Corporate Ecosystem Services Review: Guidelines for Identifying Business


Risks & Opportunities Arising from Ecosystem Change. 2008. WRI and Meridian
Institute. (http://www.wri.org/publication/corporate-ecosystem-services-review)
 The Ecosystem Services Benchmark. A guidance document. 2009 Fauna & Flora
International, UNEP
 Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Opportunities and Challenges for Business and
Industry in the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. 2006.
 RSB Ecosystem and conservation specialist study guidelines. 2009. RSB
(http://cgse.epfl.ch/)

Protection and Conservation of Biodiversity

General
7. Habitat is defined as a terrestrial, freshwater, or marine geographical unit or an airway
passage that supports complexities of living organisms and their interactions with the non-
living environment. For the purposes of implementation of this Performance Standard,
habitats are divided into modified, natural, and critical.
5
8. For protection and conservation of the biodiversity, the mitigation hierarchy includes
6
biodiversity offsets.
_____________________
5
As defined in Performance Standard 1, the mitigation hierarchy is to avoid adverse impacts, reduce significant
impacts when avoidance is not possible, restore significant impacts when both avoidance and minimization is
not possible, and offset significant residual impacts as a last resort.
6
Biodiversity offsets are measurable conservation outcomes resulting from actions designed to compensate for
significant adverse biodiversity impacts arising from project development and persisting after appropriate
avoidance, minimization and restoration measures have been taken. Generally, these are not within the project
site.

130
Guidance Note 6
Biodiversity Conservation and the Sustainable Management of
Ecosystem Services and Living Resources
May 19, 2010

G25. Performance Standard 6 recognizes the need to consider impacts on biodiversity in both
natural and modified habitats as modified habitats can also have significant biodiversity value,
often in managed agricultural landscapes. It is in modified habitats that much private sector
development takes place.

G26. In practice, natural and modified habitats exist on a continuum that ranges from
completely undisturbed, pristine natural habitats at one end of the scale, through habitats with
some degree of human impact, to modified habitats that are intensively managed and have a
non-native assemblage of plants and animals. The identification of an area as either a natural or
a modified habitat can therefore be complex, especially as project sites will often contain a
mosaic of habitats.

G27. The delineation of natural or modified habitats will be determined based on the
biodiversity attributes on the site (e.g., extent of anthropogenic modification, spread of invasive
species, degree of pollution, the extent of habitat fragmentation, the viability of existing
naturally-occurring species assemblages, the resemblance of existing ecosystem functionality
and structure to historical conditions, the degree of other types of habitat degradation etc.). This
type of technical analysis should take place as part of the risks and impact identification process
as described in Performance Standard 1. In recognizing and delineating natural or modified
habitats, clients will need to consult suitably qualified professionals for advice. Clients must
retain qualified and experienced external experts when dealing with critical habitat and legally
protected areas.

G28. In addition to the above analysis, when identifying either modified and natural habitats,
and as part of the Assessment process, the client should also establish the differing values
attached to particular biodiversity resources by relevant local, national and international
stakeholder groups. These ‘values’ may be intrinsic (valued in and of itself) or human derived
(associated with a human benefit). Biodiversity values will be viewed differently depending on
the stakeholders, and will vary from place to place. Stakeholder groups with whom to consult
include affected stakeholders within the immediate vicinity of the project, governmental officials,
academic institutions, technical specialists and international conservation NGOs.

G29. For all projects, but especially those in natural and critical habitats, the client should be
especially diligent in designing measures to adequately mitigate for indirect impacts. Some of
the most pervasive indirect impacts are caused by invasive species and induced access by third
parties (including project staff and local communities) into previously undisturbed or largely
inaccessible wilderness areas. Induced access control measures include limits or prohibitions
on the construction of new access roads or patrolling the use of existing or newly constructed
access roads. Access control measures are essential for linear infrastructure developments,
especially through intact wilderness areas, in areas susceptible to poaching or in areas with the
presence of species listed on Appendix 1 or 2 of Convention on International Trade in
Endangered Species (CITES).

G30. Habitat degradation is one of the most significant potential threats to biodiversity and
ecosystem services associated with projects involving significant land development, including
mining, plantations or certain energy and industrial projects (e.g., oil and gas developments,
construction material extraction, for instance in cement manufacturing). Habitat alteration and
degradation may occur during different stages of projects: while oil and gas projects may have
the greatest potential for temporary or permanent alteration of terrestrial and aquatic habitats
occurring during construction, with mining and quarrying projects the greatest potential is

131
Guidance Note 6
Biodiversity Conservation and the Sustainable Management of
Ecosystem Services and Living Resources
May 19, 2010

typically associated with the operational activities. Additionally, exploration activities in both the
mining and oil and gas sectors often require the development of access routes, transportation
corridors, seismic tracks, temporary facilities (such as storage material storage yards,
workshops, airstrips and helipads, equipment staging areas), construction material extraction
sites (including borrow pits and quarries), and temporary camps to house workers which may all
result in varying degrees of land-clearing and population in- migration. The client should adopt
the principle of footprint minimization through all project life cycles, and develop and implement
appropriate ecological restoration strategies, including physical reinstatement (or restoration)
and revegetation (or biorestoration) planning and methods, at the earliest possible stage in the
project planning. The basic principles should include: (i) protection of topsoil and restoration of
vegetation cover as quickly as possible after construction or disturbance, (ii) reestablishment of
original habitat retuning the project footprints to their preconstruction / predisturbance
conditions, (iii) where native species (especially protected species) cannot be retained in situ,
consideration of conservation techniques such as translocation / relocation.

Modified Habitat
9. Modified habitats are those that may contain a large proportion of plant and/or animal
species of non-native origin, or where human activity has substantially modified the area’s
7
primary ecological functions. Modified habitats include agricultural areas, forest
plantations, reclaimed coastal zones, and wetlands.

10. In areas of modified habitat, the client will exercise care to reduce any additional
conversion or degradation of such habitat.
_____________________
7
This excludes habitat that has been converted in anticipation of the project.

G31. Definitions for modified habitats or degraded lands vary dramatically, and as previously
mentioned, project sites will often be located on mosaics of modified and natural habitats. Given
the range of habitats in which IFC invests, there is no prescriptive set of metrics for determining
if an area is to be considered ‘modified’ or not. The risks and identification process should
determine the level to which human-derived activities (excluding traditional uses by indigenous
peoples) have modified the ecological structure and functions of that habitat and its native
biodiversity.

G32. Regardless of a ‘modified’ designation, the client should determine if there are existing
biodiversity attributes of particular importance to conservation and the degree to which such
attributes are valued by relevant stakeholders, particularly local stakeholders and international
conservation NGOs. Mitigation measures should be designed to maintain such attributes either
on-site or within the landscape/seascape. As mentioned previously, some modified habitats may
also contain biodiversity attributes that trigger a critical habitat designation. For example, highly
modified habitats, such as ancient hedges in European agricultural landscapes or ‘tembawang’
rubber plantations in Kalimantan, might have very high biodiversity value, triggering a critical
habitat designation.

G33. Clients should locate project activities on modified, rather than natural habitats; however,
those natural habitats that have been converted or degraded by the client or by recent
unsustainable landuse practices before IFC’s investment will not be considered modified.

Natural Habitat
11. Natural habitats are those (i) composed of viable assemblages of plant and/or animal
species of largely native origin, and/or (ii) where human activity has not essentially modified
the area’s primary ecological functions

132
Guidance Note 6
Biodiversity Conservation and the Sustainable Management of
Ecosystem Services and Living Resources
May 19, 2010

8
12. In areas of natural habitat, the client will not significantly covert or degrade such
habitat, unless the following could be demonstrated:
 No other viable alternatives within the region exist for development of the project on
modified habitat
 Adequate conservation measures will be implemented within the project site, which
9
may include the identification and protection of set-asides
 Any conversion or degradation is mitigated according to the mitigation hierarchy

13. Mitigation measures will be designed to achieve no net loss of biodiversity where
feasible, and may include a combination of actions, such as:
 Post-operation restoration of habitats
 Implementation of biodiversity offsets, such as the creation of ecologically comparable
10
areas that are managed for biodiversity
 Investment in a relevant and credible offset banking scheme
 Implementation of measures to reduce habitat fragmentation, such as biodiversity
corridors
_____________________
8
Significant conversion or degradation is (i) the elimination or severe diminution of the integrity of a habitat
caused by a major, long-term change in land or water use; or (ii) modification of a habitat that substantially
reduces the habitat’s ability to maintain viable population of its native species.
9
Set-asides are land areas within the project site that are excluded from development and are targeted for the
implementation of conservation enhancement measures. Set-asides will likely contain biodiversity attributes
and/or provide ecosystem services of significance at the national and/or regional level.
10
During offset development, clients will respect the ongoing usage of proposed offset sites by Indigenous
Peoples or traditional communities

G34. As mentioned for modified habitats, there are no prescribed set of metrics available to
identity what is a ‘natural habitat’. The determination of natural habitat will be made using
credible scientific analysis and best available information. An assessment and comparison of
current and historic conditions should be conducted, and local knowledge and experience
should be utilized. Natural habitats are not to be interpreted as ‘untouched’ or ‘pristine’ habitats.
It is assumed that the majority of habitats designated as ‘natural’ will indeed have undergone
some degree of historic or recent anthropogenic impact. The question is the degree of impact. If
the habitat still largely contains the principal characteristic and key elements of its native
ecosystem(s), such as complexity, structure and diversity, than it should be considered a natural
habitat regardless of the presence of some invasive species, secondary forest or other human-
induced alteration.

