IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aaea07/9790.html

The Ghost of Extinction: Preservation Values and Minimum Viable Population in Wildlife Models

Author

Listed:
  • van Kooten, G. Cornelis
  • Eiswerth, Mark E.

Abstract

The inclusion of a minimum viable population in bioeconomic modeling creates at least two complications that are not resolved by using a modified logistic growth function. The first complication can be dealt with by choosing a different depensational growth function. The second complication relates to the inclusion of the in situ benefits of wildlife into the analysis. Knowledge about the magnitude of the in situ benefits provides no guide for policy about conservation management. Simply knowing that people are willing to pay a large amount each year to protect a species says nothing about whether one should manage habitat to protect or enhance the species' numbers, unless the species is in imminent danger of extinction. If willingness to pay is to be a guide, it needs to be better tied to population numbers, especially the minimum viable population.

Suggested Citation

  • van Kooten, G. Cornelis & Eiswerth, Mark E., 2007. "The Ghost of Extinction: Preservation Values and Minimum Viable Population in Wildlife Models," 2007 Annual Meeting, July 29-August 1, 2007, Portland, Oregon 9790, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea07:9790
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.9790
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/9790/files/sp07ko09.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.9790?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
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. is not listed on IDEAS
    2. repec:rnp:ppaper:mn37 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Abbott, Brant & van Kooten, G. Cornelis, 2011. "Can domestication of wildlife lead to conservation? The economics of tiger farming in China," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(4), pages 721-728, February.
    4. Naald, Brian Vander & Cameron, Trudy Ann, 2011. "Willingness to pay for other species' well-being," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(7), pages 1325-1335, May.
    5. Adrian A. Lopes & Shady S. Atallah, 2021. "Correction to: Worshipping the Tiger: Modeling Non‑use Existence Values of Wildlife Spiritual Services," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 78(2), pages 375-379, February.
    6. Donovan, Pierce & Springborn, Michael, 2022. "Balancing conservation and commerce: A shadow value viability approach for governing bycatch," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;

    JEL classification:

    • Q20 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - General
    • Q24 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Land
    • C61 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - Optimization Techniques; Programming Models; Dynamic Analysis

    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:aaea07:9790. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.