Addressing ecological connectivity in the

development of roads, railways and canals

Robert Ament, Anthony Clevenger, and Rodney van der Ree, Editors

IUCN WCPA Technical Report Series No. 5

IUCN WCPA TECHNICAL REPORT SERIES
IUCN WCPA Technical Reports are intended to be timely, peer reviewed syntheses of issues of global importance to protected
area managers, policy makers, and scientists. These reports define critical issues or problems facing protected areas now and
into the future, place the issue or problem within the broader context of protected area management, and make recommenda­
tions for how the issue or problem may best be addressed in the future. The audience for these reports includes national and
sub-national governments, protected area agencies, non-governmental organizations, communities, private-sector partners,
the Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity, and other interested parties striving to reach goals and commitments
related to advancing protected area establishment and management.

A full set of Technical Reports, as well as IUCN WCPA’s Best Practice Protected Area Guidelines, is available to download at:
http://www.iucn.org/theme/protected-areas/publications/
Complementary resources are available at www.cbd.int/protected/tools/
Contribute to developing capacity for a Protected Planet at www.protectedplanet.net/

IUCN PROTECTED AREA DEFINITION, MANAGEMENT CATEGORIES AND GOVERNANCE TYPES

IUCN defines a protected area as:

A clearly defined geographical space, recognised, dedicated and managed, through legal or other effective
means, to achieve the long-term conservation of nature with associated ecosystem services and cultural values.

The definition is expanded by six management categories (one with a sub-division), summarized below.
Ia Strict nature reserve: Strictly protected for biodiversity and also possibly geological / geomorphological features, where
human visitation, use and impacts are controlled and limited to ensure protection of the conservation values.
Ib Wilderness area: Usually large unmodified or slightly modified areas, retaining their natural character and influence, without
permanent or significant human habitation, protected and managed to preserve their natural condition.
II National park: Large natural or near-natural areas protecting large-scale ecological processes with characteristic
species and ecosystems, which also have environmentally and culturally compatible spiritual, scientific, educational,
recreational and visitor opportunities.
III Natural monument or feature: Areas set aside to protect a specific natural monument, which can be a landform, sea
mount, marine cavern, geological feature such as a cave, or a living feature such as an ancient grove.
IV Habitat/species management area: Areas to protect particular species or habitats, where management reflects this
priority. Many will need regular, active interventions to meet the needs of particular species or habitats, but this is not a
requirement of the category.
V Protected landscape or seascape: Where the interaction of people and nature over time has produced a distinct
character with significant ecological, biological, cultural and scenic value: and where safeguarding the integrity of this
interaction is vital to protecting and sustaining the area and its associated nature conservation and other values.
VI Protected areas with sustainable use of natural resources: Areas which conserve ecosystems, together with
associated cultural values and traditional natural resource management systems. Generally large, mainly in a natural
condition, with a proportion under sustainable natural resource management and where low-level non-industrial natural
resource use compatible with nature conservation is seen as one of the main aims.

The category should be based around the primary management objective(s), which should apply to at least three-quarters
of the protected area – the 75 per cent rule.

The management categories are applied with a typology of governance types – a description of who holds authority and
responsibility for the protected area. IUCN defines four governance types.
Type A. Governance by government: Federal or national ministry/agency in charge; sub-national ministry or agency in
charge (e.g. at regional, provincial, municipal level); government-delegated management (e.g. to NGO).
Type B. Shared governance: Trans-boundary governance (formal and informal arrangements between two or more
countries); collaborative governance (through various ways in which diverse actors and institutions work together); joint
governance (pluralist board or other multi-party governing body).
Type C. Private governance: Conserved areas established and run by individual landowners; non-profit organisations
(e.g. NGOs, universities) and for-profit organisations (e.g. corporate landowners).
Type D. Governance by Indigenous peoples and local communities: Indigenous peoples’ conserved areas and territories
- established and run by Indigenous peoples; community conserved areas – established and run by local communities.

For more information on the IUCN definition, categories and governance types see Dudley (2008). Guidelines for applying
protected area management categories, which can be downloaded at: www.iucn.org/pa_categories

For more on governance types, see Borrini-Feyerabend, et al., (2013). Governance of Protected Areas: From understanding
to action, which can be downloaded at https://portals.iucn.org/library/node/29138
Addressing ecological connectivity in the
development of roads, railways and canals
 Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD)

International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Opened for signature at the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro
in 1992, and entered into force in December 1993, the
IUCN helps the world find pragmatic solutions to our most Convention on Biological Diversity is an international treaty
pressing environment and development challenges. IUCN for the conservation of biodiversity, the sustainable use of the
works on biodiversity, climate change, energy, human components of biodiversity and the equitable sharing of the
livelihoods and greening the world economy by supporting benefits derived from the use of genetic resources. With 196
scientific research, managing field projects all over the world, Parties so far, the Convention has near universal participation
and bringing governments, non-governmental organisations, among countries.
the United Nations and companies together to develop policy,
laws and best practice. IUCN is the world’s oldest and largest www.cbd.int
global environmental organisation, with more than 1,400
members from government and non-governmental organi­
sations and more than 15,000 volunteer experts volunteer
experts. IUCN’s work is supported by around 950 staff in
more than 50 countries and hundreds of partners in public,
non-governmental organisations and private sectors around
the world.

www.iucn.org WCPA Connectivity Conservation Specialist Group (CCSG)

CCSG was established in 2016 under the IUCN World Com­

mission on Protected Areas (WCPA) to support information
sharing, active participation, global awareness, and action
to maintain, enhance, and restore ecological connectivity
conservation around the world. Its objective is to advance the
science, policy, and practice at international, national, and
IUCN World Commission on Protected Areas (WCPA) subnational levels to meet the growing demand for solutions
that advance the identification, recognition, and implementation
IUCN’s World Commission on Protected Areas (WCPA) is the of consistent connectivity conservation measures.
world’s premier network of protected and conserved areas
expertise. The Commission has over 2,500 members spanning www.iucn.org/wcpa-connectivity
140 countries who provide strategic advice to policymakers www.conservationcorridor.org/ccsg
and work to strengthen capacity and investment for protected
areas establishment and management. The Technical Reports
series is one of the Commission’s flagship products, providing
timely guidance on aspects of protected area planning,
management and assessment

www.iucn.org/our-union/commissions/world-commission-
protected-areas/our-work/wcpa-publications/iucn-wcpa Center for Large Landscape Conservation (CLLC)

CLLC develops solutions, implements projects and contri­

butes to global efforts that connect and protect crucial
habi­tat across terrestrial, marine and freshwater ecosystems.
It provides expertise through four key focus areas: science,
policy, mentorship and networking, and on-the-ground
project implementation. By bringing knowledge and
experience to bear on connectivity conservation issues
worldwide, the Center works with communities, governments
and other stakeholders to stop fragmentation and safeguard
the legacy of protected and conserved areas by making them
part of larger ecological networks for conservation.

www.largelandscapes.org
Addressing ecological connectivity in the
development of roads, railways and canals
Robert Ament, Anthony Clevenger, and Rodney van der Ree, Editors

IUCN WCPA TECHNICAL REPORT SERIES NO 5

The designation of geographical entities in this book, and the presentation of the material, do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever
on the part of IUCN or other participating organisations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, or area, or of its authorities, or con­
cerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries.

The views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect those of IUCN or other participating organisations.

IUCN is pleased to acknowledge the support of its Framework Partners who provide core funding: Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Denmark; Ministry
for Foreign Affairs, Finland; Government of France and the French Development Agency (AFD); Ministry of Environment, Republic of Korea;
Ministry of the Environment, Climate and Sustainable Development, Grand Duchy of Luxembourg; the Norwegian Agency for Development
Cooperation (Norad); the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (Sida); the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation
(SDC) and the United States Department of State.

This publication has been made possible in part by funding from Aptenia Foundation, New York Community Trust, and Woodcock Foundation.
Additional support was provided by friends of the Center for Large Landscape Conservation.

Published by: IUCN, Gland, Switzerland

Produced by: Center for Large Landscape Conservation and IUCN WCPA Connectivity Conservation Specialist Group

Copyright: © 2023 IUCN, International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources

Reproduction of this publication for educational or other non-commercial purposes is authorised without prior written permission from the
copyright holder provided the source is fully acknowledged. Reproduction of this publication for resale or other commercial purposes is
prohibited without prior written permission of the copyright holder.

Recommended citation: Ament, R., Clevenger, A., & van der Ree, R. (Eds.) (2023). Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of
roads, railways and canals. IUCN WCPA Technical Report Series No. 5. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN.

ISBN: 978-2-8317-2244-3 (PDF)

978-2-8317-2245-0 (print)
DOI: https://doi.org/10.53847/IUCN.CH.2023.PATRS.5.en

Cover photo: Asian elephant (Elephas maximus) in Sabah, Malaysia © Gary Tabor

Back cover photo: A white-faced capuchin (Cebus imitator) crosses above Route 257 using a canopy bridge in Costa Rica. © Panthera

Layout by: David Harmon editorial + creative

Printed by: Allegra Marketing Print Mail, Bozeman, MT, USA

The text of this book is printed on paper made from wood fibre from well-managed forests certified in accordance with the rules of the
Forest Stewardship Council (FSC).
Contents
Foreword. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . viii
Executive summary & key messages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ix
Acknowledgements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .x
Acronyms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xi
Glossary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xii

1 Introduction: Linear transport infrastructure, protected and conserved areas and ecological
connectivity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
The unique role of linear transport infrastructure in balancing sustainable development and biodiversity conservation. . . . . . . . . 2
The importance of ecological connectivity to global environmental integrity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Building a community of transport ecologists and partners . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Objectives of this Technical Report. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Key messages in this chapter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

2 The impacts of roads, railways and canals on wildlife, protected and conserved areas and
ecological connectivity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Habitat loss. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Habitat degradation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Barrier and filter effects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Animal mortality. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Attraction and corridor effect. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Impacts extend beyond the infrastructure corridor. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Differences in impacts among roads, railways and canals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Key messages in this chapter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

3 Legislation, policies and planning to improve the sustainability of linear transport

infrastructure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
The importance of upstream planning: A land use planning approach. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
Incorporating climate risk in infrastructure planning and policy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
The mitigation hierarchy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
Safeguards and performance standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
Project certification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
Underlying social and cultural values and the rights of local communities and Indigenous peoples. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
Key messages in this chapter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43

4 Environmental assessments for linear transport infrastructure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45

Strategic environmental assessments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
Development of strategic environmental assessments. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
Environmental impact assessment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
Recommendations for applying strategic environmental assessments and environmental impact assessments to linear
transport infrastructure. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
Key messages in this chapter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54

5 Social consequences and public participation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55

The potential social consequences of linear transport infrastructure projects. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
Frameworks for participation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
Free, Prior and Informed Consent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
Relevant and readily available information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
Access to justice. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
The role of public participation in environmental impact assessments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
Key messages in this chapter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63

6 Financing safeguards for linear transport infrastructure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65

International financial institutions, multilateral finance and official development assistance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
Bilateral finance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67

Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals v

 Private and commercial bank finance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
Public-private partnerships . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
Chinese investment in infrastructure development and the Belt and Road Initiative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
Additional financing considerations: operations and maintenance funding. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
Environmental and social due diligence. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
Improving financing and environmental outcomes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
Key messages in this chapter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74

7 Mitigation measures to reduce wildlife mortality and maintain ecological connectivity across
roads, railways and canals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
Defining mitigation objectives. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
Large herbivores . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
Large carnivores . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
Arboreal species . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
Amphibians and reptiles. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
Aquatic species. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
Birds and bats. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
Selecting the proper site location for mitigation measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
Key messages in this chapter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86

8 Monitoring and evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87

Why evaluate performance? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
Mitigation measures need to be effective. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
Performance assessments can be complex. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
Study design and methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
Adaptive mitigation in transportation planning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
Key messages in this chapter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96

9 Construction, operation and maintenance of roads, railways and canals. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97

Minimising and mitigating the environmental impacts of construction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98
Sourcing and storing construction materials. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
Blasting and clearing. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
Fencing, wildlife crossing structures and other mitigation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
Operating and maintaining roads, railways and canals. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101
Key messages in this chapter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106

10 Conclusion: The road ahead . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107

Postscript . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111

References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112

Annex 1: International financial institution environmental policies

(adapted from Losos et al., 2019). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125

Annex 2: Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126

Part 1: Connectivity conservation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126
Part 2: Linear transport infrastructure ecology. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126
Part 3: Additional resources. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129

vi Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals

Tables
Table 1: Mitigation objectives for wildlife crossings (simple to complex), target level of biological organization, and required study
duration and cost to evaluate effectiveness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
Table 2. Methods of measuring effectiveness of mitigating impacts of LTI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91

Figures
Figure 1: Jaguar (Panthera onca) populations and corridors mapped across its range. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Figure 2: The Transport Working Group operates under the World Commission on Protected Areas – one of six IUCN expert
commissions - and its Connectivity Conservation Specialist Group. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Figure 3. A typical pattern of ‘fishbone’ deforestation arrayed along the edges of expanding roads in the Amazon. . . . . . . . . 18
Figure 4: LTI often creates a ‘Pandora’s Box’ effect on the landscape by providing easier access to natural resources, thus
intensifying environmental exploitation and degradation.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Figure 5: Factors influencing the severity of barrier effects on species and their free movement across LTI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Figure 6: Impacts of roads on the environment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Figure 7: Impacts of rails on the environment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Figure 8: Impacts of canals on the environment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Figure 9: An example of the diversity of spatial land use layers that can be considered in upstream planning, including
ecological, social and economic factors. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
Figure 10: A depiction of varying approaches for applying the mitigation hierarchy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
Figure 11: International Finance Corporation (IFC) Performance Standards. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
Figure 12: A map identifying corridors in the Central Indian and Eastern Ghats tiger landscapes connecting existing protected
areas and Bengal tiger (Panthera tigris tigris) population source sites, with available data up to 2018. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
Figure 13: The identified tiger corridors with protected areas overlaid by proposed LTI including roads, rails and canals. . . . . 47
Figure 14: Map of international protected areas that would be directly (red) and indirectly (orange) impacted by the E40
waterway, a 2,000 km navigable transport project planned to connect the Baltic and the Black Seas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
Figure 15: Locations of wildlife crossing structures (green) across Dutch national highways (red) and railroads (black); part of
Netherlands’ Multi-Year Programme for Defragmentation (MJPO) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
Figure 16: The Equator Principles are best practices and industry guidelines set by the MDBs that can help project teams more
effectively manage the environmental elements of projects. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
Figure 17: Map of Asian elephant distribution and the larger regional context of China’s Belt and Road Initiative based on best
available data in 2021. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
Figure 18: Map of migration paths of pronghorn (Antilocapra americana), mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus), elk (Cervus
canadensis) near Interstate 80 in Wyoming, USA. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
Figure 19: Crossing intensity of tiger (Panthera tigris tigris), leopard (Panthera pardus fusca), gaur (Bos gaurus) and wild dog
(Cuon alpinus) in India . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81

Boxes
Box 1: Salamander-friendly ramps and tunnels for safe passage in Waterton Lakes National Park, Alberta, Canada. . . . . . . . 13
Box 2: Stakeholder engagement to avoid railway impacts to Chitwan and Parsa National Parks, Nepal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Box 3: Addressing wildlife-vehicle collisions with mule deer and pronghorn on Highway 191, Wyoming, USA. . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
Box 4: A green ‘toolbox’ to mitigate the impacts of railways on Asian elephants, Bangladesh. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
Box 5: Protecting environmental values and preserving connectivity while developing new roads in Bhutan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
Box 6: A path to more wildlife-friendly roads in Costa Rica . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
Box 7: Statutory requirements help protect wildlife from transport development in India . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
Box 8: Stakeholder engagement in Kenya’s Standard Gauge Railway Phase 2A (Nairobi City – Naivasha Town Industrial Park –
Narok Town). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
Box 9: Coalition of women assist Costa Rica to build wildlife-friendly roads. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
Box 10: Hanoi Forum on Sustainable Infrastructure: Integrating climate resilience and natural capital into transport infrastructure
planning and design. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
Box 11: USAID review enforces environmental safeguards on the Narayanghat – Butwal (NB) Road, Nepal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
Box 12: Functional connectivity as a tool to help plan where to mitigate road impacts on movement and mortality in Portugal’s
Montado landscape. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
Box 13: Mitigating the impacts of the Q-T Railway on long-distance migrating Tibetan antelope. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
Box 14: Simple, low-cost mitigation measures reduce Zanzibar red colobus mortality by 80% . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
Box 15: Using a Before-After-Control-Impact (BACI) study design to evaluate canopy bridges and glider poles for arboreal
mammals in Australia. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92
Box 16: Asian elephant crossing structures on the Sixiao Expressway, Xishuangbanna, China. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94
Box 17: Protecting roosting bats under bridges in the southern United States. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104
Box 18: Reconnecting the canopy with arboreal crossings and underpasses on Costa Rican roads. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105

Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals vii
Foreword
The planet is experiencing unprecedented levels of land However, LTI can also sever human communities,
conversion and habitat loss, often in the most biologically fragment habitat, isolate wildlife populations, and
rich ecosystems. The process of degradation often disrupt fundamental ecological processes on which
begins with a single road that triggers a cascading array we all depend. So, while LTI is often portrayed as
of associated development and impacts. We recognize an investment in the future, that same future must
the societal and economic benefits of infrastructure, also account for the twin challenges of our time:
but at the same time we must temper indiscriminate biodiversity loss and climate change. Smart LTI
development with safeguards for biodiversity, vital development means addressing today’s needs so
ecological services, and Indigenous Peoples and local that future generations will be proud of the decisions
communities. There are few trade-offs with habitat loss we make. As this Technical Report makes clear,
and fragmentation. With every hectare lost, we lose a proactive approach means avoiding the harmful
opportunities to conserve biodiversity and improve impacts of development from the very beginning and
human health and wellbeing. not trying to devise 11th hour solutions.

It is often a challenge to understand the cumulative As we maintain and grow our protected areas and
impacts of infrastructure on nature. This Technical Report implement other landscape-based conservation
explores linear transport infrastructure (LTI) – roads, solutions, we seek to maximise their effectiveness
railways and canals - and solutions to its profound over the long term. If we are to have well-connected
impacts on ecological connectivity, biodiversity, crucial protected area networks, we must think ahead about
habitats, and protected and conserved areas. These how proposed LTI is planned and constructed. We must
impacts extend well beyond the visible, direct footprint also find opportunities to proactively retrofit existing LTI.
of every LTI project. But creative solutions abound: for As connectivity conservation is the countermeasure of
the elephant populations reconnected by an overpass fragmentation, this report stresses the need to avoid
on the flanks of Mount Kenya; for a tiger who traversed processes of fragmentation in the first place, and
its habitat in and out of India’s Pench National Park mitigate all adverse impacts using the best science
thanks to passages constructed on National Highway available. Protected and conserved areas, ecological
7; and for a grizzly bear, granted passage over the corridors, and other areas important for biodiversity are
TransCanada Highway and Canadian Pacific Rail, whose not the place for new roads, railways and canals. Rather,
barrage of noise, lights and vibrations run through the they can serve as a starting point for planning that sites,
heart of Banff National Park. As a global community, we builds, and maintains infrastructure with appropriate
have underestimated these impacts for too long. From safeguards to protect nature and benefit all people.
the ecology to the engineering to the economics of
infrastructure development, numerous disciplines must This is the first time that an IUCN publication system­
come together to craft solutions that balance the needs atically addresses the array of LTI impacts on protected
of people and nature. and conserved areas and provides clear and practical
solutions. We are proud of this effort and hope that you
For certain, LTI provides access to markets, transports will use this Report as a ‘road map’ to success in your
people and their goods and services, and creates jobs. home landscapes.

Dr. Madhu Rao Dr. Gary Tabor

Chair Chair
IUCN World Commission on Protected Areas IUCN WCPA Connectivity Conservation Specialist Group

viii Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals
Executive summary & key messages
The unprecedented rate of linear transport infrastructure (LTI) planning, design, construction, operations and monitoring.
development such as roads, railways and canals is a key This is the first IUCN publication to examine this topic in
driver of global biodiversity decline. Direct impacts have been this context, and is intended to increase awareness and
documented around the world: primarily habitat degradation, inspire commitment, the allocation of resources, good
fragmentation and loss, direct species mortality, and the governance and effective policies. Combined, these actions
creation of physical barriers and filters to wildlife movement will contribute to more successful conservation, sustainable
and ecological flows. In addition, other impacts can occur, livelihoods and resilient landscapes. Overall, this report
such as pollution due to noise, light, vibration and chemicals, identifies effective solutions that can be used in a variety
air and water quality degradation, the spread of invasive of contexts around the world to better address ecological
alien species and changes in hydrology and microclimate. connectivity when developing LTI in and adjacent to PCAs.
Protected areas and other effective area-based conservation
measures (OECMs) (hereafter referred to as “conserved areas” Key messages
and “protected and conserved areas (PCAs)) can face severe • The direct and indirect impacts of LTI on ecological
impacts to their ecosystems, species and habitats with the connectivity, biodiversity, crucial habitats and PCAs are
expansion within or nearby of linear transport infrastructure. increasing around the world. They need to be better
As more intact areas with high environmental, biodiversity and accounted for and addressed with adequate, effective
ecological connectivity values become more accessible, an safeguards.
assortment of indirect problems can arise, including increased
rates of hunting and poaching of wildlife; illegal mining, logging • It is important to have policies and plans that promote
and other extractive industries; increased frequency and and adequately fund effective safeguards for biodiversity
intensity of wildfires; land speculation and illegal settlement. and ecological connectivity. This will help more projects
Addressing these direct and indirect impacts will require much achieve no net loss or net gains of biodiversity.
more attention, increased technical skills and a better trained
workforce as the demand for LTI grows precipitously around • Full, effective and genuine participation of local communi­
the world, especially in developing countries of Africa, Asia and ties and Indigenous peoples is necessary and increases
South America. the potential for LTI projects to benefit all stakeholders.

Ambitious economic and social development programs can • Investment mechanisms and decisions for funding
generate large LTI investments to give communities better pro­jects require environmental and social due diligence
access to services, markets and resources. These projects throughout the process, in project identification, feasi­
either expand the size and volume of existing linear infrastructure bility, assessment, design and implementation. These
or are constructed in previously undeveloped, intact landscapes, mechanisms will ensure that LTI projects achieve their
often of high conservation value. Without proper safeguards for social and environmental safeguard objectives.
biodiversity and ecological connectivity, given the present speed
and scale of expansion, there lies a high potential to unravel the • Incorporating climate risk and applying the mitigation
progress made over the past five decades to designate, design hierarchy – avoid, minimise, mitigate/restore and offset/
and manage PCAs embedded in ecological networks. Thus, compensate - should always be applied in the proper
the future will require planners and decision-makers to strike a order to achieve the best possible safeguards for
balance between the anticipated socio-economic benefits of biodiversity and ecological connectivity.
LTI with the challenges of safeguarding healthy ecosystems,
ecological connectivity and biodiversity. • The impacts to PCAs, their ecological connectivity and
biodiversity should be considered at the beginning of the
The purpose of this WCPA Technical Report Addressing planning phase of LTI projects. Only when all avoidance
ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and minimization options have been exhausted should
and canals is to provide an overview of practical, feasible appropriate mitigation and compensation measures be
science-based strategies for PCA managers, transport applied through careful planning, assessment and design.
practitioners, industry, conservationists and other interested
stakeholders. It introduces and describes the numerous • There are many practical and proven science-based miti­
solutions that are available to support biodiversity and gation strategies and techniques that effectively protect
ecological connectivity conservation in, and adjacent to, the ecological connectivity of PCAs and reduce the direct
PCAs. It promotes best practices and provides details mortality of wildlife caused by roads, railways and canals.
for the various phases of infrastructure development:

Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals ix

Acknowledgements
This Technical Report is a principal output of the Transport Appreciation is expressed to all the Contributors to various
Working Group (TWG) based on the terms of reference chapters and who have also provided much valuable
provided it by the IUCN World Commission on Protected feedback, information, case studies and photographs:
Areas’ (WCPA) Connectivity Conservation Specialist Group Daniela Araya-Gamboa, Fernando Ascensão, Rafael
(CCSG). The report also contributes toward fulfilment of Barrientos, Kimberly Bonine, Terry Brennan, Melissa Butynski,
IUCN Resolution WCC 2020 Res 071, ‘Wildlife-friendly linear Gail Chambers, Reuben Clements, Wendy Collinson, Marcello
infrastructure’. D’Amico, Norris Dodd, Alexis Erwin, Evan Freund, Lazaros
Georgiadis, Elke Hahn, Mohd Rosli Mohd Hasan, Hanna
Many individuals and organisations have supported this effort. Helsingen, Pablo Herrera, Djuro Huber, Sandra Jacobson,
We especially thank Madhu Rao (Chair, IUCN WCPA), Kathy Jochen Jaeger, Edith Kahubire, Gordon Keller, Julia Kintsch,
MacKinnon (former Chair, IUCN WCPA), the IUCN WCPA Aaron Laur, Nina-Marie Lister, Terry McGuire, Pramod
Steering Committee 2017-2021, Nigel Dudley, Sue Stolton Neupane, Leslie Olonyi, Gabriel Oppler, Milind Pariwakam,
(Editors, Technical Report Series), and Craig Groves (former Gary Tabor, Fernanda Teixeira, Sandeep Tiwari, Marc Tkach,
Editor, BPG Series) for their kind contributions throughout Jo Treweek, Marguerite Trocme, Srinivas Vaidyanathan, Divya
development of this publication. We also thank the staff at Vasudev, and Zachary Wurtzebach.
the Center for Large Landscape Conservation for supporting
the development, preparation and publishing of this report, We want to thank Edgar van der Grift and Andreas Kindel
including Publication Coordinators Aaron Laur, Gabriel Oppler, for their peer review of this Technical Report and the keen
Mary Collins, Melissa Butynski, and Grace Stonecipher. insights they both provided.

x Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals

Acronyms
ADB Asian Development Bank
AIIB Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank
BACI Before-After-Control-Impact
BBA Baseline biodiversity assessment
BNG Biodiversity net gain
BRI Belt and Road Initiative
CBD Convention on Biological Diversity
CCSG Connectivity Conservation Specialist Group of WCPA
CDB China Development Bank
CMS Convention on Migratory Species of Wild Animals
EIA Environmental impact assessment
EMP Environmental management plan
ESF Environmental and Social Framework
ESG Environmental, social and governance
ESIA Environmental and social impact assessment
ESS Environmental and Social Standards
IUCN International Union for Conservation of Nature
FPIC Free, Prior and Informed Consent
G20 Group of Twenty
G7 Group of Seven
IBRD International Bank for Reconstruction and Development
IDA International Development Association
IFC International Finance Corporation
IFI International finance institution
LTI Linear transport infrastructure
MDB Multilateral development bank
NDB New Development Bank
NGO Nongovernmental organisation
NNL No net loss
ODA Official development assistance
OECM Other effective area-based conservation measure
PA Protected area
PCA Protected and conserved area
PPP Public-private partnership
PPPs Plans, policies and programmes
SDGs Sustainable Development Goals
SEA Strategic environmental assessment
TWG Transport Working Group of the CCSG of WCPA
UN United Nations
UNEP United Nations Environment Programme
WCPA IUCN World Commission on Protected Areas
USAID United States Agency for International Development

Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals xi

Glossary
Arboreal crossing structure: Wildlife crossing structure for disturbances and other land, freshwater or sea­
arboreal species (e.g. glider pole, canopy rope ladder). scape elements presumed to be important for
organisms to move through their environment.
Avoidance: The first step of the mitigation hierarchy. Any Structural connectivity is used in efforts to restore or
action that prevents an impact from occurring, often involving estimate functional connectivity where measures of
the relocation of an activity or infrastructure away from it are lacking (Hilty et al., 2019).
important habitat.
Conservation: The protection, care, management and
Before-After-Control-Impact (BACI): A study design in maintenance of ecosystems, habitats, wildlife species and
which data are collected before and after an intervention (or populations, within or outside of their natural environments, in
impact) at sites with and without an intervention; the latter order to safeguard the natural conditions for their long-term
known as control sites. persistence.

Barrier effect: The extent to which roads or other linear Dispersal: The movement of individuals or seeds from one
features prevent animal movement. The barrier effect can be site to another breeding or growing site.
quantified by species, populations, etc. May also be termed
the ‘filter effect’ when the barrier is partial. Ecological corridor: A clearly defined geographical space
that is governed and managed over the long term to maintain
Biodiversity: The variability among living organisms from or restore effective ecological connectivity (Hilty et al., 2020).
all sources including terrestrial, marine and other aquatic
ecosystems, and the ecological complexes of which they are Ecological network (for conservation): A system of
part; this includes diversity within species, between species, core habitats (protected areas, OECMs and other intact
and of ecosystems (CBD Article 2, 1992). natural areas), connected by ecological corridors, which is
established, restored as needed and maintained to conserve
Compensation: Sometimes referred to as offsetting, the biological diversity in systems that have been fragmented
fifth step in the mitigation hierarchy. Involves replacing or (Hilty et al., 2020).
substituting resources or environments that are typically
outside of the footprint of an infrastructure project that Ecosystem: A dynamic complex of plant, animal and micro-
cannot be avoided, minimised, mitigated or restored on site. organism communities and their non-living environment
Compensation usually involves payments as offsets, such interacting as a functional unit. It is the sum total of all the
as to fund and implement management plans for PCAs, abiotic and biotic processes going on in an ecosystem that
support research that enhances biodiversity protection, or transfer energy and matter within and between ecosystems
enhance enforcement activities and infrastructure. (e.g. biogeochemical cycles, primary production, etc.) (CBD
Article 2, 1992).
Connectivity
• Ecosystem functioning: The collective life activities
• Ecological connectivity: The unimpeded movement of of plants, animals and microbes and the effects these
species and the flow of natural processes that sustain life activities – feeding, growing, moving, excreting waste,
on Earth (CMS, 2020a). etc. – have on the physical and chemical conditions of
the environment (Naeem et al., 1999).
There are various sub-definitions of ecological connectivity • Ecosystem services: The benefits people obtain
that are useful in the context of this Technical Report: from ecosystems. These include provisioning services
such as food and water production; regulating services
º Ecological connectivity for species (scientific- such as flood and disease control; cultural services
detailed definition): The movement of populations, such as spiritual, recreational and cultural benefits; and
individuals, genes, gametes and propagules between supporting services such as nutrient cycling that maintain
populations, communities and ecosystems, as well the conditions for life on Earth (Millennium Ecosystem
as that of non-living material from one location to Assessment, 2005).
another. • Ecosystem structure: The biophysical architecture
º Functional connectivity for species: A description of an ecosystem; the composition and arrangement of
of how well genes, gametes, propagules or indi­ all the living and non-living physical matter at a location
viduals move through land, fresh water and sea­ (Russi et al., 2013).
scapes (Rudnick et al., 2012; Weeks, 2017).
º Structural connectivity for species: A measure Environmental impact assessment (EIA): The process
of habitat permeability based on the physical of identifying, predicting, evaluating and mitigating the bio­
features and arrangements of habitat patches, physical, social and other relevant effects of development

xii Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals
proposals prior to major decisions being taken and commit­ Describes any actions to reduce the severity of the impact of
ments made (IAIA, 2009). an activity or development.

Fragmentation: The breaking up of a habitat, ecosystem or Mitigation: The third step of the mitigation hierarchy. Mitiga­
land-use type into smaller and, often, more isolated parcels, tion occurs after all possible avoidance and minimisation
thereby reducing the number of species that can be supported. alternatives have been implemented. Mitigation measures are
implemented to moderate, reduce or eliminate unavoidable
Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC): A legal principle impacts over time.
(UNDRIP, 2007), framework and process that should be
applied to all development projects that may affect livelihoods, Mitigation hierarchy (also called effects management
resources or lands of Indigenous, marginalized, local or rural hierarchy): A simple framework that allows proponents to
communities. assess and address the impacts of infrastructure with an
initial focus on avoidance, and if not possible, followed by
Gene flow: The transfer of alleles or genes from one indi­ minimisation, mitigation, restoration and finally, compensation
vidual or population to another. (or offsetting) of residual impacts.

Habitat: The place or type of site where an organism or Monitoring: The collecting of information on indicators and/
population naturally occurs (CBD Article 2, 1992). or targets repeatedly over time to evaluate trends in the
status of conservation targets, often related to evaluating the
Indigenous Peoples: Tribal peoples whose social, cultural effectiveness of management and/or governance activities.
and economic conditions distinguish them from other
sections of the national community, and whose status is Other effective area-based conservation measure
regulated wholly or partially by their own customs or traditions (OECM): A geographically defined area other than a
or by special laws or regulations. The term also includes protected area, which is governed and managed in ways
peoples in independent countries who are regarded as that achieve positive and sustained long-term outcomes
indigenous on account of their descent from the populations for the in situ conservation of biodiversity with associated
that inhabited the country, or a geographical region to which ecosystem functions and services and, where applicable,
the country belongs, at the time of conquest or colonisation cultural, spiritual, socio-economic and other locally relevant
or the establishment of present state boundaries and who, values are also conserved (IUCN WCPA, 2019).
irrespective of their legal status, retain some or all of their
own social, economic, cultural and political institutions Overpass: A wildlife crossing structure that facilitates move­
(Borrini-Feyerabend et al., 2004; following IUCN’s use of ments of wildlife over/above LTI.
the International Labour Organization’s ILO Convention 169
on Indigenous and Tribal Peoples). Preferred terminology Population: All the organisms of the same species that live
varies around the world, and terms such as ‘Aboriginal’ or in a specific geographic area at the same time and have the
‘Traditional Peoples’ are sometimes used instead. capability of interbreeding.

Landscape: A heterogeneous space comprising a clus­ter Protected area: A clearly defined geographical space,
of interacting ecosystems, geological features and eco­ recognised, dedicated and managed, through legal or other
logical processes, and often including human influences. effective means, to achieve the long-term conservation of
Landscapes are generally large but can be defined at a range nature with associated ecosystem services and cultural values
of spatial scales. (Dudley, 2008; Stolton et al., 2013).

Linear transport infrastructure (LTI): Roads, railways and Restoration: The fourth step in the mitigation hierarchy.
canals, for the purpose of this publication. Other forms of LTI Restoration or rehabilitation occurs after all possible avoidance,
exist, including power transmission lines and pipelines. minimisation and mitigation actions have been implemented.
Restoration involves measures to repair and rehabilitate
Migration: The regular annual or seasonal movement of ecosystem structure such as reforestation, or ecosystem
individual animals or populations of animals between distinct function such as functional ecological connectivity. Restoration
habitats, each of which is occupied during different parts of is aimed at reversing habitat degradation and typically occurs
the year. at or nearby to the site of an infrastructure project.

Migratory species: The entire population or any geographi­ Rightsholders, stakeholders: In the context of protected
cally separate part of the population of any species or lower areas and conservation, the term ‘rightsholders’ refers to
taxon of wild animals, a significant proportion of whose people (such as but not limited to landowners) socially endowed
members cyclically and predictably cross one or more with legal or customary rights with respect to land, water and
national jurisdiction boundaries (CMS Article 1, 1979). natural resources. By contrast, ‘stakeholders’ possess direct or
indirect interests and concerns about these resources but do
Minimisation: The second step of the mitigation hierarchy not necessarily enjoy a legally or socially recognised entitlement
that occurs after all possible avoidance has occurred. to them (Borrini-Feyerabend et al., 2013).

Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals xiii
Safeguards: Policies, practices and other direct and indirect Verge: Also referred to as ‘right-of-way’. The area of land
measures that aim to avoid or minimize environmental and between the LTI and fence or other boundary demarcating
social harm during the planning, design, construction and the land reserved for the infrastructure. Verges can be cleared
operation of LTI. or continue to support natural vegetation and habitats.

Strategic environmental assessment (SEA): The proactive Wildlife crossing structure: Any structure designed as
assessment of numerous alternatives to proposed or exist­ purpose built or retrofitted to facilitate the safe movement of
ing plans, policies and programmes in the context of a wildlife across LTI.
broader vision, set of goals, or objectives to assess the likely
outcomes of various means to select the best alternative(s) to Wildlife-vehicle collision (WVC): The act of animals being
reach desired ends (Noble, 2000). hit by vehicles, trains or ships.

Underpass: A wildlife crossing structure that facilitates the

movements of wildlife under LTI.

xiv Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals
 1. Introduction

Part 1

Introduction: Linear transport infrastructure,

protected and conserved areas and ecological
connectivity

Deforestation and land grading in Malaysia. New roads increase logging and fragmentation of forests, and entire landscapes. © Adobe Stock

Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals 1

 1. Introduction

The unique role of linear transport Linear infrastructure can be a barrier or filter to wildlife
movement and ecological flows, as well as a threat to the
infrastructure in balancing integrity of PCAs when routes are constructed within or near
sustainable development and their borders (Ament et al., 2008; Laurance et al., 2009;
biodiversity conservation EEA, 2012). There are many direct impacts on ecological
connectivity including fragmentation of intact habitats
The global decline of biodiversity has reached an unprecedent­ and PCAs (reducing structural connectivity), degradation,
ed rate, and infrastructure development to support a growing alteration and loss of habitat (reducing structural and
human population is a key driver (Rockström et al., 2009; functional connectivity), and species and process alteration
Butchart et al., 2010; EEA-FOEN, 2011; McCallum, 2015). The (removing functional connectivity). Once areas become more
variety of impacts that LTI has on biodiversity and ecosystems accessible, indirect impacts include human encroachment
are well-described and include habitat loss, wildlife-vehicle and subsequent intensification of hunting, logging, land use,
collisions (WVCs) which kill and injure wildlife and motorists, and permanent settlement in and around areas with high
creation of physical barriers, noise and light disturbance, the environmental and ecological connectivity values. As a result,
spread of pollution and invasive alien species, and changes there has been an increase in global attention to protect
in hydrology and microclimate (Forman et al., 2003; Benítez- the various interconnections of nature, including plant and
López et al., 2010; van der Ree et al., 2015a). The increasing animal dispersal, wildlife migration, fluvial processes and the
scale of impacts is exemplified by the prevalence of roads connectivity that is inherently present in large wild areas.
now fragmenting Earth’s terrestrial surface into more than
600,000 patches, the majority less than one square kilometre Importantly, this awareness has been increasingly incorporated
in area (Ibisch et al., 2016). Railways and canals have similar into international policies in recent years, including:
ecological impacts to roads, albeit at different spatial scales
and intensities. Furthermore, while the number and extent of • The Convention on Biological Diversity’s 15th Conference
protected and conserved areas (PCAs) continues to increase of the Parties (CoP-15) adopting the Kunming-Montreal
around the world (UNEP-WCMC, 2021), ongoing urbanisation Global Biodiversity Framework’ emphasizing the
and intensification of land use, coupled with rapidly developing fundamental contribution of ecological connectivity to
transport infrastructure, is jeopardizing ecological connectivity. healthy ecosystems for achieving objectives as part of

An Asian elephant (Elephas maximus) walks along a road within Banke National Park in Nepal. © Pramod Neupane

2 Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals

 1. Introduction

its strategic plan for the period 2022–2030, in particular º Identifying key drivers and building synergies across
under Goal A, Targets 1, 2, 3, and 12 (CBD, 2022). institutions and borders to implement solutions.

