Potential conservation benefits of a voluntary corporate certification program

  • Alex W. IrelandEmail author
  • Laura J. Napoli
  • Katherine A. Basiotis
  • Emily J. Voldstad
  • Kayhan Ostovar


Conservation on privately held and working land will be an important component of large-scale efforts aimed at tempering habitat loss to protect biodiversity. This realization has given rise to numerous voluntary conservation initiatives. The Wildlife Habitat Council (WHC) is a not-for-profit non-governmental organization founded in 1989 to promote and certify voluntary habitat conservation on corporate lands through partnerships and education. To date, little effort has gone toward analyses of data generated through WHC’s certification program to test hypotheses about potential conservation benefits. To address this gap, we performed two distinct data synthesis exercises. First, we conducted a site-level synthesis using data from 1990 through 2015 to determine growth of the program through time. Second, we conducted a detailed synthesis of certification application data submitted between 2012 and 2015 to determine characteristics of recent efforts. We explored potential on-the-ground conservation benefits of WHC certification programs by looking at participating sites within the USA using two geospatial analyses. First, we examined the proximity of these sites to selected areas currently under conservation management and areas considered by The Nature Conservancy to be high priorities for future conservation management. Second, we examined the intersection of sites with mapped potential ranges of species of concern. To illustrate some of the activities associated with these sites, we provide three brief illustrative case studies. Collectively, results suggest potential for WHC certification to provide landscape connectivity and measurable conservation benefits comparable to some financially incentivized programs.


Wildlife Habitat Council Corporate conservation Biodiversity Private lands 



We thank Thelma Redick for providing historical data and perspective. Gloria Smith provided invaluable assistance with data compilation. We thank Kara Bogden and others at Bacardi-Martini, USA, as well as Shannon Veader and the Conservation Team at Fidelity Investments for sharing their programs as case studies.


  1. Batllori, E., Miller, C., Parisien, M. A., Parks, S. A., & Moritz, M. A. (2014). Is U.S. climatic diversity well represented within the existing federal protection network? Ecological Applications, 24(8), 1898–1907. Scholar
  2. BenDor, T., Lester, T. W., Livengood, A., Davis, A., & Yonavjak, L. (2015). Estimating the size and impact of the ecological restoration economy. PLoS ONE, 10, e0128339. Scholar
  3. Chen, S., & Bouvain, P. (2009). Is corporate social responsibility converging? A comparison of corporate responsibility reporting in the USA, UK, Australia, and Germany. Journal of Business Ethics, 87(1), 299–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cushman, S., Landguth, E., & Flather, C. (2012). Evaluating the sufficiency of protected lands for maintaining wildlife population connectivity in the U.S. northern Rocky Mountains. Diversity and Distribution, 18(9), 873–884.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dietz, R. W., & Czech, B. (2005). Conservation deficits for the continental United States: An ecosystem gap analysis. Conservation Biology, 19(5), 1478–1487. Scholar
  6. Giannini, H., & Heinen, J. (2014). Miami-Dade County’s environmentally endangered lands covenant program creating protected areas on private lands via financial incentives. Natural Areas Journal, 34(3), 338–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Griffiths, J. (2010). Biodiversity should be a top priority for businesses. The Guardian Sustainable Business Blog. Accessed July 27, 2017.
  8. Hellerstein, D. M. (2017). The US conservation reserve program: the evolution of an enrollment. Land Use Policy, 63, 601–610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. IUCN. 2016. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species grid analysis of range maps. Version 2016.3. Downloaded under license from the Integrated Biodiversity Assessment Tool. Accessed 2 Apr 2019.
  10. Jennings, M. D. (2000). Gap analysis: Concepts, methods, and recent results. Landscape Ecology, 15(1), 5–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kaplan, R., Bardwell, L. V., Ford, H. A., & Kaplan, S. (1996). The corporate back-40: Employee benefits of wildlife enhancement efforts on corporate land. Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 1(2), 1–13. Scholar
  12. Kelly, J. M., & Hodge, M. R. (1996). The role of corporations in ensuring biodiversity. Environ Manag, 20(6), 947–954.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Lacoeuilhe, A., Prevot, A., & Schwartz, A. (2017). The social value of conservation initiatives in the workplace. Landscape and Urban Planning, 157, 493–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Merrill, D., & Leatherby, L. (2018). Here’s how America uses its land. Bloomberg. Accessed 2 Apr 2019.
  15. National Conservation Easement Database (NCED). (2016). Accessed 2 Apr 2019.
  16. NatureServe. (2016). Conservation registry web service. Accessed July 2016.
  17. Quinn, J. E., & Wood, J. M. (2017). Application of a coupled human natural system framework to organize and frame challenges and opportunities for biodiversity conservation on private lands. Ecology and Society, 22(1), 39. Scholar
  18. Rodgers, K., Willcox, A., & Willcox, E. (2017). Common influences on the success of habitat conservation planning under the endangered species act. Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 22(5), 438–453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Rodriguez, S., Peterson, M., Cubbage, F., Sills, E., & Bondell, H. (2012). Private landowner interest in market-based incentive programs for endangered species habitat conservation. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 36(3), 469–476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Scott, J. M., Davis, F. W., McGhie, R. G., Wright, R. G., Groves, C., & Estes, J. (2001). Nature reserves: Do they capture the full range of America’s biological diversity? Ecological Applications, 11(4), 999–1007.;2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Stralberg, D., Cameron, D., Reynolds, M., Hickey, C., Klausmeyer, K., Busby, S., et al. (2011). Identifying habitat conservation priorities and gaps for migratory shorebirds and waterfowl in California. Biodiversity and Conservation, 20(1), 19–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Sundberg, J. O. (2013). Tax incentives for open space preservation: Examining the costs and benefits of preferential assessment. Land Lines, October 2013:14–20.Google Scholar
  23. The Nature Conservancy (TNC). (2011). TNC Conservation Portfolio. Accessed 2 Apr 2019.
  24. United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). (2017). Conservation Reserve Program Status—End of June 2017. U.S. Department of Agriculture Farm Service Agency. Accessed August 7, 2017.
  25. United States Geological Survey, Gap Analysis Program (USGS-GAP). (2016). Protected areas database of the United States (PAD-US), version 1.4 Combined Feature Class.Google Scholar
  26. Vitousek, P. M., Mooney, H. A., Lubchenco, J., & Melillo, J. M. (1997). Human domination of Earth’s ecosystems. Science, 277(5325), 494–499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Wilcove, D. S., Rothstein, D., Dubow, J., Phillips, A., & Losos, E. (1998). Quantifying threats to imperiled species in the United States. BioScience, 48(8), 607–615.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Wright, B. A., Cordell, H. K., Brown, T. L., Rowell, A. L. (1988). The national private land ownership study: Establishing the benchmark. In A. H. Watson (Ed.), Outdoor recreation benchmark 1988: Proceedings of the national outdoor recreation forum, Tampa, FL, January 13–14, 1988 (pp. 33–50). United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service, General Technical Report SE-52.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alex W. Ireland
    • 1
    Email author
  • Laura J. Napoli
    • 1
  • Katherine A. Basiotis
    • 2
  • Emily J. Voldstad
    • 2
  • Kayhan Ostovar
    • 3
  1. 1.ExxonMobil Biomedical Sciences, Inc.AnnandaleUSA
  2. 2.The Wildlife Habitat CouncilSilver SpringUSA
  3. 3.Rocky Mountain CollegeBillingsUSA

Personalised recommendations