IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecoser/v15y2015icp134-142.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Conservation banking mechanisms and the economization of nature: An institutional analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Boisvert, Valérie

Abstract

During the last decade, conservation banking mechanisms have emerged in the environmental discourse as new market instruments to promote biodiversity conservation. Compensation was already provided for in environmental law in many countries, as the last step of the mitigation hierarchy. The institutional arrangements developed in this context have been redefined and reshaped as market-based instruments (MBIs). As such, they are discursively disentangled from the complex legal-economic nexus they are part of. Monetary transactions are given prominence and tend to be presented as stand alone agreements, whereas they take place in the context of prescriptive regulations. The pro-market narrative featuring conservation banking systems as market-like arrangements as well as their denunciation as instances of nature commodification tend to obscure their actual characteristics.

Suggested Citation

  • Boisvert, Valérie, 2015. "Conservation banking mechanisms and the economization of nature: An institutional analysis," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 15(C), pages 134-142.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecoser:v:15:y:2015:i:c:p:134-142
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoser.2015.02.004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212041615000224
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecoser.2015.02.004?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Innes, Robert, 1997. "Takings, Compensation, and Equal Treatment for Owners of Developed and Undeveloped Property," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 40(2), pages 403-432, October.
    2. Stavins, Robert, 1998. "Market-Based Environmental Policies," RFF Working Paper Series dp-98-26, Resources for the Future.
    3. Coggan, Anthea & Buitelaar, Edwin & Whitten, Stuart & Bennett, Jeff, 2013. "Factors that influence transaction costs in development offsets: Who bears what and why?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 222-231.
    4. Harvey, David, 2007. "A Brief History of Neoliberalism," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199283279, Decembrie.
    5. Harvey, David, 2005. "The New Imperialism," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199278084, Decembrie.
    6. Stephen Polasky & Holly Doremus & Bruce Rettig, 1997. "Endangered Species Conservation On Private Land," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 15(4), pages 66-76, October.
    7. Cropper, Maureen L & Oates, Wallace E, 1992. "Environmental Economics: A Survey," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 30(2), pages 675-740, June.
    8. Patricia Machemer & Michael Kaplowitz, 2002. "A Framework for Evaluating Transferable Development Rights Programmes," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(6), pages 773-795.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sponagel, Christian & Angenendt, Elisabeth & Piepho, Hans-Peter & Bahrs, Enno, 2021. "Farmers’ preferences for nature conservation compensation measures with a focus on eco-accounts according to the German Nature Conservation Act," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    2. Poudel, Jagdish & Zhang, Daowei & Simon, Benjamin, 2018. "Estimating the demand and supply of conservation banking markets in the United States," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 320-325.
    3. Sebastian Theis & Mark S. Poesch, 2022. "Assessing Conservation and Mitigation Banking Practices and Associated Gains and Losses in the United States," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-24, May.
    4. Cole, Scott & Moksnes, Per-Olav & Söderqvist, Tore & Wikström, Sofia A. & Sundblad, Göran & Hasselström, Linus & Bergström, Ulf & Kraufvelin, Patrik & Bergström, Lena, 2021. "Environmental compensation for biodiversity and ecosystem services: A flexible framework that addresses human wellbeing," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 50(C).
    5. Higashida, Keisaku & Tanaka, Kenta & Managi, Shunsuke, 2019. "The efficiency of conservation banking schemes with inter-regionally tradable credits and the role of mediators," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 175-186.
    6. Jagdish Poudel & Raju Pokharel, 2021. "Financial Analysis of Habitat Conservation Banking in California," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-12, November.
    7. Álvaro Enríquez-de-Salamanca & Rosa M. Martín-Aranda & Ruben Diaz-Sierra, 2017. "Towards an Integrated Environmental Compensation Scheme in Spain: Linking Biodiversity and Carbon Offsets," Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management (JEAPM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 19(02), pages 1-25, June.
    8. Elofsson, Katarina & Hiron, Matthew & Kačergytė, Ineta & Pärt, Tomas, 2023. "Ecological compensation of stochastic wetland biodiversity: National or regional policy schemes?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 204(PA).
