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.

This research used Geographical Information System (GIS) data to estimate the acreage of wetland loss due to small-scale activities (taking into account exempt, permitted, and unauthorized activities) in the Southwest District of the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) between 2006 and 2011 and compared that net loss with the unmitigated wetland net loss that DEP documented during that time for authorized activities and violations that were discovered. The comparison allowed an estimation of the extent of undocumented small-scale unmitigated wetland loss that occurred during those six years. DEP records show that 88% of non-compliance cases remain unresolved, and the net loss of wetlands that was documented by DEP is 28.66 acres. The change in acreage of DEP-regulated wetlands (and wetlands on agricultural parcels) as determined by GIS analysis is 1,250 acres gained. However, evidence shows that some of the water features categorized as wetlands in the GIS interface are reservoirs which may not be providing the functions necessary to mitigate for wetland loss. Evidence also shows that many small-scale wetland alterations were not detected by remote sensing, indicating that there is a great level of uncertainty in the GIS interpretation. Consequently, achievement of the No Net Loss goal in Florida cannot be determined using documented alterations, nor can it be determined by use of medium-high resolution aerial imagery. The analysis can be extrapolated to the rest of Florida, where State wetland protection regulations are constant.

Titre : La compensation écologique : du principe de non perte nette de biodiversité à son opérationnalisation – analyse de l’action collectiveMots clés : Compensation écologique, action collective, effets spatio-temporels, Non perte nette de biodiversité.Résumé : En France la compensation écologique des impacts résiduels sur la biodiversité a pour objectif l'atteinte de la non perte nette de biodiversité. Un cadre normatif énonçant une dizaine de principes permet théoriquement d'atteindre cet objectif.Nous étudions donc la mise en œuvre de la compensation écologique à travers trois projets de LGV. Nous analysons le jeu d'acteur autour de cette mise en œuvre grâce aux théories de l'action collective, et notamment grâce au cadre analytique de la Traduction proposé par M. Callon. Cette première analyse nous permet de comprendre en quoi la compensation est un objet socio-technique. Nous mettons en évidence que de nombreux acteurs aux intérêts divergents se mobilisent pour mettre en place la compensation écologique. Nous montrons qu’il y a une tension entre la mobilisation des acteurs et les exigences écologiques, ces deux aspects ne sont pas toujours compatibles. La durée des cahiers de charges et la rétribution des propriétaires fonciers, chargés de la mise en œuvre de la compensation écologique est déterminante à la fois pour la mobilisation des humains et des nons humains (biodiversité). Nous nous interrogeons ensuite sur les effets spatiaux temporels de l’action collective et de sa capacité à tendre vers une non perte nette de biodiversité. Nous montrons que les mesures n’ont pas pu être effectives avant le démarrage des impacts. La gestion du foncier en France semble pour le moment difficilement compatible avec une mise en œuvre de la compensation non anticipée très en amont. Nous montrons que la majorité des sites de mesures de compensation sont de petites tailles, bien que des espaces de grandes tailles semblent davantage vertueux d’un point de vue écologique. Enfin nous montrons que la pérennité des mesures de compensations peut être appréhendée à différents niveaux suivant (i) le type de maîtrise foncière (acquisition, conventionnement); (ii) les contrats de mesures de compensation (durée, contenu de ces derniers – les sanctions en cas de manquement aux obligations influent sur le maintien des mesures) ; (iii) la gestion du renouvellement de ces contrats; (iv) la vocation des propriétaires des sites (une entreprises publique ou privée de construction n’a pas comme rôle au départ de conserver la biodiversité, tandis qu’une association naturaliste en a la vocation) ; (v) la pérennité des structures et les assurances quant au devenir des sites de mesures de compensation en cas de faillite; (vi) le suivi et le contrôle l’application de la compensation. / In France, the objective of ecological compensation for residual impacts on biodiversity is to achieve no net loss of biodiversity. A normative framework setting out about ten principles theoretically makes it possible to achieve this objective.We are therefore studying the implementation of biodiversity offset through three High Speed Railway projects. We analyze the actor's game around this implementation through the theories of collective action, and in particular the analytical framework of Translation proposed by M. Callon. This first analysis allows us to understand how biodiversity offset is a socio-technical object. We highlight that many actors with diverging stakes are mobilizing to implement ecological compensation. We show that there is a tension between the mobilization of actors and ecological requirements, these two aspects are not always compatible. The duration of the environmental services specifications and the associated retribution of landowners, who set-up biodiversity offset specification, is decisive for both human and non-human (biodiversity) mobilization. We then question the temporal spatial effects of collective action and its ability to achieve a net loss of biodiversity. We show that the measures could not be effective before the impacts began. Land management in France seems for the moment to be difficult to reconcile with the implementation of unanticipated biodiversity offset at a very early stage. We show that the majority of biodiversity offset sites are small in size, although larger areas seem more virtuous for biodiversity. Finally, we show that the sustainability of biodiversity offset measures can be assessed at different levels depending on (i) the type of land control (acquisition, agreement); (ii) biodiversity offset contracts (duration, content of the latter - sanctions in the event of failure to comply with obligations influence the maintenance of the measures); (iii) the management of the renewal of these contracts; (iv) the vocation of the owners of the sites (a public or private construction company does not initially have the role of conserving biodiversity, whereas an environmental NGO has the vocation); (v) the sustainability of the structures and assurances as to the future of the biodiversity offset measures sites in the event of bankruptcy; (vi) the monitoring and control of the implementation.