• The UN Ocean Conference adopting the political • The 13th Conference of the Parties to the Convention
declaration Our ocean, our future, our responsibility’, on Migratory Species (CMS) adopting Resolution 12.26
including Objective 13 stressing use of “cooperative, (REV.COP13) Improving Ways of Addressing Connectivity
ecologically representative, and well-connected” marine in the Conservation of Migratory Species’ including
protected areas as essential for science-based ocean the first-ever definition by a multilateral environmental
conservation (UNOC, 2022). agreement of “ecological connectivity” as “the
unimpeded movement of species and the flow of natural
• The 15th Conference of the Parties to the UN Convention processes that sustain life on Earth” (CMS, 2020a).
to Combat Desertification (UNCCD) adopting the Land,
Life and Legacy Declaration’ encouraging Parties These developments also build on a wide-ranging mandate to
take into account the “connectivity of ecosystems” to advance more sustainable infrastructure in international and
accelerate commitments to achieve land degradation regional policy, including:
neutrality by 2030 (UNCCD, 2022).
• The Convention on Biological Diversity’s 15th Conference
• The 5th session of the UN Environment Assembly in 2022 of the Parties (CoP-15) adopting the Kunming-Montreal
issuing its ministerial declaration reaffirming commitment Global Biodiversity Framework’ Target 14 for ensuring
to the UN Decade of Ecosystem Restoration and work “the full integration of biodiversity and its multiple values
towards halting the fragmentation of ecosystems, into policies, regulations, planning and development
including by “promoting ecological connectivity” (UNEP, processes, poverty eradication strategies, strategic
2022a), and adopted a policy resolution on “Sustainable environmental assessments, environmental impact
and Resilient Infrastructure” (UNEP, 2022e). assessments and, as appropriate, national accounting
within and across all levels of government and across all
• The 2021 G7 Leaders’ Summit (Canada, France, sectors...” (CBD, 2022).
Germany, Italy, Japan, United Kingdom, United States)
agreeing to the 2030 Nature Compact’ advocating for • The 1st IUCN Africa Protected Areas Congress adopting
“…improved quality, effectiveness and connectivity the Kigali Call to Action for People and Nature’, inclu­
of protected areas and other effective area-based ding calling for “restoring fragmented and degraded
conservation measures (OECMs)…” (G7, 2021). ecosystems and avoiding or mitigating the impacts of
climate change, new infrastructure and environmentally
• The UN General Assembly in 2021 adopting Resolution destructive activities, thereby maintaining ecological
75/271 Nature knows no borders: transboundary connectivity through networks of protected and con­
cooperation – a key factor for biodiversity conservation’ served areas, including OECMs and transboundary
encouraging “…member States to maintain and enhance areas” (APAC, 2022).
connectivity of habitats, including but not limited to those
of protected species and those relevant for the provision • The 3rd Asian Elephant Range States Meeting adopting the
of ecosystem services, including through increasing the Kathmandu Declaration for Asian Elephant Conservation’
establishment of transboundary protected areas, as (AsERS, 2022) containing two priority commitments to be
appropriate, and ecological corridors based on the best achieved by 2025:
available scientific data…” (UNGA, 2021). º “Promote the maintenance and connectivity of large
Asian Elephant conservation landscapes where
• The UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration Strategy’ new permitted developmental activities such as
(2021–2030) identifying activities necessary for catalysing linear infrastructures are elephant- and biodiversity-
large-scale restoration, including “the importance of appropriate”; and
ecological connectivity in restoring ecosystem functioning º “Promote the development of national guidelines
and how to incorporate this concept into natural resource on wildlife-friendly linear infrastructure, including
planning and management” (UNDER, 2021). elephant, based on those developed by the Asian
Elephant Specialist Group of the IUCN SSC and
• The IUCN World Conservation Congress in 2020/2021 Connectivity [Conservation] Specialist Group [of the
adopting Resolution 073 Ecological connectivity IUCN WCPA] after Range States consultations”.
conservation in the post-2020 global biodiversity
framework: from local to international levels’ (IUCN, • The 2nd Asia Parks Congress concluding the Kota
2020a) emphasizing the importance of ecological Kinabalu Declaration’ (APC, 2022) calling for:
networks and corridors to sustaining biodiversity and º “Maintaining and restoring fragmented ecosystems
nature’s contributions to people, and recommending that and avoiding or mitigating the impacts of new
all IUCN Members work to conserve connectivity by: infrastructure and environmentally destructive
º Documenting it across ecosystems; activities”;
º Informing policies, laws, and plans; and

Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals 3

 1. Introduction

º “Establishing and restoring ecological connectivity • The 13th Conference of the Parties to CMS further
through networks of protected and conserved adopting Decisions 13.130 to 13.134 regarding
areas”; and Infrastructure Development and Migratory Species’
º “Securing natural habitat and improving connectivity directed respectively to Parties, the Scientific Council, the
of protected areas to maintain viable population of Secretariat, and other stakeholders, including a request
critically endangered species such as Asian rhinos”. to establish a “multi-stakeholder Working Group on linear
infrastructure” (CMS, 2020b).
• The Group of 20 (G20) setting forth an agenda to promote
infrastructure that is “sustainable, resilient, modern, • The 13th Conference of the Parties to CMS adopting
connected and inclusive” and developing national buy-in Resolution 11.24 (Rev.COP13) in 2020 on the Central
through virtual workshops in 2021 hosted by the G20 Asian Mammals Initiative’ recognizing the particularly
Infrastructure Working Group (G20, 2021). detrimental impacts that linear infrastructure can have
on migratory mammals, direct mortality, fragmentation
• The IUCN World Conservation Congress in 2020/2021 of habitats, disruption of movement, and “...the urgent
adopting Resolution 071 Wildlife-friendly linear infra­ need to mitigate the direct and indirect impacts on
structure’ (IUCN, 2020b): migratory mammals, including the increased human
º Recognizing preparation of this present publication; habitation and associated poaching along infrastructure
º Requesting multiple constituencies and stakeholders routes” (CMS, 2020c).
to increase collaboration “...for more effective new
and existing linear infrastructure avoidance and • The 14th Conference of the Parties to the CBD adopt­ing
mitigation, based on specific targets and indicators”; Decision 14/3 in 2018 titled Mainstreaming of biodiversity
º Outlining development and implementation of a suite in the energy and mining, infrastructure, manufacturing
of more advanced methods, tools, and measures and processing sectors’ providing a comprehensive
toward providing all necessary protection for bio­ listing of actions that can be taken across sectors to
diversity; and increase and improve the application of best practices
º Inviting all relevant actors to work together in a and emphasizing a long-term strategic approach (CBD,
diverse coalition to mainstream wildlife-friendly linear 2018a).
infrastructure in science, policy, and practice.

Nine-banded armadillo (Dasypus novemcinctus) roadkill in Costa Rica. © Daniela Araya-Gamboa

4 Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals

 1. Introduction

• The United Nations and its Member States adopting in demand for transportation services. This growth is especially
2015 the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development’ rapid in tropical and subtropical countries where infrastructure
and its 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) – in is often built through PCAs and unprotected wilderness
particular, Goal 9 “Build resilient infrastructure, promote because such lands are typically owned by governments
inclusive and sustainable industrialization and foster and can avoid issues associated with private property such
innovation” and Goal 15 “Protect, restore and promote as eminent domain, just compensation and resettlement.
sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably Importantly, these impacts are in addition to those caused by
manage forests, combat desertification, and halt and the vast network of existing infrastructure within and near to
reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss” areas of high conservation value.
(UNDESA, 2021).
The anticipated benefits of improved transportation include
the improvement of trade routes and access to natural
resources, including supporting mining, logging, and
The importance of ecological hydroelectric operations (Caro et al., 2014). Yet, for all the
connectivity to global environmental expected economic and social benefits, the environmental
integrity impacts are mounting. For example, in Brazil, if originally
planned reconstruction of the BR-319 (Manaus-Porto Velho)
Identifying and prioritizing where to conserve ecological Highway – from dirt passable in the dry season to a new
connectivity can reduce threats to biodiversity and increase paved road – were to commence, it is considered to be
opportunities for climate change adaptation (see for example the “beginning of the end” of large, still intact areas of the
Figure 1). However, even as PCAs and larger ecological Amazon Rainforest by linking the current “arc of deforestation”
networks are increasingly being recognised as critical for to central Amazonia (Fearnside & de Alencastro Graça, 2006).
conserving biodiversity and providing ecosystem services, In another example in Africa’s Congo Basin, the movements
they are simultaneously being impacted by the increasing of forest elephants are increasingly restricted due to the

Figure 1: Jaguar (Panthera onca) populations and corridors mapped across its range. Populations and ecological corridors were prioritised according to ecological
importance, network integrity, and vulnerability. © Panthera

Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals 5

 1. Introduction

construction of new roads to connect human settlements and have the potential to contribute to economic and social
facilitate extractive industries, such as logging and mining development through increased access to markets and
(Blake et al., 2008). Railways have similar barrier effects on resources, there are also environmental and social costs
wildlife, especially smaller species such as the Eastern box that must be better accounted for, and balanced with, the
turtle in the USA (Kornilev et al., 2006). Large canals on the development of LTI (Vilela et al., 2020).
other hand are almost total barriers to the movement of all
non-flying terrestrial vertebrates (Gregory et al., 2021). Avoiding and limiting habitat fragmentation, especially due to
the development of linear infrastructure, is a central component
The current challenges to the ecological connectivity of PCAs of conserving ecological connectivity and an increasingly
and remaining intact natural areas are predicted to escalate. important facet of PCA management. The overriding fact is
The world’s road systems are projected to increase by over that LTI can result in a direct loss of habitat, degradation of
25 million lane-kilometres and its rail systems by 300,000 habitat quality and habitat fragmentation. It also can form a
track-kilometres by mid-century with most of this burgeoning barrier to the movement of wildlife, impede ecological flows,
expansion slated for developing countries (Dulac, 2013). reduce beneficial natural processes and ecosystem services
New canals continue to be built around the world, but global and threaten human and wildlife safety through WVC on roads,
forecasts in growth are not available. While much attention wildlife strikes by trains, and drownings in canals.
is paid to the ecological consequences of China’s Belt and
Road Initiative (BRI) – one of the largest infrastructure and Linear infrastructure that transports people, goods and services
development plans in history (Hughes et al., 2020; Narain et — here with a focus on roads, railways and canals — often
al., 2020; Ng et al., 2020) – there are many other investments poses an even greater risk to biodiversity than other forms
being made by governments and financial institutions around of linear infrastructure such as power transmission lines, gas
the world that may have similar impacts (Jones et al., 2019; and oil pipelines, fences and trails (Laurance et al., 2015). The
Joniak-Lüthi et al., 2022). The cumulative impacts of an ecological impacts of other types of linear infrastructure, such
innumerable number of smaller projects, such as sealing as bird mortality due to collision with powerlines or barrier
unpaved roads or widening existing networks, must also be effects of certain types of fencing, can still be significant and
recognised as significant contributors. While many projects should not be ignored. Nevertheless, transport networks (i.e.

Key information – Defining ecological connectivity

Ecological connectivity is defined as the unimpeded movement of species and the flow of natural processes that sustain
life on Earth (CMS, 2020a). Conserving and restoring ecological connectivity depends on a strong foundation of formal
protected and conserved areas working in conjunction with connectivity-specific measures, such as ecological corridors
and ecological networks (Hilty et al., 2020). Connectivity conservation expands the traditional model of area-based
conservation to recognise the important role of private lands, working lands and urban spaces in protecting biodiversity.

Achieving well-connected terrestrial, freshwater and marine ecosystems requires maintaining, enhancing and restoring
processes by which genes, populations, nutrients and energy move among and between habitats and ecosystems.
Connectivity is a key component of nature conservation and an essential strategy that allows species to adapt and be more
resilient to the challenges posed by an expanding human population, unprecedented land-use change and a changing
climate. Maximising ecological connectivity reduces human-caused fragmentation by linking land and seascapes, enabling
species to move and ecosystems processes to flow. Key terms in this regard include:

Ecological connectivity: The unimpeded movement of species and the flow of natural processes that sustain life on Earth
(CMS, 2020a).
Ecological corridor: A clearly defined geographical space that is governed and managed over the long term to conserve
or restore effective ecological connectivity (Hilty et al., 2020). Ecological corridors can be continuous or patchy (i.e. stepping
stones’).
Ecological network (for conservation): A system of core habitats (protected areas, OECMs and other intact natural
areas), connected by ecological corridors, which is established, restored as needed and maintained to conserve biological
diversity in systems that have been fragmented (Hilty et al., 2020).
OECM (Other effective area-based conservation measure): A geographically defined area, other than a protected
area, which is governed and managed in ways that achieve positive and sustained long-term outcomes for the in situ
conservation of biodiversity with associated ecosystem functions and services and, where applicable, cultural, spiritual,
socio-economic and other locally relevant values are also conserved (IUCN WCPA, 2019).
Protected area: A clearly defined geographical space, recognised, dedicated and managed, through legal or other
effective means, to achieve the long-term conservation of nature with associated ecosystem services and cultural values
(Dudley, 2008; Stolton et al., 2013).

6 Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals

 1. Introduction

Forest clearing for construction of a toll road through rural land. The amount of land that needs to be cleared for infrastructure projects is often much wider than the
roads, rails, or canals themselves. © Alex Traveler/ Adobe Stock

Machinery clearing a forest to make way for the Narayanghat-Butwal Road Project; a 113 km long upgrade of an existing two-lane road to a four-lane highway in
Nepal. © Anthony P. Clevenger

Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals 7

 1. Introduction

roads, railways and canals) can have significant additional van der Ree et al., 2015b; Ibisch et al., 2016; Laurance &
impacts on natural systems and wild areas caused by Arrea, 2017; Ascensão et al., 2018). In response to this
increased human access, such as land clearing, human global concern, the IUCN World Commission on Protected
settlement, poaching, illegal mining and wildfires. In fact, many Areas’ (WCPA) Connectivity Conservation Specialist Group
types of linear infrastructure are built together – for example, (CCSG) has established the Transport Working Group
roads are typically required to support the construction and (TWG) (see Figure 2). Formed in 2016, the CCSG serves as
maintenance of railways, powerlines, pipelines and canals. the global hub for providing scientific, policy and technical
All told, expanding LTI presents a major challenge to efforts advice that mainstreams connectivity conservation as a
working to maintain, enhance and restore effective ecological nature-based solution to enhance the integrity of PCAs, save
corridors that link larger ecological networks for conservation. biodiversity and increase resilience to climate change across
terrestrial, freshwater and marine ecosystems. In turn, the
LTI enables people and resources to move more safely TWG provides guidance to a wide diversity of audiences,
and efficiently across landscapes. As a consequence, it including PCA managers and staff, government ministries
also increases access to areas that may have previously and agencies, investors in linear infrastructure, connectivity
been inaccessible or difficult to access, especially PCAs, conservation experts, land use and transportation planners,
ecological corridors, and ecological networks. For example, civil and construction engineers, communities, civil society
studies of patterns of forest loss in frontier wilderness areas organizations and businesses. Together, members of the
demonstrate a clear link between road development and Working Group seek to promote application of the mitigation
the acceleration of wide-spread clearing (Southworth et al., hierarchy’ through strategies that foremost avoid, and
2011). For this reason, the first cut into an intact ecosystem otherwise minimise, mitigate, restore and compensate (or
is the most destructive and should be avoided as the highest offset) the impacts of linear transport systems on ecological
priority safeguard (see for example Figure 3 of fishbone connectivity. TWG objectives include:
clearing in the Amazon, Chapter 2). Further, following road
development, hunting of wildlife for local consumption and • Policy – Informing legislative, administrative and
markets, along with poaching for illegal trade, often arise. regulatory efforts by providing examples of standards,
For example, as habitats adjacent to roads in many parts of laws, regulations, policies and other legal provisions for
Asia, Africa and South America now frequently support lower planning and implementing ecologically sensitive projects
species richness and abundance, habitats further from roads that meet community needs.
are increasingly encroached upon to harvest natural resources
and wildlife (e.g. Laurance et al., 2006). Unfortunately, many • Science – Identifying current and future research needs
developing countries lack the controls and regulations to and increasing generation, compilation and dissemination
prevent poaching and illegal logging, settlement and land of information including monitoring and analytical
clearing, and consequently, roads, railways and canals methods for assessment, identification and prioritization
are often the harbinger of further ecological damage and of mitigation locations and evaluation of measures taken.
ecosystem collapse. Recognising the likelihood and severity
of indirect and flow-on effects is a critical part of planning, • Finance – Collecting, evaluating and conveying
designing, constructing and operating new transport projects understanding off financial tools that encourage
and avoiding these effects should always be the highest design and implementation of best practices, including
priority. And if they can’t be avoided, decisions to build the international funding institutions’ safeguard mechanisms.
infrastructure should be reconsidered.
• Culture – Engaging and collaborating at international,
A key global strategy for the conservation of biodiversity is to regional, national and sub-national levels to achieve
increase the extent, connectivity and integrity of PCAs and their best practices sensitive to the needs and input of local
associated lands and waters around the world (CBD, 2018b). communities and Indigenous peoples.
As development pressures increase, many PCAs are facing
greater threats from both within and outside their boundaries, • Practice – Providing technical advice, design expertise and
including the wildlife that move in and out of them. One such engineering techniques that support innovation, efficiency
factor is the development of LTI which can often put at risk and effectiveness implementing the mitigation hierarchy.
much of the progress made over the last five decades to design
and manage PCAs through ecosystem-based approaches • Resilience – Identifying strategies that promote ecological
and shift the emphasis from individual PCAs to protected area connectivity and address the need for infrastructure to be
systems and ecological networks (Gross et al., 2016). more resilient to natural disasters and the long-term effects
of climate change.

Building a community of transport

ecologists and partners Objectives of this Technical Report
The scientific community has issued repeated calls for As transport ecology is a rapidly growing science, the TWG
improved policies and practices to reduce the impact of has increasingly collaborated with global partners to provide
transport systems on nature (e.g. Laurance et al., 2014; improved guidance at various spatial and temporal scales for

8 Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals

 1. Introduction

Figure 2: The Transport Working Group operates under the World Commission on Protected Areas – one of six IUCN expert commissions – and its Connectivity
Conservation Specialist Group. © Kendra Hoff / CLLC

A site visit to a wildlife underpass in the Atlantic Forest of Argentina. © Diego Varela

Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals 9

 1. Introduction

more ecologically permeable linear transport systems that wildlife overpasses and underpasses) for a certain species,
are less lethal to wildlife. Building on publication of the IUCN is beyond the scope of this report. In addition, an in-depth
Guidelines for conserving connectivity through ecological treatment of the social impacts of infrastructure development
networks and corridors (Hilty et al., 2020), the objective of is also beyond its scope. To learn more of impacts and
this Technical Report is to provide PCA managers, transport their solutions that are not addressed here, readers are
practitioners from government and private industry and encouraged to consult the resources provided in Annex 2.
other stakeholders with an overview of feasible, science-
based and context-sensitive strategies that are practical and Chapter 2 of this report introduces the various direct and
effective. Ultimately, these measures can be deployed in a indirect impacts that roads, railways and canals can have
variety of ways to limit the impacts of roads, railways and on nature. These range from habitat loss to fragmentation,
canals on biodiversity and achieve more effective avoidance, disruption of wildlife movement, and direct mortality. It also
minimisation, mitigation, restoration and compensation (or details the known similarities and differences between the
offset) measures that maximize the ecological connectivity of impacts of such infrastructure and how ecosystems can be
PCAs, as well as reduce the direct mortality of wildlife caused affected well beyond the direct areas of construction and
by these transport systems. Each chapter includes at least operation.
one informative and illustrative box. Stories or examples in
these boxes were chosen to represent diverse geographies, To improve the ecological sustainability of LTI within and
modes of transport, challenges and solutions. These contri­ outside PCAs, Chapter 3 highlights the importance of having
butions were collected from TWG members from around the upstream policies and planning that reflect best-practices to
world and are intended to highlight specific examples and balance environmental, social and economic benefits. This
practical applications of the concepts discussed in the text. includes incorporating climate risk and applying the mitigation
hierarchy to better safeguard PCAs and biodiversity. Further
The publication is not intended to enumerate the many sections consider the environmental, social and cultural
knowledge gaps that exist in the field nor develop a research safeguard policies that are increasingly applied to manage
agenda to address these shortfalls. The specific details of risks of often large investments in infrastructure.
the numerous strategies and techniques to avoid, minimise,
mitigate, restore and compensate (or offset) for the impacts Chapter 4 emphasises the importance of more
of LTI on biodiversity, such as the size of a wildlife crossing comprehensive understanding of ecosystems and
structure (also often referred to as wildlife passages and development plans in and across countries, as well as

Pronghorn antelope (Antilocapra americana) killed by a collision with a train in the USA. © Kestrel Aerial Services

10 Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals

 1. Introduction

Key information – Objective of this publication

The objective of this Technical Report is to provide protected area managers, transport practitioners from government and
private industry, and other stakeholders with an overview of feasible, science-based, and context-sensitive best practices.
Ultimately, they can be deployed in a variety of ways to limit the impacts of roads, railways and canals on biodiversity and
achieve more effective avoidance and mitigation measures that maximise the ecological connectivity of protected and
conserved areas, as well as to reduce direct mortality of wildlife caused by these transport systems.

conducting formal environmental assessments for all projects Consent” including freedom to information, access to justice
to achieve no net loss or net gain of biodiversity. The role and engagement in environmental assessment processes.
of strategic environmental assessments and project level
environmental impact assessments is discussed, as well as The importance of investment decisions in achieving more
the processes and practices that can better apply available sustainable outcomes is covered in Chapter 6. The various
scientific information to make decisions with the best possible sources and mechanisms for funding LTI development are
environmental, social and financial outcomes. succinctly described, including the general types of public
and private sector institutions that are active. Furthermore, the
Chapter 5 highlights the importance of public participation chapter covers specific lending policies of major institutions
to avoid negative consequences often associated with LTI related to the environment and biodiversity and offers insights
development. A number of existing international frameworks for improving related outcomes.
are discussed that emphasise full, effective and genuine
participation of local communities and Indigenous peoples Chapter 7 covers the diversity of mitigation strategies that can
and are applicable to such projects to increase their potential be employed if project impacts are unavoidable when building
to benefit all stakeholders. Additional sections detail the new or upgrading existing LTI. Additionally, it emphasises the
applicability of the legal principle of “Free, Prior and Informed importance of defining mitigation objectives and discusses

Community members gather to celebrate one of the first wildlife overpasses in Asia, the 140m-long and 44m-wide Mandai Eco-Link@BKE ecological bridge
in Singapore. Covered with native plant and tree species and incorporating specialised fencing, the overpass was designed for use by species such as Sunda
pangolins (Manis javanica) and Palm civets (Paradoxurus hermaphroditus). © Rodney van der Ree

Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals 11

 1. Introduction

The highest railroad on Earth, the Qinghai-Tibet Railway transports visitors over China’s Wubei Underpass. © Wenjing Xu

Tibetan antelope (Pantholops hodgsonii), an iconic species to the area, use the Wubei Underpass to migrate between wintering grounds in the Sanjiangyuan Nature
Reserve and calving grounds in the Hoh-Xil Nature Reserve. © Nyanpo Yurtse / Environment Protection Association

these in relation to a diverse suite of species. A final section evaluation is so important, what can be assessed and
provides guidance on how best to determine the location of approaches for designing and conducting effective studies.
necessary mitigation measures.
Chapter 9 discusses best practices for the construction,
Monitoring and evaluation is equally important for under­ operation and maintenance of LTI that can minimise environ­
standing the effectiveness of PCA management, as well as mental impacts of projects. A number of relatively simple
all mitigation, compensation or restoration measures that measures are detailed that can limit negative effects from the
are implemented. Chapter 8 highlights why performance first tree felled throughout the lifespan of a specific project.

12 Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals

 1. Introduction

Box 1

Salamander-friendly ramps and tunnels for safe passage in Waterton Lakes National Park, Alberta,
Canada

Key lesson: Roads and curbsides can impede important annual migrations of slow-moving amphibians, but creative
solutions are available to mitigate their blockage. This experience in Waterton Lakes National Park (Canada) is one of
discovery, observation, community engagement, research and evaluation.

In 1991, a population of long-toed salamanders (Ambystoma macrodactylum) was first discovered in Waterton Lakes
National Park when a park biologist observed that their migration to and from a nearby lake was interrupted by newly
constructed curbs and sidewalks along a road. Salamanders had difficulty climbing the steep curbs, backing up large
numbers along the road to be run over by vehicles.

Park biologists tested and monitored several alternatives to help reduce salamander road mortality. Ramps were an easy
solution though salamanders still needed to cross the road surface. However, the amphibians had difficulty climbing some
of the smoother curbs. Smooth
curbs were replaced with new,
gently sloped cement curbs,
roughened’ to provide toeholds for
climbing salamanders. These were
much more effective in keeping
salamanders moving.

To preserve migrations, four

tunnels were installed as wildlife
underpasses for salamanders in
2008. Drift fences were used to
direct salamanders toward tunnel
entrances. Subsequent research
showed that salamander road
mortality decreased from 10% of
the population to 2% following
installation of tunnels and fences.
In one season, researchers
documented a total of 104
salamanders using tunnels, 23%
of the immigrating population.
Salamanders were 20 times more
likely to use tunnels when traveling
to the breeding site than when
leaving the site and road-related
mortality decreased from 10% of
the population to <2%.

This case study is an example

of how seemingly undetectable
wildlife, and their critical annual
migrations, can be interrupted
by standard road features.
Salamander-friendly curbs and
tunnels are tools that have helped
reduce mortality and provide safe Construction of a salamander-friendly underpass tunnel in Waterton Lakes National Park, Alberta, Canada.
passage. © Cyndi Smith, Parks Canada

Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals 13

 1. Introduction

Box 2

Stakeholder engagement to avoid railway impacts to Chitwan and Parsa National Parks, Nepal

Key lesson: Linear infrastructure projects can avoid critical landscapes through proactive planning, collaboration and
coordination between project developers and conservation stakeholders.

Nepal’s Chitwan and Parsa National Parks are some of the most important protected areas in the Terai Arc Landscape,
relatively unfragmented and rich in wildlife, especially tigers.

In 2010, this landscape, which includes a UNESCO World Heritage Site, came under threat. A feasibility study was
conducted for a section of the proposed Asia East-West Electric railway alignment which would pass through southern
portions of Chitwan and Parsa National Parks. This option would have had serious impacts on the ecological connectivity of
the region. In total, two alignments were proposed; one through the parks (recommended) and one outside (alternate).

Nepal’s national parks agency was against the recommended alignment and called for a re-assessment workshop.
Alignment feasibility discussions were attended by many government and NGO stakeholders who ultimately agreed on
the alternate alignment with the railway passing outside the national parks. While economics were not a primary factor in
decision making, it was revealed after the fact that unit construction costs per km also were lower outside the protected
areas and better served the local communities.

Several recommendations were made including wildlife crossing structures, tunnels, sound barriers and a lower design
speed adjacent to the protected areas. As of 2023, an environmental impact assessment (EIA) is being prepared for this
section. Of great concern is the railway alignment through the critically important Barandabhar corridor and proximity to
Beeshazari Lake, a Ramsar site.

This case study is a successful example of the rarely used avoidance’ part of the mitigation hierarchy. Meetings among
stakeholders resulted in shifting the alignment outside the national parks and a success for conservation.

Proposed alignments of East-West Railway Section 4, Tamsariya to Simara. Recommended Alignment (red line) traverses the southern part and border
of Chitwan and Parsa National Parks (dark green). The Alternate Alignment (blue line) follows the Mahendra Highway and was eventually adopted as the
preferred alignment despite construction of several tunnels near Hetauda. © WWF-Nepal

14 Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals

 1. Introduction

In conclusion, Chapter 10 reiterates key messages and recom­ • International organizations and conventions, such
mendations for the reader, along with an invitation to further as IUCN, the United Nations Environment Program,
advance this important field of science, policy and practice. Convention on Migratory Species, Convention on
Biological Diversity, G7 and G20, are increasingly
recognising the potential ecological impacts of
Key messages in this chapter transport infrastructure and the critical importance
of planning, designing, building and managing such
• The ecological connectivity of the world’s PCAs and infrastructure using nature-based solutions.
other natural areas is being fragmented, and their
effective management is at risk. • Collaborative networks of practitioners in
government, NGO, academia, finance, and industry
• LTI development, such as roads, railways and canals, – such as the Transport Working Group – are needed
is increasing around the world and more attention to catalyse development and application of best
needs to be paid to reducing its negative impacts on practices.
biodiversity, PCAs, wildlife habitat and movement,
and natural processes and ecosystem services.

Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals 15

 2. Impacts

Part 2

The impacts of roads, railways and canals

on wildlife, protected and conserved areas
and ecological connectivity

African lions (Panthera leo) rest on the railway in Balule Nature Reserve, South Africa © Pete Eastwood / Hannah de Villiers

Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals 17

 2. Impacts

The construction and operation of roads, railways and canals enforcement are limited. For example, there are nearly three
have a range of diverse effects on wildlife, PCAs and natural kilometres of illegal roads for every kilometre of legal road
areas in both intact and human-dominated landscapes in the Brazilian Amazon, and nearly 95% of all deforestation
(Dogherty et al., 1995; van der Ree et al., 2015a; Borda- there occurs within 5.5 km of roads (Barber et al., 2014).
de-Água et al. 2017). The impacts range from habitat loss Therefore, the proliferation of unplanned illegal roads and
and fragmentation to disruption of animal movement and other infrastructure in remote and intact ecosystems is
increases in animal mortality. Described below are various one of the most serious conservation problems in tropical
types of impacts that these three modes of transport can countries today. In extreme cases, the construction of roads
cause to PCAs, associated habitats and the distribution of and railways may lead to the downgrading, downsizing or
wildlife populations. degazettement of the PCAs they pass through (Mascia &
Pailler 2011; Qin et al., 2019).

Habitat loss
The initial construction and subsequent widening and Key information –
maintenance of LTI results in the loss of wildlife habitat by Linear transport infrastructure:
transforming the natural environment into pavement, dirt Opening Pandora’s Box’
tracks, railway lines, canals and subsequent cleared rights-
of-way. Low vagility wildlife, those found in relatively low
densities, or others with low reproductive rates, tend to be Road, railway and canal infrastructure expansion can
the most sensitive to habitat loss. Other construction impacts have severe impacts on ecosystems and species,
include noise from blasting, machinery and pile-driving, night- especially in and around protected and conserved areas.
lighting as well as off-site impacts such as quarries for gravel, Some of these environmental problems include:
sand and cement.
• The loss, fragmentation and degradation of habitat
Roads, railways and canals and other infrastructure can • Increased rates of hunting and poaching of wildlife
have particularly deleterious effects, potentially opening a • Illegal mining, logging and other extractive industries
host of ongoing environmental problems (Laurance et al., • Pollution due to noise, light, vibrations and
2015). Infrastructure plays a key role in opening otherwise chemicals from vehicles and trains
intact forested regions to legal and illegal logging, hunting, • Increased frequency and intensity of wildfires
mining and settlement (Figure 4; Laurance et al., 2014; • Land speculation
Pedlowski et al., 2005). The impacts of infrastructure on • Illegal settlements
wildlife and ecosystems are often exacerbated where laws or

Figure 3: A typical pattern of fishbone’ deforestation arrayed along the edges of expanding roads in the Amazon © Grégoire Dubois

18 Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals

 2. Impacts

Figure 4: LTI often creates a Pandora’s Box’ effect on the landscape by providing easier access to natural resources, thus intensifying environmental exploitation and
degradation. © Julie Johnson / Madison Mayfield, courtesy Center for Large Landscape Conservation

Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals 19

 2. Impacts

Two people hide behind excavation machinery as an Asian elephant (Elephas maximus) approaches on a recently cleared roadway in Sabah, Malaysia. © Gary Tabor

A serval (Leptailurus serval) crossing a road in South Africa. Species preferring cover or considered shy or elusive, such as many wild felines, can experience a barrier
effect when approaching roads, rails or canals. Variations in noise, vibrations and vehicle movement can determine barrier effect severity. © Robert Ament

20 Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals

 2. Impacts

Habitat degradation overall lower population viability. These harmful effects have
underscored the need to maintain, enhance and restore
Habitat quality, which is especially important for the long- wildlife movements across LTI to sustain genetic interchange.
term management of PCAs, often declines near LTI. Roads
creates edge effects, which are physical and biological High-volume and high-speed roads and railways can be
changes associated with the often-abrupt edge of linear considerable barriers to animal movement and population
clearings, for example changing microclimates which can interchange. Some studies have shown that even lesser,
increase abundance of edge-dwelling wildlife or decrease secondary highways and unpaved roads can impede animal
abundance of interior species (Murcia, 1995). Railways have movements by acting as complete barriers or partial filters.
similar types of edge effects as roads, which typically increase Even the smallest roads with low traffic volumes can be
the abundance of plant species that proliferate along edges, significant barriers and cause mortality to susceptible species,
including facilitating the spread of invasive plant species. such as amphibians and reptiles. Generally, this barrier effect
Canals are typically built and managed for water control and increases with road width, traffic volume and speed, as well
delivery, and their routes and edge effects can have varying as noise, vibration and habitat alteration (Figure 5).
impacts on habitat quality, as well as influencing availability
of surface water and belowground reservoirs, depending on Wildlife avoidance of gaps in habitat due to LTI is a primary
seasonal rainfall and management regimes. cause of connectivity loss, and the avoidance of actual road
surfaces can also play a role for some species (Ford & Fahrig,
Traffic noise, lighting and chemical pollution from vehicles and 2008; D’Amico et al., 2016). Canals can be significant barriers
trains can decrease habitat quality by making areas unsuitable to animal movement, particularly if they do not swim or if
for the persistence of some organisms, such as the impact there are swift currents or steep embankments. As a type of
of pollution on native forest plants or by sensory disturbance priority infrastructure in an increasingly water-thirsty world,
that leads to behavioural avoidance by affected species canals deserve more attention with regards to their impacts
(Benitez-Lopez et al., 2010; Parris, 2015; Blackwell, 2015). on wildlife and ecological connectivity. The global extent of
The ecological impacts of vehicle and train noise can extend reduced movement of mammals in areas with a high human
for many hundreds of metres into adjacent habitats, and footprint has recently been documented, with reductions of
there is increasing recognition of its significance at influencing one-half to one-third observed (Tucker et al. 2018). Roads,
wildlife populations, especially birds and amphibians (e.g. railways and navigable waterways are also significant
Cooke et al., 2020). The severity of the impacts of noise contributors to the Human Footprint Index and are thus
is a function of the type, volume and speed of vehicular major drivers of changes in wildlife movements, population
traffic and trains, as well as topography and the design of persistence and ecosystem processes.
the road or railway (Ware et al., 2015). While the amount
of artificial lighting is greatest in urban areas, even relatively
small amounts of lighting in natural areas can have significant Animal mortality
impacts on light-sensitive species of wildlife (Longcore &
Rich 2004). Roads, railways and canals also impact the Mortality from collisions is the most visible and arguably the
hydrological, geomorphological and chemical features of most significant impact of vehicles and trains on wildlife.
a landscape by altering the flow of water, chemicals and
sediment across the landscape and increasing erosion and
landslides. Impacts vary according to rainfall, soil stability
and topography, and each physical change affects how
floodplains function and the condition of aquatic systems.

Barrier and filter effects

Structural ecological connectivity is a measure of habi­tat
permeability based on the physical features and arrange­
ments of habitat patches, disturbances and other landscape
elements important for organisms to move through their
environment (Hilty et al., 2019). For wildlife populations to
persist, they rely on functional connectivity, a description of
how well genes, gametes, propagules or individuals actually
move through the land (Rudnick et al., 2012). High levels
of functional connectivity occur when the areas within and
between important habitats are free of barriers, allowing
wildlife to move through them to meet their biological
needs. Reduced connectivity and limited movement due
Figure 5: Factors influencing the severity of barrier effects on species and their
to LTI may result in higher wildlife mortality, lower fitness free movement across LTI © Mary Collins / CLLC, adapted from Wildlife Institute
and reproduction rates, ultimately smaller populations, and of India

Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals 21

 2. Impacts

With increasing lack of forest canopy connectivity over LTI, arboreal species risk mortality when forced to cross on the ground. A white-faced capuchin (Cebus
imitator) lies dead along Route 32 in Braulio Carrillo National Park, Costa Rica. © Daniela Araya-Gamboa / Panthera

Similarly, many species drown in canals when attempting to success (Hels & Buchwald, 2001; Dorsey et al., 2015). In
cross or accessing water for drinking. This has an immediate the case of canals, wildlife can become trapped if they enter
effect on populations and can have severe consequences the canal and are unable to climb out. Many species of
for the long-term survival of wildlife that are rare, occur at wildlife drown while attempting to cross canals in a variety of
low-densities or have low reproductive potential. Species landscapes, many of which go undetected (Rautenstrauch
that are active during the day or have peaks of activity at & Krausman 1989; Peris & Morales 2004; Albanesi et al.,
dawn and dusk, which corresponds to higher volumes of 2016). Wildlife mortality directly affects population size and
traffic, are typically more prone to collisions than nocturnal the risk of extinction, but also contributes to the overall
species. For example, day-active langurs are susceptible barrier effect and loss of genetic diversity (Jackson & Fahrig
to road mortality in parts of Asia (Areendan & Pasha, 2000; 2011; Ascensao et al., 2013).
Rajvanshi et al., 2001), and the highest rates of collision
between Eastern Grey Kangaroos and trains in south-east
Australia occur at dawn and dusk (Visintin et al., 2018). Attraction and corridor effect
However, nocturnal species that hunt along roads, such as
owls, can experience high rates of mortality, even though Roads, railways and canals can attract animals which benefit
traffic volumes are relatively low. On railways, the rate at from the resources produced directly or indirectly in the
which a species moves and the propensity of some species linear corridors (Lambertucci et al., 2009). Carcasses from
to travel along railways also influences mortality and crossing WVC, grain spillage on railway tracks (e.g. Gangadharan

22 Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals

 2. Impacts

et al., 2017), pavement surfaces that are warmer than the of roads, railways and canals can be important habitat and
adjacent habitat (e.g. Tanner & Perry 2007), and freshwater possibly the only remaining functional habitat for some
sources can attract a variety of wildlife. Attraction can also species in highly developed and fragmented landscapes
be a result of conditions related to adjacent habitat (nesting, (e.g. Bennett & van der Ree, 2001). The verge habitat can
living space) or food found in the cleared areas adjacent also serve as travel corridors between patches of important
to linear infrastructure, often called verges. In some cases, habitat, facilitating dispersal and range extensions of some
verges support abundant populations of small mammals, species. However, this attraction to the infrastructure can
insects and birds, as well as native plant species. Verges result in the creation of sink’ habitats where the rate of

Juvenile bighorn sheep (Ovis canadensis) habituated to a road in the western USA. In winter months, salted roads attract animals seeking minerals but increases
exposure to traffic strikes. © Adobe Stock

African wild dogs (Lycaon pictus) using a rail line as a movement corridor in the Balule Nature Reserve, South Africa © Hannah de Villiers

Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals 23

 2. Impacts

A community of western chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes verus) crossing a road in Bossou, Guinea. The negative impacts of major roads on chimpanzee populations
across West Africa can extend for more than 17 km on both sides. © Dr Kimberley Hockings

mortality from WVC exceeds the benefits provided by the work has shown that these effect zones can be extremely
verge habitat, resulting in an overall decline in the population large – up to 17.2 km for the critically endangered Western
(Mumme et al., 2020). Chimpanzee (Andrasi et al., 2021) – and that these effects
must be better accounted for in impact assessments of
projects.

Impacts extend beyond the

infrastructure corridor
Differences in impacts among
The spatial extent and severity of many of the ecological roads, railways and canals
impacts of LTI is, among others, influenced by the size of the
road, rail or canal, density of the network, the type, volume Less is known about the impacts of railways on PCAs,
and speed of the vehicles, type of road surface, and other wildlife and their habitats than roads, and canals even
design features (Jaeger et al., 2005). These impacts extend less so. Nonetheless, there is clear overlap in many of the
well beyond the footprint, in some cases thousands of impacts and procedures applied to the management of
metres away (Benitez-Lopez et al., 2010), and form an effect roads that are frequently applied to railways and can also
zone’ (Forman & Alexander, 1998; see also Figures 6, 7, 8). be applied to canals. Different mitigation approaches may
This concept has been applied to railways (e.g. Lucas et be used where the two differ (Borda-de-Água et al., 2017;
al., 2017) and could similarly be applied to canals. The road St Clair et al., 2017). While the types of impacts of railways
effect zone has been quantified for many species, including are broadly similar to roads (e.g. habitat loss, habitat
African forest elephants (Barnes et al., 1991), impala (Mtui, degradation, barrier and filter effects, wildlife mortality,
2014), frogs (Eigenbrod et al., 2009) and insectivorous bats sensory disturbance, hydrological modification, chemical
(Bhardwaj et al., 2021), and all exhibited lower densities or pollution), they are generally considered less severe.
activity levels near roads. In China, the road effect zone for
Siberian weasels extended 50 metres beyond the edge of However, there is increasing evidence that some impacts of
the road (Kong et al., 2013). In the same study, the effect railways and trains can exceed those on roads. For example,
on 17 bird species was variable, with the largest road effect many high-speed railway corridors may be con­tinuously
zone extending greater than 150 metres from the road. In fenced for tens or even hundreds of kilometres, creating an
India’s Bandipur National Park, research indicates that each impermeable barrier for many species. In these situations,
kilometre of road impacts at least 10 hectares of adjacent wildlife crossing structures should be installed (see Chapter
habitat (Raman, 2011). In Swedish Natura 2000 areas – 7). In Sweden, the number of reported ungulate deaths
the network of PCAs that is a cornerstone for biodiversity per kilometre of generally unfenced railway exceeds that
conservation within the European Union – substantial habitat of highways, many of which are fenced (Seiler & Olsson,
degradation and reduced wildlife densities are found within 2017). Railways cause similar edge effects as roads, which
one kilometre of roads and railways (Helldin, 2019). Recent typically increase the abundance, diversity, and growth rates

24 Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals

 2. Impacts

Figure 6: Impacts of roads on the environment © Julie Johnson / Madison Mayfield, courtesy Center for Large Landscape Conservation

Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals 25

 2. Impacts

Figure 7: Impacts of rails on the environment © Julie Johnson / Madison Mayfield, courtesy Center for Large Landscape Conservation

26 Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals

 2. Impacts

Figure 8: Impacts of canals on the environment © Julie Johnson / Madison Mayfield, courtesy Center for Large Landscape Conservation

Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals 27

 2. Impacts

Box 3

Addressing wildlife-vehicle collisions with mule deer and pronghorn on Highway 191, Wyoming, USA

Key lesson: The influence of roads on migratory movements can be mitigated with species- and context-dependent
measures.

