The hitchhiker's guide to generic ecological-economic modelling of land-use-based biodiversity conservation policies

Introducing wetland offset markets under development-restoration conflicts: The role of public offset credit supply

Wetland offset markets (WOMs) are increasingly applied worldwide as powerful tools for mitigating conflicts between wetland development and restoration. Reducing benefit uncertainty is key to promoting private restoration and introducing WOMs, which necessitates sufficient and stable price signals. Given that governments are important suppliers in WOMs, this article aims to explore the role of public offset credit (OC) supply in delivering and adjusting price signals during WOM formation and evolution. A general spatial agent-based wetland offset market model is built to simulate landowners' behavior, price dynamics, and WOM evolution under different public OC supply schemes. The results show that the spontaneous formation of WOMs is a time-consuming process. Price signals of public OCs reduce price fluctuations at the early stage of WOMs. This price stabilizing effect can cause a long-term reduction in benefit uncertainty perceived by landowners. Therefore, public OCs can facilitate WOM formation either through the supply side with high supply prices or through the demand side with low supply prices. During the entire WOM evolution process, due to landowners' readaptation, cheap public OCs can cause significant market fluctuations following the ceasing of cheap public supplies. The impacts of public OC on wetland development and restoration might change over time, and the suitability of public OC supplies under different long-term wetland management preferences was analyzed. These findings can further the understanding of the process of introducing a new market mechanism, such as WOMs, and the role of the government as a supplier. The research results provide insights for WOM practices, public restoration and OC supply scheme design, and wetland development-restoration conflict coordination.

Flexibility trade-offs in conservation offsets

Conservation offsets promise cost-effective conservation of biodiversity, especially under economic and environmental change, because they represent a more flexible approach to biodiversity conservation, allowing for the economic development of ecologically valuable land provided that this development is offset by restoration of previously developed areas. The level of flexibility is determined by the trading rules. Lax rules allow for more flexibility, which promises cost savings, but will likely lead to unintended loss of biodiversity. I analyzed the trade-off between economic costs and ecological benefits (biodiversity conservation) in biodiversity offsetting with an ecological-economic model that considered the three main types of offset flexibility: spatial, temporal, and ecosystem type. I sought to examine the influence of ecological and economic conditions on offset flexibility trade-offs. Large variation in the conservation costs and small costs of habitat restoration strongly increased trading activity and reduced the ecological benefit. The ecological benefit was most sensitive to spatial flexibility when a short range of ecological interaction was considered. At a large interaction range, spatial flexibility delivered large cost savings without overly reducing the ecological benefit. Risks and time lags associated with habitat restoration favored an offsetting scheme in which credits are awarded with the initiation of restoration projects rather than their successful completion-given appropriate offsetting multipliers were chosen. Altogether, under scarce resources, the level of flexibility in an offsetting scheme should be chosen by carefully balancing ecological benefits and economic costs.