Can Biodiversity Offsets and Conservation Banking Help the British Countryside?
Can we conserve our countryside, biodiversity and ecosystem services even as our small island is faced with growth in house-building, renewable energy projects and other major infrastructure development? Biodiversity offsets offer one potential mechanism to balance the impacts of development activities with the conservation of biodiversity, simultaneously generating the means to pay farmers, landowners, Wildlife Trusts and others to deliver the biodiversity outcomes we need.
Biodiversity offsets are measurable conservation outcomes resulting from actions designed to compensate for significant residual adverse impacts on biodiversity arising from development plans or projects after appropriate prevention and mitigation measures have been taken. Their goal is to achieve no net loss and preferably a net gain of biodiversity on the ground with respect to species, habitats, ecosystem function and people's use and cultural values associated with biodiversity. (BBOP, 2009)
We are well-placed in the UK to design and implement a national scheme to deliver ‘no net loss' or a ‘net gain' of biodiversity. Our existing policy and regulatory framework, detailed knowledge of the UK's biodiversity and familiarity with agri-environment schemes give us a head start. Properly conceived, biodiversity offsets could save time and money by introducing clarity to the planning process; strengthen the protected area system and help it adapt to climate change; move beyond the present loss of biodiversity in the wider countryside through the cumulative impact of ‘death by 1000 cuts'; and give individuals an economic incentive to conserve the biodiversity on their land.
Policy changes
To achieve these goals, however, we're going to need some policy changes. Last year, Defra commissioned a scoping study for the design and use of biodiversity offsets in an English context, and I was a member of the study team. The report, concludes that while biodiversity offsets are already required in some strict circumstances under EU law, they are merely encouraged, but not unambiguously required, under UK law and planning policy. Current practice is patchy. Offsets have only occasionally been used for ‘wider biodiversity' - that is, for the full range of biodiversity components (beyond listed species and habitats) that comprise the richness of our wildlife and which are increasingly lost to cumulative impacts and fragmentation of habitat. There is inadequate guidance to enable developers to determine whether a biodiversity offset is appropriate, when it is required and what is the necessary nature, scale and location for any offsetting activities. Policy guidance that answers these questions and offers workable methods for offset design and implementation will be necessary for the approach to work in the UK.
Conservation banking and credit trading schemes are a promising way to generate a market to deliver biodiversity offsets, rather than relying on prescriptive and detailed regulations. Developers who do not wish to undertake for themselves the conservation actions needed to offset their residual impacts could choose instead to buy the appropriate number of ‘credits' generated by individuals, organisations or conservation banking companies. Credits of the kind and in the locations required by the policy framework could be generated by improving and restoring habitats, protecting habitats that would otherwise be at risk of loss or degradation, or enhancing populations of particular species. Any landowners prepared to produce additional conservation outcomes on their land and secure these for the long term could sell the resulting credits into the market-place, thus turning biodiversity into an economic asset rather than a liability. We currently lack a system to trade biodiversity credits or operate conservation banks in the UK. The UK Biodiversity Action Plan, tailored to individual habitat types and species, and other existing approaches to classifying our biodiversity, could be used as the basis for defining biodiversity credits which could be traded. We would need to establish the ground rules for the kind of impacts that are capable of being offset and thus suitable for offsets and conservation banks; the basis for describing the biodiversity being exchanged (known in biodiversity offset circles as ‘like-for-like or better' exchange rules); and of course the basis for quantifying the residual loss of biodiversity caused by a project and gained through an offset.
Poised for action
The encouraging news is that we are poised for action. The Defra study laid the groundwork and Ministers have agreed the next steps to move ahead. Defra will work with local authorities to gather evidence on the practicalities of offsetting in order to develop and spread best practice. Further research, testing, analysis and development are planned, following our recommendations in the report. Also, David Cameron has stated that, under his leadership, government would adopt a system of conservation credits. He has tasked Nick Herbert with setting up a review into its scope. And there is considerable experience around the world of what is needed for biodiversity offsets and conservation banks to succeed. We can learn lessons from countries as varied as Australia, Brazil, South Africa and the US. Over the last four years, I have been directing the Business and Biodiversity Offsets Programme (BBOP), an international partnership of some 40 leading organisations and individuals including multinational companies, governments, conservation experts and financial institutions from around the world. Based on our members' experience, we have developed some principles and methodologies to support best practice in biodiversity offset design and implementation, begun to test these in a series of pilot projects, and consulted very broadly with policy makers, business, conservation and community groups. Our expectation is that biodiversity offsets will become a standard part of the development process for projects with a significant residual impact on biodiversity. If we are right, this will result in long term and globally significant conservation outcomes. I hope that the UK will be in the vanguard.
Kerry ten Kate is an independent consultant and Director of the Business and Biodiversity Offsets Program at Forest Trends, a non-profit conservation group promoting conservation by creating and capturing market values for ecosystem services: kerrytenkate@hotmail.com
BBOP, 2009: Business and Biodiversity Offsets Programme (BBOP): Business, Biodiversity Offsets and BBOP: An Overview. BBOP, Washington, D.C. Available here. ISBN 978-1-932928-29-7
Treweek, J., ten Kate, K., Butcher, W., Venn, O., Garland, L., Wells, M., Moran, D., and Thompson, S. 2009. Scoping study for the design and use of biodiversity offsets in an English context. Final report, April 2009. Contract NE 0801. Available here.
Kerry ten Kate - 20/08/2009 Have your say
You must be logged in to comment. If you don't have an account, you can register for an account.
Comments