A platform for research: civil engineering, architecture and urbanism
A platform for research: civil engineering, architecture and urbanism
Biodiversity Offsetting: Ethical Views within Environmental Organisations in the European Union
Biodiversity offsetting is a nature conservation instrument that is increasingly used but also strongly criticised. Previous studies have identified the ethical underpinnings of this criticism, but if and how ethically-based objections exist among persons active in nongovernmental environmental organisations is not clear. This study, therefore, explores occurring ethical views through seven in-depth interviews within this group of stakeholders. Among the results, the respondents in general took a consequential ethical view, according to which both benefits and costs with biodiversity offsetting should be considered and balanced, resting on a strong biocentric or ecocentric base, albeit within an ethical frame of restrictions for when to not use the instrument, indicating a strong deontological ethical basis. Overall, the respondents did not consider that the existence of intrinsic nature values, which they recognised, nor the potential commodification of such values, constituted definite barriers to biodiversity offsetting. Moreover, they did not see that offsetting, per se, would lead to non-virtuous attitudes towards nature. On social justice issues, the views diverged significantly. However, all respondents underlined a strong need for improved governance, including to prevent biodiversity offsetting of high nature values, to restrict flexibilities, and to apply multipliers with sufficient margins.
Biodiversity Offsetting: Ethical Views within Environmental Organisations in the European Union
Biodiversity offsetting is a nature conservation instrument that is increasingly used but also strongly criticised. Previous studies have identified the ethical underpinnings of this criticism, but if and how ethically-based objections exist among persons active in nongovernmental environmental organisations is not clear. This study, therefore, explores occurring ethical views through seven in-depth interviews within this group of stakeholders. Among the results, the respondents in general took a consequential ethical view, according to which both benefits and costs with biodiversity offsetting should be considered and balanced, resting on a strong biocentric or ecocentric base, albeit within an ethical frame of restrictions for when to not use the instrument, indicating a strong deontological ethical basis. Overall, the respondents did not consider that the existence of intrinsic nature values, which they recognised, nor the potential commodification of such values, constituted definite barriers to biodiversity offsetting. Moreover, they did not see that offsetting, per se, would lead to non-virtuous attitudes towards nature. On social justice issues, the views diverged significantly. However, all respondents underlined a strong need for improved governance, including to prevent biodiversity offsetting of high nature values, to restrict flexibilities, and to apply multipliers with sufficient margins.
Biodiversity Offsetting: Ethical Views within Environmental Organisations in the European Union
Mikael Karlsson (author)
2022
Article (Journal)
Electronic Resource
Unknown
Metadata by DOAJ is licensed under CC BY-SA 1.0
Biodiversity offsetting and net positive design
| Taylor & Francis Verlag | 2016
Biodiversity offsetting and net positive design
| British Library Online Contents | 2016
Biodiversity offsetting and net positive design
| Online Contents | 2016
Biodiversity offsetting and net positive design
| Online Contents | 2016