@article{fdi:010065416,
  title = {{T}owards a comparative and critical analysis of biodiversity banks},
  author = {{F}roger, {G}. and {M}enard, {S}. and {M}{\'e}ral, {P}hilippe},
  editor = {},
  language = {{ENG}},
  abstract = {{T}he emergence of the concept of ecosystem services has triggered considerable discussion about the appropriate fools and institutional arrangements to provide ecosystem services. {T}hese tools include among others biodiversity "banks" that have been developed to provide biodiversity units or credits to offset environmental damage caused by economic development. {S}o far, little attention has been focused on the design of offset schemes and on the variety of their institutional forms. {T}he purpose of this article is to analyse the development of biodiversity banking, to evaluate its implementation to date in the light of various institutional arrangements and to summarise the outstanding theoretical and practical problems. {T}his article distinguishes and maps different biodiversity banking mechanisms based on different characteristics, in particular statement content, ecosystem services assessment and the nature of biodiversity banking. {O}ur mapping exercise differentiates several main categories of biodiversity banks: private non-commercial, private commercial, hybrid commercial, public commercial and public non-commercial. {T}his article presents concrete illustrations from existing biodiversity banking systems ({US}, {A}ustralia, {F}rance and {G}ermany) and then analyses advantages and limits of each mechanism (and its concrete example).},
  keywords = {{O}ffsets ; {E}conomic incentives ; {I}nstitutional arrangements ; {B}iodiversity banks ; {C}onservation ; {D}evelopment ; {ETATS} {UNIS} ; {AUSTRALIE} ; {FRANCE} ; {ALLEMAGNE}},
  booktitle = {},
  journal = {{E}cosystem {S}ervices},
  volume = {15},
  numero = {},
  pages = {152--161},
  ISSN = {2212-0416},
  year = {2015},
  DOI = {10.1016/j.ecoser.2014.11.018},
  URL = {https://www.documentation.ird.fr/hor/fdi:010065416},
}