Abstract
Despite their increasing recognition in selected public discourses, biodiversity offsets remain a highly specific subject in expert circles in various locations worldwide. However, these circles are increasingly connected and exchanging, in particular using information and communication technologies online. Therefore, an expert and Internet based research approach was chosen for this study. It follows a netnographic approach in terms of an “offering strategy” to start an interaction and to engage others in a research process. For this purpose, the “Biodiversity Offsets Blog” was created. It served as a content management system to store, structure, and comment information, and it provided the base for a personal learning network, together with exploratory qualified Internet research using the Google search engine as well as chosen social network sites (LinkedIn, ResearchGate, and Twitter) and online curation services (Scoop.it).
In research practice, the process of typification often follows simplified methodologies or is implicitly carried out (intuitive types). By contrast, this study explicitly reflects the process of how types are built. Building on the method of empirically grounded typification, this study consists of an extensive theoretical analysis of voluntariness and biodiversity offsets. This is empirically underlined by two consecutive steps: (1) a screening of potential biodiversity offsets cases and (after grouping these cases to the built types) and (2) illustrative case studies for each of the built types. Due to the exploratory nature of the study, both the screening and the choice of illustrative case studies built on maximum variation, i.e., a spatially and functionally diverse set of cases.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
This observation refers to offsets at global scale. Notwithstanding, there are single offset schemes with a long tradition and numerous projects implemented, e.g., US Wetland Mitigation and German Impact Mitigation.
- 2.
According to Silverman (2006, cited in Earl et al. 2010), document review involves systematic categorization of information into either predetermined or emergent themes.
References
Barton AH (1955) The concept of property-space in social research. In: Lazarsfeld PF, Rosenberg M (eds) The language of social research. Free, New York, pp 40–53
BirdLife International (2008) Finding ways to offset private sector impacts on biodiversity. Presented as part of the BirdLife State of the world’s birds website. Available at http://www.birdlife.org/datazone/sowb/casestudy/206. Checked 24/02/2016
Bohnsack R (2007) Typenbildung, Generalisierung und komparative Analyse: Grundprinzipien der dokumentarischen Methode. In: Bohnsack R, Nentwig-Gesemann I, Nohl A-M (eds) Die dokumentarische Methode und ihre Forschungspraxis. Leske + Budrich, Opladen, pp 225–253
Corsten M, Herma H (2015) Internetbasierte Daten als sprachsoziologische Rätsel. In: Schirmer D, Sander N, Wenninger A (eds) Die qualitative Analyse internetbasierter Daten. Springer, Wiesbaden, pp 199–226
Darbi M, Ohlenburg H, Herberg A, Wende W (2010) Impact mitigation and biodiversity offsets-compensation approaches from around the world: a study on the application of Article 14 of the CBD (Convention on Biological Diversity). BfN-Schr.-Vertrieb im Landwirtschaftsverl.
Earl G, Curtis A, Allan C (2010) Towards a duty of care for biodiversity. Environ Manag (4):682–696
FERN (n.d.) Biodiversity offsetting. Available at http://www.fern.org/campaign/biodiversity-offsetting
Flick U, Kardorff EV, Steinke I (2000) Qualitative forschung. Ein Handbuch, vol 337. Rowohlt, Reinbek
Harris R (2014) Is biodiversity offsetting just a tool for the elite to extract more wealth from natural resources? LinkedIn discussion. Available at https://www.linkedin.com/groups/3667510/3667510-5829721851814776836
Hempel CG, Oppenheim P (1936) Der Typusbegriff im Lichte der neuen Logik. Wissenschaftstheoretische Untersuchungen zur Konstitutionsforschung u. Psychologie. Sijthoff, Leiden
Kluge S (1999) Empirisch begründete Typenbildung. Zur Konstruktion von Typen und Typologien in der qualitativen Sozialforschung. Leske + Budrich, Opladen
Kozinets RV (2010) Netnography. Wiley, London
Lazarsfeld PF (1937) Some remarks on the typological procedures in social research. Zeitschrift für Sozialforschung 6(1):119–139
Monbiot G (2014) The pricing of everything. Available at http://www.monbiot.com/2014/07/24/the-pricing-of-everything/
Müller R, Plieninger J, Rapp C (2013) Recherche 2.0: Finden und Weiterverarbeiten in Studium und Beruf. Springer, Wiesbaden
Nentwich M (2003) Cyberscience: research in the age of the internet. Austrian Academy of Sciences Press, Vienna, pp 479–489
Nentwich M, König R (2012) Cyberscience 2.0: research in the age of digital social networks, vol 11. Campus, Frankfurt
Nielsen M (2012) Reinventing discovery: the new era of networked science. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ
Nonprobability sampling (n.d.) Wikipedia. Available at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonprobability_sampling
Purposive sampling (2012) Laerd dissertation. Available at http://dissertation.laerd.com/purposive-sampling.php
Schirmer D, Sander N, Wenninger A (eds) (2015) Die Qualitative Analyse internetbasierter Daten: Methodische Herausforderungen und Potenziale von Online-Medien. Springer, Wiesbaden
Schütz A (1932) Der sinnhafte Aufbau der sozialen Welt. Eine Einleitung in die verstehende Soziologie. Springer, Wien
Science 2.0 (n.d.) Wikipedia. Available at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_2.0
Srubar I (1979) Die Theorie der Typenbildung bei Alfred Schütz. Ihre Bedeutung und ihre Grenzen
Ullrich CG, Schiek D (2015) Forumsdiskussionen im Internet als reaktives Instrument der Datenerhebung. Ein Werkstattbericht. In: Schirmer D, Sander N, Wenninger A (eds) Die qualitative Analyse internetbasierter Daten. VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, Wiesbaden, pp 133–159
Wenninger A (2015) Hermeneutische Analysen neuer Kommunikationsformen im Internet. In: Schirmer D, Sander N, Wenninger A (eds) Die qualitative Analyse internetbasierter Daten. Soziologische Entdeckungen. Springer, Wiesbaden
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Darbi, M. (2020). Developing a Typology of Biodiversity Offsets Using an Internet and Expert Based Approach: Methods and Materials. In: Biodiversity Offsets Between Regulation and Voluntary Commitment. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-25594-7_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-25594-7_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-25593-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-25594-7
eBook Packages: Biomedical and Life SciencesBiomedical and Life Sciences (R0)