The installation of wildlife crossing structures can reduce WVC and maintain ecological connectivity. In many projects,
wildlife underpasses are the most common type of crossing structure due to their relatively low construction cost compared
to overpasses, and their greater flexibility in varied topography. However, species-specific use must be considered to
ensure that they are effective and maximally beneficial.

A map of five-year reduction in animal deaths, represented by dots, in the area near Trappers Point, Wyoming, after over- and underpasses were installed
along US Highway 191. Reproduced with permission from Wild Migrations: Atlas of Wyoming’s Ungulates, Oregon State University Press
© 2018 University of Wyoming and University of Oregon

28 Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals

 2. Impacts

Box 3 (continued)

US Highway 191 is located in western Wyoming, USA. The two-lane highway bisects important summer and winter
habitat for migratory mule deer (Odocoileus virginianus) and pronghorn (Antilocarpa americana). To better protect key
migratory paths along this increasingly popular tourist route to Grand Teton and Yellowstone National Parks, the Wyoming
Department of Transportation installed six underpasses and two overpasses. Prior to installation, WVCs with all species
averaged about 85 per year. After the first three years, WVCs were reduced by 81% and total average road-killed to 16 per
year. Post-construction monitoring revealed that 93% of observed pronghorn crossings utilized the overpasses compared
to underpasses, highlighting the importance of overpasses for this species and the need for species-specific design
planning Sawyer et al., 2016). While overpasses can carry a significantly higher construction cost, the reduction of WVCs
and cost savings associated with accidents (property damage, human injury or fatality) made a strong case for these safe
passage investments by road agencies.

Reference
Sawyer, H., Rodgers, P.A., and Hart, T. (2016). Pronghorn and mule deer use of underpasses and overpasses along U.S.
Highway 191. Wildlife Society Bulletin 40(2):211–216. https://doi.org/10.1002/wsb.650.

Mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus) buck on the edge of a road © Adobe Stock

of adjacent vegetation (St Clair et al., 2019) and the spread of The position of canals in the landscape is reliant on topography
invasive plant species. Like roads, train collisions with wildlife for water flow and they are usually independent of paved
produce carcasses that can attract and increase mortality risk roads or railways. The very few studies about the impacts of
for scavenging species (Whittington et al., 2005). Trains can canals on wildlife have shown they can be a significant cause
also provide additional food attractants via spilled agricultural of mortality, primarily for small- and medium-sized wildlife. For
products from cars and gates (Gangadharan et al., 2017). In example, drowning in canals has been found to be the second
combination, these features attract wide-ranging, omnivorous highest cause of mortality for wild boars in Spain (Rosell et al.,
species like bears, and are likely to contribute to train-caused 2001). The rate of wildlife mortality due to drowning in canals
mortality of brown bears in many areas (Waller & Servheen, is likely related to the speed of water flow and the height,
2005; Dorsey et al., 2015; Gangadharan et al., 2017, St Clair gradient and surface of the embankment, as well as species-
et al., 2019). specific traits. Like roads, canals can fragment habitat for

Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals 29

 2. Impacts

many species, especially if very wide or if fences are used to • LTI increases barrier and filter effects reducing the
reduce human entry. Unlike roads and railways, canals have ability of wildlife to move within and among habitats.
less potential to spread chemical pollutants and emit noise,
and also have negligible vibration. Despite the growing need • Roads, railways and canals attract some species
for irrigation worldwide, the density of canal networks on the of wildlife, increasing the rate of mortality due
landscape is relatively low, unlike the growing road and rail to collisions and drowning, ultimately reducing
networks throughout many parts of the world today. population sizes and increasing the risk of extinction.

• The ecological impacts of LTI extend beyond the

Key messages in this chapter direct footprint of the road, railway, or canal to form
an effect zone’, impacting species and adjacent
• The construction, operation, and maintenance of habitats for hundreds to thousands of metres.
roads, railways and canals have a range of direct
impacts including the loss, fragmentation and • Many of the impacts of roads, railway and canals
degradation of habitat, as well as disrupting animal are similar but vary in severity and extent. However,
movement and increasing rates of wildlife mortality. knowledge of the impacts vary among the three
modes of transport and additional research,
• Edge effects’ causing physical and biological especially on railways and canals, is urgently
changes in adjacent ecosystems, and hydrological, required to accurately quantify impacts.
geomorphological and chemical changes are
common impacts of LTI.

30 Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals

 3. Legislation, policies and planning

Part 3

Legislation, policies and planning to improve the

sustainability of linear transport infrastructure

A male caribou (Rangifer tarandus) walks across a river valley in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska, USA, one of the least disturbed ecosystems on
Earth. © Joris Beugels / Unsplash

Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals 31

 3. Legislation, policies and planning

Laws, regulations, policies and guidelines are fundamental The importance of upstream planning:
to improving the ecological sustainability of LTI within and
outside PCAs and ecological corridors to ensure maximum
A land use planning approach
functionality of ecological networks. Sound guidance can
provide proponents, regulators and financial investors with The primary strategy to avoid the negative environmental
a framework to assess potential impacts, make informed and social impacts of new linear infrastructure is to develop
planning and design decisions and approve and fund projects in locations which optimise social and economic
projects that meet strict criteria. The use of best practices benefits, while minimising environmental and biodiversity
should be supported by legislation and policies that impacts. Integrated land use planning is a proven approach
require consistently high standards of planning, design and that has the potential to assist in achieving this win-win
operation of transportation projects that can be applied outcome, especially in conjunction with long-term PCA
to new projects and as retrofits to existing infrastructure. planning (Spoelder et al., 2015). An integrated land use
All levels of government should develop and adopt these planning approach is “essentially a mechanism for decision
policies and guidelines as a matter of priority, and ensure support to guide stakeholders in selecting the best
they are regularly updated with robust, science-based sustainable land use options which are consistent with their
evidence and understanding. objectives. This approach is participatory and recognises the

Figure 9: An example of the diversity of spatial land use layers that can be considered in upstream planning, including ecological, social and economic factors
© Wildlife Conservation Trust

32 Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals

 3. Legislation, policies and planning

rights of all stakeholders” (FAO, 1999). A key part of such an loss of ecosystem services, will ensure that decisions are
approach is ensuring that infrastructure planning considers made using all available information. Integrated planning
a wide range of information to ensure that investment also involves quantifying the ecosystem services potentially
maximises utility and provides social, environmental and affected by a project that should also be an integral part
economic benefits. Some tangible ways to achieve this is of the assessment process (Mandle et al., 2016). In such
to take a whole-of-landscape approach, bundle multiple cases, ecosystem services are simply “the benefits people
projects within the same development corridor and use multi- obtain from ecosystems,” (MEA, 2005), and the benefits that
criteria analyses to aid in transparent and objective decision infrastructure derives from ecosystem services can include,
making (Vilela et al., 2020). Ensuring that environmental and for example, sediment retention and flood regulation, which
social aspects are considered early in planning processes significantly lower the risk of floods, landslides, and erosion.
can reduce negative impacts and lessen the need for Evaluation of the critical benefits that specific locations
investment in social and environmental mitigation measures. confer to development along with their value for ecosystem
To achieve this, plans, policies and programmes (PPPs) that services, such as air and water purification, and habitat, can
promote sustainable land use and a comprehensive and then inform infrastructure planning. This type of assessment
strategic approach to infrastructure are necessary and will be underpins land use planning, given that infrastructure is often
strongest when enshrined in national law (UNEP, 2022b,c,e). linked to other forms of anthropogenic intensification including
This includes strategic environmental assessments (SEAs) agriculture, mining, and settlement (Laurance et al., 2009).
at the earliest stage of decision making (see Chapter 4). Including ecological connectivity in planning processes for
Therefore, an integrated approach requires coordination and LTI can assist to maintain ecosystem functions, reduce WVC,
collaboration among key stakeholders (e.g. Ament et al., and safeguard biodiversity.
2021; Simeonova et al., 2019).

Reliable and comprehensive information can help to identify

the social, environmental and economic costs and benefits
Incorporating climate risk in
of proposed infrastructure projects. Transparent accounting infrastructure planning and policy
of the economic value of the traditional costs and benefits
of a project, such as construction costs and improved According to the 6th report of the Intergovernmental Panel on
travel times as well as environmental costs, such as the Climate Change (IPCC), the increasing intensity and frequency

Flooded road and rail intersection. Building resilient infrastructure can reduce vulnerability to ongoing and predicted catastrophic threats of climate change.
© Adobe Stock

Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals 33

 3. Legislation, policies and planning

of climate and weather extremes, such as droughts, floods, making framework. When the mitigation hierarchy is applied
cyclones, heat waves, and fires pose a significant threat according to IFC Performance Standard 6, decisions can
to infrastructure and “[…] are increasingly vulnerable if be made to achieve no net loss (NNL) in ecological value
design standards do not account for changing climate as a minimum, or a net gain in value as an aspirational
conditions” (IPCC, 2021). To reduce risks, governments are goal. In recent years, biodiversity net gain (BNG) has been
increasing and expanding climate change adaptation plans embraced as the ultimate goal in many countries, particularly
and policies that, in part, protect long-term investments the United Kingdom (Bull & Brownlie, 2017; PAS, 2021).
in transport systems. If thoroughly considered, building When applied conscientiously, alone or in combination,
resilient infrastructure systems can reduce vulnerability to the the following hierarchy facilitates cost-effective and timely
predicted ongoing and often catastrophic threat of climate project implementation with measurable positive conservation
change, such as severe weather events (Gariano & Guzzetti, outcomes.
2016). Therefore, ecosystem-based adaptation approaches
to planning should become a cornerstone of LTI development Avoid impacts of development altogether as the first and most
to protect nature, people and infrastructure. Other important important approach in the mitigation hierarchy. Not taking an
considerations relate to the contribution of new or expanded action or parts of an action by preventing an impact is the
infrastructure on processes that may accelerate climate most effective way of safeguarding biodiversity. Avoidance
change, such as land use and land clearing (Reymondin et may be accomplished through spatial adjustments, such as
al., 2014). the relocation of activities or infrastructure away from critical
habitats. Infrastructure projects that avoid sensitive biodiversity
Information about climate risk must be incorporated into the areas may be longer than the most direct routes, however
decision making by financial institutions, transport planning they will have less need for expensive mitigation measures or
organizations and contracting companies. Evaluating how other offsets with lower ecological impacts overall. Alternative
changes in temperature and precipitation increases the risk alignments outside PCAs and avoiding ecological corridors can
of floods and landslides and thereby threatens infrastructure also best-consider constructability, economics, environmental
and the financial investment is critical. Furthermore, an impact, and access of local populations to benefit. The remain­
evaluation of this type and incorporation into EIAs can inform der of the mitigation hierarchy must still be considered even
the location of infrastructure projects to avoid PCAs, other when proposed infrastructure has been relocated because
high-risk natural areas and to conserve others that contribute there may still be impacts that require minimisation, mitigation,
toward reducing the frequency and severity of extreme restoration or compensation (or offsetting).
events. Climate risk should also be translated into the context
of ecological connectivity and infrastructure development as Minimise is applied when impacts cannot be completely
biodiversity must move in response to global climate change. avoided. Similar to avoidance, minimisation is a preventative
approach achieved through proactive measures to limit the
degree or magnitude of actions. Minimisation measures may
The mitigation hierarchy include short-term actions during construction to reduce soil
erosion or more permanent efforts during operation to reduce
The mitigation hierarchy (Figure 10) is key to EIA processes contamination from pollution. Minimisation activities are often
(see Chapter 4), as well as for achieving the desired result of carried out under an environmental management plan (EMP)
planning and designing infrastructure that better safeguards geared to reduce the project footprint. An EMP includes
PCAs, ecological connectivity, biodiversity and ecosystem directives to reduce disturbance, such as the preservation of
services. This hierarchy is a simple framework that allows tree canopy adjacent to roads, or a shortened construction
proponents to assess and address the impacts of infrastructure period.
with an initial focus on avoidance, and if not possible,
followed by minimisation, mitigation, restoration and finally, Mitigate is applied only when genuine efforts to avoid and
compensation (or offsetting) of residual impacts. There is minimise impacts have taken place. Mitigation measures are
some variation globally in the naming and exact terminology, often technological or construction strategies that are enacted
with some jurisdictions combining minimisation and mitigation to moderate, reduce or eliminate unavoidable impacts over
into the same approach, and others including reduction, time. Commonly used mitigation measures in infrastructure
rectification, or rehabilitation. In New Zealand, for example, the projects are noise and light barriers to prevent spillover into
approach is dubbed the Effects Management Hierarchy’ (CSBI, adjacent habitats, wildlife underpasses and overpasses with
2015), while the US Council on Environmental Quality includes associated directional and exclusionary fencing to provide
the hierarchy as part of its definition of mitigation’ (Protection of for ecological connectivity and minimise WVC, and escape
Environment, 2023). ramps in canals to prevent wildlife from drowning.

The hierarchy is central to the International Finance Corpora­ Restore refers to efforts within or adjacent to the construc­
tion’s Performance Standard 6: Biodiversity Conservation tion footprint that address unavoidable impacts to achieve
and Sustainable Management of Living Natural Resources NNL of biodiversity value or ecosystem services. Restoration
(IFC, 2012). This performance standard has been adopted involves measures to repair and rehabilitate ecosystem
by many development banks and other financial institutions, structure such as reforestation, or ecosystem function such
as well as governments and private industry as a decision- as functional ecological connectivity. Restoration is aimed

34 Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals

 3. Legislation, policies and planning

Figure 10: A depiction of varying approaches for applying the mitigation hierarchy © Julie Johnson / Madison Mayfield, courtesy Center for Large Landscape Conservation

Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals 35

 3. Legislation, policies and planning

A herd of plains zebra (Equus quagga) graze below the Nairobi-Mombasa Railway. Bisecting Nairobi National Park, the rail design allows for wildlife movement under
the tracks, but avoidance of the protected area was not taken into consideration. Consequently, the impacts of construction, maintenance and rail effects such as
noise, vibrations and movement, are now pervasive. © Martin / Adobe Stock

at reversing habitat degradation and typically occurs at or lateral agreements between two countries, multi-lateral banks
nearby to the site of an infrastructure project. Restoration is (e.g. World Bank, Asian Development Bank, InterAmerican
most effective when well-established, practical techniques Development Bank, African Development Bank and European
are maintained and monitored for long-term success (IFC, Bank for Reconstruction and Development), private developers
2012). Nevertheless, on their own, restoration measures are (e.g. toll roads) and private equity investors (e.g. multinational
rarely sufficient to achieve NNL consistent with biodiversity companies, pension funds, and sovereign wealth funds) (see
baselines (IFC, 2012). As result, a goal of NNL often Chapter 6 for a comprehensive summary). Globally, lenders
necessitates the pursuit of offsets. and sponsors are increasingly developing and adopting
requirements that include the protection of biodiversity as a
Compensate (or Offset) addresses impacts by replacing or condition of project approval or funding, part of what is often
substituting resources or environments that are typically outside known as environmental, social and governance (ESG) policies.
of the footprint of an infrastructure project that cannot be
avoided, minimised, mitigated or restored on site. Offsets should The International Finance Corporation (IFC) Performance
be measurable and significantly tip the scale’ toward achieving Standards (Figure 11) outline a widely adopted framework for
NNL of biodiversity and ecosystem services. Offsets are gen­ managing social and environmental risks. This comprehensive
erally characterised as: i) restoration offsets that rehabilitate and practical approach is considered the international bench­
degraded habitats, ecosystems, or ecosystem function, or ii) mark. Based on the IFC Performance Standards, the Equator
protection offsets that maintain biodiversity under threat of loss Principles’ are a framework for financial institutions to manage
(CSBI, 2015). Compensation usually involves payments as environmental and social risk in projects they fund. Whereas
offsets, such as to fund and implement management plans for all IFC Performance Standards are relevant to infrastructure
PCAs, support research that enhances biodiversity protection, or planning, Standards 1, 3, 4 and 6 are of particular interest to
enhance enforcement activities and infrastructure. planning LTI because they outline the need for an integrated
approach that addresses resource efficiency and biodiversity.
IFC Performance Standard 1 establishes the importance of
using an integrated assessment to identify environmental
Safeguards and and social impacts, risks, and opportunities. It also ensures
performance standards the use of the mitigation hierarchy, promotes engagement
with affected communities and supports the use of grievance
Around the world, LTI projects are funded through a variety mechanisms. IFC Performance Standard 3 outlines a project-
of mechanisms, including government appropriations, bi- level approach to resource efficiency and pollution prevention

36 Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals

 3. Legislation, policies and planning

Wildlife overpass across National Route 101, part of the Urugua-í-Foerster Biological Corridor in Argentina © Adobe Stock

Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals 37

 3. Legislation, policies and planning

While LTI planning processes that either incorporate or provide

LTI safeguards may appear robust on paper and follow recog­
nised performance standards, they sometimes fail to deliver
environmentally responsible outcomes (e.g. Hedge et al.,
2022). Plans and commitments can be derailed by a wide
range of complications, including economic considerations,
corruption and political intervention.

Project certification
A range of third-party certification programs are being devel­
oped and implemented around the world to assess the overall
sustainability of infrastructure projects. The programs develop
measures that rate a project’s environmental, social and
economic performance, often referred to as the triple bottom
line (Elkington, 1998), with some including specific ecological
considerations. The programs are highly variable, with
one that focuses solely on pavement maintenance (Zhang
& Mohsen, 2018). Six different US-based highway rating
Figure 11: International Finance Corporation (IFC) Performance Standards systems were reviewed and some cover only the construction
© Mary Collins / CLLC phase, while others evaluate the operations and maintenance
phases of a project (Nikumbh & Aher, 2017). A more compre­
hensive program developed for Australia and New Zealand
to avoid or minimise adverse impacts on human health and by the Infrastructure Sustainability Council assesses planning,
the environment, and to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. design, construction and operation phases (ISC, 2022). Such
IFC Performance Standard 4 addresses the responsibility schemes seek to influence the financing of LI and encourage
of avoiding and minimising risks and impacts to community designs and their implementation that consider life cycle
health, safety and security, with special attention to vulnerable assessments, encourage the use of recycled materials, the
groups. reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, as well as further or
protect many other societal values. In the future, if the issue
Of specific importance, the objectives of IFC Performance is properly promoted, the managers and decision-makers of
Standard 6 are to: (i) protect and conserve biodiversity, (ii) such programs could incorporate the protection of ecological
maintain benefits from ecosystem services, and (iii) promote connectivity explicitly into their sustainability rating systems.
sustainable management of natural resources via practices
that integrate conservation with development priorities.
This standard provides a framework for the classification
of habitats within proposed development areas and sets
Underlying social and cultural values
acceptable limits for impacts to modified, natural, and critical and the rights of local communities
habitats, respectively. This classification ensures that specific and Indigenous peoples
actions occur within the different areas of habitat during the
planning phase of projects. Developmental priorities vary regionally and countries
undergoing rapid infrastructure development may prioritise
When applied diligently to project planning, design and economic and social development over environmental
implementation, the mitigation hierarchy and outcome goals conservation. Nevertheless, there is growing consensus that
described in IFC Performance Standard 6 (2012) provide social and environmental considerations need to be better
lending institutions, governments and NGOs assurances integrated into infrastructure investment and development
for transparent, data-driven, and sustainable development that is often motivated by the aspiration to provide employ­
that balances conservation with development. Without the ment opportunities and increase economic growth (Thacker et
conscientious application of these standards and thorough al., 2019). While more sustainable infrastructure may come at
EIAs, there is a high likelihood that infrastructure and other a higher initial cost, the long-term monetary and time savings
types of development projects will fail to adequately protect of reduced repair, social upheaval and environmental damage
the environment (Laurance, 2015; Rainer et al., 2018). are significant and can often outweigh the extra up-front
As of 2023, 138 financial institutions have signed onto the cost. Despite these advantages, developing countries with
Equator Principles. Other institutions also have additional limited budgets and planning horizons may find it chal­lenging
environmental and social safeguard policies. Recent analyses to design and build sustainable infrastructure, and many
demonstrate their widespread acceptance, with 69 countries proposed projects will fail to deliver the promised social,
having adopted or currently developing NNL mitigation environmental and economic benefits (Vilela et al., 2020).
outcome policies for development projects (Maron et al., This difficulty should be considered in the development,
2016; Arlige et al., 2018). implementation and, sometimes, enforcement of good

38 Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals

 3. Legislation, policies and planning

Box 4

A green toolbox’ to mitigate the impacts of railways on Asian elephants, Bangladesh

Key lesson: It is imperative that roads are designed and constructed with the best available science and with external
oversight to apply context-specific environmental safeguards.

The Chittagong – Cox’s Bazar Railway Project crosses through three of Bangladesh’s 24 legally defined protected areas
(PAs; Ministry of Railways, 2016). All three are known to support endangered Asian elephants (Elephas maximus). A
baseline biodiversity assessment (BBA) was commissioned as part of the project EIA to determine the status of Asian
elephants in the project area, inventory elephant crossings, assess human-elephant conflicts, and propose environmental
safeguards to promote elephant connectivity and minimise elephant-train collisions (Dodd & Imran, 2018).

A toolbox’ of green infrastructure and use of best available science was developed to address the impacts on wildlife and
biodiversity (Dodd & Imran, 2018). Wildlife crossing structures (overpasses and underpasses), elephant detection system
technology, and funnelling treatments (e.g. fencing and alternatives) were recommended. An international biodiversity
consultant who helped conduct the BBA serves as an independent monitor during construction and will conduct a
minimum two years of post-construction monitoring for the Asian Development Bank.

As of 2023, construction is well underway. Two underpasses have been completed. One is a 10 m wide by 5 m high
reinforced concrete box culvert that has already received use by elephants, even though funnel fencing has not yet been
installed. Construction of the elephant overpass, the world’s first designed specifically for elephants, is now complete. The
50 m wide reinforced concrete box overpass creates a tunnel through which trains will pass below the revegetated elephant
corridor above. Approximately 4 km of 2.2 m high (and 2.2 m below ground) durable and low-maintenance concrete
elephant barrier fence is being constructed along the railway to link the two underpasses, five upsized culverts, and the
overpass; this will prevent elephant-train collisions and funnel elephants to the structures.

Cox’s Bazar railway underpass, Bangladesh. The project increases connectivity between three protected areas that support endangered Asian elephants
(Elephas maximus). Prints in the ground indicate that elephants are already using the box culvert underpass. © Norris Dodd

Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals 39

 3. Legislation, policies and planning

Box 4 (continued)

Top and bottom: The overpass is the world’s first designed specifically for elephants. Construction as of 2023 © Tapan Kumar Dey.

References
Dodd, N.L. and Imran, A. (2018). Assessment of biodiversity baseline and Asian elephant distribution within the
Chittagong – Cox’s Bazar rail project area of influence, Bangladesh. Project TA-8731 BAN. Report prepared for Asian
Development Bank.

Ministry of Railways, Government of Bangladesh. (2016). BAN: SASEC Chittagong – Cox’s Baxar Railway Project Phase 1.
Environmental Impact Assessment. Prepared for the Asian Development Bank.

40 Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals

 3. Legislation, policies and planning

Box 5

Protecting environmental values and preserving connectivity while developing new roads in Bhutan

Key lesson: In the small yet biodiverse country of Bhutan, ecological connectivity is manifest in designated biological
corridors and a commitment to highway mitigation measures. Although not yet built, the proposed highway was aligned to
avoid the most critical habitat for endangered species..

Bhutan is a small country in the Himalayan Mountains who have demonstrated that even a relatively poor and developing
nation can make ecological connectivity conservation a priority. Bhutan’s mountainous terrain supports tremendous
biodiversity due to its location at the intersection of two biogeographic zones, coupled with an extreme elevation gradient of
nearly 7,300 m across a distance of 135 km. Importantly, 52% of Bhutan’s land area is conserved within PAs, all of which
are interconnected by designated biological corridors.

Prior to 1960, Bhutan had no paved highways. There are now 1,975 km of national highways, with the primary East-West
National Highway crossing the centre of the country in large part as a narrow and winding road. Bhutan’s 2007−2027 Road
Sector Master Plan prioritizes construction of a second east-west highway to connect communities and support economic
development in the south. To date, five segments of this highway totalling 183 km have been completed, two of which pass
through habitat for endangered Asian elephants (Elaphus maximus) and other species. To minimise barrier effects, wildlife
crossing structures have been integrated into designs, allowing for unobstructed elephant movement.

Prior to construction of the southern East-West Highway, wildlife surveys were conducted to determine locations for large
underpasses; based on results they were situated at waterway crossings where elephants travelled regularly. Elephants

Technicians install a wildlife camera on an underpass in Bhutan. © Norris Dodd / ADB

Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals 41

 3. Legislation, policies and planning

Box 5 (continued)

Camera trap monitoring showed that Asian elephant (Elephas maximus) crossed safely through the underpass. © Norris Dodd / ADB

were the focal species because their conservation is considered to also benefit other species. Transboundary, Indo-Bhutan
wildlife connectivity considerations for elephants and other endangered species were also incorporated into the planning
and design of road segments and corresponding crossing structures by the Bhutan Department of Roads and multilateral
funding institutions. Each of the four underpasses monitored were used by wildlife soon after construction. Measured as
successful crossings per total road approaches, the average success rate for elephants was 75.5% (Chogyel et al., 2017).

Initial proposals for a segment of the second East-West highway crossed the length of the Phipsoo Wildlife Sanctuary,
located along the border with India. A baseline biodiversity assessment confirmed the presence of 27 IUCN Red List
species in Phipsoo, including two critically endangered species. This meant that a significant proportion of two proposed
segments would pass through critical habitat and potentially render them non-compliant with the funding institution (ADB,
2018). As biodiversity was highest in the sanctuary core and lowest along the border due to previous human impacts,
biologists advocated for an alternative alignment along the border that avoided critical habitat. Along with aforementioned
mitigation and other conservation offsets, the final alignment resulted in NNL of biodiversity, showcasing an avoidance
approach and viable alternative for conservation and development.

References
Asian Development Bank (ADB). (2018). Biodiversity baseline assessment. Phipsoo Wildlife Sanctuary in Bhutan. Asian
Development Bank, Manila, Philippines. http://dx.doi.org/10.22617/TCS189223.

Chogyel, K., Dodd, N. and Yangzom, K. (2017). Wildlife use of highway underpasses in southern Bhutan. 2017
Proceedings of the International Conference on Ecology and Transportation, Center for Transportation and the Environment.
Raleigh, NC, USA: North Carolina State University.

42 Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals

 3. Legislation, policies and planning

legislation. Moreover, these types of limitations underscore Key messages in this chapter
the need for thorough consultations and the participation of
key stakeholders early in planning processes. • Building new, and upgrading (or removing) existing
roads, railways and canals should be part of a
Conservation efforts by local communities, Indigenous comprehensive and coordinated plan that integrates
peoples, women and youth are increasingly acknowledged all land-use planning. Ad hoc and unplanned actions
as critical to successful conservation and climate change rarely lead to good environmental outcomes.
adaptation (WWF et al., 2021). Yet, recognition of the
contributions of Indigenous and local community groups • Future risks from a changing climate must be
is often missing from government policies and planning identified and explicitly considered in land-use and
practices, including those for infrastructure development transportation planning.
(e.g. Yang et al., 2021; Vilela et al., 2020). Just as policies
to increase coverage of PCAs may conflict with the rights • The mitigation hierarchy should always be genuinely
of Indigenous peoples to manage and conserve their own applied in the proper order to achieve the best
lands, infrastructure development may threaten Indigenous possible social, environmental and economic
lands, traditions and values. Therefore, the rights of outcomes.
Indigenous peoples must be respected in land use planning,
development and conservation activities. Furthermore, • All countries, regions and municipalities, as well
policies for natural resource management, infrastructure as lending institutions and private contractors
development, and mitigation need to increasingly promote must develop and adopt minimum safeguard and
consultation and participation by Indigenous groups to performance standards that are followed to ensured
achieve this requirement (e.g. Clements et al., 2018). best practice outcomes.

• Indigenous peoples and local communities are

often significantly and negatively impacted by new
infrastructure development, and their wishes and
rights must be properly considered.

A wildlife overpass and bilingual signage constructed along US Highway 93, which passes through lands of the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes (CSKT) of
the Flathead Reservation in Montana, USA. This mitigation measure is one of 41 wildlife crossing structures built along 90 km of road, which makes this area one of
the most thoroughly mitigated road stretches in the United States. The Tribes’ leadership on the project – and commitment to safety improvements for both motorists
and wildlife – grew out of a philosophy that every species has value as an integral part of the whole ecosystem. While collaborating with state and federal agencies,
the sovereign CSKT ensured that the project outcomes aligned with their values. © Luca Guadagno

Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals 43

 4. Environmental assessments

Part 4

Environmental assessments
for linear transport infrastructure

Indian rhinoceros (Rhinoceros unicornis) on the side of a road in Kaziranga National Park, Assam, India © Grégoire Dubois

Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals 45

 4. Environmental assessments

Even the most well-planned, designed and built LTI projects development options, including the no-action alternative
may still have a diversity of impacts on PCAs, biodiversity (Gonçalves, et al., 2022).
(Chapter 2), and vulnerable communities (Chapter 5). To reduce
undesirable effects, the mitigation hierarchy (IFC, 2012)—avoid, Although there is a diversity of approaches for transport
minimise, mitigate, restore and compensate (or offset) — planning across the globe, it is important that LTI projects
should be applied as a fundamental guiding principle (Chapter increasingly be identified through strategic evaluation. The
3). If complete avoidance of adverse impacts is infeasible, then LTI projects identified in such strategic evaluations can
minimisation, mitigation, and compensatory measures should then be further developed in transport sector plans. Ideally,
be developed and implemented to achieve no net loss or a these strategic evaluations should help incorporate needs
net gain in biodiversity. Strategic environmental assessments assessments based on future transport demand, analyses
(SEAs) and environmental impact assessments (EIAs) are and modelling that result in alternative solutions and budgets
formal planning processes that often use the mitigation (see Box 6: A path to more wildlife-friendly roads in Costa
hierarchy as a procedural tool for environmental decision Rica). They should also advance national, regional or sub-
making and achieving more sustainable development (Benson, national development goals – often referred to as plans,
2003; Marshall et al., 2005). policies and programmes (PPPs) (Noble, 2000).

Both types of assessments need to increase their focus on

integrating connectivity and biodiversity more systematically
into their evaluation processes (Torres et al., 2022). As a
Strategic environmental
best practice, more frequent and intensive appraisal of the assessments
impacts on connectivity and biodiversity must be undertaken
for all LTI projects. This includes selection of multiple target SEAs can improve transport sector plans and their resulting
species, evaluating scale optimisation, and applying adaptive LTI projects. An SEA has been defined as “the proactive
management for maximising application of the mitigation assessment of alternatives to proposed or existing PPPs, in
hierarchy for better evidence-based evaluation and to the context of a broader vision, set of goals, or objectives to
more fully understand the potential impacts of each of the assess the likely outcomes of various means to select the

Figure 12: A map identifying corridors in the Central Indian and Eastern Ghats tiger landscapes connecting existing protected areas and Bengal tiger (Panthera tigris
tigris) population source sites, with available data up to 2018. The areas shown in red and orange indicate where tiger movement remains most viable.
© Wildlife Conservation Trust

46 Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals

 4. Environmental assessments

best alternative(s) to reach desired ends” (Noble, 2000). Thus, development of a larger range of alternatives at earlier stages of
SEAs seek to effectively mainstream environmental, social, transport plan development that result in the creation of more
economic, and health issues while ensuring the sustainability preferred options for EIAs that evaluate LTI projects.
of their decisions (IAIA, 2009). SEAs are considered a family’
of approaches that can be used to prioritize and balance SEA processes need to be structured according to their
development with environmental stewardship across large terms of reference and developed to address specific needs
spatial scales and multiple jurisdictions. Moreover, they are and scopes. Therefore, they lack universally defined steps
considered an essential tool for evaluating and incorporating or phases. Depending on the level of formality in a country’s
scientific information, such as species distribution maps, into legislation, regulation and practice, SEAs can be applied in
decision making. In addition, they can identify and prioritise different ways using a variety of methods that better mainstream
the protection of roadless areas and PCAs, ecological corri­ environmental considerations. They can significantly inform the
dors and the overall ecological connectivity of landscapes at EIAs of specific projects and their decisions, and promote good
regional, national and international scales (Iuell et al., 2003; governance approaches (Thompson et al., 2013). For example,
Hlaváč et al., 2019). the Convention on Biological Diversity has identified “stakeholder
involvement, transparency and good quality information” as key
principles of SEA development (Slootweg et al., 2006). Many
countries have established guidelines and procedures for SEAs,
Development of strategic and best practices have been described for four basic stages,
environmental assessments and these can be applied to LTI planning as follows:

SEAs can provide for more informed decisions in transport 1. Create transparency by establishing the context for
sector plans, providing them with a broader context of visions, the SEA, including screening, setting objectives and
goals, and objectives, that serve to address a wider range identifying stakeholders;
of potential impacts from LTI projects at multiple scales (see 2. Technically assess and carry out the SEAs in dialogue
Chapter 2 for a discussion of the direct and indirect impacts with stakeholders: collect baseline data, identify
of LTI development). The more comprehensive and flexible alternatives, identify opportunities to mitigate impacts,
strategies in SEAs have the potential to help facilitate the provide quality assurances and author excellent reports;

Figure 13: The identified tiger corridors with protected areas overlaid by proposed LTI including roads, rails and canals © Wildlife Conservation Trust

Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals 47

 4. Environmental assessments

Stakeholders collaborate at the Hanoi International Forum on Sustainable Infrastructure: Integrating Climate Resilience and Natural Capital into Transport
Infrastructure Planning and Design © Rodney van der Ree

3. Use the information from the technical assessment to consist of the following fundamental phases (Slootweg, et al.,
inform decision making in dialogue with stakeholders; 2006; Pavlyuk et al., 2017):
and
4. Monitor and evaluate the decisions made in PPPs and 1. Screening and/or a complete feasibility study to ascertain
SEAs and their implementation (Slootweg, et al., 2006; the need for, and determine the type of, assessment
OECD, 2006). required, such as a full or partial impact assessment;
2. Scoping to identify components, boundaries, and
baselines for what impacts are relevant to evaluate and
Environmental impact assessment to identify alternative solutions;
3. Assessment and evaluation to predict and identify likely
EIA is defined as “the process of identifying, predicting, impacts, including their significance and elaboration of
evaluating and mitigating the biophysical, social, and other alternatives;
relevant effects of development proposals prior to major 4. Report on the determination of the EIA, including
decisions being taken and commitments made” (IAIA, 2009). communication to the public of identification of impact
As a systematic process, an EIA examines, in advance, mitigation measures and an environmental management
the environmental consequences of a specific project or plan (EMP);
development. 5. Review by technical experts and the public based on the
original scoping;
A quality EIA will provide and assess multiple alternatives 6. Decision making on whether to approve or not approve a
(including a no action alternative) and include often highly project, including conditions for approval; and
detailed and technical appraisals that can inform how best to 7. Monitoring, compliance, enforcement, environmental
apply the mitigation hierarchy to a development project and auditing, and adaptive management of the impacts and
to optimise positive outcomes (Stokes, 2015). After assessing mitigation measures as defined in the EMP to verify
various general requirements and recommendations, and compliance and address deficiencies in implementation.
preparing a project description and design, all EIAs should

48 Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals

 4. Environmental assessments

Figure 14: Map of international protected areas that would be directly (red) and indirectly (orange) impacted by the E40 waterway, a 2,000 km navigable transport
project planned to connect the Baltic and the Black Seas. Such canal projects can alter hydrologic systems and destroy habitats in their path, such as wetlands and
free flowing rivers. To date, neither an SEA nor an EIA have been conducted. © Save Polesia / Mapbox

Recommendations for applying • Before an investment decision is made, preliminary

strategic environmental assessments engineering designs and EIAs should be conducted
according to any safeguards set by the proponent and
and environmental impact funders (see Chapter 6). This should include production
assessments to linear transport of reliable budget estimations that include costs of
infrastructure engineering, construction, environmental and social
mitigation and possible resettlement compensation.
While the use and overall quality of SEA and EIA processes
is increasing around the world, there are a diversity of • The cost of each approach in the mitigation hierarchy,
improvements that can be made concerning LTI (Laurance, and all efforts to meet no net loss or net gain in
2022). Following are some of the most crucial insights biodiversity requirements, should be identified early in
for enhancing the application of these processes when the planning process to ensure that adequate funding
developing LTI: is allocated in the project budget (see Box 6: A path
to more wildlife-friendly roads in Costa Rica). Too often
• Conventional approaches to EIAs for LTI projects in the budgets are set before mitigation measures are identified
feasibility stage often lack consideration of impacts on or ecological aspects are cut from the project when
threatened and non-threatened species and ecosystem funds become constrained.
functions, including ecological connectivity. Ideally,
enhanced approaches would contribute such important • EIAs should include an integrated synthesis of the studies
ecological information into the overall determination of conducted for the project, with a clear and concise sum­
the technical, environmental and financial/economic mary of anticipated impacts on the environment for each
feasibility of the project (Hyari & Kandil, 2009; Jaeger, alternative (Jaeger, 2015; Stokes, 2015). Additionally, the EIA
2015). At the earliest stages, such as in the feasibility report or statement should specify the required measures
analysis, it is essential to accurately document ecological that will be needed as conditions for implementation, inclu­
corridors that reflect migration and other wildlife ding a Biodiversity Action Plan. This should include a rating
movement needs (see Box 7: Statutory requirements of project impacts before and after the application of the
help protect wildlife from transport development in India). recommended mitigation measures (Stokes, 2015).

Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals 49

 4. Environmental assessments

• Increase the awareness among decision-makers, funders practical guidelines and enhancing clarity about the
and practitioners that SEAs provide many benefits by roles and responsibilities of different agencies in SEA
incorporating environmental issues and constraints early development (Slootweg, et al., 2006; OECD, 2006).
in the planning stages, and strengthen governments’
ability to increase institutional frameworks for applying • Improve the collection of high-quality data to evaluate
SEA processes. This can include bolstering technical the impact of PPPs and LTI projects on PCAs and
expertise and knowledge of cumulative impacts of surrounding habitat, ecological connectivity, rare species
projects, supporting administrative capacity, providing or those of conservation concern in SEA and EIA

Figure 15: Locations of wildlife crossing structures (green) across Dutch national highways (red) and railroads (black); part of Netherlands’ Multi-Year Programme
for Defragmentation (MJPO). Concluded in 2018, the programme was able to mitigate approximately 60% of all the ecological barriers caused by the national
infrastructure system, and as of 2017, there were almost 2,100 wildlife crossings for motorways and provincial roads. © Sijtsma et al., 2020

50 Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals

 4. Environmental assessments

processes. This includes allocating longer time periods impartiality in the biological evaluation on the part of
for field surveys (Jaeger, 2015; da Silva Dias, 2017) and private contractors often carrying out the EIAs and to
undertaking biological evaluations to directly measure reduce the influence of project proponents on political
the amount of habitat cleared or number of animals killed and governance processes (Laurance & Salt 2018).
during construction (Gannon, 2021). This can ensure
greater attention to monitoring of gene flow or underlying • Improvements in cumulative effects analyses are
ecological processes and functions that support the long- needed for both SEAs and EIAs. This requires more fully
term health of a species (Bigard et al., 2017) to strengthen incorporating the impacts of development that arise
conclusions, and deliver more adequate mitigation beyond the LTI alignment footprint (i.e. construction
measures and more positive environmental outcomes. access and support facilities, presence of laborers, and
supply chains). For example, recent meta-analysis of
• EIAs need to increase their application of state of the art’ biodiversity considerations in EIAs in France found that,
modelling methods, based on robust data collection, although EIAs have recently shifted towards acknowl­
for environmental impact prediction (Jaeger, 2015; da edging cumulative impacts, they “do not propose
Silva Dias, 2017). These models will serve to enhance adequate measures to reduce them” (Bigard et al., 2017).

Box 6

A path to more wildlife-friendly roads in Costa Rica

Key lesson: In Costa Rica, road planning now begins at the ministry level and effectively incorporates environmental and
social considerations.

The Ministry of Transportation in Costa Rica is increasingly making its roads wildlife-friendly by applying rigorous
SEA and EIA processes. An important reason for this progress is the Ministry’s Process of Environmental and
Social Management team (PROGAS, in Spanish). PROGAS was created in response to a request from the Inter-
American Development Bank in 2011 and is now responsible for the environmental and social components of road
project planning. PROGAS has many functions; the team enforces laws, supports scientific studies, sets the Terms
of Reference for environmental studies, provides training, coordinates with the National Technical Secretary of
Environment, and evaluates road projects.

When PROGAS began operation, only one road in Costa Rica had wildlife underpasses. As of 2020, 39 underpasses had
been developed along five roads; underpasses built since 2015 have been designed and located based on data collection
and analysis of wildlife at each project site. Incorporating environmental and social needs early in the planning process
helps assure that PCAs and wildlife concerns are properly addressed and adequately funded.

