Biodiversity offsets: case studies in limestone mining sector in Brazil

Biodiversity is responsible for maintaining benefits that society obtains from ecosystems. Economic activities such as mining often cause loss and fragmentation of habitat, with consequences for the functioning of ecosystems.... [ view full abstract ]

Biodiversity is responsible for maintaining benefits that society obtains from ecosystems. Economic activities such as mining often cause loss and fragmentation of habitat, with consequences for the functioning of ecosystems. In response to the increasing loss of native vegetation and biodiversity, a growing number of countries have adopted “offsetting” policies that seek to balance local habitat destruction by restoring, enhancing and/or protecting. In this context, biodiversity offset is a mechanism that counteracts adverse effects of projects, and is applied to adverse effects that can not be avoided by applying the mitigation hierarchy, as recommended by guidelines such as IFC's Socioenvironmental Sustainability Performance Standards. Although the offset is already a consolidated instrument in the environmental licensing process in Brazil and in other countries, there are questions about the effectiveness of the compensatory measures regarding the ability to actually offset the losses in terms of biodiversity. Looking to analyse whether the compensation practiced in Brazil is able to compensate losses of biodiversity, three offset projects practiced by limestone mining enterprises, located in the Atlantic Forest domain, in the Southeast of Brazil, are discussed in the light of international recommendations for biodiversity offset to verify the possible adherence or to identify the main gaps regarding the international principles and recommendations of good practices in biodiversity offset. Results suggests that, although Brazilian offset is focused on protection, replacement and restoration of affected habitat, there is some equivalency between compensation and international recommendations for biodiversity offsets. However, improvements are needed in terms of stakeholder participation in offsets design, which could result in gains for the affected beneficiaries of ecosystem services, which were impacted negatively by the project. The results of the research indicate that the offset practiced by the analysed cases do not guarantee the biodiversity loss, because focus only on government determinations, lack of consideration of species richness or monitoring of biodiversity practices.