Exploring the risks and benefits of flexibility in biodiversity offset location in a case study of migratory shorebirds

Nicole Shumway*, Megan I. Saunders, Sam Nicol, Richard A. Fuller, Noam Ben-Moshe, Takuya Iwamura, Sun W. Kim, Nicholas J. Murray, James E.M. Watson, Martine Maron

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

5 Scopus citations

Abstract

Biodiversity offsets aim to counterbalance the residual impacts of development on species and ecosystems. Guidance documents explicitly recommend that biodiversity offset actions be located close to the location of impact because of higher potential for similar ecological conditions, but allowing greater spatial flexibility has been proposed. We examined the circumstances under which offsets distant from the impact location could be more likely to achieve no net loss or provide better ecological outcomes than offsets close to the impact area. We applied a graphical model for migratory shorebirds in the East Asian–Australasian Flyway as a case study to explore the problems that arise when incorporating spatial flexibility into offset planning. Spatially flexible offsets may alleviate impacts more effectively than local offsets; however, the risks involved can be substantial. For our case study, there were inadequate data to make robust conclusions about the effectiveness and equivalence of distant habitat-based offsets for migratory shorebirds. Decisions around offset placement should be driven by the potential to achieve equivalent ecological outcomes; however, when considering more distant offsets, there is a need to evaluate the likely increased risks alongside the potential benefits. Although spatially flexible offsets have the potential to provide more cost-effective biodiversity outcomes and more cobenefits, our case study showed the difficulty of demonstrating these benefits in practice and the potential risks that need to be considered to ensure effective offset placement.

Original languageEnglish
Article numbere14031
JournalConservation Biology
Volume37
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 2023

Funding

FundersFunder number
Australian University Librarians
Australian Research CouncilFT140100516
University of Queensland

    Keywords

    • aves costeras migratorias
    • biodiversity offset
    • compensación de la biodiversidad
    • conservation policy
    • migratory shorebirds
    • no net loss
    • políticas de conservación
    • pérdida neta nula

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'Exploring the risks and benefits of flexibility in biodiversity offset location in a case study of migratory shorebirds'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this