Abstract

AbstractBiodiversity offsets are an increasingly popular yet controversial tool in conservation. Their popularity lies in their potential to meet the objectives of biodiversity conservation and of economic development in tandem; the controversy lies in the need to accept ecological losses in return for uncertain gains. The offsetting approach is being widely adopted, even though its methodologies and the overriding conceptual framework are still under development. This review of biodiversity offsetting evaluates implementation to date and synthesizes outstanding theoretical and practical problems. We begin by outlining the criteria that make biodiversity offsets unique and then explore the suite of conceptual challenges arising from these criteria and indicate potential design solutions. We find 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. Evidence to support this conclusion comes primarily from developed countries, although offsets are increasingly being implemented in the developing world. We are at a critical stage: biodiversity offsets risk becoming responses 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 research agenda for specific topics around metrics, baselines and uncertainty.

Highlights

  • The conservation of global biodiversity alongside economic development is a key challenge for the 21st century

  • ‘No net loss’ can have different meanings against different baselines Insufficient ecological information provided on development impacts to calculate true losses The classification of habitats changing with time enough multipliers to achieve what are termed ‘robustly fair’ offsets, if they would need to be as large as those derived by Moilanen et al (2009)

  • We believe that to ensure robust offsetting, research is required on three issues

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The conservation of global biodiversity alongside economic development is a key challenge for the 21st century. Three criteria can be distilled, common to key legal offset policies (McKenney & Kiesecker, 2010) and Business and Biodiversity Offsets Programme guidance, which in combination make offsets unique: (1) they provide additional substitution or replacement for unavoidable negative impacts of human activity on biodiversity, (2) they involve measurable, comparable biodiversity losses and gains, and (3) they demonstrably achieve, as a minimum, no net loss of biodiversity We use these criteria to define offsets, finding them to be consistent, in principle, with the majority of offset schemes. Interim losses of biodiversity may be unacceptable either because they have detrimental impacts upon the wider ecosystem, or because they represent a temporary lack of ecosystem service provision Solutions to this include requiring offsets to be implemented before development (Bekessy et al, 2010), or applying time discount rates. An example is the Brazilian Forest Code, which allows trade in forest set-asides (McKenney & Kiesecker, 2010) but which

Result
Findings
Discussion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call