The global extent of biodiversity offset implementation under no net loss policies

Bull, Joseph W.; Strange, Niels

doi:10.1038/s41893-018-0176-z

Cited by 153 publications

(146 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

138

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…We restricted our search to English‐language articles from relevant topic categories (Supporting Information). Previous research has shown that English captures most literature on offsets tied to international funding requirements, studies from North America and Oceania, and a substantial proportion of European literature, so our findings should be representative of the global literature (Bull & Strange, ; Bull et al., ). Additionally, we searched through all reference lists in papers meeting our inclusion criteria for additional literature.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 71%

“…Twenty‐nine studies met our inclusion criteria (7% of potentially relevant studies), with a further three identified via in‐article citations, leaving 32 studies from five countries (Table ; Figure ). Our database includes four landscape‐scale, 18 program‐scale, and 10 project‐scale studies (covering 26 projects), and accounts for a minimum of 300,000 ha of offsets and 180,000 ha of impacts, representing approximately 2% of the global area of spatially explicit known offset implementation (Bull & Strange, ). In total, we identified 121 outcome variables (column 11, Table ) from 48 NNL policies or individual offsets (1–44 outcomes per study, mean = 3.75).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We identify a substantial gap between the global implementation of NNL and the evidence base concerning ecological effectiveness. Sixty‐seven percent of the world's offsets are applied in forested ecosystems (Bull & Strange, ), yet our review reveals that only four studies have assessed NNL outcomes from offsets applied to forest ecosystems or wildlife. Of these, none demonstrated that their associated NNL targets were achieved.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Of these, none demonstrated that their associated NNL targets were achieved. Similarly, 20% of the world's offsets entail some form of protection or avoided loss (Bull & Strange, ). Yet, only six studies have assessed NNL outcomes from this common offset type, and none found that NNL was achieved.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…NNL policies are proliferating around the world (Bennett et al., ), reflected in the widespread implementation of biodiversity offsets (Bull & Strange, ). Throughout, we use the term “biodiversity offsets” to refer to all offsets implemented as the final stage of NNL policies, as nearly all policies focus on achieving outcomes that are related to or underpinned by biodiversity.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

The ecological outcomes of biodiversity offsets under “no net loss” policies: A global review

Ermgassen

Baker

Griffiths

et al. 2019

CONSERVATION LETTERS

Self Cite

146

121

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

No net loss (NNL) biodiversity policies mandating the application of a mitigation hierarchy (avoid, minimize, remediate, offset) to the ecological impacts of built infrastructure are proliferating globally. However, little is known about their effectiveness at achieving NNL outcomes. We reviewed the English‐language peer‐reviewed literature (capturing 15,715 articles), and identified 32 reports that observed ecological outcomes from NNL policies, including >300,000 ha of biodiversity offsets. Approximately one‐third of NNL policies and individual biodiversity offsets reported achieving NNL, primarily in wetlands, although most studies used widely criticized area‐based outcome measures. The most commonly cited reason for success was applying high offset multipliers (large offset area relative to the impacted area). We identified large gaps between the global implementation of offsets and the evidence for their effectiveness: despite two‐thirds of the world's biodiversity offsets being applied in forested ecosystems, we found none of four studies demonstrated successful NNL outcomes for forested habitats or species. We also found no evidence for NNL achievement using avoided loss offsets (impacts offset by protecting existing habitat elsewhere). Additionally, we summarized regional variability in compliance rates with NNL policies. As global infrastructural expansion accelerates, we must urgently improve the evidence‐base around efforts to mitigate development impacts on biodiversity.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 71%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

The ecological outcomes of biodiversity offsets under “no net loss” policies: A global review

Ermgassen

Baker

Griffiths

et al. 2019

CONSERVATION LETTERS

Self Cite

146

121

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Evidence shortfalls in the recommendations and guidance underpinning ecological mitigation for infrastructure developments

Hunter

Ermgassen

Downey

et al. 2021

Ecol Sol and Evidence

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

1. In the United Kingdom and European Union, legal protection of species from the impacts of infrastructure development depends upon a number of ecological mitigation and compensation (EMC) measures to moderate the conflict between development and conservation. However, the scientific evidence supporting their effectiveness has not yet been comprehensively assessed.2. This study compiled the measures used in practice, identified and explored the guidance that informed them and, using the Conservation Evidence database, evaluated the empirical evidence for their effectiveness.3. In a sample of 50 U.K. housing applications, we identified the recommendation of 446 measures in total, comprising 65 different mitigation measures relating to eight taxa. Although most (56%) measures were justified by citing published guidance, exploration of the literature underpinning this guidance revealed that empirical evaluations of EMC measure effectiveness accounted for less than 10% of referenced texts. Citation network analysis also identified circular referencing across bat, amphibian and reptile EMC guidance. Comparison with Conservation Evidence synopses showed that over half of measures recommended in ecological reports had not been empirically evaluated, with only 13 measures assessed as beneficial.4. As such, most EMC measures recommended in practice are not evidence based.The limited reference to empirical evidence in published guidance, as well as the circular referencing, suggests potential 'evidence complacency' , in which evidence is not sought to inform recommendations. In addition, limited evidence availability indicates a thematic gap between conservation research and mitigation practice.More broadly, absence of evidence on the effectiveness of EMC measures calls into question the ability of current practice to compensate for the impact of development on protected species, thus highlighting the need to strengthen requirements for impact avoidance. Given the recent political drive to invest in infrastructureThis is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

show abstract

References

2022

The Baseline Concept in Biodiversity Conservation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The global extent of biodiversity offset implementation under no net loss policies

Abstract: The version in the Kent Academic Repository may differ from the final published version. Users are advised to check http://kar.kent.ac.uk for the status of the paper. Users should always cite the published version of record.

Cited by 153 publications

References 37 publications

The ecological outcomes of biodiversity offsets under “no net loss” policies: A global review

The ecological outcomes of biodiversity offsets under “no net loss” policies: A global review

Evidence shortfalls in the recommendations and guidance underpinning ecological mitigation for infrastructure developments

References

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About