Go to the content. | Move to the navigation | Go to the site search | Go to the menu | Contacts | Accessibility

| Create Account

Chavarria Resendez, Ariadna (2017) Biodiversity offsetting: valuation aspects and development of
environmental compensation tools.
[Ph.D. thesis]

Full text disponibile come:

[img]
Preview
PDF Document (PhD on Biodiversity Banking in Europe) - Submitted Version
9Mb

Abstract (english)

The loss of ecosystem functions and services related to the land-use change has become a concerning issue in Europe. The European Union has committed to reducing the ecosystems loss through the Biodiversity and the No Net Loss (NNL) Strategies (2012). These strategies propose instruments to ensure NNL, and invite the Members States (MS) to implement novel forms to compensate the loss over the environment, as for instance biodiversity offsetting mechanisms (BO) (European Commission 2011, Conway et al., 2013b; Turcker et al., 2014; Froger and Hrabanski, 2015).

There are mature and nascent biodiversity offsetting schemes addressing the loss of ecosystem functions and services due to the adverse environmental effects of developments project. Biodiversity Banking mechanisms are Market-Based Instruments for biodiversity offsetting (MBI) developed to offer a more cost- and ecological-effective solution to compensate the environment through the acquisition of credits delivering ex-ante, and often, in-kind and off-site conservation actions. Biodiversity banks were developed by the first time in the 1970’s in USA and their pioneer appearance and implementation for conservation has inspired countries to develop a similar market and non-market based schemes to address ecological compensation of development projects. However, little has been studied from a scientific point of view on how environmental compensation can occur through a market-based mechanism.

The overall aim of this research is to extend the scientific knowledge on the use of Biodiversity Offsetting Schemes as an instrument to regulate and deliver compensation for environmental impacts. More specific, this research provides a scientific background on the ecological impacts assessment methods and the institutions and policies of existing and nascent offsetting mechanism in the USA and Europe. This thesis presents an overview the current European initiatives and Directives, and the Members States regulations on environmental impacts compensation. Also, this thesis analyses the empirical use of the USA Conservation and Conservation Banking to identify the key institutional, political and ecological components needed for the scheme functioning. Lastly, this thesis presents a crossed-analysis between the EU and the USA schemes practices to discuss the theory-practices gap of these schemes. To conclude this thesis analyses the Italian Member State regulations for environmental impacts compensation to finalise with a proposal of actions to develop a market-based mechanism for biodiversity compensation that can be applied in Italy and other European countries.

Abstract (italian)

L’impoverimento degli ecosistemi e del loro funzionamento a causa dell’utilizzo incontrollato dei territori, sta diventando, sempre più, un tema estremamente rilevante in Europa. L'Unione Europea si è impegnata a ridurre tale impoverimento degli ecosistemi attraverso la Strategia per la Biodiversità e la quella del No Net Loss (2012). Queste strategie propongono gli strumenti necessari a garantire il mantenimento del funzionamento degli ecosistemi, e invitano gli Stati Membri (SM) ad implementare meccanismi innovativi che possano compensare tali perdite ambientali, quali per esempio il Biodiversity Offsetting (BO) (si veda in merito: European Commission 2011, Conway et al., 2013b; Turcker et al., 2014; Froger and Hrabanski, 2015).

Nel mondo esistono numerosi e crescenti schemi di compensazione sulla biodiversità che trattano il degrado dei servizi ecosistemici, specialmente quelli che si soffermano sugli effetti nocivi per l’ambiente di taluni piani di sviluppo. I meccanismi basati su transazioni di mercato sono stati sviluppati negli USA per offrire una soluzione più efficace in termini ecologici ed economici. Questi meccanismi di mercato funzionano attraverso l'acquisto di crediti di habitat che forniscono azioni di conservazione a titolo preventivo, e spesso, in modalità like-for-like in luoghi diversi al luogo impattato. Le banche biodiversità sono il migliore esempio di meccanismo compensativo di mercato. Queste banche sono state sviluppate negli anni Settanta negli USA, e la loro pionieristica comparsa, unitamente all’obiettivo di salvaguardia dell’ambiente, ha ispirato diversi paesi a sviluppare sistemi simili, basati sia su meccanismi di mercato e non, al fine di compensare dal punto di vista ambientale i progetti di sviluppo. Tuttavia, dal punto di vista scientifico sono ancora trascurabili i contributi riguardanti gli elementi necessari per un sistema di compensazione ambientale basato sui meccanismi di mercato.