In the past, mitigation measures

were considered an additional
and optional expense within
transportation budgets. This
often led to insufficient funding to
safeguard the environment. Now,
all new road projects in Costa
Rica are included in the country’s
National Plan and placed in the
portfolio of the Ministry of Planning.
This has allowed for adequate
budget allocation for environmental
mitigation and is a significant
change in policy and practice for
transportation projects across Costa
Rica. The Costa Rican experience
in improving mitigation measures
that protect wildlife and ecological
connectivity demonstrates that
developing countries can achieve
An interdisciplinary team consisting of members of PROGAS (Ministry of Transportation), a construction
substantial progress in transport company, and an NGO setting up camera traps in a modified culvert to measure wildlife crossings ©
planning and implementation. Daniela Araya-Gamboa

Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals 51

 4. Environmental assessments

Box 7

Statutory requirements help protect wildlife from transport development in India

Key lesson: National legislation in India has created a strong legal basis for performing environmental assessments and
gaining clearance to undertake infrastructure projects.

In India, the importance of ecological connectivity was neglected until recently, due in part to the absence of a legal defini­
tion of corridors or connectivity. In 2006, the Wildlife Protection Act of 1972 was amended to address corridors for tigers,
which are defined as “areas connecting one protected area or tiger reserve with another protected area or tiger reserve”
(Wildlife Protection Act, 2006). Consequently, all projects that affect tiger corridors must attain a Wildlife Clearance (WC)
and approval from the National Tiger Conservation Authority.

In 2016, this concept was extended when the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC) adopted
guide­lines for mitigating the negative impacts of linear infrastructure, thereby ensuring infrastructure projects comprehensively
address important environmental impacts. Despite these guidelines, most EIAs fail to adequately evaluate all potential impacts
of a project, including impacts on ecological connectivity because of: (i) their short duration; (ii) minimal budgets; and (iii) the
multitude of natural resources impacted, including soil, water, and air, along with complex social factors.

New concerns have been raised as more recent measures have eased the process of obtaining a WC or Forest Clearance
(FC), such as allowing the project proponent to self-determine whether an FC or WC is required. In the Central Indian
Landscape, 399 LTI projects applied for an FC and nearly 86% of these should have required WCs (Pariwakam et al.,
2018). Having project proponents self-determine the need for a WC therefore reduces evaluations to protect wildlife.

A total of 202 EIAs for projects (151 roads, 10 railway lines, 41 power transmission lines) in central India have been
submitted to MoEFCC seeking WCs since the adoption of mitigation guidelines for linear infrastructure. While most of
these proposals are still under review, 18 (10 roads, three railway lines, and five power transmission lines) have been
approved with mitigation strategies, three road projects were approved without any strategies and one railway line has
been rejected outright.

Although India has the second largest network of roads and the fourth largest railway network in the world, no railways and
only two highways have used wildlife crossing structures in their mitigation strategies. Of these, the best-documented are
along a 60 km section of National Highway 7, where six wildlife crossing structures have been constructed, including two of
the world’s longest underpasses (750 m long each). The six structures help maintain connectivity between the Kanha and
Pench Tiger Reserves and are the result of a protracted legal challenge brought by individuals and civil society organizations.

As new systems and procedures are put in place to ensure WCs maintain connectivity for wildlife, an improved spatial
framework to assess the needs of wildlife and connectivity is needed. This will help ensure that appropriate mitigation
measures are included in transportation project proposals. In the future, proponents will need to allocate adequate funds
in their budgets to first avoid, or when impacts cannot be avoided, seek to fully mitigate negative impacts on ecological
connectivity. This will make certain that funds for thorough EIAs and their resulting mitigation measures are adequate to
better safeguard biodiversity.

References
The Forest (Conservation) Act of 1980 (Act. No. 69 of 1980) (2015). Law of Forests in India 4th Edition, New Delhi, India:
Orient Publishing Company.

Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC) (2020). Welcome to PARIVESH.
https://parivesh.nic.in (Accessed: 29 July 2020).

Pariwakam, M., Aditya J., Sheetal N. and Srinivas V. (2018). A Policy Framework for Connectivity Conservation and Smart
Green Linear Infrastructure Development in the Central Indian and Eastern Ghats Tiger Landscape. Mumbai, India: Wildlife
Conservation Trust.

Wildlife Institute of India (WII) (2016). Eco-Friendly Measures to Mitigate Impacts of Linear Infrastructure on Wildlife.
Dehradun, India: Wildlife Institute of India.

The Wildlife (Protection) Act of 1972 (Act. No 53 of 1972) (as amended up to 2006). New Delhi, India: Universal Law
Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd.

52 Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals

 4. Environmental assessments

Box 7 (continued)

A wildlife underpass sized appropriately for Asian elephants (Elephas maximus) in India © Robert Ament

Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals 53

 4. Environmental assessments

Key messages in this chapter • Well-developed and executed SEAs and EIAs
should be undertaken for all LTI projects to better
• SEAs are comprehensive processes that are aimed integrate ecological connectivity and biodiversity
at mainstreaming environmental, social, economic considerations at multiple scales. This includes
and health issues while ensuring the sustainability allocating ample capacity, undertaking effective
of strategic decision concerning LTI development. scoping, considering the full potential of the mitigation
Individual projects and their EIAs are more effective hierarchy, proposing a full spectrum of sustainable
when nested within SEAs which have broader alternatives and delivering assessments at critical
scopes and incorporate multiple projects and junctures in the decision-making processes.
the concerns of a variety of sectors and actors at
national or regional scales.

• EIAs are processes intended to provide for

sound scientific information, transparent public
participation and informed decision making.

54 Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals

 5. Social consequences

Part 5

Social consequences and public participation

A moose (Alces alces) crosses a road in Alaska, USA. © JT Fisherman / Adobe Stock

Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals 55

 5. Social consequences

Around the world, there are many communities who derive and be employed only if no other viable alternative exists. In
their livelihoods and well-being from natural resources and some instances, communities may benefit through improved
the benefits provided by PCAs, such as from ecosystem housing and better planned settlements. Many rural, margi­
services and tourism. While LTI projects can provide many nalized and Indigenous communities do not possess title
social and economic benefits to local communities, they can deeds to their lands despite being the rightful owners, such
also impact communities in a myriad of devastating ways. All as in ancestral lands passed down through generations.
rightsholders, stakeholders and affected people should be Communal lands that belong to the whole community may
genuinely and appropriately consulted and given opportunities also lack titles. Therefore, authorities need to exercise utmost
to be involved in the planning process. vigilance, caution and due diligence to avoid inaccuracies,
mistakes and unfair practices during resettlement. These
include situations where bona fide members of a community
are left out of resettlement plans or compensation, while
The potential social consequences imposters benefit. Best practices include alternatives to
of linear transport infrastructure resettlement; fair, adequate and timely compensation of a
projects range of values, including physical assets such as crops,
buildings, natural resources and ecosystem services, as well
LTI projects can disrupt the livelihoods of people through as intangible cultural and spiritual values; asset inventory
resettlement, economic displacement, and social and cultural and valuation of both communal and individual assets in
changes, including through the arrival of new migrants and compensation calculations; and an approach that upholds
settlers. The social, economic and cultural aspects of a human rights. Displaced persons should be able to provide
development project are to be managed through a holistic input into the resettlement process, and resettlement must
and integrated approach that aims to accommodate the also be practical for the socio-economic livelihoods of the
needs and wishes of those who are interested in or affected persons or community that may be resettled.
by the project.
Economic displacement may also occur due to temporary or
Resettlement may occur when individuals or communities permanent loss of livelihoods or income during the disruption
need to voluntarily, or involuntarily, vacate their lands (IFC, caused by resettlement (Picciotto, 2013). For instance, a
2002). Involuntary resettlement should come as a last resort family that depends on resources like fruit, bee keeping,

Children walk along the roadside in Alto Conte, Costa Rica, where proposed road improvements would provide year-long access for an Indigenous community and
a nearby town. Avoiding disruption of people and their communities by LTI projects needs to be carefully considered for balancing the negative and positive social,
cultural and environmental changes that they may experience. © Andrea Avila Alfaro

56 Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals

 5. Social consequences

firewood collection, farming, or herding on land earmarked for impacts (Aarhus Convention, 1998). Public participation
compulsory acquisition may be destabilized. The restoration must therefore allow for the timely airing of views, ideas,
of livelihoods should thus include a range of measures to sentiments and concerns when decisions about projects are
mitigate the effects of economic displacement and provide being made especially with regard to communities adjacent
opportunities for affected communities (Picciotto, 2013). to the infrastructure right-of-way. For instance, any changes
in construction routes or schedules, constraints on the types
Furthermore, LTI projects may also contribute to sudden of land use, restrictions on activities in easements or lands
changes in the demographics of rural, marginalised or near linear infrastructure, risks associated with the linear
Indigenous communities during construction and operation. infrastructure and possible emergency responses should be
Population increases from relocation of construction and explained to the public.
operations workers can affect communities that may not be
resilient to the sudden influx of new cultures, which can lead Public participation allows local, traditional and Indigenous
to a cultural weakening of local communities. These fluxes knowledge to enrich project design and inform decision
can also occur after the road or railway has been built as new making, thus helping to avoid, minimise, mitigate, restore
migrants arrive and settle. and compensate (or offset) for potential impacts (UNEP,
2002). Local knowledge of social or cultural activities (e.g.
religious shrines), local information on daily non-motorized
Frameworks for participation routes of a community (cycling, walking or running), wildlife
migration routes and livestock dispersal, as well as grazing
The right to public participation in public affairs and gover­ routes among others can help project designers to mitigate
nance, including in proposed LTI projects, is enshrined in disruptions from the project.
various international frameworks, including the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR, 1966) and
the Aarhus Convention on Access to Information, Public Free, Prior and Informed Consent
Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in
Environmental Matters. Public participation ought to be full, Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) is a legal principle
effective and genuine and ensure that the public is wholly (UNDRIP, 2007), framework and process that should be
informed of the proposed infrastructure project and its likely applied to all development projects that may affect livelihoods,

Community members gather under Route 1 in a wildlife underpass used by jaguar (Panthera onca), part of road ecology training for practitioners in the greater
Mesoamerica Region, Guanacaste, Costa Rica. © Daniela Araya-Gamboa

Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals 57

 5. Social consequences

Stakeholders gather at the Hanoi International Forum on Sustainable Infrastructure: Integrating Climate Resilience and Natural Capital into Transport Infrastructure
Planning and Design. © Rodney van der Ree

Key information – Free, Prior and Informed consent consists of the

following:
• Free – Consent should be voluntary. Negotiations towards consent should be devoid of coercion, bribery, intimidation
and manipulation (FAO, 2020).
• Prior – Negotiations for consent should sufficiently precede any development or infrastructure project that affects the
lands and livelihoods of Indigenous, marginalized, rural or local communities. Consent ought to be given before any
projects are authorized or commenced (OHCHR, 2013).
• Informed – Indigenous, marginalized, rural, or local communities must be provided with full and accurate information
about a proposed project and its impacts. Information provided must be in a language and manner that the
community understands (OHCHR, 2013).
• Consent – Refers to decisions made collectively by affected communities. Consent can be the result of formal or
informal decision-making processes, whichever are commonly used by a community to make decisions. Communities
may grant consent, give conditional consent or withhold consent (OHCHR, 2013).

resources or lands of Indigenous, marginalized, local or rural of sustainable development in multiple international legal
communities. FPIC as a best practice can also be applied principles, norms and policies, including the United Nations
to LTI development in and around PCAs, areas important Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Regional
for ecological connectivity, and among communities of conventions like the Revised African Convention on the
people living adjacent to or within such areas. FPIC is based Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (Maputo
on the principle and right of self-determination that allows Convention, 2003) also require prior, informed consent of
communities to control their own destinies and resources affected communities. Importantly, FPIC should not be used
by determining the sort of development they desire, rather as a form of inclusionary control, in which project details
than having it imposed on them (UNDRIP, 2007). Additionally, and impacts are glossed over and subsequent consultations
FPIC has been highlighted as a fundamental component manipulated towards a specific end.

58 Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals

 5. Social consequences

Community members gather to consult with the Ministry of Public Works and Transportation on road improvements, including paving and the construction of three
bridges, to provide year-long access between an Indigenous community and the nearby town of Alto Conte, Costa Rica. © Andrea Avila Alfaro

Relevant and readily available Access to justice

information
Access to justice is recognised as a right in the Universal
Access to timely and relevant information is a precondition for Declaration of Human Rights and in the International Cov­
public participation and for FPIC to be viable and legitimate enant on Civil and Political Rights. International conventions
(Creighton, 2005; UN-REDD, 2013). Such information like the Aarhus Convention, Escazú Convention, and
includes the proposed route and design of a project, as well Rio Declaration (Principle 10) and the UN Sustainable
as anticipated environmental, social, economic and cultural Development Goals (Goal 16) also affirm this right. This
impacts (Rio Declaration, 1992). This is because the public principle is critical to safeguarding the rights of access to
can only make an informed decision after being fully briefed information, public participation and FPIC, which together
(UNCHR, 2005) and information should be relayed in a ensure that the public and nearby communities can contribute
language and manner that communities are able to follow to decisions about infrastructure projects that affect them (Rio
and comprehend (Saramaka People v. Suriname, 2007). Declaration, 1992). Such access refers to the availability of
Access to public information therefore obligates governments legally recognised systems to resolve disputes and the ability
and project proponents not only to abstain from restricting to engage in dispute resolution without systemic barriers
the flow of information, but also to publicise and impart such as the cost of legal advice and representation (Rio
knowledge. Additionally, information should be available to Declaration, 1992). It guarantees the availability of a review
any person upon request without their having to justify their procedure to challenge a decision, act, or omission by a
interest. In view to shaping LTI projects, information about private body or public authority before a court or independent
the financial and commercial contracts and transactions and impartial body (Ebbesson & Okowa, 2009). For instance,
that affect the public, PCAs, ecological connectivity and if the right of access to information has been contravened or
wildlife should also be made available. Importantly, the role an EIA licence irregularly issued, the public should have an
of corruption in large-scale infrastructure projects involving avenue to challenge such acts or omissions.
multinational companies and governments cannot be ignored,
since opacity of contracting in some infrastructure projects In such cases, an administrative or judicial dispute resolution
may facilitate corrupt practices in public participation, land process should be expeditious to avert a potential danger or
acquisition, population resettlement, and EIA licensing, or wrong by avoiding environmental damage before it occurs or
even in the initial justification for the proposed infrastructure. by restoring damages sustained and determining other punitive

Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals 59

 5. Social consequences

measures for perpetrators. National administrative, legal and among jurisdictions and proponents (Hasan et al., 2018).
judicial systems and mechanisms that guarantee timely access For example, some jurisdictions specifically mention social
to justice must therefore be in place. However, access to considerations in the title (i.e. Environmental and Social
justice is frustrated if a dispute resolution process drags on Impact Assessment (ESIA)) to ensure social aspects are
while an alleged wrong is ongoing and environmental damage thoroughly considered and not ignored, despite the fact that
continues unabated. Governments, public bodies and project an EIA should address social, environmental and economic
proponents must adhere to the decisions made by dispute impacts. In other contexts, cumulative impacts may also
resolution bodies and be prepared to enforce them. be considered. In all cases, public participation in the EIA
process needs to occur throughout and, as an absolute
minimum, via public exhibition of the report (Glucker et al.,
2013). Importantly, studies have shown that projects with
The role of public participation in comprehensive and genuine public participation result in
environmental impact assessments enhanced social and environmental outcomes, less conflict
and more transparent decision making (Rega & Baldizzone,
EIAs are a systematic and methodical process to examine 2015). Finally, the means of engagement must be appropriate
and predict the likely effects of a proposed development to the target audience and be two-way, thereby enabling
project on people and the environment and to maximise review and critique by all interested individuals and groups,
positive environmental and social outcomes (see Chapter and the project proponent should respond to each point
5). The format, practical details and terms of reference raised during the public exhibition.
of an EIA are determined by national laws and may differ

Box 8

Stakeholder engagement in Kenya’s Standard Gauge Railway Phase 2A (Nairobi City – Naivasha
Town Industrial Park – Narok Town)

Key lesson: Without proper enforcement mechanisms, project proponents may ignore calls from stakeholders to modify or
halt construction.

The Standard Gauge Railway (SGR) Phase 2A was commissioned by the Kenya Railways Corporation as the project
proponent and contracted to the China Road and Bridge Corporation to link Kenya’s capital city of Nairobi to the towns
of Naivasha and Narok. The SGR is a small portion of an ambitious East Africa Railway Master Plan that envisions a rail
system linking eight countries.

The East Africa Railway Master Plan is highly important to the economic development of countries in the region. However,
it is equally imperative that environmental laws and regulations are adhered to during implementation of such large infra­
structure projects. Kenya’s laws require that an independent EIA be conducted, which must include public participation as a
key legal component. The resulting EIA report is then submitted to the National Environment Management Authority (NEMA)
for approval and licensing. Once NEMA receives an EIA report, it is evaluated, public comment is invited, and additional
public hearings may be held.
However, a number of irregularities were noted during the Kenya Standard Gauge Railway EIA reporting and approval
process. These irregularities should have been addressed during the process, or invalidated the EIA. Some of the
irregularities include:

• A predetermined decision to route the SGR through Nairobi National Park despite opposition expressed by
different stakeholders during public participation and suggested alternative routes that had a lower impact on
Nairobi National Park;
• Publication of an unsigned and undated EIA report by the project proponent;
• Omitting written comments made by stakeholders during public participation;
• Not providing full access to relevant information collected concerning the project during the EIA process;
• Continuation of construction despite the issuance of a stop order by the National Environment Tribunal for all project
activities; and
• Failure to meet the required time frame for public notice prior to holding some public hearings and thus preventing
some stakeholders from attending and contributing to the public hearings.

The project went ahead and was completed despite the noted irregularities and a stop order. The effects of the SGR
on the park include vibration and noise pollution; landscape/aesthetic degradation; and additional fragmentation of the
park ecosystem which already faces severe pressures from urbanisation and a road bypass that had been previously

60 Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals

 5. Social consequences

Box 8 (continued)

Construction activity of the Standard Gauge Railway Phase 2A in Kenya, bisecting Nairobi National Park between the port city of Mombossa and the capital
city of Nairobi © Eliud Ndung’u

constructed on land carved off from the park (Nyumba et al. 2021; Okita-Ouma, et al. 2020). In this case, even with reg­
ulatory mechanisms in place, NEMA allowed the proponent to bypass laws and commit irregularities. This is a concerning
example of the government endorsing requirements for public participation, but failing to heed public concern, and ulti­
mately, to comply with its own regulatory requirements.

References
Nyumba, T.O., Sang, C.C., Olago, D.O., Marchant, R., Waruingi, L., Githiora, Y., Kago, F., Mwangi, M., Owira, G.,
Barasa, R., and Omangi, S. (2021). Assessing the ecological impacts of transportation infrastructure development: A
reconnaissance study of the Standard Gauge Railway in Kenya. PLoS One 16(1):e0246248.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0246248.

Okita, Ouma, B., Koskei, M., Tiller, L., Lala, F., King, L., Moller, R., Amin, R., and Douglas-Hamilton, I. (2020). Effectiveness
of wildlife underpasses and culverts in connecting elephant habitats: a case study of new railway through Kenya’s Tsavo
National Parks. African Journal of Ecology 59(3):624–640. https://doi.org/10.1111/aje.12873.

Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals 61

 5. Social consequences

Box 9

Coalition of women assist Costa Rica to build wildlife-friendly roads

Key lesson: An initiative to create a landmark best practices document for wildlife-friendly roads was organised by
volunteers with minimal funding and full support and participation of the public.

In 2012, several members of the public asked the Costa Rican Ministry of Transportation to implement a range of measures
to reduce the environmental impacts of roads on wildlife. The Ministry agreed that the sustainability of transportation
infrastructure in Costa Rica needed to be improved, but they required guidance and assistance to achieve that goal.

Between 2013 and 2014, a group of six women from academia, conservation NGOs and government prepared technical
guidelines to reduce the ecological impacts of roads and traffic. The guidelines focused on environmentally sensitive areas
and wildlife, and also included a legislation section to support the implementation of measures on roads for wildlife. To
ensure that the guidelines were both comprehensive and achievable, a series of workshops with scientists, academics,
government, practitioners, financial agencies and environmental consultants were held in 2014. In 2015, a draft was
circulated to national and international reviewers. Subsequently, the recommendations were incorporated into the final
document titled Guía Ambiental: Vías Amigables con la Vida Silvestre, which was officially adopted by the Ministry of
Environment in 2015 (Pomareda et al., 2015).

This initiative was developed without a specific budget and made possible by the voluntary collaboration of its authors
and their organizations. In another demonstration of the role and value of public participation, a group of elementary
schoolchildren raised funds to print the guidelines, enabling the distribution of the document to key entities and stake­
holders. While the guidelines remain recommendations, rather than formal policy, the Costa Rican Ministry of Transportation
has been using them since 2016 to identify and implement mitigation measures on new roads across the country.

Reference
Pomareda, E., Araya-Gamboa, D., Ríos, Y., Arévalo, E., Aguilar, M. and R. Menacho. (2015). Guía Ambiental “Vías
Amigables con la Vida Silvestre”. Comité Científico de la Comisión Vías y Vida Silvestre. Costa Rica.

The Comité Científico de la Comisión Vías y Vida Silvestre, a group of six women from academia, conservation NGOs, and government, who prepared technical
guidelines to reduce the ecological impacts of roads and traffic across Costa Rica © Comité Científico de la Comisión Vías y Vida Silvestre

62 Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals

 5. Social consequences

Key messages in this chapter full, effective, and genuine public participation in
public affairs and governance.
• More holistic and integrated approaches to linear
infra­structure development are necessary to better • Public access to timely and relevant information is
account for the individuals and communities – necessary for FPIC to be realised, and this includes
especially rural, marginalized and Indigenous proposed routes, project designs, and anticipated
communities – that may be disrupted through environmental, social, economic and cultural impacts
resulting resettlement, economic displacement, and of LTI projects.
social, cultural, and environmental changes.
• Access to justice is critical for the public to have
• The right to participate, including Free, Prior and remedies for challenging decisions, acts, or omissions
Informed Consent (FPIC), in the development of LTI associated with the right to participate in EIA
projects, is enshrined in a variety of international and processes.
regional covenants and agreements that guarantee

Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals 63

 6. Financing safeguards

Part 6

Financing safeguards
for linear transport infrastructure

Bengal tiger (Panthera tigris tigris) in Tadoba National Park, India. India’s highly populated landscape leaves narrow, yet essential tiger movement pathways through
and around towns and infrastructure. © Grégoire Dubois

Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals 65

 6. Financing safeguards

The creation and management of PCAs is an increasing vehicle licensing fees, fuel levies, etc.), and ODA remains
focus of financial investment for protecting the environment, the dominant source of external funding for transport
especially in the form of official development assistance infrastructure. International financial institutions (IFIs),
(ODA) that can support nature-based economic develop­ including several multilateral development banks (MDBs)
ment. This is premised on providing jobs and generating have historically supported the development of LTI projects
revenue through such approaches as nature-based tourism through the provision of ODA and, recently, new MDBs such
and payments for ecosystem services, while at the same as the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), the New
time contributing to biodiversity conservation and climate Development Bank (NDB) and the China Development Bank
resilience efforts (Emerton et al., 2006). Yet, the investments (CDB), have emerged as important actors in supporting LTI in
made to conserve biodiversity, particularly to increase the developing countries.
extent and management of PCAs and ecological corridors
can be undermined by the LTI projects that are often The lending policies of IFIs strive to provide lower than
financed with the intent to promote economic prosperity and commercial rates to sovereign (public) clients. The rates and
alleviate poverty. terms of lending often depend on the borrowing country’s
gross national income per capita. Low-income countries
Many LTI projects fail to achieve these aims and increasingly can benefit from grants and concessional loans (rates, grace
contribute to the degradation of natural systems that people and repayment periods significantly better than at-market
depend on for their health and livelihoods (Arcus Foundation, rates). Middle and high-income countries receive lending at
2018). Traditionally, LTI projects, especially in developing near market rates. All countries are encouraged to benefit
countries, have been financed via public resources, namely from other IFI services such as capacity-building, institutional
tax revenues and government borrowing. While the demand strengthening and upstream planning. IFIs utilise a variety
for the provision of more LTI and improved transport services of financial instruments (debt, guarantees, grants) to invest
is growing – particularly in emerging economies – the public in, or fund, both the planning and operation of a range of
revenues available for transport spending are becoming projects, including LTI. MDBs typically support governments
more uncertain (Woetzel et al., 2016). Overall, levels of through the financing of sector plans (e.g. transport master
public sector debt in developing countries stand at record plans, SEAs) and project-specific preparatory studies (e.g.
levels, and many countries have seen their budget deficits pre/feasibility analyses, EIAs, cost benefit analyses) to assist
increase in recent years. governments in their efforts to realise the need for additional
transport infrastructure.
In response, public and private sector institutions play
increasingly important roles in the identification, financing For projects, IFI operations manuals provide the policies,
and management of LTI projects. These institutions directives and procedures that apply to an IFI’s business
can be broadly categorised as: (i) international financial processes. They can be loosely categorized into (i) project
institutions (IFIs), including global, regional and sub-regional financing, (ii) environmental and social, (iii) procurement, and
development banks; (ii) bilateral institutions; and (iii) private (iv) institution-specific policies. Environmental and social
or commercial financial institutions. With the launch of safeguard policies are relevant to PCAs, biodiversity and
China’s Belt and Road Initiative in 2013, there has been natural habitat protection. Approximately half of the MDBs
a significant increase in global financing of LTI across all have some form of institutionalized safeguards.
categories of financial institutions.
Even though IFIs have their own sets of environmental and
This chapter summarises the different types of financial social standards, the policies look similar across most MDBs
institutions, the polices of major institutions regarding with the policies of the World Bank Group (i.e. International
safeguards for biodiversity and addresses recent changes Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD),
that may impact or affect their biodiversity objectives. It then International Development Association (IDA), International
concludes with emerging trends of new entrants from China Finance Corporation (IFC), and others) setting a standard (see
and the policies directed towards client countries including Annex 1). The World Bank’s 2018 Environmental and Social
investors of the BRI. It is important to note that the specific Framework for public clients, and the International Finance
architecture of entities financing transportation projects in Corporation’s 2012 Performance Standards (Chapter 3), for
developing countries is more nuanced than reported here private clients are considered good industry international
and that this chapter offers a necessarily limited review into practice for multilateral, bilateral and commercial loans (Losos
these organizations. et al., 2019). In time, other IFIs will likely revise and harmonise
their environmental, social and governance (ESG) policies with
these in mind.

International financial institutions, The World Bank updated its previously numerous ESG
multilateral finance and official policies in 2018 and combined them all under a single
development assistance Environmental and Social Framework (ESF). This ESF makes
it easier for borrowers to comply with and the Bank to
International development finance is the primary source of respond to, “a growing demand for lending operations to be
money to supplement domestic funding (e.g. tax revenues, more efficient, for due diligence to be more flexible, and for

66 Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals

 6. Financing safeguards

greater reliance on host country environmental and social in particular from China, are less known and increasingly
standards” (Losos et al., 2019) which are less likely to be as exploited. The European Union provides funding to transport
strict (Dollar, 2018). Other institutions are slowly updating their infrastructure projects through its European Development
policies to reflect the World Bank’s new ESF. Fund to African, Caribbean and Pacific countries. The US
Government, through its development finance mechanisms
The World Bank ESF comprises 10 Environmental and (e.g. the US Agency for International Development, the
Social Standards (ESS), with ESS1 (processes and mitigation Millennium Challenge Corporation and the Development
hierarchy) and ESS6 (biodiversity) of highest relevance to Finance Corporation) support emerging market transport
PCAs, biodiversity and natural habitat protection. The IFC infrastructure projects. Unlike the MDBs, bilateral donors
provides private sector lending and addresses mitigation of do not necessarily adhere to a common set of policies
environmental and social impact under their Performance associated with their approvals process and may set specific
Standards (PS). Performance Standard 6 is analogous to requirements related to funding approvals.
ESS6 and aims for a net gain of Critical Habitat and no net
loss of Natural Habitat. Application of PS6 is site-specific
and is a significant undertaking that requires an early start Private and commercial bank finance
with project planning and integration with an EIA (Biodiversity
Consultancy, 2020). The IFC monitors the implementation Among the potential expanded opportunities for financing
of the Performance Standards based on a client’s observed LTI in developing countries are those provided by the private
ability to achieve them. Clients with robust and effective sector. As demands for investment in transport are increasing,
systems receive an annual audit, whereas clients requiring the MDBs and other financial institutions are finding ways to
corrective actions can receive up to quarterly audits. leverage private finance. The leveraging strategy has been
moderately successful for bankable’ transport projects (e.g.
toll roads and rail), and typically only in countries with stable,
Bilateral finance investor-friendly enabling environments. Private finance may
be defined as term-limited (specific duration of investment)
While the traditional sources of bilateral aid (direct govern­ or open-ended (sustained ownership or management of an
ment to government) are well known and widely used, asset) and is more frequently used to finance existing assets
multiple new and expanding sources of bilateral funding, as opposed to new or greenfield development projects.

The World Bank’s Environmental and Social Framework defines its

The Asian Development Bank’s 2019 guidance outlining the awareness, commitment to sustainable development, with the aim of ending extreme
commitments and opportunities to protect Asia’s biodiversity during the poverty and promoting shared prosperity, and makes it easier for borrowers
design and implementation of transport infrastructure projects to comply with standards, including the mitigation hierarchy and biodiversity
© Asian Development Bank protection. © The World Bank

Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals 67

 6. Financing safeguards

Construction of a toll road through a rural area, intended to replace an existing road © Alex Traveler / Adobe Stock

In developing countries, private investors are known to cut construction costs for profit, building deficient infrastructure that over time can require much more
maintenance that countries may have to assume. © Adobe Stock

68 Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals

 6. Financing safeguards

While private or commercial lending institutions adhere to their sources, with strong roles played by both the public sector
own lending and safeguard policies, their ESG considerations and development financing institutions (UNECE, 2017). MDBs
are increasingly prevalent and feature as important decision- and bilateral institutions are the most active in International
making and planning criteria. Generally, ESG factors in Development Association (IDA) countries, playing a key role
infrastructure investing create a unique set of challenges to mobilize private sources of financing in countries where
for investors. With best practices and industry guidelines private lenders may not otherwise be comfortable taking
such as the Equator Principles (Figure 16) set by the MDBs, country risk.
many investors feel that the environmental element of ESG
can be managed effectively under the appropriate ESG Support for the adoption of PPP programs to deliver invest­
management system. The social aspect of ESG, specifically ment in transport infrastructure is by no means universal,
stakeholder engagement and consultation, land acquisition although it can be a condition of finance being made available.
and resettlement are much more dynamic and unpredictable An advantage of a PPP in the transport sector is that
elements. As stewards of investors’ capital, it is critical infrastructure is developed and services delivered according
that an investor maintains its social licence to operate from to objective standards, or private providers suffer financial and
the community, otherwise the financial and reputational operational penalties that can lead to contract termination.
ramifications can be catastrophic. The disadvantages generally result from contracts that are not
well specified or executed. This can include a lack of flexibility
or inappropriate transfer of risk, leading to high costs or poor
Public-private partnerships value for money.

Most direct private finance in transport infrastructure comes

via public-private partnerships (PPPs). Though commonly
assumed that the private sector provides the majority of
Chinese investment in
financing for PPPs, analyses indicate that PPP financing in infrastructure development
developing countries actually comes from a diverse mix of and the Belt and Road Initiative
Among other massive infrastructure development plans
around the world, China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI)
is deserving of particular attention for its size and scope
(Hughes et al., 2020; Narain et al., 2020; Ng et al., 2020).
In 2016, China launched the Asian Infrastructure Investment
Bank (AIIB) and the New Development Bank (NDB) which
is a reformation of the BRICS Development Bank, originally
constituted by Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa
in 2013. AIIB published their Environmental and Social
Framework in 2016 (AIIB, 2019) which lists “Conserving
Biodiversity” as Objective 17 with further elaboration in its
Environment and Social Standard 1 (ESS1). In contrast, the
NDB uses the national systems of the member countries,
which typically have lower standards, instead of commonly
agreed safeguards to address environmental, social and
procurement risks. China’s policy banks, the China-Exim and
the China Development Bank provide most of the lending but
not at the expense of other regions (Dollar, 2018). A listing of
Chinese bank environmental policies and further discussion of
their relative strengths can be found in Annex 1.

Additional financing considerations:

operations and maintenance funding

Studies of road systems in developing countries over the past

few decades have consistently shown that road maintenance
is underfunded and often inefficient (Obeng & Tuffour, 2020).
Many countries have addressed underfunding by earmarking
specific tax revenues to road funds. Over 20 countries have
introduced a new model of road funding. This includes
Figure 16: The Equator Principles are best practices and industry guidelines
set by the MDBs that can help project teams more effectively manage the governments setting the level of general revenue taxes,
environmental elements of projects. © Mary Collins / CLLC and (in theory) road boards — with significant stakeholder

Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals 69

 6. Financing safeguards

Figure 17: Map of Asian elephant distribution and the larger regional context of China’s Belt and Road Initiative based on best available data in 2021 © Tyler Creech / CLLC

representation — determining the road user charges and whether to provide support for the proposed project and,
controlling the revenue from them (Heggie, 1995). Separate if so, the way in which environmental and social risks and
agencies are then responsible for actual road maintenance. impacts will be addressed in the assessment, development
This approach is supposed to reduce rent seeking and make and implementation of the project. The due diligence will
resource allocation more efficient by creating an explicit link assess whether the project is capable of being developed
between what users pay for roads and the quality of the roads and implemented in accordance with defined safeguards. The
available to them. Under these second-generation road funds, World Bank’s safeguard policies present a useful lens through
fuel taxes include both general revenue taxes and road user which best practices related to environmental and social due
charges. Funding of adequate operations, and specifically diligence and lending requirements may be viewed and Annex
maintenance is often a major factor when considering the 1 summarises the different policies of the major IFIs which
viability of transport infrastructure. largely align with those developed by the World Bank.

Environmental and social due Improving financing and

diligence environmental outcomes

Most lenders will conduct some degree of environmental Choosing sources of financing: The choice of funding
and social due diligence of projects proposed for support for transport infrastructure is not intrinsically linked to
prior to financing approval. The purpose of the environmental the model employed to deliver the project. However, the
and social due diligence is to assist the lender in deciding instrument for financing will have a profound impact on how

70 Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals

 6. Financing safeguards

Construction of the 414 km Laos - China high speed railway brings infrastructure prominently in view of a rural home in Laos. The rail cuts through 167 Laos villages,
and research has shown that many people in the affected villages were unclear about plans, timelines, land compensation processes and the ability to comment on
construction. © Jessica DiCarlo

each funding model functions. Thus, choosing which mix approach towards data governance which balances data
of taxes and user charges (or public and private capital) availability with privacy concerns.
to employ is a fundamental sovereign risk and must be
undertaken by governments in advance of designing the Addressing sustainability through operations and
model by which the transport infrastructure and transport maintenance: In addition to justifying a project based on
services will be delivered. sector planning, engineering designs and EIAs, funders
generally also assess the sustainability of the proposed
Availability and delivery of data will drive development: investment over time. For example, the asset lifetime of
New patterns of service needs and delivery will only roads is considerable (20+ years) if appropriately maintained.
be discernible if we have the data to identify them. The However, maintenance is typically a lower priority in many
accessibility and accuracy of this data varies considerably, developing countries and funders will take the availability and
and governments must take a systematic and holistic execution of maintenance into consideration.

Box 10

Hanoi Forum on Sustainable Infrastructure:

Integrating climate resilience and natural capital into transport infrastructure planning and design

Key lesson: A forum organised for the first time to unite government, industry, financial institutions and NGOs has
addressed new ways of financing ecologically sustainable infrastructure.

This unique and first-of-its-kind forum was co-organised in 2017 by the Asian Development Bank, the World Wildlife
Fund, the Viet Nam Institute of Strategy and Policy on Natural Resources and Environment, and the Greater Mekong
Subregion Environment Operations Center. The event convened planners, ecologists, engineers and climate specialists
alongside government ministries, multilateral banks, bilateral aid agencies, infrastructure finance investment firms, NGOs
and academia. The forum challenged participants to design infrastructure without eroding the ecological integrity or natural
capital of the lands they pass through.

Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals 71

 6. Financing safeguards

Box 10 (continued)

These forums normally bring together experts to talk about finance, or climate change, or ecology, but rarely at the same
forum and usually speaking different languages. The Hanoi Forum aimed to bring these streams together in one place,
for all to begin speaking the same language and work together on integrated solutions. Organisers used interactive
approaches including a “Trade-Off Infrastructure” game developed by The Natural Capital Project (Stanford University) to
get experts talking to each other about solutions for infrastructure challenges. On the finance side, participants discussed
principles for incorporating environmental, social, and governance risks into infrastructure designs.

The forum developed key principles for making infrastructure more sustainable. While a range of topics were covered
– including policy, planning, design, and finance – the overwhelming consensus was that planning for infrastructure
should start early, at national and landscape scales, well before a specific project is initiated to allow for integrated, multi-
sectoral priority setting. This involves diverse stakeholders and should be informed by strategic environmental and climate
assessments. These are called the Hanoi Principles for Sustainable Infrastructure. Under the theme of Facilitating Finance
for Sustainable Infrastructure’, three financing principles were developed:

• Principle 1: Develop financing systems and national policy to channel government funding and also attract international
and private funding to ensure sustainability and resilience aspects of infrastructure projects.

• Principle 2: Consider the full scope of impacts of infrastructure projects including comprehensive risk analysis (climate,
disaster, and other finance related risks) using the widest range of tools and methods (EIA, SEA, etc.).

• Principle 3: Promote mechanism to monetise environmental risks and bring out the full environmental cost of new
infrastructure projects and “build metal bridges” between green and finance worlds.

The forum was the first of its kind, bringing together biologists, engineers, planners, multilateral banks, aid agencies and
economists. Currently the principles are being refined, while case studies and guidance materials are being created to put
into practice in Asia, Africa and Latin America where global infrastructure development is accelerating dramatically.

Reference
Asian Development Bank (ADB) (2017). Forum on sustainable infrastructure: Integrating climate resilience and natural
capital into transport infrastructure planning and design – Event briefer (17-18 May 2017), Hanoi, Viet Nam. Available at:
http://www.gms-eoc.org/uploads/resources/1192/attachment/Sustainable%20Infrastructure%20-%20Forum%20Briefer.
pdf (Accessed 16 March 2022).

Participants at the Hanoi Forum play “Trade-off Infrastructure,” a game designed to spark discussion about infrastructure challenges and solutions.
© Kate Newman / WWF

72 Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals

 6. Financing safeguards

Box 11

USAID review enforces environmental safeguards on the Narayanghat – Butwal (NB) Road, Nepal

Key lesson: Deficient EIAs can result in inadequate safeguard recommendations and trigger a suspension of financial
assistance for LTI projects. This project was temporarily halted based on Asian Development Bank (ADB) and client
commitments to environmental safeguards.

The ADB-financed Narayanghat to

Butwal (NB) road improvement project
traverses the Terai Arc lowlands in Nepal.
This 115 km-long project involves the
expansion from two to four paved lanes,
and contains 24 km of road adjacent to
the buffer zone of Chitwan National Park.
Eight forest patches 47 km in length are
crossed by the NB road. These forest
patches serve as important biological
corridors for animal movement between
the National Park and the Terai Arc
Landscape. The road project will result
in increased number of wildlife road kills;
increased poaching due to improved
access; and limits to animal movement
due to habitat alteration and increased
vehicle and human activity.

The USAID review (Dear et al., 2019)

Roadside grading with revegetation after construction, part of a revised mitigation strategy for the
found numerous project deficiencies Narayanghat – Butwal (NB) Road, Nepal © Pramod Neupane
related to insufficient use of guidelines;
flawed pre-construction wildlife analyses;
mitigation recommendations not meeting
international standards; failure to consult
subject experts; and budgets inadequate
to support necessary safeguards.

Wildlife data were re-analysed in a

baseline biodiversity assessment. This
work resulted in a mitigation strategy
consisting of 112 wildlife underpasses
and two wildlife overpasses (50 m wide)
along the 115 km section of NB road.
The revised safeguards strategy reflects
a joint commitment by the Nepalese
government and ADB to develop a more
comprehensive approach to preserving
biodiversity.
One of 112 wildlife underpasses installed along the 115 km road as part of a revised mitigation
strategy for the Narayanghat – Butwal (NB) Road, Nepal
© Pramod Neupane

Reference
Dear, C., Melnyk, M., Sharma, N., Berg, K., Ament, R., Shrestha, M., and Pariwakam, M. (2019). Post-approval field review
report, SASEC Roads Improvement Project, Asian Development Bank, Nepal. Washington, DC: USAID.

Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals 73

 6. Financing safeguards

Key messages in this chapter leading World Bank Group standards, such as the
Environmental and Social Framework (ESF) for
• Unless environmental and social due diligence public sector lending and the International Finance
is addressed across the identification, financing, Corporation’s (IFC) Performance Standards for
assessment, development and implementation of private sector lending.
projects, investments in LTI will contribute to the
degradation of natural systems and undermine • China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and
other investments in biodiversity objectives, involvement in LTI projects around the world is
including PCAs, ecological corridors and ecological financed through a diversity of mechanisms that are
networks. evolving to meet international environmental norms,
including the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank
• Although projects, especially in developing countries, (AIIB), New Development Bank (NDB), China-Exim
have traditionally been financed via public resources, Bank and China Development Bank.
there is now a greater diversity of mechanisms,
including international financial institutions • The ongoing development, improvement and
(IFIs) – such as global, regional and subregional adoption of environmental and social safeguards
development banks, other bilateral institutions and by financial institutions is a key step towards
private or commercial institutions – that are providing sustainable infrastructure projects. However, there
vast amounts of funding that have varying policies remains considerable room for improvement in the
toward financing projects and requiring and fulfilling details of each safeguard and the outcomes of their
environmental and social due diligence. implementation.

• Approximately half of all MDBs have some form

of institutionalized environmental and social
safeguards, and many are similar and aligned with

74 Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals

 7. Mitigation measures

Part 7

Mitigation measures to reduce wildlife mortality

and maintain ecological connectivity across
roads, railways and canals

Malaysian sun bears (Helarctos malayanus) are vitally important to seed dispersal, pest control and nutrient cycling across their historical range. However, their
vulnerable populations are increasingly fragmented due to human infrastructure and development. © Gary Tabor

Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals 75

 7. Mitigation measures

The effective management of PCAs, the

conservation of ecological connectivity and
the needs of wildlife should be considered
at the beginning of the planning phase of
LTI projects. This can most efficiently and
effectively avoid, minimise, mitigate, restore,
and compensate (or offset) for ecological
impacts. By genuinely following the mitigation
hierarchy (Chapter 4), projects achieve
improved environmental, social and economic
outcomes. Where impacts are unavoidable,
significant effort should be made to minimise
negative effects and, when necessary, apply
appropriate mitigation measures. These
measures should be aimed at maintaining,
enhancing, and restoring ecological con­
nectivity, preventing or reducing wildlife
mortality and lessening other impacts.

Specially designed wildlife crossing structures

such as underpasses or overpasses with
accompanying directional fencing are effective
mitigation strategies for decreasing WVCs and
for increasing wildlife movement (van der Ree,
2007; Rytwinski et al., 2016). In the case of
canals, ramps, stairs and other structures can
enable wildlife to escape and reduce rates of
drowning. Non-structural mitigation techniques
such as signage, vegetation management,
lighting, movement detection or other strat­
egies may also be employed. However, these
are either completely ineffective or often
significantly less effective at safeguarding
connectivity and reducing rates of mortality
compared to wildlife crossing structures and
fencing (Huijser, et al., 2022).

To accomplish successful and cost-effective

conservation outcomes, LTI projects re­
quire close cooperation of infrastructure
planning institutions and natural resource
conservation experts. Furthermore, national
and local policies that support and incentivise
interagency and interdisciplinary collaboration
are needed to avoid or reduce the loss
of ecological connectivity due to LTI (see
Chapter 4). Where present, such policies
also contribute to the protection of overall
biodiversity in an efficient manner. It is almost
always more cost-effective to install wildlife
crossing structures and other mitigation
strategies during the initial construction
of projects, rather than to retrofit them
into existing infrastructure later. However,
upgrades and improvements to existing
roads, railways and canals provide important
opportunities to restore connectivity and
reduce mortality. Targeted mitigation on
Top: Egress steps next to a wildlife crossing structure over a canal in central India. Middle: Sediment
existing transport networks should also from canal water has partially filled many of the lower steps. Bottom: An unmitigated portion of the
be considered where high priority species, same canal © Robert Ament

76 Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals

 7. Mitigation measures

habitats or ecological corridors are impacted, independent of impacts of a project or the effectiveness of mitigation, field
any planned upgrade works. surveys, adaptive management and experimental trials should
be undertaken.

Defining mitigation objectives

Large herbivores
An important step in implementing effective mitigation
measures is to define the objectives, such as to improve Ungulates (hoofed mammals) occur naturally across all
motorist safety or increase connectivity for wildlife. Ideally, continents except Australia and include deer, moose and
the objectives are specific enough to enable a rigorous buffalo, which tend to gather in groups and move long
assessment of success (see Chapter 8). Identification of the distances. Consequently, they need to frequently cross LTI
target species or group of species for mitigation is critical to access seasonally available resources (Cramer et al.,
because wildlife perceive the landscape and potential threats 2015). Many species of ungulates are large-bodied, occur in
in varying ways, and accordingly, often require different high abundances and tend to move in herds, leading to their
solutions (Brennan et al., 2022). frequent involvement in WVCs. In North America and western
Europe, concern for motorist safety means these species are
One or more target species are typically selected as a focus often the focus of mitigation projects (Sawyer et al., 2016).
for planning and design, with the idea that, for example, a An equivalent large herbivore in Australia are kangaroos,
wildlife crossing structure designed for the target species or which also occur in large numbers in some localities and
group can also serve as a passageway for other species. are frequently involved in collisions with vehicles and trains
However, some species have very specific needs, such that (Visintin et al., 2016; 2018). Collisions between other large
effective mitigation measures may not encompass the needs herbivores (e.g. elephants, zebra, giraffe, etc.) and vehicles
of other species. Target species vary widely and may be rare or trains may be relatively less frequent than ungulates and
or endangered species. They can also include large-bodied kangaroos but can result in equally serious consequences for
species commonly involved in WVCs that may cause injury both people and wildlife involved in collisions, especially for
and death to motorists (such as elephants, deer, moose or small and declining populations of wildlife. Mitigation for these
kangaroo). Large carnivores are also ideal target species groups is therefore a high priority (Okita-Ouma et al., 2021).
whose extensive territories render them likely to encounter
LTI. In other cases, amphibians and reptiles are frequently
subject to mortality where their territories are bisected by Large carnivores
roads. Fish and other aquatic wildlife can also serve as
focal species in certain cases, as can birds and bats. While Large carnivores such as bears, wolves, tigers, wild dogs
mitigation strategies for some species are well-understood, and lynx are examples of species whose populations are
for many others, much less is known. This is especially the vulnerable to the impacts of vehicles and LTI (Grilo et al.,
case in Asia, Africa and South America, where transport 2015). Habitat fragmentation is also a major threat to many
ecology is still an incipient field. In these circumstances, large carnivores due to their large territorial requirements
a generalised approach using species guilds based on to find prey, mates and to meet other life history needs. If a
physical characteristics and anti-risk adaptations may be transportation route leads to a decrease in prey populations
helpful (Kintsch et al., 2015). In situations where there is high or hampers their ability to hunt, a carnivore population may
uncertainty about the occurrence of a species, the likely have reduced survival rates and reproductive success.

A mountain lion (Puma concolor) walks through an underpass located on the

African elephant (Loxodonta africana) using a railway underpass in Balule lands of the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes (CSKT) of the Flathead
Nature Reserve, South Africa. © Hannah de Villiers Reservation in Montana, USA. © MDT & WTI-MSU

Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals 77

 7. Mitigation measures

Direct mortality due to WVCs or drowning in canals would Amphibian populations near developments tend to have lower
then further impact an already vulnerable population. Large species richness and smaller population sizes than populations
carnivores are keystone species that play critical roles in further from LTI, particularly where they must migrate across to
controlling prey populations and regulating ecosystem access wetland breeding sites. Some species of snakes are at
functions. Due to their overarching ecological significance, increased risk because they immobilise in response to passing
and the dynamics between predator and prey, wildlife vehicles or may bask on roadways for thermoregulation
crossing structures and conservation efforts should be (Gunson et al., 2016). Turtles are especially vulnerable because
designed to conserve both groups (Smith et al., 2019). some species take more than 20 years to reach sexual maturity
and, thus, even relatively low rates of mortality reduce the
number of breeding adults and can lead to population decline
Arboreal species (Gunson et al., 2016).

Arboreal species spend all or most of their lives in trees and A variety of strategies have been used to protect ecological
primarily include possums, gliders, and primates, as well connectivity and reduce related mortality for amphibians and
as some frogs and reptiles (Soanes & van der Ree, 2015). reptiles, including specialised wildlife crossing structures,
Mitigation strategies for this group depends on their degree of along with fencing, signage and human intervention or road
arboreality and their willingness and ability to travel along the closures during migration seasons (Hamer et al., 2015;
ground, their gliding capability and degree to which they avoid Langen, 2015). In general, effective wildlife crossing structures
roads, railways and canals. A common approach around the for these species must consider their limited mobility, habitat
world are canopy bridges that connect tree canopies, made and physiological constraints, and, for some, their mass
of ropes, cables, poles or other materials (Soanes et al., migrations (Kintsch et al., 2015).
2017; see also Box 15). The installation of glider poles’ that
act as artificial trees for gliders to launch from and land on
have been widely deployed in Australia. Solutions for arboreal
frogs and reptiles are yet to be widely tested and deployed,
but crossings with continuous tree cover may be effective for
these species. Mitigation strategies for primates are similarly
being tested and developed (Donaldson & Cunneyworth
2015; Linden et al., 2020; Gregory, et al., 2022). Effective
fencing is also a challenge for arboreal species because many
are excellent climbers and can easily scale standard fencing.

Amphibians and reptiles

A greater percentage of amphibian and reptile species are
at risk of extinction globally than any other animal group
(IUCN, 2010), with LTI and traffic posing a major threat. For
example, amphibians and reptiles are affected by roads and
traffic through the loss, degradation and fragmentation of
their habitats as well as direct mortality (Jackson et al., 2015). A gravid (pregnant) female Eastern box turtle (Terrapene carolina carolina)
crosses the road in Patuxent Research Refuge, Maryland, USA. © Nicholas Tait

White-faced capuchin (Cebus imitator) cross Route 257 using a canopy bridge,
Costa Rica. © Daniela Araya-Gamboa / Panthera Female iguana (Iguana iguana) roadkill on Route 4, Costa Rica © Panthera

78 Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals

 7. Mitigation measures

Aquatic species wildlife species also move along waterways, offering the
potential for cost-effective opportunities to integrate terrestrial
Aquatic species are totally, or mostly, restricted to waterways and aquatic wildlife crossing structures at the same location.
and many drainage structures can be easily adapted to To do so effectively, the differing needs of terrestrial and
accommodate their requirements (Wagner, 2015; Ottburg aquatic wildlife must be accommodated. Structures that
& Blank, 2015). However, poorly designed and maintained replicate natural stream conditions within them may serve
bridges, culverts and pipes can disrupt the continuity of fish and other aquatic or semi-aquatic species. Yet, if the
stream channels and create barriers for fish and other aquatic bridge or culvert does not include dry banks on both sides of
species (Normann et al., 2005). Fortunately, many terrestrial a waterway, they may not allow the movement of terrestrial
wildlife. Similarly, terrestrial wildlife crossings that do not
provide sufficient depth of flow, control water velocities, or
minimise outlet drops may create barriers to the movement of
aquatic species.

Birds and bats

It is often assumed that because birds and bats can fly that
they are immune to the negative impacts of roads, railways
and canals (Abbott et al., 2015; Kociolek et al., 2015). How­
ever, some species avoid gaps in habitat created by linear
infrastructure, or avoid the disturbance caused by vehicle
traffic and trains. Others are subject to high rates of mortality
due to WVCs. There is increasing evidence that open span
bridges or vegetated overpasses which provide a (near-)
continuous strip of habitat are effective options for many
of these gap-sensitive species (e.g. Pell & Jones, 2015;
McGregor, et al., 2017). Solutions that minimise collisions and
mortality are more challenging but include fencing or walls
of poles to force individuals to fly up and over the road or
railway (Kociolek et al., 2015). The severity of impacts from
traffic or train noise and light can be minimised with panelled
fencing, soil berms, vegetation screening and other aspects
of landscape design that that block or reduce traffic or train
noise and artificial light.

Fish ladder on the Roubion River near Lyon, France. This structure was built in
2011 to provide passage for fish around a weir in place since 1964, originally built
to protect downstream infrastructure from flood damage. The ladder and ledges
were designed for eels, numerous fish and beaver. © Rodney van der Ree

A technician stands in a highway underpass incorporating design for free stream An owl struck by a passing vehicle. Many species of birds and bats are subject to
flow and ledges for dry passage by wildlife. © Daniela Araya-Gamboa/ Panthera high rates of mortality due to WVCs. © Axel Redder / Adobe Stock

Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals 79

 7. Mitigation measures

Key information – Main considerations for successful mitigation

• Identification of target species and priority locations based on data from WVCs, habitat conditions and wildlife
movement patterns

• Attention to opportunities and constraints of terrain and land use

• Prioritisation of region-wide approaches over site-by-site or project-by-project needs

• Identification of strategically important solutions and direction of limited fund to areas of greatest need and/or greatest
potential success

• Consideration of existing culverts and bridges that can be cost-effectively enhanced to improve ecological connectivity
and reduced WVC

• Installation of specifically designed wildlife crossing structures and associated directional fencing to funnel animals to
underpasses, overpasses, culverts, bridges, etc. and exclusionary fencing to reduce entry onto roads and railways,
and into canals

• Including addition of dry ledges, pathways and shelves to existing culverts and bridges for smaller species

• Replacing culverts or bridges with larger and more open structures

Selecting the proper site location for retrofits include the addition of dry ledges, pathways or
mitigation measures shelves to culverts or bridges (Forseman, 2004; Andrews et
al., 2015).
The locations of wildlife crossing structures, fences and other
mitigation measures can be determined via the analysis of Where modification of existing LTI is not feasible, culverts or
a variety of data that identify areas with high rates of wildlife bridges can be replaced with larger or more open structures
mortality, important habitats, and where best to support or designed to also allow movement of wildlife. For example, the
restore wildlife movement across LTI. The availability and installation of seven large box culverts and wildlife directional
quality of data sources can vary greatly, from spatially precise and exclusion fencing on an existing road in Wyoming, USA,
wildlife presence and movement to observational information resulted in over 49,000 mule deer passages in the first three
provided by wildlife managers or local community members. years and an 81% reduction in the rate of WVCs (Sawyer
Habitat and movement models and hotspot analyses of WVCs et al., 2012). Stand-alone projects in the United States that
can all be used to identify potential areas to install mitigation focused on resolving WVCs have realized a breakeven point
measures (Gunson & Teixeira, 2015). Once priority areas are where benefits exceed project costs in as little as three to five
identified, a mitigation strategy needs to consider opportunities years (Sawyer et al., 2012; Gagnon et al., 2015; Gagnon et
and constraints of terrain and land use. Ideally, region-wide al., 2018).
approaches rather than site-by-site or project-by-project
needs are adopted to identify strategically important mitigation The most effective approach for reducing rates of wildlife
solutions and direct limited funds to areas of greatest need. mortality and maintaining, enhancing and restoring animal
movement involves the installation of wildlife crossing
While new projects are excellent opportunities to integrate structures and associated directional fencing. This approach
mitigation into LTI, many existing roads, railways and canals is not always feasible or cost-effective due to terrain or other
already affect areas with high levels of biodiversity. Most constraints. Many other approaches have been employed
infrastructure around the globe was constructed without with varying levels of success (van der Ree et al., 2015).
consideration of the needs of wildlife and often present Strategies with some success that require significant
barriers to movement or ongoing causes of wildlife mortality. maintenance include:
Fortunately, many existing culverts and bridges are potentially
suitable for use by at least some wildlife with quick and • Vegetation management to improve driver sightlines,
cost-effective enhancements possible to improve movement wildlife visibility and reduce attractiveness of road and
and reduce mortality. For example, adding fencing to funnel railway verges to wildlife;
animals to existing culverts and bridges can keep them off
roads and railways and reduce rates of collision by 95% • Reduction in the use of de-icing salts that attract some
(Gagnon et al., 2015; Gagnon et al., 2018). Other simple herbivores;

80 Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals

 7. Mitigation measures

Figure 18: Map of migration paths of pronghorn (Antilocapra americana), mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus), and elk (Cervus canadensis) near Interstate 80 in Wyo­
ming, USA. The road creates a barrier effect to movement and a corridor effect when wildlife paths are diverted along the road. Reproduced with permission from Wild
Migrations: Atlas of Wyoming’s Ungulates, Oregon State University Press. © 2018 University of Wyoming and University of Oregon

Figure 19: Crossing intensity of tiger (Panthera tigris tigris), leopard (Panthera pardus fusca), gaur (Bos gaurus) and wild dog (dhole; Cuon alpinus) in India. Using data
collected by Wildlife Conservation Trust scientists, roadkill hotspots were located, and suitable locations identified for mitigation structures. © Wildlife Conservation Trust

Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals 81

 7. Mitigation measures

• Carcass removal to prevent secondary mortality by with sonic devices on trains to deter bears shows promise
scavengers; (Backs et al., 2020).

• Road and railway closures at certain times of the day or The potential for unintended consequences of different mitiga­
year in wildlife crossing zones; tion options should be carefully considered during planning to
optimise outcomes. For example, exclusionary fencing alone
• Animal detection systems with driver warning signs, will reduce WVCs but reduces or eliminates any connectivity
speed limit reductions and other traffic calming measures for some species. Fencing alone should therefore only be
to reduce road and rail collisions; and adopted in situations with high rates of wildlife mortality and
where connectivity at that specific location is not immediately
• Inclusion of ramps and ropes in canals to allow trapped required. Similarly, pruning trees to improve sightlines may
wildlife to climb out. increase attractiveness of the roadside to herbivores through
increased growth of desirable shrubs, forbs and grasses.
Approaches with little evidence of success include whistles, Removing trees also reduces connected habitat for arboreal
sonic devices and reflectors, or lights to deter animals from species and increases the barrier effect for gap-sensitive
roadsides and railways, along with standard signage to warn birds, reptiles and small mammals.
motorists (van der Ree et al., 2015). However, recent trials

Box 12

Functional connectivity as a tool to help plan where to mitigate road impacts on movement and
mortality in Portugal’s Montado landscape

Key lesson: Connectivity models built from species occur­

rence data can be used to prioritize locations for mitigation
measures along roads. This approach can be widely repli­
cated across large landscapes to inform road agencies and
land conservation organizations.

Mitigation measures can reduce the barrier effect of roads

and wildlife mortality by retrofitting existing structures
(e.g. cul­verts). Often, funding is limited and a prioritization
process is needed to identify the most critical road or rail
segments for implementing measures. Ideally, crossing
structures are placed where animal movement is highest,
such as at wildlife corridors.
The study area location. (a) Location within Portugal. (b) The road sector
(black line) on a connectivity map (high connectivity in red; low connectivity in
Portugal’s Montado is a biodiverse agro-silvo-pastoral eco­ yellow), also showing genet roadkill locations (blue dots). The model is from
system crossed by roads and railways. Researchers here Valerio et al. (2019) and under CC BY licence (Creative Commons Attribution
4.0 International licence).
built connectivity models for genets (Genetta genetta), a
small carnivore particularly affected by roads (Valerio et al.,
2019). Functional connectivity models were informed by species occurrence data to identify movement corridors and road
sections most critical for mitigation. Independent roadkill data were used to evaluate how well the models predicted genet
roadkill locations and dispersal. The study showed that connectivity models built from occurrence data accurately predicted
roadkills. They also performed well at predicting daily and dispersal movements.

Some lessons learned from this exercise that may aid transportation agencies who must fund wildlife crossing structures are that:

• Crossing structures are costly and require a process of identification and prioritization;
• Connectivity models built with species occurrence data can accurately predict roadkill locations; and
• Models can be a useful tool to help identify locations and prioritise mitigation investments, and can be easily replicated
at other study areas.

Reference
Valerio, F., Carvalho, F., Barbosa, A. M., Mira, A., and Santos, S. M. (2019). Accounting for connectivity uncertainties in
predicting roadkills: a comparative approach between path selection functions and habitat suitability models. Environmental
Management 64(3):329–343. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-019-01191-6.

82 Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals

 7. Mitigation measures

Box 13

Mitigating the impacts of the Q-T Railway on long-distance migrating Tibetan antelope

Key lesson: With adequate data, mitigation measures can preserve near-optimal migration routes for wide-ranging animal
populations.

Reliable pre-construction information on the fine-scale travel patterns of migratory species is necessary if mitigation
measures are to be effective. In rural western China, the highest-elevation railway on Earth transports visitors from Qinghai
to Tibet (QTR). The QTR bisects the migration route of antelope approximately 40 km from their summer calving area.
A detailed study of the estimated impacts of the QTR on Tibetan antelope (Pantholops hodgsonii) migration was not
conducted prior to design. Most information was based on anecdotal field observations. Four major wildlife crossing
structures eventually were constructed (Wubei underpass, Chumaer Bridge I and II, Wudaoliang Bridge), all designed for
connectivity of migratory Tibetan antelope to their wintering and calving areas. Crossing structures offer the only means for
antelope to cross the railway.

The Wubei underpass was evaluated to determine how placement affected migration routes and movement efficiency.
The study utilized a Tibetan antelope tracking (GPS) dataset to compare actual migrations with optimal’ migration (i.e. the
route with least energy expenditure according to topography). While the underpass did facilitate antelope migration, animals
deviated from their optimal migration route (Xu et al., 2019). This deviation led to longer travel distances and greater energy
expenditure. Animal migration is closely associated with reproduction and migration disruptions are especially detrimental
on the return trip when lactating females must migrate to meet energy demands and feed their offspring. Despite two other
underpasses being closer to the optimal migration routes, few antelope used them.

We learn here that animal movement and behavioural studies should be conducted before and after the construction of
underpasses to reveal the true impacts and the effectiveness of crossing structures aimed to facilitate connectivity. This is
especially important for migratory ungulate species that connect calving grounds with over-wintering areas.

The Qinghai-Tibet Railway (QTR) travels over China’s Wubei Underpass, constructed to facilitate Tibetan antelope (Pantholops hodgsonii) migration between
key habitats on either side of the rail. © Wenjing Xu

Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals 83

 7. Mitigation measures

Box 13 (continued)

Tibetan antelope (Pantholops hodgsonii), an iconic species in Tibet © Nyanpo Yurtse / Environment Protection Association

Reference
Xu, W., Huang, Q., Stabach, J., Buho, H., and Leimgruber, P. (2019). Railway underpass location affects migration distance
in Tibetan antelope (Pantholops hodgsonii). PLoS One 14(2):e0211798. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0211798.

Box 14

Simple, low-cost mitigation measures reduce Zanzibar red colobus mortality by 80%

Key lesson: In some cases, low-cost interventions like speed bumps and signage can lead to significant protections for
wildlife.

Zanzibar red colobus (Procolobus kirkii) runs across a road. Crossing signs and speed bumps were placed by park managers attempting to reduce collisions
that are now the leading cause of mortality for the species across Unguja (also known as Zanzibar Island), Tanzania. © Alexander Georgiev

84 Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals

 7. Mitigation measures

Box 14 (continued)

Proposed and constructed development corridors in Africa have the potential to affect nearly one-third of Africa’s protected
areas (Sloan et al., 2017). Simple measures such as speed limits, speed bumps and signage offer affordable options for
protected area managers looking to mitigate the effects of LTI. Unguja (also known as Zanzibar Island) is home to 6,000
endangered Zanzibar red colobus (Piliocolobus kirkii), a species endemic to the island. Half of these individuals are in
Jozani-Chwaka Bay National Park. With no large predators located within the island’s only national park, road mortality has
become the leading cause of red colobus mortality. The road which intersects the national park was resurfaced in 1996 and
this improvement allowed for faster travel speeds and increased traffic. Historical estimates suggest that annual average
road mortality comprised 14.5% of the local population living near the road.

In response, park managers began planning how best to mitigate road impacts on these primates. Their solution was to
install four speed bumps and wildlife crossing signs close to the park entrance. After installation, they found that the annual
average road fatalities of red colobus was reduced to 3.2% of the location population (Olgun et al., 2021). While further
mitigation measures are being explored, this example highlights the efficacy of relatively low-cost mitigation options that can
be viable for protected area managers.

References
Olgun, H., Mohammed, M. K., Mzee, A. J., Green, M. E. L., Davenport, T. R. B., and Georgiev, A. V. (2021). The
implications of vehicle collisions for the Endangered endemic Zanzibar red colobus Piliocolobus kirkii. Oryx 56(2):268-276.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0030605320000605.

Sloan, S., Bertzky, B., and Laurance, W. F. (2017). African development corridors intersect key protected areas. African
Journal of Ecology 55(4):731–737. https://doi.org/10.1111/aje.12377.

Zanzibar red colobus (Piliocolobus kirkii) on Unguja (also known as Zanzibar Island), Tanzania © Alexander Georgiev

Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals 85

 7. Mitigation measures

Key messages in this chapter fencing, are effective mitigation strategies that far
outperform other non-structural strategies.
• The effective management of PCAs, the conservation
of ecological connectivity and the needs of wildlife • It is more cost-effective to install wildlife crossing
should be considered at the beginning of the struc­tures during initial construction but retrofitting
planning phase of LTI projects. and replacement should also be considered during
upgrades of existing infrastructure or as stand-alone
• Where impacts from projects are unavoidable and projects.
sig­nificant minimisation options are exhausted,
appropriate mitigation measures should be applied • Successful planning and construction of mitigation
through careful planning. measures requires the identification of specific
objectives and target species as well as identification
• Specially designed wildlife crossing structures, such of priority locations for implementing mitigation
as underpasses and overpasses with accompanying solutions.

86 Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals

 8. Monitoring and evaluation

Part 8

Monitoring and evaluation

Technicians monitor the effectiveness of a wildlife underpass on Route 4, Costa Rica. © Daniela Araya-Gamboa / Panthera

Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals 87

 8. Monitoring and evaluation

Research, monitoring and evaluation is an integral component Assessment of mitigation effectiveness can help to improve
of landscape management and conservation (Nichols & the planning and design of future mitigation measures using an
Williams, 2006). A systematic and comprehensive monitoring adaptive management approach (CMP, 2020). As measures
program is important when evaluating the effectiveness of are evaluated for a variety of taxa in different ecosystems
management of PCAs (Margules & Pressey, 2000). The and cultural contexts, increasingly reliable information and
impacts of existing and new linear infrastructure, especially insights will support the development of robust best practice
within and around PCAs, wilderness areas and ecological techniques. While research and monitoring have provided
corridors and networks, should also be evaluated and the excellent guidance on effectiveness of various measures in
effectiveness of mitigation measures assessed. parts of Australia, Europe and North America (van der Ree et
al., 2015; IENE, 2021; Huijser et al., 2021), there is an urgent
need for parallel research in developing countries with high
Why evaluate performance? levels of biodiversity, complex ecosystems and unique fauna.

Assessing whether actions taken in all approaches of the

mitigation hierarchy are functional and meet their intended
objectives is an important best management practice. Such
Mitigation measures need to be
evaluation allows for: (i) appraisal of whether the resources effective
invested achieved the intended outcome; (ii) identification
of necessary modifications or adaptive management Mitigation measures are primarily designed to reduce wildlife
of actions to achieve better performance; and (iii) the mortality and promote ecological connectivity by allowing
generation of knowledge to maximise the success of future safe movement of animals across LTI. The criteria to measure
projects. Considerable research has been conducted on the whether goals are achieved depend on whether the purpose
performance of various measures to reduce collisions with of the measures is to reduce wildlife mortality or to restore
large wildlife over the past 20 years (Rytwinski et al., 2016), functional population connectivity, or to achieve both
especially in temperate climates and developed countries. aims. Some guidance has been developed to evaluate the
In many parts of the developing world, however, where the performance and conservation value of mitigation measures
application of more sustainable LTI is now growing, the (van der Grift et al., 2015; van der Grift & van der Ree, 2015).
relative effectiveness of different measures is unknown even Goals range from measures geared to benefit a single species
for some common species. to entire populations, to those that seek to address ecological
processes and functions (Clevenger, 2005). The use of
crossing structures by wildlife does not guarantee that they
are effective (Clements, 2013). Rather, assessing effectiveness
is complex, and interpretations of functional mitigation and
impact reduction can vary (van der Grift et al., 2013).

Ideally, performance objectives for each mitigation measure

should be developed a priori, be agreed upon by all stake­
holders, be scientifically defensible and be measurable.
Further, adequate funding must be in place to ensure that:

A hippo (Hippopotamus amphibius) using a railway underpass in Balule Nature

Reserve, South Africa. This photograph was taken using a camera trap, which
is a key monitoring tool that informs managers about the effectiveness of wildlife
crossing structures, including species diversity and numbers utilizing them. ©
Technicians install a wildlife camera onto a tree trunk in Malaysia. © Rosli Hasan Hannah de Villiers

88 Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals

 8. Monitoring and evaluation

(i) the evaluation of the effectiveness of mitigation measures thinking through the duration of data collection to sufficiently
is conducted in a sound manner, and (ii) that applicable laws answer both management questions and applied research
and policies are enforced to minimise adverse LTI impacts questions. Sampling should be adequately resourced and
on threatened species and other statutory natural resource account for seasonal variations, inter-annual variability and
requirements (e.g. those that protect tiger corridors, wetlands, necessary sample size for robust analysis.
community forests, water quality).
Study designs should be able to test for anticipated changes
before and after mitigation measures are installed. Impacts of
concern may include mortality rates, movement patterns and
Performance assessments can be complex ecosystem processes such as changes in predator-
complex prey relationships. Effective measures should result in positive
changes, such as reduced mortality, or increased movement
LTI affects wildlife at all levels of biological organization, and ecological connectivity after mitigation. Several study
from genes to species and populations, to communities designs to test for these changes using control and treatment
and ecosystems (Noss, 1990). Measures of performance (mitigation) sections have been published (Roedenbeck et
can therefore vary across a gradient of complexity from the al., 2007; Rytwinski et al., 2015; van der Grift et al., 2013).
individual animal level (e.g. use of structures, dispersal) to Options include: (i) collecting data before and after mitigation
the meta-community or ecosystem levels (e.g. community at sites with mitigation and sites without; the latter known
structure, population dynamics). Each of these suggests as control sites. This design is commonly called Before-
different sets of mitigation measures and requires specific After-Control-Impact (BACI) and is typically a robust design
approaches to research and monitoring. Biological diversity and should always be implemented if feasible (Rytwinski et
should be monitored at multiple levels of organization and al., 2015), while some LTI projects may benefit from other
at various spatial and temporal scales (Noss, 1990). For
example, evaluations of small culverts for small- and medium-
sized mammals will likely need different monitoring techniques
and evaluation processes to those applied to overpasses or
other types of wildlife crossing structures, or for rare or wide-
ranging species of wildlife. To frame objectives and determine
performance indicators, it is also important to consider
specific spatial and temporal scales. These factors influence
how ecological connectivity is measured within populations
and ecosystems, and the cost and duration of research that
is required to address performance adequately (Table 1).

Study design and methods

After formulating mitigation objectives, a critical next step
is the design of a monitoring program that applies a robust
study design, appropriate methods of data collection and
analysis. The design of the research framework requires

Glider poles are installed on the verges of linear infrastructure or in the centre
median at locations where the size of the gap in tree cover exceeds the glide
distance of gliding animals. This close-up shows the cross-arm or launch plat­
form at the top of a glider pole, along with cameras and solar panels to evaluate
Wildlife cameras and passive integrated transponder (PIT) tags mounted at the use. The metal shield on top of the pole and the pipe under the cross arm pro­
end of a canopy bridge in Australia. PIT tag readers are technologies used to vides shelter from aerial predators. The cross-arm points towards the trees on
track the movement of individual animals that carry internal microchips. the opposite side of the infrastructure, thereby decreasing the size of the gap to
© Rodney van der Ree be crossed. © Rodney van der Ree

Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals 89

 8. Monitoring and evaluation

Table 1: Mitigation objectives for wildlife crossings (simple to complex), target level of biological organization, and required study duration and cost to evaluate effectiveness

Level Mitigation objectives Level of biological organization Cost & duration of monitoring effort
Movement within populations and Genetic Low-cost / Short-term
1 genetic interchange
Ensure that the biological requirements Species-population Moderate-to-High cost / Long-term
2 of finding food, cover and mates are
satisfied
Dispersal from maternal ranges and Species-population Moderate-to-High cost / Long-term
3 recolonisation after long absences
Population movement in response Ecosystem-community High-cost / Long-term
4 to environmental changes or natural
disasters
5 Long-term maintenance of Ecosystem-community High-cost / Long-term
metapopulations, community stability,
and ecosystem processes

designs (Thiault et al., 2017); (ii) data collection before and 2012). Monitoring strategies also need to allow enough time
after mitigation with no control areas; and (iii) data collection and data to allow for strong inferences about wildlife crossing
post-mitigation with control areas (Clements, 2013). performance. Importantly, it can take several years for wildlife
to adapt and learn to use wildlife crossing structures (Reed et
In evaluation, it is also important to determine whether al., 1975; Gagnon et al., 2011), so most monitoring should be
unrelated factors might be affecting monitoring results and, conducted for at least 4–5 years. More well-designed studies
ultimately, performance. These types of factors can include that quantify the effectiveness of mitigation measures are still
illegal hunting and human disturbance, damaged fencing needed (Rytwinski et al., 2016), especially in Africa, Asia and
that allows wildlife to enter the right-of-way, and passages South America.
blocked by debris or occupied by people (Clements, 2013).
These factors must be monitored and managed to avoid A variety of methods can be used to assess the performance
negative effects on wildlife movement that can confound of mitigation measures (Table 2) and it is important to choose
results. a method that provides data that is most closely aligned to
the objective. For example, roadkill surveys indicate changes
The duration of monitoring will vary depending on the objec­ in mortality rates; tracking methods provide information on
tives of mitigation and the likely response time of the target individual behaviours and movements; genetic sampling
species. Simple power analysis can be used to determine and camera traps (for species with unique markings) identify
data requirements needed to detect significant changes in individuals and functional genetic connectivity; and mark-
species mortality rates (Guillera-Arroita & Lahoz-Monfort, recapture can be used for population responses.

Arboreal species crossing structures are being deployed around the world. Here, a technician in Costa Rica places cameras to monitor their
effectiveness and use. © Panthera

90 Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals

 8. Monitoring and evaluation

Table 2: Methods of measuring effectiveness of mitigating impacts of LTI

Metric Methods Selected references

Roadkill rates • Surveys Gerow, et al., 2010
• Encounter surveys Guinard, et al., 2012
• Citizen science Lee et al., 2006
• Review of existing databases
Wildlife use of crossing structures • Sign surveys Gonzales-Gallina, 2018
• Tracking beds (e.g. sand, snow, sooted Clevenger & Waltho, 2005
track plates) Clements, 2013
• Camera traps (with or without individual Soanes et al., 2013
identification) Mateus et al., 2011
• Video cameras Wang et al., 2017
• Passive integrated transponder (PIT)
tags and automated readers
Animal movements and dispersal • Animal tracking (e.g. radio, satellite, Shephard et al., 2008
GPS, etc.) Colchero et al., 2011
• Species encounter rates (camera- Bautista et al., 2004
trapping without individual identification)
• Camera-trapping with individual
identification (dispersal)
• Movement/behavioural observation
Genetic and demographic connectivity • Non-invasive sampling (hair snaring’) Sawaya et al., 2014
• Invasive sampling to collect DNA Balkenhol & Waits, 2009
Soanes et al., 2018
Species occurrence and distribution • Camera trapping, trapping, active Goosem, 2002
(plants, animals) searches Herrmann et al., 2016
• Vegetation plots
Animal population demographic • Capture-mark-recapture Garland & Bradley, 1984
parameters McCall et al., 2010

effective. Similarly, pre-construction data gathered on the

occurrence of local species and wildlife movements should
Adaptive mitigation in transportation be used to determine the locations and types of mitigation
planning measures. Adaptive management of the project design
from pre-construction monitoring results will require regular
The rapid expansion of LTI across the globe emphasises communication between the wildlife research coordinator
the importance of monitoring and evaluation as a vital and the environmental manager of the construction project.
part of informed decision making. It will serve to shape Subsequently, close coordination between research and
the deployment of future mitigation measures and the management will allow for timely changes to project design
development of better policies (Walters, 1986). Monitoring plans that reflect the most current results from monitoring
results should be used in a deliberate, adaptive management’ activities. In addition to using monitoring and evaluation
approach to make informed decisions with the information results to inform individual projects, adaptive mitigation allows
available (CMP, 2020). For example, the design of wildlife for meta-analysis by increasing experimental replications
crossing structures and associated measures like fencing (Rytwinski et al., 2016) of similar measures, similar habitats
should be improved if monitoring results show they are not and/or of the same species in different locations.

Post-construction monitoring of two honey badgers (Mellivora capensis) using a railway underpass in Balule Nature Reserve, South Africa © Hannah de Villiers

Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals 91

 8. Monitoring and evaluation

Box 15

Using a Before-After-Control-Impact (BACI) study design to evaluate canopy bridges and glider
poles for arboreal mammals in Australia

Key lesson: Programs that evaluate the use and effectiveness of wildlife crossing structures and other mitigation must be
scientifically robust to ensure the information they provide is reliable.

One of the first studies to use a replicated Before-After-Control-Impact (BACI) experimental design to assess the effectiveness
of crossing structures was conducted in southeastern Australia for arboreal mammals. The primary focus was the squirrel
glider, a small (~300 gm) marsupial that can glide up to 40 m, limiting its ability to safely cross wide roads.

A collaborative project between the state transportation agency and two universities established the baseline, or before’,
conditions for arboreal mammals through detailed field studies, including estimating population size and rates of crossing
(van der Ree et al., 2010), survival (McCall et al., 2010) and gene flow at multiple sites along the Hume Freeway in northern
Victoria. After installing two canopy bridges and three arrays of glider poles, the same parameters were re-measured and
compared at sites with and without crossing structures, as well as before and after mitigation. Similar measurements were
taken at another five bridges and 12 pole arrays in New South Wales.

Extensive after’ studies showed a wide

range of species and multiple individuals
used the structures over time. Use varied
by species and population density, and
for glider poles use was related to glide
length and number of poles in the array
(Soanes et al., 2013; Soanes & van der Ree,
2015). Gene flow before the installation of
the crossing structures was significantly
increased after mitigation, demonstrating
a successful reduction in the barrier effect.
Only one (unsuccessful) predation event
was observed from >13,000 detections of
arboreal mammals on the structures (Soanes
et al., 2018).

The main strengths of this work were the

use of unmitigated control sites to provide a
robust comparison and a suite of measures Arboreal crossing over Hume Freeway, Australia © Rodney van der Ree
(e.g. use, rate of crossing, survival, and gene
flow) used to evaluate success. Transportation agencies and researchers should collaborate more to undertake these
experiments to better understand the effectiveness of mitigation, not just whether or not animals use a crossing structure and
how often they use them.

References
McCall, S., van der Ree, R., McCarthy, M. A., Cesarini, S., Soanes, K., and Harper, M. J. (2010). Highway living reduces survival
of Squirrel Gliders. Ecology and Society 15(3):27. Available at: https://ecologyandsociety.org/vol15/iss3/art27/

Soanes, K., Carmody Lobo, M., Vesk, P. A., McCarthy, M. A., Moore, J. L., and van der Ree, R. (2013). Movement re-
established but not restored: inferring the effectiveness of road crossing mitigation for a gliding mammal by monitoring use.
Biological Conservation 159:434–441. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2012.10.016.

Soanes, K., Mitchell, B., and van der Ree, R. (2017). Quantifying predation attempts on arboreal marsupials using wildlife
crossing structures above a major road. Australian Mammalogy 39:254–257. https://doi.org/10.1071/AM16044.

Soanes, K., Taylor, A. C., Sunnucks, P., Vesk, P. A., Cesarini, S., and van der Ree, R. (2018). Evaluating the success of
wildlife crossing structures using genetic approaches and an experimental design: lessons from a gliding mammal. Journal
of Applied Ecology 55:129–138. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.12966.

92 Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals

 8. Monitoring and evaluation

Box 15 (continued)

Soanes, K., Vesk, P. A., and van der Ree, R. (2015). Monitoring the use of road-crossing structures by arboreal marsupials:
insights gained from motion-triggered cameras and passive integrated transponder (PIT) tags. Wildlife Research 42:241–
256. https://doi.org/10.1071/WR14067.

Van der Ree, R., Cesarini, S., Sunnucks, P., Moore, J. L., and Taylor, A. C. (2010). Large gaps in canopy reduce road
crossing by a gliding mammal. Ecology and Society 15(4):35. Available at: https://ecologyandsociety.org/vol15/iss4/art35/,

A squirrel glider (Petaurus norfolcensis) captured on camera using a glider pole over Warrenbayne road, Australia
© Rodney van der Ree

Ringtail possum (Pseudocheirus peregrinus) with young on its back using a canopy bridge in Australia
© Rodney van der Ree

Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals 93

 8. Monitoring and evaluation

Box 16

Asian elephant crossing structures on the Sixiao Expressway, Xishuangbanna, China

Key lesson: Monitoring and performance evaluation is critical for understanding the effectiveness of bridges and tunnels
built for Asian elephants.

