The document discusses the impact of formal regulation and biodiversity offset policies on the rate of deforestation in Australia. It aims to quantify deforestation rates from 1972-2011, examine the effects of climatic, economic, social and policy drivers on rates, and determine if "market based" offset policies have had different impacts than "command and control" regulation. Preliminary analysis of satellite imagery data shows forest cover changes over time and an initial deforestation rate calculation. Next steps include addressing data issues and time series modeling to disentangle the various drivers of deforestation.

1. The impact of formal regulation and
offset policy on the rate of deforestation
in Australia
SHE XIX Conference
Australian National University, Canberra, 5-8 February 2013
Megan C. Evans1*, Andrew K. Macintosh2, Philip Gibbons1
1 Fenner
School of Environment and Society, ANU College of Medicine, Biology and Environment
2 ANU Centre for Climate Law and Policy, ANU College of Law

2. Loss of biodiversity is still a problem (surprise!)
• Habitat loss largest threat to biodiversity in
Australia (Evans et al. 2011 BioScience) and globally
• Deforestation rate climbing:
2.7 million ha/year (1990 to 2000) to 6.3 million
ha/year (2000 to 2005) (Lindquist et al. 2012)
Source: Hoffman et al. 2010 Science
2

3. Environmental policy
Public
Regulation Suasion Economic
provision
• Protected areas • Native vegetation • Voluntary guidelines, • Financial incentives
(NRS) legislation e.g codes of practice • Market based
• Caring for Country Vegetation Management • Traditions and norms instruments (MBIs)
Act 1999 (Qld)
• EPBC Act 1999
Friction Quantity Price
based based based
• Revolving funds • Biodiversity • Reverse auctions
offsets e.g BushTender
e.g BushBroker (Vic), Environmental
(Vic), BioBanking Stewardship
(NSW) Program (Aus)
3
Adapted from MJA 2010 and Coggan et al. 2008

4. Environmental policy
Public
provision
Regulation Suasion Economic
?
Vegetation
Management Act
• Protected areas • Native vegetation • Voluntary guidelines, • Financial incentives
1999 (Qld)
(NRS) legislation codes of practice • Market based
Vegetation Management
• Caring for Country • EPBC Act 1999 • Traditions and norms instruments (Qld)
Act 1999 (MBIs)
1987: permit to clear Friction Quantity Price
required under Soil based based based
Native
and Land Vegetation
Conservation Act Regulation
• Revolving funds • Biodiversity • Reverse auctions
2005 (NSW)
(SALCA) 1945
offsets e.g BushTender
e.g BushBroker Native Environmental
(Vic), Vegetation
(Vic), BioBanking Stewardship
Retention (NVR)
Native Vegetation (NSW) Program (Aus)
controls under the
Act 1991 (SA) Planning and
4
Environment Act 1987
Adapted from MJA 2010 and Coggan et al. 2008 (Vic)

5. Environmental policy
Public
Regulation Suasion Economic
provision
• Protected areas • Native vegetation • Voluntary guidelines, • Financial incentives
(NRS) legislation codes of practice • Market based
• Caring for Country • EPBC Act 1999 • Traditions and norms instruments (MBIs)
Friction Quantity Price
based based based
• Revolving funds • Biodiversity • Reverse auctions
offsets e.g BushTender
e.g BushBroker (Vic), Environmental
(Vic), BioBanking Stewardship
(NSW) Program (Aus)
5
Adapted from MJA 2010 and Coggan et al. 2008

6. Environmental policy
Public
Regulation Suasion Economic
provision
• Protected areas • Native vegetation • Voluntary guidelines, • Financial incentives
(NRS) legislation codes of practice • Market based
• Caring for Country • EPBC Act 1999 • Traditions and norms instruments (MBIs)
Friction Quantity Price
based based based
• Revolving funds • Biodiversity • Reverse auctions
offsets e.g BushTender
e.g BushBroker (Vic), Environmental
(Vic), BioBanking Stewardship
(NSW) Program (Aus)
6
Adapted from MJA 2010 and Coggan et al. 2008

7. A tree for a tree:
Biodiversity offsetting
• Broad goal is to achieve no net loss or net gain of
biodiversity
• Rapid growth in uptake: policies exist in 45 countries,
and in development in another 27
• Global annual market size is $1.8-$2.9 billion
Total Wetland and Stream
Mitigation Banks (USA)
1980-2009
Source: Gibbons and
Lindenmayer (2007)
Madsen et al. (2010). State of the Biodiversity Markets Report
7

8. No net loss?
“...no net loss of native vegetation within
Australia by July 2001.”
“ It is quite clear that this target will not be met…”
ACF, Natural Heritage Trust Annual Report 1998/99
Source: Australia State of the
Environment 2006

