En Europe, l'abondance et la variété des espèces animales présentes sur les terres agricoles – la «biodiversité des terres agricoles» – connaissent un déclin marqué. L'UE s'était pourtant engagée à enrayer la perte de biodiversité d'ici 2020. À cet effet, la Commission a prévu d'allouer 66 milliards d'euros au titre de la politique agricole commune entre 2014 et 2020.

L’Initiative des droits et ressources (RRI pour son sigle en anglais), publie trois nouvelles analyses techniques qui serviront de feuille de route pour intensifier les réformes des régimes fonciers à l’échelle mondiale. Le lancement de ces analyses est destiné à influencer les bailleurs de fonds, les décideurs politiques, les négociateurs et les investisseurs avant la Semaine du climat des Nations unies, et à alimenter les négociations du Cadre mondial pour la biodiversité de l’après-2020, de la Convention sur la diversité biologique 15 et de la CCNUCC COP 26.

Amid climate change, biodiversity loss and food insecurity, there is the growing need to draw synergies between micro-scale environmental processes and practices, and macro-level ecosystem dynamics to facilitate conservation decision-making. Adopting this synergistic approach can improve crop yields and profitability more sustainably, enhance livelihoods and mitigate climate change.

Insects, the most diverse and abundant animal species on the planet, are critical in providing numerous ecosystem services which are significant to the United Nation’s Sustainable Development Goals (UN-SDGs). In addition to the UN-SDGs, the UN has declared the period 2021–2030 as the “Decade on Ecosystem Restoration.” Insects, because of the ecosystem services they provide, are critical indicators of restoration success.

Offsets for compensating biodiversity loss are increasingly suggested as a system for allocating responsibilities onto those actors who contribute to the loss. As the mechanism is outlined as a new opportunity, the expectations need to be analyzed relative to the ensuing changes in rights and responsibilities over biodiversity degradation, conservation and restoration. In this paper we conduct an analysis of rights and responsibilities using literature and empirical material.

Most stakeholder-based research concerning agri-environmental schemes (AES) derives from work engaging with farmers and land managers. Consequently, the voices and opinions of other actors involved in AES tends to be unrepresented in the wider literature. One group of actors that seem particularly overlooked in this respect are private (independent) farm advisors (i.e., the consultants contracted by farmers and land managers to advise-on AES and agronomic matters).

The conciliation between different issues such as agriculture production, biodiversity conservation and water management remains unsolved in many places in the world. As a striking example, the wet grasslands of the Marais Poitevin region (France) presents many obstacles against the integration of these issues, especially in terms of public policy design.

Avoided ecological loss is an appropriate measure of conservation effectiveness, but challenging to measure because it requires consideration of counterfactual conditions. Land-use simulation is a well suited but underutilized tool in this regard. As a case study for the application of land-use simulation to assess the impact of protected areas, we present a scenario analysis exploring conservation options in Canada’s western boreal forest.

Worldwide semi-natural habitats of high biological value are in decline. Consequently, numerous Agri-Environment Schemes (AESs) intended to halt biodiversity loss within these habitats have been implemented. One approach has been the application of “adaptive management”, where scientific knowledge is applied alongside the traditional ecological knowledge (TEK) of stakeholders in order to establish an integrated approach that is adjusted as outcomes are assessed. In this paper we examine the effectiveness of the adaptive management approach of Norway’s Action Plan for Hay Meadows (APHM).

Increasing food production without further harming biodiversity is a key challenge of contemporary societies. In this paper, we assess trade-offs between agricultural output and two key agri-environmental indicators in four contrasting scenarios for Europe in 2040. The scenarios represent different storylines encompassing assumptions on macro-economic drivers (e.g.

Over the past 15 years Australia has been trialling conservation tenders and other market based instrument approaches to generate environmental outcomes, particularly on private lands. The best known of these is the BushTender auction for vegetation protection in Victoria, begun in the early 2000s. Subsequently, nearly 100 other tenders for biodiversity protection have been run in Australia with substantial variations in application and methodology generated by a mix of both intended design and case study differences.

Biodiversity offsets seek to counterbalance loss of biodiversity due to major developments by generating equivalent biodiversity benefits elsewhere, resulting, at least in theory, in ‘no net loss’ (or even a ‘net positive gain’) in biodiversity. While local costs of major developments themselves receive significant attention, the local costs of associated biodiversity offsets have not.