Wikipedia

User:Manxshearwater/environmentalmitigation

< User:Manxshearwater

Environmental mitigation

edit

Environmental mitigation refers to the process by which measures to avoid, minimise, or compensate for adverse impacts on the environment are applied.[1] In the context of planning processes like Environmental Impact Assessments, this process is often guided by applying conceptual frameworks like the "mitigation hierarchy" or "mitigation sequence".[2] This generally includes the steps avoid, reduce, restore, and offset.[3] In some countries, environmental mitigation measures, including biodiversity offsetting, may be required by law.[4]

In practice, environmental mitigation measures might be implemented by establishing new habitat, restoring degraded habitat, and preserving or enhancing existing habitats to offset impacts that cannot be avoided or reduced.[5] It is also often applied with certain objectives for biodiversity levels or specific ecosystems in mind, such as "no net loss" or "net gain".[6]

Terminology

edit

Environmental mitigation can be defined in various ways depending on the institutions and countries where the term is applied, or on the framework that is used to guide mitigation. For example, it may be defined as the process by which measures to avoid, minimise, or compensate for adverse impacts on the environment are applied.[1]

According to the Business and Biodiversity Offsets Programme, mitigation is defined as "measures to reduce impacts to the point where they have no adverse effects", including avoidance, minimisation, restoration, offsetting and compensation.[7]

The term mitigation is used synonymously with biodiversity offsetting in some countries. For example, in the US, what is referred to as "biodiversity offsetting" in Australia, the UK, and South Africa comes under the term compensatory mitigation.[8] Biodiversity offsets are classified as a type of mitigation measure and are defined in the United Nations' biodiversity glossary as "measurable conservation outcomes resulting from actions designed to compensate for significant residual adverse biodiversity impacts arising from project development after appropriate prevention and mitigation measures have been taken."[9]

Background

edit

Biodiversity loss is occurring on a global scale and humans are driving this through changes in land use, exploitation of organisms, climate change, pollution, and invasive species.[10] According to WWF's Living Planet Report, these drivers are underpinned by rapid economic growth and human population growth over the past 50 years.[11]

The need to address biodiversity loss and to reconcile this with economic development so that sustainability and conservation goals can be met has motivated the development of environmental mitigation measures, like biodiversity offsetting and mitigation banking.[12] A growing awareness of this has led to the expansion of legal requirements for environmental mitigation globally - 191 of the United Nations member states have Environment Impact Assessment legislation and more than 108 countries now have policies for biodiversity offsetting, a form of environmental mitigation.[13][14]

Mitigation hierarchy

edit

The mitigation hierarchy is a tool that is commonly used to guide the application of environmental mitigation measures. It aims to manage risks through application of a hierarchy of steps.[15] The steps of the mitigation hierarchy (and terms used to describe them) vary regionally and across fields.[16] In Environmental Impact Assessments, to which it is commonly applied, the mitigation hierarchy generally includes the following steps:[17][3]

  • Avoid - measures taken to avoid creating impacts. This step is widely regarded as the most important.[18]
  • Minimise - measures to reduce impacts that cannot be avoided.
  • Restore/rehabilitate - measures to restore or rehabilitate ecosystems that have been cleared or degraded, following a development project/activity that caused impacts that could not be avoided or minimised. Restoration involves assisting the recovery of an ecosystem that has been degraded, damaged or destroyed.[19]
  • Offset - measures to compensate for residual negative impacts that cannot be avoided, minimised, or restored/rehabilitated, generally with the aim of no net loss or net gain of biodiversity.

The importance of applying these steps in order to effectively achieve conservation aims has been emphasised.[20] However, critics have argued that the use of a mitigation hierarchy approach to dealing with the negative impacts of development means that biodiversity offsetting can become the default, rather than the last resort.

An increasing number of policies apply the principles of the mitigation hierarchy to environmental impact assessments that address the impacts of businesses and governments on the environment, including on biodiversity and ecosystem services.[21] In this context, the mitigation hierarchy is usually applied with the goal of achieving no net loss. In some jurisdictions, the application of the mitigation hierarchy is required by law.[22] Requirements for compliance with the mitigation hierarchy are often embedded within regulations to govern Environmental Impact Assessments and environmental licensing systems to evaluate and mitigate the environmental impacts of economic development.[23]

Variations to the classical mitigation hierarchy have been proposed, like the Mitigation and Conservation Hierarchy and the Science Based Target Network's AR3T framework. In addition to its use for biodiversity, alternate versions of the mitigation hierarchy have been proposed for different sectors, such as waste, food waste, energy, and carbon.[16]

Environmental mitigation in the United States

edit
Further information: Mitigation banking and Conservation banking

The Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act in 1934 included the first legal expressions of the duty to minimise and compensate for negative environmental impacts.[24][25] The act was a response to the impacts of rapid urban expansion and dam building in the US on salmon and other migratory fish.[24][25] These efforts were later expanded on with the introduction of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and with other regulations that require compensatory mitigation for some projects.

