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. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. Pierre Courtois & Charles Figuieres & Chloé Mulier, 2014. "Conservation Priorities when Species Interact: The Noah's Ark Metaphor Revisited," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(9), pages 1-8, September.
    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 & Katrin 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," INRAE Sciences Sociales, Institut national de recherche pour l'agriculture, l'alimentation et l'environnement (INRAE), 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. 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.

    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. Gerber, Nicolas, 2011. "Biodiversity measures based on species-level dissimilarities: A methodology for assessment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(12), pages 2275-2281.
    2. Pierre Courtois & Charles Figuieres & Chloé Mulier, 2014. "Conservation Priorities when Species Interact: The Noah's Ark Metaphor Revisited," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(9), pages 1-8, September.
    3. Perry, Neil & Shankar, Sriram, 2017. "The State-contingent Approach to the Noah's Ark Problem," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 65-72.
    4. 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.
    5. Perry, Neil, 2010. "The ecological importance of species and the Noah's Ark problem," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(3), pages 478-485, January.
    6. Gerber, Nicolas, 2009. "Measuring Biodiversity – an axiomatic evaluation of measures based on genetic data," Discussion Papers 51305, University of Bonn, Center for Development Research (ZEF).
    7. 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.
    8. Bartkowski, Bartosz & Lienhoop, Nele & Hansjürgens, Bernd, 2015. "Capturing the complexity of biodiversity: A critical review of economic valuation studies of biological diversity," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 1-14.
    9. Maarten Punt & Hans-Peter Weikard & Ekko Ierland & Jan Stel, 2012. "Large Scale Marine Protected Areas for Biodiversity Conservation Along a Linear Gradient: Cooperation, Strategic Behavior or Conservation Autarky?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 53(2), pages 203-228, October.
    10. Maestre Andrés, Sara & Calvet Mir, Laura & van den Bergh, Jeroen C.J.M. & Ring, Irene & Verburg, Peter H., 2012. "Ineffective biodiversity policy due to five rebound effects," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 101-110.
    11. Brei, Michael & Pérez-Barahona, Agustín & Strobl, Eric, 2016. "Environmental pollution and biodiversity: Light pollution and sea turtles in the Caribbean," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 95-116.
    12. Gerrit Ansmann & Tobias Bollenbach, 2021. "Building clone-consistent ecosystem models," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(2), pages 1-25, February.
    13. Sarr, Mare & Goeschl, Timo & Swanson, Tim, 2008. "The value of conserving genetic resources for R&D: A survey," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(2), pages 184-193, September.
    14. Ricotta, Carlo & Szeidl, Laszlo, 2009. "Diversity partitioning of Rao’s quadratic entropy," Theoretical Population Biology, Elsevier, vol. 76(4), pages 299-302.
    15. Meinard, Yves & Grill, Philippe, 2011. "The economic valuation of biodiversity as an abstract good," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(10), pages 1707-1714, August.
    16. Sol, Joeri, 2019. "Economics in the anthropocene: species extinction or steady state economics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 1-1.
    17. Martinet, Vincent & Blanchard, Fabian, 2009. "Fishery externalities and biodiversity: Trade-offs between the viability of shrimp trawling and the conservation of Frigatebirds in French Guiana," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(12), pages 2960-2968, October.
    18. Walter Bossert & Conchita D'Ambrosio & Eliana La Ferrara, 2011. "A Generalized Index of Fractionalization," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 78(312), pages 723-750, October.
    19. William A. Brock & Anastasios Xepapadeas, 2003. "Valuing Biodiversity from an Economic Perspective: A Unified Economic, Ecological, and Genetic Approach," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(5), pages 1597-1614, December.
    20. Paul, Prosenjit & Kar, T.K., 2016. "Impacts of invasive species on the sustainable use of native exploited species," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 340(C), pages 106-115.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    conservation priorities; ecological interactions; biodiversity indices;
    All these keywords.

    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.

    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: Dorothée Charlier (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/faereea.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.