One of the key deliverables expected to emerge from the discussions held by global leaders at COP15 is the development of an update to the Global Biodiversity Framework. The vision of the framework is a commitment that “…By 2050, biodiversity is valued, conserved, restored, and wisely used, maintaining ecosystem services, sustaining a healthy planet and delivering benefits essential for all people.”
There is no single solution that will allow us to achieve this goal. No one universal enterprise is going to lead to the full protection of restoration of our national or global biodiversity. Instead, it will take a series of actions, at every scale, to generate the overall positive impact needed to protect our planet’s future.
One of the tools that must be applied is biodiversity offsets: actions taken to balance, or improve, the damage done to biodiversity by a given action. This tool could be used to counter the impact of any sort of development, from transmission lines and highways to commercial buildings and mining operations.
The Evolution of Using Offsets
While the concept of using offsets to ‘pay’ for damage done to a natural ecosystem in the terrestrial realm is relatively new to Canada, biodiversity offsets in the more general sense are not.
Canada has been a leader in biodiversity offsetting for many years on the fisheries side. Proponents wishing to develop a project that adversely affects fish in Canada must offset those adverse effects under the Fisheries Act. Offsets for wetlands have also been introduced in different Canadian jurisdictions, including Alberta, which has a clear application process for activities involving a wetland and a series of regulations that must be adhered to.
Terrestrial offsets are the next frontier in Canada’s biodiversity space. It remains in its infancy in many global jurisdictions, including Canada, but use of terrestrial offsets is expected to increase as commercial, industrial and government stakeholders look for ways to drive growth without causing irreversible environmental damage. One country that has seen progress is England, which has introduced a law allowing for terrestrial offsets to be utilized by some forms of development.
While the implementation of terrestrial offsets has been minimal in Canada thus far, there are a few examples where companies are working to get ahead of the curve. Mining giant Teck Resources Limited announced in June 2022 its commitment to becoming nature-positive “…through conserving or rehabilitating at least three hectares for every one hectare affected by its mining activities.” This includes land conservation investments of approximately 14,000 hectares of land in Canada and Chile.
Our team at WSP is working closely with several clients to develop loss-gain accounting systems to help them implement the full mitigation hierarchy, limit impacts to biodiversity, and understand offset obligations. This work helps to focus proponents on the first three steps of the mitigation hierarchy (avoid, minimize, and rehabilitate). Offsetting can be both expensive and technically challenging. Ensuring that all options to address biodiversity impacts using the first part of the mitigation hierarchy have been fully explored during project design is key to conserving biodiversity and reducing offset obligation.
Expanding the Implementation of Terrestrial Offsets
There is still work to be done if terrestrial offsets are going to be more widely used both in Canada and abroad. To start, more research is needed on offset efficacy. There are not enough good examples of terrestrial offsets that have been sufficiently studied to demonstrate success and to help guide future implementation.
In Canada, we need clearer regulations. And we need to expand the technical solutions and know-how within the sector. We need to maintain a focus on the mitigation hierarchy and avoid potential perverse outcomes of biodiversity offsets (e.g., license to trash).
We have the opportunity to protect and restore our biodiversity, and the commitments made at COP15 will help push Canada along this path. Terrestrial offsets are only part of the solution, but as we gain a better understanding of their overall effectiveness, they will likely prove an important and necessary tool for achieving our national and global biodiversity targets.
