English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

L’evolution du contexte reglementaire a renforce l’obligation de compenser " en nature " les impacts sur la biodiversite qui n’ont pas pu etre evites ou reduits. Dans ce contexte, l’evaluation de l’equivalence entre les pertes causees par ces impacts et les gains de biodiversite attendus des actions de compensation suscite des questions scientifiques et techniques quant aux concepts et connaissances a mobiliser et aux methodes d’evaluation a developper et mettre en ½uvre. On y trouve en particulier l'identification des elements de biodiversite a considerer, le developpement d’indicateurs appropries permettant de comparer pertes et gains, la selection d’un etat de reference pour le calcul des pertes et gains, et la prise en compte des dynamiques ecologiques et des incertitudes dans l’evaluation du devenir des sites de compensation. Par ces questions, l'equivalence ecologique donne un cadre de raisonnement explicite a la conception et au dimensionnement de la compensation qui est appropriable par chacun des acteurs concernes. / Since 2007 France has seen a radical strengthening of its legislation concerning the mitigation of development impacts on biodiversity and ecosystems. Under pressure from the European Union and as an outcome of a national consultative process called the “Grenelle de l’Environnement”, the scope of the mitigation hierarchy of avoiding, reducing and offsetting impacts of plans, programs and projects has been expanded. It now includes stronger requirements in terms of monitoring and effective implementation. These changes – which have strong financial and legal implications for developers - have revealed the lack of technical guidelines for designing and sizing offsets. Assessing the ecological equivalence between losses caused by impacts and the gains expected from offset actions raises scientific and technical issues that remain unresolved. These include the identification of relevant components of biodiversity, the development of appropriate indicators, the identification of reference states and the incorporation of ecological dynamics and uncertainties into offset design and sizing.

hal (le centre pour la communication scientifique directe)

Les enjeux de l’équivalence écologique pour la conception et le dimensionnement de mesures compensatoires d’impacts sur la biodiversité et les milieux naturels,