G35. The first bullet point is especially relevant to agribusiness projects where it might be
feasible in some cases to site the plantation on heavily modified and degraded lands rather than
on recently deforested areas or on other forms of natural habitat. In these cases, a well-
developed locations alternative analysis should be conducted to explore potential viable options
for development on modified habitat. The term ‘viable’ includes, but is not limited to, technical
and financial feasible alternatives. In addition, all reasonable attempts must be made to
conserve the remaining biodiversity attributes of importance on the site where significant
conversion and degradation is to take place. Such conservation measures may take the form of
set-asides, such as those prescribed by governments or by voluntary standards, such as the
Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) and the Roundtable for Sustainable Oil Palm (RSPO).

G36. If a project has the potential to result in a significant conversion or degradation of natural
habitats, relevant stakeholder groups must be engaged as part of a rigorous, fair and balanced

133
Guidance Note 6
Biodiversity Conservation and the Sustainable Management of
Ecosystem Services and Living Resources
May 19, 2010

multi-stakeholder dialogue. Stakeholders should include a diverse set of opinions, including


scientific and technical experts, members of the international conservation NGO community in
addition to affected stakeholders. The stakeholder engagement is intended to further inform the
technical analysis as described in paragraph G34 of this Guidance Note. Outcomes of this
stakeholder process will shed light on the particular biodiversity attributes of interest and the
values of such attributes and the types of mitigation and other conservation measures to
consider, including biodiversity offsets.

G37. Mitigation measures in natural habitat should be adequately supported by financial


resources from the client and, if necessary, supplemented by other financial sources, such as
donor funds. The client should identify roles and responsibilities for itself and any third party for
mitigation monitoring arrangements.

G38. In areas of natural habitat, the client should design mitigation measures to achieve “no
net loss” through the application of various on-site and offset mitigation measures. The types of
measures to establish no net loss will vary from site to site as will the biodiversity attributes of
each site that require specific attention. The above mentioned technical analysis and
stakeholder engagement will be essential in identifying which attributes the client should focus
on in striving to obtain ‘no net loss.’ All natural habitat is not the same, and the biodiversity
attributes and values of such attributes will vary from place to place. The methods to achieve no
net loss in Brazilian grasslands will differ considerably from those in the Saharan Desert or in
tracts of larch in Siberia.

G39. Regarding offsets, the client should adhere to the latest thinking on this topic, which has
been put forward by the Business and Biodiversity Offset Program (BBOP).6 For example,
BBOP has developed a set of ‘Offset Principles’ and emphasizes that offsets must achieve
conservation outcomes ‘on-the-ground.’7 The creation of an ecologically comparable area is one
example of the many types of offsets that could be developed by the client. Nevertheless,
offsets in natural habitats should strive to achieve “like for like” or better. In some cases, it might
be more effective for the client to invest in existing offset banking schemes, but IFC would
expect the client to demonstrate the credibility and long-term viability of such initiatives.

G40. Habitat fragmentation is one of the most pervasive impacts to biodiversity in natural
habitats and often leads to long-term habitat degradation due to edge effects, increased human
access into previously undisturbed areas, and sometimes genetic isolation of fauna and flora
populations. When a project is located in an expansive intact wilderness, the client should seek
to define mitigation measures to limit fragmentation such as the design of wildlife corridors or
other measures to help ensure connectivity between habitats or existing metapopulations. The
client should also consider developing strategic frameworks with other companies and/or with
the government, where possible, in an effort to mitigate cumulative impacts through the design
of joint mitigation measures. These types of initiatives must be identified with the assistance of
qualified specialists.

Depending on the scale and nature of the project, and especially relevant to the extractive
industries, the client should establish a reclamation funding mechanism for project’s located in
natural habitats. The costs associated with reclamation and/or with post-decommissioning
activities, should be included in business feasibility analyses during the planning and design

6
http://www.forest-trends.org/biodiversityoffsetprogram/
7
Offset Principles: No net loss, adherence to mitigation hierarchy, landscape context, stakeholder participation, equity, long-term
success and transparency.

134
Guidance Note 6
Biodiversity Conservation and the Sustainable Management of
Ecosystem Services and Living Resources
May 19, 2010

stages. Minimum considerations should include the availability of all necessary funds, by
appropriate financial instruments, to cover the cost of reclamation and project closure at any
stage in the project's lifetime, including provision for early, or temporary reclamation or closure.

Critical Habitat
14. Critical habitat is a subset of both natural and modified habitat that deserves particular
attention. Critical habitat includes areas with high biodiversity value, including areas with
the following criteria: (i) habitat of significant importance to Critically Endangered and/or
Endangered species, endemic and/or restricted-range species, and globally significant
concentrations of migratory species, and/or congregatory species; (ii) areas with regionally
unique and/or highly threatened ecosystems; and (iii) areas which are associated with key
evolutionary processes.

15. In areas of critical habitat, the client will not implement any project activities unless the
following requirements are met:
 There are no measurable adverse impacts on the criteria for which the critical habitat
was designated and on the ecological processes supporting that criteria
 The project is not anticipated to lead to a net reduction in the global or
national/regional population of any Critically Endangered or Endangered species over
time
 The client has implemented a robust biodiversity monitoring program
 All other impacts are mitigated in accordance with the mitigation hierarchy

16. In areas of critical habitat, biodiversity offsets will be designed to achieve net positive
gain of the relevant criteria described in paragraph 14 of this Performance Standard.

G41. The critical habitat definition presented in paragraph 14 of PS6 is in line with criteria
captured from a wide range of definitions of priority habitat for biodiversity conservation in use
by the conservation community and contained in governmental legislation and regulations on
nature conservation. As stated in paragraph 14 of PS6 both natural and modified habitats may
contain high biodiversity values, thereby qualifying as critical habitat. The extent of human-
induced alteration of the habitat is therefore not necessarily an indicator of its biodiversity value.

G42. Considering the breadth of ecosystems (e.g., forests, grasslands, deserts, freshwater
and marine habitats), the various forms of critical habitat (e.g., habitats required for the survival
of threatened and migratory species, containing unique evolutionary processes, biodiversity of
cultural importance to local communities) and the range of species (e.g., benthos, plants,
insects, birds, reptiles/amphibians, wide-ranging megafauna) covered under PS6, specific
methods for the assessment of biodiversity will inherently be project and site-specific. Guidance
Note 6 therefore does not provide specific methods for conducting biodiversity assessments.

G43. It is especially important to emphasize that relatively broad landscape and seascape
units might qualify as critical habitat. The scale of the critical habitat assessment therefore
depends on the biodiversity attributes particular to the habitat in question and the ecological
processes required to maintain them. A critical habitat assessment therefore must not solely
focus on the project area. Whilst it often may not be feasible to conduct an actual field survey
‘outside the fence’ of the project site, the client should be prepared to conduct desktop
assessments and/or consult with experts and other relevant stakeholders to obtain an
understanding of the relative importance or ‘uniqueness’ of the site with respect to the regional
and even global scale.

135
Guidance Note 6
Biodiversity Conservation and the Sustainable Management of
Ecosystem Services and Living Resources
May 19, 2010

G44. The designation of critical habitat and the determination of what a client may or may not
do in critical habitat is not a black and white issue. There are ‘gradients’ of critical habitat or a
‘continuum’ of degrees of biodiversity value associated with critical habitats based on the
relative vulnerability (degree of threat) and irreplaceablity (rarity or uniqueness)8 of the site. This
‘gradient’ or ‘continuum of criticality’ is true for all criteria as listed in the critical habitat definition.
Even within a single site designated as critical habitat there might be habitats or habitat features
of higher or lower biodiversity value.

G45. In order to facilitate internal decision-making, and as presented in the forthcoming


paragraphs, IFC employs a ‘tiered approach’ for the first three critical habitat criteria (i.e.,
Critically Endangered and Endangered species; endemic and restricted-range species;
migratory and congregatory species). The tiers provided in GN6 are based on globally
standardized numerical thresholds published by the International Union for Conservation of
Nature (IUCN) as Best Practice Protected Area Guidelines.9,10 It should be emphasized that
both the thresholds and associated tiers are indicative and serve as a guideline for decision-
making only. There is no universally accepted or automatic formula for making determinations
on critical habitat. The involvement of relevant experts and project-specific assessments is
critical, especially when data are limited as will often be the case.