L'obiettivo principale di questa tesi è di ampliare la conoscenza scientifica relativa all'uso di meccanismi che si fondano su Biodiversity Offsetting, inteso come strumento per regolare e promuovere un riequilibrio degli ecosistemi. In particolar modo, questa ricerca fornisce una rassegna dei metodi di valutazione utilizzati per stimare gli effetti di tali cambiamenti ambientali, del ruolo esercitato dalle istituzioni e le relative politiche adottate per implementare schemi compensativi di tale impoverimento ecologico, sia nel contesto americano sia europeo. Tale studio, poi, analizza empiricamente lo schema compensativo statunitense adottato in ambito di impatto sugli habitat e specie protette, i.e. lo schema di Conservation Banking. Successivamente, questo contributo presenta un’analisi comparativa degli schemi adottati dall’UE e dagli USA per discutere di eventuali disparità che possano emergere, da un punto di vista puramente teorico e concettuale, tra i modelli osservati. Infine, per concludere, vengono esaminate le normative italiane per la compensazione degli impatti ambientali in tema di biodiversità, con l’intento di presentare una proposta operativa volta ad incentivare meccanismi di mercato applicabili sia in Italia sia in altri paesi europei.

Statistiche Download - Aggiungi a RefWorks
EPrint type:Ph.D. thesis
Tutor:Gatto , Paola
Ph.D. course:Ciclo 28 > Scuole 28 > TERRITORIO, AMBIENTE, RISORSE E SALUTE
Data di deposito della tesi:30 January 2017
Anno di Pubblicazione:29 January 2017
Key Words:Environmental Impacts Compensation, Biodiversity Offsetting, Market-based Offsets, Impacts metrics
Settori scientifico-disciplinari MIUR:Area 07 - Scienze agrarie e veterinarie > AGR/01 Economia ed estimo rurale
Struttura di riferimento:Dipartimenti > Dipartimento Territorio e Sistemi Agro-Forestali
Codice ID:10068
Depositato il:14 Nov 2017 12:25
Simple Metadata
Full Metadata
EndNote Format

Bibliografia

I riferimenti della bibliografia possono essere cercati con Cerca la citazione di AIRE, copiando il titolo dell'articolo (o del libro) e la rivista (se presente) nei campi appositi di "Cerca la Citazione di AIRE".
Le url contenute in alcuni riferimenti sono raggiungibili cliccando sul link alla fine della citazione (Vai!) e tramite Google (Ricerca con Google). Il risultato dipende dalla formattazione della citazione.

Agenzia Regionale per la Prevenzione e Protezione Ambientale del Veneto. 2010. La legge Forestale Regionale, All'Art. 11. http://www.arpa.veneto.it/temi-ambientali/neve/riferimenti/normativa Vai! Cerca con Google

Agnoletti, M. 2012. Book. Italian Historical Rural Landscapes: Dynamics, Data Analysis and Research Findings. Chapter 1. P 3-87. Cerca con Google

Angelini, P., Augello, R., Bagnaia, R., Bianco, P., Capogrossi, R., Cardillo, A., Ercole, S., Francescato, C., Giacanelli, V., Laureti, L., Lugeri, F., Lugeri, N., Novellino, E., Oriolo, G., Papallo, O., Serra, B. Il progetto Carta della Natura Linee guida per la cartografia e la valutazione degli habitat alla scala 1:50.000. ISPRA. http://www.isprambiente.gov.it/files/carta-della-natura/cdn-manuale.pdf Vai! Cerca con Google

Bassi, A., Howard, R., Geneletti, D. and Ferrari, S. 2012. UK and Italian systems: A comparative study on management practice and performance in the construction industry. Environmental Impact Assessment Review. v. 34, p. 1-11. Cerca con Google

BBOP, 2009. Biodiversity Offset Design Handbook: Overview. B Washington D.C.: Business and Biodiversity Offsets Programme. Cerca con Google

BBOP, 2012. Guidance Notes to the Standard on Biodiversity Offsets, Washington D.C.: Business and Biodiversity Offsets Programme. Cerca con Google

Blackburn, T. m., Essl., F., Evans, T., Philip E. Hulme, Jeshcke, J. M., Kühn, J., Kumschick, S., Marková, Z., Mrugała, A., Nentwig, W., Pergl., Pyšek, P., Rabitsch., W., and Bacher., S. 2014. A Unified Classification of Alien Species Based on the Magnitude of their Environmental Impacts. http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1001850 Vai! Cerca con Google

BOE (Boletín Oficial del Estado), 2013. Ley 21/2013, de 9 de diciembre, de evaluación ambiental. Número 296, Sec. I. Pag 98151. Available at https://www.boe.es/boe/dias/2013/12/11/pdfs/BOE-A-2013-12913.pdf Vai! Cerca con Google

Boisvert, V. 2015. Conservation banking mechanisms and the economization of nature: An institutional analysis. Ecosystem Services. Available at http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2015.02.004i Vai! Cerca con Google

Boisvert, V., Méral, P., & Froger, G., 2013. Market-based instruments for ecosystem services: institutional innovation or renovation? Society & Natural Resources, 26(10), 1122-1136. Cerca con Google

Boyd, J., 2000. A Market-based Analysis of Financial Assurance Issue AssociatedWith U.S. Natural Resource Damage Liability. Resource for the Future, Washington D.C. Cerca con Google

Boyd, J., Banzhaf, S., 2007. What are ecosystem services? Ecological Economics 63 (2–3), 616–626. Cerca con Google

