State of knowledge regarding how we can improve adherence to the Mitigation Hierarchy, with a particular focus on the avoid stage

The Mitigation Hierarchy is the sequence of actions (avoid-minimise-restore-compensate) to anticipate and avoid adverse impacts on biodiversity and ecosystem services. The avoid or prevent stage is the first and most important stage of the mitigation hierarchy in which developers anticipate adverse impacts on biodiversity before actions or decisions are taken. Action is then taken to prevent adverse impacts by considering different options in the project location, scale, layout, technology and phasing. Avoidance is often the easier, cheaper and more effective way than trying to restore a damaged habitat or offset elsewhere. The Mitigation Hierarchy application is mandatory in France. However, the French Biodiversity Agency put a request to Eklipse to find out to what extent the adherence to and implementation of the hierarchy is correctly applied and ecosystem services are considered and well documented.

To answer this request, an Expert Working Group on Mitigation hierarchy was established to answer three main questions:

1. To gather knowledge on how ecosystem services/natural capital as concepts foster the conservation and enhancement of biodiversity within planning processes in sectors that are likely to have a direct impact on biodiversity, e.g., infrastructure development, resource use and land use change.

2. To identify EU-wide cases and practices that actively consider and address the aspect of ecosystem services in the mitigation hierarchy; for example, in natural capital assessments, impact assessments of projects, plans, programmes, policies or similar processes.

3. To develop guidance on best practices and information on:

a. If and how the consideration and operationalisation of ecosystem services can be integrated into natural capital assessments, impact assessments, and policymaking processes to enhance biodiversity conservation as well as to understand the risks and potential ecosystem service trade-offs involved.

b. What kind of outcomes, impacts, challenges, solutions, etc., may occur when the ecosystem services concept is used in the natural capital assessments, impact assessments, mitigation hierarchy and similar processes?

c. The level of replicability/transferability of suggested/known tools/guidance/processes in other countries or regions that have been used successfully in the avoid stage.

Three steps were implemented to answer the questions:

i) A systematic mapping approach was used to provide an overview of the available evidence and knowledge gaps.

ii) An Applied Policy Delphi process for deliberative consultation, discussion, and feedback.

iii) An analysis of results and conclusions based on the findings from the systematic mapping and the Applied Policy Delphi.

This research aimed to unveil whether land use planning and development in Europe is in line with the state of the art on biodiversity conservation and ecosystem services.

The report also provides evidence-based knowledge on if and how ecosystem services can be considered in projects, programmes, policies and associated impact assessments with a particular focus on the avoid stage of the mitigation hierarchy. Due to the focus of the report, restoration and compensation stages of the mitigation hierarchy were not included in the research.