Proposed Omkareshwar National Park Complex (ONPC), is a planned park in Madhya Pradesh (central India) that is being designed as a compensatory conservation plan to overcome the loss of wildlife and forest by the construction and submergence from nearby Indira-Sagar and Omkareshwar dams, part of the infamous multi-purpose Narmada dam project. All the village communities in the ONPC largely depend on the forest resources for their daily sustenance, particularly fuel-wood and non-timber forest products such as tendupatta, mahua, kullu and dhavda gums. The local people typically engage as gatherers of non-timber forest resources, farmers or work as labors on other agricultural farms. Enclosing, this forest commons, threatens the livelihood opportunities of adivasis. Hence, this dissertation questions how compensatory conservation transforms the forest governance and the economic activities of the local communities. I examine how rules-in-use control spatial actions alter economic, political and social relationships within proposed ONPC in central India. I gathered the economic, social and political data through interviews, case-studies and surveys. Farmers benefit from the creation of the ONPC as a biodiversity offset, while other villagers engaged in off-farm and NTFP extraction labor, are more economically vulnerable. Adivasi depend mostly on the forest resource extraction for their income generation. Therefore, with increasing restrictions placed on the resource access and control, resource users are forced to travel outside their villages in search of wage labor.

L’apport majeur de la thèse est de montrer que la place grandissante de la biodiversité dans les politiques d’aménagement du territoire tient beaucoup au rôle joué par les instruments d’évaluation des impacts, qu’on regroupe sous le terme d’évaluation environnementale. En considérant ces instruments (études d’impact, mécanismes de compensation, processus participatifs associés) comme des « coproductions », c’est-à-dire des instruments mélangeant des éléments de science et de décisions politiques, nous avons montré qu’ils avaient des effets propres qui ont largement influencé les politiques d’aménagement et la manière dont les acteurs de l’aménagement se représentent la biodiversité.L’étude des instruments de l’évaluation environnementale, selon une démarche socio-historique d’une part et au travers de l’étude d’une série de grands projets ferroviaires d’autre part, nous a permis de montrer l’existence de plusieurs « régimes » caractéristiques de l’évaluation environnementale, qui mobilisent différents outils et différentes représentations de la biodiversité, et que nous avons identifié comme « pionnier », « institutionnalisé » et « utilitariste ».L’étude de la biodiversité dans la société peut être appréhendée non seulement au travers des conventions, lois, et conflits d’acteurs qu’elle génère mais aussi par les instruments concrets mis en place pour la prendre en compte, ces instruments étant à la fois des révélateurs des représentations de la biodiversité à un moment donné et des vecteurs de changement de ces représentations. / The major contribution of this thesis is to show that the growing role for biodiversity in territorial planning policies is firmly linked to the role played by impact assessment instruments, grouped together under the term 'environmental assessment'. By considering these instruments (impact studies, offset mechanisms, associated participatory processes) as 'co-productions', that is to say as instruments mixing elements of science and political decision-making, we showed that they had their own effects, which have strongly influenced planning policies and the way in which planning actors conceive of biodiversity.The study of environmental assessment instruments, following on the one hand a socio-historical approach and on the other a series of case studies of large-scale railway projects, allowed us to show the existence of several 'regimes' characteristic of environmental assessment, that mobilise different tools and different representations of biodiversity, and which we have identified as 'pioneering', 'institutionalised' and 'utilitarian'.The study of biodiversity in society can therefore be approached not only through analysing the conventions, law and conflicts between actors that it generates, but also through considering the concrete instruments implemented in order to take biodiversity into account, these instruments revealing the representations of biodiversity at a moment in time and being the vectors of change in these representations.

Development and land use change diminish the quantity of natural habitat, impacting negatively on the number of animal and plant species – biodiversity. Concern about the consequences of these losses has led to calls for mechanisms which allow development to proceed only when no net loss of biodiversity can be assured, such as biodiversity offsets. Markets for biodiversity offsets are being tried as mechanisms for achieving this societal objective in the most efficient manner possible. Theoretically, this thesis develops a framework connecting the Polanyi-inspired notion of the economy as an instituted process, and concepts developed by Callon and colleagues in the Social Studies of Finance literature. This framework is used to analyse the emergence, development and expansion of markets for biodiversity offsets. Using qualitative methodologies, the research examines in detail three existent biodiversity offset markets: Species Banking (United States), Impact Mitigation Regulations (Germany) and Biodiversity Offsets (England). The emergence of markets for biodiversity offsets is shown to be the result of performativity of economics. Changing representations of biodiversity, anchored on economic sciences, lead to policies which create economic experiments, such as markets for biodiversity offsets. Because these markets are historical and geographically contingent, the economic experiments emerge in the context of preexisting regulations and traditions, resulting in variety of forms of organising biodiversityoffset markets. To bring biodiversity to the market involves measuring and quantifying externalities. This requires the creation and development of market agencements – assemblages of agents and market devices – to commodify biodiversity. These agencements constitute the technical infrastructures upon which the markets are built, but they too are contingent of pre-market practice. This creates tensions between the role of agents and the role of devices inside the market infrastructure. Biodiversity offsets are shown to not maintain their commodity status beyond certain geographical and geopolitical boundaries. The result is the creation of mutually exclusive market nodes, between which no trade takes place. Despite common origins and infrastructures, the local markets do not exchange between themselves. This thesis contributes a framework for the analysis of market emergence, in which two literatures are used to complement each other’s limitations. As a result, the thesis is able to conceptualise how a common generative mechanism results in variety of economic organisation. It also demonstrates that it is possible for markets to share a regulatory and technical infrastructure, but not exchange between themselves and expand.