BSOE (Bavarian State Office for the Environment), 2015a. Recognized Ökokontobetreiber. Commercial operator of eco-accounts. Available at http://www.lfu.bayern.de/natur/oekokonto/anerkannte/index.htm Vai! Cerca con Google

BSOE (Bavarian State Office for the Environment), 2015b. Ökoflächenkataster Statistics. Available at http://www.lfu.bayern.de/natur/oekokonto/statistik/index.htm (accessed on August 25th, 2016, Site last update on 29th June 2015) Vai! Cerca con Google

Bull, J. W., Suttle, B. K., Gordon, A., Navinder S. J., Milner-Gulland, E. J. 2013. Biodiversity offsets in theory and practice. Fauna and Flora, Oryx, 0(0), 1-12. Cerca con Google

Bunn, D., Lubell, M. and Johnson C. K., 2014. Reforms could boost conservation banking by landowners. California Agriculture. V. 67 (2), p. 86-95 Cerca con Google

Calvet, C., Napoléone, C., Salles, J.M., 2015. The biodiversity offsetting dilemma: between economic rationales and ecological dynamics. Sustainability, v.7, p. 7357-7378. Cerca con Google

Camera dei Deputati, 2016. Collegato ambientale alla Legge di Stabilita 2016. Legge, 28/12/2015 n° 221, G.U. 18/01/2016. Gazzeta Ufficiale. http://www.gazzettaufficiale.it/eli/id/2016/1/18/16G00006/sg Vai! Cerca con Google

Carson, R. et al., 2003. Contingent valuation and los passive use: Damages from the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill. Environmental and Resources Economics, Volume 25, pp. 257-286. Cerca con Google

CBD, 2013. What is Impact Assessment?. Cerca con Google

Available at: http://www.cbd.int/impact/whatis.shtml Vai! Cerca con Google

[Accessed 23 October 2013]. Cerca con Google

Celesti-Grapow, L., Pretto, F., Brundu, G., Carli, E., and Blasi, C. 2009. Strategia Nazionale per la Biodiversita. Le invasioni di specie vegetali in Italia. Ministero dell’Ambiente e della Tutela del Territorio e del Mare. Direzione per la Protezione della Natura. Cerca con Google

CEPL and IEPP, 2013. Collingwood Environmental Planning Limited in partnership with The Institute for European Environmental Policy. Evaluation of the Biodiversity Offsetting Pilot Phase, WC 1051. Summary of Interim Report. Available at: http://randd.defra.gov.uk/Document.aspx?Document=11689_WC1051-Summary Vai! Cerca con Google

Chapman, D., LeJeune, K. 2001. Resource equivalency methods for Assessing Environmental Damage in the EU. Deliverable No. 6A: Review report on resource equivalence methods and applications. Cerca con Google

CIFOR, 2001. Payments for environmental services: Some nuts and bolts. Occasional paper No. 42. http://www.cifor.org/publications/pdf_files/OccPapers/OP-42.pdf Vai! Cerca con Google

Constanza, R. et al., 1997. The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital.. Nature, Volume 387, p. 253–260. Cerca con Google

Conway, M., Rayment, M., White, A., Bermans, S., 2013a. Exploring potential demand for and supply of habitat banking in the EU and appropriate design elements for a habitat banking scheme- Annexes l. http://ec.europa.eu/environment/enveco/taxation/pdf/Habitat_banking_annexes.pdf Vai! Cerca con Google

Conway, M., Tucker, G., Allen, B., Dickie, I., Hart, K., Rayment, M., Schulp, C., van Teeffelen, A., 2013b. Policy Options for an EU No Net Loss Initiative. Report to the European Commission. Institute for European Environmental Policy, London. Cerca con Google

Cosnier A. (2013). « Destruction d’espèces protégées : rôle et attribution du CNPN », Lettre des Juristes de l’environnement, URL : http://www.juristesenvironnement.com/article_detail.php?id=1035 Vai! Cerca con Google

Costantino, P., Scialò, A. 2008. La nuova valutazione di impatto ambientale, L'iter secondo il DLgs 152/2006 come modificato DLgs 4/2008. DEI – Tipografia del Genio Civile, Roma. Cerca con Google

COWI. 2009. Study concerning the application and the effectiveness of the EIA Directive. European Commission, Department of the Environment. Document No. 2,. Denmark. Cerca con Google

Darbi, M., Ohlenburg, H., Herberg, A., Wende, W., Skambracks, D. and Herbert, M., 2009. International Approaches to Compensation for Impacts on Biological Diversity. Final Report. Cerca con Google

DECC NSW, 2007. BioBanking. Scheme overview, Sydney: Department of Environment and Climate Change. Cerca con Google

DEFRA, 2011a. Biodiversity Offsetting Background. Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. London. http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/natural/biodiversity/uk/offsetting/ Vai! Cerca con Google

