Free Access
Issue
Nat. Sci. Soc.
Volume 20, Number 1, janvier-mars 2012
Dossier « Le champ des commons en question : perspectives croisées » (suite)
Page(s) 16 - 29
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/nss/2012003
Published online 04 July 2012
  • Banque mondiale, 1997. Expanding the Measure of Wealth: Indicators of Environmentally Sustainable Development, Washington (DC), Banque mondiale.
  • Barbier, E.B., 1994. Valuing environmental functions, tropical wetlands, Land Economics, 70, 155-173. [CrossRef]
  • Barbier, E.B., Baumgärtner, S., Chopra, K., Costello, C., Duraiappah, A., Hassan, R., Kinzig, A., Lehmann, M., Pascual, U., Polasky, S., Perrings, C., 2009. The Valuation of ecosystem services, in Naeem, S., Bunker, D.E., Hector, A., Loreau, M., Perrings, C. (Eds), Biodiversity, Ecosystem Functioning, and Human Well Being, Oxford and New York, Oxford University Press, 248-262.
  • Bartelmus, P., 2009. The cost of natural capital consumption: Accounting for a sustainable world economy, Ecological Economics, 68, 6, 1850-1857. [CrossRef]
  • Bas, A., Gaubert, H., 2010. La Directive « Responsabilité environnementale » et ses méthodes d’équivalence, La Défense, Commissariat général du développement durable, Service de l’économie, de l’évaluation et de l’intégration du développement durable (http://www.developpement-durable.gouv.fr/IMG/pdf/ED19b.pdf).
  • Boltanski, L., Thévenot, L., 1991. De la justification : les économies de la grandeur, Paris, Gallimard.
  • Borde, A.B., O’Rourke, L.K., Thom, R.M., Williams, G.W., Diefenderfer, H.L., 2004. National Review of Innovative and Successful Coastal Habitat Restoration. Report prepared for National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Coastal Services Center, Battelle Memorial Institute, Duxbury (MAS).
  • Braat, L., ten Brink, P., 2008. The Cost of Policy Inaction (COPI): The Case of not Meeting the 2010 Biodiversity Target. Report to the European Commission, Wageningen/Brussels (http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/biodiversity/economics/teeb_en.htm).
  • Chevassus-au-Louis, B., Salles, J.-M., Pujol, J.-L. (Eds), Conseil d’analyse stratégique, 2009. Approche économique de la biodiversité et des services liés aux écosystèmes, Paris, La Documentation française.
  • Commission des comptes et de l'économie de l'environnement, 2009. L'Économie de l'environnement en 2007 : rapport de la Commission des comptes et de l’économie de l’environnement. Édition 2009. Commissariat général au développement durable, Service de l’observation des statistiques, La Défense.
  • Committee on Assessing and Valuing the Services of Aquatic and Related Terrestrial Ecosystems, National Research Council, 2004. Valuing Ecosystem Services: Toward Better Environmental Decision-Making, Washington (DC), The National Academies Press.
  • Costanza, R., d’Arge, R., de Groot, R., Farber, S., Grasso, M., Hannon, B., Limburg, K., Naeem, S., O’Neill, R.V., Paruelo, J., Raskin, R.G., Sutton, P., van den Belt, M., 1997. The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital, Nature, 387, 253-260. [CrossRef]
  • Costanza, R., Fisher, B., Mulder, K., Liu, S., Christopher, T., 2007. Biodiversity and ecosystem services: A multi-scale empirical study of the relationship between species richness and net primary production, Ecological Economics, 61, 2-3, 478-491. [CrossRef]
  • Daily, G.C., Polasky, S., Goldstein, J., Kareiva, P.M., Mooney, H.A., Pejchar, L., Ricketts, T.H., Salzman, J., Shallenberger, R., 2009. Ecosystem services in decision making: Time to deliver, Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 7, 1, 21-28. [CrossRef]
  • Desrosières, A., 2003. Les qualités des quantités, Courrier des statistiques, 105-106, 51-63.
  • Dunford, R.W., Ginn, T.C., Desvousges, W.H., 2004. The use of habitat equivalency analysis in natural resource damage assessments, Ecological Economics, 48, 1, 49-70. [CrossRef]
  • Ekins, P., 2003. Identifying critical natural capital: Conclusions about critical natural capital, Ecological Economics, 44, 2-3, 277-292. [CrossRef]
  • Environmental Protection Agency, 2009. Valuing the Protection of Ecological Systems and Services. Report of the EPA Science Advisory Board, Washington (DC).
  • Espeland, W.N., Stevens, M.L., 1998. Commensuration as a social process, Annual Review of Sociology, 24, 313-343. [CrossRef]
  • Fonseca, M.S., Kenworthy, W.J., Julius, B.E., Shutler, S., Fluke, S., 2002. Seagrasses, in Perrow, M.R., Davy, A.J., Handbook of Ecological Restoration, vol. 2, Cambridge (UK) and New York, Cambridge University Press, 149-170.
  • Gunderson, L.H., Holling, C.S. (Eds), 2002. Panarchy: Understanding Transformations in Human and Natural Systems, Washington (DC), Island Press.
