Ecological compensation: From general guidance and expertise to specific proposals for road developments

Abstract

The main scientific bibliography addressing the rationale behind ecological compensation is reviewed in order to examine general guidelines. This contains interesting general guidance on how to implement compensation, and provides the basis for future developments in compensation practice. On this basis, we propose a further step in compensation practice, advancing compensation proposals or rules for specific kinds of projects and contexts, focusing on road projects in the Spanish Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). Three main residual impacts of roads are identified which usually remain uncompensated for: the loss of natural and semi-natural land use, the increase in emissions resulting from any new road, and the fragmentation, severance or barrier effect on the landscape and its wildlife. To counteract these, four proposals, or "rules", are advanced: conservation of natural and semi-natural land use area, conservation of dominant plant species physiognomy, compensation for emissions, and the rule of positive defragmentation.

Perceptions of environmental compensation in different scientific fields

“…A Canadian study shows that actors involved in compensation for the loss of wetland areas agreed that the compensation measures should be taken near the site of the damage, and also that the functions damaged should be replaced with similar functions [28]. There are of course problems with these approaches since it may be difficult to find suitable sites for planned compensation measures, and since certain natural elements cannot be recreated [29]. Here is one example of a federal guidance document calling for greater flexibility as regards compensation for wetland areas in the USA:…”

Compensation in Swedish infrastructure projects and suggestions on policy improvements

“…in the context of a strategy governed by objectives (Villarroya et al 2014). The use of the kind of overall landscape perspective characteristic of the latter approach leads to greater flexibility and makes it easier to find locations for compensation measures.…”

“…In the Commission's opinion, somewhere between half and all of this loss should be compensated for each year (ICF GHK 2013). In Sweden, like in many other EU and other European countries such as Norway, environmental compensation has not fully come into use yet and few guidelines have been developed (Samferdseldepartementet 2013, Villarroya et al 2014. Moreover, there is no information about how widespread the use of environmental compensation is.…”

The many meanings of no net loss in environmental policy

“…Since the term NNL was first popularized during the 1988 United States presidential election campaign of George H. W. Bush 3,4 , such goals increasingly have become embedded within international pledges 5,6 , national and regional government policies 7 , voluntary corporate sustainability policy 8 and lending requirements for major financial institutions 9 . For example, the European Commission is exploring policy options for a European Union-wide NNL Initiative, and countries including France, Colombia and Peru have recently introduced legislation that includes such goals 10,11 . Biodiversity offset policies that require NNL of biodiversity are now in place or enabled in over 80 countries 7 .…”