DEFRA, 2011b. Biodiversity 2020: A strategy for England’s wildlife and ecosystem services. Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. London. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/69446/pb13583-biodiversity-strategy-2020-111111.pdf (accessed on September 3rd, 2016) Vai! Cerca con Google

DEFRA, 2012. Biodiversity Offsetting Pilots. Guidance for developers, London: Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs. Cerca con Google

Defrancesco, E., Rosato, P., Rossetto, L., Candido, A., La Notte, A., 2008. Valuing environmental damage: an integrated framework. In: Cesaro, L., Gatto, P., Pettenella, D. (Eds.), The Multifunctional Role of Forests—Policies, Methods and Case Studies. EFI Proceedings No. 55. European Forest Institute, Joensuu, Finland, pp. 277–290. Cerca con Google

Denisoff, C., 2008. Business considerations, in Carroll, N., Bayon, R., and Fox, J. 2008. Conservation Biodiversity Banking. A guide to setting up and running biodiversity credit trading systems. London: Earthscan, p. 109-111. Cerca con Google

Denisoff, C., DeYoung, G., 2011. The challenge of implementing market-based programs by regulatory agencies. National Wetlands Newsletter, v. 33, no. 4, p 8-9. Cerca con Google

DeWeese, J. 1994. An evaluation of selected wetland creation projects authorized through the Corps of Engineers Section 404 Program. Report by US Fish and Wildlife Service. May 1994. Sacramento. Cerca con Google

Drayson, K., and Thompson, S. (2013). Ecological mitigation measures in English Environmental Impact Assessment. Journal of Environmental Management 119 (2013) 103e110. Cerca con Google

Dumax, N., Rozan, A., 2011. Using an adapted HEP to assess environmental cost. Ecol. Econ. 72, 53–59. Cerca con Google

Eftect-IEEP et al., 2010. The use of Market-Based Instruments for Biodiversity Protection-The case of Habitat Banking, London: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/enveco/index.htm. Vai! Cerca con Google

Ellis, E. C. et al. 2013. Used planet: A global history. Proceedings of the National Academy od Sciences of the United States of America. http://www.pnas.org/content/110/20/7978.full.pdf Vai! Cerca con Google

Environment bank, 2012. Available at: www.environmentbank.com/docs/Habitat-Banking-FAQs.pdf Vai! Cerca con Google

Environmental Bank Ltd, 2010. Frequent Asked Questions. www.environmentbank.com/docs/Habitat-Banking-FAQs.pdf Vai! Cerca con Google

Environmental Defense Fund, 1999. Mitigation Banking as an Endangered Species Conservation Tool. Report by the Environmental Defense Fund in cooperation with Sustainable Conservation. The Environmental Defense Fund. Washington, D. C. Cerca con Google

Eppink, F., & Wätzold, F. (2009). Comparing visible and less visible costs of the habitats directive: The case of hamster conservation in Germany. Biodiversity and Conservation, 18(4), 795–810. Cerca con Google

ESA. Endangered Species Act. 1973. 16 US Code Chapter 35 Sections 1531-1544. https://www.fws.gov/le/USStatutes/ESA.pdf (accessed on October 3rd, 2016) Vai! Cerca con Google

EU Commission, 2001. Study on the valuation and restoration of damage to natural resources for the purpose of environmental liability. Final Report. B4-3040/2000/ 265781/MAR/B3.MacAlister Elliott and Partners Ltd., London. Cerca con Google

European Comission, 2012. Call for Expression of Interest in Participating in a Working Group on "No Net Loss" of Ecosystem Services and Their Services, in the Context of the EU Biodiversity Strategy to 2020. http://ec.europa.eu/environment/consultations/pdf/call_interest_wgnnl.pdf Vai! Cerca con Google

European Commission, 2007. Guidance Document on the Strict Protection of Animal Species of Community Interest Under the Habitats Directive 92/43/EEC. European Commission, Brussels, Belgium. Cerca con Google

European Commission, 2011. Our Life Insurance, Our Natural Capital: An EU Biodiversity Strategy to 2020 3. 5. 2011. COM (2011) 244. European Commission, Brussels, Belgium. Cerca con Google

European Commission, 2016. Supporting the Implementation of Green Infrastructure. Final Report. http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/ecosystems/docs/green_infrastructures/GI%20Final%20Report.pdf Vai! Cerca con Google

Falter, C. & Scheuer, S., 2005. EU Environmental Policy Handbook- A Critical Analysis of EU Environmental Legislation, s.l.: European Environmental Bureau. Cerca con Google

Flores, N. and Thacher, J.2002. Money, who needs it? Natural resources damage assessment. Contemporary Economic Policy (ISSN 1074-3529) Vol. 20, No. 2, April 2002, 171-178. Cerca con Google

Foley, J. A., R. DeFries, et al. (2005). "Global Consequences of Land Use." Science 309(5734): 570-574. Cerca con Google

Froger, G., & Hrabanski, M. 2015. Biodiversity offsets as market-based instruments for ecosystem services? Ecosystem Services, (15), 123-124. Cerca con Google