9. Evaluation of environmental policy
“…evaluation can cut through and resolve data-free debates
about the relative merits of different approaches”
Bottrill & Pressey (2012)
“If we want to ensure that our limited resources make a
difference, we must accept that testing hypotheses about what
policies protect biological diversity requires the same scientific
rigor and state-of-the-art methods that we invest in testing
ecological hypotheses”
Ferraro & Pattanayek (2006)
9

10. No net loss?
10

11. No net loss?
• Timing is important
• Offset schemes and regulation are interrelated
• Other factors?
– Bartel (2004) observed that land clearance rates had declined in some
states following the enactment of legislation, but they had also fallen in
states with little or no regulation.
• Socio-economic drivers, rainfall, arable land remaining
– Suggested that best way to examine impact of policy is to analyse
satellite imagery
Bartel, R. L. (2004). Satellite Imagery and Land Clearance Legislation: A Picture of Regulatory
Efficacy? Australasian Journal of Natural Resources Law and Policy, 9(1), 1–31.
11

12. Evaluation of environmental policy
…crucial, yet rare
• Some work on deforestation
inside/outside PAs
• Extensive literature on drivers of
deforestation
• Few (if any) quantitatively analyse
impact of policy timing
Ewers, R. M., Laurance, W. F., & Souza, C. M. (2008).
Temporal fluctuations in Amazonian deforestation rates.
FAO. State of the World’s Forests 2012. Environmental Conservation, 35(04), 303–310
12

13. Aims of this study
1. Quantify rate of deforestation in Australia from
1972-2011
2. Disentangle effects of climatic, economic & social
drivers from the regulatory & policy impacts on
deforestation rate
3. Determine whether ‘market based’ offset policies have
significantly different impact on deforestation as
compared to ‘command and control’ regulation
13

14. Forest Extent & Change
• Derived from Landsat satellite
imagery; discriminates between
forest and non-forest cover
• Used for international carbon
accounting obligations
• A forest is defined as vegetation
with a minimum 20 per cent
canopy cover, potentially
reaching 2 metres high and a
Figure 1: Map of available forest extent and
minimum area of 0.2 hectares change products. Areas shaded yellow are the
intensive landuse zone.
14

15. Forest Extent & Change
• Source: Department of Climate Change & Energy Efficiency (DCCEE)
– ~ 700 tiles (39 years, 20 epochs)
• Reclassified data from:
– 0 (no forest), 1 (forest), to:
– 0 (no forest), 1 (primary forest), 2 (regrowth forest)
1972 1977 1977_reclass
15

16. Forest Extent & Change
• GIS analysis using R raster package
• Calculated forest cover according to:
– State
– Land Tenure
• Leasehold, Freehold, Public
– Land Use
• Conservation & Natural Environments
• Cropping
• Forestry
• Mining
• Other Agriculture
• Pasture
• Residential
16

17. Initial results
Forest cover
17

18. Initial results
Deforestation rate
18

19. Next steps
• Data issues
– 1989 satellite changeover
– Uneven temporal gaps
– Clarify whether data is appropriately ‘masked’ – e.g forestry, fires
• Covariate selection
• Time series modelling
19

20. Thanks
Email: megan.evans@anu.edu.au
My blog/website: economical-ecology.com
Twitter: @megcevans
www.nerpdecisions.edu.au
www.ceed.edu.au

21. References
Bartel, R. L. (2004). Satellite Imagery and Land Clearance Legislation: A Picture of Regulatory
Efficacy? Australasian Journal of Natural Resources Law and Policy, 9(1), 1–31.
Bottrill, M. C., & Pressey, R. L. (2012). The effectiveness and evaluation of conservation planning.
Conservation Letters, 5, no–no. doi:10.1111/j.1755-263X.2012.00268.x
Coggan, A. (2008). Best practice mechanism design and implementation: Concepts and Case Studies
for Biodiversity.
Evans, M. C., Watson, J. E. M., Fuller, R. A., Venter, O., Bennett, S. C., Marsack, P. R., &
Possingham, H. P. (2011). The Spatial Distribution of Threats to Species in Australia. BioScience,
61(4), 281–289. doi:10.1525/bio.2011.61.4.8
Ewers, R. M., Laurance, W. F., & Souza, C. M. (2008). Temporal fluctuations in Amazonian
deforestation rates. Environmental Conservation, 35(04), 303–310. Food and Agriculture Organization
of the United Nations. (2012). State of the World’s Forests. Rome.
Ferraro, P. J., & Pattanayak, S. K. (2006). Money for nothing? A call for empirical evaluation of
biodiversity conservation investments. Plos Biology, 4, 482–488. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0040105
Lindquist, E. J., D’Annunzio, R., Gerrand, A., MacDicken, K., Achard, F., Beuchle, R., Brink, A., et al.
(2012). Global forest land-use change 1990 - 2005. Rome. Marsden Jacob Associates. (2010).
Review of the Environmental Stewardship Program.
The R Foundation for Statistical Computing. (2012). R: A language and environment for statistical
computing version 2.7.2. Vienna, Austria.
21