Conceptual Logic of Permanence and Buffer in Biodiversity Credits
Should the results of ex-post voluntary biodiversity credits be permanent?
Voluntary biodiversity credits incorrectly group together two distinct models: historical credits issued retrospectively, which document already verified conservation outcomes, and guaranteed credits, which commit to lasting impacts in the future. Requiring permanence and buffer reserves for the former is, conceptually, inconsistent, as subsequent events do not invalidate a historical outcome and, unlike carbon, there is normally no formal offset that needs to be backed up. This confusion creates information asymmetries and price distortions that harm legitimate projects.
As an alternative, both categories should be clearly recognised and labelled: historical credits with no permanence or buffer requirements (except to cover errors or fraud) and future-guaranteed credits subject to explicit timeframes, buffers proportional to the risk, and prices that incorporate the cost of that guarantee.