Froger, G., Ménard, S. and Méral, P., 2014. Toward a comparative and critical analysis of biodiversity banks. Ecosystem Services. In press. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2014.11.018i Vai! Cerca con Google

FWPCA. 2002. Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended through P.L. 107-303. Available at: http://www.epw.senate.gov/water.pdf Vai! Cerca con Google

Gómez-Baggethun, E., & Muradian, R. (2015). In markets we trust? Setting the boundaries of Market-Based Instruments in ecosystem services governance. Ecological Economics, 117, 217-224. Cerca con Google

Hanski, I., Metapopulation Ecology, Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK, 1999. Cerca con Google

Haygarth, P. & Ritz, K., 2009. The future of soils and land use in the UK: Soil systems for the provisions of land-based ecosystem services. Land Use Policy, vol. 26, No. Supp 1, 12. 2009, p. S187-S197. Cerca con Google

Hood, P., 2012. Principles of Lender Liability. Consultant edition by John Virgo ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Cerca con Google

Howe C., 1990. Damage Handbook: a Uniform Framework and Measurement Guidelines for Damages from Natural and Related Man-made Hazards. Draft Report to the National Science Foundation. Mimeo. Cerca con Google

ICF GHK and Bio Intelliegnece Service, 2013. Exploring potential demand for and supply of habitat banking in the EU and appropriate design elements for a habitat banking scheme , London: European Commission . Cerca con Google

ICMM, 2005. Biodiversity Offsets: a briefing paper for the mining industry, s.l.: International Council on Mining and Metals. Cerca con Google

ISPRA, 2001. Annex 2B of the Italian Guidelines for the EIA execution, available at http://www.isprambiente.gov.it/it/temi/valutazione-di-impatto-ambientale-via Vai! Cerca con Google

ISPRA, 2009. Gli habitat in Carta della Natura, Rome, Italy available at http://www.isprambiente.gov.it/files/carta-della-natura/catalogo-habitat.pdf Vai! Cerca con Google

ISPRA, 2014. Presentation at the National Conference on Conservation Status and Monitorinh, Rome, 27-28 February 2014, ISPRA and Italian Ministry of Environment and Land and Sea Protection. Availble at: http://www.isprambiente.gov.it/it/events/la-biodiversita-in-italia-stato-di-conservazione-e-monitoraggio/presentazioni/Biondi.pdf Vai! Cerca con Google

ISPRA, 2015. Il consumo di suolo in Italia. Istituto Superiore per la Protezione e la Ricerca Ambientale. ISBN 978-88-448-0703-0. http://www.isprambiente.gov.it/files/pubblicazioni/rapporti/Rapporto_218_15.pdf Vai! Cerca con Google

Jessel, B., Schöps, A., Gall, B. and Szaramowicz, M., 2006. Flächenpools in der Eingriffsregelung und regionales Landschaftswassermanagement als Beiträge zu einer integrierten Landschaftsentwicklung am Beispiel der Mittleren Havel. Bonn - Bad Godesberg: Bundesamt für Naturschutz (ed.), Naturschutz und Biologische Vielfalt Heft 33. Bonn. Available at: http://www.ufz.de/index.php?en=20939&pub_data[dbaf][dbaf_page]=view&pub_data[dbaf][pk][PUB_ID]=2745 Vai! Cerca con Google

Kylakorpi, L. et al., 2005. The biotope method 2005. A method to assess the impact of land use on biodiversity, Stockholm: Vattenfall. Cerca con Google

Landi, G. 2009. La valutazione di impatto ambientale e la valutazione ambientale strategica. UTET – Guide tecniche, Torino. Cerca con Google

Layne, V. and Rowan, V., 2015. Session 4: The role of conservation banking review teams & development of conservation banking instruments. Within the Conservation Banking Training Course offered by the Conservation Fund USFWS. July 13-17 2015. Shepherdstown, WV. Unpublished material. Cerca con Google

Layne, V., 2011. Using templates to expedite establishment of multiagency mitigation banks. National Wetlands Newsletter, v. 33, no. 4, p 10-11. Cerca con Google

Louviere, J., Hensher, D. & Swait, J., 2000. Stated Choice Methods: Analysis and Application. Cambridge University Press. Cerca con Google

Madsen, Becca, Carroll, N., Brands, M., and Kelly, 2010. State of Biodiversity Markets: Offset and Compensation Programs Worldwide. Forest Trends, Ecosystem Marketplace. Washington D.C. Available at: http://www.ecosystemmarketplace. com/documents/acrobat/sbdmr.pd Vai! Cerca con Google

Madsen, Becca, Carroll, N., Kandy, D. and Bennett G., 2011. Update: State of Biodiversity Markets. Forest Trends, Ecosystem Marketplace. Washington D.C. Available at: http://www. ecosystemmarketplace.com/reports/2011_update_sbdm Vai! Cerca con Google

Mann, C. and Absher, J. D., 2014. Adjusting policy to institutional, cultural and biophysical context conditions: The case of conservation banking in California. Land Use Policy. V.36, 73-82. Cerca con Google

