Efficiency and Concordance of Alternative Methods for Minimizing Opportunity Costs in Conservation Planning

Efficiency and Concordance of Alternative Methods for Minimizing Opportunity Costs in... Abstract: Scarce resources and competing land‐use goals necessitate efficient biodiversity conservation. Combining multicriteria analysis with conservation decision‐support tools improves efficiency of conservation planning by maximizing outcomes for biodiversity while minimizing opportunity costs to society. An opportunity cost is the benefit that could have been received by taking an alternative course of action (i.e., costs to society of protecting an area for biodiversity rather than developing it for some other use). Although different ways of integrating multiple opportunity costs into conservation planning have been suggested, there have been no tests as to which method is most efficient. We compared the relative efficiency of 3 such procedures (, , and a procedure of our own design) in a systematic conservation‐planning framework for the Milne Bay Province of Papua New Guinea. We devised 14 opportunity costs and assigned these to 3 scenarios representing different conservation planning concerns: food security, macro‐economic development, and biodiversity persistence. For each scenario, we compared the efficiency of the 3 methods in terms of amount of biodiversity protected relative to total expenditure for each opportunity cost. All 3 methods captured similar amounts of biodiversity, but differed in total cost. Our method had the least overall cost and was therefore most efficient. Nevertheless, there was a high correlation and geographical concordance among all 3 methods, indicating a high degree of spatial overlap. This suggests that choosing an appropriate approach may often depend on contextual factors related to the design of the planning question, rather than efficiency alone. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Conservation Biology Wiley

Efficiency and Concordance of Alternative Methods for Minimizing Opportunity Costs in Conservation Planning

Loading next page...
 
/lp/wiley/efficiency-and-concordance-of-alternative-methods-for-minimizing-b0Hq7hku30
Publisher
Wiley
Copyright
©2008 Society for Conservation Biology
ISSN
0888-8892
eISSN
1523-1739
D.O.I.
10.1111/j.1523-1739.2008.00982.x
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Abstract: Scarce resources and competing land‐use goals necessitate efficient biodiversity conservation. Combining multicriteria analysis with conservation decision‐support tools improves efficiency of conservation planning by maximizing outcomes for biodiversity while minimizing opportunity costs to society. An opportunity cost is the benefit that could have been received by taking an alternative course of action (i.e., costs to society of protecting an area for biodiversity rather than developing it for some other use). Although different ways of integrating multiple opportunity costs into conservation planning have been suggested, there have been no tests as to which method is most efficient. We compared the relative efficiency of 3 such procedures (, , and a procedure of our own design) in a systematic conservation‐planning framework for the Milne Bay Province of Papua New Guinea. We devised 14 opportunity costs and assigned these to 3 scenarios representing different conservation planning concerns: food security, macro‐economic development, and biodiversity persistence. For each scenario, we compared the efficiency of the 3 methods in terms of amount of biodiversity protected relative to total expenditure for each opportunity cost. All 3 methods captured similar amounts of biodiversity, but differed in total cost. Our method had the least overall cost and was therefore most efficient. Nevertheless, there was a high correlation and geographical concordance among all 3 methods, indicating a high degree of spatial overlap. This suggests that choosing an appropriate approach may often depend on contextual factors related to the design of the planning question, rather than efficiency alone.

Journal

Conservation BiologyWiley

Published: Aug 1, 2008

References

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Search

Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly

Organize

Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.

Access

Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve

Freelancer

DeepDyve

Pro

Price

FREE

$49/month
$360/year

Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed

Create folders to
organize your research

Export folders, citations

Read DeepDyve articles

Abstract access only

Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles

Print

20 pages / month

PDF Discount

20% off