Biodiversity losses are occurring at an unprecedented rate, with ongoing environmental degradation at the expense of expanding economic activities. A transformative change is needed away from business-as-usual development and towards prioritizing the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity. For the effective governance of biodiversity, a well-designed mix of policy instruments are needed that are suited to the local context. This PhD project examines the social-ecological implications of policy instruments for biodiversity governance, with an emphasis on biodiversity offsets. Offsets are a policy instrument where actions are taken to compensate for negative impacts to biodiversity caused by developments. I discuss how such policy instruments must be carefully designed and implemented to ensure positive outcomes for people and biodiversity. In Paper I, I examined how biodiversity offset policies, which have been commonly misunderstood as a market-based mechanism, can be designed with various levels of involvement from market and state. I presented an ideal-typical typology based on the institutions from which biodiversity offsets are organised: Public Agency, Mandatory Market and Voluntary Offset. I identified the institutional arrangements of six offset policies using cross-case comparison and stakeholder mapping to analyse how the biodiversity losses and conservation measures are decided. Based on these results, I determined how the six policies relate to the ideal types. The results found that the government plays a key role not just in enforcing mandatory policies but also in controlling the supply and demand of biodiversity units, supervising the matching of biodiversity values or granting legitimacy to the offset. The paper concluded that commensurability of natural capital is restricted in offsets (biodiversity is always exchanged with biodiversity), while different degrees of commodification are possible depending on the policy design and role of price signals when trading credits. In Paper II, I examined the implementation gap of the Convention on Biological Diversity’s (CBD) objectives and global biodiversity targets at a (sub)national level. I identified obstacles to achieving the Aichi Biodiversity Targets and challenges faced in interpreting the CBD guidelines through a content analysis of biodiversity policy documents, participant observation as well as semi-structured interviews with experts at the 14th meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the CBD. As compliance was found as a key challenge in the CBD, I presented insights for fostering the implementation and enforcement of biodiversity policies by drawing from concepts in international human rights law. In particular, I examined review mechanisms of human rights law and biodiversity agreements to determine the strategies used for compliance. The paper concluded that recognising the synergies between human rights and biodiversity can help strengthen review mechanisms for implementing the objectives of the CBD.The findings from Paper I provided a foundation for understanding the institutional design of national and local offset policies. In Paper II, I then broadened out to discuss the challenges faced in interpreting and implementing global biodiversity targets into national regulatory frameworks. Together, both papers analysed the institutional design and implementation of policy instruments, and examined their contributions to a transformation for the sustainable use of biodiversity.

