POLICY PERSPECTIVE

Avoiding bio-perversity from carbon sequestration solutions

  1. David B. Lindenmayer1,2,
  2. Kristin B. Hulvey3,
  3. Richard J. Hobbs3,4,
  4. Mark Colyvan4,
  5. Adam Felton5,
  6. Hugh Possingham2,
  7. Will Steffen6,
  8. Kerrie Wilson2,
  9. Kara Youngentob1,
  10. Philip Gibbons1

Article first published online: 3 JAN 2012

DOI: 10.1111/j.1755-263X.2011.00213.x

Issue

Conservation Letters

Conservation Letters

Volume 5, Issue 1, pages 28–36, January 2012

Additional Information

How to Cite

Lindenmayer, D. B., Hulvey, K. B., Hobbs, R. J., Colyvan, M., Felton, A., Possingham, H., Steffen, W., Wilson, K., Youngentob, K. and Gibbons, P. (2012), Avoiding bio-perversity from carbon sequestration solutions. Conservation Letters, 5: 28–36. doi: 10.1111/j.1755-263X.2011.00213.x

Author Information

  1. 1

    Fenner School of Environment and Society and ARC Centre of Excellence for Environmental Decisions, The Australian National University, Canberra, ACT 0200, Australia

  2. 2

    ARC Centre of Excellence for Environmental Decisions, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland 4072, Australia

  3. 3

    School of Plant Biology and ARC Centre of Excellence for Environmental Decisions, The University of Western Australia, 35 Stirling Highway, Crawley, WA 6009, Australia

  4. 4

    Sydney Centre for the Foundations of Science, A14 Main Quadrangle, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia

  5. 5

    Southern Swedish Forest Research Centre, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Box 49, SE-230 53 Alnarp, Sweden

  6. 6

    ANU Climate Change Institute, The Australian National University, Canberra, ACT 0200, Australia

*David B. Lindenmayer, Fenner School of Environment and Society, The Australian National University, Canberra, ACT 0200, Australia. Tel: +61-(0)2-61250654; fax: +61-(0)2-61250757. E-mail: david.lindenmayer@anu.edu.au

  1. EditorDr. Jos Barlow

Publication History

  1. Issue published online: 26 JAN 2012
  2. Article first published online: 3 JAN 2012
  3. Accepted manuscript online: 1 DEC 2011 12:26AM EST
  4. Received, 10 July 2011, Accepted, 14 November 2011

SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

ARTICLE TOOLS

View Full Article (HTML) Get PDF (713K)

Keywords:

  • Altered ecosystem processes;
  • biodiversity;
  • bio-perversity;
  • carbon economy;
  • invasive tree species;
  • land clearing;
  • large-scale tree plantations

Abstract

The development of a new carbon economy has the potential to offer win–win outcomes for environments and economies. Large-scale tree plantations are expected to play a major role in carbon economies but could have negative ecological and economic consequences when key environmental values such as biodiversity conservation are not considered. We discuss three potential “bio-perversities”—negative outcomes for biodiversity—that could result from inappropriate plantation tree programs aimed solely at reducing atmospheric carbon dioxide and mitigating rapid climate change effects. These are: (1) clearing native vegetation to establish tree plantations, (2) planting trees that become invasive taxa, and (3) tree plantations negatively affecting key ecosystem processes such as fire and hydrological regimes. These bio-perversities may result from common mistakes in environmental management: (1) too narrow a focus on a single environmental value, (2) failing to adequately quantify ecological uncertainty, and (3) failing to anticipate how different groups of people respond to an environmental problem. We highlight ways to prevent possible bio-perverse outcomes in large-scale plantation programs. These include requiring that risk assessments precede project establishment, full carbon accounting is undertaken, incentives used to stimulate tree plantation establishment are rigorously examined, and rigorous compliance and ecological monitoring is undertaken.

View Full Article (HTML) Get PDF (713K)