IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolec/v70y2011i4p771-777.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Fine-scale conservation planning outside of reserves: Cost-effective selection of retention patches at final harvest

Author

Listed:
  • Perhans, Karin
  • Glöde, Dan
  • Gilbertsson, Jessica
  • Persson, Anette
  • Gustafsson, Lena

Abstract

Retaining forest patches at final harvest is a key conservation measure in boreal forests, but guidelines for how to increase its cost-effectiveness are lacking. In a study in boreal Sweden, we compared the cost-effectiveness of three different approaches a forest owner may use to select patches: selection based on the conservation value of patches alone, economic cost alone or both of them combined. We also compared the cost-effectiveness of six different common types of patches. Conservation value was measured as species richness of bryophytes and lichens and as structural characteristics of patches. Compared to the selection approach in which both conservation value and cost were used, cost-effectiveness was 5-14% lower when only conservation value was used, depending on how conservation value was measured. On the contrary, using only the economic cost decreased the cost-effectiveness by only 1-2%. Among the patch types, swamp forest areas and deciduous tree groups were cost-effective types to retain. However, the patch types were complementary in their species composition and all hosted unique species. We argue that, ideally, assessments of both conservation values and economic costs of retaining patches should be made prior to harvest to enable planners to make well-informed and cost-effective decisions.

Suggested Citation

  • Perhans, Karin & Glöde, Dan & Gilbertsson, Jessica & Persson, Anette & Gustafsson, Lena, 2011. "Fine-scale conservation planning outside of reserves: Cost-effective selection of retention patches at final harvest," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(4), pages 771-777, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:70:y:2011:i:4:p:771-777
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921-8009(10)00467-2
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    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. Andrew Balmford & Kevin J. Gaston, 1999. "Why biodiversity surveys are good value," Nature, Nature, vol. 398(6724), pages 204-205, March.
    2. Ilkka Hanski & Otso Ovaskainen, 2000. "The metapopulation capacity of a fragmented landscape," Nature, Nature, vol. 404(6779), pages 755-758, April.
    3. Babcock, Bruce A. & Lakshminarayan, P. G. & Wu, J. & Zilberman, David, 1997. "Targeting Tools for the Purchase of Environmental Amenities," Staff General Research Papers Archive 5220, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    4. Stephen Polasky & Jeffrey D. Camm & Brian Garber-Yonts, 2001. "Selecting Biological Reserves Cost-Effectively: An Application to Terrestrial Vertebrate Conservation in Oregon," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 77(1), pages 68-78.
    5. Paul J. Ferraro, 2003. "Assigning priority to environmental policy interventions in a heterogeneous world," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 22(1), pages 27-43.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Jacob R. Fooks & Kent D. Messer & Maik Kecinski, 2018. "A Cautionary Note on the Use of Benefit Metrics for Cost-Effective Conservation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 71(4), pages 985-999, December.
    2. Boyd, James & Epanchin-Niell, Rebecca & Siikamaki, Juha, 2012. "Conservation Return on Investment Analysis: A Review of Results, Methods, and New Directions," RFF Working Paper Series dp-12-01, Resources for the Future.
    3. Drechsler, Martin & Wätzold, Frank & Johst, Karin & Shogren, Jason F., 2010. "An agglomeration payment for cost-effective biodiversity conservation in spatially structured landscapes," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 261-275, April.
    4. Duke, Joshua M. & Dundas, Steven J. & Johnston, Robert J. & Messer, Kent D., 2014. "Prioritizing payment for environmental services: Using nonmarket benefits and costs for optimal selection," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 319-329.
    5. Soh, Moonwon & Cho, Seong-Hoon & Yu, Edward & Boyer, Christopher & English, Burton, 2018. "Targeting Payments for Ecosystem Services Given Ecological and Economic Objectives," 2018 Annual Meeting, February 2-6, 2018, Jacksonville, Florida 266502, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    6. Cho, Seong-Hoon & Soh, Moonwon & English, Burton C. & Yu, T. Edward & Boyer, Christopher N., 2019. "Targeting payments for forest carbon sequestration given ecological and economic objectives," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 214-226.
    7. Kim, Taeyoung & Cho, Seong-Hoon & Larson, Eric R. & Armsworth, Paul R., 2014. "Protected area acquisition costs show economies of scale with area," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 122-132.
    8. Grand, Linda & Messer, Kent D. & Allen, William, 2017. "Understanding and Overcoming the Barriers for Cost-effective Conservation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 139-144.
    9. Cho, Seong-Hoon & Kim, Taeyoung & Larson, Eric R. & Armsworth, Paul R., 2017. "Economies of scale in forestland acquisition costs for nature conservation," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 73-82.
    10. Messer, Kent D. & Borchers, Allison M., 2015. "Choice for goods under threat of destruction," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 137-140.
    11. Jean-Sauveur Ay, 2015. "Information sur l’hétérogénéité de la terre et délégation de la régulation foncière," Revue d'économie politique, Dalloz, vol. 125(3), pages 453-474.
    12. Sharma, Bijay P. & Cho, Seong-Hoon & Yu, T. Edward, 2019. "Designing cost-efficient payments for forest-based carbon sequestration: An auction-based modeling approach," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 182-194.
    13. Vergamini, Daniele & Raggi, Meri & Viaggi, Davide, 2013. "Evaluating the potential contribution of spatially differentiated payments to the efficiency of Agri-Environmental Measures: A resource allocation model for Emilia Romagna (Italy)," 2013 Second Congress, June 6-7, 2013, Parma, Italy 150235, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA).
    14. Whitten, Stuart M., 2017. "Designing and implementing conservation tender metrics: Twelve core considerations," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 561-571.
    15. Bauer, Dana Marie & Swallow, Stephen K. & Paton, Peter W.C., 2010. "Cost-effective species conservation in exurban communities: A spatial analysis," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 180-202, April.
    16. Bauer, Dana Marie & Swallow, Stephen K., 2013. "Conserving metapopulations in human-altered landscapes at the urban–rural fringe," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 159-170.
    17. Sharma, Bijay P. & Cho, Seong-Hoon, 2021. "Analyzing how forest-based amenity values and carbon storage benefits affect spatial targeting for conservation investment," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    18. Juutinen, Artti & Monkkonen, Mikko, 2004. "Testing alternative indicators for biodiversity conservation in old-growth boreal forests: ecology and economics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(1-2), pages 35-48, September.
    19. Wang, Yangyang & Atallah, Shady & Shao, Guofan, 2017. "Spatially explicit return on investment to private forest conservation for water purification in Indiana, USA," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 26(PA), pages 45-57.
    20. Legras, Sophie & Martin, Elsa & Piguet, Virginie, 2018. "Conjunctive Implementation of Land Sparing and Land Sharing for Environmental Preservation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 170-187.

    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:70:y:2011:i:4:p:771-777. 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.