Biodiversity Offsets

Within the mitigation hierarchy (See Diagram)

Currently the world is witnessing an unprecedented loss of biodiversity in ecosystems around the globe. Some 10-30% of all mammal, bird, and amphibian species are threatened with extinction. A major cause of this loss is the destruction of natural habitats by developments in the agriculture, forestry, oil and gas, mining, transport, and construction sectors, among others. At the same time, countries rely on these developments for economic growth and for products, services, and jobs.

A growing number of companies, governments and NGOs are now aware that biodiversity offsets could achieve more, better and higher priority conservation and livelihood outcomes. Biodiversity offsets not only rehabilitate sites but also address the company's full impact on biodiversity at the landscape scale. Biodiversity offsets can also support sustainable livelihoods by addressing the underlying causes of biodiversity loss and can assist companies to manage their risks, liabilities and costs.

Developers should pursue biodiversity offsets only at the end of the mitigation hierarchy, after they have reduced and alleviated residual environmental harm as much as possible. Biodiversity offsets can be used to compensate for the residual impact to biodiversity that cannot be mitigated onsite and therefore balance the impact of the project.

Offset Activities:
Each offset must demonstrate additional, measurable conservation outcomes. While appropriate offset activities will vary from site to site, a range of different land (and marine) management interventions could typically be involved in biodiversity offsets, including:

Strengthening ineffective protected areas: Improving the conservation status of certain neglected zones in a forest reserve by replanting degraded areas with native species and/or removing invasive alien species.

Safeguarding unprotected areas: For instance, by entering into agreements with local communities as custodians of biodiversity.

Addressing underlying causes of biodiversity loss: Working with communities to address their livelihood needs to support alternative sustainable livelihoods, such that unsustainable activities (currently depleting biodiversity – e.g. charcoal burning or crop plantation in forests) are stopped.

Establishing corridors: Identifying and securing the conservation management of land that provides biological corridors between protected areas.

Establishing buffer zones: For instance, around a national park lacking a buffer zone.

Zoning marine areas: For example, demarcating and protecting areas important for feeding and breeding. Working with companies and communities to avoid exploitation in these areas. Supporting sustainable aquaculture initiatives for communities to compensate for lost income.

Securing migration paths: Establishing interventions to secure migration paths.

Removing goats from a biologically sensitive site which is being overgrazed.

What are the main risks of biodiversity offsets and how will the BBOP address these?

A number of potential risks associated with biodiversity have been identified, particularly by some conservation organizations. Their main fear is that biodiversity offsets could be used by developers and government authorities to allow for developments which are too damaging to the environment to be considered appropriate. In addition, some groups are skeptical that biodiversity offsets will truly deliver “no net loss”. Finally, the lack of credible standards on biodiversity offsets act as a barrier.

The BBOP is well aware of these risks. In order to minimize the first risk, BBOP takes a strong stance conveying to companies that: (1) all operations should comply with all relevant international, national and customary law; (2) some projects may be inadvisable given their likely damage to biodiversity and associated business risk, even if they are allowed by law; (3) the mitigation hierarchy of seeking to avoid, minimise and mitigate harm to biodiversity should be followed prior to considering an offset for the residual harm. BBOP will not be associated with projects that we do not feel meet these criteria. In addition, the BBOP Secretariat and many members of the International Advisory Committee are working with companies, industry associations and others to refine corporate and government policy on the decision-making process for determining whether or not developments should proceed.

The design, monitoring and evaluation of the BBOP pilots is explicitly aimed at addressing the risk that offsets may fail to deliver adequate conservation and livelihood benefits. Finally, BBOP will produce recommendations to feed into the development of standards by international organizations, thus addressing the third risk.