Evaluating the cost-effectiveness of conservation: the UK Biodiversity Action Plan.

Ecological and economic evaluation should be a key component of biodiversity conservation programmes since it underpins the efficient allocation of resources. However, most such programmes are not currently assessed in terms of the rate of return on investment that they provide. The UK Government launched the UK Biodiversity Action Plan in 1994. We collected data from those responsible for monitoring this programme, then used a form of cost-effectiveness analysis to evaluate its effectiveness and efficiency at meeting the targets of individual Species Action Plans. In this context, effectiveness refers to the goal of maximising total conservation gains, whereas efficiency refers to maximising conservation gain per unit cost. We define the latter as a basic economic objective for conservation resource allocation. We find that the distribution of spending across plans was highly biased towards vertebrates and there was no correlation between cost and effectiveness. Non-vertebrate plans tended to be more efficient than vertebrate plans. However, following a species utility-based weighting, this tendency was less pronounced and a significant positive correlation between cost and effectiveness emerged. Nevertheless, this evidence suggests that the efficiency of the UK Biodiversity Action Plan could be improved by correcting the imbalance in spending between vertebrate and non-vertebrate plans. This study highlights the importance of effective monitoring and reporting in determining the utility of biodiversity conservation programmes. It demonstrates how explicit cost-effectiveness analysis can be used to evaluate such programmes, and shows that it could also be adapted to accommodate other forms of ecological and social value.

[1]  Ross Cullen,et al.  Integrating Economics into Priority Setting and Evaluation in Conservation Management , 2003 .

[2]  K. Hughey,et al.  Cost effectiveness of endangered species management: the kokako (Callaeas cinerea) in New Zealand , 2004 .

[3]  F. Thibodeau.  Endangered species: Deciding which species to save , 1983 .

[4]  J. O. Mountford,et al.  The cost and practicality of techniques for the reversion of arable land to lowland wet grassland—an experimental study and review , 1999 .

[5]  Devra G. Kleiman,et al.  Improving the Evaluation of Conservation Programs , 2000 .

[6]  K. Gaston,et al.  Integrating Costs of Conservation into InternationalPriority Setting , 2000 .

[7]  P. Kareiva,et al.  Improving U.S. Endangered Species Act Recovery Plans: Key Findings and Recommendations of the SCB Recovery Plan Project , 2002 .

[8]  J. Davidson,et al.  Conserving biodiversity: the UK approach. , 2007 .

[9]  E. Bulte,et al.  Economic Science, Endangered Species, and Biodiversity Loss , 2000 .

[10]  M. Bean,et al.  Measuring progress in US endangered species conservation. , 2005, Ecology letters.

[11]  C. S. Holling.  Cross-Scale Morphology, Geometry, and Dynamics of Ecosystems , 1992 .

[12]  K. Hughey,et al.  Economic analyses to aid nature conservation decision making , 2005, Oryx.

[13]  R. Engeman,et al.  An economic analysis of predator removal approaches for protecting marine turtle nests at Hobe Sound National Wildlife Refuge , 2002 .

[14]  J. Marzluff,et al.  Funding Extinction? Biological Needs and Political Realities in the Allocation of Resources to Endangered Species Recovery , 2002 .

[15]  Kenneth F. D. Hughey,et al.  COPY: A new technique for evaluation of biodiversity protection projects , 1999 .

[16]  Dominic Moran,et al.  The Economic Value of Biodiversity. , 1995 .

[17]  R. Fraser,et al.  A method for evaluating alternative landscape management scenarios in relation to the biodiversity conservation of habitats , 2007 .

[18]  M. Whitby,et al.  Estimating the Supply of Conservation Goods in Britain: A Comparison of the Financial Efficiency of Two Policy Instruments , 1996 .

[19]  J. Holmes,et al.  Enhancing the use of science in environmental policy-making and regulation , 2008 .

[20]  J. Bergh,et al.  Economic valuation of biodiversity: sense or nonsense? , 2001 .

[21]  N. Hanley,et al.  Assessing the success of agri-environmental policy in the UK , 1999 .

[22]  A. Hendriks,et al.  The power of size: A meta-analysis reveals consistency of allometric regressions , 2007 .

[23]  K. Hughey,et al.  Measuring the success and cost effectiveness of New Zealand multiple-species projects to the conservation of threatened species , 2005 .

[24]  Richard Margoluis,et al.  Threat Reduction Assessment: a Practical and Cost‐Effective Approach to Evaluating Conservation and Development Projects , 1999 .

[25]  D. Macmillan,et al.  Cost-effectiveness analysis of woodland ecosystem restoration , 1998 .

[26]  Hugh P. Possingham,et al.  Avoiding Costly Conservation Mistakes: The Importance of Defining Actions and Costs in Spatial Priority Setting , 2008, PloS one.

[27]  H. Sezer,et al.  Regional welfare weights for the UK: England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland , 2005 .

[28]  Martin L. Weitzman,et al.  Conflicts and Choices in Biodiversity Preservation , 1998 .

[29]  Hugh P. Possingham,et al.  Prioritizing global conservation efforts , 2006, Nature.

[30]  J. Greenwood,et al.  Comparative Losses of British Butterflies, Birds, and Plants and the Global Extinction Crisis , 2004, Science.

[31]  S. Polasky,et al.  Integrating economic costs into conservation planning. , 2006, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[32]  Craig R. Miller,et al.  The Endangered Species Act: Dollars and Sense? , 2002 .

[33]  農林水産奨励会農林水産政策情報センター,et al.  The green book : appraisal and evaluation in central government , 2003 .

[34]  D. Pearce,et al.  Global biodiversity priorities: A cost-effectiveness index for investments , 1996 .

[35]  Andrew Metrick,et al.  Patterns of Behavior in Biodiversity Preservation , 1994 .

[36]  James J. Murphy,et al.  A Meta-analysis of Hypothetical Bias in Stated Preference Valuation , 2003 .

[37]  D. Fink,et al.  Jurisdiction Over Endangered Species' Habitat: the Impacts of People and Property on Recovery Planning , 2002 .

[38]  J. Shogren,et al.  Economics of the Endangered Species Act , 1998 .

[39]  Ross Cullen,et al.  Measuring the productivity of threatened-species programs , 2001 .

[40]  P. Kareiva,et al.  How Good Are Endangered Species Recovery Plans? , 2001 .

[41]  Gary H. McClelland,et al.  Probability and utility of endangered species preservation programs , 1996 .

[42]  Robert Costanza,et al.  Economic Reasons for Conserving Wild Nature , 2002, Science.

[43]  Andrew S. Pullin,et al.  Effectiveness in Conservation Practice: Pointers from Medicine and Public Health , 2001 .

[44]  J. M. Scott,et al.  Examining Differences between Recovered and Declining Endangered Species , 2001 .

[45]  E. Neumayer.  A Missed Opportunity: The Stern Review on Climate Change Fails to Tackle the Issue of Non-Substitutable Loss of Natural Capital , 2007 .

[46]  R. Engeman,et al.  An economic assessment of the potential for predator management to benefit Puerto Rican parrots , 2003 .

[47]  Claire A. Montgomery,et al.  The Marginal Cost of Species Preservation: The Northern Spotted Owl , 1994 .

[48]  Subhrendu K. Pattanayak,et al.  Money for Nothing? A Call for Empirical Evaluation of Biodiversity Conservation Investments , 2006, PLoS biology.

[49]  T. Caro,et al.  On the Use of Surrogate Species in Conservation Biology , 1999 .

[50]  Hugh P. Possingham,et al.  Maximizing return on investment in conservation , 2007 .