Avoiding Costly Conservation Mistakes
Author Information
Author(s): Josie Carwardine, Kerrie A. Wilson, Matt Watts, Andres Etter, Carissa J. Klein, Hugh P. Possingham
Primary Institution: The Ecology Centre, School of Integrative Biology, University of Queensland
Hypothesis
Clearly specifying conservation objectives and incorporating cost data can improve conservation planning efficiency.
Conclusion
The study demonstrates that failing to specify conservation actions and costs can lead to inefficient and expensive conservation outcomes.
Supporting Evidence
- Using the right cost data can cut conservation costs by half.
- Misallocating funds can lead to expensive mistakes in conservation.
- Spatially explicit cost data improves the efficiency of conservation planning.
Takeaway
When planning to protect nature, it's important to know exactly what you want to do and how much it will cost, so you don't waste money.
Methodology
The study used a decision-support tool to analyze candidate priority areas for conservation actions based on cost data.
Potential Biases
Potential biases may arise from the reliance on economic data that can be uncertain.
Limitations
The study did not consider management costs, threats, and land-market feedbacks that may affect conservation costs.
Participant Demographics
The study focused on candidate priority areas across Australia.
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
Want to read the original?
Access the complete publication on the publisher's website