IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aaea03/22013.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Wetlands, Wildlife, And Water Quality: Targeting And Trade Offs

Author

Listed:
  • Newbold, Stephen C.
  • Weinberg, Marca

Abstract

Cost-effective targeting of conservation activities has only recently been addressed by economists. Most work to date has focused on finding the best locations to set aside land for the protection of biodiversity. An economic approach to the problem, where biodiversity reserve networks are delineated to maximize the number of species protected subject to a budget constraint, has been shown to be much more cost-effective than the standard approach, where reserve networks are delineated subject to an area constraint, ignoring differences in costs across sites. This paper is among the first to use spatially explicit models of production functions for ecosystem services in an optimization framework for prioritizing sites for wetlands restoration. Tradeoffs between two classes of environmental benefits from wetlands restoration, habitat, and water quality were assessed in the Central Valley of California. Habitat benefits were estimated by a count regression model that relates breeding mallard abundances to the configuration of land use types in the study area, and water quality benefits were estimated by a spatially distributed model of nonpoint source pollution and nutrient attenuation in wetlands. Two decision scenarios were analyzed. In the first scenario the optimal configuration of restoration activity was determined for a small watershed, and in the second scenario sites were selected from those offered for enrollment in an easement program throughout the valley. The results reveal the potential for gains in effectiveness from spatial targeting, and they suggest that there will be substantial tradeoffs between environmental benefits. Maximizing habitat quality in the small watershed yielded a 34% increase in mallard abundance and a 3% decrease in nitrogen loads to the river. In contrast, maximizing water quality resulted in a 25% decrease in nitrogen loads and a 2% increase in mallard abundance. Qualitatively similar results were obtained when sites were selected from a set of offered sites throughout the valley, but the tradeoffs were not as severe. The results also suggest that at traditional funding levels the Wetlands Reserve Program in California could reduce nitrogen loads to rivers by approximately 29,000 kg and increase total mallard abundance in the breeding season by approximately 150 individuals throughout the Central Valley in a given year.