G46. Both a ‘Tier 1’ or a ‘Tier 2’ habitat would qualify as ‘critical’ but the likelihood of project
investment in a Tier 1 habitat is generally considered to be substantially lower than in a Tier 2
habitat. Note that GN6 does not outline the particularities of when an investment is or is not a
suitable one for IFC in terms of the presence of critical habitat. IFC’s decision to invest in a
development in or near a Tier 1 or Tier 2 critical habitat, or in a habitat with particularly high
biodiversity values that trigger Criteria 4 and 5, is determinant on the client’s ability to comply
with paragraphs 15 and 16, of PS6 over the long-term. Given the sensitivity of Tier 1 habitats
however, if a development is located in a Tier 1 habitat, or the like for the non-tiered criteria, it is
considered unlikely that the client will be able to comply with paragraphs 15 and 16 in the
majority of cases.

G47. Although numerical thresholds are not appropriate for the latter three criteria, best
available scientific information and expert opinion would be used to guide the decision-making
with respect to the relative ‘criticality’ of a habitat triggered by these criteria. It is emphasized
however that in the critical habitat determination process, all criteria are equally weighed in
terms of potential compliance with paragraphs 15 and 16 of PS6. There is no one criterion that
is ‘more important’ than another for making critical habitat designations or for determining
compliance with PS6. ‘Tiered’ (Criteria 1 through 3) and ‘non-tiered’ (Criteria 4 and 5) criteria
are equally important in this regard.

G48. The client is expected to fully consult the current version of the IUCN Red List of
Threatened Species and best available scientific data.11 Given the paucity of scientific data
available for species in many places around the world, especially for invertebrates and
freshwater and marine species, expert opinion and professional judgment will often be
8
As paraphrased from Margules, C.R. and R. L. Pressey, Systematic Conservation Planning. Nature 405, 243-253 (11 May 2000),
irreplaceability is the extent to which the loss of the area will compromise regional conservation targets, and vulnerability is the risk
of the area being transformed by extractive uses. Areas with high values for both should receive priority for conservation action.
9
See Langhammer, P.F. et al. 2007. Identification and Gap Analysis of Key Biodiversity Areas: Targets for Comprehensive
Protected Area Systems. Best Practice Protected Area Guideline Series No. 15. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland.
10
Key Biodiversity Areas are nationally mapped sites of global significance for biodiversity conservation that have been selected
using globally standard criteria and thresholds based on the framework of vulnerability and irreplaceability widely used in systematic
conservation planning.
11
Available at www.iucnredlist.org

136
Guidance Note 6
Biodiversity Conservation and the Sustainable Management of
Ecosystem Services and Living Resources
May 19, 2010

necessary to make final determinations with respect to the thresholds. The client will be required
to consult with recognized species specialists who are qualified to make determinations on
species occurrences.

G49. Critical habitat determinations should also be made in alignment with existing landscape
prioritization schemes for biodiversity conservation as established by the existing in-country
network of conservation organizations, global conservation groups, academic institutions and/or
the local/national government. Therefore, a substantive literature search and consultation with
established conservation organizations or other relevant authorities in the area of interest is
essential in determining critical habitat. Note that systematic conservation assessments and
plans, which are recognized by national or provincial governments, should be consulted for
guidance on threatened ecosystems, vegetation types and land classes.

Critical Habitat Criteria


G50. Critical habitats are areas of high biodiversity value that can be identified through the
presence of one or more of the following five values or “criteria” specified in paragraph 14 of
PS6. These are as follows and should form the basis of any critical habitat assessment:

 Criterion 1: Critically Endangered and/or Endangered Species


 Criterion 2: Endemic and/or Restricted-range Species
 Criterion 3: Migratory and/or Congregatory Species
 Criterion 4: Regionally unique and/or highly threatened ecosystems
 Criterion 5: Key Evolutionary Processes

G51. The above mentioned criteria encompass a number of other types of biodiversity
attributes that are also of high value but that are not spelt out in paragraph 14 of PS6. For
example, the following attributes would fall under the PS6 critical habitat criteria as shown
below:

 Areas of high scientific value such as those containing concentrations of species new
and/or little known to science (Criterion 1).
 Areas required for the reintroduction of CR and EN species and refuge sites for
highly threatened species (habitat used during periods of stress [e.g. flood, drought
or fire]) (Criteria 1 and 5)
 Landscape and ecological processes (e.g., water catchments, areas critical to
erosion control, disturbance regimes [e.g., fire, flood]) required for maintaining critical
habitat (Regionally unique and/or highly threatened ecosystems) (Criterion 4).
 Areas of primary / old-growth / undisturbed forests or other landscapes (Criterion 4).
 Habitat critical for the survival of keystone species (Criterion 4).
 Ecosystems that are of high importance to species for climate adaptation purposes
(Criterion 5)

G52. In general, and as also referenced in paragraph 17 of PS6, internationally and/or


nationally recognized areas of high biodiversity value will likely qualify as critical habitat;
examples include the following:

 Areas that meet the criteria of the IUCN’s Protected Area Management Categories
Ia, Ib and II12.

12
http://www.unep-wcmc.org/protected_areas/categories/index.html

137
Guidance Note 6
Biodiversity Conservation and the Sustainable Management of
Ecosystem Services and Living Resources
May 19, 2010

 The majority of KBAs, which encompass inter alia Ramsar Sites, Important Bird
Areas (IBA), Important Plant Areas [IPA] and Alliance for Zero Extinction Sites [AZE].
 Areas identified by the client as High Conservation Value (HCV) using internationally
recognized standards, where criteria used to designate such areas is consistent with
the biodiversity values listed paragraph 17.13

Criterion 1: Critically Endangered and Endangered Species

G53. Species threatened with global extinction and listed as Critically Endangered (CR) and
Endangered (EN) on the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species shall be considered as part of
Criterion 1. Critically Endangered species face an extremely high risk of extinction in the wild.
Endangered species face a very high risk of extinction in the wild.

G54. The inclusion of species in Criterion 1 that are listed nationally / regionally as CR or EN,
in countries that have adhered to IUCN guidance, shall be determined on a project by project
basis14,15. The same is true in instances where nationally or regionally listed species’
categorizations do not correspond well to those of the IUCN (e.g., some countries more
generally list species as ‘protected’ or ‘restricted’), although in these cases an assessment
might be conducted on the rationale and purpose of the listing. In either case, this decision-
making would take place in consultation with recognized species specialists.

G55. As previously mentioned, IFC is employing a ‘tiered approach’ for the first three critical
habitat criteria in order to facilitate internal decision-making. Both tiers would qualify a habitat as
‘critical’ although the likelihood of project investment in a Tier 1 habitat is generally considered
to be substantially lower than in a Tier 2 habitat.

G56. The client should determine if the project site is located in a Tier 1 or Tier 2 critical
habitat with respect to Criterion 1.

G57. Tier 1 sub-criteria for Criterion 1 are defined as follows:

 Habitat required to sustain ≥ 10 percent of the global population of an IUCN Red-


listed CR or EN species where there are known, regular occurrences of the species
and where that habitat could be considered a discrete management unit for that
species.16,17,18

13
The HCV Framework was established by the Forest Stewardship Council’s Principles and Criteria for Responsible Forest
Management (FSC P&C) in 1999. See http://www.hcvnetwork.org/ for further information.
14
IUCN (2003). Guidelines for Application of IUCN Red List Criteria at Regional Levels: Version 3.0. IUCN Species Survival
Commission. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK. IUCN. 2003.
15
See http://www.nationalredlist.org/site.aspx
16
Regular Occurrence: Occurring continuously in the habitat (e.g. physical residence), seasonally or cyclically (e.g., migratory sites)
or episodic (e.g., temporary wetlands). Regular occurrence does not include vagrancies, marginal occurrence and historical records
or unconfirmed anecdotal evidence, while it does include migratory species in transit. Adapted from definition of ‘regularly occurs’ in
Langhammer et al. (2007).
17
Discrete Management Unit: An area with a definable boundary within which the character of biological communities and/or
management issues have more in common with each other than they do with those in adjacent areas (Adapted from the definition of
‘discreteness’ by the Alliance for Zero Extinction). A discrete, management unit may or may not have an actual management
boundary (e.g., legally protected areas, World Heritage sites, KBAs, IBAs, community reserves) but could also be defined by some
other sensible ecologically definable boundary (e.g., watershed, interfluvial zone, intact forest patch within patchy modified habitat,
seagrass habitat, a coral reef, a concentrated upwelling area, etc.). The delineation of the management unit will depend on the
species (and, at times, subspecies) of concern.
18
Note that all Alliance for Zero Extinction (AZE) sites would automatically qualify as Tier 1 critical habitat per Criterion 1 as the AZE
threshold is set at 95 percent of CR and EN species (in a discrete management unit). See Ricketts, T.H., et al. 2005. Pinpointing
and Preventing Imminent Extinctions. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences - US. 51: 18497-18501

138
Guidance Note 6
Biodiversity Conservation and the Sustainable Management of
Ecosystem Services and Living Resources
May 19, 2010

 Habitat with known, regular occurrences of CR or EN species where that habitat is


one of 10 or fewer discrete management sites globally for that species.

