Appraising offsets as a tool for integrated environmental planning and management

Abstract

The steady growth in major development projects suggests that firms will increasingly need to respond to more stringent environmental determinations and project approvals. Accordingly, this article positions offsets as a mechanism for integrated environmental planning and management in response to development impacts. The study uses a stakeholder analysis methodology to identify and explicate the environmental planning and management practices that can be delivered by offsets, while demonstrating how firms and governments may use offsets as a tool to plan and manage environmental conservation and protection. However, despite our positive expectations, the research found that the current framework of offsets rules, regulations and supporting infrastructure requires changes if effective planning and management of the environment is to be facilitated through the offsets mechanism. Highlights • Offsets are often used to reduce environmental impacts • Offsets can used for environmental planning and management • Stakeholder analysis was undertaken to determine management practices that can be enabled through offsets • Findings suggest that current framework for offsets needs to change to enable integrated planning and management

Evaluating the potential of biodiversity offsets to achieve net gain

“…In the usually long period necessary to achieve restoration outcomes, there will be a net loss (Fernandes et al., 2023) because gains will be obtained only in the future, whereas losses are immediate (Maseyk et al., 2021). Thus, considering that the time lag in offset planning requires the application of a discount rate (a method for estimating the present value of future benefits) or multipliers, increasing the offsets ratios is a way to deal with the uncertainty of restoration actions (Lodhia et al., 2018). Often, for ease of application, multipliers are defined by policy as an arbitrary ratio (Souza & Sánchez, 2018), but the literature proposes defining multipliers based on counterfactual scenarios (Sonter et al., 2020).…”

Biodiversity Offsets Can Be a Valuable Tool in Achieving Sustainable Development Developing a Holistic Model for Biodiversity Offsets That Incorporates Environmental, Social and Economic Aspects of Sustainable Development

“…Furthermore, they should not create inequities from political changes over time (Taherzadeh & Howley, 2016), with the biodiversity offset commitment lessening to the detriment of communities or increasing to the detriment of developers. The risk of time lags in the delivery of biodiversity offset outcomes can be lessened by having compensatory conservation activities start in advance of the development impact (advanced offsets) (Burgin, 2008;Gardner et al, 2013;Kiesecker et al, 2009;Lodhia, Martin, & Rice, 2018;Quétier & Lavorel, 2011;Villarroya et al, 2014). Alternately, the risks associated with time lags can be avoided or reduced by increasing the size/scale of the offset through use of a multiplier (Gardner et al, 2013;Villarroya et al, 2014), with longer time lags corresponding to offsets that are larger in scope and/or scale (Yu et al, 2018).…”

Os impactos e compensações em projetos de mineração: caminho positivo para biodiversidade e serviços ecossistêmicos.

“…Em 2020, havia 12 artigos disponíveis até agosto do mesmo ano, quando esta etapa da pesquisa foi realizada.O país analisado é a Austrália, com 20 trabalhos, seguido pelos Estados Unidos, com 11 (Figura 3). A Austrália e os Estados Unidos são países pioneiros em políticas de compensação da biodiversidade, apresentando legislação desde 1999(Lodhia et al, 2018;Thorn et al, 2018) e 1970 (Grimm e Köppel, 2019.Figura 3: Número de trabalhos de acordo com os países analisados.Nota: Observe que um artigo pode analisar mais de um país.Ao ler todos os 103 trabalhos selecionados, identificaram-se 12 princípios importantes no contexto das compensações da biodiversidade (Figura 4), dos quais o mais consolidado é a equivalência em proporção, com objetivo claro de não haver perda líquida (relacionado em 57 artigos). O segundo princípio mais citado em artigos (49) é a aderência à hierarquia de mitigação, que estabeleceu a compensação como a última opção para um impacto, destacando a importância de evitar impactos sobre a biodiversidade.…”