2274 § assessing coherence between regulation, practice and international standards § recognizing persistent gaps and methodological bottlenecks § establishing criteria for comparability, traceability and verification of offsets This methodological synthesis provides the basis for the study’s recommendations, aimed at strengthening technical consistency and alignment with global practices, as well as improving replication and verification of outcomes in environmental offset plans in Peru. 2.1 Biodiversity Data The characterization and determination of ecological value used in this study are based on an integrated set of physical, biological, spatial and regulatory data that enable estimation of residual impacts, sizing of offset measures and assessment of ecological equivalence. This data architecture aligns with MINAM offset guides and widely used international standards, ensuring traceability, technical consistency and comparability across projects and regions (MINAM, 2019, 2021, 2023; IFC, 2012; BBOP, 2012). 2.1.1 Data sources and scope Baseline and monitoring biophysical data Data from Environmental Impact Assessments structured by ecosystem (mainly wetlands) were integrated. Results followed MINAM Ecosystem Offsetting Guides, which define indicators and specific methodologies for each ecosystem type (MINAM, 2016; MINAM, 2019; MINAM, 2021; MINAM, 2023). Spatial layers and territorial context Spatial layers included land cover and land use, anthropogenic pressures, tenure, legal status, connectivity, slopes and hydrographic units. These inputs support the assessment of ecological equivalence and the selection of offset areas, in accordance with the SEIA Environmental Offsetting Guide (MINAM, 2024). Ecosystem-specific indicators and metrics MINAM’s ecosystem guides establish reference and additional indicators that enable estimation of ecological condition and translation into an ecological value (EV). These indicators align with international loss/gain measurement frameworks, facilitating traceability and comparability (MINAM, 2019; IFC, 2012; BBOP, 2012; CSBI, 2015). § High-Andean ecosystems: species richness, cover, canopy cover, biomass, organic matter, invasive plant species (MINAM, 2016). § Bofedales: cover, hydromorphological features, indicator species, compaction, drainage and basic hydrological parameters (MINAM, 2019). § Dry forest: structure, basal area, regeneration, indicator/threatened species, use pressure and fragmentation (MINAM, 2019). § Yunga: richness, abundance, stratification, canopy cover and understory integrity (MINAM, 2019). § Amazon humid forest: structure, cover, integrity, anthropogenic pressure and ecosystem-specific typologies (MINAM, 2021). § Páramo: physiognomic and functional markers, hydrological indicators and condition of humid grasslands (MINAM, 2023). § Aquatic ecosystems: In the absence of a specific national guide, SENACE and ANA adapt terrestrial criteria for offsets in aquatic ecosystems. ANA requires restoration or improvement of hydrological functions when there are significant residual impacts, prioritizing storage, regulation and baseflow conditions. Minimum data includes flows, channel morphology, connectivity, water quality and indicator aquatic communities (ANA, 2025; SENACE, 2024). The technical–operational analysis was based exclusively on publicly available information contained in approved environmental management instruments.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTM0Mzk2