IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolec/v234y2025ics092180092500093x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Allocating conservation resources between uncertain future states of nature

Author

Listed:
  • Perry, Neil
  • Shankar, Sriram

Abstract

When uncertainty prevails, conservation decision makers allocate funds, inputs and resources between future states of nature to hedge their bets. Decision makers explicitly or implicitly substitute biodiversity in one future state of nature for biodiversity in another. However, the decision making frameworks common in conservation biology do not model, explain or justify such behavior. Frameworks such as information gap analysis, expected benefit, stochastic dominance and minimizing the maximum loss result in resources being dedicated to one state of nature. Portfolio theory applied to conservation under uncertainty leads to resource allocations across states of nature but the framework we propose in this paper is more general and a better (more realistic) representation of conservation decision making. Utilizing a standard hypothetical example of maximizing the population size of the endangered orange-bellied parrot (Neophema chrysogaster), we develop the state-contingent approach and contrast it with standard decision-making frameworks. We explain that the state-contingent approach is unique because it is explicit about the relationship between actions and the states of nature that could arise. The extent to which any one action or future state of nature receives funding depends on three variables – the subjective probability that the state of nature will arise, society's risk preferences, and the conservation technology, or the effectiveness of the conservation action under different states of nature. We focus on the conservation technology and introduce three different classes – state general technologies, state allocable technologies, and state specific technologies. Each type of conservation technology leads to different allocation solutions and we provide examples from the conservation literature where each technology applies. Using a framework grounded in economic theory, the state-contingent approach improves the justification of precautionary conservation action, and we discuss the applicability of the approach to the conservation of the Tasmanian devil (Sarcophilus harrisii).

Suggested Citation

  • Perry, Neil & Shankar, Sriram, 2025. "Allocating conservation resources between uncertain future states of nature," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 234(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:234:y:2025:i:c:s092180092500093x
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2025.108610
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S092180092500093X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2025.108610?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jonathan Aldred, 2012. "Climate change uncertainty, irreversibility and the precautionary principle," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 36(5), pages 1051-1072.
    2. Rasmussen, Svend, 2003. "Criteria for optimal production under uncertainty. The state-contingent approach," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 47(4), pages 1-30.
    3. John Quiggin & Robert G. Chambers, 2006. "The state-contingent approach to production under uncertainty ," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 50(2), pages 153-169, June.
    4. Chambers, Robert G. & Quiggin, John, 2008. "Generalized Invariant Preferences: Two-parameter Representations of Preferences," Risk and Sustainable Management Group Working Papers 151186, University of Queensland, School of Economics.
    5. Chambers, Robert G. & Quiggin, John C., 2004. "Technological and financial approaches to risk management in agriculture: an integrate approach," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 48(2), pages 1-25.
    6. Sriram Shankar, 2012. "Production economics in the presence of risk," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 56(4), pages 597-620, October.
    7. Chambers,Robert G. & Quiggin,John, 2000. "Uncertainty, Production, Choice, and Agency," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521785235, June.
    8. Sriram Shankar, 2013. "Firm behaviour under uncertainty: a simple parametric model," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 57(1), pages 141-151, January.
    9. Svend Rasmussen, 2011. "Optimisation of Production Under Uncertainty," SpringerBriefs in Economics, Springer, number 978-3-642-21686-2, September.
    10. John Quiggin & Robert G. Chambers, 2004. "Drought policy: a graphical analysis," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 48(2), pages 225-251, June.
    11. Clarke Harry, 2008. "Classical decision rules and adaptation to climate change ," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 52(4), pages 487-504, December.
    12. O'Donnell, Christopher J. & Shankar, Sriram, 2009. "Estimating State-Allocable Production Technologies When There are Two States of Nature and State Allocations of Inputs are Unobserved," 2009 Conference (53rd), February 11-13, 2009, Cairns, Australia 50898, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    13. Gerling, Charlotte & Drechsler, M. & Leins, Johannes A. & Sturm, Astrid & Wätzold, Frank, 2025. "Cost-effective policy instruments for biodiversity conservation under climate change – The need for flexibility," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 227(C).
    14. Sandmo, Agnar, 1971. "On the Theory of the Competitive Firm under Price Uncertainty," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 61(1), pages 65-73, March.
    15. Quiggin, John & Chambers, R.G.Robert G., 2004. "Invariant risk attitudes," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 117(1), pages 96-118, July.
    16. William F. Sharpe, 1964. "Capital Asset Prices: A Theory Of Market Equilibrium Under Conditions Of Risk," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 19(3), pages 425-442, September.
    17. Svend Rasmussen, 2011. "Optimising Production Under Uncertainty," SpringerBriefs in Economics, in: Optimisation of Production Under Uncertainty, chapter 0, pages 43-78, Springer.
    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. Adamson, David & Mallawaarachchi, Thilak & Quiggin, John C., 2007. "Water use and salinity in the Murray–Darling Basin: A state-contingent model," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 51(3), pages 1-19.
    2. Quiggin, John & Chambers, Robert G., 2005. "The state-contingent approach to production and uncertainty," Risk and Sustainable Management Group Working Papers 151168, University of Queensland, School of Economics.
    3. John Quiggin & Robert G. Chambers, 2006. "The state-contingent approach to production under uncertainty ," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 50(2), pages 153-169, June.
    4. Adamson, David & Loch, Adam & Schwabe, Kurt, 2017. "Adaptation responses to increasing drought frequency," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 61(3), July.
    5. Andreas Tsakiridis & Kevin Hanrahan & James Breen & Cathal O’Donoghue & Michael Wallace, 2025. "Modelling pasture-based beef production costs using panel data from farms with different soil quality," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Springer, vol. 106(1), pages 1-71, May.
    6. Perry, Neil & Shankar, Sriram, 2017. "The State-contingent Approach to the Noah's Ark Problem," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 65-72.
    7. Robert G. Chambers & Margarita Genius & Vangelis Tzouvelekas, 2021. "Invariant Risk Preferences and Supply Response under Price Risk," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 103(5), pages 1802-1819, October.
    8. Sriram Shankar & John Quiggin, 2013. "Production under uncertainty: a simulation study," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 39(3), pages 207-215, June.
    9. Adamson, David & Mallawaarachchi, Thilak & Quiggin, John, 2004. "Modelling basin level allocation of water in the Murray Darling Basin in a world of uncertainty," Risk and Sustainable Management Group Working Papers 149844, University of Queensland, School of Economics.
    10. Shankar, Sriram, 2012. "Production economics in the presence of risk," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 56(4), pages 1-24, December.
    11. Shankar, Sriram, 2015. "Efficiency analysis under uncertainty: a simulation study," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 59(2), April.
    12. Robert G. Chambers & John Quiggin, 2008. "Generalized Invariant Preferences: Two-parameter Representations of Preferences," Risk & Uncertainty Working Papers WPR08_1, Risk and Sustainable Management Group, University of Queensland.
    13. Quiggin, John C. & Chambers, Robert G., 2004. "Drought policy: a graphical analysis," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 48(2), pages 1-27.
    14. Tomasz Gerard Czekaj & Arne Henningsen, 2013. "Panel Data Nonparametric Estimation of Production Risk and Risk Preferences: An Application to Polish Dairy Farms," IFRO Working Paper 2013/6, University of Copenhagen, Department of Food and Resource Economics.
    15. Pedro Macedo & Elvira Silva & Manuel Scotto, 2014. "Technical efficiency with state-contingent production frontiers using maximum entropy estimators," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 41(1), pages 131-140, February.
    16. Chambers, Robert G. & Grant, Simon & Polak, Ben & Quiggin, John, 2014. "A two-parameter model of dispersion aversion," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 611-641.
    17. Cherchye, L. & Post, G.T., 2001. "Methodological Advances in Dea," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2001-53-F&A, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    18. Robert G. Chambers & John Quiggin, 2007. "Dual Approaches to the Analysis of Risk Aversion," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 74(294), pages 189-213, May.
    19. Rasmussen, Svend, 2003. "Criteria for optimal production under uncertainty. The state-contingent approach," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 47(4), pages 1-30.
    20. Macedo, Pedro & Scotto, Manuel, 2014. "Cross-entropy estimation in technical efficiency analysis," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 124-130.

    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:eee:ecolec:v:234:y:2025:i:c:s092180092500093x. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolecon .

    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.