  • Heal, G., 2000. Nature and the Marketplace: Capturing the Value of Ecosystem Services, Washington (DC), Island Press.
  • Jones, C.-A., Pease, K.-A., 1997. Restoration-based compensation measure in natural resource liability statutes, Contemporary Economic Policy, 15, 110-122. [CrossRef]
  • Kalaydjian, R. (Ed.), 2007. La Mer a de l’avenir : données économiques maritimes françaises 2007. Synthèse Ifremer, Issy-les-Moulineaux.
  • King, D.M., Bohlen, C.C., 1995. The Cost of Wetland Creation and Restoration. Technical Report DOE/MT/92006-9 (DE95000174), US Department of Energy, Washington (DC).
  • Krutilla, J.V., 1967. Conservation reconsidered, The American Economic Review, 57, 4, 83-91.
  • Levrel, H., Fontaine, B., Henry, P-Y, Jiguet, F., Julliard, R., Kerbiriou, C., Couvet, D., 2010. Balancing state and volunteer investment in biodiversity monitoring for the implementation of CBD indicators: A French example, Ecological Economics, 69, 7, 1580-1586. [CrossRef]
  • Lewis, R.R., 2001. Mangrove restoration: Costs and benefits of successful ecological restoration, Mangrove Valuation Workshop, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Penang, 4-8 April, Beijer International Institute of Ecological Economics, Stockholm.
  • Martinez, M.L., Intralawan, A., Vázquez, G., Pérez-Maqueo, O., Sutton, P., Landgrave, R., 2007. The coasts of our world: Ecological, economic and social importance, Ecological Economics, 63, 2-3, 254-272. [CrossRef]
  • Mazzotta, M., Opaluch, J.J., Grigalunas, T.A., 1994. Natural resource damage assessment: The role of resource restoration, Natural Resource Journal, 34, 1, 153-178.
  • Micklin, P., 2007. The Aral Sea disaster, Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences, 35, 47-72. [CrossRef]
  • Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, 2005. Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Synthesis, Washington (DC), Island Press.
  • Moberg, F., Rönnbäck, P., 2003. Ecosystem services of the tropical seascape: Interactions, substitutions and restoration, Ocean Coastal Management, 46, 27-46. [CrossRef]
  • National Research Council, 2000. Watershed Management for Potable Water Supply: Assessing the New York City Strategy, Washington (DC), The National Academy Press.
  • National Research Council, 2001. Compensating for Wetlands Losses under the Clean Water Act: Committee on Mitigating Wetland Losses, Washington (DC), The National Academy Press.
  • Nelson, E., Mendoza, G., Regetz, J., Polasky, S., Tallis, H., Cameron, D.R., Chan, K.M., Daily, G.C., Goldstein, J., Kareiva, P.M., Lonsdorf, E., Naidoo, R., Ricketts, T., Shaw, M.R., 2009. Modeling multiple ecosystem services, biodiversity conservation, commodity production, and tradeoffs at landscape scales, Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 7, 1, 4-11. [CrossRef]
  • Norgaard, R.B., Bode, C., 1998. Next, the value of God, and other reactions, Ecological Economics, 25, 1, 37-39. [CrossRef]
  • OCDE, 2004. Handbook of Market Creation for Biodiversity: Issues in Implementation, Paris, OECD Publications.
  • Palmer, M.A., Filoso, S., 2009. Restoration of ecosystem services for environmental markets, Science, 325, 575-576. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  • Pearce, D.W., Atkinson, G.D., 1993. Capital theory and the measurement of sustainable development: An indicator of “weak” sustainability, Ecological Economics, 8, 2, 103-108. [CrossRef]
  • Pimentel, D., Zuniga, R., Morrison, D., 2005. Update on the environmental and economic costs associated with alien-invasive species in the United States, Ecological Economics, 52, 3, 273-288. [CrossRef] [MathSciNet]
  • Roach, B., Wade, W.W., 2006. Policy evaluation of natural resource injuries using habitat equivalency analysis, Ecological Economics, 58, 2, 421-433. [CrossRef]
  • Thanner, S.E., McIntosh, T.L., Blair, S.M., 2006. Development of benthic and fish assemblages on artificial reef materials compared to adjacent natural reef assemblages in Miami-Dade county, Florida, Bulletin of Marine Science, 78, 1, 57-70.
  • The Economics of Ecosystem and Biodiversity, 2010. Mainstreaming the Economics of Nature: A synthesis of the Approach, Conclusions and Recommendations of TEEB (http://www.teebweb.org/Portals/25/TEEB%20Synthesis/TEEB_Synth Report_09_2010_online.pdf).
  • Thompson, D.B., 2002. Valuing the environment: Courts’ struggles with natural resource damages, Environmental Law, 32, 57-89.
  • Weber, J.-L., 2007. Implementation of land and ecosystem accounts at the European Environment Agency, Ecological Economics, 61, 4, 695-707. [CrossRef]
  • Zafonte, M., Hampton, S., 2007. Exploring welfare implications of resource equivalency analysis in natural resource damage assessments, Ecological Economics, 61, 1, 134-145. [CrossRef]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.