The application of the Swedish Environmental Code's regulations on ecological compensation in Sweden

Sammanfattning: Biodiversity loss is one of the greatest environmental challenges met on a global scale today. One approach developed to halt biodiversity loss is ecological compensation (EC), which means that damage to the natural environment caused by exploitation is compensated by the one who caused the damage. In 2015, the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency (Swedish EPA) published a report on EC, in which it was concluded that the application of EC varies between different case files and in different parts of Sweden. The following year the Swedish EPA published a handbook on EC to help increase the use of EC in Sweden and to provide a more uniform use of the regulations on EC in the Environmental Code. The aim of this thesis is to: (1) Map the use of EC and the application of the regulations on EC in the Environmental Code in permits and exemptions regarding Species Protection, Protected Areas, and Habitat Protection Areas during the period 2015–2018, to (i) identify the extent to which EC is used, and (ii) examine if and how the application differs in different parts of Sweden (2) Identify differences in the application between the periods 2011–2014 and 2015–2018 (3) Discuss if the goals of the Swedish EPA’s handbook on EC have been achieved. This has been investigated by mapping more than 7,000 decisions from the period 2015–2018 and comparing the data with the mapping from 2015 (the period 2011–2014). Linear regression analysis has been used to analyse the proportion of approvals with demand on EC and the proportion of demands with reference to the regulations on EC in the Swedish Environmental Code during each period. In addition, Wilcoxon rank sum test has been performed for comparison between the forms of protection and the two periods. The results have been discussed from a policy implementation and policy evaluation perspective. The conclusions from this thesis are: EC is only used to a limited extent and differs between different case files, regarding: to what extent EC is demanded, to what extent the Swedish Environmental Code is referred to, and to which section in the Swedish Environmental Code there is a reference. County Administrative Boards might demand EC to different extent. There are no differences between the two mappings (2011–2014 and 2015–2018) regarding to what extent EC is demanded. However, there are some uncertainties due to differences in the methods of the two mappings. Finally, the handbook on EC does not seem to have had the desired effect on the use of EC.