Ecological compensation is an example of a trade-off whereby loss of natural values is remedied or offset by a corresponding compensatory action on the same site or elsewhere, determined through the process of Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). Ecological compensation actions are often criticised for having low levels of compliance: meaning that they are achieved only partially or not at all, while development activity proceeds with much greater certainty. Our research investigated compliance with 245 conditions relating to ecological compensation across 81 case studies across New Zealand under the Resource Management Act 1991. Our results show that present tools and practice in New Zealand are not adequately securing the necessary benefits from ecological compensation requirements, with 35.2% of requirements not being achieved. Significant variation in non-compliance with ecological compensation occurs between different activities, applicant types and condition types, while critical variables within the planning process influence levels of compliance. Our research demonstrates the importance of understanding the nature of non-compliance and of providing a consistent and robust decision-making framework for the consideration of ecological compensation in practice