IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0218093.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Building a stakeholder-led common vision increases the expected cost-effectiveness of biodiversity conservation

Author

Listed:
  • Rocío Ponce Reyes
  • Jennifer Firn
  • Sam Nicol
  • Iadine Chadès
  • Danial S Stratford
  • Tara G Martin
  • Stuart Whitten
  • Josie Carwardine

Abstract

Uniting diverse stakeholders through communication, education or building a collaborative ‘common vision’ for biodiversity management is a recommended approach for enabling effective conservation in regions with multiple uses. However, socially focused strategies such as building a collaborative vision can require sharing scarce resources (time and financial resources) with the on-ground management actions needed to achieve conservation outcomes. Here we adapt current prioritisation tools to predict the likely return on the financial investment of building a stakeholder-led vision along with a portfolio of on-ground management strategies. Our approach brings together and analyses expert knowledge to estimate the cost-effectiveness of a common vision strategy and on-ground management strategies, before any investments in these strategies are made. We test our approach in an intensively-used Australian biodiversity hotspot with 179 threatened or at-risk species. Experts predicted that an effective stakeholder vision for the region would have a relatively low cost and would significantly increase the feasibility of on-ground management strategies. As a result, our analysis indicates that a common vision is likely to be a cost-effective investment, increasing the expected persistence of threatened species in the region by 9 to 52%, depending upon the strategies implemented. Our approach can provide the maximum budget that is worth investing in building a common vision or another socially focused strategy for building support for on-ground conservation actions. The approach can assist with decisions about whether and how to allocate scarce resources amongst social and ecological actions for biodiversity conservation in other regions worldwide.

Suggested Citation

  • Rocío Ponce Reyes & Jennifer Firn & Sam Nicol & Iadine Chadès & Danial S Stratford & Tara G Martin & Stuart Whitten & Josie Carwardine, 2019. "Building a stakeholder-led common vision increases the expected cost-effectiveness of biodiversity conservation," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(6), pages 1-18, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0218093
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0218093
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0218093
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0218093&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0218093?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Parkhurst, Gregory M. & Shogren, Jason F. & Bastian, Chris & Kivi, Paul & Donner, Jennifer & Smith, Rodney B. W., 2002. "Agglomeration bonus: an incentive mechanism to reunite fragmented habitat for biodiversity conservation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 305-328, May.
    2. Oscar Venter & Eric W. Sanderson & Ainhoa Magrach & James R. Allan & Jutta Beher & Kendall R. Jones & Hugh P. Possingham & William F. Laurance & Peter Wood & Balázs M. Fekete & Marc A. Levy & James E., 2016. "Sixteen years of change in the global terrestrial human footprint and implications for biodiversity conservation," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 7(1), pages 1-11, November.
    3. Milner-Gulland, E.J. & Rowcliffe, J. Marcus, 2007. "Conservation and Sustainable Use: A Handbook of Techniques," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198530350.
    4. Richard Margerum & Debra Whitall, 2004. "The challenges and implications of collaborative management on a river basin scale," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 47(3), pages 409-429.
    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. Frans P. Vries & Nick Hanley, 2016. "Incentive-Based Policy Design for Pollution Control and Biodiversity Conservation: A Review," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 63(4), pages 687-702, April.
    2. Surun, Clément & Drechsler, Martin, 2018. "Effectiveness of Tradable Permits for the Conservation of Metacommunities With Two Competing Species," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 189-196.
    3. Rakotonarivo, O. Sarobidy & Bredahl Jacobsen, Jette & Poudyal, Mahesh & Rasoamanana, Alexandra & Hockley, Neal, 2018. "Estimating welfare impacts where property rights are contested: methodological and policy implications," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 71-83.
    4. Conor Waldock & Bernhard Wegscheider & Dario Josi & Bárbara Borges Calegari & Jakob Brodersen & Luiz Jardim de Queiroz & Ole Seehausen, 2024. "Deconstructing the geography of human impacts on species’ natural distribution," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-15, December.
    5. Hui Wen & Jiquan Chen & Zhifang Wang, 2020. "Disproportioned Performances of Protected Areas in the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei Region," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-15, August.
    6. Kim, Yeon-Su & Rodrigues, Marcos & Robinne, François-Nicolas, 2021. "Economic drivers of global fire activity: A critical review using the DPSIR framework," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    7. Zandersen, Marianne & Oddershede, Jakob Stoktoft & Pedersen, Anders Branth & Nielsen, Helle Ørsted & Termansen, Mette, 2021. "Nature Based Solutions for Climate Adaptation - Paying Farmers for Flood Control," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).
    8. François Bareille & Matteo Zavalloni & Davide Viaggi, 2023. "Agglomeration bonus and endogenous group formation," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 105(1), pages 76-98, January.
    9. Chian Jones Ritten & Christopher Bastian & Jason F. Shogren & Thadchaigeni Panchalingam & Mariah D. Ehmke & Gregory Parkhurst, 2017. "Understanding Pollinator Habitat Conservation under Current Policy Using Economic Experiments," Land, MDPI, vol. 6(3), pages 1-13, August.
    10. Samuel Xin Tham Lee & Zachary Amir & Jonathan H. Moore & Kaitlyn M. Gaynor & Matthew Scott Luskin, 2024. "Effects of human disturbances on wildlife behaviour and consequences for predator-prey overlap in Southeast Asia," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-12, December.
    11. Thomas Eichner & Marco Runkel, 2022. "Animal Welfare, Moral Consumers and the Optimal Regulation of Animal Food Production," CESifo Working Paper Series 10149, CESifo.
    12. Kuhfuss, Laure & Préget, Raphaële & Thoyer, Sophie & de Vries, Frans P. & Hanley, Nick, 2022. "Enhancing spatial coordination in payment for ecosystem services schemes with non-pecuniary preferences," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 192(C).
    13. Meijerink, Gerdien W., 2007. "If services aren't delivered, people won't pay: the role of measurement problems and monitoring in Payments for Environmental Services," 106th Seminar, October 25-27, 2007, Montpellier, France 7948, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    14. Ehsan Rahimi & Pinliang Dong, 2022. "What are the main human pressures affecting Iran’s protected areas?," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 12(4), pages 682-691, December.
    15. Marie Ferré & Stefanie Engel & Elisabeth Gsottbauer, 2023. "External validity of economic experiments on Agri‐environmental scheme design," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 74(3), pages 661-685, September.
    16. Stephen Polasky & Erik Nelson & Derric Pennington & Kris Johnson, 2011. "The Impact of Land-Use Change on Ecosystem Services, Biodiversity and Returns to Landowners: A Case Study in the State of Minnesota," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 48(2), pages 219-242, February.
    17. Lafuite, A.-S. & Loreau, M., 2017. "Time-delayed biodiversity feedbacks and the sustainability of social-ecological systems," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 351(C), pages 96-108.
    18. Matteo Zavalloni & Meri Raggi & Davide Viaggi, 2016. "Assessing Collective Measures in Rural Policy: The Effect of Minimum Participation Rules on the Distribution of Benefits from Irrigation Infrastructure," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-19, December.
    19. Wätzold, Frank & Drechsler, Martin, 2014. "Agglomeration payment, agglomeration bonus or homogeneous payment?," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 85-101.
    20. Lawley, Chad & Yang, Wanhong, 2015. "Spatial interactions in habitat conservation: Evidence from prairie pothole easements," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 71-89.

    More about this item

    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:plo:pone00:0218093. 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.