Mengyang is the largest nature reserve in Xishuangbanna and is home to more than half of China’s Asian elephants
(Elaphus maximus) – approximately 150–180 individuals. Forests provide important habitats, natural food sources and

Asian elephant (Elephas maximus) underpass across the Sixiao Expressway, Xishuangbanna, China © Yun Wang

Signage alerts travellers to the presence of wild elephants and asks them to refrain from honking their car horns, Sixiao Expressway,
Xishuangbanna, China. © Yun Wang

94 Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals

 8. Monitoring and evaluation

Box 16 (continued)

minerals for the elephants. These animals use both sides of the reserve and cross Sixiao Expressway and the 213 National
Road frequently. Crops outside the reserve further attract elephants to approach villages scattered along the road.

Constructed in 2006, Sixiao Expressway is 97 km long with 18 km bisecting the Mengyang Nature Reserve. The EIA for the
project indicated the highway would fragment habitat and act as a barrier to movement of elephants. Mitigation measures
were suggested consisting of wildlife crossing structures including viaducts or flyovers as many parts of the expressway
were crossing large valleys. As a result, 23 bridges and two tunnels were built. Crossings had funnel fencing (1.9 m in
height) on both sides of the expressway to keep animals off the road and direct them to use the crossings.

The bridges and tunnels were monitored from April 2006 to May 2008. Many of the crossings were not used by elephants,
presumably because they were outside elephant habitat. However, use of the crossings increased slightly from 76 total
crossings (at eight crossing structures) in 2006 to 86 detected crossings (at 10 crossing structures) in 2008. Elephants
seemed to prefer crossing structures placed along their original corridors. However, elephants also walked across the
expressway surface at grade; most of these crossings occurred in the evening, causing several vehicle-elephant collisions.

Key lessons learned from this project were that human activities that cause deforestation near the crossings – such as
quarrying – should be prohibited; crossings should be sited at the original migration routes and movement corridors of
Asian elephants; and lastly, careful planning is needed prior to road construction which involves collaboration among
politicians, scientists, conservation practitioners and land use planners.

Reference
Pan, W.J., Lin L., Luo A., and Zhang, L. (2009). Corridor use by Asian elephants. Integrative Zoology 4(2):220-231.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-4877.2009.00154.x.

An overpass used by Asian elephants (Elephas maximus) in China © Yun Wang

Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals 95

 8. Monitoring and evaluation

Key messages in this chapter linear infrastructure and evaluate the effectiveness of
mitigation measures.
• Research and monitoring that evaluates the
performance of mitigation measures is a critical • Study designs should test for anticipated changes
component of infrastructure projects to ensure they before and after (commonly called Before-After-
function and meet their intended objectives. Control-Impact (BACI)) mitigation measures are
installed, such as mortality rates, movement and
• Such assessments can evaluate if resources were complex ecosystem processes like changes in
well-allocated, whether modifications are necessary predator-prey relationships.
to increase performance, and inform the planning
and design of future projects. • The results of monitoring should be applied by
overseeing authorities toward adaptive management
• Although assessing effectiveness can be complex, that consistently improves the project and its
there are exemplary study designs and methods performance.
available.

• There is an urgent need in developing countries for

research and monitoring to quantify the impacts of

96 Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals

 9. Construction, operation and maintenance

Part 9

Construction, operation and maintenance

of roads, railways and canals

Saiga antelope (Saiga tatarica), a critically endangered species in central Asia, migrate up to 1,000 km each year in a north-south orientation. In 2015, Kazakhstan,
Mongolia, Russian and Uzbekistan agreed on joint conservation measures to facilitate the species’ free movement and survival under the UN Convention on
Migratory Species (CMS). © Nikolay Denisov / Adobe Stock

Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals 97

 9. Construction, operation and maintenance

The construction, operation and maintenance of LTI projects adjacent to the road, railway or canal. Simple steps to
are critical to ensuring that long-term ecological impacts are minimise or mitigate these impacts include:
limited in accordance with aims and objectives detailed during
the planning, design and approval phases. Roads, railways • Ensure the bidding documents and contracts clearly
and canals that are poorly built, badly operated or inadequately specify all mandatory environmental requirements
maintained can have significant impacts on PCAs, ecological and restrictions, with non-compliance consequences
connectivity, and biodiversity. These longer-term impacts described;
typically remain unaddressed because the focus of regulators
and the community has moved on or shifted to other projects • Locate construction camps, offices, storage areas,
or issues. This is particularly apparent on highly contentious parking areas and related construction facilities offsite
projects when opponents who campaigned for many years and avoid natural vegetation, ecological corridors and
to stop or change the alignment or design can feel that the other sensitive areas;
struggle is over once construction begins. However, project
construction is a high-risk stage for not achieving the ecological • Physically demarcate areas of special concern and
goals of a project. This is because many unexpected changes sensitivity as no-go’ zones with fencing or bunting,
can occur, sequential interpretations of detailed designs can and ensure they are maintained and enforced during
result in the construction of sub-standard mitigation measures, construction;
or they can be dropped from the project entirely due to
time and cost over-runs or lack of contingency funding. In • Ensure strict hygiene and waste management protocols
addition, costs involved in building mitigation measures can are developed and followed, and that waste materials are
be wasted if they are poorly or incorrectly maintained and appropriately re-used, recycled or disposed;
become ineffective. After a project has been planned and
designed, there are three phases related to successful and • Undertake strict supervision and formal performance
efficient transportation systems: construction, operation and audits once construction commences, with non-
maintenance. These phases have different objectives and can compliance consequences enforced;
affect biodiversity and ecological connectivity in different ways
(McGuire & Morrall, 2000). • Establish an environmental and social code of conduct
for all workers and visitors to the construction site,
including ensuring all workers and visitors are inducted
prior to commencement, with periodic refreshers
Minimising and mitigating the as required, explaining the environmental and social
environmental impacts of construction conditions and expectations and encouraging workers
and visitors to report breaches of the code and any
While only temporary, construction impacts can still be observations of significant wildlife;
significant and affect the presence, survival and movement
of wildlife due to noise, operation of heavy equipment, • Provide incentives to encourage exceptional
excavation and blasting and increased human presence. environmental outcomes, such as clearing less wildlife
Even the construction of mitigation measures, such as habitat than approved;
underpasses, overpasses and fencing, can cause significant
ecological impacts that need to be considered. For example, • Prohibit hunting, fishing, timber cutting and plant
fencing and approach ramps to wildlife crossing structures collection within and adjacent to the project area, while
may require the clearing of large areas of high-quality habitat restricting firearm permits to security personnel only; and

Key information – Three phases of a project on the ground

Construction is the physical process of building the infrastructure. While relatively short in duration, construction activity
has the potential to cause significant interruption and disturbance to habitats and wildlife and their movement due to noise,
movement of equipment, disturbance, establishment of work camps, and the sourcing and delivery of raw materials.

Operation commences after construction and represents the use of infrastructure creating noise, light, chemical and other
disturbance and impacts to the surrounding environment, as well as causing deterioration of the asset itself. Operational
activities include salting to de-ice surfaces, sweeping, line painting, and mowing and pruning of adjacent vegetation.

Maintenance is the routine and periodic activity required to maintain or extend the effective life of the infrastructure, and
includes pothole patching, re-sealing, repair and replacement of guard-rails and fencing. Maintenance is also done on
mitigation measures such as repair to fencing, cleaning of underpasses and other work to strengthen wildlife crossing
structures (van der Ree and Tonjes, 2015).

98 Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals

 9. Construction, operation and maintenance

• Incorporate seasonal scheduling, suspension or Blasting and clearing

reduction of construction activities to address sensitive
times of the year such as annual migrations, hibernation While the construction of roads, railways and canals is
periods or breeding seasons of species. noisy, dirty and disruptive, there are numerous strategies to
minimise these effects in sensitive environments, including:

• Avoid bulk-earthworks during high-rainfall periods when

Sourcing and storing construction the risk of seasonal flooding, flash flooding and erosion is
materials highest;

The construction of LTI usually requires vast quantities of raw • Ensure dust-suppression measures are adopted during
construction materials, much of which often needs to be hot, dry and windy conditions to avoid the spread of dust
sourced from quarries. Material sourced locally can reduce into adjacent habitat;
construction costs and carbon dioxide emissions and decrease
construction time. However, extracting and processing material • Do not undertake blasting and tree clearing during
within sensitive ecological areas can have significant impacts sensitive periods for wildlife, such as during breeding
and should be avoided. It is also important that the sourcing of seasons, hibernation periods or other times when
raw materials for construction is included in the EIA to ensure wildlife are near the construction zone and likely to be
all impacts of the project are fully considered. For example, all significantly impacted;
quarries and other source areas should have plans for their
development and remediation, such as converting quarries into • Always use environmentally sensitive construction tech­
wetland habitats. A further best practice is for raw materials niques, such as avoiding ammonia nitrate explosives
stored during construction to be placed outside sensitive areas in favour of more environmentally friendly excavation
and contained to prevent run-off and erosion into waterways methods;
and other habitats.
• Minimise the extent of vegetation clearing, and where
feasible maintain vegetation structure and tree canopies
over the right of way as a natural bridge for arboreal
species and sensitive species of birds and bats; and

• Minimise disruption to important vegetation along stream

banks (riparian zone) that is used by many species and
creates shade for fish.

Fencing, wildlife crossing structures

and other mitigation
All infrastructure projects through environmentally sensitive
areas should have a suite of mitigation measures, such as

Construction of an overpass over Interstate 90 on Snoqualmie Pass, Washington,

USA. Spanning six lanes of traffic, this large overpass is just one piece of a
multi-phase, multi-decade effort to restore connectivity in the Cascade Range. Overpass construction in progress that includes natural surfaces, vegetation
Other elements include a 330 m elevated stretch where wetlands and creeks variations and design elements to reduce noise and light disturbances to provide
flow beneath the highway, and numerous expanded culverts. Monitoring has favourable conditions for a diversity of species to cross the Trans-Canada
documented around 4,000 successful wildlife crossings per year. © Terry McGuire Highway, Banff National Park, Alberta, Canada. © Terry McGuire

Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals 99

 9. Construction, operation and maintenance

The diversity of canals built around the world have different ecological impacts at different spatial scales and intensities. Large canals can be almost total barriers to
species movement, but any canal may alter landscape and species connectivity. Top: An excavator digs a new irrigation canal. © Dusan Kostic / Adobe Stock. Bottom:
Heavy machinery building a canal to connect lakes created as part of large-scale strip-mining restoration efforts in Germany. © Getty Images

100 Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals
 9. Construction, operation and maintenance

fencing and wildlife crossing structures to protect biodiversity Operating and maintaining roads,
and maintain ecological connectivity. There are typically three railways and canals
types of fencing that may be used on infrastructure projects,
each with different designs and potential impacts: (i) temporary The operation and maintenance of LTI will likely continue for
fencing to exclude people or wildlife from the construction site decades or centuries, and can therefore significantly influence
or sensitive exclusion zones; (ii) permanent fencing along the PCAs, ecological connectivity and ecosystem integrity. It
right of way to delineate property ownership; and (iii) permanent is critical that the mitigation measures identified during the
fencing to exclude wildlife from the road, railway or canal and planning and design stages and built during construction
direct wildlife to crossing structures (van der Ree et al., 2015). It are maintained appropriately to ensure their long-term
is important to consider the following: effectiveness. Standard maintenance programs consist of four
key elements which should also be applied to maintaining
• Ensure the fencing, crossing structures and other types mitigation measures: 1) inventory of the asset; 2) inspection
of mitigation are constructed as planned and designed schedule; 3) routine upkeep and repairs; and 4) adaptive
by conducting regular audits of construction activities response to new information about maintenance techniques.
and consulting the ecological and wildlife specialists
when design changes are proposed, such as changing Unfortunately, maintenance can be expensive and is typically
the size or location of the structure; underfunded and done poorly, resulting in poor ecological
outcomes. The cost-effectiveness of maintenance can
• Always assess the timing and frequency (i.e. daily, be improved by engaging with maintenance engineers
seasonal, annual) with which wildlife are crossing the and ecologists during the design stage and incorporating
construction site before erecting any fencing. Some features to improve maintainability, despite the potentially
species may have very set migration pathways and are slightly higher initial construction cost. In addition, registering
unable to easily adjust their routes, such as elephants; the mitigation measure on the transportation department
database as an asset’ will help ensure sufficient funding and
• When fencing is installed to reduce WVCs, always resources are allocated to maintenance.
construct the associated crossing structures first;
Maintenance programs for LTI are often developed without
• Install fencing progressively on both sides of the consideration of the objectives of PCAs and the wildlife
transportation corridor to avoid trapping wildlife on the within and outside of them, and many standard practices are
wrong side of the fence; incompatible with these needs. For example, the cleaning of
culverts and clearing of vegetation at underpass entrances may
• Include escape mechanisms, such as jump-outs, to discourage use by some wildlife. Well-meaning maintenance
allow trapped animals to escape the fenced right of way crews can render crossing structures temporarily or permanently
(Huijser et al., 2015); and ineffective through simple mistakes and it is critical that they
know the specific requirements of each mitigation measure. The
• Ensure the fencing is appropriately designed for target program should also provide information on the ecological goal
species, is of sufficient length and attention is given to of the mitigation measure, the target species and some relevant
the design of the fence ends (Huijser et al., 2016). ecological information (van der Ree & Tonjes, 2015).

Wildlife crossing structures can be even more effective when integrating directional fencing to funnel animals to the safest passage and reduce rates of collisions with
vehicles. Left: The 100 m wide Dedin green bridge’ with directional fencing in the foreground was constructed along with 43 viaducts and tunnels on the highway
stretching 68.5 km from Zagreb to Rijeka in Gorski kotar (Croatia). © Djuro Huber; Right: Underpass on US Highway 93 with directional fencing on the lands of the
Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes (CSKT) of the Flathead Reservation in Montana, USA © Luca Guadagno

Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals 101
 9. Construction, operation and maintenance

For the first time in over 100 years, an endangered and divided Western hoolock gibbon (Hoolock hoolock) population was reunited when technicians at Hoollongapar
Gibbon Sanctuary in Jarhat, India, intertwined branches over a rail line. Intact vegetation structure and tree canopies over right of ways serve as natural bridges
connecting arboreal species and sensitive bird species. © Dilip Chetry

Effective fencing is critical to the success of crossing struc­

tures and reducing rates of WVC (van der Ree, Gagnon &
Smith, 2015) and maintenance is essential to its effectiveness
(Huijser et al., 2016). Fencing damaged by falling trees,
floods, the build-up of snow or sand and vehicles leaving the
roadway must be quickly identified and repaired to maximise
effectiveness. Fencing that incorporates easily adjusted
bracing and other designs to withstand damage will also
increase fence longevity and reduce repair and maintenance
costs (Huijser et al., 2015).

Other important operational activities include maintenance

of vegetation adjacent to roads, railways and canals, such
as regular mowing to reduce attractants for wildlife, improve
motorist and wildlife visibility, or control invasive weeds.
Recent innovations include the establishment of pollinator-
friendly plant species along linear infrastructure to reduce
mowing costs and simultaneously provide a biodiversity
benefit (Ries et al., 2001, Hopwood et al., 2015).

Some species of wildlife have adapted to these linear intru­

sions in their habitat and use structures such as bridges
and ­culverts for roosting and denning. For example, many
bridges and culverts are used as roosts by bats, birds of
prey can nest on bridge structures and many mammals will
use culverts as underground dens. Standard approaches to A male Western hoolock gibbon (Hoolock hoolock) in Assam, India
maintenance activities or replacement of failing structures can © Gregoire Dubois

102 Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals
 9. Construction, operation and maintenance

result in significant impacts to such wildlife, and alternative sensitive areas if not managed accordingly. It is not feasible
approaches can be adopted, such as doing work at certain to outline a comprehensive maintenance program to main­
times of year when not in use by wildlife, or by providing tain ecological connectivity because maintenance standards
alternative structures as substitute roosts. and approaches are still being developed for many types
of structures and regions. Therefore, a common-sense
The relatively short-term duration of the construction phase approach based on objectives of PCAs, the needs of
of a project belies its critical importance in ensuring the ecological connectivity, and wildlife is needed initially,
infrastructure is built as planned and can be operated and including with regular review and adaptation over time to
maintained effectively. In addition, the risks associated with refine the program. Above all, the primary guiding goal of
inappropriate construction techniques are often significant maintenance should always be to improve the effectiveness
and can have lasting ecological impacts in environmentally of a mitigation measure.

Wetland restoration of gravel/borrow pits along a major highway in Canada, before (top) and after (bottom) © Terry McGuire

Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals 103
 9. Construction, operation and maintenance

Box 17

Protecting roosting bats under bridges in the southern United States

Key lesson: Maintenance activities can be important to help protect and sustain populations of wildlife that are sometimes
forgotten, such as bats.

Bats are an important component of many ecosystems worldwide and many species use road and railway bridges as
roosting sites. The construction of roads has the potential to negatively impact bat populations through loss of roosts,
foraging habitats, and by fragmenting landscapes used as commuting routes by bats. Increasingly, growing numbers of
transportation departments are integrating bat management techniques into maintenance schedules.

Gray bats (Myotis grisescens) roosting between beams on the underside of a bridge in Kentucky, USA. The deteriorating bridge was slated for rehabilitation,
but when the bats were discovered, transportation planners adjusted their designs to protect the vulnerable species. Repairs were conducted in midwinter
when the bats were hibernating elsewhere. New beams were installed with extra space in between to provide safe habitat for the bats to return.
© Kentucky Transportation Cabinet

Transportation departments need information on bat roosts in bridges to protect roosting bats while safely and effectively
maintaining bridge functions. As an example, the US Federal Highway Administration initiated a national study of bat use
of bridges. They found that just within the southern USA, 3,600 highway structures were being used by approximately
33 million bats. The fact that 43 percent of bridges suitable for night roosting were used indicates that in many areas bat
habitat enhancement projects would be successful and could help by providing roosts needed for rearing young.

Transportation departments are ideally positioned to help re-establish globally important wildlife at little or no cost through
highly popular proactive measures. Other countries are also beginning to recognise the value of providing roosts in bridges
and are initiating their own projects, suggesting that habitat enhancements in highway structures may become a powerful
conservation tool worldwide.

If creating roosts on LTI structures for bats, a review of the species susceptibility to collisions with vehicles or trains (Fensome
& Matthews, 2016) should be evaluated so that the potential benefits outweigh the costs.

References
Fensome, A.G., and Mathews, F. (2016). Roads and bats: a meta-analysis and review of the evidence on vehicle collisions
and barrier effects. Mammal Review 46(4):311-323. https://doi.org/10.1111/mam.12072.

Keeley, B. (1998) Some bridges are serving as Noah’s Arks for homeless bats, and many more could do so in the future….
Bats Magazine, 15(3). Available at: https://www.batcon.org/article/bats-in-bridges/ (Accessed 8 June, 2021).

104 Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals
 9. Construction, operation and maintenance

Box 18

Reconnecting the canopy with arboreal crossings and underpasses on Costa Rican roads

Key lesson: Cross sectoral partnerships can assist in designing, installing, and monitoring mitigation measures like canopy
crossings.

Costa Rica is a biodiverse country with 25% of the territory dedicated to the protection of wild places. Development here
needs to be in balance with the conservation of its natural resources. Underpasses, arboreal crossings, and road signs are
now a frequent part of new roads in Costa Rica. Monitoring of this green infrastructure’ is crucial to evaluate whether they
ensure connectivity and reduce mortality of Costa Rica’s rich wildlife.

Arboreal species need a connected canopy to cross

roads safely. Many of them cannot travel across the
road on the ground. When building roads, arboreal
connectivity is mostly lost, as right-of-ways are
widened, trees cleared, and the canopy opened up.
Arboreal bridges (canopy crossings) are a useful tool
to reconnect canopy-dwelling species. However,
installing canopy crossings requires special equipment,
as does monitoring with camera traps. Maintenance
crews and specialised technicians can assist by using
their skills.

In Costa Rica, canopy crossings were installed by

local communities, electric utility companies and road
administrators. On Route 4, volunteer firefighters
helped install camera traps to monitor arboreal
bridges. Kinkajous, howler monkeys, porcupines,
opossums, and capuchin monkeys use them to
cross safely over the road. An NGO monitored these
structures with funding from a service agreement from
the Ministry of Transportation. This agreement helps A white-faced capuchin (Cebus imitator) crosses above Route 257 using a canopy
support monitoring wildlife use of the structures with bridge in Costa Rica. © Panthera
camera traps and helps inform new projects (Araya-
Jiménez 2019). Mitigation measures are being built throughout Costa Rica. NGOs, academia, and government have been
working hand in hand for over 10 years for safer roads for wildlife and motorists. Through this collaborative work, Costa Rica
has built nearly 40 underpasses for wildlife and more than 100 arboreal bridges.

Reference
Araya-Jiménez, Y. (2019). Efectividad de estructuras para el paso de fauna silvestre en la Ruta Nacional No 4, Bajos de
Chilamate – Vuelta Kooper, Costa Rica. Tesis de Licenciatura en Ciencias Biológicas con énfasis en Ecología y Desarrollo
Sostenible, Escuela de Ciencias Biológicas. Universidad Latina de Costa Rica. Costa Rica.

A mantled howler monkey (Alouatta palliata) crosses above Route 4 using a canopy bridge in Costa Rica. © Panthera

Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals 105
 9. Construction, operation and maintenance

Key messages in this chapter biodiversity and ecological connectivity in varying

ways.
• The construction phase of linear infrastructure
projects requires careful attention to ensure that plans • It is important to minimise and mitigate the
and designs are followed to achieve the ecological construction phase by limiting impacts that affect
goals of the project. the presence, survival and movement of wildlife such
as operation of heavy equipment, excavation and
• Most projects encounter unexpected challenges that blasting, increased human presence, sourcing and
require last-minute changes as well as sequential storing of construction material, and the fencing,
inter­pretation of detailed designs that result in wildlife crossing structures and other impacts
modifications to the project. The effect of these associated with the mitigation measure itself.
iterative changes on the ability of the project to
achieve its ecological goals must be assessed prior • Operation and maintenance of LTI lasts for decades,
to adoption. if not centuries, and influence PCAs, ecological
connectivity and ecosystem integrity over long time
• Ecological mitigation measures may be eliminated spans. Consequently, the mitigation measures must
or downgraded during construction due to time and be similarly maintained for ongoing effectiveness.
cost over-runs elsewhere on the project. This must
be avoided because it invariably leads to insufficient • Standard maintenance programs for maintaining
mitigation and poor ecological outcomes. mitigation measures consist of four key elements:
inventory of the asset, inspection schedule, routine
• The construction, operation and maintenance phases upkeep and repairs and adaptive response to new
of projects have different objectives and can affect information and maintenance techniques.

106 Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals
 10. Conclusion

Part 10
Conclusion: The road ahead

One of Russia’s first wildlife overpasses, Route M3, Kaluga, Russia © Adobe Stock

Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals 107
 10. Conclusion

Roads, railways and canals are a significant and growing and affect ecosystems near and far. The most effective way to
threat to the species, habitats and ecosystem processes protect the natural environment from impacts of LTI is to avoid
within PCAs, ecological corridors and networks and habitats constructing new or expanding existing infrastructure in or
around the world. The boom in LTI development, especially near protected areas, ecological corridors and networks, and
in developing and emerging economies in Africa, Asia, other intact natural areas. In some situations, the impacts of
and South America has the potential to wreak havoc on existing LTI may be serious enough to warrant removal of the
biodiversity and undermine efforts to achieve conservation, road, railway or canal.
sustainable livelihoods and resilient landscapes. A vast body
of research and practice globally has identified a suite of Policies and planning: Positive outcomes from LTI pro­
effective solutions that can be applied in all contexts around jects are much more likely when ecological concerns
the world. Navigating the road ahead will depend not just on are incorporated early in the decision-making process.
awareness of the issues, but a shared commitment, allocation Upstream planning is essential to ensure that projects do no
of sufficient resources, good governance and effective poli­ harm to the local environment and communities, which can
cies. Based on the best available science and research, we be better achieved through coordinated and comprehensive
conclude this Technical Report with the following recom­ planning that includes all relevant stakeholders. Managers
mendations for addressing ecological connectivity in the of PCAs are encouraged to get involved in the planning of
development of roads, railways and canals: any LTI as early as possible. This includes contributing to
the collection of sufficient and rigorous data, while being
Impacts: When considering the role of LTI on the landscape, prepared to apply high quality information to make a strong
it is important to understand that construction, operation and case in stakeholder meetings and planning processes. The
maintenance of roads, railways and canals exert a range of mitigation hierarchy – avoid, minimise, mitigate, restore,
direct and indirect impacts on the environment. The loss, compensate (or offset) – should always be genuinely applied
fragmentation and degradation of habitat is often severe, and to achieve the best possible outcomes. Significant residual
the disruption to animal movement and increased wildlife impacts may still exist after applying the mitigation hierarchy,
mortality are likely. The ecological impacts of LTI can extend and in some cases, proposed projects should not proceed.
many kilometres beyond the immediate area of the project

In Alto Conte, Costa Rica, Indigenous community members gather to consult with the Ministry of Public Works and Transportation on road improvements slated to
include construction of three bridges and paving to provide year-long access to a nearby town. © Andrea Avila Alfaroy

108 Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals
 10. Conclusion

Financing: All countries, regions and municipalities, as well Mitigation measures: While avoidance and minimisation
as lending institutions and private contractors, must adhere to should always be the first priorities of proposed LTI projects,
minimum performance standards and effective environmental there are also tools available to mitigate impacts. Wildlife
and social safeguards. It is encouraging to see financial crossing structures, such as underpasses and overpasses
institutions develop, improve and adopt these safeguards. with accompanying directional fencing, can effectively mitigate
However, there is an urgent need to improve many details of the roadkill and barrier effects of LTI for many species and should
safeguards and their implementation to maximise their benefits. be implemented where those impacts are unable to be
avoided or minimised.
Environmental assessments: All LTI plans and projects
should be guided by master planning that is informed by SEAs Monitoring and evaluation: All approaches in the mitigation
and associated EIAs. These processes should evaluate all hierarchy should be thoroughly studied after implementation
available scientific information and identify and prioritise PCAs, to evaluate effectiveness. Robust data sets ensure that
ecological corridors and networks at regional, national and resources for mitigation continue to be allocated wisely and
international scales. enable adaptive management of each project – contributing
to improved performance over time.
Social consequences and public participation: To avoid
disruption to people and their communities – especially rural, Construction, operation and maintenance: Construction,
marginalized and Indigenous communities – more holistic operation and maintenance phases of LTI can affect biodiver­
and integrated approaches are necessary. LTI projects sity and ecological connectivity in varying ways. Operation
should account for the true costs of resettlement, economic and maintenance of LTI is a commitment of decades, or
displacement, and the myriad of both negative and positive centuries, and influences PCAs, ecological connectivity
social, cultural and environmental changes. To assist planning and ecosystem integrity over correspondingly long-time
processes, SEA and EIA should adhere to the legal doctrine spans. Consequently, mitigation measures must be similarly
of Free, Prior, and Informed Consent in the development of maintained for ongoing effectiveness.
LTI projects. Lastly, SEAs and EIAs should be prepared by
experts independent of LTI project proponents and adhere to
proper quality assurances and controls.

Red crabs (Gecarcoidea natalis) use a specially designed bridge with purpose-built directional fencing to safely cross a road during seasonal migration on Christmas
Island, Australia. © Parks Australia

Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals 109
 10. Conclusion

A wildlife crossing over a canal east of Banff National Park, Canada. Top: view from the side; Bottom: view from above © Francesco Del Greco

110 Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals
 10. Conclusion

Postscript
This Technical Report sought to primarily provide practical roads, railways and canals that we plan and build today
guidance for managers to address the impacts of LTI projects function in harmony with ecological processes.
affecting their PCAs and adjacent landscapes. It is a resource This is the first IUCN publication to examine LTI in such a
that we hope will also assist transportation and conservation context. While not intended to serve as a formal guideline,
professionals to achieve international ambitions for the report lays the groundwork for subsequent efforts. Along
sustainable development by balancing human development with numerous partners, the Transport Working Group will
with the needs of nature. Importantly, this resource is also continue to expand on this initial foray. For example, future
available to inform communities and enable local leaders to work may wish to evaluate and provide guidance on other LTI,
achieve improved LTI in their communities. including power lines and pipelines. While we hope the reader
has found this report helpful, there will always be a need to
In the first two decades of the 21st century, critical advances improve global information sharing about what does and does
have been made in science and engineering that have not work. Collaboration among a network of practitioners will
allowed LTI ecology to make great strides. Currently, new continue to support an open dialogue, share ideas, and spur
technologies are being developed to even more effectively innovative ideas. As the field matures, accessible information,
address the impact of LTI on the environment, and we inter-organisational and interdisciplinary collaboration and
can expect more progress in coming years. Ultimately, the partnerships are increasingly important. This publication
goal of this report is to inspire a future where biodiversity contributes to that end.
conservation is at the forefront of LTI development and the

Leopard (Panthera pardus) using a culvert underpass below a railway in Balule Nature Reserve, South Africa © Hannah de Villiers

Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals 111
 References

References Ascensão, F., Fahrig, L., Clevenger, A.P., Corlett, R.T., Jaeger, J.A.G.,
Laurance, W.F., and Pereira, H.M. (2018). Environmental challenges
Aarhus Convention (UNECE Convention on Access to Information, for the Belt and Road Initiative. Nature Sustainability 1:206-209.
Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-018-0059-3.
Environmental Matters) (25 June 1998). Available at: https://www.
unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/env/pp/documents/cep43e.pdf (Accessed: Asia Parks Congress (APC) (2022). Kota Kinabalu Declaration, Kota
15 April 2023). Kinabalu, Malaysia (25-29 May 2022). Available at: https://2nd-asia-
parks-congress.sabahparks.org.my/ (Accessed: 15 April 2023).
Abbott, I.M., Berthinussen, A., Stone, E., Boonman, M., Melber, M.,
and Altringham, J. (2015). Bats and roads. In: van der Ree, R., Smith, Asian Elephant Range States (AsERS) (2022). Kathmandu Declaration
D.J., and Grilo, C., (eds.), Handbook of Road Ecology, pp.290–299. for Asian Elephant Conservation, Kathmandu, Nepal (27-29 April
Oxford, UK: John Wiley and Sons Ltd. 2022). Available at: https://www.asesg.org/PDFfiles/2022kathmandu.
pdf (Accessed: 15 April 2023).
Africa Protected Areas Congress (APAC) (2022). Kigali Call to Action
for People and Nature, Kigali, Rwanda (18-23 July). Available at: Backs, J.A.J., Nychka, J.A., and St. Clair, C.C. (2020). Warning
https://apacongress.africa/download/english-version-of-apac-kigali- systems triggered by trains increase flight-initiation times of wildlife.
call-to-action/ (Accessed: 15 April 2023). Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment,
87:102502. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2020.102502.
Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) (2019). Environmental
and Social Framework. Available at: https://www.aiib.org/en/policies- Balkenhol, N. and Waits, L.P. (2009). Molecular road ecology:
strategies/_download/environment-framework/Final-ESF-Mar-14- exploring the potential of genetics for investigating transportation
2019-Final-P.pdf (Accessed: 15 April 2023). impacts on wildlife. Molecular Ecology 18:4151–4164.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-294X.2009.04322.x.
Ament, R., Clevenger, A.P., Yu, O., and Hardy, A. (2008). An Assess­
ment of Road Impacts on Wildlife Populations in U.S. National Parks. Barber, C.P., Cochrane, M.A., Souza, C.M., and Laurance, W.F.
Environmental Management 42(3):480-496. (2014). Roads, deforestation, and the mitigating effect of protected
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-008-9112-8. areas in the Amazon. Biological Conservation 177:203–209.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2014.07.004.
Ament, R., Stonecipher, G., Butynski, M., Creech, T., Clevenger,
A.P., Neelakantan, A., Gangadharan, A., Krishna, C., Bell, M., Barnes, R.F.W., Barnes, K.L., Alers, M.P.T., and Blom, A. (1991).
Vilela, T., Bonine, K., Monga, M., Van Epp, T., Laur, A., Breuer, A., Man determines the distribution of elephants in the rain-forests of
Parashar, S., Weinheimer, C.G., and Hoff, K. (2021). Final Report: Northeastern Gabon. African Journal of Ecology 29:54−63.
Building a foundation for linear infrastructure safeguards in Asia. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2028.1991.tb00820.x.
Prepared by Perez, APC for Contract no. AID-OAA-I-15-00051/
AIDOAA-TO-16-00028, ESS WA#13. Washington, DC: U.S. Bautista, L.M., García, J.T., Calmaestra, R.G., Palacín, C., Martín,
Agency for International Development (USAID). Available at: https:// C.A., Morales, M.B., Bonal, R., and Viñuela, J. (2004). Effect of
largelandscapes.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/LISA_FinalReport_ weekend road traffic on the use of space by raptors. Conservation
FINAL.pdf (Accessed: 15 April 2023). Biology 18:726–732. https://www.jstor.org/stable/3589083.

Andrasi, B., Jaeger, J.A.G., Heinicke, S., Metcalfe, K., and Benítez-López, A., Alkemade, R. and Verweij, P. A. The impacts of
Hockings, K.J. (2021). Quantifying the road-effect zone for a critically roads and other infrastructure on mammal and bird populations:
endangered primate. Conservation Letters 14(6):e12839. a meta-analysis. (2010). Biological Conservation 143:1307-1316.
https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.12839. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2010.02.009.

Andrews, K.M., Nanjappa, P., and Riley, S.P.D. (eds.) (2015). Roads Benson, J.F. (2003). What is the alternative? Impact assessment tools
and ecological infrastructure: Concepts and applications for small and sustainable planning. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal
animals. Baltimore, USA: Johns Hopkins University Press. 21(4):261-280. https://doi.org/10.3152/147154603781766185.

Arcus Foundation (2018). State of the Apes: Infrastructure Bhardwaj, M., Soanes, K., Lahoz-Monfort, J.J., Lumsden, L.F.,
Development and Ape Conservation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge and van der Ree, R. (2021). Insectivorous bats are less active near
University Press. Available at: https://www.stateoftheapes.com/wp- freeways. PLoS One 16(3): e0247400. https://doi.org/10.1371/
content/uploads/2018/11/SotA3-Composite-WEB.pdf (Accessed: 15 journal.pone.0247400.
April 2023).
Bigard, C., Pioch, S., andThompson, J.D. (2017). The inclusion of
Ascensão, F., Clevenger, A., Santos-Reis, M., Urbano, P., biodiversity in environmental impact assessment: Policy-related
and Jackson, N. (2013). Wildlife–vehicle collision mitigation: Is progress limited by gaps and semantic confusion. Journal of
partial fencing the answer? An agent-based model approach. Environmental Management 200:35-45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Ecological Modelling 257: 36-43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. jenvman.2017.05.057.
ecolmodel.2013.02.026.

112 Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals
 References

The Biodiversity Consultancy (2020). IFC PS6 Approaches. Available Roads in a Globally Important Tiger Conservation Landscape. Human
at: https://www.thebiodiversityconsultancy.com/approaches/ifc-ps6/ Ecology 46:909–915. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10745-018-0029-4.
(Accessed: 15 June 2020).
Clevenger, A.P. (2005). Conservation value of wildlife crossings:
Blake, S., Deem, S.L., Strindberg, S., Maisels, F., Momont, L., measures of performance and research directions. GAIA-Ecological
Inogwabini-Bila, I., Douglas-Hamilton, I., Karesh, W.B., and Kock, Perspectives for Science and Society 14:124-129.
M.D. (2008). Roadless wilderness area determines forest elephant https://doi.org/10.14512/gaia.14.2.12.
movements in the Congo Basin. PLoS One 3(10):e3546.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0003546. Clevenger, A.P. and Waltho, N. (2005). Performance indices to identify
attributes of highway crossing structures facilitating movement of
Borda-de-Água, L., Barrientos, R., Beja, P., and Pereira, H.M. (eds.) large mammals. Biological Conservation 121:453-464.
(2017). Railway Ecology. Cham, Switzerland: Springer Cham. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2004.04.025.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-57496-7.
Colchero, F., Conde, D., Manterola, C., Chavez, C., Rivera, A., and
Borrini-Feyerabend, G., Dudley, N., Jaeger, T., Lassen, B., Broome, Ceballos, G. (2011). Jaguars on the move: modelling movement to
N., Phillips, A., and Sandwith, T. (2013). Governance of Protected mitigate fragmentation from road expansion in the Mayan Forest.
Areas: From Understanding to Action. Best Practice Protected Areas Animal Conservation 14:158-166. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-
Guideline Series, no. 20. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN. 1795.2010.00406.x.
https://portals.iucn.org/library/node/29138.
Conservation Measures Partnership (CMP) (2020). Open Standards
Borrini-Feyerabend, G., Kothari, A., and Oviedo, G. (2004). for the Practice of Conservation’, Version 4.0. Conservation Measures
Indigenous and Local Communities and Protected Areas: Towards Partnership. Available at: https://conservationstandards.org/wp-
Equity and Enhanced Conservation. Best Practice Protected Areas content/uploads/sites/3/2020/12/CMP-Open-Standards-for-the-
Guideline Series, no. 11. Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK: Practice-of-Conservation-v4.0-English.pdf (Accessed: 15 April 2023).
IUCN. https://doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.CH.2004.PAG.11.en.
Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) (5 June 1992). 1760
Brennan, L., Chow, E., and Lamb, C. (2022). Wildlife overpass UNTS 69. Available at: https://treaties.un.org/pages/ViewDetails.
structure size, distribution, effectiveness, and adherence to expert aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=XXVII-8&chapter=27. (Accessed: 13
design recommendations. PeerJ 10:e14371 February 2023).
http://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.14371.
CBD (2018a). Decision 14/3 Mainstreaming of biodiversity in the
Bruzelius, N., Flyvbjerg, B., and Rothengatter, W. (2002). Big energy and mining, infrastructure, manufacturing and processing
decisions, big risks. Improving accountability in mega projects. sectors, Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt (17-29 November 2018). CBD/COP/
Transport Policy 9(2):143-154. DEC/14/3. Available at: https://www.cbd.int/doc/decisions/cop-14/
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0967-070X(02)00014-8. cop-14-dec-03-en.pdf (Accessed: 15 April 2023).

