生物多样性

• • 上一篇    

生物多样性信用的企业参与途径、市场发展障碍与建议

彭昀月1, 彭奎1*, 刘昕然2, 孙天怡3, 张小全1   

  1. 1 大自然保护协会(美国)北京代表处, 北京 100600 2 不列颠哥伦比亚大学林学院, 温哥华 V6T 1Z4 3 多伦多大学生态与进化生物学系, 多伦多 M5S 3B2
  • 收稿日期:2026-01-27 修回日期:2026-03-04 接受日期:2026-03-27
  • 通讯作者: 彭奎

Corporate engagement pathways, market development barriers and recommendations for biodiversity credits

Yunyue Peng1, Kui Peng1*, Xinran Liu2, Tianyi Sun3, Xiaoquan Zhang1   

  1. 1 The Nature Conservancy Beijing Representative Office, Beijing, 100600 

    2 Faculty of Forestry, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, V6T 1Z4 

    3 Department of Ecology & Evolutionary Biology, University of Toronto, Toronto, M5S 3B2

  • Received:2026-01-27 Revised:2026-03-04 Accepted:2026-03-27
  • Contact: Kui Peng

摘要: 作为弥补生物多样性保护资金缺口与推动生态价值转化的新兴市场化工具, 生物多样性信用正逐渐活跃成为调动社会资本参与自然保护的重要途径。本文围绕形成市场的核心要素, 系统性分析了生物多样性信用如何衡量、如何定价、为何参与以及如何参与的关键问题。研究表明, 生物多样性信用通常通过多维度生物多样性指标聚合计算的方法核算生物多样性净增益;其定价以保护与恢复行动的直接成本和交易成本为基础;企业参与的动机综合了合规与风险管理需求、品牌与社会责任诉求、以及潜在的长期资产回报;企业可通过购买信用、共同开发项目、产品与信用捆绑以及与碳信用叠加等多元方式介入。然而, 当前市场仍面临将信用误用为抵消、碳市场遗留问题引发的“漂绿”担忧、方法与数据瓶颈、市场基础设施与监管规则不完善以及使用场景和信用声明缺乏规范指导等障碍, 阻碍企业对生物多样性信用的投资。为此, 本文针对未来中国生物多样性信用市场建设提出了一系列建议, 旨在为构建规范、透明的高诚信生物多样性信用体系提供战略思路, 使其成为企业参与生物多样性投融资并助力全球生物多样性目标实现的重要路径。

关键词: 生物多样性信用, 企业参与, 生物多样性净增益, 市场机制, 环境、社会与治理 (ESG)

Abstract

Background & Aim: As a complementary market tool to address the financing gap in biodiversity conservation and support the ecological value transition, biodiversity credits are emerging as an innovative mechanism that mobilizes corporate capital and participation in conservation and restoration. Biodiversity credit markets are still at an early stage, yet they are increasingly recognized by enterprises as relevant to regulatory expectations, risk management needs, brand value and social responsibility, and long-term investment potential. This paper systematically analyzes the core elements of biodiversity credits, including how biodiversity net gain is quantified, how value is priced, and how enterprises participate, and examines key issues in the development of biodiversity credit markets. 

Results: In this paper, we showed that biodiversity credits quantify biodiversity net gain through methodologies that aggregate multiple biodiversity indicators; their pricing is based on conservation and restoration actions rather than ecosystem asset valuation. Corporate participation is driven by regulatory and disclosure requirements, risk mitigation considerations, brand value and social license, and expectations of long-term returns. Participation pathways include direct credit purchases, co-development of conservation and restoration projects, product-credit bundling, and biodiversity–carbon combined instruments. However, challenges persist: concerns about credit misuse and offsetting, greenwashing risks, methodological uncertainty, monitoring and verification difficulties, insufficient market infrastructure, and gaps in regulatory systems and standardized guidelines for credit use and claims. These challenges collectively limit market confidence and hinder corporates’ effective participation. 

Suggestions & Perspectives: Based on the identified gaps, we proposed a set of recommendations for the future development of China's biodiversity credit market, including strengthening methodological transparency, improving monitoring and verification systems, building supporting market and regulatory infrastructure, and establishing unified rules for credit usage, claims and benefit-sharing. These measures are essential for creating a high-integrity biodiversity credit framework that supports enterprise-driven biodiversity investment and financing and contributes to biodiversity conservation outcomes.

Key words: biodiversity credit, corporate engagement, biodiversity net gain, market mechanism, Environment, Social and Governance (ESG)