IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/fae/wpaper/2015.21.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A Tale of Two Diversities

Author

Listed:
  • Chloé Mulier

    (LAMETA)

  • Pierre Courtois

    (INRA-LAMETA)

  • Charles Figuières

    () (INRA-LAMETA)

Abstract

Efficient management of biodiversity aims at allocating conservation efforts in order to maximize diversity. Defining a diversity criterion is however far to be trivial; there is not one but several indices that can be used as biodiversity measures. This paper elicits and compares two in situ criterions for biodiversity conservation, based on two biodiversity indices stemming from different disciplines: Weitzman's index in economics and Rao's index in ecology. Both indices combines differently pieces of information about (1) species survival probability, and (2) measures of dissimilarity between species. In order to truly have in situ protection criterions, we add another layer of information about (3) the ecological interactions between species. Considering a simple three species ecosystem, we show that choosing one criterion or the other has policy implications, for they sometimes deliver diverging protection recommendations. We unravel the role played by the elements (1), (2) and (3) in the ranking, which allows us to highlight some specificities of the in situ criterions. For example, other things equal, Weitzman's in situ ranking tends to favor "robust" species, while Rao's in situ ranking gives priority to "fragile" species.

Suggested Citation

  • Chloé Mulier & Pierre Courtois & Charles Figuières, 2015. "A Tale of Two Diversities," Working Papers 2015.21, FAERE - French Association of Environmental and Resource Economists.
  • Handle: RePEc:fae:wpaper:2015.21
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://faere.fr/pub/WorkingPapers/Mulier_Courtois_Figuieres_FAERE_WP2015_21.pdf
    File Function: First version, 2015
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Solow Andrew & Polasky Stephen & Broadus James, 1993. "On the Measurement of Biological Diversity," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 60-68, January.
    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. Courtois, Pierre & Figuieres, Charles & Mulier, Chloe & Weill, Joakim, 2018. "A Cost–Benefit Approach for Prioritizing Invasive Species," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 607-620.
    4. Pierre Courtois & Charles Figuières & Chloé Mulier, 2014. "Conservation Priorities when Species Interact: the Noah's Ark Metaphor Revisited," Working Papers 2014.02, FAERE - French Association of Environmental and Resource Economists.
    5. Steven Polasky & Andrew R. Solow, 1993. "Option Value, Gallot's Inequality, And The Measurement Of Biological Diversity," Boston College Working Papers in Economics 241, Boston College Department of Economics.
    6. Martin L. Weitzman, 1998. "The Noah's Ark Problem," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 66(6), pages 1279-1298, November.
    7. Stéphanie Aulong & K. Erdlenbruch & C. Figuières, 2005. "Un tour d'horizon des critères d'évaluation de la diversité biologique," Post-Print hal-00452144, HAL.
    8. Walter Bossert & Prasanta K. Pattanaik & Yongsheng Xu, 2003. "Similarity of Options and the Measurement of Diversity," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 15(4), pages 405-421, October.
    9. Figuières, Charles & Aulong, Stéphanie & Erdlenbruch, Katrin, 2008. "Criteria for assessment of biodiversity: properties and difficulties of use," INRA Sciences Sociales, Institut National de la recherche Agronomique (INRA), Departement Sciences Sociales, Agriculture et Alimentation, Espace et Environnement (SAE2), vol. 2008, pages 1-5, September.
    10. Gerber, Nicolas, 2011. "Biodiversity measures based on species-level dissimilarities: A methodology for assessment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(12), pages 2275-2281.
    11. van der Heide, C. Martijn & van den Bergh, Jeroen C.J.M. & van Ierland, Ekko C., 2005. "Extending Weitzman's economic ranking of biodiversity protection: combining ecological and genetic considerations," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(2), pages 218-223, November.
    12. Schultz, Jessica A. & Darling, Emily S. & Côté, Isabelle M., 2013. "What is an endangered species worth? Threshold costs for protecting imperilled fishes in Canada," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 125-132.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Pierre Courtois & Charles FiguiËres & ChloÈ Mulier & Joakim Weill, 2017. "A cost-benefit approach for prioritizing invasive species," Policy Papers 2017.06, FAERE - French Association of Environmental and Resource Economists.
    2. Courtois, Pierre & Figuieres, Charles & Mulier, Chloe & Weill, Joakim, 2018. "A Cost–Benefit Approach for Prioritizing Invasive Species," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 607-620.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    conservation priorities; ecological interactions; biodiversity indices;

    JEL classification:

    • C6 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling
    • Q5 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:fae:wpaper:2015.21. 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: (Mireille Chiroleu-Assouline). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/faereea.html .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.