conservation offsets: concept, policy and issues

CONSERVATION OFFSETS:
CONCEPT, POLICY AND ISSUES
Dave Poulton
Land Use 2014
May 8, 2014
1
CONSERVATION OFFSETS: CONCEPT
AKA “Biodiversity Offsets”, “Habitat Compensation”, “Habitat
Replacement”, “Compensatory Mitigation”, “Conservation Allowances”
“[M]easurable conservation outcomes resulting from actions designed to
compensate for significant residual adverse biodiversity impacts arising from
project development after appropriate prevention and mitigation measures have
been taken.”
Business and Biodiversity
Offset Programme, 2009
2
CONSERVATION OFFSETS: CONCEPT
10
8
1. Impact Site
2. Offset Site
______________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________
6
4
Offset
2
0
-2
Basic
Development
Less Avoided
Impact
Less Mitigation
No net loss
Net Benefit
-4
Positive impact
-6
Offset
Avoided
-8
-10
-12
Mitigation Hierarchy
Mitigation
Negative Impact
3
CONSERVATION OFFSETS - VARIATIONS
Drivers
 Voluntary
 Permit condition by regulators
 Required by law or policy
Offset Supply Mechanisms
Photo: Dave Poulton
 Project-specific (AKA Permittee-responsible, Bespoke)
 Banking
 Fees in-lieu
4
CONSERVATION OFFSETS: CURRENT AND
EMERGING REGULATION
International Context
 45 offset programs worldwide, 27 under development (Madsen et al, 2011)
 Research into offsets supported by parties to Convention on Biological
Diversity
 International Financial Corporation (World Bank) Performance
Standard 6

No net loss in natural habitat

Net gain in critical habitat
 Equator Principles
5
CONSERVATION OFFSETS: CURRENT AND
EMERGING REGULATION
Federal Policy
 Fish habitat (s 35(2) of Fisheries Act

Both freshwater and marine

No net loss by policy

Priority upgraded by recent amendments to Act
 Federal wetlands policy

No net loss policy
 Species at Risk Act
 Operational Framework for Use of Conservation Allowances (2012)
6
CONSERVATION OFFSETS: CURRENT AND
EMERGING REGULATION
Regulatory Conditions
 NEB 2010 – 2012: 3 decisions on NGTL pipeline proposals in Horne
River area: caribou habitat offsets
 JRP 2011: Total Joslyn oilsands mine: offsets for species at risk
 JRP 2013: Shell Jackpine oilsands mine: wide range of offsets
recommendations
 JRP 2013: Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline conditions: 10
conditions for 4 different types of offsets (wetlands, freshwater fish
habitat, marine habitat, caribou habitat).
7
CONSERVATION OFFSETS: CURRENT AND
EMERGING REGULATION
Alberta Policy
 Alberta Wetland Policy (2013)

Does not use no net loss.
 Alberta Land Stewardship Act

s 45-47 provide for exchange to be established dealing in “stewardship units” to
“counterbalance” adverse effects of activity on the land
 References:

Lower Athabasca Regional Plan

Responsible Action (Alberta Oilsands Strategy)

Draft South Saskatchewan Regional Plan
 Pilot program currently underway in SE Alberta
8
SOME ISSUES
 Need for clear and measurable landscape objectives
 Like-for-like or specific objectives
 Metrics for assessing equivalency
 Lack of conservation tools on public lands
 Temporary vs permanent offsets
 Who pays for system infrastructure?
 Simplicity of operation vs. scientific rigour
 Equity and distribution concerns
 Managing and distributing risk
 Banking and credit exchange systems
9
SOME RESOURCES
http://bbop.forest-trends.org
www.sustainableprosperity.ca
> Publications
10
CONSERVATION OFFSETS: CONCEPT
10
8
1. Impact Site
2. Offset Site
______________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________
6
4
Offset
2
0
-2
Basic
Development
Less Avoided
Impact
Less Mitigation
No net loss
Net Benefit
-4
Positive impact
-6
Offset
Avoided
-8
-10
-12
Mitigation Hierarchy
Mitigation
Negative Impact
11

Download Report