Performance of habitat offsets for species conservation in dynamic human-modified landscapes

, Liu, Yan, Wahyudi, Agung, Maron, Martine, Iftekhar, Md Sayed, & Brisbane, Shantala (2024) Performance of habitat offsets for species conservation in dynamic human-modified landscapes. People and Nature, 6(5), pp. 1774-1788.

Open access copy at publisher website

Description

Biodiversity offsets are a popular policy tool for mitigating the impact of development on biodiversity, but the ecological success of offsets arise from complex interactions among socio-economic, ecological and policy processes, making outcomes challenging to assess. Many offset policies use habitat surrogates to determine offset requirements, rather than using direct measures of impacted biota, and this can lead to poor outcomes for species. One potential solution to this is for offsets to be delivered by a public agency (agency-led) rather than by developers (developer-led). This is because agencies may be able to strategically choose offset sites that maximise outcomes for species (e.g. abundance), while there may be little reason for developers to act strategically in this way when offset requirements are based purely on habitat surrogates. Yet, the success of a strategic agency-led approach is likely to depend on patterns of development and offset site availability. To examine this, we developed a novel integrated spatially explicit model of land-use change, habitat, species abundance and offset regulation. We apply the model to the Queensland Government's Environmental Offsets Policy for koalas Phascolarctos cinereus in South East Queensland, Australia, and test how patterns of development and offset site availability influence the performance of agency-led versus developer-led offsets. When potential offset sites were plentiful, agency-led offsets tended to outperform developer-led offset delivery for maximising koala abundance while achieving similar or better outcomes for habitat area. Yet, when potential offset sites were rare, the relative performance of agency-led offset was often poor, and offset requirements for habitat area were less likely to be met. Different spatial patterns of development had little effect on the relative performance of agency-led versus developer-led offsets. Our analysis shows that agency-led offsets with strategic choices of offset sites can improve species' outcomes for habitat-based offsets but can also risk failing to meet habitat area requirements when the availability of offset sites is low. Importantly, our integrated spatial model provides a holistic approach to assessing policy options for biodiversity offsets in dynamic human-modified landscapes. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.

Impact and interest:

3 citations in Scopus
3 citations in Web of Science®
Search Google Scholar™

Citation counts are sourced monthly from Scopus and Web of Science® citation databases.

These databases contain citations from different subsets of available publications and different time periods and thus the citation count from each is usually different. Some works are not in either database and no count is displayed. Scopus includes citations from articles published in 1996 onwards, and Web of Science® generally from 1980 onwards.

Citations counts from the Google Scholar™ indexing service can be viewed at the linked Google Scholar™ search.

ID Code: 245727
Item Type: Contribution to Journal (Journal Article)
Refereed: Yes
ORCID iD:
Rhodes, Jonathan R.orcid.org/0000-0001-6746-7412
Additional Information: Funding Information: This project was funded by the Queensland Government under a Community Sustainability Action Grant (CSAR17005) and an Australian Research Council Discovery Project (DP170104235). JRR was supported by an Australian Research Council Future Fellowship (FT200100096).
Measurements or Duration: 15 pages
Keywords: biodiversity offsets, environmental policy, environmental regulation, koala, land-use change model, policy evaluation, urban development
DOI: 10.1002/pan3.10494
ISSN: 2575-8314
Pure ID: 155730604
Funding Information: Thank you to Hawthorne Beyer who provided advice and help with the analysis and contributed to obtaining funding. Thank you also to the large number of people from the Queensland Department of Environment and Science and the Department of State Development, Tourism and Innovation who assisted greatly with ideas and data for this project. Particularly thanks to Catherine George, Zoe Kemp, Carole Rayner, Carol Wall, Harriet Preece and Mark Roberts. This project was funded by the Queensland Government under a Community Sustainability Action Grant (CSAR17005) and an Australian Research Council Discovery Project (DP170104235). JRR was supported by an Australian Research Council Future Fellowship (FT200100096).
Funding:
Copyright Owner: 2023 The Authors
Copyright Statement: This work is covered by copyright. Unless the document is being made available under a Creative Commons Licence, you must assume that re-use is limited to personal use and that permission from the copyright owner must be obtained for all other uses. If the document is available under a Creative Commons License (or other specified license) then refer to the Licence for details of permitted re-use. It is a condition of access that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. If you believe that this work infringes copyright please provide details by email to qut.copyright@qut.edu.au
Deposited On: 23 Jan 2024 09:15
Last Modified: 02 Jun 2026 21:51