IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/socarx/2pqyx_v1.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Local People’s Preferences for Housing Development-associated Biodiversity Net Gain in England

Author

Listed:
  • Butler, Amber
  • Groom, Ben
  • Milner-Gulland, E.J.

Abstract

Biodiversity Net Gain (BNG) in England is a recently-legislated mechanism for ensuring that the biodiversity impacts of new developments are appropriately mitigated. Despite the assumption that some elements, such as the preference for locally-implemented offsetting of impacts, should provide benefits for people, the policy's focus is on ecological outcomes. The social feasibility of BNG guidelines has not been properly tested, nor has their generalisability across people and places. Understanding the preferences of local project-affected people for Biodiversity Net Gain and incorporating this into both policy and project-level decision-making is a critical step for managing trade-offs ex-ante, thereby maximising the likelihood that BNG projects benefit people’s wellbeing. Using a choice experiment of hypothetical BNG projects in the context of housing development we examine the trade-offs between the features of the BNG project: distance from home; biodiversity level (species richness); off-site vs on-site biodiversity provision; public access to the offset site; and a non-biodiversity feature (% affordable housing). We found that public access and species richness were proportionally more important than proximity and the % of affordable housing. These preferences were of course heterogeneous and determined by sociopsychological variables, e.g., captured in the notions of "attachment to place", connectedness to nature, socio-economic variables and rural versus urban location. The preferences expressed identify a range of BNG approaches that respect peoples' preferences and trade-offs, noting that acceptance of BNG depends to a great degree on outcomes that are either not an explicit priority (i.e., species richness) or are disincentivised (i.e., public access) by current BNG policy.

Suggested Citation

  • Butler, Amber & Groom, Ben & Milner-Gulland, E.J., 2025. "Local People’s Preferences for Housing Development-associated Biodiversity Net Gain in England," SocArXiv 2pqyx_v1, Center for Open Science.
  • Handle: RePEc:osf:socarx:2pqyx_v1
    DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/2pqyx_v1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/679792fb312ea175beb52dfb/
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31219/osf.io/2pqyx_v1?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bull, Joseph & Baker, Julia & Griffiths, Victoria Frances & Jones, Julia & Milner-Gulland, E.J., 2018. "Ensuring No Net Loss for people as well as biodiversity: good practice principles," SocArXiv 4ygh7, Center for Open Science.
    2. Virna Vaneza Gutiérrez & Luis Abdón Cifuentes & Nicolás C. Bronfman, 2015. "Factors Influencing Compensation Demanded for Environmental Impacts Generated by Different Economic Activities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(7), pages 1-20, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sandra Cortés & Soledad Burgos & Héctor Adaros & Boris Lucero & Lesliam Quirós-Alcalá, 2021. "Environmental Health Risk Perception: Adaptation of a Population-Based Questionnaire from Latin America," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(16), pages 1-13, August.
    2. Strazzera, Elisabetta & Meleddu, Daniela & Atzori, Rossella, 2022. "A hybrid choice modelling approach to estimate the trade-off between perceived environmental risks and economic benefits," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    3. Isabel L. Jones & Joseph W. Bull, 2020. "Major dams and the challenge of achieving “No Net Loss” of biodiversity in the tropics," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 28(2), pages 435-443, March.
    4. Griffiths, Victoria F. & Bull, Joseph W. & Baker, Julia & Infield, Mark & Roe, Dilys & Nalwanga, Dianah & Byaruhanga, Achilles & Milner-Gulland, E.J., 2020. "Incorporating local nature-based cultural values into biodiversity No Net Loss strategies," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 128(C).
    5. Booth, Hollie & Milner-Gulland, E.J. & Starkey, Malcolm, 2023. "Operationalizing transformative change for business in the context of nature positive," OSF Preprints vk2hq, Center for Open Science.
    6. Milner-Gulland, E.J. & Addison, Prue & Arlidge, William & Baker, Julia & Booth, Hollie & Brooks, Thomas & Bull, Joseph & Burgass, Michael & Ekstrom, Jonathan & zu Ermgassen, Sophus Olav Sven Emil, 2020. "Four Steps for the Earth: mainstreaming the post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework," SocArXiv gjps6_v1, Center for Open Science.
    7. Booth, Hollie & Milner-Gulland, E.J. & McCormick, Nadine & Starkey, Malcolm, 2023. "Operationalizing transformative change for business in the context of nature positive," OSF Preprints vk2hq_v1, Center for Open Science.
    8. Souza, Barbara A. & Rosa, Josianne C.S. & Siqueira-Gay, Juliana & Sánchez, Luis E., 2021. "Mitigating impacts on ecosystem services requires more than biodiversity offsets," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 105(C).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:osf:socarx:2pqyx_v1. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://arabixiv.org .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.