Marsh, L. L., Proter, D. R. and Salvesen, D. A. 1996. Introduction and overview in Marsh, L. L., Porter, D. R. and Salvesen, D. A. (eds) Mitigation Banking: Theory and Practice, Island Press, Washington DC, p. 1–14. Cerca con Google

Martin-Ortega, J., Brouwer, R. and Aiking, H., 2011. Application of a value-based equivalency method to assess environmental damage compensation under the European Environmental Liability Directive. Journal of Environmental Management, 92, p. 1461-1470. Cerca con Google

Mazzetti, V., 2006. Cultura ambientale e sviluppo sostenibile, I cuaderni della formazione Ambientale. Rome: APAT. Cerca con Google

McCann, L., 2013. Transaction costs and environmental policy design. Ecological Economics, 88, 253-262. Cerca con Google

McCarthy, M. A. et al., 2004. The habitat hectares approach to vegetation assessment: An evaluation and suggestions for improvement, s.l.: Ecological Management and Restoration. Cerca con Google

McKenney, B. A., Kiesecker, J. M. 2009. Policy development for biodiversity offsets: a review of offset frameworks. Environmental Management 45(1) 165–176. Cerca con Google

Mead, L. D. 2008. Overview. History and theory: the origin and evolution of conservation banking, in Carroll, N., Bayon, R., and Fox, J. 2008. Conservation Biodiversity Banking. A guide to setting up and running biodiversity credit trading systems. London: Earthscan, 9-49. Cerca con Google

MEDDE (2013) Lignes directrices nationales sur la séquence éviter, réduire et compenser les impacts sur les milieux naturels. Ministère de l’Écologie, du Développement Durable et de l’Energie, Paris, France. http://www.developpement-durable.gouv.fr/Lignes-directrices-nationales-sur.html Vai! Cerca con Google

MEDDE, 2012a. Doctrine relative à la séquence éviter, réduire et compenser les impacts sur le milieu naturel. Ministère de l’Écologie, du Développement Durable et de l’Energie, Paris, France. http://www.developpement-durable.gouv.fr/Doctrine-eviter-reduire-et,28438.html Vai! Cerca con Google

MEDDE, 2012a. Guide Espèces protégées, aménagements et infrastructures. Ministère de l’Écologie, du Développement Durable et de l’Energie, Paris, France. http://www.developpement-durable.gouv.fr/Guide-especes-protegees.html Vai! Cerca con Google

Mitchell, R. & Carson, R., 1989. Using Surveys to Value Public Goods: The Contingent Valuation Method. Resources for the Future, pp. Washington, D.C. Cerca con Google

Monitoraggio Fondo Aree Verdi, 2016. Regione di Lombardia, Luglio 2016. http://www.agricoltura.regione.lombardia.it/cs/Satellite?c=Redazionale_P&childpagename=DG_Agricoltura%2FDetail&cid=1213820175332&packedargs=NoSlotForSitePlan%3Dtrue%26menu-to-render%3D1213596257037&pagename=DG_AGRWrapper Vai! Cerca con Google

Morandeau, D., Vilaysack,D., 2012. Compensating for Damage to Biodiversity: An International Benchmarking Study. Etude set documents, General Commission for Sustainable Development Economy, Evaluation and Integration of Sustainable Development Service. no.68. Cerca con Google

Muradian et al. 2012. Payment for ecosystem services and the fatal attraction of win-win solutions. Conservation Letters 6:4 July/August (2013) 274–279. Cerca con Google

Naumann, S., Vorwerk, A., Bräuer, I., 2008. Compensation in the form of Habitat Banking. Short-Case Study Report. Draft Report. Resource Equivalency Methods for Assessing Environmental Damage in the EU. Cerca con Google

Newbold, et al. 2015. Global effects of land use on local terrestrial biodiversity. Nature 520, 45-50. Cerca con Google

NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration), 2012. A Citizen’s Guide to Conservation Easements in Alabama and Mississippi. Available at: http://masglp.olemiss.edu/citizen2007.pdf Vai! Cerca con Google

NOAA, 1996. Natural Resource Damage Assessment Guidance Document:Assessment Phase (Oil Pollution Act of 1990). National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Damage Assessment and Restoration Program, Silver Spring, MD. Cerca con Google

NOAA, 2000. Habitat Equivalence Analysis: An overview. Damage Assessment and Restoration Program, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Department of Commerce. Cerca con Google

OECD, The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, 2013. Biodiversity Offsets. In: Scaling-up Finance Mechanisms for Biodiversity. OECD Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264193833-en. Vai! Cerca con Google

Ofiara, D.D., 2002. Natural resource damage assessment in the United States: rules and procedures for compensations from spills of hazardous substances in oil waterways under US jurisdiction. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 44, 96–110. Cerca con Google

Parkes, D., Newell, G. & Cheal, D., 2003. Assessing the quality of native vegetation: the ‘‘habitat hectares’’ approach. Ecological Management & Restoration, Volume 4, pp. 28-38. Cerca con Google

