Integrating economic costs into conservation planning

被引:775
作者
Naidoo, Robin
Balmford, Andrew
Ferraro, Paul J.
Polasky, Stephen
Ricketts, Taylor H.
Rouget, Mathieu
机构
[1] World Wildlife Fund, Conservat Sci Program, Washington, DC 20037 USA
[2] Univ Cambridge, Dept Zool, Conservat Sci Grp, Cambridge CB2 3EJ, England
[3] Georgia State Univ, Dept Econ, Andrew Young Sch Policy Studies, Atlanta, GA 30302 USA
[4] Univ Minnesota, Dept Appl Econ, Dept Ecol Evolut & Behav, St Paul, MN 55108 USA
[5] S African Natl Biodivers Inst, ZA-0001 Pretoria, South Africa
关键词
D O I
10.1016/j.tree.2006.10.003
中图分类号
Q14 [生态学(生物生态学)];
学科分类号
071012 ; 0713 ;
摘要
Recent studies that incorporate the spatial distributions of biological benefits and economic costs in conservation planning have shown that limited budgets can achieve substantially larger biological gains than when planning ignores costs. Despite concern from donors about the effectiveness of conservation interventions, these increases in efficiency from incorporating costs into planning have not yet been widely recognized. Here, we focus on what these costs are, why they are important to consider, how they can be quantified and the benefits of their inclusion in priority setting. The most recent work in the field has examined the degree to which dynamics and threat affect the outcomes of conservation planning. We assess how costs fit into this new framework and consider prospects for integrating them into conservation planning.
引用
收藏
页码:681 / 687
页数:7
相关论文
共 72 条
[1]   Species distributions, land values, and efficient conservation [J].
Ando, A ;
Camm, J ;
Polasky, S ;
Solow, A .
SCIENCE, 1998, 279 (5359) :2126-2128
[2]   The coincidence of people and biodiversity in Europe [J].
Araújo, MB .
GLOBAL ECOLOGY AND BIOGEOGRAPHY, 2003, 12 (01) :5-12
[3]  
Araújo MB, 2002, P ROY SOC B-BIOL SCI, V269, P1971, DOI 10.1098/rspb.2002.2121
[4]   Land market feedbacks can undermine biodiversity conservation [J].
Armsworth, PR ;
Daily, GC ;
Kareiva, P ;
Sanchirico, JN .
PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 2006, 103 (14) :5403-5408
[5]   An invitation to ecological economics [J].
Armsworth, PR ;
Roughgarden, JE .
TRENDS IN ECOLOGY & EVOLUTION, 2001, 16 (05) :229-234
[6]   Integrating costs of conservation into international priority setting [J].
Balmford, A ;
Gaston, KJ ;
Rodrigues, ASL ;
James, A .
CONSERVATION BIOLOGY, 2000, 14 (03) :597-605
[7]   The worldwide costs of marine protected areas [J].
Balmford, A ;
Gravestock, P ;
Hockley, N ;
McClean, CJ ;
Roberts, CM .
PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 2004, 101 (26) :9694-9697
[8]   Conservation conflicts across Africa [J].
Balmford, A ;
Moore, JL ;
Brooks, T ;
Burgess, N ;
Hansen, LA ;
Williams, P ;
Rahbek, C .
SCIENCE, 2001, 291 (5513) :2616-2619
[9]   Global variation in terrestrial conservation costs, conservation benefits, and unmet conservation needs [J].
Balmford, A ;
Gaston, KJ ;
Blyth, S ;
James, A ;
Kapos, V .
PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 2003, 100 (03) :1046-1050
[10]  
BALMFORD A, IN PRESS CONSERV BIO