|
Biodiversity regulation exists largely in the US and Australia (with some local or regional programs in
other countries) and operates on the concept of compensatory credits. This concept means that habitat impacts that
cannot be avoided must be 'offset' by an equal amount of restoration and protection in an area that
has substantially similar ecological value.
Regulatory regimes create the demand. On the supply side, land owners now have an opportunity to
receive compensation (in the form of credits) to 'do the right thing', which is particularly important in
harder economic times when reaping value from land is even more essential.
 |
| Burrowing Owl |
The more robust the market structure is, the more chance it will be taken up by other jurisdictions.
With quality registry infrastructure in place, there are many opportunities to streamline regulatory
processes, provide more accurate market information, encourage third party brokers into the market,
and better facilitate transactions in both the regulatory market and the emerging voluntary market.
In the United States, 'habitat banking' markets were established under the Clean Water Act and the
Endangered Species Act, effectively capping habitat loss at the federal level.
While 35 years old, the endangered species habitat and wetland mitigation banking markets really
only started to take shape in the mid 1990s (in California), and are starting to develop and gather
momentum. At the same, more fish, wildlife and habitat are disappearing every year and now, more
than ever, these markets need to be scaleable, efficient, transparent and replicable in other
jurisdictions to complement other regulatory, voluntary and philanthropic measures.
The principles of 'avoid, reduce then mitigate' remain fundamental to these markets and while
biodiversity banking and wetlands mitigation banking is just one tool to mitigate adverse impacts,
these markets appear to be a powerful tool to engagmaking as to land use.
Click here for more on US markets.
These markets have long-term, strong (bipartisan) political support and a robust regulatory
framework. The various regulatory drivers and mechanisms are creating a variety of eco-credits
including:
- Compensatory wetland mitigation credits (Clean Water Act with a goal of "no overall net loss" of
wetland acres)
- Conservation / species banking credits (Endangered Species Act, Fish & Wildlife Acts, Californian
state laws) for more on conservation banking in the US click here.
- Water quality credits (discharge and emission regulators)
- Natural Resource Damage credits (Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act).
With a range of regulatory drivers comes a range of regulatory agencies involved in enforcing the
relevant legislation including (at a federal level - there are of course state regulators also):
- USACE (United States Army Core of Engineers - "the Corps") administers the Clean Water Act
- USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency) oversees the Clean Water Act
- NRCS (National Resources Conservation Service) administers the Food Security Act and is
involved in water standards and funding various US environmental initiatives
- USFWS (United States Fish & Wildlife Service) enforces and administers the Endangered Species
Act
- NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Fisheries Service) for marine species
only.
For more information see the resources page.

|
High level diagram of the legislation & regulators involved (from the Californian
perspective). Click to enlarge |
New markets based on the U.S. models are now developing in New South Wales (Australia) and
Europe. New South Wales officially launched its BioBanking scheme on 1 July 2008.
For more information see the resources page.
While less advanced than the U.S. and Australia in this area, governments in Europe have also
experimented with market-based mechanisms for incentivizing biodiversity conservation and other
countries are starting to see the importance of this market structure.
There are also smaller local schemes in other countries such as New Zealand where under the NZ
Resource Management Act 1991, Environment Waikato (the regional council with regulatory
authority) has capped the amount of nitrogen entering the lake. Each land use and hectare of land in
the lake Taupo watershed will have a nitrogen discharge limit and togher with a trading program
focusing on agricultural sources, aims to maintain water quality at 2001 levels.
For more information see the resources page.
|