IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Cost-effective species conservation in exurban communities: A spatial analysis

Listed author(s):
  • Bauer, Dana Marie
  • Swallow, Stephen K.
  • Paton, Peter W.C.

Exurban areas have increasingly become zones of conflict as conservation and development compete for the same finite land resources. Conversion of natural areas to land dominated by human use results in loss, degradation, and fragmentation of wildlife habitat which often lead to species endangerment or even extinction. Recently, reserve site selection models have begun to integrate spatial attributes in order to design more compact and connected reserve networks that are thought to improve long-term species persistence. While these models are a good step forward to designing conservation reserve networks, they might not be adequate for use in exurban areas that consist of heterogeneous mosaics of land uses where habitat fragmentation already exists and not all parcels are available for preservation. This paper presents a species conservation framework that expands upon traditional reserve site selection models in three ways. First, because of the focus on exurban areas, the framework used here allows for land conversion within core habitat patches. Second, the framework provides a more robust assessment of connectivity among patches by accounting for land-use heterogeneity in the dispersal matrix. And third, the framework explicitly incorporates species population dynamics. We apply our conservation framework to the case of pond-breeding salamanders in an exurban community in Rhode Island, USA. Comparisons are made between the outcomes for uniform conservation policies and more flexible policies that accommodate ecological and economic heterogeneity. As expected, policies that offer more flexibility in the decision-making process are less costly in terms of foregone development. Conservation planners should consider core habitat patches, dispersal matrix, and spatial scale in their decision making. By not assessing the potential impact of dispersal barriers, reserve site selection models will result in conservation plans that may not protect species over the long term, particularly for species residing in highly fragmented landscapes such as those found in many exurban communities.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL:
Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Resource and Energy Economics.

Volume (Year): 32 (2010)
Issue (Month): 2 (April)
Pages: 180-202

in new window

Handle: RePEc:eee:resene:v:32:y:2010:i:2:p:180-202
Contact details of provider: Web page:

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

in new window

  1. Spring, Daniel A. & Kennedy, John O.S., 2005. "Existence value and optimal timber-wildlife management in a flammable multistand forest," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(3), pages 365-379, November.
  2. Brown, Gardner & Roughgarden, Jonathan, 1997. "A metapopulation model with private property and a common pool," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 65-71, July.
  3. Heimlich, Ralph E. & Anderson, William D., 2001. "Development At The Urban Fringe And Beyond: Impacts On Agriculture And Rural Land," Agricultural Economics Reports 33943, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
  4. Bulte, Erwin H. & van Kooten, G. Cornelis, 1999. "Metapopulation dynamics and stochastic bioeconomic modeling," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 293-299, August.
  5. Fisher, Anthony C. & Krutilla, John V., 1974. "Valuing long run ecological consequences and irreversibilities," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 1(2), pages 96-108, August.
  6. Michael P Johnson, 2001. "Environmental impacts of urban sprawl: a survey of the literature and proposed research agenda," Environment and Planning A, Pion Ltd, London, vol. 33(4), pages 717-735, April.
  7. Michael T. Bond & Vicky L. Seiler & Michael J. Seiler, 2002. "Residential Real Estate Prices: A Room with a View," Journal of Real Estate Research, American Real Estate Society, vol. 23(1/2), pages 129-138.
  8. 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.
  9. Sandra S. Batie & Carl C. Mabbs-Zeno, 1997. "Opportunity Costs of Preserving Coastal Wetlands: A Case Study of a Recreational Housing Development," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 62(1), pages 1-9.
  10. Sanchirico, James N. & Wilen, James E., 1999. "Bioeconomics of Spatial Exploitation in a Patchy Environment," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 129-150, March.
  11. Stephen Polasky & Jeffrey D. Camm & Brian Garber-Yonts, 2001. "Selecting Biological Reserves Cost-Effectively: An Application to Terrestrial Vertebrate Conservation in Oregon," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 77(1), pages 68-78.
  12. Sanchirico, James & Wilen, James, 2000. "Dynamics of Spatial Exploitation: A Metapopulation Approach," Discussion Papers dp-00-25-rev, Resources For the Future.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:resene:v:32:y:2010:i:2:p:180-202. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.