Evaluating the effectiveness and efficiency of biodiversity conservation spending

Ecological Economics

Volumn 70, Issue 10, 2011, Pages 1789-1796

  Laycock, Helen F ^a   Moran, Dominic ^b   Smart, James C R ^a   Raffaelli, David G ^a   White, Piran C L ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF YORK   (United Kingdom)

^b SCOTTISH AGRICULTURAL COLLEGE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Conservation planning; Cost Utility Analysis; Interdisciplinary; Questionnaire; Species Action Plans; Threat Reduction Assessment

Indexed keywords

ACTION PLAN; BIODIVERSITY; BIRD; CONSERVATION PLANNING; CONSERVATION STATUS; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS; EFFICIENCY MEASUREMENT; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT; INTERDISCIPLINARY APPROACH; MAMMAL; QUESTIONNAIRE SURVEY;

UNITED KINGDOM;

AVES; MAMMALIA; VERTEBRATA;

EID: 79959846242     PISSN: 09218009     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2011.05.002     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Anon Biodiversity: The UK Steering Group Report: Volume 1-Meeting the Rio Challenge 1995, HMSO, London.
2. Brown G.M., Shogren J.F. Economics of the Endangered Species Act. Journal of Economic Perspectives 1998, 12:3-20.
3. Bulte E., van Kooten G.C. Economic science, endangered species, and biodiversity loss. Conservation Biology 2000, 14:113-119.
4. Caro T.M., O'Doherty G. On the use of surrogate species in conservation biology. Conservation Biology 1999, 13:805-814.
5. Christie M., Hanley N., Warren J., Murphy K., Wright R., Hyde T. Valuing the diversity of biodiversity. Ecological Economics 2006, 58:304-317.
6. Christie M., Fazey I., Hyde T. Economic Valuation of the Benefits of the UK Biodiversity Action Plan (draft report forthcoming) 2010, Defra, London.
7. Cullen R., Fairburn G., Hughey K. COPY: a new technique for evaluation of biodiversity protection projects. Pacific Conservation Biology 1999, 5:115-123.
8. Cullen R., Fairburn G.A., Hughey K.F.D. Measuring the productivity of threatened-species programs. Ecological Economics 2001, 39:53-66.
9. Cullen R., Moran E., Hughey K.F.D. Measuring the success and cost effectiveness of New Zealand multiple-species projects to the conservation of threatened species. Ecological Economics 2005, 53:311-323.
10. Defra Conserving Biodiversity-The UK Approach. In Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs 2007, Defra, London.
11. Fairburn G.A., Hughey K.F.D., Cullen R. Cost effectiveness of endangered species management: the kokako (Callaeas cinerea) in New Zealand. New Zealand Journal of Ecology 2004, 28:83-91.
12. Ferraro P.J., Pattanayak S.K. Money for nothing? A call for empirical evaluation of biodiversity conservation investments. PLoS Biology 2006, 4:482-488.
13. Research Needs for UK Biodiversity: A Summary of the Important Knowledge Gaps, Identified by the UK Biodiversity Research Advisory Group, 2003-2006 2007, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, London. R. Ferris (Ed.).
14. GHK Consulting Ltd. UK Biodiversity Action Plan: Preparing Costings for Species and Habitat Action Plans. Final Report to Defra and Partners 2006, GHK, London.
15. Guikema S., Milke M. Quantitative decision tools for conservation programme planning: practice, theory and potential. Environmental Conservation 1999, 26:179-189.
16. Hendriks A.J. The power of size: a meta-analysis reveals consistency of allometric regressions. Ecological Modelling 2007, 205:196-208.
17. Hockley N. No shortcuts to prioritising conservation funding. Biological Conservation 2009, 143:825.
18. Holling C.S. Cross-scale morphology, geometry, and dynamics of ecosystems. Ecological Monographs 1992, 62:447-502.
19. Hughey K.F.D., Cullen R., Moran E. Integrating economics into priority setting and evaluation in conservation management. Conservation Biology 2003, 17:93-103.
