IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolec/v144y2018icp59-64.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Real Options for Endangered Species

Author

Listed:
  • Conrad, Jon M.

Abstract

Endangered species often exhibit low or negative intrinsic growth rates and experience random environmental shocks that can significantly affect population abundance. Geometric Brownian motion has been shown to be a valid model for an endangered species (Dennis et al. 1991). This paper argues that an endangered species should be viewed as a quasi-public good and shows how real option theory can be used to determine the optimal timing of a conservation intervention that might prevent extinction. When a species goes extinct we assume society incurs a biodiversity loss, that can be measured in dollars. Regret is the interest cost on that loss. Social anxiety increases toward regret as the population of an endangered species declines toward extinction. The complete model requires information on (1) the drift and standard deviation rates before and after the conservation intervention, (2) the social cost (anxiety) from endangerment, (3) the fixed and variable costs of the conservation intervention, and (4) the social rate of discount. The model is illustrated with data on the captive breeding program for the California condor.

Suggested Citation

  • Conrad, Jon M., 2018. "Real Options for Endangered Species," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 59-64.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:144:y:2018:i:c:p:59-64
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.07.027
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800917306584
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.07.027?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ryan M. Finseth & Jon M. Conrad, 2014. "Cost-effective Recovery of an Endangered Species: The Red-cockaded Woodpecker," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 90(4), pages 649-667.
    2. Avinash K. Dixit & Robert S. Pindyck, 1994. "Investment under Uncertainty," Economics Books, Princeton University Press, edition 1, number 5474.
    3. Martin L. Weitzman, 2001. "Gamma Discounting," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(1), pages 260-271, March.
    4. Jon M. Conrad, 1980. "Quasi-Option Value and the Expected Value of Information," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 94(4), pages 813-820.
    5. Ryan M. Finseth & Jon M. Conrad, 2014. "Cost-effective Recovery of an Endangered Species: The Red-cockaded Woodpecker," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 90(4), pages 649-667.
    6. Martin L. Weitzman, 1992. "On Diversity," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 107(2), pages 363-405.
    7. Ben Abdallah, Skander & Lasserre, Pierre, 2012. "A real option approach to the protection of a habitat dependent endangered species," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 295-318.
    8. Dixit, Avinash K, 1989. "Entry and Exit Decisions under Uncertainty," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 97(3), pages 620-638, June.
    9. Kenneth J. Arrow & Anthony C. Fisher, 1974. "Environmental Preservation, Uncertainty, and Irreversibility," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 88(2), pages 312-319.
    10. John A. C. Conybeare, 1992. "A Portfolio Diversification Model of Alliances," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 36(1), pages 53-85, March.
    11. Burton A. Weisbrod, 1964. "Collective-Consumption Services of Individual-Consumption Goods," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 78(3), pages 471-477.
    12. Weitzman, M.L., 1992. "Diversity Functions," Harvard Institute of Economic Research Working Papers 1610, Harvard - Institute of Economic Research.
    13. Martin L. Weitzman, 1993. "What to Preserve? An Application of Diversity Theory to Crane Conservation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 108(1), pages 157-183.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Alexander, Carol & Chen, Xi & Ward, Charles, 2021. "Risk-adjusted valuation for real option decisions," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 191(C), pages 1046-1064.
    2. Sol, Joeri, 2019. "Economics in the anthropocene: species extinction or steady state economics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 1-1.
    3. Gatmiry, Zohreh S. & Hafezalkotob, Ashkan & Khakzar bafruei, Morteza & Soltani, Roya, 2021. "Food web conservation vs. strategic threats: A security game approach," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 442(C).
    4. Natalia Morozko & Nina Morozko & Valentina Didenko, 2020. "The Use of Real Options in Assessing the Development of Small Energy in Russia," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 10(4), pages 205-211.
