Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-mp689 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-16T14:16:32.372Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Economic-ecological evaluation of temporary biodiversity offsets in Alberta's boreal forest

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 July 2015

MARIAN WEBER ,
GRANT HAUER  and
DAN FARR
MARIAN WEBER*
Affiliation:
Alberta Innovates Technology Futures, 250 Karl Clark Road, Edmonton, Alberta, CanadaT6N 1E4
GRANT HAUER
Affiliation:
Department of Resource Economics and Environmental Sociology, University of Alberta, 515 General Services Building, Edmonton, Alberta, CanadaT6G 2H1
DAN FARR
Affiliation:
Alberta Biodiversity Monitoring Institute, University of Alberta, CW 405 Biological Sciences Building, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, T6G 2E9
*
*Correspondence: Dr Marian Weber e-mail: marian.weber@albertainnovates.ca
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

To conserve biodiversity on forest landscapes, it is necessary to understand how incentives in an offset market affect the dynamics of habitat loss and restoration. In this study, a model of firm behaviour in a temporary biodiversity offset market is developed to understand the impact of offset rules on the dynamics of land use and offset policy costs and benefits for Alberta's boreal forest. Policy treatments include eligibility rules for restoration versus avoided loss; time lags for crediting restoration benefits; and geographic trading restrictions. The analysis highlights the assumptions and trade-offs embedded in offset principles such as additionality. Restoration-based policies, which require biodiversity benefits to be established prior to development, are over 200 times more costly than policies that include avoided loss. Geographic trading restrictions result in a significant redistribution of policy costs and ecological risks between regions, with little impact on aggregate policy costs and benefits. Including avoided loss results in a decline in biodiversity intactness by 2% to 2.2% compared to a decline of 3.6% under a no-offset policy. Increasing time lags for crediting restoration to match ecological recovery trajectories reduces restoration effort when policies include both restoration and avoided loss.

Keywords

Albertaboreal forestbiodiversity conservationCanadaforest policyoffset market
Type
Papers
Information
Environmental Conservation , Volume 42 , Issue 4: Thematic section: Tradable Rights in Conservation , December 2015 , pp. 315 - 324
Copyright
Copyright © Foundation for Environmental Conservation 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alberta Biodiversity Monitoring Institute (2014) Manual for species modeling and intactness, Version 2014–09–25 [www document]. URL http://abmi.ca/docroot/assets//home/publications/documents/47_ABMI_2014-09-25_SpeciesModelingAndIntactnessManual_ABMI.pdf Google Scholar
Alberta Department of Energy (2007 a) Alberta's conventional oil and gas industry: investor economics and fiscal system comparison. Technical Royalty Report OG#2. Alberta Department of Energy, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.Google Scholar
Alberta Department of Energy (2007 b) Alberta's oil sands fiscal system: historical context and system performance. Technical Royalty Report OS#1. Alberta Department of Energy, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.Google Scholar
Alberta Department of Energy (2007 c) Preliminary fiscal evaluation of Alberta oil sands terms. Alberta Department of Energy, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.Google Scholar
Alberta Energy Regulator and Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (2013) Report of the Joint Review Panel Established by the Federal Minister of Environment and the Energy Resources Conservation Board. Decision 2013 ABAER 011: Shell Canada Energy, Jackpine Mine Expansion Project, Application to Amend Approval 9756, Fort McMurray area. July 9, 2013. Ottawa, Canada. [www document]. URL http://www.ceaa.gc.ca/050/documents/p59540/90873E.pdf Google Scholar
Alberta Energy Resources Conservation Board (2011) Alberta's energy reserves 2010 and supply/demand outlook 2011–2020. Report ST98–2011. ERCB, Calgary, Alberta, Canada [www document]. URL http://www.aer.ca/documents/sts/ST98/st98-32011.pdf Google Scholar
Alberta Energy and Utilities Board (2007) Alberta's energy reserves 2006 and supply/demand outlook 2007–2016. EUB serial publication ST98–2007. Alberta Energy and Utilities Board, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.Google Scholar
Alberta Geological Survey (2009) Alberta Township system (ATS) and universal transverse mercator (UTM) cartographic conversion tools [www document]. URL http://www.ags.gov.ab.ca/gis/map_converters/conversion_tools.html Google Scholar
