IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v38y2018i5p1009-1035.html

Evaluation of Two Approaches to Defining Extinction Risk under the U.S. Endangered Species Act

Author

Listed:
  • Grant G. Thompson
  • Lynn A. Maguire
  • Tracey J. Regan

Abstract

The predominant definition of extinction risk in conservation biology involves evaluating the cumulative distribution function (CDF) of extinction time at a particular point (the “time horizon”). Using the principles of decision theory, this article develops an alternative definition of extinction risk as the expected loss (EL) to society resulting from eventual extinction of a species. Distinct roles are identified for time preference and risk aversion. Ranges of tentative values for the parameters of the two approaches are proposed, and the performances of the two approaches are compared and contrasted for a small set of real‐world species with published extinction time distributions and a large set of hypothetical extinction time distributions. Potential issues with each approach are evaluated, and the EL approach is recommended as the better of the two. The CDF approach suffers from the fact that extinctions that occur at any time before the specified time horizon are weighted equally, while extinctions that occur beyond the specified time horizon receive no weight at all. It also suffers from the fact that the time horizon does not correspond to any natural phenomenon, and so is impossible to specify nonarbitrarily; yet the results can depend critically on the specified value. In contrast, the EL approach has the advantage of weighting extinction time continuously, with no artificial time horizon, and the parameters of the approach (the rates of time preference and risk aversion) do correspond to natural phenomena, and so can be specified nonarbitrarily.

