Working with industrial and third sector partners, this project will support the development of the world's first biodiversity credit standard (i.e. core environmental, social and governance requirements biodiversity projects must meet to become certified). Recent and upcoming legislation in the UK, EU and elsewhere is introducing greater requirements for organisations of many types to report on the effects of their activities on both carbon and nature. There is also rapidly increasing private-sector interest in nature conservation as part of corporate social responsibility, positive publicity, etc. These trends, plus various natural capital impact assessment schemes being developed, are creating a large demand for biodiversity credits, but no biodiversity credit standard exists yet. Analogous to carbon credits, biodiversity credits assign investable and tradeable economic value to biodiversity, for example allowing a landowner to raise finance (based on forecast biodiversity uplift) to fund nature conservation on their land. This project co-designs a Biodiversity Credit Tool (BCT) with multiple stakeholders. It centres on a partnership between two charities (Wallacea Trust - conservation; Plan Vivo - standards and certification) that have signed a Memorandum of Understanding to develop a biodiversity credit standard, and have already received a large amount of interest (see Beneficiaries). The project PI is in the Biodiversity Uplift Methodology Working Group (meeting since mid-2021) and has been selected as the only academic on the Biodiversity Standard Working Group (BSWG), starting in 2022, and also to Chair the upcoming Technical Advisory Committee (TAC). The current academic literature on standards development and commensuration challenges in environmental contests tends to be retrospective. This project provides a rare opportunity to observe tensions and equivocality emerging between scientific and different stakeholders goals in practice. This will improve understanding of decision making in biodiversity economics. The Coalition for Private Investment in Conservation's 2021 Conservation Finance report shows very rapid growth in private-sector biodiversity funding: from US$2 billion in 2016 to $18 billion in 2020. Remarkably, the report concludes that the growth rate could be considerably higher, but is held back by lack of appropriate methods for quantifying biodiversity. Our current NERC-ESRC project aims to provide a synthesis of methods to quantify biodiversity for potential use in biodiversity valuation and trading. That synthesis is informing project partner Plan Vivo's ongoing development of the methodology for its biodiversity standard. A key part of our proposed project is to rigorously field-test shortlisted options for this biodiversity quantification. Once the standard is launched, we will work with our stakeholders to improve it, and develop tools to implement it. The stakeholders have already produced an early draft of documentation for applying for biodiversity credits, and invited 10 of the many interested organisations to use it to put in pilot applications. These pilots (from 8 countries in 5 continents; see Track Record) will be processed iteratively, learning from the experience and from our stakeholder and field research to improve the standard and its workflows before full roll-out. The biodiversity quantification method being proposed for the credit standard requires field sampling and significant cost for project applicants (reflecting the difficulty of measuring biodiversity for economic valuation). In the later stages of the project - once that method has been developed - we therefore aim to develop tools to help select the most appropriate sites for biodiversity uplift projects. Overall, our project represents a synergy of fundamental academic questions addressed as part of delivering on a stakeholder-led initiative with high expected impact.

There is a global biodiversity crisis driven by mounting pressures including land degradation and climate change. Within the UK, responses include the Government's 25 Year Environment Plan, which sets out a vision to secure a more biodiverse, connected and resilient landscape. The Natural Capital Committee has argued for the need to secure Net Environmental Gains, and this is a provision of the upcoming Environment Bill. A recent report from the UK Parliamentary Office for Science and Technology highlights the needs to secure our natural capital, not just to support biodiversity, but also ensure the provision of wider ecosystem services. Questions remain, however, as to how we achieve net environmental gain; what should go where? What does success look like? How long may it take to reassemble resilient communities that can reliably deliver ecosystem services? One widely adopted approach to securing net environmental gain is that of "ecological restoration". However, using specific natural and semi-natural ecosystems to define endpoints is increasingly contested, as target "pristine" states are hard to define, climate change is leading to a shifting baseline, and there is a need to restore ecosystems that are resilient to future pressures. We need a new paradigm for goal-seeking in ecological restoration which goes beyond reference systems, is agnostic as to prior assumptions of intactness, integrity and system "health", based on diagnostics of characteristics of functionally intact systems. There is an aspiration across the devolved administrations to deliver net environmental gain in biodiversity across all land uses. However, the restoration of ecological communities has been led by practitioners, with relatively little evidence gathered as to how individual restoration projects link together spatially to enhance the resilience of communities. This consortium brings together leading academic ecologists with a public sector organisation and a charity at the forefront of practical restoration activities, to extract the evidence from past activities through a natural experiment, and test resilience through manipulations. We intend to measure biodiversity, architecture and multifunctionality in ecosystems in different stages of transition from a degraded state, identify determinants and measures of complexity, and seek signals of emergent properties - especially resilience to perturbation. We have chosen grasslands and woodlands, being two major habitat types targeted for restoration programmes. Further to this we shall explore how approaches to accelerating re-integration of systems may affect emergent properties. In summary, we propose to move restoration science forward, but considering complexity and resilience as fundamental aims for restoration projects, rather than attempting to re-create specific target ecosystems.

