State and Not-For-Profit delivery of species conservation. Cost utility analysis of multiple-species projects
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.
|Date of creation:||Aug 2008|
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.nzares.org.nz/|
More information through EDIRC
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.