In the United States, compensatory mitigation is a commonly used form of environmental mitigation and, for some projects, it is legally required under the Clean Water Act 1972. Compensatory mitigation is defined by the US Department of Agriculture as "measures to restore, create, enhance, and preserve wetlands to offset unavoidable adverse impacts."[26] Early wetland compensatory mitigation was regarded as a failure.

One of the main methods of compensatory mitigation in the US is mitigation banking, a market-based method to offset adverse impacts to wetlands (or streams and other bodies of water) that cannot be either avoided or reduced.[27] This is done by selling credits from mitigation banks, which are sites where activities to preserve, enhance, create, or restore aquatic habitat are conducted and valued in the form of credits. Developers can purchase credits from mitigation banks to offset the "debit" of negative environmental impacts with the aim of achieving no net loss of wetlands. No net loss is the policy objective used to guide compensatory mitigation in the United States, but has since expanded to other countries, where no net loss of biodiversity may be required as the aim of environmental mitigation measures like biodiversity offsets.

Conservation banking is also used in the United States in the context of endangered species under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 as a form of compensatory mitigation.[28]

Environmental crediting systems

edit
See also: Biodiversity banking and Mitigation banking

Environmental mitigation in the form of biodiversity offsetting might be conducted as part of an environmental crediting system established by governing bodies which involves allocating debits and credits. Debits occur in situations where a natural resource has been destroyed or severely impaired and credits are given in situations where a natural resource has been deemed to be improved or preserved.

Therefore, when an entity such as a business or individual has a "debit" they are required to purchase a "credit". In some cases credits are bought from "mitigation banks" which are large mitigation projects established to provide credit to multiple parties in advance of development when such compensation cannot be achieved at the development site or is not seen as beneficial to the environment. Crediting systems can allow credit to be generated in different ways. For example, in the United States, projects are valued based on what the intentions of the project are which may be to preserve, enhance, restore or create (PERC) a natural resource.

Reception

edit

Environmental mitigation systems and measures have been received in various ways.