Suggested Citation

  • Newbold, Stephen C. & Weinberg, Marca, 2003. "Wetlands, Wildlife, And Water Quality: Targeting And Trade Offs," 2003 Annual meeting, July 27-30, Montreal, Canada 22013, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea03:22013
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.22013
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/22013/files/sp03ne05.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.22013?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. Ribaudo, Marc O., 1989. "Water Quality Benefits from the Conservation Reserve Program," Agricultural Economic Reports 308069, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    2. Taylor, Michael L. & Adams, Richard M. & Miller, Stanley F., 1992. "Farm-Level Response To Agricultural Effluent Control Strategies: The Case Of The Willamette Valley," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 17(1), pages 1-13, July.
    3. Edward B. Barbier, 1994. "Valuing Environmental Functions: Tropical Wetlands," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 70(2), pages 155-173.
    4. Randhir, Timothy O. & Lee, John G., 1997. "Economic And Water Quality Impacts Of Reducing Nitrogen And Pesticide Use In Agriculture," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 26(1), pages 1-13, April.
    5. Ribaudo, Marc O. & Heimlich, Ralph & Claassen, Roger & Peters, Mark, 2001. "Least-cost management of nonpoint source pollution: source reduction versus interception strategies for controlling nitrogen loss in the Mississippi Basin," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 183-197, May.
    6. Wu, JunJie & Boggess, William G., 1999. "The Optimal Allocation of Conservation Funds," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 302-321, November.
    7. Stavins, Robert N., 1990. "Alternative renewable resource strategies: A simulation of optimal use," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 19(2), pages 143-159, September.
    8. 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.
    9. C. R. Margules & R. L. Pressey, 2000. "Systematic conservation planning," Nature, Nature, vol. 405(6783), pages 243-253, May.
    10. 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.
    11. Brown, Gardner, Jr & Hammack, Judd, 1973. "Dynamic Economic Management of Migratory Waterfowl," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 55(1), pages 73-82, February.
    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. 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.
    2. Ribaudo, Marc O. & Heimlich, Ralph & Claassen, Roger & Peters, Mark, 2001. "Least-cost management of nonpoint source pollution: source reduction versus interception strategies for controlling nitrogen loss in the Mississippi Basin," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 183-197, May.
    3. Johst, Karin & Drechsler, Martin & Watzold, Frank, 2002. "An ecological-economic modelling procedure to design compensation payments for the efficient spatio-temporal allocation of species protection measures," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 37-49, April.
    4. Robin Naidoo & Taylor H Ricketts, 2006. "Mapping the Economic Costs and Benefits of Conservation," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 4(11), pages 1-12, October.
    5. Kangas, Johanna & Ollikainen, Markku, 2022. "A PES scheme promoting forest biodiversity and carbon sequestration," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 136(C).
    6. Gordon, Simon, 2003. "Economic Instruments For Nonpoint Source Water Pollution: Options For The Swan-Canning River System," 2003 Conference (47th), February 12-14, 2003, Fremantle, Australia 57873, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    7. Ando, Amy W. & Getzner, Michael, 2006. "The roles of ownership, ecology, and economics in public wetland-conservation decisions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 287-303, June.
    8. Cho, Seong-Hoon & Kim, Taeyoung & Larson, Eric R. & Armsworth, Paul R., 2017. "Economies of scale in forestland acquisition costs for nature conservation," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 73-82.
    9. Kusiima, Jamil M. & Powers, Susan E., 2010. "Monetary value of the environmental and health externalities associated with production of ethanol from biomass feedstocks," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 2785-2796, June.
    10. Groeneveld, Rolf, 2005. "Economic considerations in the optimal size and number of reserve sites," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(2), pages 219-228, January.
    11. Lewis, David J. & Plantinga, Andrew J. & Nelson, Erik & Polasky, Stephen, 2011. "The efficiency of voluntary incentive policies for preventing biodiversity loss," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 192-211, January.
    12. Junjie Wu & Katharine Skelton‐Groth & William G. Boggess & Richard M. Adams, 2003. "Pacific Salmon Restoration: Trade‐Offs Between Economic Efficiency And Political Acceptance," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 21(1), pages 78-89, January.
    13. Mapp, Harry P., Jr., 1999. "Impact Of Production Changes On Income And Environmental Risk In The Southern High Plains," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 31(2), pages 1-11, August.
    14. Ramilan, Thiagarajah & Scrimgeour, Frank G., 2006. "Abatement Cost Heterogeneity and its Impact on Tradable Nitrogen Discharge Permits," 2006 Conference, August 24-25, 2006, Nelson, New Zealand 31972, New Zealand Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    15. Bauer, Dana Marie & Swallow, Stephen K. & Paton, Peter W.C., 2010. "Cost-effective species conservation in exurban communities: A spatial analysis," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 180-202, April.
    16. Brock, William & Xepapadeas, Anastasios, 2010. "Pattern formation, spatial externalities and regulation in coupled economic-ecological systems," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 59(2), pages 149-164, March.
    17. Christopher C. Moore & Thomas P. Holmes, 2008. "Valuing Forest Protection Programs to Maximize Economic Benefit," NCEE Working Paper Series 200807, National Center for Environmental Economics, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, revised Aug 2008.
    18. Richard T. Melstrom & David W. Shanafelt & Carson J. Reeling, 2022. "Coordinating investments in habitat management and economic development," Journal of Bioeconomics, Springer, vol. 24(1), pages 67-91, April.
    19. Matekole, Augustus N. & Westra, John V., 2009. "Economic Analysis of Tillage and Nutrient Best Management Practices in the Ouachita River Basin, Louisiana," 2009 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, 2009, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 49519, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    20. Glenn Sheriff, 2005. "Efficient Waste? Why Farmers Over-Apply Nutrients and the Implications for Policy Design," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 27(4), pages 542-557.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Resource /Energy Economics and Policy;

    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:ags:aaea03:22013. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.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.