Journal ArticleDOI
Biodiversity offsets and the challenge of achieving no net loss.
Toby A. Gardner,Toby A. Gardner,Amrei von Hase,Susie Brownlie,Jonathan M. M. Ekstrom,John D. Pilgrim,Conrad Savy,R. T. Theo Stephens,J. R. Treweek,Graham T. Ussher,Gerri Ward,Kerry ten Kate +11 more
Reads0
Chats0
TLDR
This work examined what no net loss means as a desirable conservation outcome and reviewed the conditions that determine whether, and under what circumstances, biodiversity offsets can help achieve such a goal, and proposed a conceptual framework to substitute the often ad hoc approaches evident in many biodiversity offset initiatives.Abstract:
Businesses, governments, and financial institutions are increasingly adopting a policy of no net loss of biodiversity for development activities. The goal of no net loss is intended to help relieve tension between conservation and development by enabling economic gains to be achieved without concomitant biodiversity losses. biodiversity offsets represent a necessary component of a much broader mitigation strategy for achieving no net loss following prior application of avoidance, minimization, and remediation measures. However, doubts have been raised about the appropriate use of biodiversity offsets. We examined what no net loss means as a desirable conservation outcome and reviewed the conditions that determine whether, and under what circumstances, biodiversity offsets can help achieve such a goal. We propose a conceptual framework to substitute the often ad hoc approaches evident in many biodiversity offset initiatives. The relevance of biodiversity offsets to no net loss rests on 2 fundamental premises. First, offsets are rarely adequate for achieving no net loss of biodiversity alone. Second, some development effects may be too difficult or risky, or even impossible, to offset. To help to deliver no net loss through biodiversity offsets, biodiversity gains must be comparable to losses, be in addition to conservation gains that may have occurred in absence of the offset, and be lasting and protected from risk of failure. Adherence to these conditions requires consideration of the wider landscape context of development and offset activities, timing of offset delivery, measurement of biodiversity, accounting procedures and rule sets used to calculate biodiversity losses and gains and guide offset design, and approaches to managing risk. Adoption of this framework will strengthen the potential for offsets to provide an ecologically defensible mechanism that can help reconcile conservation and development. Balances de Biodiversidad y el Reto de No Obtener Perdida Neta.read more
Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
Renewable energy and biodiversity: Implications for transitioning to a Green Economy
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors synthesize the existing knowledge at the interface of renewable energy and biodiversity accross the five drivers of ecosystem change and biodiversity loss of the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA) framework (i.e., habitat loss/change, pollution, overexploitation, climate change and introduction of invasive species).
Journal ArticleDOI
Taming a Wicked Problem: Resolving Controversies in Biodiversity Offsetting
Martine Maron,Christopher D. Ives,Christopher D. Ives,Heini Kujala,Joseph W. Bull,Fleur J. F. Maseyk,Sarah A. Bekessy,Ascelin Gordon,James E. M. Watson,Pia E. Lentini,Philip Gibbons,Hugh P. Possingham,Richard J. Hobbs,David A. Keith,Brendan A. Wintle,Brendan A. Wintle,Megan C. Evans +16 more
TL;DR: It is argued that there are many risks associated with the unscrutinized expansion of offset policy, so working rapidly to clarify and-where possible-to resolve these issues is essential.
Journal ArticleDOI
A global mitigation hierarchy for nature conservation
William N. S. Arlidge,Joseph W. Bull,Prue F. E. Addison,Michael J. Burgass,Dimas Gianuca,Taylor M Gorham,Céline Jacob,Nicole Shumway,Samuel P. Sinclair,James E. M. Watson,Chris Wilcox,E. J. Milner-Gulland +11 more
TL;DR: The mitigation hierarchy's conceptual power and ability to clarify thinking could provide the step change needed to integrate the multiple elements of conservation goals and interventions in order to achieve successful biodiversity outcomes.
Journal ArticleDOI
Locking in loss: Baselines of decline in Australian biodiversity offset policies
TL;DR: In this article, the authors examined crediting baselines used in offset policies across Australia, and compared them with recent estimates of decline in woody vegetation extent, concluding that crediting baseline in Australian offset schemes risk exacerbating biodiversity loss.
Journal ArticleDOI
The true loss caused by biodiversity offsets
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors examine the irreplaceability of ecosystems, the limits of restoration, and the environmental values that claim to be compensated through ecosystem restoration through biodiversity offsets, and summarize the multiple ecological, regulatory, and ethical losses that are often dismissed when evaluating offsets and the no-net-loss objective.
References
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
The neoliberalization of ecosystem services: wetland mitigation banking and problems in environmental governance
TL;DR: In this article, the authors argue that the wetland mitigation banking industry serves as a bellwether that presages problems that other strategies of neoliberal environmental governance will experience, arguing that relying on ecological science to define the unit of trade, and the problem of aligning the somewhat independent relations of law, politics, markets and ecosystems across an array of spatial scales.
Journal ArticleDOI
Faustian bargains? Restoration realities in the context of biodiversity offset policies
Martine Maron,Richard J. Hobbs,Atte Moilanen,Jeffrey W. Matthews,Kimberly Christie,Toby A. Gardner,David A. Keith,David B. Lindenmayer,Clive McAlpine +8 more
TL;DR: In this article, the authors examine the effectiveness of restoration as an approach for offsetting biodiversity loss, and conclude that many of the expectations set by current offset policy for ecological restoration remain unsupported by evidence.
Journal ArticleDOI
Assessing the quality of native vegetation: The 'habitat hectares' approach
TL;DR: In this article, the authors describe a novel approach to vegetation or habitat quality assessment (habitat hectares approach) that can be used in almost all types of terrestrial vegetation, based on explicit comparisons between existing vegetation features and those of "benchmarks" representing the average characteristics of mature stands of native vegetation of the same community type in a "natural" or "undisturbed" condition.
Journal ArticleDOI
Policy Development for Biodiversity Offsets: A Review of Offset Frameworks
TL;DR: A set of major offset policy frameworks is reviewed—US wetlands mitigation, US conservation banking, EU Natura 2000, Australian offset policies in New South Wales, Victoria, and Western Australia, and Brazilian industrial and forest offsets—to find substantial policy commonalities that may serve as a sound basis for future development of biodiversity offsets policy.
Journal ArticleDOI
Biodiversity offsets in theory and practice
TL;DR: It is found that biodiversity offset schemes have been inconsistent in meeting conservation objectives because of the challenge of ensuring full compliance and effective monitoring and because of conceptual flaws in the approach itself.