Local conditions and policy design determine whether ecological compensation can achieve No Net Loss goals
Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review
Standard Standard
In: Nature Communications, Vol. 11, No. 1, 29.04.2020, p. 2072.
Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review
HarvardHarvard
APA
CBE
MLA
VancouverVancouver
Author
RIS
TY - JOUR
T1 - Local conditions and policy design determine whether ecological compensation can achieve No Net Loss goals
AU - Sonter, Laura J.
AU - Simmonds, Jeremy S.
AU - Watson, James E. M.
AU - Jones, Julia P. G.
AU - Kiesecker, Joseph M.
AU - Costa, Hugo M.
AU - Bennun, Leon
AU - Edwards, Stephen
AU - Grantham, Hedley S.
AU - Griffiths, Victoria F.
AU - Jones, Kendall
AU - Sochi, Kei
AU - Puydarrieux, Philippe
AU - Quétier, Fabien
AU - Rainer, Helga
AU - Rainey, Hugo
AU - Roe, Dilys
AU - Satar, Musnanda
AU - Soares-Filho, Britaldo S.
AU - Starkey, Malcolm
AU - ten Kate, Kerry
AU - Victurine, Ray
AU - von Hase, Amrei
AU - Wells, Jessie A.
AU - Maron, Martine
PY - 2020/4/29
Y1 - 2020/4/29
N2 - Many nations use ecological compensation policies to address negative impacts of development projects and achieve No Net Loss (NNL) of biodiversity and ecosystem services. Yet, failures are widely reported. We use spatial simulation models to quantify potential net impacts of alternative compensation policies on biodiversity (indicated by native vegetation) and two ecosystem services (carbon storage, sediment retention) across four case studies (in Australia, Brazil, Indonesia, Mozambique). No policy achieves NNL of biodiversity in any case study. Two factors limit their potential success: the land available for compensation (existing vegetation to protect or cleared land to restore), and expected counterfactual biodiversity losses (unregulated vegetation clearing). Compensation also fails to slow regional biodiversity declines because policies regulate only a subset of sectors, and expanding policy scope requires more land than is available for compensation activities. Avoidance of impacts remains essential in achieving NNL goals, particularly once opportunities for compensation are exhausted.
AB - Many nations use ecological compensation policies to address negative impacts of development projects and achieve No Net Loss (NNL) of biodiversity and ecosystem services. Yet, failures are widely reported. We use spatial simulation models to quantify potential net impacts of alternative compensation policies on biodiversity (indicated by native vegetation) and two ecosystem services (carbon storage, sediment retention) across four case studies (in Australia, Brazil, Indonesia, Mozambique). No policy achieves NNL of biodiversity in any case study. Two factors limit their potential success: the land available for compensation (existing vegetation to protect or cleared land to restore), and expected counterfactual biodiversity losses (unregulated vegetation clearing). Compensation also fails to slow regional biodiversity declines because policies regulate only a subset of sectors, and expanding policy scope requires more land than is available for compensation activities. Avoidance of impacts remains essential in achieving NNL goals, particularly once opportunities for compensation are exhausted.
UR - https://static-content.springer.com/esm/art%3A10.1038%2Fs41467-020-15861-1/MediaObjects/41467_2020_15861_MOESM1_ESM.pdf
U2 - 10.1038/s41467-020-15861-1
DO - 10.1038/s41467-020-15861-1
M3 - Article
C2 - 32350288
VL - 11
SP - 2072
JO - Nature Communications
JF - Nature Communications
SN - 2041-1723
IS - 1
ER -