G58. Tier 2 sub-criteria for Criterion 1 are defined as follows:

 Habitat that supports the regular occurrence of a single individual of an IUCN Red-
listed CR species and/or habitat containing regionally-important concentrations of an
IUCN Red-listed EN species where that habitat could be considered a discrete
management unit for that species.
 Habitat of significant importance to CR or EN species that are wide-ranging and/or
whose population distribution is not well understood and where the loss of such a
habitat could potentially impact the long-term survivability of the species.
 As appropriate, habitat containing nationally / regionally-important concentrations of
an EN, CR or equivalent national/regional listing.

G59. In certain circumstances, and through consultation with a recognized species specialist,
the guidance provided for Criterion 1 may be extended to some subspecies. This determination
would be made on a case-by-case basis. This statement also applies to critical habitat Criterion
2 and 3.

Criterion 2: Endemic and Restricted-range Species

G60. An endemic species is defined as one that has ≥ 95 percent of its global range inside the
country or region of analysis.19

G61. A restricted-range species is defined as follows. 8

 For terrestrial vertebrates, a restricted-range species is defined as those species


which have a historical breeding range of 50,000 km2 or less.
 For marine systems, restricted-range species are provisionally being considered
those with an extent of occurrence of 100,000 km2 or less.20
 For freshwater systems, a standardized threshold has not been developed as the
measurement of a species’ range itself is problematic.
 For plants, restricted-range species may be listed as part of national legislation.
Plants are more commonly referred to as ‘endemic’, and the definition provided in
paragraph G60 would apply.21

G62. The client should determine if the project site is located in a Tier 1 or Tier 2 critical
habitat with respect to Criterion 2.

G63. The Tier 1 sub-criterion for Criterion 2 are defined as follows:

 Habitat known to sustain ≥ 95 percent of the global population of an endemic or


restricted-range species where that habitat could be considered a discrete
management unit for that species (e.g., a single-site endemic).

19
Definition from Langhammer et al. (2007). Note that “region” may also be a landscape or other sensible geographical unit within
the country itself.
20
See Edgar, G. J. et al. 2009. Key biodiversity areas as globally significant target sites for the conservation of marine biological
diversity. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems. 18: 969-983.
21
Plantlife International. 2004. Identifying and Protecting the World’s Most Important Plant Areas. Salisbury, UK.

139
Guidance Note 6
Biodiversity Conservation and the Sustainable Management of
Ecosystem Services and Living Resources
May 19, 2010

G64. Tier 2 sub-criteria for Criterion 2 are defined as follows:

 Habitat known to sustain ≥ 1 percent but < 95 percent of the global population of an
endemic or restricted-range species where that habitat could be considered a
discrete management unit for that species, where adequate data are available.

G65. For some species, estimates might not be available for the species’ global population
and/or local population. In these cases, the client is expected to use expert opinion to determine
the significance of the discrete management unit with respect to the global population.
Surrogates of population size (e.g., extent of occurrence [EOO]22, estimates of total area of
known sites, estimates of area of occupied habitat) will be highly valuable in this decision-
making. This statement also applies to Tier 2 for Criterion 3.

Criterion 3: Migratory and Congregatory Species

G66. Migratory species are defined as any species of which a significant proportion of its
members cyclically and predictably move from one geographical area to another (including
within the same ecosystem).

G67. Congregatory species are defined as species whose individuals gather in large groups
on a cyclically or otherwise regular and/or predictable basis; examples include the following:
 Species that form colonies;
 Species that form colonies for breeding purposes and/or where large numbers of
individuals of a species gather at the same time for non-breeding purposes (e.g.,
foraging, roosting).
 Species that move through ‘bottleneck’ sites where significant numbers of individuals
of a species pass over a concentrated period of time (e.g., during migration).
 Species with ‘large but clumped’ distributions where a large number of individuals
may be concentrated in a single or a few sites while the rest of the species is largely
dispersed (e.g., wildebeest distributions)
 ‘Source populations’ where certain sites hold populations of species that make an
inordinate contribution to recruitment of the species elsewhere (especially important
for marine species)

G68. The client should determine if the project site is located in a Tier 1 or Tier 2 critical
habitat with respect to Criterion 3. The Tier 1 sub-criterion for Criterion 3 are defined as follows:

G69. Habitat known to sustain, on a cyclical or otherwise regular basis, ≥ 95 percent of the
global population of a migratory or congregatory species at any point of the species’ lifecycle
where that habitat could be considered a discrete management unit for that species.

G70. The Tier 2 sub-criteria for Criterion 3 are defined as follows:

22
Extent of occurrence is defined as the area contained within the shortest continuous imaginary boundary which can be drawn to
encompass all the known, inferred or projected sites of present occurrence of a taxon, excluding cases of vagrancy. This measure
may exclude discontinuities or disjunctions within the overall distributions of taxa (e.g. large areas of obviously unsuitable habitat).
Extent of occurrence can often be measured by a minimum convex polygon (the smallest polygon in which no internal angle
exceeds 180 degrees and which contains all the sites of occurrence). Definition provided in IUCN (2001) IUCN Red List Categories
and Criteria: version 3.1. IUCN, Gland and Cambridge.

140
Guidance Note 6
Biodiversity Conservation and the Sustainable Management of
Ecosystem Services and Living Resources
May 19, 2010

 Habitat known to sustain, on a cyclical or otherwise regular basis, ≥ 1 percent but <
95 percent of the global population of a migratory or congregatory species at any
point of the species’ lifecycle and where that habitat could be considered a discrete
management unit for that species, where adequate data are available.
 For birds, habitat that meets BirdLife International’s Criterion A4 for congregations
and/or Ramsar Criteria 5 or 6 for Identifying Wetlands of International
Importance.23,24
 For species with large but clumped distributions, a provisional threshold is set at ≥5
percent of the global population for both terrestrial and marine species.
 Source sites that contribute ≥ 1 percent of the global population of recruits.

Criterion 4: Regionally Unique and Highly Threatened Ecosystems

G71. Regionally unique and highly threatened ecosystems are defined by a combination of
factors that determine their importance for conservation action. The prioritization of rare and
endangered ecosystems employs similar factors to those used for the IUCN Red List of
Threatened Species. The ecosystem prioritization factors include long-term trend, rarity,
ecological condition, and threat. All of these values contribute to the relative biodiversity and
conservation value of the particular ecosystem.

G72. For regional scale biodiversity conservation applications, ecosystems are classified and
mapped at specific scales with a focus on vegetation structure and composition, land cover, and
key abiotic factors. Data used to create these regional scale ecosystem maps typically include
vegetation and land use maps, and other driving environmental factors including climate,
hydrology, geochemistry, and landscape position (elevation and aspect).

G73. To implement the Regionally Unique and/or Highly Threatened Ecosystems criterion, the
client must first conduct a substantive literature search and consult with established
conservation organizations or other relevant authorities in the area of interest to secure a
standardized ecosystem map for the region that includes the project site. Existing ecosystem
maps can be used directly, or new maps can be produced relatively quickly at moderate cost, as
practicable. If regional ecosystem mapping has not been conducted in the area of interest
and/or depending on the nature and scale of the project type, the client could also use expert
opinion to determine the uniqueness and rarity of the ecosystem in question with respect to the
regional scale.

G74. Land areas determined to be ‘irreplaceable’ based on systematic conservation


planning25 techniques carried out at the landscape and/or regional scale by academic
institutions, national governments and/or other relevant qualified authorities (including
internationally-recognized NGOs), will qualify as critical habitat per Criterion 4.

Criterion 5: Key Evolutionary Processes

G75. The structural attributes of a region, such as its topography, geology, soil,
temperature and vegetation and combinations of these variables can influence the
23
See IBA global criteria in http://www.BirdLife.org/datazone/sites/european_criteria.html
24
See http://195.143.117.139/key_criteria.htm
25
See Margules, C.R. and R. L. Pressey, Systematic Conservation Planning. Nature 405, 243-253 (11 May 2000). In short,
systematic conservation planning a largely quantitative and objective approach to the selection of priority areas for targeting
conservation action. Typically it involves the integration of expert knowledge, various forms of GIS modeling (involving vulnerability
and irreplaceability analysis) with other published sources of information.

141
Guidance Note 6
Biodiversity Conservation and the Sustainable Management of
Ecosystem Services and Living Resources
May 19, 2010

evolutionary processes that give rise to regional configurations of species and ecological
properties. In some cases, spatial features that are unique or idiosyncratic of the landscape
have been associated with genetically unique populations or subpopulations of plant and
animal species. Physical or spatial features have been described as ‘surrogates’ or ‘spatial
catalysts’ for evolutionary and ecological processes, and spatial catalysts are often
associated with species diversification26. Maintaining these ‘key evolutionary processes’
inherent in a landscape as well as the resulting species (or subpopulations of species) has
become a major focus of biodiversity conservation in recent decades, and particularly the
conservation of ‘genetic’ diversity. By conserving the species diversity within a landscape,
the processes that drive speciation, as well as the genetic diversity within a species,
ensures the evolutionary flexibility in a system, which is especially important in a rapidly
changing climate.

