Presentation Transcript

1. The Privatisation of Biodiversity? - New Approaches to Nature Conservation Law

   Dr. Walters Nsoh University of Dundee
2. Background State of biodiversity loss Current approach and role of the state in conservation Development of alternatives to “command-and-control” in environmental contexts “Nudging” mechanisms Environmental taxes Reporting and disclosure duties Eco-labelling Trading and offset schemes Greenhouse gases and carbon
3. New Approaches Conservation covenants/burdens Payment for ecosystem services Biodiversity offsetting Recognise value of biodiversity in a way that allows it to be traded or paid for private sector becomes involved in paying and deciding what to pay for
4. Conservation Covenants Enduring restrictions on the use of land to serve a conservation purpose binding on successors in title enforceable without any need for neighbouring land Law Commission consultation paper Potential set own priorities mechanism for payments from private sector mechanism for PES and offsetting
5. Payment for Ecosystem Services - What are these? Provisioning services food, fibre, fuel, fresh water Regulating services climate regulation, air quality, purification of water, flood and erosion control, pest regulation Cultural services recreation, aesthetic and spiritual benefits Supporting services soil formation, nutrient cycling Immense cost to replace these
6. PES Schemes Provide a vehicle for the beneficiaries to pay the providers incentive to ensure services are maintained or restored saves vast cost of replacement Need to identify: What is being paid for Who is entitled to receive payment Who should be paying
7. Biodiversity Offsetting Allow development that causes some harm in one place to go ahead so long as compensating benefits provided somewhere else Ensure no net loss to biodiversity (at least) Allows flexibility to enable development Private sector pays for conservation polluter pays
8. Green Paper DEFRA: Biodiversity Offsetting in England September 2013 Responses due by 7 November “The Government does not want to delay the introduction of biodiversity offsetting … plans to set out [detailed proposals] by the end of 2013.”
9. Experience Scottish Borders – windfarms over £600,000 contribution from developers almost 500 hectares of habitat created or enhanced since 2006 co-ordinated by planning authority using planning system See http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/ 0042/00426294.pdf
10. Challenges of Market Approach Definition of units/services to be sold/traded non-fungible; lack of data; priorities Effectiveness practical results – coherence, timing and scale needs of a working market Governance Ethical issues
11. Non-fungible ≠
12. Baseline data Lack of basic data - especially for less glamorous species
13. Local and global priorities One is globally common One is endangered Which is widely seen as the priority?
14. Public sentiment
15. Public sentiment
16. Public sentiment
17. Coherence Migration routes of individual cuckoos. British Trust for Ornithology Must join up action in lots of locations to achieve results
18. Coherence Migration routes of individual woodcock: From Game & Wildlife Conservation Trust
19. Timing Habitat takes time to mature so as to deliver benefits “Credit” given before delivery?
20. Scale New habitat not so rich, so need more
21. Dynamic environments Changing coastlines
22. Climate Change St Andrews 2050?
23. DEFRA Proposals & Questions Mandatory? Optional? Site-by-site or overall impact? analogy of infrastructure levy Planning guidance or legislation?
24. Metrics Pilot study has simple matrix Habitat lost: area; quality of habitat; distinctiveness of habitat (three point scales) Offset provided: same factors, with discounts for: risk, time, location Not for “irreplaceable” habitats
25. Exchangeability Like-for-like or substitution? potential to allow “trading up” Location ecological value of larger areas impact on residents Note emphasis on well-being in 2020 Challenge for Scotland’s Biodiversity
26. Security Quality of assessments Mechanism to ensure offset continues to be provided conservation covenants Fall-back provision financial guarantee, public trust fund, insurance pool
27. Additionality Ensure that offset is genuinely additional vital to ensure no net loss (or actual gain) Issues: existing conservation sites biobanks extending life of current fixed-term benefits (e.g. agri-environment schemes)
28. Ethical Concerns Positive? biodiversity becomes part of the economic system which dominates society does not get overlooked as decisions are being made Negative? transforms biodiversity from common heritage to commodity fundamentally misconceived view of our relationship with nature
29. The way forward? Private sector and market approaches have potential for biodiversity Major challenges in designing effective and enduring frameworks Cannot simply carry over schemes from other contexts Likely to be a supplement to direct regulation, not replacement for it
30. What difference for sites? Policy balance favours conservation Should not be undermined by offset Policy balance favours development Offset offers something in place of what would otherwise simply be lost Policy balance uncertain How far will availability of offset tip the balance? Genuine concern for nature or “licence to trash”?
31. Acknowledgements AHRC Project: The Privatisation of Biodiversity? Principal Investigator: Professor Colin Reid Pictures from BTO, GWCT, Clip Art, Anne Reid and Colin Reid