Pay monetary compensation for habitat damage remediation

Overall effectiveness category No evidence found (no assessment)
Number of studies: 0
Share Tweet Email

View assessment score

How is the evidence assessed?

Effectiveness

not assessed
Certainty

not assessed
Harms

not assessed

Calculating overall effectiveness category

Background information and definitions

Following damages to habitats and natural resources, for instance from pollution or physical disturbances, the guilty parties could be required to pay monetary compensation (Price et al. 2012). Such compensations can be direct monetary ‘fines’ for damages, payments towards the costs of environmental assessments, or reimbursement for remediation, restoration or offsetting actions. For instance, following the massive oil spill of 1991, a multibillion-dollar compensation was paid to several Gulf States for damages and restoration projects (Payne & Sand 2011; Price et al. 2012). Monetary compensation can benefit subtidal benthic invertebrates when used for remediation, restoration or offsetting projects (Jones et al. 2012).

Evidence related to offsetting projects for lost habitats, which can be undertaken through monetary compensation, are summarised under “Habitat restoration and creation – Offset habitat loss from human activity by restoring or creating habitats elsewhere”.

_{Jones D.A., Nithyanandan M. & Williams I. (2012) Sabah Al-Ahmad Sea City Kuwait: development of a sustainable manmade coastal ecsystem in a saline desert. Aquatic Ecosystem Health Management, 15, 82–90.}

_{Payne C. & Sand P. (Eds.) (2011) Gulf War Reparations and the UN Compensation Commission Environmental Liability. Oxford University Press, Oxford.}

_{Price A.R.G., Donlan M.C., Sheppard C.R.C. & Munawar M. (2012) Environmental rejuvenation of the Gulf by compensation and restoration. Aquatic Ecosystem Health & Management, 15, 7–13.}

Key messages

We found no studies that evaluated the effects of paying monetary compensation for habitat damage remediation on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.

‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this intervention during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore, we have no evidence to indicate whether or not the intervention has any desirable or harmful effects.

About key messages

Key messages provide a descriptive index to studies we have found that test this intervention.

Studies are not directly comparable or of equal value. When making decisions based on this evidence, you should consider factors such as study size, study design, reported metrics and relevance of the study to your situation, rather than simply counting the number of studies that support a particular interpretation.

Please cite as:

Lemasson, A.J., Pettit, L.R., Smith, R.K. & Sutherland, W.J. (2020) Subtidal Benthic Invertebrate Conservation. Pages 635-732 in: W.J. Sutherland, L.V. Dicks, S.O. Petrovan & R.K. Smith (eds) What Works in Conservation 2020. Open Book Publishers, Cambridge, UK.

Where has this evidence come from?

List of journals searched by synopsis

All the journals searched for all synopses

This Action forms part of the Action Synopsis:

Subtidal Benthic Invertebrate Conservation

Related Actions

Actions	Effectiveness	Studies	Category
Pay monetary compensation for habitat damage remediation Action Link	No evidence found (no assessment)	0	Synopsis Link
Remove and relocate habitat-forming (biogenic) species before onset of impactful activities Action Link	Unknown effectiveness (limited evidence)	1	Synopsis Link
Offset habitat loss from human activity by restoring or creating habitats elsewhere Action Link	Unknown effectiveness (limited evidence)	2	Synopsis Link