Locking in loss: Baselines of decline in Australian biodiversity offset policies

Maron, M, Bull, J, Evans, M and Gordon, A 2015, 'Locking in loss: Baselines of decline in Australian biodiversity offset policies', Biological Conservation, vol. 192, pp. 504-512.


Document type: Journal Article
Collection: Journal Articles

Title Locking in loss: Baselines of decline in Australian biodiversity offset policies
Author(s) Maron, M
Bull, J
Evans, M
Gordon, A
Year 2015
Journal name Biological Conservation
Volume number 192
Start page 504
End page 512
Total pages 9
Publisher Elsevier BV
Abstract Biodiversity offset trades usually aim to achieve 'no net loss' of biodiversity. But the question remains: no net loss compared to what? Determining whether an offset can compensate for a given impact requires assumptions about the counterfactual scenario-that which would have happened without the offset-against which the gain at an offset site can be estimated. Where this counterfactual scenario, or 'crediting baseline', assumes a future trajectory of biodiversity decline, the intended net outcome of the offset trade is maintenance of that declining trajectory. If the rate of decline of the crediting baseline is implausibly steep, biodiversity offset trades can exacerbate biodiversity decline. We examined crediting baselines used in offset policies across Australia, and compared them with recent estimates of decline in woody vegetation extent. All jurisdictions permitted offset credit generated using averted loss-implying an assumption of background decline-but few were explicit about their crediting baseline. The credit calculation approaches implied assumed crediting baselines of up to 4.2% loss (of vegetation extent and/or condition) per annum; on average, the crediting baselines were >5 times steeper than recent rates of vegetation loss. For these crediting baselines to be plausible, declines in vegetation condition must be rapid, but this was not reflected in the approaches for which assumptions about decline in extent and condition could be separated. We conclude that crediting baselines in Australian offset schemes risk exacerbating biodiversity loss. The near-ubiquitous use of declining crediting baselines risks 'locking in' biodiversity decline across impact and offset sites, with implications for biodiversity conservation more broadly.
Subject Conservation and Biodiversity
Environment Policy
Wildlife and Habitat Management
Keyword(s) Biodiversity offsets
Conservation policy
Counterfactuals
Crediting baselines
Deforestation
Policy evaluation
DOI - identifier 10.1016/j.biocon.2015.05.017
Copyright notice © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
ISSN 0006-3207
Versions
Version Filter Type
Citation counts: TR Web of Science Citation Count  Cited 56 times in Thomson Reuters Web of Science Article | Citations
Scopus Citation Count Cited 32 times in Scopus Article | Citations
Altmetric details:
Access Statistics: 197 Abstract Views  -  Detailed Statistics
Created: Thu, 03 Dec 2015, 08:38:00 EST by Catalyst Administrator
© 2014 RMIT Research Repository • Powered by Fez SoftwareContact us