The Australian Centre for Sustainable Mining Practices, School of Mining Engineering, The University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW 2052, Australia; Institute of Environmental Studies, School of Biological, Earth and Environmental Sciences, The University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW 2052, Australia.
BioCarbon Group Pte Ltd, 158 Cecil Street, 11-01, 069545, Singapore.
J Environ Manage. 2014 Oct 1;143:61-70. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2014.03.027. Epub 2014 May 24.
Mining and associated infrastructure developments can present themselves as economic opportunities that are difficult to forego for developing and industrialised countries alike. Almost inevitably, however, they lead to biodiversity loss. This trade-off can be greatest in economically poor but highly biodiverse regions. Biodiversity offsets have, therefore, increasingly been promoted as a mechanism to help achieve both the aims of development and biodiversity conservation. Accordingly, this mechanism is emerging as a key tool for multinational mining companies to demonstrate good environmental stewardship. Relying on offsets to achieve "no-net-loss" of biodiversity, however, requires certainty in their ecological integrity where they are used to sanction habitat destruction. Here, we discuss real-world practices in biodiversity offsetting by assessing how well some leading initiatives internationally integrate critical aspects of biodiversity attributes, net loss accounting and project management. With the aim of improving, rather than merely critiquing the approach, we analyse different aspects of biodiversity offsetting. Further, we analyse the potential pitfalls of developing counterfactual scenarios of biodiversity loss or gains in a project's absence. In this, we draw on insights from experience with carbon offsetting. This informs our discussion of realistic projections of project effectiveness and permanence of benefits to ensure no net losses, and the risk of displacing, rather than avoiding biodiversity losses ("leakage"). We show that the most prominent existing biodiversity offset initiatives employ broad and somewhat arbitrary parameters to measure habitat value and do not sufficiently consider real-world challenges in compensating losses in an effective and lasting manner. We propose a more transparent and science-based approach, supported with a new formula, to help design biodiversity offsets to realise their potential in enabling more responsible mining that better balances economic development opportunities for mining and biodiversity conservation.
采矿和相关基础设施的发展本身可能是一种经济机遇,发展中国家和工业化国家都很难放弃。然而,它们几乎不可避免地导致生物多样性的丧失。在经济贫困但生物多样性高度丰富的地区,这种权衡可能是最大的。因此,生物多样性补偿越来越多地被作为一种机制来帮助实现发展和生物多样性保护的目标。相应地,这种机制正在成为跨国矿业公司展示良好环境管理的关键工具。然而,依靠补偿来实现生物多样性的“零净损失”,需要在使用补偿来制裁栖息地破坏的情况下,确保其生态完整性的确定性。在这里,我们通过评估一些国际领先的生物多样性补偿倡议在多大程度上综合了生物多样性属性、净损失核算和项目管理的关键方面,来讨论生物多样性补偿的实际做法。我们的目的不是简单地批评这种方法,而是要改进它,因此我们分析了生物多样性补偿的不同方面。此外,我们还分析了在项目不存在的情况下,对生物多样性损失或收益进行反事实情景假设的潜在陷阱。在这方面,我们借鉴了碳补偿的经验。这使我们能够讨论项目有效性和收益持久性的现实预测,以确保没有净损失,并避免生物多样性损失(“泄漏”)的风险。我们表明,最突出的现有生物多样性补偿倡议采用广泛而有些随意的参数来衡量栖息地的价值,并且没有充分考虑以有效和持久的方式补偿损失的实际挑战。我们提出了一种更透明和基于科学的方法,并提供了一个新的公式,以帮助设计生物多样性补偿,使其在更负责任的矿业中发挥潜力,更好地平衡矿业发展机会和生物多样性保护。