20. JNCC UK Biodiversity Action Plan. Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Peterborough 2006.
21. Laycock H., Moran D., Smart J.C.R., Raffaelli D., White P. Evaluating the cost-effectiveness of conservation: the UK Biodiversity Action Plan. Biological Conservation 2009, 142:3120-3127.
22. Male T.D., Bean M.J. Measuring progress in US endangered species conservation. Ecology Letters 2005, 8:986-992.
23. Metrick A., Weitzman M.L. Patterns of behavior in endangered species preservation. Land Economics 1996, 72:1-16.
24. Miller J.K., Scott J.M., Miller C.R., Waits L.P. The endangered species act: dollars and sense?. Bioscience 2002, 52:163-168.
25. Moran D., Pearce D., Wendelaar A. Global biodiversity priorities: a cost-effectiveness index for investments. Global Environmental Change 1996, 6:103-119.
26. Moran D., Laycock H., White P.C.L. The role of cost-effectiveness in conservation decision-making. Biological Conservation 2010, 143:826-827.
27. Murdoch W., Polasky S., Wilson K.A., Possingham H.P., Kareiva P., Shaw R. Maximizing return on investment in conservation. Biological Conservation 2007, 139:375-388.
28. Nunes P., van den Bergh J. Economic valuation of biodiversity: sense or nonsense?. Ecological Economics 2001, 39:203-222.
29. Restani M., Marzluff J.M. Funding extinction?: biological needs and political realities in the allocation of resources to endangered species recovery. Bioscience 2002, 52:169-177.
30. Salafsky N., Margoluis R. Threat Reduction Assessment: a practical and cost-effective approach to evaluating conservation and development projects. Conservation Biology 1999, 13:830-841.
31. Shepherd P.A., Gillespie J., Garrod G., Willis K. An Initial Investigation of the Actual Costs of Implementing UK Biodiversity Action Plans. Baker Shepherd Gillespie Ecological Consultants 2002, Bakewell.
32. TEEB The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity: an Interim Report http://www.teebweb.org.uk.
33. Thomas J.A., Telfer M.G., Roy D.B., Preston C.D., Greenwood J.J.D., Asher J., Fox R., Clarke R.T., Lawton J.H. Comparative losses of British butterflies, birds, and plants and the global extinction crisis. Science 2004, 303:1879-1881.
34. Treasury H.M. Appraisal and Evaluation in Central Government: Treasury Guidance 1997, The Stationery Office, London.
35. Treasury H.M. The Green Book: Appraisal and Evaluation in Central Government 2003, The Stationery Office, Norwich.
36. UK Biodiversity Group Sustaining the Variety of Life: 5years of the UK Biodiversity Action Plan Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions, London 2001.
37. UK Biodiversity Partnership The UK Biodiversity Action Plan: Highlights from the 2005 Reporting Round 2006, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, London.
38. White P.C.L., Gregory K.W., Lindley P.J., Richards G. Economic values of threatened mammals in Britain: a case study of the otter Lutra lutra and the water vole Arvicola terrestris. Biological Conservation 1997, 82:345-354.
39. White P.C.L., Bennett A.C., Hayes E.J.V. The use of willingness-to-pay approaches in mammal conservation. Mammal Review 2001, 31:151-167.
40. White P.C.L., Vaughan Jennings N., Renwick A.R., Barker N.H.L. Questionnaires in ecology: a review of past use and recommendations for best practice. Journal of Applied Ecology 2005, 42:421-430.
41. White P.C.L., Godbold J.A., Solan M., Wiegand J.A., Holt A.R. Ecosystem services and policy: a review of coastal wetland ecosystem services and an efficiency-based framework for implementing the ecosystem approach. Issues in Environmental Science and Technology 2010, 30:29-51. R.E. Hester, R.M. Harrison (Eds.).
42. Wilson K.A., McBride M.F., Bode M., Possingham H.P. Prioritizing global conservation efforts. Nature 2006, 440:248.