The Energy & Biodiversity Initiative
Indicators are a way of presenting and managing complex information in a simple and clear manner. Using an approach based on risk assessment, this document outlines a methodology for developing site-level indicators to monitor significant positive and negative biodiversity impacts and company-level indicators to inform and report on the approach taken to biodiversity conservation at a strategic level. It is not the intention of this document to provide a prescriptive list of indicators to be used in every circumstance: the diverse nature of biodiversity and of oil and gas operations makes this an unrealistic expectation. Therefore, the emphasis here is on the method of deriving indicators rather than the indicators themselves. Although based on a strong theoretical foundation, the methodology is centered on the practical needs of staff at oil and gas operations and corporate HSE professionals. Ideally, the methodology should be used within a formal Environmental Management System (EMS), where much of the information required will already exist.
By monitoring impacts over time, the conservation outcomes that result from modifying or changing technology, adopting improved operational practices and integrating biodiversity issues into management strategy can be determined. A formalized system to measure and monitor the effects of an operation on biodiversity will allow a company – as well as regulators and civil society – to more easily understand, predict, minimize and prevent impacts; manage activities; and develop, monitor and refine management practices and eventually company policies. Establishing a system of indicators for reporting on impacts will also allow the company to provide assurance and transparency about its performance, especially if incorporated into the EMS. Although individual indicators will vary from project to project, “good” indicators follow the SMART philosophy (specific, measurable, achievable, relevant and timely). Biodiversity indicators must also be sufficiently sensitive to provide a warning of change before irreversible damage occurs – effectively they must serve to indicate where no significant change is occurring, and also where the threshold between insignificant and significant change lies.
Determining changes in natural systems can be a lengthy process, particularly if the relative importance of natural cycles and anthropogenic changes is to be properly understood. However, in many cases there may be an urgent requirement for an indicator, so that activities can be modified to immediately reduce significant impacts. In these cases, it may be appropriate to consider in the short term an indicator that does not directly measure change in a biological system but rather measures change in an activity that, if left unaltered, will lead to biodiversity impacts. Using a short-term, “indirect” indicator may enable activities to be quickly modified, while data are being acquired to develop the final long-term indicator based on the direct measurement of changes in the biological system. However, the less clear the link between the indicator and the impact, the greater the possibility of modification to activities not achieving the expected outcomes, and therefore indirect indicators must be used with caution and close monitoring.
