Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://bura.brunel.ac.uk/handle/2438/26807
Title: Identifying opportunities to deliver effective and efficient outcomes from business-biodiversity action
Authors: White, TB
Mukherjee, N
Petrovan, SO
Sutherland, WJ
Keywords: business-biodiversity;impact mitigation;evidence-based decision making;cost-effectiveness;CESG
Issue Date: 26-Dec-2022
Publisher: Elsevier
Citation: White, B. (2023) 'Identifying opportunities to deliver effective and efficient outcomes from business-biodiversity action', Environmental Science and Policy, 140, pp. 221 - 231. doi: 10.1016/j.envsci.2022.12.003.
Abstract: Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Business-biodiversity action is increasingly seen as critical for delivering conservation goals, but such action needs to be effective. Using detailed semi-structured interviews with leading business-biodiversity professionals and consultants we aimed to understand the actions currently taken and why, how actions are decided upon, and current challenges that hinder effective, efficient action. The scale and type of action varied by sector, driven largely by the risks (reputational, financial) of inaction. Cost-effectiveness was important to businesses, but the limited quantification of the economic consequences of biodiversity action hindered uptake. Indirect evidence sources were generally used to guide decision-making including using expert consultants, guidance, standards or certifications. Acquiring better evidence of cost-effectiveness, particularly if embedded within these indirect sources, could improve practice. A diverse set of challenges emerged that impeded business engagement with biodiversity, effective decision-making, and action implementation. We discuss opportunities to address them and thus improve the effectiveness of business-biodiversity action.
Description: Data Availability: The data that has been used is confidential.
Supporting information The interview guide (S1), thematic framework (S2), research information document (S3), prior informed consent form (S4), information on how the research met qualitative research transparency criteria (S5), expanded tables of quotes (S6) and an observational standpoint (S7) are included in the supporting information: supplementary material is available online at https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1462901122003720?via%3Dihub#sec0115 .
URI: https://bura.brunel.ac.uk/handle/2438/26807
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2022.12.003
ISSN: 1462-9011
Other Identifiers: ORCID iD: Nibedita Mukherjee https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2970-1498
Appears in Collections:Dept of Social and Political Sciences Research Papers

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
FullText.pdfCopyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).2.35 MBAdobe PDFView/Open


This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons