The emergence, formalisation and evolution of biodiversity offset use in Australia

Abstract

Generally built upon policy aims of 'no net loss' to environmental values, biodiversity offset policies are in place in all Australian states, territories and at the Commonwealth level. The typical aim of a biodiversity offset is to undertake environmental management activities to ameliorate the residual environmental impacts associated with development activities. Most often required as a condition associated with a planning and development approval, biodiversity offset programmes centre the politically compelling promise of balancing the objectives of both environmental conservation and economic growth. Biodiversity offset use is, however, plagued with questions about rigour, uncertainty regarding the ability to recreate or replace ecosystem function, and the time-lag between impacts and benefits.

Typically credited as emerging as a formal policy instrument in the 1980s, Australia is considered a leading proponent of the use of biodiversity offsets. Australian biodiversity offset used commenced in the 1990s in an ad hoc, discretionary manner during negotiations between the proponent of a development application and environment and planning officers. Within the context of Australia, biodiversity offset use has been simultaneously described as world-leading, rigorous, and as inadequately resourced and a missed opportunity. The research examining the use of biodiversity offsets on a policy scale, as opposed to focusing on individual projects, rarely examines the longer scope of the totality of biodiversity offset use. A consequence of this lack of research is that the broader political, scientific and social context influencing the emergence, design and evolution of biodiversity offset use is not well understood. Drawing from this gap, this research asks: what are the drivers of the emergence, design and evolution of biodiversity offset use and policy in New South Wales, Queensland and the Commonwealth from ~1990s-2016?

This research engages with government policy documents, Freedom of Information requests, and interviews with experts and public servants to determine the drivers behind the emergence, design and evolution of biodiversity offset use in these three jurisdictions. Overarching these case studies is the development of a three-part theoretical model which, unlike traditional theoretical frameworks that consider only single parts of the policy process, applies to all parts of the policy cycle. This includes problem construction, establishment of norms, policy design, introduction, reform and persistence. Noting the gap in the literature, this research argues that a consequence of the deficiency in research mapping the policy process may be that there is little 'policy learning' occurring. The absence of such learning means that there may be the development of new policies built upon the importing of existing policy designs without a critical evaluation of the political context that defined the policy consultation and design, scientific errors in the methodology, and problems of implementation and enforcement.

Without understanding the long-term political, social and scientific context that justifies a policy's introduction, design, change, and persistence, it is difficult to understand why a policy may continue even as it struggles to achieve its policy goal. This persistence of biodiversity offset policy designs that include calculation errors, exemptions for certain activities, a lack of transparency and unclear compliance measures may undermine the capacity of the planning and environment regimes to achieve their goals. A consequence is that we see native vegetation and the already fragmented habitat of many protected species continue to be destroyed upon the uncertain promise of a biodiversity offset. Show more