Suggested Citation

  • Grant G. Thompson & Lynn A. Maguire & Tracey J. Regan, 2018. "Evaluation of Two Approaches to Defining Extinction Risk under the U.S. Endangered Species Act," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(5), pages 1009-1035, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:38:y:2018:i:5:p:1009-1035
    DOI: 10.1111/risa.12927
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.12927
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/risa.12927?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. Harry Markowitz, 1952. "The Utility of Wealth," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 60(2), pages 151-151.
    2. Harald Ibrekk & M. Granger Morgan, 1987. "Graphical Communication of Uncertain Quantities to Nontechnical People," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 7(4), pages 519-529, December.
    3. David S. Brookshire & Larry S. Eubanks & Alan Randall, 1983. "Estimating Option Prices and Existence Values for Wildlife Resources," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 59(1), pages 1-15.
    4. Robin Gregory & Nathan Dieckmann & Ellen Peters & Lee Failing & Graham Long & Martin Tusler, 2012. "Deliberative Disjunction: Expert and Public Understanding of Outcome Uncertainty," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(12), pages 2071-2083, December.
    5. Anders Skonhoft, 1999. "On the Optimal Exploitation of Terrestrial Animal Species," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 13(1), pages 45-57, January.
    6. Eiswerth, Mark E. & Haney, J. Christopher, 2001. "Maximizing conserved biodiversity: why ecosystem indicators and thresholds matter," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 259-274, August.
    7. Erwin Bulte & G. van Kooten, 1999. "Marginal Valuation of Charismatic Species: Implications for Conservation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 14(1), pages 119-130, July.
    8. James E. Smith, 1998. "Evaluating Income Streams: A Decision Analysis Approach," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 44(12-Part-1), pages 1690-1708, December.
    9. Ronald L. Wasserstein & Nicole A. Lazar, 2016. "The ASA's Statement on p -Values: Context, Process, and Purpose," The American Statistician, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 70(2), pages 129-133, May.
    10. 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.
    11. Burton A. Weisbrod, 1964. "Collective-Consumption Services of Individual-Consumption Goods," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 78(3), pages 471-477.
    12. Monya Baker, 2012. "On the edge," Nature, Nature, vol. 485(7400), pages 672-672, May.
    13. Manel Baucells & Rakesh Sarin, 2007. "Evaluating Time Streams of Income: Discounting What?," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 63(2), pages 95-120, September.
    14. Chad Settle & Jason E Shogren, 2002. "Modeling Native-Exotic Species within Yellowstone Lake," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 84(5), pages 1323-1328.
    15. Levhari, David & Mirman, Leonard J, 1977. "Savings and Consumption with an Uncertain Horizon," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 85(2), pages 265-281, April.
    16. Martin L. Weitzman, 2001. "Gamma Discounting," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(1), pages 260-271, March.
    17. Menahem E. Yaari, 1965. "Uncertain Lifetime, Life Insurance, and the Theory of the Consumer," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 32(2), pages 137-150.
    18. Nathan F. Dieckmann & Ellen Peters & Robin Gregory, 2015. "At Home on the Range? Lay Interpretations of Numerical Uncertainty Ranges," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(7), pages 1281-1295, July.
    19. M. L. Cropper & Milton C. Weinstein & Richard J. Zeckhauser, 1978. "The Optimal Consumption of Depletable Natural Resources: An Elaboration, Correction, and Extension," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 92(2), pages 337-344.
    20. Lopes, Paula & Michaelides, Alexander, 2007. "Rare events and annuity market participation," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 4(2), pages 82-91, June.
    21. Lev R. Ginzburg & Lawrence B. Slobodkin & Keith Johnson & Andrew G. Bindman, 1982. "Quasiextinction Probabilities as a Measure of Impact on Population Growth," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 2(3), pages 171-181, September.
    22. V. Kerry Smith & John V. Krutilla, 1979. "Endangered Species, Irreversibilities, and Uncertainty: A Comment," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 61(2), pages 371-375.
    23. Paul A. Samuelson, 1937. "A Note on Measurement of Utility," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 4(2), pages 155-161.
    24. Kassar, Ilhem & Lasserre, Pierre, 2004. "Species preservation and biodiversity value: a real options approach," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 857-879, September.
    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. Hansen, Anders Chr., 2006. "Do declining discount rates lead to time inconsistent economic advice?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(1), pages 138-144, November.
    2. Eppink, Florian V. & van den Bergh, Jeroen C.J.M., 2007. "Ecological theories and indicators in economic models of biodiversity loss and conservation: A critical review," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(2-3), pages 284-293, March.
    3. Post, Thomas, 2009. "Individual welfare gains from deferred life-annuities under stochastic Lee-Carter mortality," SFB 649 Discussion Papers 2009-022, Humboldt University Berlin, Collaborative Research Center 649: Economic Risk.
    4. Dorian Jullien, 2018. "Under Risk, Over Time, Regarding Other People: Language and Rationality within Three Dimensions," Research in the History of Economic Thought and Methodology, in: Including a Symposium on Latin American Monetary Thought: Two Centuries in Search of Originality, volume 36, pages 119-155, Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
    5. Jacobs Martin, 2016. "Accounting for Changing Tastes: Approaches to Explaining Unstable Individual Preferences," Review of Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 67(2), pages 121-183, August.
    6. HILDEBRAND Vincent, 2001. "Wealth Accumulation of US Households: What do we learn from the SIPP data?," IRISS Working Paper Series 2001-01, IRISS at CEPS/INSTEAD.
    7. Gary Hansen & Selahattin Imrohoroglu, 2008. "Consumption over the Life Cycle: The Role of Annuities," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 11(3), pages 566-583, July.
    8. Richard M. Peck & Padmanabhan Srinagesh, 1986. "Time Preference and Uncertain Lifetime1," The American Economist, Sage Publications, vol. 30(2), pages 41-45, October.
    9. Bommier, Antoine & Leroux, Marie-Louise & Lozachmeur, Jean-Marie, 2011. "On the public economics of annuities with differential mortality," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(7-8), pages 612-623, August.
    10. Halevy, Yoram, 2004. "Diminishing Impatience: Disentangling Time Preference from Uncertain Lifetime," Microeconomics.ca working papers halevy-04-10-29-09-59-47, Vancouver School of Economics, revised 25 Feb 2014.
    11. Hui Li & Seth Neumuller & Casey Rothschild, 2021. "Optimal annuitization with imperfect information about insolvency risk," Journal of Risk & Insurance, The American Risk and Insurance Association, vol. 88(1), pages 101-130, March.
    12. Partha Dasgupta & Eric Maskin, 2005. "Uncertainty and Hyperbolic Discounting," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(4), pages 1290-1299, September.
    13. Pavlo R. Blavatskyy, 2025. "Evaluation of intertemporal streams," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 70(2), pages 129-146, April.
    14. Antoine Bommier, 2005. "Life-Cycle Theory for Human Beings," Working Papers hal-00441890, HAL.
    15. L. Venkatachalam, 2025. "Environmental Economics and Ecological Economics: Historical Evolution and the Current Status," Review of Development and Change, , vol. 30(1_suppl), pages 25-49, May.
    16. Drouhin, Nicolas, 2020. "Non-stationary additive utility and time consistency," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 1-14.
    17. Khelifi, Atef, 2014. "Should the Neoclassical growth model include the saving flow in the Utility function?," MPRA Paper 59751, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. Heilmann, Conrad, 2008. "A representation of time discounting," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 23858, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    19. Joan Costa-Font & Cristina Vilaplana-Prieto, 2022. "Biased survival expectations and behaviours: Does domain specific information matter?," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 65(3), pages 285-317, December.
    20. Marco Casari & Davide Dragone, 2015. "Choice reversal without temptation: A dynamic experiment on time preferences," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 50(2), pages 119-140, April.

    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:wly:riskan:v:38:y:2018:i:5:p:1009-1035. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1539-6924 .

    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.