IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aesc14/169713.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Something to grouse about? The cost-effectiveness of biodiversity measures in Scotland

Author

Listed:
  • McVittie, Alistair
  • Austin, Zoe
  • White, Piran
  • Moxey, Andrew
  • McCracken, Davy
  • Moran, Dominic

Abstract

The development of environment measures in the reformed CAP can be informed by the evaluation of existing policies. We undertook a cost-effectiveness analysis of biodiversity measures in Scotland to determine whether current biodiversity objectives have been achieved. We assessed measures targeting 13 species and 5 habitats under the Scottish Rural Development Programme (SRDP) and similar schemes. Expert interviews were used to determine the extent to which published conservation objectives for species and habitats have been achieved. Effectiveness scores for multiple objectives were then weighted and combined to produce overall effectiveness for each species or habitat. Cost data for relevant SRDP and other scheme measures were apportioned to our study species and habitats. There was a wide variation in cost per unit of effectiveness both across and within species and habitats, e.g. Hazel gloves fungus cost-effectiveness was £3,286 per unit whilst Black grouse ranged between £112k and £4m. These results reflected both levels of funding and effectiveness; also the often wide variation in assessment of effectiveness can be linked to vague objectives and lack of monitoring. We also considered impacts on wider ecosystem services which found that there are often broader benefits from biodiversity measures that should be considered.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:aesc14:169713
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.169713
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/169713/files/Alistair_McVittie_McVittie_AES14__CE_paper.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.169713?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. 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.
    2. Andrew Metrick & Martin L. Weitzman, 1998. "Conflicts and Choices in Biodiversity Preservation," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 12(3), pages 21-34, Summer.
    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. Gerard Wynn, 2002. "The Cost-effectiveness of Biodiversity Management: A Comparison of Farm Types in Extensively Farmed Areas of Scotland," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(6), pages 827-840.
    5. 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. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. Christian Langpap & Joe Kerkvliet & Jason F Shogren, 2018. "The Economics of the U.S. Endangered Species Act: A Review of Recent Developments," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 12(1), pages 69-91.
    4. Liang, Yuanning & Rudik, Ivan & Zou, Eric Yongchen, 2021. "Economic Production and Biodiversity in the United States," SocArXiv qy76a, Center for Open Science.
    5. Kerkvliet, Joe & Langpap, Christian, 2007. "Learning from endangered and threatened species recovery programs: A case study using U.S. Endangered Species Act recovery scores," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(2-3), pages 499-510, August.
    6. Felix Schläpfer & Michael Tucker & Irmi Seidl, 2002. "Returns from Hay Cultivation in Fertilized Low Diversity and Non-Fertilized High Diversity Grassland," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 21(1), pages 89-100, January.
    7. Alejandro M. Bellon, 2019. "Does animal charisma influence conservation funding for vertebrate species under the US Endangered Species Act?," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 21(3), pages 399-411, July.
    8. Oliver Fromm, 2000. "Ecological Structure and Functions of Biodiversity as Elements of Its Total Economic Value," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 16(3), pages 303-328, July.
    9. 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.
    10. 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.
    11. Ariane Amin & Johanna Choumert, 2015. "Development and biodiversity conservation in Sub-Saharan Africa: A spatial analysis," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 35(1), pages 729-744.
    12. Langenmayr Dominika & Mittermaier Ferdinand, 2021. "Nachhaltiges Wirtschaften, nachhaltig finanziert: Herausforderungen für die Politik in den 2020er Jahren," Perspektiven der Wirtschaftspolitik, De Gruyter, vol. 22(3), pages 176-190, September.
    13. 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.
    14. Clem Tisdell & Clevo Wilson, 2006. "Information, Wildlife Valuation, Conservation: Experiments And Policy," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 24(1), pages 144-159, January.
    15. 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.
    16. Mathias Reynaert & Edouardo Souza-Rodrigues & Arthur van Benthem, 2023. "The Environmental Impacts of Protected Area Policy," Post-Print hal-04448711, HAL.
    17. 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.
    18. Rauscher, Michael & Barbier, Edward B., 2010. "Biodiversity and geography," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 241-260, April.
    19. Tisdell, Clement A. & Wilson, Clevo & Swarna Nantha, Hemanath, 2004. "Public Support for Sustainable Commercial Harvesting of Wildlife: An Australian Case Study," Economics, Ecology and Environment Working Papers 51418, University of Queensland, School of Economics.
    20. 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.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Agricultural and Food Policy; Environmental Economics and Policy; International Development;
    All these keywords.

    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:aesc14:169713. 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/aesukea.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.