Alberta Sustainable Resource Development, Alberta Environment, Alberta Community Development and Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (2005) Natural region and subregions of Alberta [www document]. URL http://www.albertaparks.ca/albertaparksca/library/downloadable-data-sets.aspx Google Scholar
Bekessy, S., Wintle, B., Linenmayer, D.B., McCarthy, M., Colyvan, M. & Burgman, M. (2010) The biodiversity bank cannot be a lending bank. Conservation Letters 3: 151–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bendor, T. (2009) A dynamic analysis of the wetland mitigation process and its effects on no net loss policy. Landscape and Urban Planning 89: 17–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brownlie, S. & Botha, M. (2009) Biodiversity offsets: adding to the conservation estate, or ‘no net loss’? Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal 27: 227–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bull, J.W., Suttle, K., Singh, N.J. & Milner-Gulland, E.J. (2013) Conservation when nothing stands still: moving targets and biodiversity offsets. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 11: 203–210. doi: 10.1890/120020 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Business and Biodiversity Offsets Programme (2009) Biodiversity offset design handbook. Business and Biodiversity Offsets Programme, Washington, DC, USA [www document]. URL http://www.forest-trends.org/biodiversityoffsetprogram/guidelines/odh.pdf Google Scholar
Butchart, S.H.M., Walpole, M., Collen, B., van Strien, A., Scharlemann, J.P.W., Almond, R.E.A., Baillie, J.E.M., Bomhard, B., Brown, C., Bruno, J., et al. (2010) Global biodiversity: indicators of recent declines. Science 328: 1164–1168.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cabeza, M. & Moilanen, A. (2001) Design of reserve networks and the persistence of biodiversity. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 16: 242–248.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cabeza, M. & Moilanen, A. (2003) Site-selection algorithms and habitat loss. Conservation Biology 17: 1402–1413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Convention on Biological Diversity (2009) Report of the expert meeting on mainstreaming biodiversity in development cooperation [www document]. URL http://www.cbd.int/doc/meetings/development/emmbdc-01/official/emmbdc-01-02-en.pdf Google Scholar
Cumming, S., Burton, P. & Klinkenberg, B. (1996) Boreal mixedwood forests may have no ‘representative’ regions: some implications for reserve design. Ecography 19: 162–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Curran, M., Hellweg, S. & Beck, J. (2014) Is there any empirical support for biodiversity offset policy? Ecological Applications 24: 617–632.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dyer, S., Grant, J., Lesack, T. & Weber, M. (2008). Catching up: conservation and biodiversity offsets in Alberta's boreal forest. Canadian Boreal Initiative, Ottawa, Canada [www document]. URL http://www.pembina.org/pub/1650 Google Scholar
eftec & IEEP (2010) The use of market-based instruments for biodiversity protection. Habitat banking case studies [www document]. URL http://www.forest-trends.org/documents/files/doc_2410.pdf Google Scholar
Environment Canada (2012) Recovery strategy for the woodland caribou (Rangifer tarandus caribou), boreal population in Canada. Species at Risk Act Recovery Strategy Series. Environment Canada, Ottawa, Canada: xi + 138 pp. [www document]. URL https://www.registrelep-sararegistry.gc.ca/document/default_e.cfm?documentID=2253 Google Scholar
Ferraro, P.J. & Pattanayak, S.K. (2006) Money for nothing? A call for empirical evaluation of biodiversity conservation investments. PLoS Biology 4: 482–488.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gardner, T.A., Von Hase, A., Brownlie, S., Ekstrom, J.M.M., Pilgrim, J.D., Savy, C.E., Theo Stephens, R.T., Treweek, J., Ussher, G.T., Ward, G. & Ten Kate, K. (2013) Biodiversity offsets and the challenge of achieving no net loss. Conservation Biology 27: 1254–1264.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
GLJ Petroleum Consultants (2009 a) Natural gas and sulphur price forecast, January 1, 2009. GLJ Petroleum Consultants, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.Google Scholar
GLJ Petroleum Consultants (2009 b) Crude oil and natural gas liquids price forecast, January 1, 2009. GLJ Petroleum Consultants, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.Google Scholar
Gosselin, P., Naeth, M.A., Hrudey, S.E., Plourde, A., Therrien, R., Van Der Kraak, G. & Xu, Z. (2010) The Royal Society of Canada Expert Panel: environmental and health impacts of Canada's oil sands industry report. The Royal Society of Canada. Ottawa, Ontario, Canada [www document]. URL https://rsc-src.ca/en/expert-panels/rsc-reports/environmental-and-health-impacts-canadas-oil-sands-industry Google Scholar