Bull, J. and Brownlie, S. (2017). The transition from No Net Loss to a CBD (2018b). Decision 14/8 Protected areas and other effective
Net Gain of biodiversity is far from trivial. Oryx 51(1), 53–59. area-based conservation measures, Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt (17-29
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0030605315000861. November 2018). CBD/COP/DEC/14/8. Available at: https://www.
cbd.int/doc/decisions/cop-14/cop-14-dec-08-en.pdf (Accessed: 15
Butchart, S.H., Walpole, M., Collen, B., van Strien, A., Scharlemann, April 2023).
J.P.,… and Watson, R. (2010). Global biodiversity: Indicators of recent
declines. Science 328(5982):1164–1168. CBD (2022). Decision 15/4 Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity
https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1187512. Framework, Montreal, Canada (7-19 December 2022). CBD/COP/
DEC/15/4. Available at: https://www.cbd.int/doc/decisions/cop-15/
Caro, T., Dobson, A., Marshall, A. J., and Peres, C. A. (2014). cop-15-dec-04-en.pdf (Accessed: 15 April 2023).
Compromise solutions between conservation and road building in the
tropics. Current Biology, 24(16):R722–R725. Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2014.07.007. (CMS) (23 June 1979) UNTS 1651. Available at: https://www.cms.
int/sites/default/files/instrument/CMS-text.en_.PDF. (Accessed: 28
Clements, G.R. (2013). The environmental and social impacts of March 2023).
roads in Southeast Asia. James Cook University Doctoral thesis.
Research online @ JCU. Available at: https://researchonline.jcu.edu. CMS (2020a). Resolution 12.26 (REV.COP13) Improving Ways of
au/31888/1/31888_Clements_2013_thesis.pdf (Accessed: 15 April Addressing Connectivity in the Conservation of Migratory Species,
2023). Gandhinagar, India (17-22 February 2020). UNEP/CMS/Resolution
12.26 (REV.COP13). Available at: https://www.cms.int/sites/default/
Clements, G.R., Aziz, S.A., Bulan, R., Giam, X., Bentrupperbaumer, files/document/cms_cop13_res.12.26_rev.cop13_e.pdf (Accessed:
J., Goosem, M., Laurance, S., and Laurance, W.F. (2018) Not 15 April 2023).
Everyone Wants Roads: Assessing Indigenous People’s Support for

Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals 113
 References

CMS (2020b). Decisions 13.130 – 13.134 Infrastructure Development Dudley, N. (ed.) (2008). Guidelines for Applying Protected Area
and Migratory Species, Gandhinagar, India (17-22 February 2020). Management Categories. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN.
UNEP/CMS/Decisions 13.130-13.134. Available at: https://www. https://doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.CH.2008.PAPS.2.en.
cms.int/en/page/decisions-13130-13134-infrastructure-development-
and-migratory-species (Accessed: 15 April 2023). Dulac, J. (2013). Global land transport infrastructure requirements:
Estimating road and railway infrastructure capacity and costs to
CMS (2020c). Resolution 12.26 (REV.COP13) Central Asian Mammals 2050. Paris, France: International Energy Agency. Available at:
Initiative, Gandhinagar, India (17-22 February 2020). UNEP/CMS/ https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document?repid=rep1&type=pdfhttp&
Resolution 11.24 (Rev.COP.13). Available at: https://www.cms.int/ doi=42289029c160b739d093d483481168c0685e2145
sites/default/files/document/cms_cop13_res.11.24_rev.cop13_e.pdf
(Accessed: 15 April 2023). Ebbesson, J. and Okowa, P. (2009). Environmental Law and Justice
in Context. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Cooke, S.C., Balmford, A., Donald, P.F., Newsom, S.E., and https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511576027.
Johnston, A. (2020). Roads as a contributor to landscape-scale
variation in bird communities. Nature Communications 11:3125. European Environment Agency (EEA) (2012). Protected areas
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-16899-x. in Europe – an overview. EEA report No. 5/2012. Copenhagen,
Denmark: European Environment Agency. Available at: https://
Cramer, P. C., Olsson, M., Gadd, M.E., van der Ree, R., and Sielecki, www.eea.europa.eu/publications/protected-areas-in-europe-2012
L. (2015). Transportation and large herbivores. In: van der Ree, R., (Accessed: 15 April 2023).
Smith, D.J., and Grilo, C. (eds.) Handbook of Road Ecology, pp.344-
353. Oxford, UK: John Wiley and Sons Ltd. EEA and Swiss Federal Office for the Environment (FOEN) (2011).
Landscape fragmentation in Europe: Joint EEA-FOEN report. EEA
Creighton, J.L. (2005). The Public Participation Handbook: Making report No. 2/2011. European Environment Agency and Swiss
Better Decisions Through Citizen Involvement. San Francisco: Federal Office for the Environment. Luxembourg: Publications Office
Jossey-Bass Publishers. of the European Union. Available at: https://www.eea.europa.eu/
publications/landscape-fragmentation-in-europe (Accessed: 15 April
Cross Sector Biodiversity Initiative (CSBI) (2015). A cross-sector 2023).
guide for implementing the mitigation hierarchy. Lead authors: J.
Ekstrom, L. Bennun and R. Mitchell. Cambridge, UK: The Biodiversity Eigenbrod, F., Hecnar, S.J., and Fahrig, L. (2009). Quantifying
Consultancy Ltd. Available at: http://www.csbi.org.uk/wp-content/ the road-effect zone: Threshold effects of a motorway on anuran
uploads/2017/10/CSBI-Mitigation-Hierarchy-Guide.pdf (Accessed: populations in Ontario, Canada. Ecology and Society 14(1):24.
30 July 2020). Available at: https://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol14/iss1/art24/
(Accessed 15 April 2023).
D’Amico, M., Périquet, S., Román, J. and Revilla, E. (2016). Road
avoidance responses determine the impact of heterogeneous road Elkington, J. (1998). Accounting for the triple bottom line. Measuring
networks at a regional scale. Journal of Applied Ecology 53:181-190. Business Excellence, 2(3):18-22. https://doi.org/10.1108/eb025539.
https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.12572.
Emerton, L., Bishop, J., and Thomas, L. (2006). Sustainable
da Silva Dias, A.M., Fonseca, A., and Paglia, A.P. (2017). Biodiversity Financing of Protected Areas: A global review of challenges and
monitoring in the environmental impact assessment of mining options. Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK: IUCN.
projects: a (persistent) waste of time and money?. Perspectives in https://doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.CH.2005.PAG.13.en.
Ecology and Conservation, 15(3):206-208.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecon.2017.06.001. Engen, L. and Prizzon, A. (2018). A guide to multilateral development
banks. Overseas Development Institute (ODI). Available at: https://
Dollar, D. (2018). Is China’s Development Finance a Challenge to the cdn.odi.org/media/documents/12274.pdf (Accessed: 15 April 2023).
International Order?’ Asian Economic Policy Review, 13(2):283-298.
https://doi.org/10.1111/aepr.12229. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) (1999).
The Future of Our Land. Facing the Challenge. Rome: UNEP and FAO.
Donaldson, A. and P. Cunneyworth (2015). Case study: Canopy Available at: https://www.fao.org/publications/card/en/c/bb43c1b1-
bridges for primate conservation. In: van der Ree, R., Smith, D.J., 5e1a-519a-90d0-d10d3bb99456/ (Accessed 15 April 2023).
and Grilo, C. (eds.) Handbook of Road Ecology, pp.341-343. Oxford,
UK: John Wiley and Sons Ltd. FAO (2020). Free, Prior and Informed Consent. Available at: http://
www.fao.org/indigenous-peoples/our-pillars/fpic/en/ (Accessed: 14
Dorsey, B., Olsson, M., and Rew, L.J. (2015). Ecological effects of June 2020).
railways on wildlife. In: van der Ree, R., Smith, D.J., and Grilo, C.
(eds.). Handbook of Road Ecology, pp.219-227. Oxford, UK: John Fearnside, P.M. and de Alencastro Graça, P.M.L. (2006). BR-319:
Wiley and Sons, Ltd. Brazil’s Manaus-Porto Velho Highway and the potential impact of
linking the arc of deforestation to central Amazonia. Environmental
Dougherty, T.C. and Hall, A.W. (1995). Environmental Impact Management, 38:705-16.
Assessment of irrigation and drainage projects. UK: HR Wallingford. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-005-0295-y.

114 Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals
 References

Ford, A.T. and Fahrig, L. (2008). Movement patterns of eastern Gerow, K., Kline, N.C., Swann, D.E., and Pokorny, M. (2010).
chipmunks (Tamias striatus) near roads. Journal of Mammalogy, Estimating annual vertebrate mortality on roads at Saguaro National
89:895-903. https://doi.org/10.1644/07-MAMM-A-320.1. Park, Arizona. Human-Wildlife Interactions 4:283–292.
https://doi.org/10.26077/dhg5-wg98.
Foresman, K.R. (2004). The effects of highways on fragmentation of
small mammal populations and modifications of crossing structures Glucker, A. N., Driessen, P.P.J., Kolhoff, A., and Runhaar, H.A.C.
to mitigate such impacts. Final Report, prepared for State of Montana (2013). Public participation in environmental impact assessment: why,
Department of Transportation, Research Section. Available at: who and how?’ Environmental Impact Assessment Review 43: 104-
https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/24824 (Accessed 15 April 2023). 111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2013.06.003.

Forman, R.T.T. and Alexander, L.E. (1998). Roads and Their Major Gonçalves, L.O., Kindel, A., Bastazini, V.A.G., and Teixeira, F.Z.
Ecological Effects. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, (2022). Mainstreaming ecological connectivity in road environmental
29:207–231. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.29.1.207. impact assessments: a long way to go. Impact Assessment and
Project Appraisal (IAPA) 40(6):475-480.
Forman, R.T.T. and Godron, M. (1986). Landscape Ecology. New https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2022.2099727.
York: John Wiley & Sons.
Goosem, M. (2002). Effects of tropical rainforest roads on small
Forman, R.T.T., Sperling, D., Bissonette, J.A., Clevenger, A.P., mammals: fragmentation, edge effects and traffic disturbance. Wildlife
Cutshall, C.D., Dale, V.H., Fahrig, L., France, R., Goldman, C.R., Research 29(3):277–289. https://doi.org/10.1071/WR01058.
Haenue, K., Jones, J.A., Swanson F.J., Turrentine, T., and Winter,
T.C. (2003). Road ecology – Science and solutions. Washington, DC, Gregory, T., Abra, F., Linden, B., Nekaris, K., Soanes, K., and Teixeira,
USA: Island Press. https://islandpress.org/books/road-ecology. F. Z. (2022). A new window into canopy bridges as a mitigation
strategy for arboreal mammals. Folia Primatologica, 93(3-6):197-203.
Friends of the Earth (FOE) (2016). Emerging Sustainability Frame­ https://doi.org/10.1163/14219980-930306IN.
works: China Development Bank and China Export-Import Bank.
Washington, DC. Available at: Gregory, A.; Spence, E.; Beier, P., and Garding, E. (2021). Toward
https://1bps6437gg8c169i0y1drtgz-wpengine.netdnassl.com/wp- Best Management Practices for Ecological Corridors. Land 10(2):140.
content/uploads/wpallimport/files/archive/emerging-sustainability- https://doi.org/10.3390/land10020140.
frameworks-CDBChinaExim.pdf (Accessed: 15 June 2020).
Grilo, C., Smith, D.J., and Klar, N. (2015). Carnivores: Struggling for
Gagnon, J.W., Dodd, N.L., Sprague, S.C., Ogren, K.S., Loberger, survival in roaded landscapes. In: van der Ree, R., Smith, D.J., and
C.D., and Schweinsburg, R.E. (2018). Animal-activated highway Grilo, C. (eds.). Handbook of Road Ecology, pp.300-312. Oxford, UK:
crosswalk: long-term impact on elk-vehicle collisions, vehicle speeds, John Wiley and Sons, Ltd.
and motorist braking response. Human Dimensions of Wildlife 24:1-
16. https://doi.org/10.1080/10871209.2019.1551586. Gross, John E., Woodley, S., Welling, L.A., and Watson, J.E.M. (eds.)
(2016). Adapting to Climate Change: Guidance for protected area
Gagnon, J.W., Loberger, C.D., Sprague, S.C., Ogren, K.S., Boe, S.L., managers and planners. Best Practice Protected Area Guidelines
and Schweinsburg, R.E. (2015). Cost-effective approach to reducing Series No. 24, Gland, Switzlerland: IUCN.
collisions with elk by fencing between existing highway structures. https://doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.CH.2017.PAG.24.en.
Human–Wildlife Interactions 9:248–264.
https://doi.org/10.26077/z5kk-s204. Group of Seven (G7) (2021). G7 2030 Nature Compact. Cornwall,
England (11-13 June 2021). Available at: https://www.g7uk.org/wp-
Gangadharan, A., Pollock, S., Gilhooly, P., Friesen, A., Dorsey, B., content/uploads/2021/06/G7-2030-Nature-Compact-PDF-120KB-4-
and St. Clair, C.C. (2017). Grain spilled from moving trains create a pages.pdf (Accessed: 15 April 2023).
substantial wildlife attractant in protected areas. Animal Conservation
20(5): 391-400. https://doi.org/10.1111/acv.12336. Group of Twenty (G20). (2021). G20 economic recovery lays on a
transformative infrastructure agenda. Available at: https://www.g20.
Gannon, P. (2021). The time is now to improve the treatment org/g20-economic-recovery-lays-on-a-transformative-infrastructure-
of biodiversity in Canadian environmental impact statements. agenda.html (Accessed: 11 August 2021)
Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 86:106504.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2020.106504. Guillera-Arroita, G. and Lahoz-Monfort, J. (2012). Designing studies
to detect differences in species occupancy: power analysis under
Gariano, S.L. and Guzzetti, F. (2016). Landslides in a changing imperfect detection. Methods in Ecology and Evolution 3:860-869.
climate. Earth-Science Reviews 162(2016):227–252. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2041-210X.2012.00225.x.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.earscirev.2016.08.011.
Guinard, É., Julliard, R., and Barbraud, C. (2012). Motorways and
Garland Jr., T. and Bradley, W.G. (1984). Effects of a highway on bird traffic casualties: carcasses surveys and scavenging bias.
Mojave Desert rodent populations. American Midland Naturalist Biological Conservation 147:40–51.
47–56. Available at: https://biology.ucr.edu/people/faculty/Garland/ https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2012.01.019.
GarlBr84.pdf (Accessed: 15 April 2023).

Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals 115
 References

Gunson, K., Seburn, D., Kintsch, J., and Crosley, J. (2016). Best Hilty, J., Worboys, G.L., Keeley, A., Woodley, S., Lausche, B., Locke,
management practices for mitigating the effects of roads on H., Carr, M., Pulsford I., Pittock, J., White, J.W., Theobald, D.M.,
amphibian and reptiles species in Ontario. Toronto, Canada: Queen’s Levine, J., Reuling, M., Watson, J.E.M., Ament, R., and Tabor, G.M.
Printer for Ontario. (2020). Guidelines for conserving connectivity through ecological
networks and corridors. Best Practice Protected Area Guidelines
Gunson, K. and Teixeira, F.Z. (2015). Road-Wildlife Mitigation Series No. 30. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN.
Planning can be Improved by Identifying the Patterns and Processes https://doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.CH.2020.PAG.30.en.
Associated with Wildlife-Vehicle Collisions. In: van der Ree, R., Smith,
D.J. and Grilo, C. (eds.) Handbook of Road Ecology, pp.101–109. Hlaváč, V., Anděl, P., Matoušová, J., Dostál, I., Strnad, M.,
Oxford, UK: John Wiley and Sons, Ltd. Immerová, B., Kadlečík, J., Meyer, H., Moț, R., Pavelko, A., Hahn,
E., and Georgiadis, L. (2019). Wildlife and traffic in the Carpathians.
Hamer, A.J., Langton, T.E.S., and Lesbarreres, D. (2015). Making a Guidelines how to minimize impact of transport infrastructure
safe leap forward: Mitigating road impacts on amphibians. In: van der development on nature in the Carpathian countries. Danube
Ree, R., Smith, D.J. and Grilo, C. (eds.). Handbook of Road Ecology, Transnational Programme TRANSGREEN Project, The State Nature
pp.261–270. Oxford, UK:John Wiley and Sons, Ltd. Conservancy of the Slovak Republic, Banská Bystrica. Available at:
https://www.interreg-danube.eu/uploads/media/approved_project_
Hasan, M.A., Nahiduzzaman, K.M., and Aldosary, A.S. (2018). output/0001/35/02caaafe3c1c1365f76574e754ddbdc4e1af4a7a.pdf
Public participation in EIA: A comparative study of the projects run (Accessed: 15 April 2023).
by government and non-governmental organizations. Environmental
Impact Assessment Review 72:12–24. Hopwood, J., Black, S., and Fleury, S. (2015). Pollinators and
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2018.05.001. Roadsides: Best Management Practices for Managers and Decision
Makers. FHWA Report FHWA-HEP-16-020. Washington, DC USA.
Hegde, M., Patel, K., and Diduck, A.P. (2022). Environmental Available at: https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/55914 (Accessed: 15
clearance conditions in impact assessment in India: moving beyond April 2023).
greenwash. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal 40(3):214–
227. https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2022.2025689. Hughes, A.C., Lechner, A.M., Chitov, A., Horstmann, A., Hinsley, A.,
Tritto, A., Charlton, A., Li, B.V., Ganapin, D., Simonov, E., Morton,
Heggie, I.G. (1995). Earmarking versus Commercialization: A Strategy K., Toktomushev, K., Foggin, M., Tan-Mullins, M., Orr, M.C., Griffiths,
to Strengthen Financing of Roads. Transportation, Water, and Urban R., Nash, R., Perkin, S., Glémet, R., Kim, M., and Yu, D.W. (2020).
Development Department, Transport No. RD-19. Washington, DC: Horizon Scan of the Belt and Road Initiative. Trends in Ecology &
World Bank. Available at: https://ntlrepository.blob.core.windows.net/ Evolution 35(7):583-593. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2020.02.005.
lib/10000/10100/10125/Commercial_Management_and_Financing_
of_Roads.pdf (Accessed: 15 April 2023). Huijser, M.P., Ament, R.J., Bell, M., Clevenger, A.P., Fairbank, E.R.,
Gunson, K.E., and Maguire, T. (eds). Final Report 2022: Animal
Helldin, J.O. (2019). Predicted impacts of transport infrastructure vehicle collision reduction and habitat connectivity pooled fund
and traffic on bird conservation in Swedish Special Protection Areas. study – Literature Review. Transportation Pooled Fund Study, TPF-
Nature Conservation 36:1–16. 5(358). Nevada Department of Transportation, Carson City, NV.
https://doi.org/10.3897/natureconservation.36.31826. Available at: https://westerntransportationinstitute.org/wp-content/
uploads/2022/10/Report_TPF-5-358_AVC_Reduction_Connectivity_
Hels, T. and Buchwald, E. (2001). The effect of road kills on Solutions_Literature_Review-V2.pdf (Accessed: 15 April 2023).
amphibian populations. Biological Conservation 99:331–340.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0006-3207(00)00215-9. Huijser, M., Duffield, J., Clevenger, A.P., Ament, R., and McGowen,
P. (2009). Cost–Benefit Analyses of Mitigation Measures Aimed at
Herrmann, J.D., Carlo, T.A., Brudvig, L.A., Damschen, E.I., Haddad, Reducing Collisions with Large Ungulates in the United States and
N.M., Levey, D.J., Orrock, J.L., and Tewksbury, J.J. (2016). Canada: A Decision Support Tool. Ecology and Society 14(2):15.
Connectivity from a different perspective: comparing seed dispersal Available at: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol14/iss2/art15/
kernels in connected vs. fragmented landscapes. Ecology 97:1274– (Accessed: 15 April 2023).
1282. https://doi.org/10.1890/15-0734.1.
Huijser, M.P., Fairbank, E.R., Camel-Means, W., Graham, J., Watson,
Hilty, J.A., Keeley, A.T.H., Lidicker Jr., W.Z., and Merenlender, V., Basting, P., and Becker, D. (2016). Effectiveness of short sections
A.M. (2019). Corridor Ecology: Linking Landscapes for Biodiversity of wildlife fencing and crossing structures along highways in reducing
Conservation and Climate Adaptation. 2nd ed. Washington, DC: wildlife–vehicle collisions and providing safe crossing opportunities for
Island Press. large mammals. Biological Conservation 197:61-68.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2016.02.002.
Hilty, J.A. and Merenlender, A.M. (2000). Faunal indicator taxa
selection for monitoring ecosystem health. Biological Conservation Huijser, M., Kociolek, A.V., Allen, T.D.H., McGowen, P. (2015).
92:185–197. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0006-3207(99)00052-X. Construction guidelines for wildlife fencing and associated
escape and lateral access control measures. National
Cooperative Highway Research Program Project 25-25, Task
84. Washington DC, USA: Transportation Research Board,.

116 Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals
 References

Available at: https://westerntransportationinstitute.org/wp-content/ International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) (2010). IUCN
uploads/2018/02/4W4542_NCHRP25-2584_FINAL_REPORT.pdf Red List of Threatened Species 2010. International Union for the
(Accessed 15 April 2023). Conservation of Nature (IUCN), Gland, Switzerland.
https://www.iucnredlist.org/.
Huijser, M.P., McGowen, P., Fuller, J. Hardy, A., Kociolek, A.,
Clevenger, A.P., Smith, D., and Ament, R. (2008). Wildlife-vehicle IUCN World Commission on Protected Areas (WCPA) (2019).
collision reduction study. Best Practices Manual. Washington Guidelines for Recognising and Reporting Other Effective Area-based
DC, USA: US Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Conservation Measures. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN.
Administration. Available at: https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/ https://doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.CH.2019.PATRS.3.e.
research/safety/08034/ (Accessed: 15 April 2023).
IUCN (2020a). Resolution 073 Ecological connectivity conservation
Hyari, K. and Kandil, A. (2009). Validity of feasibility studies in the post-2020 global biodiversity framework: from local to
for infrastructure construction projects. Jordan Journal of Civil international levels. https://portals.iucn.org/library/node/49212.
Engineering, 3(1), 66-77.
https://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/JJCE/article/view/17873. IUCN (2020b). Resolution 071 Wildlife-friendly linear infrastructure.
https://portals.iucn.org/library/node/49210.
Ibisch, P.L., Hoffmann, M.T., Kreft, S., Guy, P., Kati, V., Biber-
Freudenberger, L., DellaSala, D.A., Vale, M.M., Hobson, P.R., and Jackson, S.D., Langen, T.A., Marsh, D.M., and Andrews, K.A. (2015).
Selv, N. (2016). A global map of roadless areas and their conservation Natural history and physiological characteristics of small animals in
status. Science 354:1423-1427. relation to roads. In: Andrews, K.M., Nanjappa, P., and Riley, S.P.D.
https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaf7166. (eds.) Roads and Ecological Infrastructure: Concepts and Application
for Small Animals, pp.21-41. Baltimore, USA: John Hopkins
Infrastructure and Ecology Network Europe (IENE) (2021). Wildlife and University Press.
traffic, A European handbook for identifying conflicts and designing
solutions. Infrastructure and Ecology Network Europe. Available at: Jackson, N.D. and Fahrig, L. (2011). Relative effects of road mortality
https://www.iene.info/projects/iene-handbook/ (Accessed: 15 April and decreased connectivity on population genetic diversity. Biological
2023). Conservation 144(12):3143-3148.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2011.09.010.
Infrastructure Sustainability Council (ISC) (2022). IS Rating Schemes.
Available at: https://www.iscouncil.org/is-ratings/ (Accessed 30 Jaeger, J. (2015). Improving Environmental Impact Assessment and
March 2022). Road Planning at the Landscape Scale. In: van der Ree, R., Smith,
D.J., and Grilo, C. (eds.). Handbook of Road Ecology, pp.32-42.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) (2021). Summary Oxford, UK: John Wiley and Sons, Ltd.
for Policymakers. In: Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science
Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Jaeger, J.A.G., Bowman, J., Brennan, J., Fahrig, L., Bert, D.,
Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Available Bouchard, J., Charbonneau, N., Frank, K., Gruber, B., and von
at: https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg2/downloads/report/IPCC_ Toschanowitz, K.T. (2005). Predicting when animal populations are
AR6_WGII_SummaryForPolicymakers.pdf (Accessed: 15 April 2023). at risk from roads: an interactive model of road avoidance behavior.
Ecological Modelling 185:329–348.
International Association for Impact Assessment (IAIA) (2009). What is https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2004.12.015.
Impact Assessment? Available at: https://www.iaia.org/uploads/pdf/
What_is_IA_web.pdf. (Accessed 29 October 2021). Jones, K., Ament, R., and Laur, A. (2019). Transportation
Infrastructure Investments and Consequences for Wildlife: A
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) (1966). Review of Sub-Saharan Africa. Center for Large Landscape
Article 25 (19 December 1966). https://treaties.un.org/doc/ Conservation. Available at: https://largelandscapes.org/wp-content/
Treaties/1976/03/19760323%2006-17%20AM/Ch_IV_04.pdf. uploads/2019/03/Color_SSA_Infrastructure_Paper_Final.pdf
(Accessed: 15 April 2023).
International Finance Corporation (IFC) (2002). Handbook for
Preparing a Resettlement Action Plan. IFC Environment and Social Joniak-Lüthi, A., Rippa, A., Clendenning, J., DiCarlo, J., Erie, M.S.,
Development Department, Washington, D.C., USA. ISBN 0-8213- Hirsh, M., Karrar, H.H., La Mela, V., Lu, J., Mostowlansky, T., Murton,
5153-2. Available at: https://www.ifc.org/wps/wcm/connect/ G., Ng, H., Norum, R., Oakes, T., Plachta, N., Reichhardt, B.,
topics_ext_content/ifc_external_corporate_site/sustainability-at-ifc/ Sarma, J., Sulek, E., Tang, D., Urmanbetova, Z., White, T. (2022).
publications/publications_handbook_rap__wci__1319577659424 Demystifying the Belt and Road Initiative. Fribourg, Munich, and
(Accessed: 15 April 2023). Boulder. https://bri.roadworkasia.com/.

IFC (2012). IFC performance standards on environmental and social Karlson, M., Mörtberg, U., and Balfors, B. (2014). Road ecology in
sustainability. Washington, D.C., USA. Available at: https://www.ifc. environmental impact assessment. Environmental Impact Assessment
org/wps/wcm/connect/topics_ext_content/ifc_external_corporate_ Review 48:10-19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2014.04.002.
site/sustainability-at-ifc/publications/publications_handbook_pps
(Accessed: 15 April 2023).

Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals 117
 References

Kintsch, J., Jacobson, S., and Cramer, P. (2015). The wildlife crossing Laurance, W.F., Peletier-Jellema, A., Geenen, B., Koster, H.,
guilds decision framework: a behavior-based approach to designing Verweij, P., Van Dijck, P., Lovejoy, T.E., Schleicher, J., and Van Kuijk,
effective wildlife crossing structures. Proceedings of the 2015 M. (2015). Reducing the global environmental impacts of rapid
International Conference on Ecology and Transportation. Raleigh, infrastructure expansion. Current Biology 25(7):259–262.
North Carolina, USA. Available at: https://arc-solutions.org/wp- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2015.02.050.
content/uploads/2021/03/08.-ICOET-WildlifeCrossingGuilds-paper.
pdf (Accessed: 15 April 2023). Laurance, W. and Salt, D. (2018). Opinion: Environmental Impact
Assessments Aren’t Protecting the Environment. Ensia.com. Available
Kociolek, A.V., Grilo, C., Jacobson, S.L. (2015). Flight doesn’t solve at: https://ensia.com/voices/environmental-impact-assessment/.
everything: Mitigation of road impacts on birds. In: van der Ree, (Accessed 15 October 2019).
R., Smith, D.J., and Grilo C., (eds.), Handbook of Road Ecology,
pp.281–289. Oxford, UK: John Wiley and Sons, Ltd. Lee, T., Quinn, M., and Duke, D. (2006). Citizen science, highways,
and wildlife: Using a web-based GIS to engage citizens in collecting
Kong, Y., Wang, Y., and Guan, L. (2013). Road wildlife ecology wildlife information. Ecology and Society 11(1):1. Available at:
research in China. Social and Behavioral Sciences 96:1191–1197. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss1/art11/ (Accessed: 15
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.08.136. April 2023).

Kornilev, Y.V., Price, S. J., and Dorcas, M.E. (2006). Between a Leung, D., Zhao, Y., Ballesteros, A., and Hu, T. (2013). World
rock and a hard place: Responses of eastern box turtles (Terrapene Resources Institute Issue Brief Environmental and Social Policies in
carolina) when trapped between railroad tracks. Herpetological Overseas Investments: Progress and Challenges for China. Available
Review 37:145–148. Available at: https://pricelab.ca.uky.edu/files/ at: https://www.wri.org/publication/environmental-and-social-policies-
kornilev_et_al._2006_2.pdf (Accessed: 15 April 2023). overseas-investments (Accessed: 15 June 2020).

Lambertucci, S.A., Speziale, K.L., Rogers, T.E., and Morales, J.M. Linden, B., Foord, S., Horta-Lacueva, Q.J.B., and Taylor, P.J.
(2009). How do roads affect the habitat use of an assemblage of (2020). Bridging the gap: How to design canopy bridges for
scavenging raptors?’ Biodiversity and Conservation 18(8):2063– arboreal guenons to mitigate road collisions. Biological Conservation
2074. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-008-9573-3. 246:108560. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2020.108560.

Langen, T. A. (2015). A history of small animal road ecology. In: Lindenmayer, D.B. and Burgman, M. (2005). Practical Conservation
Andrews, K.M., Nanjappa, P., and Riley, S.P.D. (eds.) Roads and Biology. Victoria, Australia: CSIRO Publishing.
Ecological Infrastructure: Concepts and Application for Small Animals, https://doi.org/10.1071/9780643093102.
pp.7–20. Baltimore, USA: John Hopkins University Press.
Longcore, T. and C. Rich (2004). Ecological Light Pollution. Frontiers
Laurance, W.F. (2015). Bad roads, good roads. In: van der Ree, in Ecology and the Environment 2(4):191–198.
R., Smith, D.J. and Grilo, C. (eds.) Handbook of Road Ecology, https://doi.org/10.1890/1540-9295(2004)002[0191:ELP]2.0.CO;2.
pp.32–42. Oxford, UK: John Wiley and Sons, Ltd.
Losos, E., Pfaff, A., Olander, L.P., Mason, S., Morgan, S. (2019).
Laurance, W. F. (2022). Why environmental impact assessments Reducing Environmental Risks from Belt and Road Initiative
often fail. Therya 13:67–72. https://www.scielo.org.mx/scielo. Investments in Transportation Infrastructure. Policy Research Working
php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2007-33642022000100067. Paper (8718), p.86. Available at: http://documents.worldbank.
org/curated/en/700631548446492003/Reducing-Environmental-
Laurance, W.F. and Arrea, I.B. (2017). Roads to riches or ruin?’ Risks-from-Belt-and-Road-Initiative-Investments-in-Transportation-
Science 358:442–444. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aao0312. Infrastructure (Accessed: 15 April 2023).

Laurance, W.F., Clements, G.R., Sloan, S., O’Connell, C.S., Mueller, Lucas, P. S., Gomes de Carvalho, R., and Grilo, R. (2017). Railway
N.D., Goosem, M., Venter, O., Edwards, D.P., Phalan, B., Balmford, Disturbances on Wildlife: Types, Effects, and Mitigation Measures. In:
A., van der Ree, R., and Burgues Arrea, I. (2014). A global strategy Borda-de-Água, L., Barrientos, R., Beja, P., and Pereira, H.M. (eds.)
for road building. Nature 513:229–232. Railway Ecology, pp.81-99. Cham, Switzerland: Springer Cham.
https://doi.org/10.1038/nature13717.
Mandle, L., Griffin, R., Goldstein, J., Acevedo-Daunas, R.M., Camhi,
Laurance, W.F., Croes, B.M., Tchignoumba, L., Lahm, S.A., Alonson, A., Lemay, M.H., Rauer, E., and Peterson, V. (2016). Natural Capital
A., Lee, M.E., Campbell, P., and Ondzeano, C. (2006). Impacts and Roads: Managing Dependencies and Impacts on Ecosystem
of roads and hunting on central African rainforest mammals. Services for Sustainable Road Investments. Inter-American
Conservation Biology 20(4):1251–1261. https://doi.org/10.1111/ Development Bank (IADB).
j.1523-1739.2006.00420.x. https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-57496-7_6.

Laurance, W.F., Goosem, M., and Laurance, S.G. (2009). Impacts of Maputo Convention (Revised African Convention on the Conservation
roads and linear clearings on tropical forests. Trends in Ecology and of Nature and Natural Resources) (11 July 2003). Available at:
Evolution 24:659-669. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2009.06.009. https://au.int/sites/default/files/treaties/7782-treaty-0029_-_revised_

118 Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals
 References

african_convention_on_the_conservation_of_nature_and_natural_ Technology, Trondheim, Norway. Available at: https://ntnuopen.ntnu.

resources_e.pdf (Accessed: 15 April 2023). no/ntnu-xmlui/handle/11250/245509 (Accessed: 15 April 2023).

Margules, C.R. and Pressey, R.L. (2000). Systematic conservation Mumme, R. L., Schoech, S. J., Woolfenden, G. E., and Fitzpatrick,
planning. Nature 405:243–53. https://doi.org/10.1038/35012251. J. W. (2000). Life and Death in the Fast Lane: Demographic
Consequences of Road Mortality in the Florida Scrub-Jay.
Maron, M., Ives, C.D., Kujala, H., Bull, J.W., Maseyk, F.J., Bekessy, Conservation Biology, 14(2):501–512. https://doi.org/10.1046/
S., Gordon, A., Watson, J.E., Lentini, P.E., and Gibbons, P. (2016). j.1523-1739.2000.98370.x.
Taming a wicked problem: resolving controversies in biodiversity
offsetting. BioScience 66:489–498. Murcia, C. (1995). Edge effects in fragmented forests: implications for
https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biw038. conservation. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 10:58–62.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-5347(00)88977-6.
Marshall, R., Arts, J., and Morrison-Saunders, A. (2005). International
principles for best practice EIA follow-up. Impact Assessment and Naeem, S., Chapin III, F.S., Costanza, R., Ehrlich, P.R., Golley, F.B.,
Project Appraisal 23(3):175–181. Hooper, D.U., Lawton, J.H., O’Neill, R.V., Mooney, H.A., Sala, O.E.,
https://doi.org/10.3152/147154605781765490. Symstad, A.J., and Tilman, D. (1999). Biodiversity and ecosystem
functioning: Maintaining natural life support processes. Issues in
Mascia, M.B. and Pailler, S. (2011). Protected area downgrading, Ecology 4:2–12. Available at: https://www.esa.org/wp-content/
downsizing, and degazettement (PADDD) and its conservation uploads/2013/03/issue4.pdf (Accessed: 15 April 2023).
implications. Conservation Letters 4(1):9–20.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1755-263X.2010.00147.x. Narain, D., Maron, M., Teo, H.C., Hussey, K., and Lechner, A.M.
(2020). Best-practice biodiversity safeguards for Belt and Road
Mateus, A., Grilo, C. and Santos-Reis, M. (2011). Surveying drainage Initiative’s financiers. Nature Sustainability 3(8): 650–657.
culvert use by carnivores: sampling design and cost-benefit analyses https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-020-0528-3.
of track pads vs. video surveillance methods. Environmental
Monitoring and Assessment 181:101–109. Ng, L.S., Campos-Arceiz, A., Sloan, S., Hughes, A.C., Tiang, D.C.F.,
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-010-1816-6. Li, B.V., and Lechner, A.M. (2020) The scale of biodiversity impacts of
the Belt and Road Initiative in Southeast Asia. Biological Conservation
McCall, S.C., McCarthy, M.A., van der Ree, R., Harper, M.J., 248:1–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2020.108691.
Cesarini, S., and Sloanes, K. (2010). Evidence that a highway
reduces apparent survival rates of squirrel gliders. Ecology and Nikumbh, K.P. and Aher, P.D. (2017). A review paper – study of green
Society 15(3):27. Available at: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/ highway rating system. International Research Journal of Engineering
vol15/iss3/art27/ (Accessed: 15 April 2023). and Technology, 4(4):2104–2108. Available at:
https://www.irjet.net/archives/V4/i5/IRJET-V4I5560.pdf (Accessed: 15
McCallum, M. L. (2015). Vertebrate biodiversity losses point to a sixth April 2023).
mass extinction. Biodiversity and Conservation, 24(10):2497–2519.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-015-0940-6. Noble, B.F. (2000). Strategic Environmental Assessment: What is it?
& What Makes it Strategic?. Journal of Environmental Assessment
McGregor, M., Matthews, K., and Jones, D. (2017). Vegetated Fauna Policy and Management, 2(02): 203-224.
Overpass Disguises Road Presence and Facilitates Permeability for https://doi.org/10.1142/S146433320000014X.
Forest Microbats in Brisbane, Australia. Frontiers in Ecology and
Evolution 5(153). https://doi.org/10.3389/fevo.2017.00153. Normann, J.M., Houghtalen, R.J., and Johnston, W.J. (2005).
Hydraulic design series No. 5, 2nd edition, rev.: Hydraulic design of
McGuire, T.M. and Morrall, J.F. (2000). Strategic highway highway culverts. FHWA NHI-01-020. Washington, DC, USA: Federal
improvements to minimize environmental impacts within the Canadian Highway Administration. Available at: https://pdhonline.com/courses/
Rocky Mountain national parks. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering h136/FHWA-NHI-01-020.pdf (Accessed: 15 April 2023).
27:523–32. https://doi.org/10.1139/l99-096.
Noss, R.F. (1990). Indicators of monitoring biodiversity: a hierarchical
Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MEA) (2005). Ecosystems and approach. Conservation Biology, 4:355–364.
Human Well Being: Synthesis. Washington DC, USA: Island Press. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2385928.
Available at: https://www.millenniumassessment.org/documents/
document.356.aspx.pdf (Accessed: 15 April 2023). Obeng, D.A. and Tuffour, Y.A. (2020). Prospects of alternative funding
sourcing for maintenance of road networks in developing countries.
Morrison-Saunders, A. and Bailey, J. (1999). Exploring the EIA/ Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives 8:100225.
environmental management relationship. Environmental Management https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trip.2020.100225.
24(3):281–295. https://doi.org/10.1007/s002679900233.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)
Mtui, E.K. (2014). Road Constraints on impala (Aepyceros melampus) (2019). Strategic Environmental Assessment and Environmental
behavior. Dissertation, Norwegian University of Science and Impact Assessment. Available at: https://www.oecd.org/env/
outreach/eapgreen-sea-and-eia.htm (Accessed: 14 June 2020).

Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals 119
 References

OECD (2006). Applying Strategic Environment Assessment: Good Qin, S., Golden Kroner, R.E., Cook, C., Tesfaw, A.T., Braybrook, R.,
Practice Guidance for Development Co-operation. DAC Guidelines Rodriguez, C.M., Poelking, C., and Mascia, M.B. (2019). Protected
and Reference Series. Available at: https://www.oecd.org/ area downgrading, downsizing, and degazettement as a threat to
environment/environment-development/37353858.pdf (Accessed: 15 iconic protected areas. Conservation Biology, 33(6):1275–1285.
April 2023). https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.13365.

Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Rainer, H., White, A., and Lanjouw, A. (2018). State of the apes:
(OHCHR) (2013). Free, Prior and Informed Consent of Indigenous infrastructure development and ape conservation. Cambridge,
Peoples. Available at: https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issues/ UK: Cambridge University Press. Available at: https://www.
ipeoples/freepriorandinformedconsent.pdf (Accessed: 15 April 2023). stateoftheapes.com/volume-3-infrastructure-development/
(Accessed: 15 April 2023).
Okita-Ouma, B., Koskei, M., Tiller, L., Lala, F., King, L., Moller, R.,
Amin, R., and Douglas-Hamilton, I. (2021). Effectiveness of wildlife Rajvanshi, A., Mathur, V.B., Teleki, G.C., and Mukherjee, S.K. (2001).
underpasses and culverts in connecting elephant habitats: a case Roads, sensitive habitats and wildlife: environmental guidelines for
study of new railway through Kenya’s Tsavo National Parks. African India and South Asia. Dehradun, India: Wildlife Institute of India and
Journal of Ecology 59(3):624-640. https://doi.org/10.1111/aje.12873. Toronto, Canada: Canadian Environmental Collaborative Ltd.

Ottburg, F. and Blank, M. (2015). Solutions to the impacts of roads Raman, T.R.S. (2011). Framing ecologically sound policy on
and other barriers on fish and fish habitat. In: van der Ree, R., Smith, linear intrusions affecting wildlife habitats: Background paper for
D.J. and Grilo, C. (eds.). Handbook of Road Ecology, pp.364-372 the National Board. Mysore, India: Wildlife Nature Conservation
Oxford, UK: John Wiley and Sons, Ltd. Foundation. Available at: http://moef.gov.in/wp-content/
uploads/2018/04/Linear-intrusions-background-paper.pdf (Accessed:
Pavlyuk, O., Noble, B.F., Blakley, J.A., and Jaeger, J.A. (2017). 15 April 2023).
Fragmentary provisions for uncertainty disclosure and consideration
in EA legislation, regulations and guidelines and the need for Reed, D.F., Woodard, T.N., and Pojar, T.M. (1975). Behavioral
improvement. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 66:14–23. response of mule deer to a highway underpass. Journal of Wildlife
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2017.06.001. Management 39:361-367. https://doi.org/10.2307/3799915.

