The New Fair Metric
The Current Biodiversity Offsetting Metric in the UK
The Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) is the current designer of biodiversity offsetting metrics in the UK. The offsetting step also called compensation step is found at the end of the mitigation hierarchy, designed to classify the different steps that a developer needs to go through before starting a project.
The Steps of Mitigation
The current metric is based on habitats. The habitat to be destroyed is divided into habitat parcels that are then classified according to their distinctiveness and condition. The score obtained by both combinations will determine the type of offset to be done. For example, habitats with high score would require a ‘like for like’ offset. Once the score obtained, the developer or offset provider can determine how many biodiversity units per hectare are needed to be provided for conservation. If the services are used from offset provider, each biodiversity unit gain is sold to the developer.
The Table of Possible Scores
Source: DEFRA (2012)
How is the current biodiversity offsetting metric flawed in providing sustainable environmental protection?
1. It does not value biodiversity properly!
Forests for example are important providers of ecosystem services. In fact, they contribute a lot to climate regulation. For example, they warm the surface temperature because they have a low albedo and thus absorb more solar energy, and cool the surface temperature through evapotranspiration that produces consequently rain. They are also habitats for pollinators that provide direct benefits to agriculture.² Biodiversity has even proved to provide health benefits, to avoid depression and to give health boost to pregnant women.³ The metric also ignores that some species are more important than others in the way that they exercise important functionalities that make them control other species’ abundance. This type of species is called Keystone species.⁴
2. It is criticized for inducing socio-spatial injustice and causing the neoliberalization of nature.
A study about biodiversity offsetting, conducted through interviews and case studies around England, reached a conclusion that biodiversity offsetting is a a 'licence' to function, and trash!'⁵, that imposes a ‘radical simplification of ecological relations’.⁵ She claims that it simply the neoliberalization of nature and government recalling processes. Rather than reconciling the economic development and the environment, the current offset scheme is simply a tool creating more and more business opportunities for developers, and gives more power to private sector rather than including local communities. The process is made too technical. Biodiversity is quantified in terms of monetary units, and ignores the social implication of the destruction of an ecosystem.
3. It causes socio-environmental injustice.
Biodiversity is expressed only in terms of units. The current metric does not incorporate ecosystem services, and thus does not take into consideration the issue of socio-environmental justice. In fact, the relocation of a habitat is itself a source of injustice. People previously benefiting from ecosystem services cannot benefit from them anymore.⁵ The incorporation of ecosystem services would make the offset fairer and more ethical.6
Resources:
¹ Cardinale et al. (2012). Biodiversity loss and its impact on humanity. Nature, 486, 59–67.
² Bonan et al. (2008). Forests and Climate Change: Forcings, Feedbacks, and the Climate Benefits of Forests. Science 320, 1444.
³ The Guardian. (2017). Access to nature reduces depression and obesity, finds European Study.
⁴ Tews et al. (2003). ‘Animal species diversity driven by habitat heterogeneity/diversity : the importance of Keystone structures’, Journal of Biogeography.
⁵ Apostolopoulou, E. (2015). Biodiversity offsetting in England: Governance rescaling, socio-spatial injustices, and the neoliberalization of nature. Web Ecology, 16, 67-71.
6 Jacob et al. (2016). Investigating the inclusion of ecosystem services in biodiversity offsetting. Ecosystem Services, 21 A, 92-102.
7 DEFRA. (2012a). Biodiversity offsetting pilots. Technical paper : The metric for the biodiversity offsetting pilot in England.
Biodiversity is very important to us, as a key factor in ecosystem productivity any potential loss will impact our provisioning, regulative, supporting and cultural services.¹ The table below provides a table of the different types of ecosystem services with appropriate examples:
Have a look at this 4-min-TED video about the importance of biodiversity!