<
https://theconversation.com/developers-arent-paying-enough-to-offset-impacts-on-koalas-and-other-endangered-species-208587>
"Developers are commonly required to “offset” their impacts on biodiversity.
They can do this in two ways.
They can compensate directly for the biodiversity loss their development causes
by taking action to improve habitat and biodiversity elsewhere. It is common,
though, for developers to make payments in lieu of creating the required
biodiversity offsets themselves. It’s the same idea as when you pay to offset
your flight’s carbon emissions.
In Queensland and New South Wales developers settle almost all biodiversity
offsets required of them by making payments into an offset fund. These funds
are used to create the required biodiversity gains on the developer’s behalf.
In NSW, for example, the Biodiversity Conservation Trust does this work.
But what are the pros and cons of allowing developers simply to buy their way
out of their offset obligations? Research published today shows these so-called
“financial settlement offsets” could be highly problematic. They might even
worsen the decline of threatened species."
Cheers,
*** Xanni ***
--
mailto:xanni@xanadu.net Andrew Pam
http://xanadu.com.au/ Chief Scientist, Xanadu
https://glasswings.com.au/ Partner, Glass Wings
https://sericyb.com.au/ Manager, Serious Cybernetics