Government of Alberta (2008) Land-use framework [www document]. URL https://www.landuse.alberta.ca/Documents/LUF_Land-use_Framework_Report-2008-12.pdf Google Scholar
Grant, J., Angen, E. & Dyer, S. (2013) Forecasting the impacts of oil sands expansion: measuring the land disturbance, air quality, water use, greenhouse gas emissions, and tailings production associated with each barrel of bitumen production. Report. Pembina Institute, Canada [www document]. URL http://www.pembina.org/pub/2455 Google Scholar
Habib, T.J., Farr, D.R., Schneider, R.R. & Boutin, S. (2013) Economic and ecological outcomes of flexible biodiversity offset systems. Conservation Biology 27: 1313–1323.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hahn, R.W., Olmstead, S.M. & Stavins, R.N. (2003) Environmental regulation during the 1990s: a retrospective analysis. Harvard Environmental Law Review 27: 377–415.Google Scholar
Harrington, W., Safirova, E., Coleman, C., Houde, S. & Finkel, A.M. (2014) Consequences of public policies: an example from the management of urban vehicular travel. Resources for the Future Discussion Paper 14–04, Resources for the Future, Washington, DC, USA [www document]. URL http://www.rff.org/Publications/Pages/PublicationDetails.aspx?PublicationID=22361 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hauer, G.K., Cumming, S., Schmiegelow, F., Adamowicz, W., Weber, M. & Jagodinsk, R. (2010 a) Tradeoffs between forestry resource and conservation values under alternate policy regimes: a spatial analysis of the western Canadian boreal plains. Ecological Modelling 221: 2590–2603.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hauer, G., Adamowicz, V. & Jagodzinski, R. (2010 b) A NPV model of natural gas exploitation in northern Alberta: an analysis of land values in woodland caribou ranges. Project report 10–01. University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada [www document]. URL http://ageconsearch.umn.edu/bitstream/91422/2/PR-10-01.pdf Google Scholar
Heaps, T. & Pratt, B. (1989) The social discount rate for silviculture investments. FRDA Report No. 071. Forestry Canada and BC Ministry of Forests, Victoria, BC, Canada.Google Scholar
Jenkins, J.D. (2014) Political economy constraints on carbon pricing policies: what are the implications for economic efficiency, environmental efficacy, and climate policy design? Energy Policy 69: 467–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jentsch, A., Beierkuhnlein, C. & White, P.S. (2002) Scale, the dynamic stability of forest ecosystems, and the persistence of biodiversity. Silva Fennica 36: 393–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kiesecker, J. M., Copeland, H., Pocewicz, A. & McKenney, B. (2010) Development by design: blending landscape-level planning with the mitigation hierarchy. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 8: 261–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mahon, C.L., Bayne, E.M., Sólymos, P., Matsuoka, S.M., Carlson, M., Dzus, E., Schmiegelow, F.K.A. & Song, S.J. (2014) Does expected future landscape condition support proposed population objectives for boreal birds? Forest Ecology and Management 312: 28–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marland, G., Fruit, K. & Sedjo, R. (2001) Accounting for sequestered carbon: the question of permanence. Environmental Science and Policy 4: 259–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maron, M., Hobbs, R., Moilanen, A., Matthews, J.W., Christie, K., Gardner, T.A., Keith, D.A., Lindenmayer, D.B. & Mcalpine, C.A. (2012) Faustian bargains? Restoration realities in the context of biodiversity offset policies. Biological Conservation 155: 141–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCarthy, M.A., Parris, K.M., Van Der Ree, R., McDonnell, M.J., Burgman, M.A., Williams, N.S.G., McLean, N., Harper, M.J., Meyer, R., Hahs, A. & Coates, T. (2004) The habitat hectares approach to vegetation assessment: An evaluation and suggestions for improvement. Ecological Management & Restoration 5: 24–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McShane, T.O., Hirsch, P.D., Trung, P.C., Songorwa, A.N., Kinzig, A., Monteferri, B., Mutekanga, D., Van Thang, H., Dammert, J.L., Pulgar-Vidal, M., Welch-Devine, M., Brosius, J.P., Coppolillo, P. & O’Connor, S. (2011). Hard choices: making trade-offs between biodiversity conservation and human well-being. Biological Conservation 144: 966–972.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moilanen, A. (2013) Planning impact avoidance and biodiversity offsetting using software for spatial conservation prioritization. Wildlife Research 40: 153–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Montgomery, W.D. (1972) Markets in licenses and efficient pollution control programs. Journal of Economic Theory 5: 395–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moreno-Mateos, D., Power, M.E., Comın, F.A. & Yockteng, R. (2012) Structural and functional loss in restored wetland ecosystems. PLoS Biology 10 (1): e1001247. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.1001247 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Natural Regions Committee (2006) Natural regions and subregions of Alberta. Report, compiled by D. J. Downing. & W. W. Pettapiece, Publication No. T/852. Government of Alberta, Canada [www document]. URL http://www.albertaparks.ca/media/2942026/nrsrcomplete_may_06.pdf Google Scholar
