mod­i­fied after: http://milliontrees.me/2011/06/22/fortress-conservation-the-loss-of-recreational-access

D. M. Evans, R. Altwegg, T. W. J. Gar­ner, M. E. Gomp­per, I. J. Gor­don, J. A. John­son and N. Pet­torelli have pub­lished a paper enti­tled “Bio­di­ver­sity off­set­ting: what are the chal­lenges, oppor­tu­ni­ties and research pri­or­i­ties for ani­mal con­ser­va­tion?” in Ani­mal Con­ser­va­tion (2014, edi­to­r­ial, pp. 1–3). The authors conclude:

We believe Gard­ner et al. (2013) pro­vide a use­ful con­cep­tual frame­work of the offset-related con­di­tions and design activ­i­ties nec­es­sary to eval­u­ate efforts to achieve NNL con­ser­va­tion out­comes. How­ever, we also acknowl­edge that the sci­en­tific knowl­edge gaps are sig­nif­i­cant and that much more research is needed to ensure that bio­di­ver­sity off­set­ting schemes do ben­e­fit ani­mal con­ser­va­tion. To over­come the above-mentioned issues, con­struc­tive, crit­i­cal engage­ment is required between con­ser­va­tion sci­en­tists and deci­sion mak­ers, which could be facil­i­tated by build­ing more inter­dis­ci­pli­nary pro­grams that allow more trans­parency and com­mon under­stand­ing of con­cepts and issues among stake­hold­ers. It will then be pos­si­ble to give bio­di­ver­sity off­set­ting projects ade­quate scrutiny and move them from being a largely sym­bolic pol­icy to a use­ful tool that can rec­on­cile nature con­ser­va­tion and resource development.

You can access the full paper here or find a pdf fol­low­ing: Bio­di­ver­sity off­set­ting and ani­mal conservation