    9. Martin, Paul V., 2018. "Managing the risks of ecosystem services markets," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PB), pages 404-410.
    10. Primmer, Eeva & Varumo, Liisa & Kotilainen, Juha M. & Raitanen, Elina & Kattainen, Matti & Pekkonen, Minna & Kuusela, Saija & Kullberg, Peter & Kangas, Johanna A.M. & Ollikainen, Markku, 2019. "Institutions for governing biodiversity offsetting: An analysis of rights and responsibilities," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 776-784.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hahn, Robert W., 2000. "The Impact of Economics on Environmental Policy," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 375-399, May.
    2. Fischer, Carolyn & Parry, Ian W. H. & Pizer, William A., 2003. "Instrument choice for environmental protection when technological innovation is endogenous," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 523-545, May.
    3. J. Peter Clinch & Eoin O'Neill, 2010. "Assessing the Relative Merits of Development Charges and Transferable Development Rights in an Uncertain World," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 47(4), pages 891-911, April.
    4. Paul Pecorino, 2013. "Compensation for Regulatory Takings with a Redistributive Government," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 80(2), pages 488-501, October.
    5. Jeffrey W. Henderson, 2008. "China and the Future of the Developing World: The Coming Global-Asian Era and its Consequences," WIDER Working Paper Series RP2008-58, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    6. Shahab, Sina & Clinch, J. Peter & O'Neill, Eoin, 2019. "An Analysis of the Factors Influencing Transaction Costs in Transferable Development Rights Programmes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 409-419.
    7. Pinkerton, Evelyn & Davis, Reade, 2015. "Neoliberalism and the politics of enclosure in North American small-scale fisheries," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 303-312.
    8. Ziad Koussa, 2023. "Revolution, Change, and Democratic Transition in Egypt Since 2011: A Critical Political Economy Approach," Contemporary Review of the Middle East, , vol. 10(2), pages 165-187, June.
    9. Ju Li, 2021. "Open Sesame? The Paradoxical Development of C2C E-commerce in China," Review of Radical Political Economics, Union for Radical Political Economics, vol. 53(2), pages 266-280, June.
    10. Emmanuel Kumi & Albert Arhin & Thomas Yeboah, 2014. "Can post-2015 sustainable development goals survive neoliberalism? A critical examination of the sustainable development–neoliberalism nexus in developing countries," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 16(3), pages 539-554, June.
    11. Thomas J. Miceli & Kathleen Segerson, 2011. "Regulatory Takings," Working papers 2011-16, University of Connecticut, Department of Economics.
    12. Fischer, Carolyn, 2008. "Emissions pricing, spillovers, and public investment in environmentally friendly technologies," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 487-502, March.
    13. Neely, Megan Tobias & Carmichael, Donna, 2021. "Profiting on crisis: how predatory financial investors have worsened inequality in the coronavirus crisis," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 112697, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    14. John McSweeney, 2014. "The absence of class: Critical development, NGOs and the misuse of Gramsci’s concept of counter-hegemony," Progress in Development Studies, , vol. 14(3), pages 275-285, July.
    15. Carlos Bueno-Suárez & Daniel Coq-Huelva, 2020. "Sustaining What Is Unsustainable: A Review of Urban Sprawl and Urban Socio-Environmental Policies in North America and Western Europe," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-36, May.
    16. Patrick J. Devlin, 2010. "Exploring efficiency's dominance: the wholeness of the process," Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 7(2), pages 141-162, June.
    17. Parry, Ian & Pizer, William & Fischer, Carolyn, 2000. "How Important is Technological Innovation in Protecting the Environment?," RFF Working Paper Series dp-00-15, Resources for the Future.
    18. Polasky, Stephen & Doremus, Holly, 1998. "When the Truth Hurts: Endangered Species Policy on Private Land with Imperfect Information," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 22-47, January.
    19. Katharina Najork & Jonathan Friedrich & Markus Keck, 2022. "Bt cotton, pink bollworm, and the political economy of sociobiological obsolescence: insights from Telangana, India," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 39(3), pages 1007-1026, September.
    20. Xiao, Chaowei & Silva, Elisabete A. & Zhang, Chuchu, 2020. "Nine-nine-six work system and people’s movement patterns: Using big data sets to analyse overtime working in Shanghai," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecoser:v:15:y:2015:i:c:p:134-142. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/ecosystem-services .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.