Biodiversity Offsets Between Regulation and Voluntary Commitment: A Typology of Approaches Towards

We are witnessing an alarming, global biodiversity crisis with an ongoing loss of species and their habitats. In response, a number of tools and approaches - including some that are contested - are being explored and promoted. Biodiversity offsets are one such approach, and deserve critical examination since the debate surrounding them has often been oversimplified and lacking practical evidence. As such, this study presents a refined typology including seven types of biodiversity offsets and taking into account different contexts, governance arrangements and drivers. It draws on a detailed analysis of theoretical concepts to explain the voluntary implementation of biodiversity offsets using an internet-based (netnographic) research approach. Furthermore it builds on a broad global explorative base of 72 practical examples and presents in-depth case studies for each type. The results reveal a number of global tendencies that allow recommendations to be made for different locations, contexts and stakeholders. They also encourage the expansion of this research field to respond to the pressing needs of policy and practice.

Marianne Darbi is an environmental planner and researcher with many years of experience in landscape and spatial planning. After studying at the Technische Universitat Dresden (Germany) and Ecole d'Architecture et de Paysage de Bordeaux (France), she graduated in landscape architecture in 2007 and worked at the Leibniz Institute of Ecological Urban and Regional Development (Dresden) until December 2016. Since January 2017, she has been working as a postdoctoral researcher at the Department of Conservation Biology at the Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (Leipzig).

Marianne's research focuses on biodiversity conservation and management as well as the mitigation of environmental impacts in the national and international context, sustainable land use, green economy and market-based instruments. Her PhD on Voluntary Bioversity Offsets at the Technical University of Dresden was awarded the Study Prize of the German Environmental Impact Assessment Association in 2016.

Her work has two major aims: 1) networking biodiversity research across disciplines (interdisciplinary) and 2) making knowledge relevant and transferable for decision making (science-policy interface). Marianne has advised institutions such as the European Commission, the Business and Biodiversity Offsets Program, the German Federal Ministry for the Environment, the German Federal Agency for Nature Conservation and KfW among others. Furthermore, she has worked with various NGOs and the private sector.

