¿Los enfoques basados en el mercado son capaces de abordar la pÉrdida CRÍTICA de BIODIVERSIDAD?

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 briefing critiques the shift in biodiversity policy from conservation to 'restoration' through financial markets. It argues that biodiversity offsetting—where developers pay to recreate habitats to justify destroying existing ones—is based on the flawed premise that nature can be monetized and replaced. The author cites high failure rates in restoration projects, the inability of markets to price public goods or scarcity, and the risk of land grabbing. Instead of market tools, the document advocates for binding environmental laws and sustainable practices like agroecology to protect biodiversity.

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 schemes have demonstrated poor environmental and social outcomes, with a significant number of restoration projects failing and some resulting in a near-total loss of habitats.
  • Market-based approaches suffer from fundamental conceptual failures, including the inability to monetize cultural and spiritual values and the impossibility of creating financial markets for non-excludable public goods.
  • The two core pillars of biodiversity offsetting—price signals and additionality—are deemed non-existent or immeasurable due to financial speculation and scientific uncertainty.
  • The author argues that binding environmental regulations are a more effective and stable alternative to market tools, as they provide clear norms for the private sector and better accommodate scientific uncertainty.
  • Proposed regulatory alternatives include binding conservation laws that limit unsustainable economic activities in urban development, mining, fishing, and agriculture, while promoting agroecology and community forest management.

Cite the original document

APA
Hache, F. (2019). ¿Los enfoques basados en el mercado son capaces de abordar la pÉrdida CRÍTICA de BIODIVERSIDAD? Friends of the Earth International. https://www.foei.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/Enfoques-basados-en-el-mercado-perdida-critica-de-biodiversidad_ATI_ES.pdf
Chicago
Hache, Frederic. ¿Los enfoques basados en el mercado son capaces de abordar la pÉrdida CRÍTICA de BIODIVERSIDAD? Friends of the Earth International, 2019. https://www.foei.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/Enfoques-basados-en-el-mercado-perdida-critica-de-biodiversidad_ATI_ES.pdf.
Wikipedia
{{cite report |last1=Hache |first1=Frederic |title=¿Los enfoques basados en el mercado son capaces de abordar la pÉrdida CRÍTICA de BIODIVERSIDAD? |publisher=Friends of the Earth International |date=October 2019 |url=https://www.foei.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/Enfoques-basados-en-el-mercado-perdida-critica-de-biodiversidad_ATI_ES.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}
BibTeX
@techreport{hache2019los, author = {Hache, Frederic}, title = {{¿Los enfoques basados en el mercado son capaces de abordar la pÉrdida CRÍTICA de BIODIVERSIDAD?}}, institution = {Friends of the Earth International}, year = {2019}, month = oct, url = {https://www.foei.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/Enfoques-basados-en-el-mercado-perdida-critica-de-biodiversidad_ATI_ES.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }

Full text

Collected · Record updated