pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Global variation in terrestrial conservation costs, conservation benefits, and unmet conservation needs - PubMed

  • ️Wed Jan 01 2003

Global variation in terrestrial conservation costs, conservation benefits, and unmet conservation needs

Andrew Balmford et al. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2003.

Abstract

Our ability to identify cost-efficient priorities for conserving biological diversity is limited by the scarcity of data on conservation costs, particularly at fine scales. Here we address this issue using data for 139 terrestrial programs worldwide. We find that the annual costs of effective field-based conservation vary enormously, across seven orders of magnitude, from <$0.1 to >$1,000,000 per km(2). This variation can be closely predicted from positive associations between costs per unit area and an array of indices of local development. Corresponding measures of conservation benefit are limited but show opposing global trends, being higher in less developed parts of the world. The benefit-to-cost ratio of conservation is thus far greater in less developed regions, yet these are where the shortfall in current conservation spending is most marked. Substantially increased investment in tropical conservation is therefore urgently required if opportunities for cost-effective action are not to be missed.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1

Variation in the annual management cost of conservation projects; note axes are log10-transformed. (a) Annual cost km−2 vs. wilderness value; for comparison only, the open symbols are well-respected U.K. and U.S. zoos; these are not included in any analysis. (b) Annual cost km−2 vs. mean per capita GNP. (c) Observed vs. fitted values from the multiple regression model of annual cost given in Table 2.

Figure 2
Figure 2

Variation in the estimated benefits of field-based conservation projects. (a) Area that could be effectively conserved for $1,000,000 y−1 vs. mean per capita GNP. (b) Mean number of threatened bird species per 1/4° grid vs. mean per capita GNP. (c) Ratio of threatened bird density to annual cost km−2 vs. mean per capita GNP.

Figure 3
Figure 3

Regional variation in the percentage of the overall cost of effective reserve networks that are met. These figures refer to the estimated overall costs of expanded networks (from ref. 9), but the positive correlation with mean regional GNP holds also for the percentage of existing reserve management costs that is currently met (rs = 0.72, n = 10, P < 0.05).

Similar articles

  • The worldwide costs of marine protected areas.

    Balmford A, Gravestock P, Hockley N, McClean CJ, Roberts CM. Balmford A, et al. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2004 Jun 29;101(26):9694-7. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0403239101. Epub 2004 Jun 17. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2004. PMID: 15205483 Free PMC article.

  • Mapping the economic costs and benefits of conservation.

    Naidoo R, Ricketts TH. Naidoo R, et al. PLoS Biol. 2006 Oct;4(11):e360. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.0040360. PLoS Biol. 2006. PMID: 17076583 Free PMC article.

  • Economic reasons for conserving wild nature.

    Balmford A, Bruner A, Cooper P, Costanza R, Farber S, Green RE, Jenkins M, Jefferiss P, Jessamy V, Madden J, Munro K, Myers N, Naeem S, Paavola J, Rayment M, Rosendo S, Roughgarden J, Trumper K, Turner RK. Balmford A, et al. Science. 2002 Aug 9;297(5583):950-3. doi: 10.1126/science.1073947. Science. 2002. PMID: 12169718 Review.

  • Integrating economic costs into conservation planning.

    Naidoo R, Balmford A, Ferraro PJ, Polasky S, Ricketts TH, Rouget M. Naidoo R, et al. Trends Ecol Evol. 2006 Dec;21(12):681-7. doi: 10.1016/j.tree.2006.10.003. Epub 2006 Oct 16. Trends Ecol Evol. 2006. PMID: 17050033 Review.

  • Investing in sustainable catchments.

    Everard M. Everard M. Sci Total Environ. 2004 May 25;324(1-3):1-24. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2003.10.019. Sci Total Environ. 2004. PMID: 15081693 Review.

Cited by

References

    1. James A N, Gaston K J, Balmford A. Nature. 1999;401:323–324. - PubMed
    1. Margules C R, Pressey R L. Nature. 2000;405:243–253. - PubMed
    1. Ando A, Camm J, Polasky S, Solow A. Science. 1998;279:2126–2128. - PubMed
    1. Williams P H. In: Conservation in a Changing World. Mace G M, Balmford A, Ginsberg J R, editors. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge Univ. Press; 1998. pp. 211–249.
    1. Balmford A, Gaston K J, Rodrigues A S L, James A. Conserv Biol. 2000;14:597–605.

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources