Scale dependency of conservation outcomes in a forest‐offsetting scheme

Abstract

Offset schemes help avoid or revert habitat loss through protection of existing habitat (avoided deforestation), through the restoration of degraded areas (natural regrowth), or both. The spatial scale of an offset scheme may influence which of these 2 outcomes is favored and is an important aspect of the scheme's design. However, how spatial scale influences the trade-offs between the preservation of existing habitat and restoration of degraded areas is poorly understood. We used the largest forest offset scheme in the world, which is part of the Brazilian Forest Code, to explore how implementation at different spatial scales may affect the outcome in terms of the area of avoided deforestation and area of regrowth. We employed a numerical simulation of trade between buyers (i.e., those who need to offset past deforestation) and sellers (i.e., landowners with exceeding native vegetation) in the Brazilian Amazon to estimate potential avoided deforestation and regrowth at different spatial scales of implementation. Allowing offsets over large spatial scales led to an area of avoided deforestation 12 times greater than regrowth, whereas restricting offsets to small spatial scales led to an area of regrowth twice as large as avoided deforestation. The greatest total area (avoided deforestation and regrowth combined) was conserved when the spatial scale of the scheme was small, especially in locations that were highly deforested. To maximize conservation gains from avoided deforestation and regrowth, the design of the Brazilian forest-offset scheme should focus on restricting the spatial scale in which offsets occur. Such a strategy could help ensure conservation benefits are localized and promote the recovery of degraded areas in the most threatened forest landscapes.Resumen: Los esquemas de compensación ayudan a evitar o revertir la pérdida de hábitat mediante la protección del hábitat existente (deforestación evitada), mediante la restauración deáreas degradadas (recrecimiento natural) o ambos. La escala espacial de una mitigación puede influir en cuál de ellos es seleccionado y es un aspecto importante del diseño de esquema. Sin embargo, no se entiende bien cómo influye la escala espacial en las compensaciones entre la preservación del hábitat existente y la restauración deáreas degradadas. Utilizamos el esquema de compensación forestal más grande del mundo, que forma parte del Código Forestal Brasileño, para explorar cómo la implementación a diferentes escalas espaciales puede afectar el resultado en términos de la superficie de deforestación evitada y elárea de recrecimiento. Empleamos una simulación numérica del comercio entre compradores (i. e., aquellos que necesitan compensar la deforestación pasada) y vendedores (i. e., propietarios con exceso de vegetación nativa) en la Amazonía brasileña para estimar deforestación evitada y el recrecimiento a diferentes escalas espaciales de implementación. Permitir compensaciones en grandes escalas espaciales dio lugar a una superficie de deforestación evitada 12 veces m...

Flexibility trade‐offs in conservation offsets

“…Although a comparison of specific results with the literature is impossible due to differences in the considered modeling purposes and model structures, some general statements can be made. First, in line with Bull et al (2015), Habib et al (2013), andGiannichi et al (2019), flexibility can have substantial impacts on ecological benefit (biodiversity) and economic costs, and it is important to distinguish between the different dimensions of flexibility because their ecological and economic impacts depend on the specific ecological and economic conditions.…”

“…(2013), and Giannichi et al. (2019), flexibility can have substantial impacts on ecological benefit (biodiversity) and economic costs, and it is important to distinguish between the different dimensions of flexibility because their ecological and economic impacts depend on the specific ecological and economic conditions.…”

“…Finally, broader issues around conservation offsets, such as additionality (Giannichi et al., 2019; zu Ermgassen et al., 2020) and inappropriate baselines (Simmonds et al., 2019), were not considered explicitly. However, their effects may be similar to those of an increased type flexibility and risk of restoration failure.…”

Estrutura Fundiária E Conservação De Florestas Em Propriedades Rurais Do Circuito Das Frutas/Sp: Uma Análise Dos Impactos Da Lei 12.651/2012 Na Conformação De Reservas Legais E Cotas De Reserva Ambiental

“…De outro lado, a adoção de um "olhar local" no estabelecimento destes arranjos de compensação de RLs impacta positivamente a adicionalidade do mecanismo, e garante que os benefícios da conservação florestal, tais como o sequestro de carbono ou a produção de água, fiquem localizados. Ademais, a limitação da aquisição de CRAs em escalas locais pode impulsionar a restauração ecológica de áreas degradadas nestes recortes definidos, já que o universo de CRAs disponíveis para aquisição objetivando a regularização florestal dos imóveis rurais seria menor (GIANNICHI et al, 2019).…”