National valuation of monarch butterflies indicates an untapped potential for incentive-based conservation

Conservation Letters

Volumn 7, Issue 3, 2014, Pages 253-262

  Diffendorfer, Jay E ^a   Loomis, John B ^b   Ries, Leslie ^c,d   Oberhauser, Karen ^e   Lopez Hoffman, Laura ^f   Semmens, Darius ^a   Semmens, Brice ^g   Butterfield, Bruce ^h   Bagstad, Ken ^a   Goldstein, Josh ^b   Wiederholt, Ruscena ^f   Mattsson, Brady ⁱ   Thogmartin, Wayne E ^j  

^a United States Geological Survey Geosciences and Environmental Change Science Center   (United States)

^b Department of Environmental and Radiological Health Sciences   (United States)

^c Bldg 142   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND   (United States)

^e UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA   (United States)

^f UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA   (United States)

^g UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^h National Gardening Association   (United States)

ⁱ UNIVERSITY OF NATURAL RESOURCES AND LIFE SCIENCES   (Austria)

^j UPPER MIDWEST ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES CENTER   (United States)

more..

Author keywords

Conservation planning; Contingent valuation; Danaus plexippus; Ecosystem services; Migration; Monarch; Willingness to pay

Indexed keywords

EID: 84901657760     PISSN: None     EISSN: 1755263X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/conl.12065     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Behrens, V., Rauschmayer, F. & Wittmer, H. (2008). Managing international 'problem' species: why pan-European cormorant management is so difficult. Environ. Conserv., 35, 55-63.
2. Brower, L.P., Castilleja, G., Peralta, A., et al. (2002). Quantitative changes in forest quality in a principal overwintering area of the monarch mutterfly in Mexico, 1971-1999. Conserv. Biol., 16, 346-359.
3. Brower, L.P., Taylor, O.R., Williams, E.H., et al. (2012). Decline of monarch butterflies overwintering in Mexico: is the migratory phenomenon at risk? Insect Conserv. Diver., 5, 95-100.
4. Burkle, L.A., Marlin, J.C. & Knight, T.M. (2013). Plant-pollinator interactions over 120 years: loss of species, co-occurrence, and function. Science, 339, 1611-1615.
5. Burnham, K.P. & Anderson, D.R. (2002). Model selection and multimodel inference. A practical information-theoretic approach, 2nd ed. Springer-Verlag, New York.
6. Cameron, T.A. & Huppert, D.D. (1989). OLS versus ML estimation of non-market resource values with payment card interval data. J. Environ. Econ. Manage., 17, 230-246.
7. Carson, R.T. (2012). Contingent valuation: a practical alternative when prices aren't available. J. Econ. Perspect., 26, 27-42.
8. Chichilnisky, G. (1998). Economic returns from the biosphere. Nature (London), 391, 629-630.
9. Coursey, D. (1994). The revealed demand for a public good: evidence from endangered and threatened species, NYU Environ. Law J., 6, 411-449.
10. Garibaldi, L.A., Steffan-Dewenter, I., Winfree, R., et al. (2013). Wild pollinators enhance fruit set of crops regardless of honey bee abundance. Science, 339, 1608-1611.
11. Goulson, D. (2013). REVIEW: an overview of the environmental risks posed by neonicotinoid insecticides. J. Appl. Ecol., 50, 977-987.
12. Halstead, J. & Luloff, A. (1992). Protest bidders in contingent valuation. Northeast. J. Agric. Resour. Econ., 21, 160-169.
13. Hausman, J. (2012). Contingent valuation: from dubious to hopeless. J. Econ. Perspect., 26, 43-56.
14. Honey-Rosés, J., López-Garcia, J., Rendón-Salinas, E., et al. (2009). To pay or not to pay? Monitoring performance and enforcing conditionality when paying for forest conservation in Mexico. Environ. Conserv., 36, 120-128.
