IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/rff/dpaper/dp-22-21.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Value of Remotely-Sensed Data in Terrestrial Habitat Corridor Design for Large Migratory Species

Author

Listed:
  • Leonard, Bryan
  • Gigliotti, Laura
  • Middleton, Arthur
  • Kroetz, Kailin

    (Resources for the Future)

Abstract

Cost-effective conservation program design to support seasonal migratory species is urgently needed, but to-date has received little attention by economists. Conserving migratory corridors is a complicated design problem because of the large spatial scales over which migratory species can travel and the weakest-link characteristic of the problem. If one section or area of a potential migratory corridor is unable to support species movement, the migration through that route will not be successful. We develop and apply an integer-programming modeling approach that leverages innovative new data products to propose a cost-effective, landscape-scale conservation planning approach. We apply our approach to the Cody elk herd range within the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem (GYE), leveraging satellite data on crop type and density over time and GPS collar data on elk migrations. We provide empirical evidence that using new satellite data products can avoid unconnected corridors and increase the cost effectiveness of corridor construction. In the Cody context, we estimate that achieving the conservation outcome associated with using satellite data on both costs and benefits would cost close to twice as much when using satellite benefit data but only limited cost data and about three times as much when using satellite cost data but only limited benefit data. Empirical work across additional herds is needed to provide additional insights into characteristics of contexts under which we expect gains from satellite and/or GPS collar data.

Suggested Citation

  • Leonard, Bryan & Gigliotti, Laura & Middleton, Arthur & Kroetz, Kailin, 2022. "The Value of Remotely-Sensed Data in Terrestrial Habitat Corridor Design for Large Migratory Species," RFF Working Paper Series 22-21, Resources for the Future.
  • Handle: RePEc:rff:dpaper:dp-22-21
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.rff.org/documents/3635/WP_22-21_rGlUga4.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wolfgang Buchholz & Todd Sandler, 2021. "Global Public Goods: A Survey," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 59(2), pages 488-545, June.
    2. Walter N. Thurman & Dominic P. Parker, 2011. "Crowding Out Open Space: The Effects of Federal Land Programs on Private Land Trust Conservation," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 87(2), pages 202-222.
    3. Conrad, Jon M. & Gomes, Carla P. & van Hoeve, Willem-Jan & Sabharwal, Ashish & Suter, Jordan F., 2012. "Wildlife corridors as a connected subgraph problem," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 1-18.
    4. Jack Hirshleifer, 1983. "From weakest-link to best-shot: The voluntary provision of public goods," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 41(3), pages 371-386, January.
    5. James Boyd & Rebecca Epanchin-Niell & Juha Siikamäki, 2015. "Conservation Planning: A Review of Return on Investment Analysis," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 9(1), pages 23-42.
    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. Todd Sandler, 2023. "COVID-19 Activities: Publicness and Strategic Concerns," Games, MDPI, vol. 14(1), pages 1-19, January.
    2. Suter, Jordan & Sahan, Dissanayake & Lynne, Lewis, 2014. "Public Incentives for Conservation on Private Land," 2014 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2014, Minneapolis, Minnesota 170706, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    3. Subhasish M. Chowdhury & Iryna Topolyan, 2013. "The Attack-and-Defence Group Contests," University of East Anglia Applied and Financial Economics Working Paper Series 049, School of Economics, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK..
    4. Camacho, Carmen & Hassan, Waleed, 2023. "The dynamics of revolution: Discrimination, social unrest and the optimal timing of revolution," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 128(C).
    5. Daniel E. O'Leary, 2018. "DNA Mining and genealogical information systems: Not just for finding family ethnicity," Intelligent Systems in Accounting, Finance and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 25(4), pages 190-196, October.
    6. Atallah, Shadi S. & Huang, Ju-Chin & Leahy, Jessica & Bennett, Karen, 2020. "Preference Heterogeneity and Neighborhood Effect in Invasive Species Control: The Case of Glossy Buckthorn in New Hampshire and Maine Forests," 2020 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, Kansas City, Missouri 304623, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    7. Luca Dall’Asta & Paolo Pin & Abolfazl Ramezanpour, 2011. "Optimal Equilibria of the Best Shot Game," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 13(6), pages 885-901, December.
    8. Alejandro Caparrós & Michael Finus, 2020. "Public good agreements under the weakest‐link technology," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 22(3), pages 555-582, June.
    9. Le Maux, Benoit & Rocaboy, Yvon, 2012. "A simple microfoundation for the utilization of fragmentation indexes to measure the performance of a team," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 116(3), pages 491-493.
    10. Conybeare, John A C & Murdoch, James C & Sandler, Todd, 1994. "Alternative Collective-Goods Models of Military Alliances: Theory and Empirics," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 32(4), pages 525-542, October.
    11. Wang, Haoluan, 2017. "Land Conservation for Open Space: The Impact of Neighbors and the Natural Environment," 2017 Annual Meeting, July 30-August 1, Chicago, Illinois 258125, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    12. Kamijo, Yoshio, 2016. "Rewards versus punishments in additive, weakest-link, and best-shot contests," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 17-30.
    13. Rémy Delille & Jean-Christophe Pereau, 2014. "The Seawall Bargaining Game," Games, MDPI, vol. 5(2), pages 1-13, June.
    14. Alessandra Cepparulo & Luisa Giuriato, 2012. "Global Challenges and Country-Specific Responses through Aid Financing of Global Public Goods," Working Papers in Public Economics 156, University of Rome La Sapienza, Department of Economics and Law.
    15. Henrik Orzen, 2005. "Fundraising through Competition: Evidence from the Lab," Discussion Papers 2005-04, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
    16. Epanchin-Niell, Rebecca S. & Thompson, Alexandra & Han, Xianru & Post, Jessica & Miller, Jarrod & Newburn, David & Gedan, Keryn & Tully, Kate, 2023. "Coastal agricultural land use response to sea level rise and saltwater intrusion," 2023 Annual Meeting, July 23-25, Washington D.C. 335970, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    17. Ziyi Chen & Kaiyan Dai & Xing Jin & Liqin Hu & Yongheng Wang, 2023. "Aspiration-Based Learning in k -Hop Best-Shot Binary Networked Public Goods Games," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-19, July.
    18. Todd Sandler, 2009. "Intergenerational Public Goods: Transnational Considerations," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 56(3), pages 353-370, July.
    19. Nikolai Kukushkin, 2015. "The single crossing conditions for incomplete preferences," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 44(1), pages 225-251, February.
    20. Stefanie Gerke & Gregory Gutin & Sung-Ha Hwang & Philip Neary, 2019. "Public goods in networks with constraints on sharing," Papers 1905.01693, arXiv.org, revised Jun 2023.

    More about this item

    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:rff:dpaper:dp-22-21. 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: Resources for the Future (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/rffffus.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.