G76. This criterion therefore is principally defined by the physical features of a landscape
that might be associated with particular evolutionary processes. In some cases however this
criterion will also include species, subspecies or subpopulations that are taxonomically
known to be phylogenetically distinct.

G77. The significance of structural attributes in a habitat that may influence evolutionary
processes will be determined on a case-by-case basis, and determination of habitat that
triggers this criterion will be heavily reliant on relevant scientific knowledge. In the majority of
cases, this criterion will be triggered in areas that have been previously investigated and that
are already known or suspected to be associated with unique evolutionary processes. While
systematic methods to measure and prioritize evolutionary processes in a landscape do
exist, they are typically beyond a reasonable expectation of studies conducted by the private
sector. At the very least though, the client should be aware of what constitutes a key
‘evolutionary process’ so that this aspect may be covered as part of its assessment through
a literature search complemented, as needed, by an assessment in-field.

G78. For illustrative purposes, some potential examples of spatial features associated with
evolutionary processes are as follows:
 Isolated areas (e.g., islands, mountaintops, lakes) are associated with species that
are phylogenetically distinct;
 Areas of high endemism often contain flora and/or fauna species with unique
evolutionary histories (note overlap with Criterion 2, Endemic and Restricted-range
Species).
 Landscapes with high spatial heterogeneity are a driving force in speciation as
species are naturally selected on their ability to adapt and diversify.
 Environmental gradients, also known as ecotones, produce transitional habitat which
has been associated with the process of speciation and increased species and
genetic diversity.
 Edaphic interfaces are specific juxtapositions of soil types (e.g. serpentine outcrops,
limestone and gypsum deposits), which have led to the formation of unique plant
communities characterized by both rarity and endemism.
 Connectivity between habitats (e.g., historic corridors) ensures species migration and
gene flow, which is especially important in fragmented habitats and for the
conservation of metapopulations.

26
Pressey, R. L, et al. 2007. Conservation planning in a changing world. Trends in Ecology and Evolution. 22(11): 583-592; and,
Rouget, M. et al. 2003. Identifying spatial components of ecological and evolutionary processes for regional conservation planning
in the Cape Floristic Region, South Africa. Diversity and Distributions. 9: 191-210.

142
Guidance Note 6
Biodiversity Conservation and the Sustainable Management of
Ecosystem Services and Living Resources
May 19, 2010

 Sites of demonstrated importance to Climate Change Adaptation for either species or


ecosystems are also included within this criterion.

G79. If a project has triggered one or more of the critical habitat criteria, the very first step
is to conduct a critical habitat assessment to determine which of the initially triggered criteria
actually qualify as critical habitat, and therefore if the site is indeed located in a critical
habitat. Following this determination, which is independent of the project type or of the
mitigation strategy, the client should then demonstrate if and how the project might comply
with paragraphs 15 and 16 of PS6 over the long-term given the suite of mitigation and
management measures to be implemented.

G80. The demonstration of the Project’s approach to comply with PS6 should be included
in the form of a Biodiversity Action Plan, if that approach is not readily apparent. See Annex
A of this document.

G81. Definitions for language contained in paragraph 15 of PS6 are provided as follows.

 Measurable: Identified using a quantitative or semi-quantitative biodiversity


monitoring program throughout the project’s lifecycle. Acceptable ranges of variability
must be established for identified biodiversity attributes, which may be the actual
attributes themselves that render the habitat critical (e.g., threatened species,
migratory species) or proxies of those attributes (e.g., land cover).

 Adverse impacts: Project-related direct or indirect impacts that irreversibly alter


identified biodiversity attributes in such a way that the critical habitat cannot
withstand or fully recover from the disturbance and therefore cannot persist in the
long-term.

 Ecological processes: Biophysical processes (e.g., hydrologic regimes, local


climatic regimes, soil chemistry/nutrient cycling, fire, flood and other disturbance
regimes, grazing, herbivory, predation, ecological corridors, migration routes)
necessary for the critical habitat to persist in the landscape or seascape for the long-
term.27

 Net Reduction: A singular or cumulative loss of individuals that impacts on the


species’ ability to persist at the global, regional or national scale for many
generations or over a long period of time. The scale (global, regional or national) on
which population-level impacts are to be measured will be determined on a case by
case basis in consultation qualified species specialist. Note that net reduction over
time should not be interpreted as to be achieved within the lifetime of IFC’s
investment.

 Mitigation Hierarchy: See definition provided for Avoidance, Minimization,


Rehabilitation/Restoration, Offset in BBOP’s Glossary.28

G82. Specific required mitigation and management measures with respect to critical
habitat criteria are not being detailed in GN6 as these requirements will inherently be case-
27
Note that ecological / biophysical processes are not to be confused with ‘ecosystem services’ unless an identifiable group of
persons is directly benefiting from that process as well.
28
Business and Biodiversity Offsets Programme (BBOP). 2009. Glossary. BBOP, Washington, D.C. Available from www.forest-
trends.org/biodiversityoffsetprogram/guidelines/glossary.pdf

143
Guidance Note 6
Biodiversity Conservation and the Sustainable Management of
Ecosystem Services and Living Resources
May 19, 2010

specific. There are numerous factors that will weigh into the IFC’s internal decision-making
with respect to critical habitat, most predominantly are the following: (i) the capacity of the
client; (ii) the quality of the biodiversity assessment; (iii) the type of development with
respect to the particular critical habitat in question; (iv) the extent of mitigation, and in
particular, biodiversity offsets; (v) the willingness of the client to establish effective, long-term
strategic partnerships with the government, academic institutions, local
communities/stakeholders and/or internationally recognized conservation organizations;
and, (vi) the capacity of the host government.

G83. In general, projects with large, expansive footprints are not expected to comply with
paragraphs 15 and 16 of PS6.

G84. The acceptable ‘reduction’ in population should not be interpreted as the survival of
every individual, except in extreme situations involving CR species nearing extinction from
the wild. In all situations however, the client should be undertaking concrete measures to
promote and further the conservation of the species through a combination of on-site and
offset mitigation measures.

G85. The client shall integrate results from biodiversity monitoring into the project’s overall
Environmental & Social Management System (ESMS). Biodiversity monitoring is often
disjointed from other, more standard monitoring programs such as those developed for
emissions or effluents. The client shall use appropriately qualified experts to develop a set of
sensible biodiversity indicators appropriate to the ecological system in question. For each
indicator, the client shall use qualified expertise to specify thresholds of acceptable levels of
loss (for both species and habitats). Measurable results that exceed identified thresholds
over a set period of time indicate non-compliance with this requirement.

G86. A “robust” biodiversity monitoring program must be a quantitative or semi-


quantitative one and, if practicable, statistically defensible. The quality and reliability of the
biodiversity monitoring program is critical. The biodiversity monitoring program must be
included as part of the client’s overall ESMS throughout construction and operations.

G87. In areas of critical habitat, biodiversity offsets should be designed to achieve net
positive gain of the relevant biodiversity values described in paragraph 16. IFC considers
the implementation of biodiversity offsets a fundamental mechanism for achieving
compliance with paragraph 15 of Performance Standard 6.

G88. In areas of critical habitat, and especially relevant to the extractive industries, the
client should establish a reclamation funding mechanism for areas that are disturbed by
project activities.

G89. The type and nature of the biodiversity offset depends on the critical habitat in
question and should be determined by the client’s biodiversity specialists. As stated for
natural habitats, the Project adhere to the latest thinking on this topic, which has been put
forward by the Business and Biodiversity Offset Program (BBOP).29 As a general note, any
offset attempted in critical habitat, must be of exceptionally high quality, and the long-term
sustainability of such an offset is key.

29
http://www.forest-trends.org/biodiversityoffsetprogram/

144
Guidance Note 6
Biodiversity Conservation and the Sustainable Management of
Ecosystem Services and Living Resources
May 19, 2010

G90. One of the most important aspects to implementing a biodiversity offset that is
sustainable over the long-term is a conservation financing assessment. Whilst the client may
not know the exact cost of the offset before financial closure, as offset costs depend on a
series of assessments, the client should at least commit to establish an offset funding
mechanism as part of the BAP.

G91. With respect to Tier 1 and Tier 2 habitats for Criteria 1 through 3, the majority of Tier
1 habitats are not considered to be ‘offsetable.’ Critical habitat per Criteria 4 and 5 might
also be very difficult (or impossible) to offset, and this would be determined on a case-by-
case basis. In either case, IFC considers the ‘like-for-like’ (in-kind) or better concept, as
spelled out in BBOP guidance documents, to be a fundamental requirement of offset design
in critical habitat.30

G92. The client would be expected to demonstrate that the offset measure has the
potential to compensate for the residual impacts on the critical habitat. Actions such as
awareness-raising, environmental education, scientific research and capacity building are
not considered valid offset measures unless there is evidence of on-the-ground measurable
conservation outcomes pertaining directly to the critical habitat. In the majority of cases,
these types of activities would be considered additional benefits above and beyond
compliance.

