IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolec/v67y2008i2p194-204.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Counting the cost of vulture decline--An appraisal of the human health and other benefits of vultures in India

Author

Listed:
  • Markandya, Anil
  • Taylor, Tim
  • Longo, Alberto
  • Murty, M.N.
  • Murty, S.
  • Dhavala, K.

Abstract

Widespread use of the non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) diclofenac to treat livestock has resulted in dramatic declines in the populations of vultures across India. This has become an issue of considerable concern as vultures are a keystone species and their decline has a range of socio-economic, as well as cultural and biodiversity impacts. In this paper, we review these impacts and estimate in detail the economic cost of one of them: the human health impacts of the vulture decline. Livestock carcasses provide the main food supply for vultures, and are also eaten by dogs. Dogs are the main source of rabies in humans in India, and their populations have increased substantially in parallel with the vulture decline. The potential human health impact of rabies associated with the vulture decline is found to be significant. This, and a wide range of other impacts suggest that significant resources should be put into (1) testing of pharmaceutical products to ensure that similar situations are not repeated, (2) helping vulture populations to recover through the use of alternative drugs to diclofenac that are of low toxicity to vultures, and (3) through conservation breeding programmes.

Suggested Citation

  • Markandya, Anil & Taylor, Tim & Longo, Alberto & Murty, M.N. & Murty, S. & Dhavala, K., 2008. "Counting the cost of vulture decline--An appraisal of the human health and other benefits of vultures in India," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(2), pages 194-204, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:67:y:2008:i:2:p:194-204
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921-8009(08)00178-X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    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. J. M. Bowker & John R. Stoll, 1988. "Use of Dichotomous Choice Nonmarket Methods to Value the Whooping Crane Resource," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 70(2), pages 372-381.
    2. Dixie Reaves & Randall Kramer & Thomas Holmes, 1999. "Does Question Format Matter? Valuing an Endangered Species," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 14(3), pages 365-383, October.
    3. Harrington, Winston & Portney, Paul R., 1987. "Valuing the benefits of health and safety regulation," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 101-112, July.
    4. Thomas H. Stevens & Jaime Echeverria & Ronald J. Glass & Tim Hager & Thomas A. More, 1991. "Measuring the Existence Value of Wildlife: What Do CVM Estimates Really Show?," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 67(4), pages 390-400.
    5. Lauraine G. Chestnut & Bart D. Ostro & Nuntavarn Vichit-Vadakan, 1997. "Transferability of Air Pollution Control Health Benefits Estimates from the United States to Developing Countries: Evidence from the Bangkok Study," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 79(5), pages 1630-1635.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Grilli, Maricel Graña & Bildstein, Keith L. & Lambertucci, Sergio A., 2019. "Nature’s clean-up crew: Quantifying ecosystem services offered by a migratory avian scavenger on a continental scale," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    2. García-Jiménez, Ruth & Morales-Reyes, Zebensui & Pérez-García, Juan M. & Margalida, Antoni, 2021. "Economic valuation of non-material contributions to people provided by avian scavengers: Harmonizing conservation and wildlife-based tourism," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 187(C).
    3. Plaza, Pablo Ignacio & Lambertucci, Sergio Agustín, 2022. "Mitigating GHG emissions: A global ecosystem service provided by obligate scavenging birds," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 56(C).
    4. Pahl, Cameron C. & Ruedas, Luis A., 2021. "Carnosaurs as Apex Scavengers: Agent-based simulations reveal possible vulture analogues in late Jurassic Dinosaurs," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 458(C).
    5. Gupta, Urvi & Qureshi, Qamar & Kumar, Nishant, 2020. "Folk perceptions for avian scavengers in a tropical megacity: implications for biocultural conservation," SocArXiv tmdv4, Center for Open Science.
    6. Cody S. Clements & Zoe A. Pratte & Frank J. Stewart & Mark E. Hay, 2024. "Removal of detritivore sea cucumbers from reefs increases coral disease," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-9, December.
    7. Carucci, Tomaso & Whitehouse-Tedd, Katherine & Yarnell, Richard W. & Collins, Alan & Fitzpatrick, Fran & Botha, Andre & Santangeli, Andrea, 2022. "Ecosystem services and disservices associated with vultures: A systematic review and evidence assessment," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 56(C).
    8. Nicolas Treich, 2021. "Cultured Meat: Promises and Challenges," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 79(1), pages 33-61, May.
    9. Farley, Joshua, 2012. "Ecosystem services: The economics debate," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 40-49.
    10. Dupont, H. & Mihoub, J.B. & Becu, N. & Sarrazin, F., 2011. "Modelling interactions between scavenger behaviour and farming practices: Impacts on scavenger population and ecosystem service efficiency," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 222(4), pages 982-992.
    11. Frank, Eyal G. & Sudarshan, Anant, 2022. "The Social Costs of Keystone Species Collapse : Evidence From The Decline of Vultures in India," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 1433, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.

    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. Ojea, Elena & Loureiro, Maria L., 2011. "Identifying the scope effect on a meta-analysis of biodiversity valuation studies," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 706-724, September.
    2. Pamela Kaval & Matthew Roskruge, 2009. "The Value of Native Bird Conservation: A New Zealand Case Study," Working Papers in Economics 09/11, University of Waikato.
    3. Denise L. Stanley, 2005. "Local Perception of Public Goods: Recent Assessments of Willingness‐to‐pay for Endangered Species," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 23(2), pages 165-179, April.
    4. Bandara, Ranjith & Tisdell, Clement A., 2002. "Willingness to Pay for Conservation of the Asian Elephant in Sri Lanka: A Contingent Valuation Study," Economics, Ecology and Environment Working Papers 48738, University of Queensland, School of Economics.
    5. Ndebele, Tom & Forgie, Vicky, 2017. "Estimating the economic benefits of a wetland restoration programme in New Zealand: A contingent valuation approach," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 75-89.
    6. Cropper, Maureen L & Oates, Wallace E, 1992. "Environmental Economics: A Survey," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 30(2), pages 675-740, June.
    7. Ressurreição, Adriana & Gibbons, James & Dentinho, Tomaz Ponce & Kaiser, Michel & Santos, Ricardo S. & Edwards-Jones, Gareth, 2011. "Economic valuation of species loss in the open sea," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(4), pages 729-739, February.
    8. Kristin Jakobsson & Andrew Dragun, 2001. "The Worth of a Possum: Valuing Species with the Contingent Valuation Method," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 19(3), pages 211-227, July.
    9. Bandara, Ranjith & Tisdell, Clem, 2004. "The net benefit of saving the Asian elephant: a policy and contingent valuation study," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 93-107, January.
    10. Jette Jacobsen & Nick Hanley, 2009. "Are There Income Effects on Global Willingness to Pay for Biodiversity Conservation?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 43(2), pages 137-160, June.
    11. Lee, Choong-Ki & W. Mjelde, James, 2007. "Valuation of ecotourism resources using a contingent valuation method: The case of the Korean DMZ," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(2-3), pages 511-520, August.
    12. Richardson, Leslie & Loomis, John, 2009. "The total economic value of threatened, endangered and rare species: An updated meta-analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(5), pages 1535-1548, March.
    13. Loomis, John B. & White, Douglas S., 1996. "Economic benefits of rare and endangered species: summary and meta-analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(3), pages 197-206, September.
    14. Theodore C. Bergstrom, 2006. "Benefit-Cost in a Benevolent Society," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(1), pages 339-351, March.
    15. Dixie Reaves & Randall Kramer & Thomas Holmes, 1999. "Does Question Format Matter? Valuing an Endangered Species," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 14(3), pages 365-383, October.
    16. A. Myrick Freeman III, 2000. "The Valuation of Environmental Health Damages in Developing Countries: Some Observations," EEPSEA Special and Technical Paper sp200011t1, Economy and Environment Program for Southeast Asia (EEPSEA), revised Nov 2000.
    17. Tuan, Tran Huu & Navrud, Stale, 2009. "Applying the dissonance-minimising format to value cultural heritage in developing countries," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 53(3), pages 1-17.
    18. Indira Devi P, 2007. "Pesticide Use in the Rice Bowl of Kerala: Health Costs and Policy Options," Working Papers id:1147, eSocialSciences.
    19. repec:ipg:wpaper:13 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Kerstin K Zander & Gillian B Ainsworth & Jürgen Meyerhoff & Stephen T Garnett, 2014. "Threatened Bird Valuation in Australia," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(6), pages 1-9, June.
    21. Turpie, Jane K., 2003. "The existence value of biodiversity in South Africa: how interest, experience, knowledge, income and perceived level of threat influence local willingness to pay," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 199-216, September.

    More about this item

    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:eee:ecolec:v:67:y:2008:i:2:p:194-204. 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.