In a short apologia, Joseph Bull claims that offsets in general, and biodiversity offsets in particular, are unfairly criticised by unscientific moralists and are, on the contrary, unquestioningly essential adn unavoidable to ‘some’ unspecified extent. His claim rests on three main arguments: offsetting is a necessity under existing internatinoal agreements, it is essential for closing the so-called finance gap, and it is already being undertaken when quantifying conservation losses and gains and so unavoidable. In this short discussion paper, each of these arguments is critically reviewed and shown to be flawed. A range of underlying issues are raised concerning Bull’s implicit value theory, ethics of compensation and appeal to mainstream orthodox economics. The neutral objective scientific stance he portrays is also brought into question.
An independent think tank researching the financialisation of environmental policies