Pearce, D. & Moran, D., 1994. The economic value of Biodiversity. First ed. London: Earthscan. Cerca con Google

Pen, T. and Theodore, T. 2020. Environmental assessment. Calculating resource restoration for an oil discharge in Lake Barre, Louisiana, USA. Environmental Management Vol. 29, No. 5, pp. 691-702. Cerca con Google

Pigou, A.C. (1920). The Economics of Welfare. Macrnillan, London. Cerca con Google

Pileri, P., 2007. Compensazione Ecologica Preventiva. Principi, Strumenti e Casi. 1st Edition ed. Rome: Carocci. Cerca con Google

Pirard, R. (2012). Market-based instruments for biodiversity and ecosystem services: A lexicon. Environmental Science & Policy, 19, 59-68. Cerca con Google

Platinum. 2009. BBOP Pilot Project Case Study. Potgietersrust Platinums Limited (PPRust). Johannesburg, South Africa. Cerca con Google

Prokofieva, I., E., G., S., V. & al, e., 2009. Report on the currently applied market-based methods in the case studies. Deliverable D4.1 of the research project "NEWFOREX", Project no. 243950, KP7-KBBE 2009-3, s.l.: European Comission. Cerca con Google

Quétier, F., Lavorel., S., 2011. Assessing ecological equivalence in biodiversity offset schemes: Key issues and solutions. Biological Conservation 144, 2991-2999. Cerca con Google

Quétier, F., Regnery, B., Levrel, H., 2014. No net loss of biodiversity or paper offsets? A critical review of the French no net loss policy. Environmental Science and Policy. V. 38, p. 120-131. Cerca con Google

Redmond, A., Bates, T., Bernadino, F. and Rhodes, R. M., 1996. State mitigation banking programs: The Florida experience’, in Marsh, L. L., Porter, D. R. and Salvesen, D. A. (eds) Mitigation Banking: Theory and Practice, Island Press, Washington DC, p. 54–75. Cerca con Google

RIBITS, Regulatory In-lieu fee and Bank Information Tracking System. 2015. Available at: https://ribits.usace.army.mil/ribits_apex/f?p=107:2 (accessed on July 30th, 2016). Vai! Cerca con Google

Robertson, M. M.,2006. The nature that capital can see: science, state, and marketing the commodification of ecosystem services. Environmental Planning. D: Soc. Space 24(3), 367–387. Cerca con Google

Sattler, C., Matzdorf, B., 2013. PES in a nutshell: from definitions and origins to PES in practice—approaches, design process and innovative aspects. Ecosyst. Serv. 6, 2–11. Sommerville, M.M., Jones, J.P.G., Milner-Gulland, E.J., 2009. A revised conceptual framework. Cerca con Google

Schamberger, M. & Krohn, W. B., 1982. Status of the Habitat Evaluation Procedures, Washingson D.C.: US Fish adn Wildlife Publications. Cerca con Google

Stavins, R., 2001. Lessons from the American Experiment with Market-Based Environmental Policies. John F. Kennedy School of Government Harvard University Faculty Research Working Papers Series. Cerca con Google

Tanaka, 2008. First application of Habitat Evaluation Procedure to EIA in Japan: How to quantify loss and gain of habitats?. Perth, Australia 2008: IAIA08 ConferenProceedings', The Art and Science of Impact Assessment. 28th Annual Conference of the International Association for impact Assessment. Cerca con Google

TEEB, 2010. The Economic of Ecosystems and Biodiversity: Mainstreaming the economics of nature: A synthesis of the approach, s.l.: Conclusions and recommendations for TEEB. Technical Report. Cerca con Google

Temple, H. J., Anstee, S., Ekstrom, J., Pilgrim, J. D., Rabenantoandro, J., Ramanamanjato, J-B, Randriata, F. and Vincelette, M. 2012. Forecasting the path towards a Net Positive Impact on biodiversity for Rio Tinto QMM. IUCN. Gland, Switzerland. Cerca con Google

Temple, H. J., Edmonds, B., Butcher, B., and Treweek, J. 2010. Biodiversity Offsets: testing a possible method for measuring losses and gains at Bardon Hill Quarry, UK. In Practice, 70, 11-14 Cerca con Google

ten Kate K., Bishop J., Bayon R. (2004), Biodiversity offsets: views, experience and the business case, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK and Insight Investment, London, UK, IUCN-The World Conservation Union. Cerca con Google

ten Kate, K., 2013. Improving the mitigation hierarchy and getting to No Net Loss: International developments and the challenges for biodiversity professionals. Bulletin of the Chartered Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management, Issue 81, pp. 17-23. Cerca con Google

Theresa, Sherry. 2008. Chapter 9. Financial considerations, in Carroll, N., Bayon, R., and Fox, J. 2008. Conservation Biodiversity Banking. A guide to setting up and running biodiversity credit trading systems. London: Earthscan, 127-154. Cerca con Google