La réglementation actuelle, reposant sur la loi de 1976 sur la protection de la nature, impose aux maîtres d’ouvrage de respecter le principe « éviter – réduire – compenser » lors de la conception de les projets d’exploitation et d’aménagement. Lorsqu’un projet n’a pu ni éviter ni réduire les impacts environnementaux, il est nécessaire de définir des mesures compensatoires pour les impacts résiduels qualifiés de significatifs. Concernant les écosystèmes marins, ces mesures font appel à des actions écologiques ainsi qu’à des mesures de gestion et d’amélioration des connaissances sur le milieu marin. Alors que le développement de l’activité économique maritime est encouragé, en particulier, suite aux appels à la croissance bleue (e.g. tourisme maritime, EMR, pêche, aquaculture, ressources minérales marines, biotechnologies, transport maritime, construction navale), il est primordial de questionner nos capacités à prendre en compte les impacts de ces activités. A partir d’un état des lieux de la compensation sur le milieu marin en France, il s’agit d’identifier les limites du système actuel et de proposer des pistes d’amélioration. Ces dernières peuvent être méthodologiques et techniques, liées à la prise en compte de nouvelles approches ou à l’émergence de nouveaux systèmes de gouvernance. A travers l’analyse d’une cinquantaine d’études d’impacts françaises, les pressions et impacts générés par différents projets d’aménagements (infrastructures portuaires, dragages, extractions de granulats, prises et rejets d’eau, etc.) sont examinés et la pertinence des mesures ERC proposées est discutée. Ensuite, en se basant sur une revue bibliographique, la faisabilité et l’efficacité des techniques d’ingénierie écologique (écoconceptions portuaires, bio-remédiation et techniques de restauration des herbiers, macro-algues, récifs coralliens, populations d’ichtyofaune et bivalves) sont évaluées au regard des exigences de la séquence ERC. Cette analyse permet de discuter de la notion d’équivalence écologique et de proposer un arbre de décision original. D’autre part, constatant que les mesures compensatoires proposées dans les études d’impact ne sont que très rarement dimensionnées, une méthode opérationnelle permettant d’évaluer les besoins compensatoires est élaborée. Cette méthode associe une analyse multicritère de l’état de l’environnement inspirée de l’Unified Mitigation Assessment Method (UMAM, méthode utilisée en Floride pour les impacts autorisés) et une évaluation plus fine à l’échelle d’un indicateur empruntée à l’Habitat Equivalency Analysis (HEA, développée par la NOAA pour la compensation des dommages accidentels). Il s’agit ensuite d’examiner l’utilisation actuelle de l’approche par les services écosystémiques dans la compensation à travers la réglementation, les standards internationaux et la littérature scientifique. L’objectif est d’étudier en quoi cette approche permettrait d’améliorer la mise en place de la compensation mais aussi d’en souligner les limites. Enfin, l’approche sociologique de l’acteur-réseau (Callon, Latour) permet d’analyser les différents types organisationnels ayant émergé autour de la compensation en Californie. L’objectif est de critiquer, à partir de situations constatées en France et aux Etats-Unis, les réponses formulées en termes de gouvernance par ces deux sociétés côtières exigeant un principe de compensation. Ce travail souligne la nécessité de mettre en place des mesures ambitieuses et efficaces de compensation afin que le développement économique maritime cesse de contribuer à l’érosion de la biodiversité. / My research topic is multidisciplinary combining geography, ecology and economics and addressing the efficiency of current marine offset practice. Building on a state of the art of current practice, I am working on a more prospective approach (compared to current research on mitigation targeting terrestrial ecosystems). By offset, I am referring to legal mitigation that consists in avoiding – reducing – offsetting adverse impacts of development projects such as dredging, port infrastructure, oil exploration, marine aggregate extraction, beach nourishment, etc. on marine and coastal ecosystems. Based on a review of around fifty French marine Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs), I analyzed the assessment of impacts, the use of offset sizing methods (robust method to assess ecological losses due to development projects and ecological gains created by offset measures) and the kind of measures proposed. Within these EIAs, sizing methods were seldom used and the very few measures suggested to offset residual impacts could be questioned in terms of equivalency and appropriateness. These measures were either ecological engineering techniques (such as seagrass or coral restoration), management measures (used to reduce pressure on the impacted ecosystems through the funding of management measures in Marine Protected Areas for example) or even knowledge acquisition. Thus, I am also looking at the efficiency of ecological engineering techniques on marine and coastal ecosystems. My research mainly focuses on the offset of authorized impacts but could also deals with some aspects of the offset of accidental damages.

Economic development through the exploitation of natural resources has led to biodiversity loss among other environmental issues around the world. The use of biodiversity offsets to balance economic development and biodiversity conservation goals has significantly increased during the last three decades. A recent report of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) released in December of 2016 identified at least 56 countries with laws or policies requiring the use of these types of instruments worldwide. There are over 100 biodiversity offset programs operating in countries such as United States of America, France, New Zealand, Mexico, Australia and others, which are injecting over 3 USD billion per year into the world’s economy. Experiences of different jurisdictions indicate that biodiversity offsets can become a promising tool in addressing the biodiversity loss issue in their territories. Canada and some of its provinces such as Alberta and British Columbia, which have important oil and gas sectors, and are home to important wildlife species, have been part of the biodiversity offsets debate, and have been exploring their use. This research derives from the observation that although some of the international biodiversity offset experiences have been vastly studied, there is little experience analyzing the legal challenges of implementing biodiversity offset systems, including biodiversity banks (a type of biodiversity offset that creates biodiversity markets) on public lands. The very nature of public land, where multiple users may simultaneously access the land and conduct a variety of potentially incompatible activities, can create extra legal challenges with respect to the implementation of biodiversity offsets. Through an Alberta-focused case study, the thesis explores the characteristics that a planning and legal framework of a province with a majority of public lands would need to have in order to support the use of biodiversity offsets and a biodiversity banking system. It also identifies and analyzes the legal issues and challenges of implementing long lasting biodiversity offsets in that context. Under the system studied by this dissertation, the main users of Alberta’s public forests (forest operators and oil and gas developers) become the biodiversity bankers or suppliers, and buyers of biodiversity credits, respectively. This thesis is therefore a contribution to knowledge about how biodiversity offsets, specifically biodiversity banks, can be applied on provincial public lands, used by multiple users. It focuses on the legal frameworks, property right issues, permanence, and additionality needed for a potential biodiversity banking system for a province such as Alberta.

