Les approches basées sur le marché peuvent-elles rESOUDRE la perte critique de la biodiversité?

Report an error

Summary

AI-generated

This summary is written by a language model reading the source document. It is not the publisher's words and is not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment

The document critiques biodiversity offsetting markets, asserting that they are conceptually flawed and practically ineffective. It argues that nature cannot be accurately priced or restored to its original state, and that such markets often lead to land grabbing and human rights violations. Instead, the author proposes a return to binding environmental regulations and sustainable practices like agroecology to protect ecosystems.

Key insights

AI-generated

These insights are written by a language model reading the source document. They are not the publisher's words and are not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment
  • Biodiversity offsetting projects have a poor track record, with some studies indicating that up to two-thirds of ecosystem restoration projects failed and one study of 558 projects between 1990 and 2011 showed a 99% net habitat loss despite offsetting attempts.
  • Market-based approaches to biodiversity are linked to negative social outcomes, including the seizure of land, the displacement of local communities, and human rights abuses.
  • The document identifies several conceptual failures in biodiversity markets, including the impossibility of assigning a monetary value to nature's cultural and spiritual worth, the inability of financial markets to price rarity, and the fact that ecosystem functions are often irreplaceable.
  • The premise of offsetting relies on 'price signals' and 'additionality,' both of which the author claims are non-existent or immeasurable due to financial speculation and scientific uncertainty.
  • The author advocates for binding environmental laws that limit unsustainable economic activities—such as certain mining, fishing, and urban development—while promoting agroecology and community forest management.
  • The document argues that binding regulations provide more stability and predictability for the private sector than volatile markets, thereby reducing economic disruption and fostering innovation in sustainable activities.

Cite the original document

APA
Hache, F. (2019). Les approches basées sur le marché peuvent-elles rESOUDRE la perte critique de la biodiversité? Friends of the Earth International. https://www.foei.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/Approches-basees-sur-le-marche-perte-critique-de-la-biodiversite_ATI_FR.pdf
Chicago
Hache, Frederic. Les approches basées sur le marché peuvent-elles rESOUDRE la perte critique de la biodiversité? Friends of the Earth International, 2019. https://www.foei.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/Approches-basees-sur-le-marche-perte-critique-de-la-biodiversite_ATI_FR.pdf.
Wikipedia
{{cite report |last1=Hache |first1=Frederic |title=Les approches basées sur le marché peuvent-elles rESOUDRE la perte critique de la biodiversité? |publisher=Friends of the Earth International |date=October 2019 |url=https://www.foei.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/Approches-basees-sur-le-marche-perte-critique-de-la-biodiversite_ATI_FR.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}
BibTeX
@techreport{hache2019les, author = {Hache, Frederic}, title = {{Les approches basées sur le marché peuvent-elles rESOUDRE la perte critique de la biodiversité?}}, institution = {Friends of the Earth International}, year = {2019}, month = oct, url = {https://www.foei.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/Approches-basees-sur-le-marche-perte-critique-de-la-biodiversite_ATI_FR.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }

Full text

Collected · Record updated