IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aare12/124289.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Evaluation of predator-proof fenced biodiversity projects

Author

Listed:
  • Doelle, Sebastian

Abstract

There has been recent debate over the role of predator-proof fences in the management of New Zealand’s biodiversity. The debate has arisen due to concern that investments in fenced sanctuaries are less productive than are alternative ways to manage biodiversity. Predator-proof fences are costly and budget constraints limit the area of habitat that can be fenced. The area of habitat enclosed within fences, and number of individuals of species supported, determines project’s ability to contribute to biodiversity goals. Many fenced sanctuary projects require substantial, continuing volunteer input to monitor fences and other tasks. These projects often pursue a number of goals including species protection, habitat restoration, education and community engagement. In this paper we examine methods to evaluate fenced biodiversity projects. While Cost Benefit analysis can potentially be used to evaluate these projects, cost - effectiveness measures and multi criteria analyses provide useful ways to inform decision-makers.

Suggested Citation

  • Doelle, Sebastian, 2012. "Evaluation of predator-proof fenced biodiversity projects," 2012 Conference (56th), February 7-10, 2012, Fremantle, Australia 124289, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:aare12:124289
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.124289
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/124289/files/2012AC%20Doelle%20CP.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.124289?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. Moran, Emma & Cullen, Ross & Hughey, Kenneth F.D., 2005. "Financing threatened species management: the costs of single species programmes and the budget constraint," 2005 Conference, August 26-27, 2005, Nelson, New Zealand 98498, New Zealand Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    2. Laycock, Helen F. & Moran, Dominic & Smart, James C.R. & Raffaelli, David G. & White, Piran C.L., 2011. "Evaluating the effectiveness and efficiency of biodiversity conservation spending," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(10), pages 1789-1796, August.
    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. Christopher Cvitanovic & Marie F Löf & Albert V Norström & Mark S Reed, 2018. "Building university-based boundary organisations that facilitate impacts on environmental policy and practice," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(9), pages 1-19, September.
    2. Austin, Zoё & McVittie, Alistair & McCracken, Davy & Moxey, Andrew & Moran, Dominic & White, Piran C.L., 2016. "The co-benefits of biodiversity conservation programmes on wider ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 20(C), pages 37-43.
    3. McVittie, Alistair & Austin, Zoe & White, Piran & Moxey, Andrew & McCracken, Davy & Moran, Dominic, 2014. "Something to grouse about? The cost-effectiveness of biodiversity measures in Scotland," 88th Annual Conference, April 9-11, 2014, AgroParisTech, Paris, France 169713, Agricultural Economics Society.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Resource /Energy Economics and Policy;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:aare12:124289. 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/aaresea.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.