2015 antog världens länder 17 globala mål och Agenda 2030. I Sveriges nationella miljömålssystem fanns riktlinjer som gick i linje med Agenda 2030. Miljömålssystemet bestod bland annat av 16 miljökvalitetsmål. Denna studie fokuserade på ett av miljökvalitetsmålen, levande skogar och om skadelindringshierarkin kunde anses vara en metod för att uppnå detta mål. Skadelindringshierarkin består av fyra steg, 1. Undvika, 2. Minimera, 3. Återställa på plats, 4. Kompensera på annan plats. Tidigare studier hade visat att metoden var relativt ny i Sverige och att vissa problem fanns. Detta gjorde det intressant att redogöra för hur kommuner inom Örebro län arbetade med och tolkade metoden. En kvalitativ studie genomfördes där kommuner i Örebro län intervjuades. Resultatet visade att skadelindringshierarkin som begrepp var okänt, men att konceptet användes. Kommunerna ställde sig även positiva till metoden och ansåg att metoden kunde vara ett verktyg för kommunerna för att uppnå miljökvalitetsmålet levande skogar.

L’installation des énergies marines renouvelables s’effectue dans le respect des législations environnementales françaises. La séquence Eviter-Réduire-Compenser (ERC) est ainsi appliquée pour aboutir à une non-perte nette de biodiversité. L’objectif de la thèse est de questionner l’efficacité de cette séquence, et plus particulièrement celle de la compensation écologique, en tant qu’instrument d’internalisation et de lutte contre l’érosion de la biodiversité marine. Une approche empirique qualitative a ainsi été mise en oeuvre pour (i) identifier les facteurs écologiques et sociétaux ainsi que leurs caractéristiques théoriques qui doivent permettre à la compensation d’atteindre l’objectif de non-perte nette de biodiversité ; et (ii) contrôler si ces conditions sont vérifiées en pratique dans le cas de l’éolien en mer en Europe et en France. L’analyse met en avant les enjeux juridiques, institutionnels, méthodologiques et sociétaux à relever pour permettre à la compensation écologique d’atteindre son objectif. Sur la base de ce constat, une évaluation multicritères est proposée afin de renforcer les étapes d’évitement et de réduction pour finalement mieux définir les besoins de compensation écologique en mer. L’analyse met par ailleurs en évidence un glissement d’une compensation basée sur une équivalence écologique stricte à une compensation fondée sur une équivalence écologique relâchée. Les actions de compensation tendent à être plus généralistes et/ou davantage dirigées vers les services écosystémiques que sur les composantes des écosystèmes. Associées aux mesures d’accompagnement, elles peuvent contribuer à faciliter l’acceptabilité sociale d’un projet d’aménagement. / The installation of marine renewable energies is carried out in compliance with French environmental legislation. The mitigation hierarchy is thus applied to achieve an objective of no net loss of biodiversity. This thesis aims at questioning the effectiveness of the mitigation hierarchy and more specifically biodiversity offsetting as an internalization instrument to halt the erosion of marine biodiversity. We use a qualitative empirical approach to (i) identify the ecological and societal factors as well as their theoretical characteristics that are supposed to enable the offsets achieving the objective of no net loss of biodiversity; and (ii) control whether these conditions are verified in practice for the case of offshore wind farms in Europe and France. The analysis highlights the legal, institutional, methodological and societal issues to be addressed in order to enable biodiversity offsetting to achieve the no net loss priority. On the basis of this observation, a multi-criteria assessment is carried out to reinforce the avoidance and reduction steps of the mitigation hierarchy in order to better define offsetting needs. Ultimately, the analysis shows a shift in biodiversity offsetting based on a strict ecological equivalence to a biodiversity offsetting based on a released ecological equivalence. Offsetting actions tend to be more generalist and / or more directed to ecosystem services than to ecosystem components. Associated with accompanying measures, offsetting actions can help to increase the social acceptability of a development project.