The DOI matches its Crossref record; 46 of the 46 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Biodiversity offsets in theory and practice
Open accessAbstract
Biodiversity offsets are an increasingly popular yet controversial tool in conservation. Their popularity lies in their potential to meet the objectives of biodiversity conservation and of economic development in tandem; the controversy lies in the need to accept ecological losses in return for uncertain gains. The offsetting approach is being widely adopted, even though its methodologies and the overriding conceptual framework are still under development. This review of biodiversity offsetting evaluates implementation to date and synthesizes outstanding theoretical and practical problems. We begin by outlining the criteria that make biodiversity offsets unique and then explore the suite of conceptual challenges arising from these criteria and indicate potential design solutions. We find that biodiversity offset schemes have been inconsistent in meeting conservation objectives because of the challenge of ensuring full compliance and effective monitoring and because of conceptual flaws in the approach itself. Evidence to support this conclusion comes primarily from developed countries, although offsets are increasingly being implemented in the developing world. We are at a critical stage: biodiversity offsets risk becoming responses to immediate development and conservation needs without an overriding conceptual framework to provide guidance and evaluation criteria. We clarify the meaning of the term biodiversity offset and propose a framework that integrates the consideration of theoretical and practical challenges in the offset process. We also propose a research agenda for specific topics around metrics, baselines and uncertainty.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Beyond species: functional diversity and the maintenance of ecological processes and services
Cadotte, M. W., Carscadden, K., & Mirotchnick, N. (2011) · Journal of Applied Ecology · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2664.2011.02048.x · Cited by 2,396
Nelson, E., Mendoza, G., Regetz, J., Polasky, S., Tallis, H., Cameron, D., Chan, K. M., Daily, G. C., Goldstein, J., Kareiva, P. M., et al. (2009) · Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment · doi:10.1890/080023 · Cited by 2,389
Getting the measure of biodiversity
Purvis, A., & Hector, A. (2000) · Nature · doi:10.1038/35012221 · Cited by 1,428
Entering the Century of the Environment: A New Social Contract for Science
Lubchenco, J. (1998) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.279.5350.491 · Cited by 1,315
Money for Nothing? A Call for Empirical Evaluation of Biodiversity Conservation Investments
Ferraro, P. J., & Pattanayak, S. K. (2006) · PLoS Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0040105 · Cited by 1,312
Global mapping of ecosystem services and conservation priorities
Naidoo, R., Balmford, A., Costanza, R., Fisher, B., Green, R. E., Lehner, B., Malcolm, T. R., & Ricketts, T. H. (2008) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0707823105 · Cited by 1,048
Structural and Functional Loss in Restored Wetland Ecosystems
Moreno-Mateos, D., Power, M. E., Comín, F. A., & Yockteng, R. (2012) · PLoS Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.1001247 · Cited by 952
A TAXONOMY AND TREATMENT OF UNCERTAINTY FOR ECOLOGY AND CONSERVATION BIOLOGY
Regan, H. M., Colyvan, M., & Burgman, M. A. (2002) · Ecological Applications · doi:10.1890/1051-0761(2002)012[0618:atatou]2.0.co;2 · Cited by 789
The Myths of Restoration Ecology
Hilderbrand, R. H., Watts, A. C., & Randle, A. M. (2005) · Ecology and Society · doi:10.5751/es-01277-100119 · Cited by 554
Faustian bargains? Restoration realities in the context of biodiversity offset policies
Maron, M., Hobbs, R. J., Moilanen, A., Matthews, J. W., Christie, K., Gardner, T. A., Keith, D. A., Lindenmayer, D. B., & McAlpine, C. A. (2012) · Biological Conservation · doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2012.06.003 · Cited by 542
Metadata
- Authors
- Bull, J. W., Suttle, K. B., Gordon, A., Singh, N. J., & Milner-Gulland, E. J.
- Venue
- Oryx
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- Published
- 2013-05-14
- Volume
- 47
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 369-380
- ISSN
- 0030-6053 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-3008
- OpenAlex
- W2163177138
- Cited by
- 482
- References
- 46
- FWCI
- 90.92
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Biodiversity offsets in theory and practice. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1017/s003060531200172x
- The paper
- Bull, J. W., Suttle, K. B., Gordon, A., Singh, N. J., & Milner-Gulland, E. J. (2013). Biodiversity offsets in theory and practice. Oryx. https://doi.org/10.1017/s003060531200172x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.