Implementing Biodiversity Offsetting in Alignment with the Mitigation Hierarchy – the Experience of Land Use Planning Law in New South Wales

IF 0.4 Q4 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES
Paul J. Govind
{"title":"Implementing Biodiversity Offsetting in Alignment with the Mitigation Hierarchy – the Experience of Land Use Planning Law in New South Wales","authors":"Paul J. Govind","doi":"10.1163/24686042-12340100","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nBiodiversity offsetting is firmly established as an integral part of environmental law regimes across the world. Whether offsets are appropriate for a particular development is determined through the application of a mitigation hierarchy. Whilst a rich vein of scholarship exists dealing with the operation of the mitigation hierarchy in principle, the implementation of the mitigation hierarchy has received comparatively small coverage. From a legal perspective this prompts questions relating to the implementation of the mitigation hierarchy as part of the planning law process. This article critically examines the issue in the context of laws regulating biodiversity loss in the state of New South Wales (NSW), Australia. The article contributes to filling this gap through a critical analysis and evaluation of the statutory regime and specific examples of relevant case law in NSW where development applications have been rejected on the basis, broadly speaking, of failing to demonstrate adherence to the requirements of the mitigation hierarchy. The primary findings presented by the article maintain that the extent to which decision-makers can influence and enhance biodiversity protection through implementation of the mitigation hierarchy is inherently limited due to the underlying rationale and values of planning law. While the decisions carry value in terms of showing what might be reasonably expected from developers in terms of demonstrating how their development applications adhere to the mitigation hierarchy, change that has broader application and can be applied in a more objective manner must be provided through legislative or regulatory change. The experience of NSW can offer some lessons for the implementation of biodiversity offsets in different jurisdictions considering the recent 15th Conference of the Parties (COP) on the Convention of Biological Diversity (CBD) and the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF).","PeriodicalId":29889,"journal":{"name":"Chinese Journal of Environmental Law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Chinese Journal of Environmental Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/24686042-12340100","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Biodiversity offsetting is firmly established as an integral part of environmental law regimes across the world. Whether offsets are appropriate for a particular development is determined through the application of a mitigation hierarchy. Whilst a rich vein of scholarship exists dealing with the operation of the mitigation hierarchy in principle, the implementation of the mitigation hierarchy has received comparatively small coverage. From a legal perspective this prompts questions relating to the implementation of the mitigation hierarchy as part of the planning law process. This article critically examines the issue in the context of laws regulating biodiversity loss in the state of New South Wales (NSW), Australia. The article contributes to filling this gap through a critical analysis and evaluation of the statutory regime and specific examples of relevant case law in NSW where development applications have been rejected on the basis, broadly speaking, of failing to demonstrate adherence to the requirements of the mitigation hierarchy. The primary findings presented by the article maintain that the extent to which decision-makers can influence and enhance biodiversity protection through implementation of the mitigation hierarchy is inherently limited due to the underlying rationale and values of planning law. While the decisions carry value in terms of showing what might be reasonably expected from developers in terms of demonstrating how their development applications adhere to the mitigation hierarchy, change that has broader application and can be applied in a more objective manner must be provided through legislative or regulatory change. The experience of NSW can offer some lessons for the implementation of biodiversity offsets in different jurisdictions considering the recent 15th Conference of the Parties (COP) on the Convention of Biological Diversity (CBD) and the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF).
根据缓解等级实施生物多样性补偿——新南威尔士州土地利用规划法的经验
生物多样性补偿已被牢固确立为世界各地环境法律制度的一个组成部分。补偿是否适用于特定开发是通过应用缓解层次结构来确定的。虽然原则上存在着丰富的关于缓解层级运作的学术脉络,但缓解层级的实施所涉及的范围相对较小。从法律角度来看,这引发了与作为规划法律程序一部分的缓解等级实施有关的问题。本文在澳大利亚新南威尔士州管理生物多样性丧失的法律背景下批判性地研究了这一问题。本文通过对新南威尔士州的法定制度和相关判例法的具体例子进行批判性分析和评估,填补了这一空白。从广义上讲,新南威尔士州因未能证明遵守缓解等级要求而拒绝了开发申请。文章提出的主要结论认为,由于规划法的基本原理和价值观,决策者通过实施缓解等级制度来影响和加强生物多样性保护的程度本身就很有限。虽然这些决策具有价值,可以表明开发商在证明其开发应用程序如何遵守缓解层次结构方面的合理预期,但必须通过立法或监管变革来提供应用范围更广、能够以更客观的方式应用的变革。考虑到最近举行的《生物多样性公约》第十五届缔约方大会和《昆明-蒙特利尔全球生物多样性框架》,新南威尔士州的经验可以为不同司法管辖区实施生物多样性补偿提供一些经验教训。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
25.00%
发文量
6
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信