G93. Partnership with relevant credible organizations/authorities with scientific expertise in


offset planning, design and management is highly encouraged. Equally important is the
potential to realistically implement the offset and ensure that it is maintained for the long-
term. Government buy-in, including a legally binding commitment, is of high importance to
this end.

G94. Clients with marked internal capacity are encouraged to implement additional
programs in critical habitats such as awareness-raising, the promotion of scientific research
in understudied areas or the development of public-private partnerships to define regional
sustainability goals for biodiversity conservation.

Legally Protected and Designated Areas


11
17. In circumstances where a proposed project is located within a legally protected area
12
or an internationally designated area, the client, in addition to the applicable requirements
13
of paragraphs 12, 13 and 15 above, will:
 Demonstrate that any proposed development in such areas is legally permitted
 Act in a manner consistent with any government recognized management plans for
such areas
_____________________
11
Includes areas proposed by governments for such designation.
12
Including This includes UNESCO World Heritage Site, UNESCO Man and the Biosphere Reserves, Key
Biodiversity Areas (KBAs) and wetlands designated under the Convention on Wetlands of International
Importance (the Ramsar Convention).
13
If the primary management objectives of the legally protected or designated area are comparable with the
management objectives as described for IUCN Management Categories Ia, Ib and Category II when these
areas are designated for the protection or conservation of biodiversity.

30
’Like for like’ or ‘in-kind’ is defined here as conservation (through the biodiversity offset) of the same type of biodiversity values as
that affected by the project.

145
Guidance Note 6
Biodiversity Conservation and the Sustainable Management of
Ecosystem Services and Living Resources
May 19, 2010

 Consult protected area sponsors and managers, local communities, Indigenous


Peoples and other key stakeholders on the proposed project, as appropriate
 Implement additional programs, as appropriate, to promote and enhance the
conservation aims and effective management of the protected or designated area

G95. Performance Standard 6 specifies additional measures for projects located in legally
protected areas (including areas officially proposed for protection) and internationally
designated areas. The client should ensure that project activities are consistent with any
national land use, resource use, and management criteria (including Protected Area
Management Plans, National Biodiversity Action Plans or similar documents). This will entail
securing the necessary approvals from the responsible government agencies, and consulting
with protected area sponsors and the local communities, including communities of Indigenous
Peoples, and other key stakeholders. Additional requirements and guidance for appropriate
consultation are outlined in paragraphs X through 2X of Performance Standard 1, Performance
Standard 7 with respect to Indigenous Peoples, and Performance Standard 8 with respect to
cultural heritage, and the accompanying Guidance Notes.

G96. In the event that a project is proposed inside a legally protected area or an
internationally designated areas, it should bring financial or other tangible benefits to the
protected area such that the conservation role of the protected area is enhanced and there are
clear conservation advantages gained by the presence of the project. This can be achieved
through implementing programs that, for example, provide support for park management,
address alternative livelihoods for local residents, or carry out research needed for the
conservation aims of the protected area.

G97. If no management plan exists for the protected or designated area, the client may want
to consider funding the development of one with the suitable government agencies and
conservation organizations. This type of activity might also suffice as the “additional program” if
developed and/or implemented in a way that involved endorsement by relevant stakeholders.

G98. The client should consult the United Nations list of protected areas to identify if the
project is located in or near a listed protected area.31

Invasive Alien Species


18. Intentional or accidental introduction of alien, or non-native, species of flora and fauna
into areas where they are not normally found can be a significant threat to biodiversity,
since some alien species can become invasive, spreading rapidly and out-competing native
species.

19. The client will not intentionally introduce any new alien species (not currently
established in the country or region of the project) unless this is carried out in accordance
with the existing regulatory framework for such introduction, if such framework is present.
All introductions of alien species will be subject to a risk assessment (as part of the client’s
social and environmental risks and impacts identification process) to determine the
potential for invasive behavior. The client will not deliberately introduce any alien species
with a high risk of invasive behavior or any known invasive species. The client will
implement measures to avoid the potential for accidental or unintended introductions

31
This information could be accessed through the World Database on Protected Areas (WDPA) made available by UNEP World
Conservation Monitoring Centre (WCMC).

146
Guidance Note 6
Biodiversity Conservation and the Sustainable Management of
Ecosystem Services and Living Resources
May 19, 2010

including transportation of substrates and vectors (such as soil, ballast, and plant
materials) which may harbor invasive alien species.

20. Where invasive alien species are already established in the country or region of the
proposed project, the client will exercise diligence in not spreading them into areas in which
they have not already been established, and, as practicable, eradicating such species from
the natural habitats in which the client has management control.

G99. An alien plant or animal species is one that is introduced beyond its original range of
distribution. Invasive alien species are non-native species that may become invasive or spread
rapidly by out-competing other native plants and animals when they are introduced into a new
habitat that lacks their traditional controlling factors. Invasive alien species are now recognized
to be a major threat to biodiversity globally, as well as to ecosystem services.

G100. The client shall take all preventive measures designed to reduce the risk of
transportation or transmission of invasive alien plant or animal species, pests, or living modified
organisms through its activities.

G101. The introduction of any new alien species as part of the client’s operations should be
assessed for compliance with the existing host country regulatory framework for such
introductions. The client will not intentionally introduce any new alien species (not currently
established in the country or region of the project) unless this is carried out in accordance with
the existing regulatory framework for such introduction, if such framework is present. If not, a
risk assessment should be conducted on the invasiveness of the species, in coordination with
recognized experts of the particular species in question.

G102. With respect to the international shipping of goods and services, clients are expected to
comply with appropriate obligations developed in the framework of the International Convention
for the Control and Management of Ship’s Ballast Water and Sediments Convention (i.e. the
Ballast Water Management Convention [BWM]). Clients should also refer to Guidelines for the
Control and Management of Ships’ Ballast Water to Minimize the Transfer of Harmful Aquatic
Organisms and Pathogens, published by the International Maritime Organization (IMO) (1998)32.

G103. Genetically-modified organisms, or GMOs (also known as Living Modified Organisms or


LMOs), can also be considered to be alien species, with similar potential for invasive behavior
as well as potential for gene flow to related species. Any new introduction of such organisms
should be assessed in a manner consistent with the approach described in paragraph G24
above, with due regard to the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety.

G104. Despite the risk assessment and the existing regulatory framework, accidental
introduction from invasive fauna and flora species are extremely difficult to predict. The clients
should design an Invasive Species, Pests and Pathogens Management Plan, which specifies
mitigation measures such as inspection, washdown and quarantine procedures specifically
designed to address the spread of invasives. Alternatively, and depending on the risk of the
threat, these actions could be included as part of the Biodiversity Management Plan (see Annex
A). These types of mitigation measures are essential when the project includes a linear
infrastructure through natural and/or critical habitat, such as a pipeline right-of-way or a road or
rail development, as the project will likely traverse, and link, several habitats through one
corridor, providing optimal means for a species to quickly spread through the region.

32
http://www.mdnautical.com/imom.environment.htm

147
Guidance Note 6
Biodiversity Conservation and the Sustainable Management of
Ecosystem Services and Living Resources
May 19, 2010

G105. In many cases, invasive species will have already been established in the region in
which the project is located. In these cases, the client has the responsibility to take measures to
prevent the species from further spreading into areas in which it has not already been
established. For example, in the case of linear infrastructure, invasive weeds might be spread
into forested habitats, especially if the forest canopy is not able to reestablish itself (due to
maintenance of the right-of-way for operational purposes) and/or when opportunistic agricultural
or logging activities further widen the right-of-way, thereby facilitating spread. In these cases,
the client should also conduct an assessment to determine the severity of the threat, the mode
of spread of that species. Mitigation measures should be adopted as necessary.

Management of Renewable Natural Resources

21. Renewable natural resources are broadly defined to include natural and plantation
forests, soil-based agriculture for annual and perennial crops, aquaculture, and capture
14
fisheries. The client will manage renewable natural resources in a sustainable manner.
Where available, the client will verify sustainable management practices through
independent certification to an internationally-recognized standard. Applicable international
standards are those developed that are objective and achievable, are founded on a
continuous consultative process with relevant stakeholders, and are applied through
15
independent and accredited certifying bodies.

22. In particular, plantations, forests and aquatic systems are principal providers of natural
resources, and need to be managed as specified below.

Plantations and Natural Forests


23. Clients involved in any plantation development, including forest plantations, or in
natural forest harvesting will not cause any conversion or degradation of critical habitat or
16
areas identified as High Conservation Value (HCV). Where feasible, the client will locate
plantation projects on modified habitat (excluding land that is converted in anticipation of
the project). Clients will respect cut-off dates for conversion of natural habitats established
by applicable standards and certification systems. In addition, the client will ensure that all
natural forests and forest plantations over which they have management control employ
sustainable management practices that are verified through independent certification in
meeting conditions compatible with internationally accepted principles and criteria for
17
sustainable forest management.

