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

State and Not-For-Profit delivery of species conservation. Cost utility analysis of multiple-species projects

Listed author(s):
  • Vesey, S.E.
  • Cullen, Ross
  • Hughey, Kenneth F.D.
Registered author(s):

    Conservation of species is challenging, and there is continuing interest in finding more effective means to achieve conservation goals. State provision of conservation occurs in many countries, alongside a growing range of alternative providers including Not For Profit organisations and the private sector. Few studies have compared the effectiveness and efficiency of State provision against Not For Profit or private sector provision. This research assesses the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of multiple-species projects in regard to the conservation of threatened and endangered species using a cost-utility analysis. Three State managed projects, three Not For Profit managed projects and one project managed by the State yet funded privately, were evaluated. All of the Not For Profit managed projects were enclosed by predator-proof fences, while the other projects relied on natural barriers and/or intensive predator control methods. Results indicate that State managed multiple-species projects are both more effective and cost-effective than those projects managed by Not For Profits. While the Not For Profit managed projects are not so effective in improving national population totals, they are essential for ensuring regional biodiversity of threatened and endangered species. The objectives set by the projects appear to have a significant impact on their outputs. A number of recommendations are made for improving conservation efforts in the future. Most importantly, the development of a threatened and endangered species database to be contributed to by all conservation project providers. The importance of standardised reporting techniques is highlighted to allow comparisons both over time and between projects.

    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: no

    Paper provided by New Zealand Agricultural and Resource Economics Society in its series 2008 Conference, August 28-29, 2008, Nelson, New Zealand with number 97987.

    in new window

    Date of creation: Aug 2008
    Handle: RePEc:ags:nzar08:97987
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    More information through EDIRC

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    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:ags:nzar08:97987. 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: (AgEcon Search)

    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.