Pedlowski, M.A., Matricardi, E.A., Skole, D., Cameron, S.R., Rega, C. and G. Baldizzone (2015). Public participation in
Chomentowski, W., Fernandes, C., and Lisboa, A. (2005). Strategic Environmental Assessment: A practitioners’ perspective.
Conservation units: a new deforestation frontier in the Amazonian Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 50: 105–115.
state of Rondônia, Brazil. Environmental Conservation 32(2):149–155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2014.09.007.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0376892905002134.
Reymondin, L., Coca, A., Arango, D., Jarvis, A., Navarrete, C.,
Pell, S. and Jones, D. (2015). Are wildlife overpasses of conservation Suding, P.H., and Watkins, G.G. (2014). Potential Impact of Road
value for birds? A study in Australian sub-tropical forest, with wider Projects on Habitat Loss and Greenhouse Gas Emissions in Guyana
implications. Biological Conservation 184: 300–309. from 2012 to 2022. Inter-American Development Bank. Available
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2015.02.005. at: https://publications.iadb.org/en/potential-impact-road-projects-
habitat-loss-and-greenhouse-gas-emissions-guyana-2012-2022
Peris, S. and Morales, J. (2004). Use of passages across a canal (Accessed: 15 April 2023).
by wild mammals and related mortality. European Journal of Wildlife
Research 50:67–72. Ries, L., Debinski, D., and Wieland, M. (2001). Conservation value of
roadside prairie restoration to butterfly communities. Conservation
Picciotto, R. (2013) Involuntary Resettlement in Infrastructure Biology, 15:401–411.
Projects: A Development Perspective. In: Ingram, G.K. and Brandt, https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1523-1739.2001.015002401.x.
K.L. (eds.). Infrastructure and Land Policies, pp.238–239. Lincoln
Institute of Land Policy. Available at: https://www.lincolninst.edu/ Riley, S.P.D., Pollinger, J.P., Sauvajot, R.M., York, E.C., Bromley, C.,
sites/default/files/pubfiles/involuntary-resettlement-in-infrastructure- Fuller, T.K., and Wayne, R.K. (2006). A southern California freeway
projects_0.pdf (Accessed: 15 April 2023). is a physical and social barrier to gene flow in carnivores. Molecular
Ecology 15:1733–1741.
Planning Advisory Service (PAS), Local Government Association https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-294x.2006.02907.x.
(2021). Biodiversity Net Gain. Available at: https://www.local.gov.uk/
pas/topics/environment/biodiversity-net-gain (Accessed: 29 October Rio Declaration on Environment and Development (1992). Available
2021). at: https://www.un.org/en/development/desa/population/migration/
generalassembly/docs/globalcompact/A_CONF.151_26_Vol.I_
Protection of Environment, 40 C.F.R. pt. 1508 (2023). United States Declaration.pdf (Accessed: 15 April 2023).
Code of Federal Regulations. Available at: https://www.ecfr.gov/
current/title-40/chapter-V/subchapter-A/part-1508 (Accessed: 15 Rockström, J., Steffen, W., Noone, K., Persson, Å., Chapin, F. S.,
April 2023). Lambin, E. F., Lenton, T.M., Scheffer, M., Folke, C., Schellnhuber,
H.J., Nykvist, B., de Wit, C.A., Hughes, T., van der Leeuw, S., Rodhe,

120 Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals
 References

H., Sörlin, S., Snyder, P.K., Costanza, R., Svedin, U., Falkenmark, continuous fencing. Wildlife Society Bulletin 36:492–498.
M., Karlberg, L., Corell, R.W., Fabry, V.J., Hansen, J., Walker, B., https://doi.org/10.1002/wsb.166.
Liverman, D., Richardsson, K., Crutzen, P., and Foley, J. A. (2009).
A safe operating space for humanity. Nature, 461(7263), 472–475. Sawyer, H., Rodgers, P. A., and Hart, T. (2016). Pronghorn and mule
https://doi.org/10.1038/461472a. deer use of underpasses and overpasses along US Highway 191.
Wildlife Society Bulletin, 40(2):211-216.
Roedenbeck, I.A., Fahrig, L., Findlay, C.S., Houlahan, J.E., Jaeger, https://doi.org/10.1002/wsb.650.
J.A.G., Klar, N., Kramer-Schadt, S., and van der Grift, E.A. (2007).
The Rauischholzhausen agenda for road ecology. Ecology and Seiler, A. and Olsson, M. (2017). Wildlife deterrent methods for
Society, 12(1):11. Available at: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/ railways—an experimental study. In: Borda-de-Água, L., Barrientos,
vol12/iss1/art11/ (Accessed: 15 April 2023). R., Beja, P., and Pereira, H.M. (eds.). Railway Ecology. Cham,
Switzerland: Springer Cham.
Rosell, C., Fernandez-Llario, P. and Herrero, J. (2001). El jabali (Sus https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-57496-7.
scrofa Linnaeus, 1758). Galemys 13(2):1–26.
Sijtsma, F.J., van der Veen, E., van Hinsberg, A. Pouwels, R., Bekker,
Rudnick, D.A., Ryan, S.J., Beier, P., Cushman, S.A., Dieffenbach, R., van Dijk, R.E., Grutters, M., Klaassen, R., Krijn, M., Mouissie,
F., Epps, C.W., Gerber, L.R., Hartter, J., Jenness, J.S., Kintsch, M., and Wymenga, E. Ecological impact and cost-effectiveness of
J., Merelender, A.M., Perkl, R.M., Preziosi, D.V., and Trombulak, wildlife crossings in a highly fragmented landscape: a multi-method
S.C. (2012). The role of landscape connectivity in planning and approach. (2020). Landscape Ecology 35:1701–1720.
implementing conservation and restoration priorities. Issues in https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-020-01047-z.
Ecology 16:1–20. Available at: https://www.fs.usda.gov/research/
treesearch/42229 (Accessed: 15 April 2023). Simeonova, V., Achterberg, E., and van der Grift, E.A. (2019).
Implementing ecological networks through the Red for Green
Russi D., ten Brink, P., Farmer, A., Badura, T., Coates, D., Förster, J., approach in a densely populated country: Does it work?.
Kumar, R., and Davidson, N. (2013). The Economics of Ecosystems Environment, Development and Sustainability 21:115–143.
and Biodiversity for Water and Wetlands. London and Brussels: IEEP; https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-017-0026-6.
Gland, Switzerland: Ramsar Convention Secretariat. Available at:
https://www.cbd.int/financial/values/g-ecowaterwetlands-teeb.pdf Slootweg, R., Kolhoff, A., Verheem, R., and Höft, R. (eds.) (2006).
(Accessed: 15 April 2023). Biodiversity in EIA and SEA. Background Document to CBD
Decision VII/28: Voluntary Guidelines on Biodiversity-Inclusive Impact
Rytwinski, T., Soanes, K., Jaeger, J.A.G., Fahrig, L., Findlay, C.S., Assessment. The Netherlands: Commission for Environmental
Houlahan, J., van der Ree, R., and van der Grift, E.A. (2016). How Assessment. Available at: https://www.cbd.int/doc/publications/imp-
Effective Is Road Mitigation at Reducing Road-Kill? A Meta-Analysis. bio-eia-and-sea.pdf (Accessed: 15 April 2023).
PLoS ONE 11:e0166941.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0166941. Smith, J.A., Duane, T.P., and Wilmers, C.C. (2019). Moving through
the matrix: promoting permeability for large carnivores in a human-
Rytwinski, T., van der Ree, R., Cunnington, G.M., Fahrig, L., Findlay, dominated landscape. Landscape and Urban Planning 183:50–58.
C.S., Houlahan, J., Jaeger, J.A.G., Soanes, K., and van der Grift, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2018.11.003.
E.A. (2015). Experimental study designs to improve the evaluation
of road mitigation measures for wildlife. Journal of Environmental Snell, T. and Cowell, R. (2006). Scoping in environmental impact
Management 154:48–64. assessment: balancing precaution and efficiency?. Environmental
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2015.01.048. Impact Assessment Review 26(4):359–376.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2005.06.003.
Saramaka People v. Suriname (2007), Preliminary Objections, Merits,
Reparations, and Cost, Inter-Am. Ct. H.R. (ser. C) No. 174. Available Soanes, K., Lobo, M.C., Vesk, P.A., McCarthy, M.A., Moore, J.L. and
at: https://iachr.lls.edu/sites/default/files/iachr/Cases/Saramaka_ van der Ree, R. (2013) Movement re-established but not restored:
People_v_Suriname/Saramaka%20People%20v.%20Suriname.pdf Inferring the effectiveness of road-crossing mitigation for a gliding
(Accessed: 15 April 2023). mammal by monitoring use. Biological Conservation 159:434–441.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2012.10.016.
Sawaya, M.A., Kalinowski, S.T., and Clevenger, A.P. (2014) Genetic
connectivity for two bear species at wildlife crossing structures in Soanes, K., Taylor, A.C., Sunnucks, P., Vesk, P.A., Cesarini, S., and
Banff National Park. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological van der Ree, R. (2018). Evaluating the success of wildlife crossing
Sciences 281:20131705–20131705. structures using genetic approaches and an experimental design:
https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2013.1705. lessons from a gliding mammal. Journal of Applied Ecology 55:129–
138. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.12966.
Sawyer, H., LeBeau, C., and Hart, T. (2012). Mitigating roadway
impacts to migratory mule deer—A case study with underpasses and Soanes, K. and van der Ree R. (2015). Reducing road impacts on
tree-dwelling animals. In: van der Ree, R., Smith, D.J., and Grilo, C.

Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals 121
 References

(eds.). Handbook of Road Ecology, pp.334–341. Oxford, UK: John Tucker, M.A., Böhning-Gaese, K., Fagan, W.F., Fryxell, J.M., Van
Wiley and Sons, Ltd. Moorter, B., … and Mueller, T. (2018). Moving in the Anthropocene:
Global reductions in terrestrial mammalian movements. Science
Southworth, J., Marsik, M., Qiu, Y., Perz, S., Cumming, G., Stevens, 359:466-469. http://doi.org/10.1126/science.aam9712.
F., Rocha, K., Duchelle, A., and Barnes, G. (2011). Roads as Drivers
of Change: Trajectories across the Tri-National Frontier in MAP, the United Nations Commission on Human Rights, Sub-Commission on
Southwestern Amazon. Remote Sensing 3(5):1047–1066. the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights (UNCHR), Working
https://doi.org/10.3390/rs3051047. Group on Indigenous Populations. (2005). Legal Commentary on the
Concept of Free, Prior and Informed Consent’, 57, U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/
Spoelder, P., Lockwood, M., Cowell, S., Gregerson, P., Henchman, Sub.2/AC.4/2005/WP.1, 2005. Available at: https://www.ohchr.org/
A. (2015). Chapter 13: Planning. In Worboys, G.L., Lockwood, Documents/Issues/IPeoples/WG/E-CN4-Sub2-AC4-2005-WP2.doc
M., Kothari, A., Feary, S., and I. Pulsford (eds.). Protected Area (Accessed: 15 April 2023).
Governance and Management. Canberra, Australia: ANU Press.
United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD)
St. Clair, C.C., Backs, J., Friesen, A., Gangadharan, A., Gilhooly, (2022). Land, Life and Legacy Declaration, Decision 29/COP.15,
P., Murray, M., and Pollock, S. (2019). Animal learning may Abidjan, Ivory Coast (9-20 May 2022). ICCD/COP(15)/23/Add.1.
contribute to both problems and solutions for wildlife-train collisions. Available at: https://www.unccd.int/sites/default/files/2022-10/29_
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences cop15.pdf (Accessed: 15 April 2023).
374(1781):20180050. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2018.0050.
United Nations Decade on Ecosystem Restoration
St. Clair, C., Gangadharan, A., Pollock, S., Gilhooly, P., Friesen, A., (UNDER) (2021). The United Nations Decade on Ecosystem
and Dorsey, B. (2017). Gaining momentum on awareness of the Restoration – Strategy. Available at: https://wedocs.unep.
ecological effects of railways. Animal Conservation 20:407–408. org/bitstream/handle/20.500.11822/31813/ERDStrat.
https://doi.org/10.1111/acv.12377. pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y (Accessed: 15 April 2023).

Stokes, J. (2015). What transportation agencies need in United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples
environmental impact assessments and other reports to minimise (UNDRIP) (13 September 2007). Available at: https://www.un.org/
ecological impacts. In: van der Ree, R., Smith, D.J. and Grilo, C. development/desa/indigenouspeoples/wp-content/uploads/
(eds.). Handbook of Road Ecology, pp.364-372 Oxford, UK: John sites/19/2018/11/UNDRIP_E_web.pdf (Accessed: 15 April 2023).
Wiley and Sons, Ltd.
United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (UNDESA)
Stolton, S., Shadie, P., and Dudley, N. (2013). Guidelines for Applying (2021). The 17 Goals. Available at: https://sdgs.un.org/goals.
Protected Area Management Categories: Including IUCN WCPA Best (Accessed 8 August 2021).
Practice Guidance on Recognising Protected Areas and Assigning
Management Categories and Governance Types. Best Practice United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE), Inland
Protected Area Guidelines Series, no. 21. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN. Transport Committee. (2017). Transport Trends and Economics 2016-
https://portals.iucn.org/library/node/30018. 2017: Innovative ways for Financing Transport Infrastructure. New
York and Geneva: United Nations Publications. Available at:
Tanner, D. and Perry, J. (2007). Road effects on abundance and https://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/trans/main/wp5/publications/
fitness of Galapagos lava lizards (Microlophus albermarlensis). Journal ECE_TRANS_264_E_Web_Optimized.pdf (Accessed: 15 April 2023).
of Environmental Management 85: 270–278.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2006.08.022. UNEP (2022a). Ministerial declaration of the United Nations
Environment Assembly at its fifth session: Strengthening actions
Thacker, S., Adshead, D., Fay, M. Hallegatte, S., Harvey, M., Meller, for nature to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals. Nairobi,
H., O’Regan, N., Rozenberg, J., Watkins, G., and Hall, J.W. (2019). Kenya (22-23 February 2021 and 28 February-2 March 2022).
Infrastructure for sustainable development. Nature Sustainability UNEP/EA.5/HLS.1. Available at: https://wedocs.unep.org/
2:324–331. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-019-0256-8. bitstream/handle/20.500.11822/39728/UNEP-EA.5-HLS.1%20
-MINISTERIAL%20DECLARATION%20OF%20THE%20UNITED%20
Thompson, U-C., Marsan, J-F., Fournier-Peyresblanques, B., NATIONS%20ENVIRONMENT%20ASSEMBLY%20AT%20ITS%20
Forgues, C., Ogaa, A., and Jaeger, J.A.G. (2013). Using Compliance FIFTH%20SESSION%20-%20English.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
Analysis for PPP to bridge the gap between SEA and EIA: Lessons (Accessed: 15 April 2023).
from the Turcot Interchange reconstruction in Montreal, Quebec. EIA
Review 42:74–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2012.10.001. United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) (2002). UNEP EIA
Training Resource Manual: Public Involvement, 2nd Edition. Nairobi,
Torres, A., Patterson, C., and Jaeger, J.A.G. (2022). Advancing the Kenya. Available at:
consideration of ecological connectivity in environmental assessment: https://unep.ch/etu/publications/EIA_2ed/EIA_E_top3_body.PDF.
Synthesis and next steps forward. Impact Assessment and Project
Appraisal (IAPA) 40(6):451–459. UNEP (2022b). Integrated Approaches in Action: A Companion to the
https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2022.2134619. International Good Practice Principles for Sustainable Infrastructure.

122 Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals
 References

Available at: https://www.unep.org/resources/publication/integrated- Evaluating the effectiveness of road mitigation measures. Biodiversity
approaches-action-companion-international-good-practice-principles. and Conservation 22:425–448.
(Accessed 3 February 2023) https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-012-0421-0.

UNEP (2022c). International Good Practice Principles for Van der Ree, R., Gagnon, J.W., and Smith, D.J. (2015). Fencing:
Sustainable Infrastructure - Integrated, Systems-level Approaches a valuable tool for reducing wildlife-vehicle collisions and funneling
for Policymakers, 2nd Edition. Nairobi, Kenya. Available at: https:// fauna to crossing structures. In: van der Ree, R., Smith, D.J. and
www.unep.org/resources/publication/international-good-practice- Grilo, C. (eds.). Handbook of Road Ecology, pp. 159–171. Oxford,
principles-sustainable-infrastructure. (Accessed 3 February 2023) UK: John Wiley and Sons, Ltd.

UNEP (2022d). Mapping environmental risks and socio-economic Van der Ree, R., Gulle, N., Holland, K., van der Grift, E., Mata,
benefits of planned transport infrastructure – a global picture. C., and Suarez, F. (2007). Overcoming the barrier effect of roads:
Nairobi, Kenya. Available at: https://www.unep.org/resources/report/ how effective are mitigation strategies? An international review
mapping-environmental-risks-and-socio-economic-benefits-planned- of the use and effectiveness of underpasses and overpasses
transport. (Accessed 3 February 2023) designed to increase the permeability of roads for wildlife. UC Davis:
Road Ecology Center. Available at: https://escholarship.org/uc/
UNEP (2022e). Resolution 5/9 Sustainable and Resilient item/66j8095x (Accessed: 15 April 2023).
Infrastructure. (2 March 2022). Nairobi, Kenya (22-23 February 2021
and 28 February-2 March 2022). UNEP/EA.5/Res.9. Available at: Van der Ree, R., Smith, D.J., and Grilo, C. (eds.). (2015). Handbook
https://wedocs.unep.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.11822/39852/ of Road Ecology. Oxford, UK: John Wiley and Sons, Ltd.
SUSTAINABLE%20AND%20RESILIENT%20INFRASTRUCTURE.%20
English.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y (Accessed: 15 April 2023). Van der Ree, R. and Tonjes, S. (2015). How to maintain safe and
effective mitigation measures. In: van der Ree, R., Smith, D.J., and
UNEP World Conservation Monitoring Centre (WCMC), IUCN, and Grilo, C. (eds.). Handbook of Road Ecology, pp.138–142. Oxford,
National Geographic Society (NGS) (2021). Protected Planet Report UK: John Wiley and Sons, Ltd.
2020. Cambridge, UK: UNEP-WCMC; Gland, Switzerland: IUCN; and
Washington, DC: NGS. Available at: https://livereport.protectedplanet. Vilela, T., Harb, A.M., Bruner, A., da Silva Arruda, V.L., Ribeiro, V.,
net/chapter-8. (Accessed: 8 February 2023). Costa Alencar, A.A., Escobedo Grandez, A.J., Rojas, A., Laina, A.,
and Botero, R. (2020). A better Amazon road network for people and
United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) (2021). Resolution 75/271 the environment. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences,
Nature knows no borders: transboundary cooperation – a key factor 117(13):7095–7102. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1910853117.
for biodiversity conservation (16 April 2021). Available at: https://
undocs.org/en/A/RES/75/271 (Accessed: 15 April 2023). Visintin, C., Golding, N., van der Ree, R., and McCarthy, M.A. (2018).
Managing the timing and speed of vehicles reduces wildlife-transport
United Nations Ocean Conference (UNOC) (2022). Our ocean, our collision risk. Transportation Research, Part D: Transport and
future, our responsibility, Lisbon, Portugal (27 June-1 July 2022). A/ Environment, 59:86–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2017.12.003.
CONF.230/2022/L.1. Available at: https://documents-dds-ny.un.org/
doc/UNDOC/LTD/N22/389/13/PDF/N2238913.pdf?OpenElement Visintin C., van der Ree, R., and McCarthy, M.A. (2016). A simple
(Accessed: 15 April 2023). framework for a complex problem? Predicting wildlife-vehicle
collisions. Ecology and Evolution, 6:6409–6421.
United Nations Programme on Reducing Emissions from https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.2306.
Deforestation and Forest Degradation (UN-REDD) (2013). Guidelines
on Free, Prior and Informed Consent. Available at: https://www. Wagner, P. (2015). Form and function: A more natural approach to
uncclearn.org/sites/default/files/inventory/un-redd05.pdf (Accessed: infrastructure, fish and stream habitats. In: van der Ree, R., Smith,
15 April 2023). D.J., and Grilo, C. (eds.). Handbook of Road Ecology, pp.357-363.
Oxford, UK: John Wiley and Sons, Ltd.
Van der Grift, E.A., Jaeger, J.A.G., and van der Ree, R. (2015).
Guidelines for evaluating the effectiveness of road mitigation Waller, J.S. and Servheen, C. (2005). Effects of transportation
measures. In: van der Ree, R., Smith, D.J. and Grilo, C. (eds.). infrastructure on grizzly bears in northwestern Montana. Journal
Handbook of Road Ecology, pp.129–138. Oxford, UK: John Wiley of Wildlife Management 69:985–1000. https://www.jstor.org/
and Sons, Ltd. stable/3803338.

Van der Grift, E.A. and van der Ree, R. (2015). Guidelines for Walters, C.J. (1986). Adaptive management of renewable natural
evaluating use of crossing structures. In: van der Ree, R., Smith, resources. New York, USA: McGraw-Hill Publishers.
D.J. and Grilo, C. (eds.). Handbook of Road Ecology, pp.119–129.
Oxford, UK: John Wiley and Sons, Ltd. Wang, Y., Guan, L., Piao, Z.J., Wang, Z.C., and Kong, Y.P. (2017).
Monitoring wildlife crossing structures along highways in Changbai
Van der Grift, E.A., van der Ree, R., Fahrig, L., Findlay, S., Houlahan, Mountain, China. Transportation Research, Part D, 50:119–128.
J., Jaeger, J.A.G., Klar, N., Madriñan, L.F., and Olson, L. (2013). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2016.10.030.

Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals 123
 References

Ware, H.E., McClure, C.J.W., and Barber, J.R. (2015). A phantom World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF), UNEP-WCMC, GEF Small
road experiment reveals traffic noise is an invisible source of habitat Grants Programme, ICCA-Global Support Initiative (SGP/ICCA-GSI),
degradation. PNAS 112(39):12105–12109. LandMark Global Platform of Indigenous and Community Lands
https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1504710112. (LM), The Nature Conservancy (TNC), Conservation International (CI),
Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS), United Nations Development
Watson, D.M., Doerr, V.A.J., Banks, S.C., Driscoll, D.A., van der Programme (UNDP) Equator Prize (EP), International Land Coalition
Ree, R., Doerr, E.D., and Sunnucks, P. (2017). Monitoring ecological Secretariat (ILC-S), Conservation Matter (CM)s LLC), IUCN. (2021).
consequences of efforts to restore landscape-scale connectivity. The State of Indigenous Peoples’ and Local Communities’ Lands and
Biological Conservation 206:201–209. Territories: A technical review of the state of Indigenous Peoples’ and
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2016.12.032. Local Communities’ lands, their contributions to global biodiversity
conservation and ecosystem services, the pressures they face,
Weeks, R. (2017) Incorporating seascape connectivity into and recommendations for actions. Gland, Switzerland. Available at:
conservation prioritisation. PloS One 12:1–16. https://wwflac.awsassets.panda.org/downloads/report_the_state_
http://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0182396. of_the_indigenous_peoples_and_local_communities_lands_and_
territories_1.pdf (Accessed: 15 April 2023).
Weiss, M.A. (2017) Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB).
Congressional Research Service. Available at: https://fas.org/sgp/crs/ Wu, J. (2008). Landscape ecology. In: S.E. Jorgensen (ed.)
row/R44754.pdf (Accessed: 15 April 2023). Encyclopedia of Ecology, pp.2103–2108. Oxford, UK: Elsevier.
https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-008045405-4.00864-8.
Whittington, J., St. Clair, C.C., and Mercer, G. (2005). Spatial
responses of wolves to roads and trails in mountain valleys. Yang, H., Simmons, B.A., Ray, R., Nolte, C., Gopal, S., Ma. Y.,
Ecological Applications 15:543–553. Ma, X., and Gallagher, K.P. (2021). Risks to global biodiversity and
https://www.jstor.org/stable/4543373. Indigenous lands from China’s overseas development finance. Nature
Ecology & Evolution 5:1520–1529.
Woetzel, J., Garemo, N., Mischke, J., Hjerpe, M., and Palter, R. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-021-01541-w.
(2016). Bridging Global Infrastructure Gaps. McKinsey and Company,
McKinsey Global Institute. Available at: https://www.mckinsey. Zhang, Y., and Mohsen, J.P. (2018). A project-based sustainability
com/~/media/McKinsey/Industries/Capital%20Projects%20 rating tool for pavement maintenance. Engineering 4:200-208.
and%20Infrastructure/Our%20Insights/Bridging%20global%20 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eng.2018.03.001.
infrastructure%20gaps/Bridging-Global-Infrastructure-Gaps-Full-
report-June-2016.pdf (Accessed: 15 April 2023).

World Bank (2016). World Bank Environmental and Social Policy

for Investment Project Financing. World Bank. Available at: http://
pubdocs.worldbank.org/en/360141554756701078/World-Bank-
Environmental-and-Social-Policy-for-Investment-Project-Financing.
pdf (Accessed: 15 April 2023).

124 Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals
 Annex 1

Annex 1: International financial institution environmental policies

(adapted from Losos et al., 2019)

IFI Key Aspects of Relevant Environmental Policy Year Produced

International The IFC Performance Standards on Environmental and Social Sustainability (PS) have gained Updated 2019
Finance Corporation recognition as the global best practice standard for assessing and mitigating negative
(IFC) Performance environmental and social outcomes related to large infrastructure projects. The standards
Standards adhere strictly to the mitigation hierarchy, placing high importance on avoidance of impact
if possible. Especially relevant for the environment risks related to transport infrastructure
are Resource Efficiency and Pollution Prevention (PS3) and Biodiversity Conservation and
Sustainable Management of Living Natural Resources (PS6). Each performance standard has an
accompanying guidance note that provides more technical details about how borrowers should
adhere to the PS.
World Bank In addition to protecting the poor and the environment and ensuring sustainable development, Revised 2018
Environmental and WB’s Environmental and Social Framework (ESF) addresses, among other things, transparency,
Social Framework non-discrimination, social inclusion, public participation, and accountability. The Environmental
and Social Standards mirror the IFC’s Performance Standards very closely.
Asian Development ADB's Safeguard Policy Statement (SPS) governing the environmental and social safeguards Revised 2009
Bank (ADB) of ADB's operations are a cornerstone of its support to inclusive economic growth and
environmental sustainability in Asia and the Pacific. The objectives of the SPS are to avoid,
or when avoidance is not possible, to minimise and mitigate adverse project impacts on the
environment and affected people, and to help borrowers strengthen their safeguard systems
and develop the capacity to manage environmental and social risks.
African AfDB’s Integrated Safeguards System consists of four interrelated components: Integrated 2013
Development Bank Safeguards Policy Statement (PS), Operational Safeguards (OS), Environmental and Social
(AfDB) Assessment Procedures. The PS describes common objectives of the Bank’s safeguards and
lays out policy principles. The OS are a set of five safeguard requirements that Bank clients are
expected to meet when addressing social and environmental impacts and risks. The Impact
Assessment Guidance Notes provide technical guidance to the Bank’s borrowers or clients on
standards of sector issues, such as roads or fisheries, or on methodological approaches clients
or borrowers are expected to adopt to meet OS standards. OS3, Biodiversity, Renewable
Resources, and Ecosystem Services, is especially relevant to addressing environmental risks
from transport infrastructure.
European Bank EBRD’s Environmental and Social Policy (ESP) puts safeguards in place to prevent or minimise 2014
for Reconstruction any adverse environmental or social impacts, to improve the project’s efficiency, and maximize
and Development benefits for the wider community and future generations. ESP outlines how the EBRD will
(EBRD) address the environmental and social impacts of its projects by defining the respective roles
and responsibilities of both the Bank and its clients in designing, implementing and operating
projects; setting a strategic goal to promote projects with high environmental and social
benefits; and mainstreaming environmental and social sustainability considerations into all its
activities.
Inter-American IDB’s social and environmental safeguards are in process of modernization to an environmental 2007 draft ESPF
Development Bank and social policy framework. The core principles of the new framework will be (i) no dilution of 2019
(IDB) current policies, (ii) outcome oriented (iii), proportionality (iv), transparency and (v) “do good”
beyond “do no harm”. The draft standards track closely to the World Bank ESF.
Asian Infrastructure AIIB’s Environmental and Social Framework (ESF) includes an Environmental and Social 2017
Investment Bank Exclusion List— a list of project types or activities that the bank refuses to finance on
(AIIB) environmental or social grounds. In many ways, the AIIB Environmental and Social Framework
aligns with similar standards released by other banks, but it also relies heavily on its partners’
standards (Weiss, 2017).
New Development The NDB’s ESF includes an environmental and social policy as well as environmental and social 2016
Bank (NDB) standards (ESS). ESS1, the Environmental and Social Assessment, is particularly relevant.
Export-Import Bank The 2007 Guidelines for Environmental and Social Impact Assessment of China Export and 2007; 2015
of China (Exim Import Bank’s Loan Projects requires environmental impact assessments, monitoring, and
Bank) review of project impacts for all projects before a project gains approval. When deemed
necessary, environmental and social responsibilities may be included in the loan contact. The
Exim Bank also has the right to monitor the client’s implementation of the mitigation activities
(FOE, 2016; Leung et al., 2013).
China Development CDB has transparent sustainable development objectives – including an objective on 2004
Bank (CDB) environmental protection for climate, ecology, clean energy, and low carbon living – but
specific environmental policies and their content are not available to the public (FOE, 2016). In
2006, CDB pledged to abide by the UN Global Compact 10 principles in human rights, labour
standards, environment and anti-corruption. CBD produced a series of non-binding frameworks
to promote environmentally-friendly businesses, including an annual Work Plan for Loans to
Reduce Pollution and Emissions, Guidelines on Environmental Protection Project Development
Review, and Guidelines on Special Loans for Energy Conservation and Emission Reduction
(FOE, 2016).

Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals 125
 Annex 2

Annex 2: Resources
This Technical Report follows in the footsteps of decades of work to develop and share best practices in ecological connectivity
conservation and transport ecology around the world. Below you will find information on selected resources for connectivity
conservation (Part 1), linear transport ecology (Part 2), and other sources for further information (Part 3). For ease of use, these
resources have been organised by their geographic applicability, and ordered from newest to oldest.

Part 1: Connectivity conservation

Guidelines for conserving connectivity through ecological networks and corridors (2020)
Hilty, J., Worboys, G.L., Keeley, A., Woodley, S., Lausche, B., Locke, H., Carr, M., Pulsford I., Pittock, J., White, J.W., Theobald,
D.M., Levine, J., Reuling, M., Watson, J.E.M., Ament, R. and Tabor, G.M. Best Practice Protected Area Guidelines Series No.
30. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN. https://doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.CH.2020.PAG.30.en

“Connectivity conservation management” in Protected Area Governance and Management (2015)

Pulsford, I., Lindenmayer, D., Wyborn, C., et al. Worboys, G.L., Lockwood, M., Kothari, A., Feary, S., and Pulsford, I. (eds.).
Canberra: ANU Press. https://doi.org/10.22459/PAGM.04.2015

The Legal Aspects of Connectivity Conservation: A Concept Paper (2013)

Lausche, B., Farrier, D., Verschuuren, J., et al. IUCN Environmental Policy and Law Paper, no. 85, volume 1. Gland, Switzerland:
IUCN. https://portals.iucn.org/library/node/10421

Part 2: Linear transport infrastructure ecology

Global

A Global Strategy for Ecologically Sustainable Transport and Other Linear Infrastructure (2020)
Georgiadis, L. (Coord). Paris, France: IENE, ICOET, ANET, ACLIE, WWF, IUCN-CCSG.
http://www.iene.info/wp-content/uploads/2020Dec_TheGlobalStrategy90899.pdf

Handbook of Road Ecology (2015)

van der Ree, R., Smith, D.J. and Grilo, C. (eds.). Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons.
https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118568170

Railway Ecology (2017)

Borda-de-Água, L., Barrientos, R., Beja, P., and Miguel Pereira, H. (eds.). London, UK: Springer Nature.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-57496-7

Roads and Ecological Infrastructure (2015)

Andrews, K.M., Nanjappa, P., and Riley, S.P.D. (eds.). Baltimore, MD: JHU Press
ISBN 9781421416397

Safe Passages: Highways, Wildlife, and Habitat Connectivity (2010)

Beckmann, J.P., Clevenger, A.P., Huijser, M., and Hilty, J.A. Washington, D.C.: Island Press
ISBN 1597269670, 9781597269674

Road Ecology: Science and Solutions (2002)

Forman, R.T.T., Sperling, D., Bissonette, J.A., et al. Washington, D.C.: Island Press
ISBN 1559639334, 9781559639330.

Asia

Protecting Asian Elephants from Linear Transportation Infrastructure: The Asian Elephant Transport Working Group’s
Introduction to the Challenges and Solutions (2021)
Ament, R., Tiwari, S.K., Butynski, M., et al. IUCN WCPA and SSC Asian Elephant Transport Working Group.
https://doi.org/10.53847/VYWN4174

126 Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals
 Annex 2

Green Infrastructure Design for Transport Projects: A Road Map to Protecting Asia’s Wildlife Biodiversity (2019)
Asian Development Bank http://dx.doi.org/10.22617/TCS189222

Central Asian Mammals Migration and Linear Infrastructure Atlas (2019)

UNEP/CMS, eds. CMS Technical Series No. 41. Bonn, Germany.
https://www.cms.int/cami/sites/default/files/publication/cami_atlas_3_complete.pdf

Eco-Friendly Measures to Mitigate Impacts of Linear Infrastructure on Wildlife (2016)

Wildlife Institute of India
https://wii.gov.in/images/images/documents/eia/EIA_BPG_Report_2017.pdf

Guidelines on Mitigating the Impact of Linear Infrastructure and Related Disturbance on Mammals in Central Asia (2014)
Convention on Migratory Species. UNEP/CMS/COP11/Doc.23.3.2.
http://www.cms.int/sites/default/files/document/COP11_Doc_23_3_2_Infrastructure_Guidelines_Mammals_in_Central_Asia_E.pdf

Smart Green Infrastructure in Tiger Range Countries: A Multi-Level Approach (2010)

Quintero J., Roca, R., Morgan, A.J., and Mathur, A. Global Tiger Initiative, The World Bank, Washington, D.C.
http://www.globaltigerinitiative.org/download/GTI-Smart-Green-Infrastructure-Technical-Paper.pdf

Australia

Roads in Rainforest: Best Practice Guidelines for Planning, Design and Management (2010)
Goosem, M., Harding, E.K., Chester, G., et al. Cairns, Queensland: Reef and Rainforest Research Centre Limited. Australia.
http://researchonline.jcu.edu.au/12113/1/goosem_guidelines.pdf

Review of Mitigation Measures Used to Deal with the Issue of Habitat Fragmentation by Major Linear Infrastructure (2008)
Van der Ree, R., Clarkson, D.T., Holland, K., et al. Report for Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts
(DEWHA), Contract No. 025/2006.
https://www.environment.gov.au/system/files/resources/dbcf5e19-a1bc-4405-b497-fdcc7c05ab12/files/habitat-fragmentation.pdf

Europe

Wildlife and Traffic in the Carpathians: Guidelines how to minimize the impact of transport infrastructure development
on nature in the Carpathian countries (2019)
Hlaváč, V., Andel, P., Matoušová, J., et al. TRANSGREEN project Integrated Transport and Green Infrastructure Planning in the
Danube-Carpathian Region for the Benefit of People and Nature.
https://www.interreg-danube.eu/uploads/media/approved_project_output/0001/35/02caaafe3c1c1365f76574e754ddbdc4e1af4a7a.pdf

Ecology Guidelines for Transmission Projects: A Standard Approach to Ecological Assessment of High Voltage
Transmission Projects (2012)
EirGrid and Natura Environmental Consultants, Dublin, Ireland.
http://www.eirgridgroup.com/site-files/library/EirGrid/EirGrid-Ecology-Guidelines-for-Electricity-Transmission-Projects.pdf

Guidelines for Assessment of Ecological Impacts of National Roads Schemes (2009)

National Roads Authority, Ireland.
http://www.tii.ie/technical-services/environment/planning/Guidelines-for-Assessment-of-Ecological-Impacts-of-National-Road-
Schemes.pdf

Wildlife and Traffic: A European Handbook for Identifying Conflicts and Designing Solutions (2021)
Infrastructure and Ecology Network Europe
https://handbookwildlifetraffic.info/

Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals 127
 Annex 2

North America

Cost Effective Solutions: Best Practices Manual to Reduce Animal-Vehicle Collisions and Provide Habitat Connectivity
for Wildlife (2023)
Huijser, M.P., Fairbank, E.R., Paul, K.S., (eds). Transportation Pooled Fund Study, TPF-5(358). Nevada Department of
Transportation, Carson City, NV. 10.15788/ndot2022.2.
https://westerntransportationinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/Report_TPF-5-358_AVC_Best-Practices-Manual.pdf

Highway Crossing Structures for Wildlife: Opportunities for Improving Driver and Animal Safety (2021)
Ament, R., Jacobson, S., Callahan, R., and Brocki, M. (eds.). US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service – Pacific Southwest
Research Station, Albany, CA. General Technical Report PSW-GTR-271.
https://www.fs.fed.us/psw/publications/documents/psw_gtr271/psw_gtr271.pdf

Innovative Strategies to Reduce the Costs of Effective Wildlife Overpasses (2021)

McGuire, T.M., Clevenger, A.P., Ament, R., et al. US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service – Pacific Southwest Research
Station, Albany, CA. General Technical Report PSW-GTR-267.
https://www.fs.fed.us/psw/publications/documents/psw_gtr267/psw_gtr267.pdf

Measures to Reduce Road Impacts on Amphibians and Reptiles in California: Best Management Practices and
Technical Guidance (2021)
Langton, T.E.S. and Clevenger, A.P. Western Transportation Institute for CA Department of Transportation, Division of Research,
Innovation and System Information.
https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/programs/research-innovation-system-information/documents/final-reports/ca20-2700-
finalreport-a11y.pdf

Manual de Diseño de Pasos Para Fauna Silvestre en Carreteras [México] (2020)

Secretaría de Comunicaciones y Transportes. Subsecretaría de Infraestructura. Dirección General de Servicios Técnicos.
https://www.sct.gob.mx/fileadmin/DireccionesGrales/DGST/Manuales/Manual_de_Fauna/ManualPasosparaFauna.pdf

Road Passages & Barriers for Small Terrestrial Wildlife: Project Summary Report (2019)
Gunson, K.E. and Huijser, M.P. Eco-Kare International and Western Transportation Institute in association with Louis Berger US,
Inc. Contractor’s Final Report Prepared for AASHTO Committee on Environment and Sustainability.
http://onlinepubs.trb.org/Onlinepubs/NCHRP/docs/NCHRP25-25Task113ProjectSummaryReport.pdf

Design of Terrestrial Wildlife Crossing System: Nature Conservation Practice Note

Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department, US, Ref. AF GR CON 21/2. (2014) https://www.afcd.gov.hk/english/
conservation/con_tech/files/NCPN_No.04_Wildlife_Underpass_Structures_v2006.pdf

Trans-Canada Highway Wildlife Monitoring and Research: Final Report 2014 (Part B: Research) (2014)
Clevenger, A.P. and Barrueto, M. (eds.). Prepared for Parks Canada Agency by the Western Transportation Institute and the
Miistakis Institute.
https://arc-solutions.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/Banff-TCH-Wildlife-Monitoring-Research-Final-Report-2014_
withappendices1.pdf

Wildlife Crossing Structure Handbook: Design and Evaluation in North America (2011)
Clevenger, A.P. and Huijser, M.P. US DOT, FWA - Central Federal Lands Highway Division.
https://roadecology.ucdavis.edu/files/content/projects/DOT-FHWA_Wildlife_Crossing_Structures_Handbook.pdf

Wildlife Vehicle Collision Reduction Study: Best Practices Manual (2008)

Huijser, M.P., McGowen, P., Fuller, J., et al. Report No.FHWA-HRT-08-034. U.S. Department of Transportation.
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/research/safety/08034/08034.pdf

Central and South America

Atropellamiento de fauna silvestre en Colombia: Guía para entender y diagnosticar este impacto (2021)
Jaramillo-Fayad, J.C., Velázquez, M.M., Premauer, J.M., González, J.L., and González Vélez, J.C. Gobierno Nacional de
Colombia – Institución Universitaria ITM.
https://www.mintransporte.gov.co/publicaciones/10217/gobierno-nacional-lanza-guia-para-entender-y-diagnosticar-el-impacto-
del-atropellamiento-de-fauna-silvestre-en-colombia/

128 Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals
 Annex 2

Lineamientos de Infraestructura Verde Vial para Colombia (LIVV) (2020)

Ministerio de Ambiente y Desarrollo Sostenible-Minambiente, Fundación para la Conservación y el Desarrollo Sostenible-FCDS,
y WWF-Colombia
https://wwflac.awsassets.panda.org/downloads/infraestructura_verde_b23_c9_safe_oct2020.pdf

Guía Ambiental “Vías Amigables con la Vida Silvestre” (2014)

Pomareda, E. Araya-Gamboa D., Ríos Y., et al. Comité Científico de la Comisión Vías y Vida Silvestre, Costa Rica.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/307946704_Guia_Ambiental_Vias_Amigables_con_la_Vida_Silvestre_Environmental_
Guide_Wildlife_Friendly_Roads

Principles, Practices and Challenges for Green Infrastructure Projects in Latin America (2012)
Quintero, J. D. Discussion paper no. IDB-DP-250. Inter-American Development Bank (Available in English and Spanish).
http://www19.iadb.org/intal/intalcdi/PE/2013/11428.pdf

Guía de Manejo Ambiental de Proyectos de Infraestructura Subsector Vial (2011)

INVIAS (Instituto Nacional de Vias) y Ministerio de Ambiente, Vivienda y Desarrollo Territorial, República de Colombia.
https://www.invias.gov.co/index.php/archivo-y-documentos/documentos-tecnicos/guia-de-manejo-ambiental-de-
proyectos/971-guia-de-manejo-ambiental/file

Part 3: Additional resources

IUCN WCPA-CCSG Transport Working Group (TWG)

(https://conservationcorridor.org/ccsg/working-groups/twg/)

IUCN SSC-AsESG and WCPA-CCSG Asian Elephant Transport Working Group (AsETWG)
(https://conservationcorridor.org/ccsg/working-groups/asetwg/)

IUCN WCPA-CCSG Latin American and Caribbean Transport Working Group (LACTWG)
(https://conservationcorridor.org/ccsg/working-groups/lactwg/; https://latinamericatransportationecology.org)

Transportecology.info (https://transportecology.info/)

Conservation Evidence (https://www.conservationevidence.com/)

African Conference for Linear Infrastructure and Ecology (ACLIE) (https://aclie.org)

Australasian Network for Ecology and Transportation (ANET) (http://www.ecologyandtransport.com)

Infrastructure and Ecology Network Europe (IENE) (https://www.iene.info/)

Biodiversity and Infrastructure Synergies and Opportunities for European Transport Networks (BISON)
(https://bison-transport.eu)

International Conference on Ecology and Transportation (ICOET) (https://www.icoet.net/)

Global Conference for Linear Infrastructure and Environment (GCLIE) (https://gclie.org/)

Addressing ecological connectivity in the development of roads, railways and canals 129
INTERNATIONAL UNION
FOR CONSERVATION OF NATURE

WORLD HEADQUARTERS
Rue Mauverney 28
1196 Gland, Switzerland
[email protected]
Tel: +41 22 999 0000
Fax: +41 22 999 0002
www.iucn.org
www.iucn.org/resources/publications