Freshwater and Marine Systems


24. Clients involved in the production and harvesting of fish populations or other aquatic
species must demonstrate that their activities are being undertaken in a sustainable
_____________________
14
Renewable natural resources includes only “living” or “biotic” resources. It does not include solar, wind or
water resources, for example.
15
The An appropriate certification system would be one which is independent, cost-effective, based on
objective and measurable performance standards and developed through consultation with relevant
stakeholders, such as local people and communities, indigenous peoples, civil society organizations
representing consumer, producer, and conservation interests. Such a system has fair, transparent, independent
decision-making procedures that avoid conflicts of interest.
16
HCV areas are land areas identified using internationally recognized guidelines as provided by the HCV
Resource Network.
17
Such See footnote 7.

148
Guidance Note 6
Biodiversity Conservation and the Sustainable Management of
Ecosystem Services and Living Resources
May 19, 2010

manner, as verified through independent certification to an internationally accepted


standard, if available, or through appropriate studies carried out in conjunction with the
social and environmental assessment process.

G106. In situations where renewable natural resources are harvested directly by the client, the
client should demonstrate that such resources are being managed in a sustainable fashion. For
some resources, independent certification is available and should be used to meet the
requirements under Performance Standard 6 and, as outlined in Annex C. In the absence of a
suitable certification system for harvested resources, sustainable natural resource management
can be demonstrated through an independent evaluation of the client’s management practices
or an independent evaluation of the status of the resource populations in question.

G107. A number of international multistakeholder initiatives are underway in large commodity


sectors, such as palm oil, soy and sugarcane, with the objective of making these sectors more
sustainable throughout their supply chain. These initiatives aim to set performance targets for
the sector, identifying and promoting better management practices. Being a member of the
roundtables help companies improve their environmental and social performance, reduce
production costs, improve supply security, and calculate and manage risk and as such, clients
working with these commodities are encouraged to participate. Commodity roundtables include
palm oil (RSPO - Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil), soy beans (RTRS - Round Table on
Responsible Soy) and sugarcane (BSI - Better Sugarcane Initiative). See the "Reference
Materials" section of this document for links to the initiative websites.

G108. In order to prevent the conversion or degradation of critical habitat and areas of HCV,
the client should not harvest timber or non-timber forest products from these areas, or otherwise
disturb, any critical habitat or HCV areas (such as through road building or other infrastructure
construction)

G109. If certified timber or non-timber forest products are available, the client should obtain
chain-of-custody certification to demonstrate that the integrity of the certified timber is
maintained throughout its processing.

G110. Wherever feasible, the client should site plantation projects on degraded land or land
that has been already converted. The client should not establish plantation forests in critical
habitat or in areas of HCV, and should not adversely impact any adjacent or downstream critical
habitat or areas of HCV. Therefore, prior to establishing a plantation, the client should assess
the proposed plantation location in order to identify any critical habitat or areas of HCV, and
prepare and implement a plan to manage and conserve any such areas under the client’s
control. The client should only convert non-critical habitat if it is allowed by host country laws
and regulations and is consistent with the requirements of Performance Standard 6 and the
outcome and recommendations of the Assessment. Certification of sustainable forestry
management on timber plantations is required under the same conditions as those described for
natural forests.

Supply Chain

25. Where the resource utilized is ecologically sensitive, clients should give preference to
18
purchasing products, including renewable natural resources, from primary suppliers that
have verified sustainable management practices. The adverse impacts associated with

149
Guidance Note 6
Biodiversity Conservation and the Sustainable Management of
Ecosystem Services and Living Resources
May 19, 2010

ecologically sensitive supply chains will be considered where there is a potential risk that
primary suppliers are overexploiting areas of critical habitat or HCV.
_____________________
18
Primary suppliers are first-tier suppliers who are providing goods or materials essential for the core business
function.

G111. Where information is available, or should have been available, to the client that adverse
impacts are being incurred to areas of high biodiversity or conservation value (i.e., Critical
Habitat per PS6 or HCV areas) in the primary supply chain of goods or materials which are used
in the core function of the business, the client should review its supply chain for potential
adverse impacts and identify any risks to the client and the project, as part of the Assessment
process. It is good practice for the client to address biodiversity and sustainable management of
renewable natural resource issues, particularly those issues specified in Performance Standard
6, in its supply chain by exercising control and influence over the supplier of materials and
items, commensurate with the level of risks and impacts.

G112. Clients who purchase timber or non-timber forest products from third parties, such as
wholesalers, retailers or independent harvesting companies, should seek to ensure to the extent
possible that such timber or non-timber forest products are independently certified as being
sourced from sustainably managed forests. Recognizing that in many circumstances the client
may have little or no leverage over the management of the forests from which these timber or
non-timber forest products are sourced, the client should, as a minimum, implement policies and
procedures to ensure that such timber or non-timber forest products come from legal origins.
Implementation of a policy for the preferential purchasing of certified timber or non-timber forest
products will also help meet the requirements of this Performance Standard.

150
Guidance Note 6
Biodiversity Conservation and the Sustainable Management of
Ecosystem Services and Living Resources
May 19, 2010

Annex A

Developing a Biodiversity Action Plan / Biodiversity Management Plan

Where recognized biodiversity attributes of importance exist in the project site, or in certain
instances, in the project’s Area of Influence, the preparation of a Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP)
and/or a Biodiversity Management Plan (BMP)33 might be necessary to focus additional
attention and resources to manage project-related impacts. The development of a BAP / BMP
may be necessary to meet the client’s own biodiversity policy, or it may be requested by the IFC
or a third-party auditor to meet the requirements of Performance Standard 6. In certain
instances, a government agency, conservation NGO or other external party might be interested
in the development of a BAP/BMP in order to address specific issues of interest.

A stand-alone BAP / BMP is beneficial as it sends a clear message to external parties of


the intentions of the client when operating in sensitive habitats. The incorporation of biodiversity-
related mitigation and management measures within a more general Environmental
Management Plans is also an option, but there is a risk to the client that commitments may
appear watered down or may not be as apparent. This is especially relevant in areas of
internationally recognized importance to biodiversity or areas with particularly sensitive risks due
to local communities’ dependence on such resources. The stand-alone plan offers an additional
level of assurance as to the client’s intentions in such areas and the importance they ascribe to
sensitive biodiversity resources.

The development of a BAP / BMP will be essential in most critical habitats, and may be
required for operating in natural and modified habitats depending on the context.

Difference between a Biodiversity Action Plan and a Biodiversity Management Plan

The BAP would be required if there are information gaps in the client’s initial Environmental
and Social Assessment Process. Information gaps may have been caused by numerous factors,
some of which include the following: (i) inadequate amount of baseline data or analysis of
baseline data; (ii) omission or oversight of important biodiversity attributes from baseline (iii)
inability to collect adequate data due to time and/or seasonal constraints; (iv) inadequate
consultation with external stakeholders in identifying sensitive biodiversity attributes; and (v)
inadequate or incomplete impact analysis on sensitive receptors; (vii) inadequate identification
of mitigation measures, including biodiversity offsets; and, (viii) inadequate definition of
biodiversity monitoring requirements. In either case, the objective of the BAP is to remedy the
situation by identifying corrective action measures.

A BAP might also be necessary in instances where the client lacks a comprehensive and
integrated strategy for managing biodiversity. For example, the client might have conducted an
exceptional ESIA that contains extensive baseline data and includes an elaborate impact
assessment, but nonetheless, the client’s overall approach for biodiversity management
remains unclear. In these cases, and especially relevant to large infrastructure projects such as
oil & gas and mining, the intention of the BAP would be ‘bring the pieces together’ in developing
an overall framework for managing biodiversity issues in the long term.

The BMP would be developed when the baseline, impact assessment and proposed
mitigation measures, including on-site and biodiversity offsets, are perceived as adequate by
33
Often called a Ecological Management Plan (EMP)

151
Guidance Note 6
Biodiversity Conservation and the Sustainable Management of
Ecosystem Services and Living Resources
May 19, 2010

the IFC, any third-party auditors and/or by relevant stakeholders and the only remaining issue is
to collate such information into one implementable and auditable plan. Essential to the BMP is
that, although it is a stand-alone document, the commitments it contains are integrated into the
client’s Environmental and Social Management System (ESMS).

Biodiversity monitoring requirements might also be incorporated into the BMP, but often the
design of a sufficient biodiversity monitoring program involves considerably more innovation
than monitoring for other environmental impacts such as effluents and air emissions where
standard monitoring standardized methods and thresholds are readily available. The
development of an adequate biodiversity monitoring program might then be an action item
included in the BAP. Once the monitoring program is sufficiently developed to meet the
requirements of PS6, as determined by the IFC, it could be incorporated the BMP. Biodiversity
monitoring is also mentioned below in this Annex.

Development of Biodiversity Action Plan

Numerous examples and guidance could be found in the literature on developing BAPs for
public sector agencies, but these are of little value to private sector entities. The International
Petroleum Industry Environmental Conservation Association (IPIECA) developed A Guide to
Developing Biodiversity Action Plans for the Oil and Gas Sector34, and this is one of the few
publically available guidance documents specific to the private sector. Although intended for the
oil and gas sector, certain information provided in this document is relevant to other industries.