    5. Lewis, David J. & Kling, David M. & Dundas, Steven J. & Lew, Daniel K., 2022. "Estimating the value of threatened species abundance dynamics," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    6. Byl, Jacob P., 2019. "Perverse Incentives and Safe Harbors in the Endangered Species Act: Evidence From Timber Harvests Near Woodpeckers," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 100-108.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Esther W. Mezey & Jon M. Conrad, 2010. "Real Options in Resource Economics," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 2(1), pages 33-52, October.
    2. van den Bergh, Jeroen C.J.M., 2008. "Optimal diversity: Increasing returns versus recombinant innovation," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 68(3-4), pages 565-580, December.
    3. John A. List & Michael S. Haigh, 2010. "Investment Under Uncertainty: Testing the Options Model with Professional Traders," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 92(4), pages 974-984, November.
    4. Zeppini, Paolo & van den Bergh, Jeroen C.J.M., 2013. "Optimal diversity in investments with recombinant innovation," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 141-156.
    5. Luca Corato & Michele Moretto & Sergio Vergalli, 2013. "Land conversion pace under uncertainty and irreversibility: too fast or too slow?," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 110(1), pages 45-82, September.
    6. Sovacool, Benjamin K. & Mukherjee, Ishani, 2011. "Conceptualizing and measuring energy security: A synthesized approach," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 36(8), pages 5343-5355.
    7. Hein, Lars & Gatzweiler, Franz, 2006. "The economic value of coffee (Coffea arabica) genetic resources," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(1), pages 176-185, November.
    8. Gerber, Nicolas, 2011. "Biodiversity measures based on species-level dissimilarities: A methodology for assessment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(12), pages 2275-2281.
    9. Robert S. Pindyck, 2006. "Uncertainty In Environmental Economics," NBER Working Papers 12752, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Attanasi, Giuseppe Marco & Montesano, Aldo, 2010. "Testing Value vs Waiting Value in Environmental Decisions under Uncertainty," TSE Working Papers 10-154, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    11. Eppink, Florian V. & van den Bergh, Jeroen C.J.M., 2007. "Ecological theories and indicators in economic models of biodiversity loss and conservation: A critical review," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(2-3), pages 284-293, March.
    12. Insley, Margaret, 2017. "Resource extraction with a carbon tax and regime switching prices: Exercising your options," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 1-16.
    13. Jean-Paul Décamps & Thomas Mariotti & Stéphane Villeneuve, 2006. "Irreversible investment in alternative projects," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 28(2), pages 425-448, June.
    14. Perry, Neil, 2010. "The ecological importance of species and the Noah's Ark problem," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(3), pages 478-485, January.
    15. Ryan Kellogg, 2014. "The Effect of Uncertainty on Investment: Evidence from Texas Oil Drilling," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(6), pages 1698-1734, June.
    16. Hanemann, W. Michael, 1989. "Information and the concept of option value," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 16(1), pages 23-37, January.
    17. Barham, Bradford L. & Chavas, Jean-Paul, 1997. "Sunk Costs and Resource Mobility: Implications for Economic and Policy Analysis," 1997 Conference, August 10-16, 1997, Sacramento, California 197060, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    18. Courtois, Pierre & Figuieres, Charles & Mulier, Chloe & Weill, Joakim, 2018. "A Cost–Benefit Approach for Prioritizing Invasive Species," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 607-620.
    19. Fujii, Tomoki & Ishikawa, Ryuichiro, 2012. "Quasi-option value under strategic interactions," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 36-54.
    20. Samuel, Aurelia F. & Drucker, Adam G. & Andersen, Sven B. & Simianer, Henner & van Zonneveld, Maarten, 2013. "Development of a cost-effective diversity-maximising decision-support tool for in situ crop genetic resources conservation: The case of cacao," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 155-164.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Endangered species; Real options; Population size that triggers a conservation intervention; California condor (Gymnogyps californianus);
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q2 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:144:y:2018:i:c:p:59-64. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolecon .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.