Local people's preferences for biodiversity offsets to achieve ‘no net loss’ for economic developments

Abstract

The version in the Kent Academic Repository may differ from the final published version. Users are advised to check http://kar.kent.ac.uk for the status of the paper. Users should always cite the published version of record.

Major dams and the challenge of achieving “No Net Loss” of biodiversity in the tropics

“…Five years post-construction of the dam and implementation of associated mitigation measures, progress with implementing the Kalagala Offset (in terms of both ecological outcomes and stakeholder perceptions) is being assessed by the IFC (2017) as part of a project refinancing deal from the World Bank. Preliminary findings suggest mixed stakeholder perceptions on the desirability of mitigation measures (Griffiths et al, 2019), and though offset measures have been put in place (IFC, 2017), an assessment of ecological outcomes has yet to be completed.…”

International collaboration between collections‐based institutes for halting biodiversity loss and unlocking the useful properties of plants and fungi

“…The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MEA, 2005) recognized that scientific findings and data need to be made available to all of society and that “a major obstacle to knowing (and therefore valuing), preserving, sustainably using, and sharing benefits equitably from the biodiversity of a region is the human and institutional capacity to research a country's biota.” To effect change in the perceived value of biodiversity, it is not enough to simply document and describe. Local communities need to form part of collaborative arrangements and witness an improvement of their livelihoods resulting from the responsible and sustainable use of their biodiversity (Griffiths et al., 2019) and its longer‐term care and repair (Reyes‐García et al., 2018).…”

Distributive and contextual equity in landholder participation in biodiversity offsets: a case study of biodiversity offsets in New South Wales, Australia

“…As mentioned in the Introduction, equity has not yet been fully addressed by the biodiversity offset literature. Indeed, only a few publications tackle this question (BenDor et al 2008;Bidaud et al 2017;Griffiths et al 2019aGriffiths et al , 2019b. Moreover, these studies mostly focus on the distribution of outcomes from biodiversity offsets -that is, who gets the benefits and who bears the burden of the implementation of biodiversity offsets.…”

“…Such omissions lead to negative equity outcomes for society at large, as a proportion of the population might lose access to natural areas it values. In contrast, a critical 'reformist' approach advocates for better accounting of the social and equity outcomes of offsets (BenDor et al 2008;Bidaud et al 2017;Griffiths et al 2019aGriffiths et al , 2019b.…”