See also

edit

References

edit
  1. ^ a b "Mitigation | Caltrans". dot.ca.gov. Retrieved 2024-08-01.
  2. ^ "Mitigation hierarchy - The Biodiversity Consultancy". www.thebiodiversityconsultancy.com. Retrieved 2024-08-01.
  3. ^ a b "Mitigation Hierarchy". Smithsonian's National Zoo and Conservation Biology Institute. Retrieved 2024-08-02.
  4. ^ "Mitigation and onsite works | Ecology by Design". | Ecology by Design. Retrieved 2024-08-01.
  5. ^ US EPA, OW (2015-06-22). "Background about Compensatory Mitigation Requirements under CWA Section 404". www.epa.gov. Retrieved 2024-08-02.
  6. ^ "Biodiversity offsets". www.iucn.org. Retrieved 2024-08-02.
  7. ^ Business and Biodiversity Offsets Programme (BBOP). 2018. Glossary. BBOP, Washington, D.C. 3rd updated edition. https://www.forest-trends.org/bbop_pubs/glossary_2018/
  8. ^ Bull, Joseph W.; Gordon, Ascelin; Watson, James E. M.; Maron, Martine (2016). Carvalho, Silvia (ed.). "Seeking convergence on the key concepts in 'no net loss' policy". Journal of Applied Ecology. 53 (6): 1686–1693. doi:10.1111/1365-2664.12726. ISSN 0021-8901.
  9. ^ "Biodiversity offsets definition| Biodiversity A-Z". biodiversitya-z.org. Retrieved 2024-08-01.
  10. ^ IPBES (2019-11-25). Summary for policymakers of the global assessment report on biodiversity and ecosystem services (Report). Zenodo. doi:10.5281/zenodo.3553579.
  11. ^ Ledger, Sophie E. H.; Loh, Jonathan; Almond, Rosamunde; Böhm, Monika; Clements, Christopher F.; Currie, Jessica; Deinet, Stefanie; Galewski, Thomas; Grooten, Monique; Jenkins, Martin; Marconi, Valentina; Painter, Brett; Scott-Gatty, Kate; Young, Lucy; Hoffmann, Michael (2023-06-01). "Past, present, and future of the Living Planet Index". npj Biodiversity. 2 (1). doi:10.1038/s44185-023-00017-3. ISSN 2731-4243.
  12. ^ Carroll, N., Fox, J. (Jessica A. ), & Bayon, R. (2008). Conservation and biodiversity banking : a guide to setting up and running biodiversity credit trading systems. Earthscan.
  13. ^ Morgan, Richard K. (2012). "Environmental impact assessment: the state of the art". Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal. 30 (1): 5–14. doi:10.1080/14615517.2012.661557. ISSN 1461-5517.
  14. ^ Bull, Joseph William; Strange, Niels (2018). "The global extent of biodiversity offset implementation under no net loss policies". Nature Sustainability. 1 (12): 790–798. doi:10.1038/s41893-018-0176-z. ISSN 2398-9629.
  15. ^ BBOP & UNEP (2010) Mitigation Hierarchy. Business and Biodiversity Offsets Programme & United Nations Environment Programme, Washington DC, USA, https://wayback.archive-it.org/12090/20230311043000/https://ec.europa.eu/environment/enveco/pdf/eftec_habitat_exec_sum.pdf
  16. ^ a b WWF (2020-04-27). "First Things First: Avoid, Reduce … and only after that–Compensate". WWF. Retrieved 2024-07-01.
  17. ^ Arlidge, William N S; Bull, Joseph W; Addison, Prue F E; Burgass, Michael J; Gianuca, Dimas; Gorham, Taylor M; Jacob, Céline; Shumway, Nicole; Sinclair, Samuel P; Watson, James E M; Wilcox, Chris; Milner-Gulland, E J (2018-05-01). "A Global Mitigation Hierarchy for Nature Conservation". BioScience. 68 (5): 336–347. doi:10.1093/biosci/biy029. ISSN 0006-3568. PMC 5925785. PMID 29731513.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: PMC format (link)
  18. ^ Phalan, Ben; Hayes, Genevieve; Brooks, Sharon; Marsh, David; Howard, Pippa; Costelloe, Brendan; Vira, Bhaskar; Kowalska, Aida; Whitaker, Samir (2018-04). "Avoiding impacts on biodiversity through strengthening the first stage of the mitigation hierarchy". Oryx. 52 (2): 316–324. doi:10.1017/S0030605316001034. ISSN 0030-6053. {{cite journal}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
  19. ^ Bullock, James M.; Aronson, James; Newton, Adrian C.; Pywell, Richard F.; Rey-Benayas, Jose M. (2011). "Restoration of ecosystem services and biodiversity: conflicts and opportunities". Trends in Ecology & Evolution. 26 (10): 541–549. doi:10.1016/j.tree.2011.06.011.
  20. ^ Mackie, Harriet (2024-04-30). "Mitigation Hierarchy: Explanation & Stages". Gaia. Retrieved 2024-08-02.
  21. ^ Milner-Gulland, E.J.; Addison, Prue; Arlidge, William N.S.; Baker, Julia; Booth, Hollie; Brooks, Thomas; Bull, Joseph W.; Burgass, Michael J.; Ekstrom, Jon; zu Ermgassen, Sophus O.S.E.; Fleming, L. Vincent; Grub, Henry M.J.; von Hase, Amrei; Hoffmann, Michael; Hutton, Jonathan (2021). "Four steps for the Earth: mainstreaming the post-2020 global biodiversity framework". One Earth. 4 (1): 75–87. doi:10.1016/j.oneear.2020.12.011. ISSN 2590-3322.
  22. ^ United Nations Environment Programme, Finance Initiative; Business and Biodiversity Offsets Programme (2010). "Biodiversity offsets and the mitigation hierarchy: a review of current application in the banking sector" (PDF). UNEP Finance Initiative. Retrieved 2024-08-02. {{cite web}}: |last2= has generic name (help)
  23. ^ Villarroya, Ana; Barros, Ana Cristina; Kiesecker, Joseph (2014-09-05). "Policy Development for Environmental Licensing and Biodiversity Offsets in Latin America". PLOS ONE. 9 (9): e107144. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0107144. ISSN 1932-6203. PMC 4156437. PMID 25191758.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: PMC format (link) CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (link)
  24. ^ a b "Environmental Mitigation Regulations | U.S. Department of the Interior". www.doi.gov. 2016-10-04. Retrieved 2024-08-02.
  25. ^ a b Veiluva, Michael. (1981). The fish and wildlife coordination act in environmental litigation. Ecology Law Quarterly, 9(3), 489-518.
  26. ^ National Resources Conservation Service, US Department of Agriculture (2024-08-02). "Conservation compliance glossary". National Resources Conservation Service, US Department of Agriculture. Retrieved 2024-08-02.
  27. ^ United States Environmental Protection Agency (2024-08-02). "Wetlands Compensatory Mitigation" (PDF). Retrieved 2024-08-02.
  28. ^ White, Thomas B.; Bull, Joseph W.; Toombs, Theodore P.; Knight, Andrew T. (2021). "Uncovering opportunities for effective species conservation banking requires navigating technical and practical complexities". Conservation Science and Practice. 3 (7). doi:10.1111/csp2.431. ISSN 2578-4854.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Manxshearwater/environmentalmitigation&oldid=1238187075"