IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aaea05/19517.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Improving the Efficiency of Wildlife Management: An Application to Waterfowl Production in the Prairie Pothole Region

Author

Listed:
  • Rashford, Benjamin S.
  • Adams, Richard M.

Abstract

Wildlife management agencies increasingly use economic analyses to improve the efficiency of their management policies. Few economic studies consider supply-side analyses for wildlife management, due, in part, to a lack of biological response data that capture the full range of management strategies and the influence of landscape characteristics. This paper uses a simulation model to generate biological response functions, which are then embedded within an economic model to determine least cost management strategies. The procedure is applied to waterfowl management in the Prairie Pothole Region of the northern Great Plains. Results highlight management inefficiencies that result from oversimplified response functions that do not account for non-linear relationships or spatial heterogeneity. Results also indicate that intensive management activities, which are generally compatible with agricultural land use, are a cost effective means of achieving waterfowl population objectives. This has important implications for the tradeoff between agricultural and waterfowl production in the Prairie Pothole Region.

Suggested Citation

  • Rashford, Benjamin S. & Adams, Richard M., 2005. "Improving the Efficiency of Wildlife Management: An Application to Waterfowl Production in the Prairie Pothole Region," 2005 Annual meeting, July 24-27, Providence, RI 19517, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea05:19517
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.19517
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/19517/files/sp05ra10.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.19517?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. Hyde, William F., 1989. "Marginal Costs of Managing Endangered Species:The Case of the Red-Cockaded Woodpecker," Journal of Agricultural Economics Research, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, vol. 41(02), pages 1-8.
    2. van Wenum, J. H. & Wossink, G. A. A. & Renkema, J. A., 2004. "Location-specific modeling for optimizing wildlife management on crop farms," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(4), pages 395-407, April.
    3. Montgomery Claire A. & Brown Jr. , Gardner M. & Adams Darius M., 1994. "The Marginal Cost of Species Preservation: The Northern Spotted Owl," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 111-128, March.
    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. Polasky, Stephen & Costello, Christopher & McAusland, Carol, 2004. "On trade, land-use, and biodiversity," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 911-925, September.
    2. Nalle, Darek J. & Montgomery, Claire A. & Arthur, Jeffrey L. & Polasky, Stephen & Schumaker, Nathan H., 2004. "Modeling joint production of wildlife and timber," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 997-1017, November.
    3. Haddock, Janet & Tzanopoulos, Joseph & Mitchley, Jonathan & Fraser, Rob, 2007. "A method for evaluating alternative landscape management scenarios in relation to the biodiversity conservation of habitats," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(2-3), pages 277-283, March.
    4. Cullen, Ross & Moran, Emma & Hughey, Kenneth F.D., 2005. "Measuring the success and cost effectiveness of New Zealand multiple-species projects to the conservation of threatened species," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(3), pages 311-323, May.
    5. Mark E. Lichtenstein & Claire A. Montgomery, 2003. "Biodiversity and Timber in the Coast Range of Oregon: Inside the Production Possibility Frontier," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 79(1), pages 56-73.
    6. Daniel McKenney, 1998. "Resource Economists Should Do More Cost Analysis and Less Benefit Analysis," Working Papers in Ecological Economics 9801, Australian National University, Centre for Resource and Environmental Studies, Ecological Economics Program.
    7. Jean-Paul Chavas, 2009. "On the Productive Value of Biodiversity," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 42(1), pages 109-131, January.
    8. Dyar, Julie A. & Wagner, Jeffrey, 2003. "Uncertainty and species recovery program design," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 45(2, Supple), pages 505-522, March.
    9. Polasky, Stephen & Vossler, Christian A., 2002. "Conserving biodiversity by conserving land," MPRA Paper 38863, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Barraquand, F. & Martinet, V., 2011. "Biological conservation in dynamic agricultural landscapes: Effectiveness of public policies and trade-offs with agricultural production," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(5), pages 910-920, March.
    11. Timo Sipiläinen & Anni Huhtala, 2013. "Opportunity costs of providing crop diversity in organic and conventional farming: would targeted environmental policies make economic sense?," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 40(3), pages 441-462, July.
    12. Berentsen, Paul B.M. & Hendriksen, Astrid & Heijman, Wim J.M. & van Vlokhoven, Haske A., 2007. "Costs and benefits of on-farm nature conservation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(3-4), pages 571-579, May.
    13. N. Wear, David & Murray, Brian C., 2004. "Federal timber restrictions, interregional spillovers, and the impact on US softwood markets," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 307-330, March.
    14. Mouysset, L. & Doyen, L. & Jiguet, F. & Allaire, G. & Leger, F., 2011. "Bio economic modeling for a sustainable management of biodiversity in agricultural lands," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(4), pages 617-626, February.
    15. Polasky, Stephen & Costello, Christopher & Solow, Andrew, 2005. "The Economics of Biodiversity," Handbook of Environmental Economics, in: K. G. Mäler & J. R. Vincent (ed.), Handbook of Environmental Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 29, pages 1517-1560, Elsevier.
    16. Lauriane MOUYSSET & Luc DOYEN & Fréderic JIGUET, 2012. "How does the economic risk aversion affect biodiversity?," Cahiers du GREThA (2007-2019) 2012-03, Groupe de Recherche en Economie Théorique et Appliquée (GREThA).
    17. Gardner M. Brown & Jason F. Shogren, 1998. "Economics of the Endangered Species Act," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 12(3), pages 3-20, Summer.
    18. Bulte, Erwin & Cornelis van Kooten, G., 2002. "Downward sloping demand for environmental amenities and international compensation: elephant conservation and strategic culling," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 27(1), pages 15-22, May.
    19. Ando, Amy W. & Getzner, Michael, 2006. "The roles of ownership, ecology, and economics in public wetland-conservation decisions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 287-303, June.
    20. Erwin Bulte & G. van Kooten, 1999. "Marginal Valuation of Charismatic Species: Implications for Conservation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 14(1), pages 119-130, July.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Resource/Energy Economics and Policy;

    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:ags:aaea05:19517. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.html .

    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.