The impact and compensation of offshore wind farm development: Analysing the institutional discourse from a french case study

In France, the public acceptability of marine renewable energies and their impacts on ecosystem services (ES) involves questions about compensation for stakeholders, who may perceive some of their activities and interests to be modified. This paper seeks to understand how impacts on ES are perceived by institutional stakeholders and what is expected in terms of compensation. It also seeks to identify the communities of practice affected. We focus our study on the planned offshore wind farm in the bay of Saint-Brieuc. Our results show that institutional discourse is heterogeneous, depending on sensitivities, interests, and who or what the stakeholders surveyed represent or defend. Stakeholders' discourse can be interpreted on various gradients of perception. Six distinct communities of practice have been identified, based on the impacts perceived by institutional stakeholders. Lastly, we show that the community of practice seems to be a proper level at which to study perceptions and assess the no-net-loss goal.

Of sets of offsets: Cumulative impacts and strategies for compensatory restoration

Biodiversity offsets are increasingly advocated as a flexible approach to managing the ecological costs of economic development. Arguably, however, this remains an area where policy-making has run ahead of science. A growing number of studies identify limitations of offsets in achieving ecologically sustainable outcomes, pointing to ethical and implementation issues that may undermine their effectiveness. We develop a novel system dynamic modelling framework to analyze the no net loss objective of development and biodiversity offsets. The modelling framework considers a marine-based example, where resource abundance depends on a habitat that is affected by a sequence of development projects, and biodiversity offsets are understood as habitat restoration actions. The model is used to explore the implications of four alternative offset management strategies for a regulator, which differ in how net loss is measured, and whether and how the cumulative impacts of development are considered. Our results confirm that, when it comes to offsets as a conservation tool, the devil lies in the details. Approaches to determining the magnitude of offsets required, as well as their timing and allocation among multiple developers, can result in potentially complex and undesired sets of economic incentives, with direct impacts on the ability to meet the overall objective of ecologically sustainable development. The approach and insights are of direct interest to conservation policy design in a broad range of marine and coastal contexts.