Biodiversity offsets for ‘no net loss’ through impact assessment

Author(s):  
Susie Brownlie
2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (24) ◽  
pp. 6903 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marie Grimm ◽  
Johann Köppel

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.


2019 ◽  
Vol 236 ◽  
pp. 162-170 ◽  
Author(s):  
Victoria F. Griffiths ◽  
Oleg Sheremet ◽  
Nick Hanley ◽  
Julia Baker ◽  
Joseph W. Bull ◽  
...  

2013 ◽  
Vol 27 (6) ◽  
pp. 1254-1264 ◽  
Author(s):  
TOBY A. GARDNER ◽  
AMREI VON HASE ◽  
SUSIE BROWNLIE ◽  
JONATHAN M. M. EKSTROM ◽  
JOHN D. PILGRIM ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (11) ◽  
pp. 5951
Author(s):  
Anne-Charlotte Vaissière ◽  
Fabien Quétier ◽  
Adeline Bierry ◽  
Clémence Vannier ◽  
Florence Baptist ◽  
...  

It is increasingly common for developers to be asked to manage the impacts of their projects on biodiversity by restoring other degraded habitats that are ecologically equivalent to those that are impacted. These measures, called biodiversity offsets, generally aim to achieve ‘no net loss’ (NNL) of biodiversity. Using spatially-explicit modeling, different options were compared in terms of their performance in offsetting the impacts on wetlands of the planned urban expansion around Grenoble (France). Two implementation models for offsetting were tested: (a) the widespread bespoke permittee-led restoration project model, resulting in a patchwork of restored wetlands, and (b) recently-established aggregated and anticipated “banking” approaches whereby larger sets of adjacent parcels offset the impacts of several projects. Two ecological equivalence methods for sizing offsets were simulated: (a) the historically-prevalent area-based approach and (b) recently introduced approaches whereby offsets are sized to ensure NNL of wetland functions. Simulations showed that a mix of functional methods with minimum area requirements was more likely to achieve NNL of wetland area and function across the study area and within each subwatershed. Our methodology can be used to test the carrying capacity of a landscape to support urban expansion and its associated offsetting in order to formulate more sustainable development plans.


2018 ◽  
pp. 1-3 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wolfgang Wende ◽  
Graham Tucker ◽  
Fabien Quétier ◽  
Matt Rayment ◽  
Marianne Darbi

2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (6) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sophus O. S. E. zu Ermgassen ◽  
Julia Baker ◽  
Richard A. Griffiths ◽  
Niels Strange ◽  
Matthew J. Struebig ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document