LA NO PÉRDIDA NETA DE BIODIVERSIDAD: UNA FALSA SOLUCIÓN

The document critiques the concept of 'no net loss' (NPN/NNL) and biodiversity offsetting, asserting that these mechanisms provide a 'green' image for a development model dependent on fossil fuels and nature destruction. It explains that NNL does not prevent loss but rather allows destruction in one area to be balanced by protection or restoration elsewhere through financial tools like biodiversity credits. The author warns that this approach leads to land grabbing, threatens the rights of Indigenous peoples and local communities, and risks the economic valuation of nature. The briefing calls for a transformational system change and the exclusion of NNL from the new Global Biodiversity Framework, advocating for the avoidance of biodiversity loss rather than its compensation.

• No net loss (NNL) does not mean that biodiversity loss will not occur; instead, it functions as an accounting method where destruction in one location is offset by protection or restoration in another, thereby permitting the continued destruction of biodiversity.
• Biodiversity offsetting is facilitated by financial tools called compensation credits, which are accounting units representing the price of a site's environmental functions and species. This industry is well-established in the United States, which has over 400 biodiversity banks and private companies dedicated to this business.
• The use of offsetting mechanisms allows for the expansion of the dominant development model—which relies on fossil fuels and biodiversity degradation—by providing a 'green' image without implementing the structural or transformational system changes necessary to stop extinction.
• The annual market for biodiversity compensation is estimated between 2.4 and 4 trillion dollars, with a potential value of 45 trillion dollars, as approximately 9% of global ecosystems could be restored using these mechanisms.
• Biodiversity offsetting creates significant risks, including land grabbing and the violation of land use rights for local communities and Indigenous Peoples. In many countries, there is insufficient available land to fully compensate for expected future biodiversity losses.
• The document argues that the concept of 'equivalence' in offsetting is impossible because biodiversity is not merely a sum of interchangeable units, but is also tied to culture and spirituality.

APA

Collins, A. (n.d.). LA NO PÉRDIDA NETA DE BIODIVERSIDAD: UNA FALSA SOLUCIÓN. Friends of the Earth International. https://www.foei.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/La-no-perdida-neta-de-biodiversidad_Amigos-de-la-tierra-internacional.pdf

Chicago

Collins, Amelia. LA NO PÉRDIDA NETA DE BIODIVERSIDAD: UNA FALSA SOLUCIÓN. Friends of the Earth International, n.d. https://www.foei.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/La-no-perdida-neta-de-biodiversidad_Amigos-de-la-tierra-internacional.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Collins |first1=Amelia |title=LA NO PÉRDIDA NETA DE BIODIVERSIDAD: UNA FALSA SOLUCIÓN |publisher=Friends of the Earth International |url=https://www.foei.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/La-no-perdida-neta-de-biodiversidad_Amigos-de-la-tierra-internacional.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{collinsndprdida, author = {Collins, Amelia}, title = {{LA NO PÉRDIDA NETA DE BIODIVERSIDAD: UNA FALSA SOLUCIÓN}}, institution = {Friends of the Earth International}, url = {https://www.foei.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/La-no-perdida-neta-de-biodiversidad_Amigos-de-la-tierra-internacional.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }