Biodiversity offsetting can relocate nature away from people: An empirical case study in Western Australia

Hanna Kalliolevo,Roshan Sharma,Sarah A Bekessy,Ascelin Gordon,Joseph W Bull

doi:10.1111/csp2.512

Hanna Kalliolevo, Roshan Sharma + Show 3 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.1111/csp2.512

Copy DOI

Abstract

AbstractRegular contact with nature provides multiple health benefits for people, but biodiversity is declining fast in an urbanizing world. Biodiversity offsets are implemented to compensate for the negative residual impacts of economic development projects on biodiversity, but the impacts on people who stand to lose biodiversity from their local environment are rarely considered. Offsetting typically involves creating, restoring or protecting biodiversity values at a specified site that can be located some distance away from the development site. In this article, we explore whether any relocation of nature is occurring due to development and offsets in Western Australia (WA); a jurisdiction with one of the world's few spatially referenced and comprehensive public offset registers. We analyzed data from 158 projects within the WA Environmental Offsets Register. We compared the location of development sites within 50 km (the urban and peri urban zone) and 500 km (~one day's drive) of the central business district (CBD) of Perth with the associated offset sites. The development and offset process together can be considered to contribute to a loss of urban nature as the offset sites tended to be further away from urban areas than the associated development sites. The offset sites were also located in significantly lower population density areas. However, offsets increased the publicly accessible land area by changing land ownership and creating amenity benefit by improving nature values on public land. Nevertheless, it is unclear to what extent relocation of nature further from people is balanced by increased public access to nature. In order to maintain nature connectedness, ecosystem service delivery and environmental justice in cities, we argue offset policies should require spatial proximity between impact and offset sites.

Highlights

Nature is declining at an unprecedented rate because of global land use changes (Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, IPBES 2019) that are threatening up to 25 % of studied species with extinction, while monitored species populations have fallen by more than half since 1970 (World Wide Fund for Nature 2020)
7 (4.4 %) of the offset sites were more than 150 km away from their associated development sites
Tthe result was opposite highlighted within projects (n=52) that had development sites maximum 50 km away from the central business district (CBD)

Summary

Introduction

Nature is declining at an unprecedented rate because of global land use changes (Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, IPBES 2019) that are threatening up to 25 % of studied species with extinction, while monitored species populations have fallen by more than half since 1970 (World Wide Fund for Nature 2020). At the same time as rapid negative changes in natural environments, it is becoming well established that the health and wellbeing of people is closely linked to access to nature and biodiversity (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, MEA 2005; Hartig et al 2014; Sandifer et al 2015; Marselle et al 2019). Regular nature experiences provide mental and physical benefits to people. Greenness is associated with increased physical activity (James et al 2015), positive mental health (Wood et al 2017; Houlden et al 2018), reduced stress levels (Tyrväinen et al 2014), lower incidence of allergies (Hanski et al 2012; Ruokolainen et al 2015), reduced obesity (Pereira et al 2013; Dadvand et al 2014), increased cognitive development of children (Dadvand et al 2015) and better self-perceived general health (Triguero-Mas et al 2015)

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusion