z-logo
Premium
The ethics of offsetting nature
Author(s) -
Ives Christopher D,
Bekessy Sarah A
Publication year - 2015
Publication title -
frontiers in ecology and the environment
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 3.918
H-Index - 164
eISSN - 1540-9309
pISSN - 1540-9295
DOI - 10.1890/150021
Subject(s) - biodiversity , harm , neglect , obligation , natural resource economics , environmental ethics , commodity , business , environmental resource management , economics , environmental planning , political science , geography , ecology , law , biology , psychology , philosophy , psychiatry , finance
Biodiversity offsetting is transforming conservation practice around the world. Development activities that degrade or destroy biodiversity at one location are now increasingly acceptable because of compensatory environmental gains generated elsewhere. This change represents a major shift in how nature is protected, and yet its philosophical justification has received little attention. We argue that biodiversity offsetting aligns most easily with a utilitarian ethic, where outcomes rather than actions are the focus. However, offsetting schemes often neglect to account for the multiple values that people assign to biodiversity – including unique, place‐based values. Furthermore, the implications of defining nature as a tradeable commodity may affect our sense of obligation to protect biodiversity. Ironically, offsetting may exacerbate environmental harm because it erodes ethical barriers based on moral objections to the destruction of biodiversity. By failing to consider the ethical implications of biodiversity offsetting, we risk compromising the underlying motivations for protecting nature.

This content is not available in your region!

Continue researching here.

Having issues? You can contact us here