Synergies and Trade-Offs between Biodiversity and Carbon in Ecological Compensation (original) (raw)

Biodiversity offsets in theory and practice

Biodiversity offsets are an increasingly popular yet controversial tool in conservation. Their popularity lies in their potential to meet the objectives of biodiversity conservation and economic development in tandem, the controversy lies in the need to accept ecological losses in return for uncertain gains. The offsetting approach is seeing widespread adoption, even whilst methodologies and the overriding conceptual framework are still under development. This review of biodiversity offsetting evaluates implementation to date, synthesizing the outstanding theoretical and practical problems. We begin by outlining criteria that make biodiversity offsets unique, and then explore the suite of conceptual challenges arising from these criteria, whilst indicating potential design solutions. In practice, we find that biodiversity offset schemes have been inconsistent in meeting conservation objectives. This is as much due to the challenge of ensuring full compliance and effective monitoring as it is to conceptual flaws in the approach itself. Evidence to support this conclusion comes primarily from developed countries, though offsets are increasingly implemented in the developing world. This is a critical stage at which biodiversity offsets risk becoming a response to immediate development and conservation needs, without an overriding conceptual framework to provide guidance and evaluation criteria. We clarify the meaning of the term 'biodiversity offset', and propose a framework that integrates the consideration of theoretical and practical challenges in the offset process. We also propose a critical research agenda for specific topics around metrics, baselines and uncertainty.

The true loss caused by biodiversity offsets

Biodiversity offsets aim to achieve a " nonet loss " of biodiversity, ecosystem functions and services due to development. The " nonet less " objective assumes that the multi-dimensional values of biodiversity in complex ecosystems can be isolated from their spatial, evolutionary, historical, social, and moral context. We examine the irreplaceability of ecosystems, the limits of restoration, and the environmental values that claim to be compensated through ecosystem restoration. We discuss multiple ecological, instrumental, and non-instrumental values of ecosystems that should be considered in offsetting calculations. Considering this range of values, we summarize the multiple ecological, regulatory, and ethical losses that are often dismissed when evaluating offsets and the " nonet loss " objective. Given the risks that biodiversity offsets pose in bypassing strict regulations, eroding our moral responsibility to protect nature, and embracing misplaced technological optimism relating to ecosystem restoration, we argue that offsets cannot fulfil their promise to resolve the trade-off between development and conservation. If compensation for biodiversity loss is unavoidable, as it may well be, these losses must be made transparent and adequate reparation must embrace socio-ecological uncertainty, for example through a Multi-Criteria Evaluation framework. Above all, strict protection legislation should be strengthened rather than watered down as is the current trend.

Biodiversity Offset Program Design and Implementation

Sustainability

Biodiversity offsets are applied in many countries to compensate for impacts on the environment, but research on regulatory frameworks and implementation enabling effective offsets is lacking. This paper reviews research on biodiversity offsets, providing a framework for the analysis of program design (no net loss goal, uncertainty and ratios, equivalence and accounting, site selection, landscape-scale mitigation planning, timing) and implementation (compliance, adherence to the mitigation hierarchy, leakage and trade-offs, oversight, transparency and monitoring). Some more challenging aspects concern the proper metrics and accounting allowing for program evaluation, as well as the consideration of trade-offs when regulations focus only on the biodiversity aspect of ecosystems. Results can be used to assess offsets anywhere and support the creation of programs that balance development and conservation.

Assessing the impacts of biodiversity offset policies

Environmental Modelling and Software, 2000

In response to the increasing loss of native vegetation and biodiversity, a growing number of countries have adopted “offsetting” policies that seek to balance local habitat destruction by restoring, enhancing and/or protecting similar but separate habitat. Although these policies often have a stated aim of producing a “net gain” or “no net loss” in environmental benefits, it is challenging to