Thorne, J. H., Huber, P. R., O’Donoghue, E. and Santos, M. J. 2014. The use of regional advance mitigation planning (RAMP) to integrate transportation infrastructure impacts with sustainability; a perspective from the USA. Cerca con Google

Treweek, E. C., 2009. Appendix A. Summary of Approaches to biodiversity offsets in selected countries, London: DEFRA. Cerca con Google

Tucker, G., B. Allen, M. Conway, I. Dickie, K. Hart, M. Rayment, C. Schulp, A.J.A. van Teeffelen, 2014. Policy Options for an EU No Net Loss Initiative. Report to the European Commission. Institute for European Environmental Policy, London. Cerca con Google

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1976. Habitat Evaluation Procedures: For use by the Division of Ecological Services in evaluating water and related land resource development projects. Mimeo report. USDI Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C. 30 pp. ___ . 1980a. Habitat as a basis for environmental assessments. 101 ESM. USDI Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Ecological Services, Washington, D.C. __ . 1980b. Habitat Evaluation Procedures (HEP). ESM 102. USDI Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Ecological Services, Washington, D.C. __ . 1980c. Human Use and Economic Evaluation (HUEE). 104 ESM. USDI Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Ecological Services, Washington, D.C. __ . 1981. Standards for the development of Habitat Suitability Index models. 103 ESM. Cerca con Google

USEPA. US Environmental Protection Agency and US Army Corps of Engineers. 1990. Memorandum of agreement between the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of the Army concerning the determination of mitigation under the Clean Water Act Section 404(b)(1) guidelines. Fed Regist 55: 9210–13. http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/guidance/wetlands/mitigate.cfm Vai! Cerca con Google

USEPA. US Environmental Protection Agency, 2014. Mitigation Banking Factsheet. Compensation for Impacts to Wetlands and Streams. Available at: http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/guidance/wetlands/mitbanking.cfm Vai! Cerca con Google

USFWS, US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2015. Summary of listed species populations and recovery plans. Visited on August 17 2015 at 17:52:15 GMT. Available at: http://ecos.fws.gov/tess_public/pub/boxScore.jsp Vai! Cerca con Google

USFWS, US Fish and Wildlife Service. 2014. Greater Sage-Grouse. Range-wide mitigation framework. Version 1.0. September 3, 2014. Page 19. Cerca con Google

USFWS. US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2003. Guidance for establishment, use and operation of conservation banks. Available at: https://www.fws.gov/endangered/esa-library/pdf/Conservation_Banking_Guidance.pdf Vai! Cerca con Google

USGAO. US Government Accountability Office, Report to the Subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies, Committee on Appropriations, House of Representatives, “Prairie Pothole Region,” GAO-07,1093, September 2007, p. 20 & 34, Available at: http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d071093.pdf. Vai! Cerca con Google

USSCNR. US Senate Committee on Natural Resources. 2014. Supplemental bill note on senate bill No. 323. Available at: http://www.kslegislature.org/li_2014/b2013_14/measures/documents/supp_note_sb323_01_0000.pdf Vai! Cerca con Google

Vaissière, A. and Levrel, H., 2015. Biodiversity offset markets: What are they really? An empirical approach to wetland mitigation banking. Ecological Economics. V. 110, p. 81-88. Cerca con Google

van Teeffeelen, A., Opdam, P., Wätzold, F., Florian, H., Johst, K., Dreschler, M., Vos, C. C., Wissel S. and Quétier, F., 2015. Ecological and economic conditions and associated institutional challenges for conservation banking in dynamic landscapes. Landscape and Urban Planning. v. 130, p. 64-72. Cerca con Google

Vatn, A., Barton, D. N., Lindhjem, H., Movik, S., Ring, Irene and Santos, R. 2010. Can market protect biodiversity? An evaluation of different financial mechanisms. Department of International Environment and Development Studies, Noragric Norwegian University of Life Sciences, UMB. Cerca con Google

Wenden, W., Herberg, A. and Herzberg, A., 2005. Mitigation banking and compensation pools: improving the effectiveness of impact mitigation regulation in project planning procedures. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, v. 23:2, p. 101-111. Cerca con Google

Wheeler, D.P. and Strock, J.M., 1995. Official Policy on Conservation Banks. 1995. California Resources Agency. Available at: http://ceres.ca.gov/wetlands/policies/mitbank.html Vai! Cerca con Google

Wunder, S. 2008. Economics and Conservation in the tropics: A strategic dialogue. Conference paper. Sven Wunder, Center for Internation Forestry Research, (CIFOR), Trav. Dr. Enéas Pinheiro S/N, 66.095- 100 Belem, Brazil; (email) s.wunder@cgiar.org. Cerca con Google

Zafonte, M., Hampton., 2001. Exploring welfare implications of resource equivalency analysis in natural resource damage assessments. Ecological Economics, v. 61, p. 134-145. Cerca con Google

Download statistics

Solo per lo Staff dell Archivio: Modifica questo record