2012Wildlife ResearchRequires access

Assignment of measurable costs and benefits to wildlife conservation projects

Stephanie A. Shwiff, Aaron Anderson, Ross Cullen, Piran C. L. White, Steven Shwiff

Open publisher page 31 citations

Abstract

Success of wildlife conservation projects is determined by a suite of biological and economic factors. Donor and public understanding of the economic factors is becoming increasingly central to the longevity of funding for conservation efforts. Unlike typical economic evaluation, many costs and benefits related to conservation efforts are realised in non-monetary terms. We identify the types of benefits and costs that arise from conservation projects and examine several well developed techniques that economists use to convert benefits and costs into monetary values so they may be compared in a common metric. Costs are typically more readily identifiable than benefits, with financial project costs reported most frequently, and opportunity and damage costs reported much less often. Most current evaluation methods rely primarily on cost-effectiveness analysis rather than cost–benefit analysis, a result of the difficultly in measuring benefits. We highlight improved methodology to measure secondary costs and benefits on a broader spatial scale, thereby promoting project efficacy and long-term success. Estimation of the secondary effects can provide a means to engage a wider audience in discussions of wildlife conservation by illuminating the relevant impacts to income and employment in local economies.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Success of wildlife conservation projects is determined by a suite of biological and economic factors. Donor and public understanding of the economic factors is becoming increasingly central to the longevity of funding for conservation efforts. Unlike typical economic evaluation, many costs and benefits related to conservation efforts are realised in non-monetary terms. We identify the types of benefits and costs that arise from conservation projects and examine several well developed techniques that economists use to convert benefits and costs into monetary values so they may be compared in a common metric. Costs are typically more readily identifiable than benefits, with financial project costs reported most frequently, and opportunity and damage costs reported much less often. Most current evaluation methods rely primarily on cost-effectiveness analysis rather than cost–benefit analysis, a result of the difficultly in measuring benefits. We highlight improved methodology to measure secondary costs and benefits on a broader spatial scale, thereby promoting project efficacy and long-term success. Estimation of the secondary effects can provide a means to engage a wider audience in discussions of wildlife conservation by illuminating the relevant impacts to income and employment in local economies.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 31 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Success of wildlife conservation projects is determined by a suite of biological and economic factors. Donor and public understanding of the economic factors is becoming increasingly central to the longevity of funding for conservation efforts. Unlike typical economic evaluation, many costs and benefits related to conservation efforts are realised in non-monetary terms. We identify the types of benefits and costs that arise from conservation projects and examine several well developed techniques that economists use to convert benefits and costs into monetary values so they may be compared in a common metric. Costs are typically more readily identifiable than benefits, with financial project costs reported most frequently, and opportunity and damage costs reported much less often. Most current evaluation methods rely primarily on cost-effectiveness analysis rather than cost–benefit analysis, a result of the difficultly in measuring benefits. We highlight improved methodology to measure secondary costs and benefits on a broader spatial scale, thereby promoting project efficacy and long-term success. Estimation of the secondary effects can provide a means to engage a wider audience in discussions of wildlife conservation by illuminating the relevant impacts to income and employment in local economies.

Key concepts: Wildlife, Cost–benefit analysis, Opportunity cost, Wildlife conservation, Environmental resource management, Business, Public economics, Economic cost

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Assignment of measurable costs and benefits to wildlife conservation projects — Research Paper | ScholarLens