Certain sections from other good practice guidance documents might also be relevant to
the development of a BAP. For example, if the purpose of the BAP is to address gaps in
baseline data collection, the client might refer to the guidelines provided in paragraph G6 of
GN6. In general the scope and intention of the BAP will vary depending on the (i) industry, (ii)
project type, (iii) biodiversity resources present and sensitivity of those resources, (iv) issue of
relevance (e.g., data gap, inadequate mitigation, inadequate monitoring).

As mentioned, the BAP will comprise a set of actions to be carried out by the client. one of
the most important elements of the BAP is the definition of the agreed goal, based on a set of
objectives. The goal and objective(s) must be feasible and developed with the input of relevant
scientific experts and other stakeholders, including government agencies, local/international
conservation NGOs and/or local communities. For example, if the purpose of the BAP is to
develop a biodiversity offset in critical habitat, the goal might be to design an offset that satisfies
the “no measurable adverse impacts of….[the biodiversity values of interest]” clause of critical
habitat. The purpose of the BAP is clearly not to include a lofty goal with the sole motive to
move project activities forward. The goal/objectives must be based on consultation with relevant
experts.

For each objective, the BAP should outline a series of actions. The actions should be
reviewed and approved by a relevant stakeholder group with local, expert knowledge of the
area. For each action, the BAP should identify completion indicators, define the responsible
party, and set a timeframe.

For some actions, such as a completion of a baseline, once the action has been completed,
there might not be the need for immediate follow-up. For other actions, such as the design of
the biodiversity offset or the biodiversity monitoring plan, might require their own separate

34
http://www.ipieca.org/activities/biodiversity/downloads/publications/baps.pdf

152
Guidance Note 6
Biodiversity Conservation and the Sustainable Management of
Ecosystem Services and Living Resources
May 19, 2010

implementation plan, in which case the concept of the Biodiversity Management Plan becomes
helpful.

Development of Biodiversity Management Plan

The Biodiversity (or Ecological) Management Plan should function in exactly the same
manner as any other management plan that considers social and environmental impacts. The
plan should include a series of mitigation items, responsibilities for their implementation, the
schedule for implementation (e.g., weekly, monthly, biannual), responsible party, and monitoring
requirements. It is crucial that the Plan is considered as part of the Project’s overall
Environmental and Social Management System (ESMS) and is not an outlier to that system. For
further information, the client should refer to the Integrating Biodiversity into Environmental
Management Systems, published by the Energy and Biodiversity Initiative35.

For items such as a Biodiversity Offset, the Management Plan might take the form of an
Implementation Plan, which could be quite elaborate. In these cases, external expertise will be
required to develop such a plan as a third-party will likely be responsible for implementation the
offset. The client should refer to the Biodiversity Offset Implementation Handbook as developed
by the Business and Biodiversity Offsets Program (Forest Trends, 2009)36.

In critical habitats, biodiversity monitoring will be required to ensure that the overall
functionally and integrity of the ecosystem in question is not compromised (and, therefore, so
that the ‘no measurable adverse impact’ is upheld). In these cases, the biodiversity monitoring
plan will likely be a separate, self-standing document that may not form a part of the Biodiversity
Management Plan. In either case, biodiversity monitoring activities must e integrated into the
project’s ESMS. The same for biodiversity offsets is true of biodiversity monitoring – the client
will almost always need to retain qualified experts to design adequate monitoring programs. For
further information, the client should refer to the Biodiversity Indicators for Monitoring Impacts
and Conservation Actions, published by the Energy and Biodiversity Initiative37.

Biodiversity Management, in general, for any site, must be considered as part of an


adaptive management process. While this is relevant to all environmental and social impacts, it
is particularly relevant to biodiversity given that, in the majority of the cases, it is extremely
difficult to predict the outcomes of a project on the ecosystem, especially functionally and
structurally complex ecosystems and ones that are particularly vulnerable to external threats.
The project should be evaluating findings from the monitoring program and adapting
management and mitigation responses as necessary to more effectively ensure the protection
of the biodiversity attributes in question.

35
http://www.theebi.org/products.html
36
http://bbop.forest-trends.org/guidelines/
37
http://www.theebi.org/products.html

153
References

Several of the requirements set out in the Performance Standard relate to standards set by the
following international agreements:

 Convention on Biological Diversity (1992) - provides information on the convention,


lists of signatory nations and biodiversity experts and other useful information.
http://www.biodiv.org/default.aspx

 Ramsar Convention - The Convention on Wetlands, Iran (1971), is an


intergovernmental treaty which provides the framework for national action and
international cooperation for the conservation and wise use of wetlands and their
resources. There are presently 140 Contracting Parties to the Convention, with 1374
wetland sites, totaling 121.4 million hectares, designated for inclusion in the Ramsar
List of Wetlands of International Importance. http://www.ramsar.org/

 CITES - The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild


Fauna and Flora is an international agreement aimed at ensuring that international
trade in specimens of wild animals and plants does not threaten their survival.
Around 25,000 plant species and 5,000 animal species are covered by the provisions
of the Convention. The CITES website provides substantial resources on
endangered species. http://www.cites.org/index.html

 World Heritage Convention - The Convention Concerning the Protection of World


Cultural and Natural Heritage (UNESCO, 1972). It aims to identify and conserve the
world’s cultural and natural heritage. Its World Heritage List contains sites of
outstanding cultural and natural value. www.unesco.org/whc

 Convention on Migratory Species (Bonn Convention) – The Convention on Migratory


Species (CMS) is an intergovernmental treaty which aims to conserve terrestrial,
marine and avian migratory species throughout their range. The CMS website
includes information on species covered by the Convention and on other supporting
international agreements. http://www.cms.int/index.html

 Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety – The Cartagena Protocol is an international


agreement on biosafety, as a supplement to the Convention on Biological Diversity.
http://www.cbd.int/biosafety/default.shtml

In addition, the guidance and recommendations issued by the following organizations provide
useful information:
 A Guide to the Convention on Biological Diversity (IUCN) – provides analysis on the
Convention for those involved in the implementation of the Convention
Glowka, L, et al., (1994), A Guide to the Convention on Biological Diversity, IUCN
Gland and Cambridge. xii + 161pp., 2nd printing 1996

 World Conservation Union (IUCN) -- provides useful information on endangered


species (http://www.redlist.org/), protected areas (http://www.iucn.org/themes/wcpa/),
conservation and biodiversity expertise and other biodiversity and natural resources
issues.

154
 World Conservation Union (IUCN) -- The IUCN Guidelines for Protected Area
Management Categories (1994) also provides useful information on protected areas
and outlines a number of distinct categories of protected areas.
http://app.iucn.org/dbtw-wpd/edocs/1994-007-En.pdf

 World Conservation Monitoring Centre (WCMC) – provides information on


biodiversity, habitats and species, as well as protected areas, conservation
legislation and related issues. http://www.unep-wcmc.org/

 Global Environment Facility (GEF), established in 1991, helps developing countries


fund projects and programs that protect the global environment. GEF grants support
projects related to biodiversity, climate change, international waters, land
degradation, the ozone layer, and persistent organic pollutants. IFC works with GEF
to assist IFC clients to protect and enhance global biodiversity benefits associated
with their operations. http://www.gefweb.org/

 The Global Invasive Species Programme (GISP) was established in 1997 to address
global threats caused by Invasive Alien Species (IAS), and to provide support to the
implementation of Article 8(h) of the Convention on Biological Diversity. GISP
maintains a website with links to databases and related information on invasive
species. www.gisp.org

 The World Bank-WWF Alliance for Forest Conservation and Sustainable Use
maintains a website which includes information on the identification and conservation
of high conservation value forests and forest certification systems.
www.forest-alliance.org

 Birdlife International – Birdlife International is a global partnership of conservation


organizations that focuses on conservation of birds, bird habitat and global biodiversity.
Birdlife International makes available data on endangered bird species and important
bird areas through its publications and on-line database. http://www.birdlife.org/

 FAO – Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations – FAO is the UN
agency which specializes in agriculture, forestry and fisheries. Their website provides
information on biodiversity aspects in food and agriculture, including aspects related
to agro-ecosystems and biotechnology. http://www.fao.org/biodiversity/

 The International Association for Impact Assessment (IAIA) provides a variety of


resources on the impact assessment process, including a special publication on
Biodiversity in Impact Assessment. http://www.iaia.org/

 IFC’s Biodiversity Guide - provides further information to guide IFC clients in the
development of Biodiversity Action Plans and also provides further information on
how businesses can address biodiversity in their business activities.
http://www.ifc.org/ifcext/enviro.nsf/Content/BiodiversityGuide
 The HCV High Conservation Value Resource Network - developed by WWF, provides
useful tools and information in assessing conservation value and critical habitats.
http://www.hcvnetwork.org/

 See the following websites for additional information on commodity roundtables:

155
Better Sugarcane Initiative (BSI)
http://www.bettersugarcane.org/

Round Table on Responsible Soy (RTRS)


http://www.responsiblesoy.org/

Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO)


http://www.rspo.org/

156

You might also like