Nielsen, S.E., Bayne, E., Scheick, J., Herbers, J. & Boutin, S.A. (2007) A new method to estimate species and biodiversity intactness using empirically derived reference conditions. Biological Conservation 137: 403–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parkes, D., Newell, G. & Cheal, D. (2003) Assessing the quality of native vegetation: the ‘habitat hectares’ approach. Ecological Management and Restoration S4: 29–38.Google Scholar
Petroleum Services Association of Canada (2008) Well cost study. Report. Petroleum Services Association of Canada, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.Google Scholar
Pilgrim, J. D., Brownlie, S., Ekstrom, J. M. M., Gardner, T. A., von Hase, A., Kate, K.T., Savy, C. E., Stephens, R. T. T., Temple, H. J., Treweek, J., Ussher, G. T. & Ward, G. (2013) A process for assessing offsetability of biodiversity impacts. Conservation Letters doi: 10.1017/S003060531200172X CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Quétier, F., Regnery, B. & Levrel, H. (2014) No net loss of biodiversity or paper offsets? A critical review of the French no net loss policy. Environmental Science and Policy 38: 120–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schneider, R. & Dyer, S. (2006) Death by a thousand cuts: impacts of in situ oil sands development on Alberta's boreal forest. Report. Pembina Institute, Canada [www document]. URL www.pubs.pembina.org/reports/1000-cuts.pdf Google Scholar
Schneider, R.R., Hauer, G., Adamowicz, W.L. & Boutin, S. (2010) Triage for conserving population of threatened species: the case of woodland caribou in Alberta. Biological Conservation 143: 1603–1611.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schneider, R.R., Hauer, G., Farr, D., Adamowicz, W.L. & Boutin, S. (2011) Achieving conservation when opportunity costs are high: optimizing reserve design in Alberta's oil sands region. PLoS One 6: doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0023254 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schneider, R. R., Stelfox, J.B., Boutin, S. & Wasel, S. (2003) Managing the cumulative impacts of land uses in the Western Canadian Sedimentary Basin: a modeling approach. Conservation Ecology 7 (1): 8 [www document]. URL http://www.consecol.org/vol7/iss1/art8/ CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity (2014) Global Biodiversity Outlook 4. Montréal, Canada: 155 pp. [www document]. URL https://www.cbd.int/gbo4/ Google Scholar
Sedjo, R.A. & Marland, G. (2003) Inter-trading permanent emissions credits and rented temporary carbon emissions offsets: some issues and alternatives. Climate Policy 2: 435–444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simberloff, D. (2001) Management of boreal forest biodiversity: a view from the outside. Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research Supplement 3: 105–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Teeffelen, A.J., Opdam, P., Wätzold, F., Hartig, F., Johst, K., Drechsler, M., Vos, C.C., Wissel, S. & Quétier, F. (2014) Ecological and economic conditions and associated institutional challenges for conservation banking in dynamic landscapes. Landscape and Urban Planning 130: 64–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Teeffelen, A.J., Vos, C.C. & Opdam, P. (2012) Species in a dynamic world: consequences of habitat network dynamics for conservation planning. Biological Conservation 153: 239–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weber, M., Farr, D., Hauer, G., Nemes, V. & Perger, O. (2011) Experimental economic evaluation of offset design options for Alberta. [www document] URL https://www.landuse.alberta.ca/LandUse%20Documents/Experimental%20Evaluation%20of%20Offset%20Design%20Options%20Research%20-%202011-11.pdf Google Scholar
Wilman, E.A. (1994) Liability versus property rule protection for surface entitlements. Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics 42: 177–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, R.R., Liebezeit, J.R. & Loya, W.M. (2013) Accounting for uncertainty in oil and gas development impacts to wildlife in Alaska. Conservation Letters 6: 350–358. doi: 10.1111/conl.12016 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
World Business Council for Sustainable Development (2014) Co-optimizing solutions: water and energy for food, feed and fiber [www document]. URL http://www.wbcsd.org/Pages/EDocument/EDocumentDetails.aspx?ID=16214 Google Scholar