Development by design: blending landscape-level planning with the mitigation hierarchy

被引:176
|
作者
Kiesecker, Joseph M. [1 ]
Copeland, Holly [2 ]
Pocewicz, Amy [2 ]
McKenney, Bruce [3 ]
机构
[1] Nature Conservancy, Ft Collins, CO USA
[2] Nature Conservancy, Lander, WY USA
[3] Nature Conservancy, Charlottesville, VA USA
关键词
OFFSETS; IRREPLACEABILITY; REQUIREMENTS; SITES;
D O I
10.1890/090005
中图分类号
Q14 [生态学(生物生态学)];
学科分类号
071012 ; 0713 ;
摘要
Compensatory mitigation, or biodiversity offsets, provide a mechanism for maintaining or enhancing environmental values in situations where development is being planned, despite detrimental environmental impacts. Offsets are generally intended as an option for addressing any remaining environmental impacts of a development plan, after efforts have been made to avoid, minimize, or restore on-site impacts. Although offset programs require that developers adhere to the mitigation hierarchy to avoid, minimize, and restore biodiversity on-site before considering an offset for residual impacts, no quantitative guidelines exist for this decision-making process. What criteria are needed to require that impacts be minimized or avoided altogether? Here, we examine how conservation planning can provide a way to address this issue. By blending landscape-level conservation planning with application of the mitigation hierarchy, we can ensure that the use of biodiversity offsets is consistent with sustainable development practices.
引用
收藏
页码:261 / 266
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Planning for Implementation: Landscape-Level Restoration Planning in an Agricultural Setting
    Thompson, Bill A.
    [J]. RESTORATION ECOLOGY, 2011, 19 (01) : 5 - 13
  • [2] Making space: Putting landscape-level mitigation into practice in Mongolia
    Heiner, Michael
    Galbadrakh, Davaa
    Batsaikhan, Nyamsuren
    Bayarjargal, Yunden
    Oakleaf, James
    Tsogtsaikhan, Battsengel
    Evans, Jeffrey
    Kiesecker, Joseph
    [J]. CONSERVATION SCIENCE AND PRACTICE, 2019, 1 (10)
  • [3] Incorporating Archaeological Resources in Landscape-Level Planning and Management
    Doelle, William H.
    Barker, Pat
    Cushman, David
    Heilen, Michael
    Herhahn, Cynthia
    Rieth, Christina
    [J]. ADVANCES IN ARCHAEOLOGICAL PRACTICE, 2016, 4 (02): : 118 - 131
  • [4] Integrating fire risk considerations in landscape-level forest planning
    Gonzalez-Olabarria, Jose-Ramon
    Pukkala, Timo
    [J]. FOREST ECOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT, 2011, 261 (02) : 278 - 287
  • [5] The road towards wildlife friendlier infrastructure: Mitigation planning through landscape-level priority settings and species connectivity frameworks
    Paemelaere, Evi A. D.
    Mejia, Angela
    Quintero, Simon
    Hallett, Matthew
    Li, Fernando
    Wilson, Asaph
    Barnabas, Howard
    Albert, Andrew
    Li, Rhomayne
    Baird, Leon
    Pereira, Gerard
    Melville, Jeremy
    [J]. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REVIEW, 2023, 99
  • [6] Bigger is better: Improved nature conservation and economic returns from landscape-level mitigation
    Kennedy, Christina M.
    Miteva, Daniela A.
    Baumgarten, Leandro
    Hawthorne, Peter L.
    Sochi, Kei
    Polasky, Stephen
    Oakleaf, James R.
    Uhlhorn, Elizabeth M.
    Kiesecker, Joseph
    [J]. SCIENCE ADVANCES, 2016, 2 (07):
  • [7] Combining Landscape-Level Conservation Planning and Biodiversity Offset Programs: A Case Study
    Jared G. Underwood
    [J]. Environmental Management, 2011, 47 : 121 - 129
  • [8] Combining Landscape-Level Conservation Planning and Biodiversity Offset Programs: A Case Study
    Underwood, Jared G.
    [J]. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT, 2011, 47 (01) : 121 - 129
  • [9] Landscape-level thresholds and newt conservation
    Denoel, Mathieu
    Ficetola, G. Francesco
    [J]. ECOLOGICAL APPLICATIONS, 2007, 17 (01) : 302 - 309
  • [10] Feedbacks and landscape-level vegetation dynamics
    Bowman, David M. J. S.
    Perry, George L. W.
    Marston, J. B.
    [J]. TRENDS IN ECOLOGY & EVOLUTION, 2015, 30 (05) : 255 - 260