15. Kinzig, A.P., Perrings, C., Chapin, F.S., et al. (2011). Paying for ecosystem services-promise and peril. Science, 334, 603-604.
16. Kling, C.L., Phaneuf, D.J. & Zhao, J. (2012). From Exxon to BP: Has some number become better than no number? J. Econ. Perspect., 26, 3-26.
17. Lindhjem, H. & Tuan, T. (2012). Valuation of species and nature conservation in Asia and Oceania: a meta-analysis. Environ. Econ. Policy Studies, 14, 1-22.
18. Loomis, J.B. & White, D.S. (1996). Economic benefits of rare and endangered species: summary and meta-analysis. Ecol. Econ., 18, 197-206.
19. McCarthy, M.A., Thompson, C.J., Hauser, C., et al. (2010). Resource allocation for efficient environmental management. Ecol. Lett., 13, 1280-1289.
20. Metrick, A. & Weitzman, M.L. (1996). Patterns of behavior in endangered species preservation. Land Econ., 72, 1-16.
21. Miller, K. (2011). Conservation of migratory species in a changing climate: strategic behavior and policy design. Environ. Law, 41, 573-598.
22. Missrie, M. (2004). Design and implementation of a new protected area for overwintering monarch butterflies in Mexico. Pages 141-150 in K.S. Oberhauser, M.J. Solensky, editors. The monarch butterfly: biology and conservation. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY.
23. MonarchWatch (2013). Monarch Watch Waystation Program. http://monarchwatch.org/waystations/(visited 3 May, 2013).
24. Morse-Jones S., Bateman I.J., Kontoleon A., et al. (2012). Stated preferences for tropical wildlife conservation amongst distant beneficiaries: charisma, endemism, scope and substitution effects. Ecol. Econ., 78, 9-18.
25. NGA. (2012). National Gardening Survey: the national gardening association's comprehensive study of consumer gardening practices, trends, and product sales. National Gardening Association, South Burlington, VT, USA.
26. Pate, J. & Loomis, J. (1997). The effect of distance on willingness to pay values: a case study of wetlands and salmon in California. Ecol. Econ., 20, 199-207.
27. Pleasants, J.M. & Oberhauser, K.S. (2012). Milkweed loss in agricultural fields because of herbicide use: effect on the monarch butterfly population. Insect Conserv. Diver., 6, 135-144.
28. Portney, P. (1994). The contingent valuation debate: why economists should care. J. Econ. Perspect., 8, 3-17.
29. Ramirez, M., Miranda, G. & Zubieta, R. (2006). Serie Cartografica Monarca Volumen 1. Vegetacion y Cubiertas del Suelo, 2006. Reserva de la Biosfera Mariposa Monarca. Instituto de Geografia, UNAM, Mexico City, Mexico.
30. Richardson, L. & Loomis, J. (2009). The total economic value of threatened, endangered and rare species: an updated meta-analysis. Ecol. Econ., 68, 1535-1548.
31. Rubin, J., Helfand, G. & Loomis, J. (1991). A benefit-cost analysis of the northern spotted owl. J. Forest., 89, 25-30.
32. Salzman, J. (2005). Creating markets for ecosystem services: notes from the field. New York University Law Review, 80, 871-961.
33. Skagen, S.K. & Knopf, F.L. (1993). Toward conservation of midcontinental shorebird migrations. Conserv. Biol., 7, 533-541.
34. Tisdell, C., Nantha, H.S. & Wilson, C. (2007). Endangerment and likeability of wildlife species: how important are they for payments proposed for conservation? Ecol. Econ., 60, 627-633.
35. United States Census Bureau. (2012). Statistical Abstract of the United States (131st Edition), Washington, DC.
36. Walsh, B. (2013). The plight of the honeybee. Pages 14-29. TIME, Time Inc.
37. Wines, M. (2013). Monarch migration plunges to lowest level in decades. Page 1. New York Times. New York times, New York, USA.
38. Xerces. (2013). The Xerces Society for inverterbrate conservation, Western Monarch thanksgiving count. http://www.xerces.org/butterfly-conservation/western-monarch-thanksgiving-count/(visited 3 May, 2013).