Due to the need for climate change action, UK Government has committed to the ambitious task of achieving 'net zero' greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. However, some emissions from farming, aviation and other activities are very difficult to eliminate. So to reach net zero the UK must also directly remove greenhouse gases from the atmosphere amounting to the equivalent of 100 million tonnes of carbon dioxide/year. Of the Greenhouse Gas Removal (GGR) options available, increasing the carbon stored in the UK's 'treescapes' (forests, hedgerows etc.) has the greatest potential, the lowest cost, and can be started immediately. Planting woodlands can store carbon in standing trees, in forest soils and in timber products. For these reasons, the UK is committed to a huge increase in forest cover. However, our understanding of all these processes and how they vary across locations and over time is incomplete. This major programme will gather evidence, address knowledge gaps and allow decision makers to understand the GGR consequences of different planting options. Woodlands can also deliver many other benefits, creating habitats to conserve wild species, enhancing water quality, regulating rainfall and reducing flood risk, and providing recreation (hence the "GGR+" title). GGR+ will examine all the diverse aspects of forestry to identify "The Right Tree in the Right Place". However, it is equally possible to plant the wrong tree in the wrong place. This can result in damage to biodiversity, and even cause some soils to release huge amounts of carbon into the atmosphere. Also, if certain types of agriculture are displaced, there could be higher imports of food from countries that destroy rainforests to increase farm yields. On top of this, climate change means that many risks (forest fires, extreme weather, disease) are changing faster than ever. "The Right Tree in the Right Place" is not a simple proposition - if we are not careful, and don't consider the complexities properly, the UK's net zero tree planting strategy will be poorly designed, and at worst could result in forests that actually increase climate change. However, even understanding the consequences of planting in different locations is not enough to plan the future of the UK's forests. Land is typically privately owned and Government cannot dictate its use. Rather they need to create the conditions and incentives needed for owners to decide to plant trees. Consequently, GGR+ will also undertake the economic research needed to turn science advice into practice. This challenge cannot be addressed by scientists alone, and the GGR+ partners include UK land use policy makers, including all of the Forestry authorities, the Defra teams responsible for forestry, climate and agriculture (who will use GGR+ to plant 30,000ha/year), as well as the Ministry of Defence (which has huge land holdings). From the private and NGO sectors our partners include massive land owners such as Network Rail and the National Trust (who together will fund over 74,000ha of planting based on GGR+ advice), as well as a network of over 1,400 farmers, the timber and building sector and many other stakeholders. Together with our partners, GGR+ will design innovative "decision support tools"; bespoke software allowing users to examine the effects of a tree planting investment or policy in terms of greenhouse gas storage, food production, incomes of those involved, effects on biodiversity, water quality, flooding, recreation etc. Perhaps most revolutionary, this tool will allow users to specify what outcomes they want and then see what planting, policy or investments they need to get those outcomes. This is an exciting, highly interdisciplinary approach to answering the surprisingly challenging question of finding "The Right Tree in the Right Place" and setting the UK on the path to delivering net zero emissions by 2050.