‘Nature-positive’ (NP) is emerging as an increasingly used term, intended to encompass goals aimed at reversing the global decline in biodiversity and the incessant destruction of ecosystems. The 1.5-degree goal of the Paris agreement has become a unifying target in the climate discourse, accompanied by the guiding concept of ‘net-zero’ emissions. Anequivalent, widely accepted target for biodiversity has been called for, with NP being named a contender to take this position. However, the concept NP, and net-zero alike, have been subject to criticism. Building on an extensive literature search, this study seeks to identify and analyse the most frequently employed definitions of NP, and who promotes them. It also aims to draw conclusions from a comparative analysis where definitions of NP are mapped onto the IPBES- promoted Nature Futures Framework (NFF). For this purpose, an assessment tool (‘the NFF Mixing Triangle’) is presented. The study finds that NP is frequently used without specifying its meaning, in scientific and non-scientific literature alike. While existing dominant definitions are largely aligned on the conceptual level, there is a lack of consensus on a common definition among stakeholders. The Global Goal for Nature (GG4N) stands out as the most referenced source for defining NP, and is found to have the strongest alignment with NFF. While problematising and discussing criticism, the study suggests a number of focus areas that could serve the future potential of NP. This includes converging NP definitions, balancing definitions across the NFF value dimensions, and considering applicability across multiple scales. An aspiration to consolidate guiding frameworks, use of the Mitigation Hierarchy to strengthen the robustness of NP, and focus on stewardship inside corporations as well as across sectors and value chains, is proposed. Meanwhile, the study suggests that the external drivers of legislation and regulation, and the current growth paradigm and consumption patterns, need to be addressed in concert if NP is to have a real contribution to sustainability transformation.

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.

La compensation écologique, envisagée dans le respect de la séquence éviter-réduire-compenser les impacts, cherche à apporter des réponses à la crise actuelle d’érosion de la biodiversité. L’objectif de la thèse est de comprendre quels sont les enjeux organisationnels et institutionnels de la mise en œuvre du principe de compensation écologique pour les impacts sur les écosystèmes aquatiques marins et continentaux en Europe et aux Etats-Unis. La thèse mobilise le cadre théorique de l’économie néo-institutionnelle. Les organisations de type hiérarchique (compensation au cas par cas) ont pour principales limites d’avoir une efficacité écologique discutable et de ne pas permettre le suivi et le contrôle des mesures compensatoires ce qui conduit souvent à ce que la compensation ne soit pas ou peu mise en œuvre. Aux Etats-Unis, les banques de compensation consistent en une réponse anticipée et mutualisée aux dommages à l’environnement. Il s’agit d’une forme organisationnelle alternative hybride fortement régulée à mi-chemin entre la hiérarchie et le marché. Cependant, les acteurs ont des stratégies collectives et individuelles qui engendrent des négociations ayant des conséquences sur les enjeux de développement économique et de maintien des objectifs de conservation de la biodiversité. Le système des banques de compensation crée un double phénomène de redistribution des coûts de transaction et de diminution de ceux-ci mais il semble que l’évolution de l’ensemble du cadre d’application de la compensation écologique américain permet aujourd’hui une complémentarité institutionnelle entre ces deux formes organisationnelles plutôt qu’une disparition des formes hiérarchiques. / Biodiversity offset, as the last step of the mitigation hierarchy (avoid/reduce/offset), aims to address the current biodiversity loss crisis. The main goal of this PhD, which relies on the new institutional economics approach as a theoretical framework, is to understand the organizational and institutional issues of implementing biodiversity offsets policies for impacts on continental and offshore wetlands in Europe and the United-States. Hierarchical organizations (i.e. permittee responsible mitigation) often lead to little to no implementation of biodiversity offsets because the ecological effectiveness of case-by-case compensatory measures is unproven and the monitoring and control of numerous measures are difficult. In the United-States, the mitigation banking system aims to compensate for multiple small impacts on wetlands by carrying out restoration projects on fewer but larger wetland areas in order to reach the goal of no net loss of biodiversity. This hybrid organizational form is highly regulated and therefore stands halfway between hierarchical and market organizations. However, actors have individual and collective strategies that generate negotiations with consequences on economic development and biodiversity conservation stakes. The mitigation banking system leads to a decrease of transaction costs and a change of the actors bearing them. It seems that the evolution of the whole framework of biodiversity offsets policy implementation in the United-States leans toward an institutional complementarity between these two organizational forms rather than a disappearance of hierarchical organizations.