Policy Development for Biodiversity Offsets: A Review of Offset Frameworks |
| |
Authors: | Bruce A McKenney Joseph M Kiesecker |
| |
Institution: | (1) The Nature Conservancy, 490 Westfield Road, Charlottesville, VA 22901, USA;(2) The Nature Conservancy, 117 E. Mountain, Suite 201, Fort Collins, CO 80524, USA |
| |
Abstract: | Biodiversity offsets seek to compensate for residual environmental impacts of planned developments after appropriate steps
have been taken to avoid, minimize or restore impacts on site. Offsets are emerging as an increasingly employed mechanism
for achieving net environmental benefits, with offset policies being advanced in a wide range of countries (i.e., United States,
Australia, Brazil, Colombia, and South Africa). To support policy development for biodiversity offsets, we review a set of
major offset policy frameworks—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. We compare how the frameworks
define offset policy goals, approach the mitigation process, and address six key issues for implementing offsets: (1) equivalence
of project impacts with offset gains; (2) location of the offset relative to the impact site; (3) “additionality” (a new contribution
to conservation) and acceptable types of offsets; (4) timing of project impacts versus offset benefits; (5) offset duration
and compliance; and (6) “currency” and mitigation replacement ratios. We find substantial policy commonalities that may serve
as a sound basis for future development of biodiversity offsets policy. We also identify issues requiring further policy guidance,
including how best to: (1) ensure conformance with the mitigation hierarchy; (2) identify the most environmentally preferable
offsets within a landscape context; and (3) determine appropriate mitigation replacement ratios. |
| |
Keywords: | |
本文献已被 SpringerLink 等数据库收录! |
|