ForwordExecutive summary1 Introduction, problem statement and research questions 171.1 Introduction to the context for biodiversity offsets: from biodiversity loss to no net loss of biodiversity 171.2 Introduction to the concept of biodiversity offsets 211.3 Problems of biodiversity offsets, research gaps and problem statement 261.4 Aim and research design 362 Scientific Methods 432.1 General methodology of an internet based research 432.1.1 Introduction to web 2.0 and the role of cyberscience for academic research 452.1.2 The netnographic approach 512.1.3 Research process of internet based (web 1.0 and web 2.0) research - the RUDE procedure 522.1.4 Variety and choice of tools for research in a web 2.0 environment 542.2 Typification and categorization as a scientific method 592.2.1 Definition, terminology and scope: ideal vs. empirical types 592.2.2 Theoretical concepts of empirically grounded typification: the attribute space after Lazarsfeld and Barton 612.3 Methods for empirical analysis and sampling 632.3.1 Methods and materials of data collection 632.3.2 Methods for sampling as basis for choice of case studies 643 The concept of voluntariness 673.1 Defining and understanding the notion of voluntariness and its prerequisites: definition, terminology and scope 693.1.1 Descriptive approach 693.1.2 Normative approach 733.2 General theoretical concepts to analyse or explain voluntariness 783.2.1 The egoism-altruism paradigm 783.2.2 Economic theories 813.3 Governance and Duty of Care for Biodiversity 853.4 Voluntary environmental approaches 873.5 Willingness to Pay 963.6 Corporate (Environmental or Social) Responsibility 974 Voluntariness of biodiversity offsets 1114.1 Biodiversity Offsets and regulation 1114.1.1 US Wetland Mitigation 1134.1.2 German Impact Mitigation Regulation 1164.1.3 Situation in the EU and planned No Net Loss Initiative of the European Commission 1184.2 The business case for biodiversity offsets 1244.2.1 Does the "business case" imply voluntary biodiversity offsets? 1254.2.2 What are the motives and goals of the "business case"? 1264.2.3 What is the business in the "business case", i.e. are biodiversity offsets a business? 1274.2.4 Summing up: what is the business case - an approximation 1284.3 Common standards for biodiversity offsets 1305 Deduction of a typology of biodiversity offsets 1395.1 Deduction of an impressionistic classification of types 1395.1.1 Step 1: dichotomy between mandatory and voluntary biodiversity offsets 1395.1.2 Step 2: Typology with four biodiversity offset types (building on pressures and incentives) 1405.1.3 Step 3: Updated typology with six biodiversity offset types (as of August 2014) 1415.1.4 Results of the impressionistic classification 1435.2 Derivation of relevant attributes/criteria for voluntariness from the theory 1445.2.1 Degree or intensity of voluntariness 1445.2.2 Threshold criteria 1465.2.3 Core criteria 1475.2.4 Descriptive criteria 1505.2.5 Performance criteria 1525.2.6 Quality criteria 1535.2.7 Rejected criteria 1545.2.8 Measurement and value categories of the criteria 1545.3 Substruction of the underlying attribute space and combinations of attributes 1565.4 Transformation (rectification) of the impressionistic types and analysis of meaningful correlations 1585.5 Screening of biodiversity offset cases worldwide and grouping of cases according to the built types 1616 Illustrative case studies for the built types of biodiversity offsets 1656.1 Type 1: regulatory offsets 1666.1.1 General description 1666.1.2 Case study for regulatory offsets: Koala Offset in South East Queensland 1676.2 Type 2: conditional offsets 1716.2.1 General description 1716.2.2 Case study for conditional offsets: Nam Theun 2 Hydropower project in Laos 1746.3 Type 3: enabled offsets 1796.3.1 General description 1796.3.2 Case study for enabled offsets: Blakely Harbour residential and public road development on Bainbridge Island in the US (BBOP and City of Bainbridge biodiversity offset pilot) 1816.4 Type 4: sectoral offsets 1876.4.1 General description 1876.4.2 Case study for sectoral offsets 1896.5 Type 5: corporate offsets 1906.5.1 General description 1906.5.2 Case study for corporate offsets: QIT Mining Madagascar QMM (ilmenite mining) 1926.6 Type 6: local/consensual offsets 1966.6.1 General description 1966.6.2 Case study for local offsets: Network Rail's Thameslink railway project in the UK 1976.7 Type 7: altruistic offsets 2036.7.1 General description 2036.7.2 Case study for altruistic offsets: Antamina mine in Peru 2047 Discussion 2097.1 Discussion and critique of methodology 2097.1.1 Appropriateness of the research methodology 2097.1.2 Mixed types - the limits of typification to represent real world examples 2117.1.3 Difficulties of comparability and clear classification of biodiversity offsets 2117.2 Discussion of the research hypotheses 2167.3 Discussion of the single types 2197.3.1 Magnitude, location and particularities of type 1 regulatory offsets 2197.3.2 Magnitude, location and particularities of type 2: conditional offsets 2247.3.3 Magnitude, location and particularities of type 3: enabled offsets 2277.3.4 Magnitude, location and particularities of type 4 sectoral offsets 2317.3.5 Magnitude, location and particularities of type 5: corporate offsets 2337.3.6 Magnitude, location and particularities of type 6: local offsets 2367.3.7 Magnitude, location and particularities of type 7: altruistic offsets 2397.4 Discussion of the typology 2437.4.1 Differences between the types 2437.4.2 Similarities and overlap between the types 2467.4.3 Limitations of the typology 2478 Conclusion and contextualization of the results 2518.1 Conclusions from the built typology 2518.1.1 Stakeholder orientation - which conclusions can be drawn on the roles and responsibilities of different actors? 2518.1.2 The way ahead - which of the offset types are promising and why? 2558.1.3 Global variety - what are the implications for different contexts worldwide? 2598.1.4 Application spectrum - what can the typology be used for? 2608.2 Contextualization: Bringing together the theoretical fundamentals with the practical evidence on offsets 2638.2.1 How do biodiversity offsets fit into the nature conservation toolbox? 2638.2.2 How can the results of this study inform the theoretical discussion on voluntariness in environmental protection? 2649 Outlook and further research 2679.1 Discussion of the appropriateness of biodiversity offsets vs. the commodification of nature 2699.2 Outcome of biodiversity offsets and need for an evaluation of effectiveness and efficiency of compensation approaches 2739.3 Need for a broader empirical base of implemented biodiversity offset cases 2769.4 Concluding remarks 27810 References 27911 Annex 307