IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Wildlife Conservation


  • Spash, Clive L.
  • Aldred, Jonathan


In this paper we consider how conservation has arisen as a key aspect of the reaction to human-initiated degradation and disappearance of ecosystems, wild lands. and wildlife. Concern over species extinction is given an historical perspective which shows the way in which pressure on wild and natural aspects of global ecology have changed in recent centuries. The role of conservation in the struggle to protect the environment is then analysed using underlying ethical arguments behind the economic, ecological and rights based justifications given for conservation. The moral considerability of species and individuals is reviewed and different positions contrasted, most importantly utilitarianism versus rights. A central argument with primary influence over economics is the utilitarian justification for action and this is explored with reflection upon the use of monetary valuation. Rights are then explored and the use of consequentialism in adjudicating different rights claims introduced. Human preferences can be seen as practically powerful in justifying conservation policy decisions. even when an animal-centred ethic has been adopted. Yet ecological and non-consequentialist expressions of concern characterise the entire problem in fundamentally different ways, e.g. biodiversity and ecosystems maintenance versus marginal species loss, designation of wilderness areas versus management of parklands. Leaving the wild in wilderness and the natural in Nature cannot then be reduced to preference utilitarianism as in the economic calculus.

Suggested Citation

  • Spash, Clive L. & Aldred, Jonathan, 1998. "Wildlife Conservation," MPRA Paper 21132, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:21132

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Kristin M. Jakobsson & Andrew K. Dragun, 1996. "Contingent Valuation and Endangered Species," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 1120, Summer.
    2. Nick Hanley & Clive L. Spash, 1993. "Cost–Benefit Analysis and the Environment," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 205, Summer.
    3. Loomis, John B. & White, Douglas S., 1996. "Economic benefits of rare and endangered species: summary and meta-analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(3), pages 197-206, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Gurluk, Serkan, 2006. "The estimation of ecosystem services' value in the region of Misi Rural Development Project: Results from a contingent valuation survey," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(3), pages 209-218, December.
    2. Bandara, Ranjith & Tisdell, Clem, 2004. "The net benefit of saving the Asian elephant: a policy and contingent valuation study," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 93-107, January.
    3. Tisdell, Clement A. & Wilson, Clevo, 2003. "The Public's Knowledge of and Support for Conservation of Australia's Tree-Kangaroos," Economics, Ecology and Environment Working Papers 48955, University of Queensland, School of Economics.
    4. Marjainé, Szerényi Zsuzsanna, 2001. "A természeti erőforrások pénzbeli értékelése [Monetary valuation of natural resources]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(2), pages 114-129.
    5. Peter Howley & Stephen Hynes & Cathal O’Donoghue, 2009. "Countryside Preferences: Exploring individuals’ WTP for the protection of traditional rural landscapes," Working Papers 0906, Rural Economy and Development Programme,Teagasc.
    6. Jette Jacobsen & Nick Hanley, 2009. "Are There Income Effects on Global Willingness to Pay for Biodiversity Conservation?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 43(2), pages 137-160, June.
    7. Peter Howley & Stephen Hynes & Cathal O’Donoghue, 2009. "The citizen versus consumer hypothesis: Do welfare estimates differ?," Working Papers 0911, Rural Economy and Development Programme,Teagasc.
    8. Annunziata Vita, 2012. "La Valutazione Economica dei Parchi Marini. Il Caso "Punta Infreschi"," Working Papers 3_220, Dipartimento di Scienze Economiche e Statistiche, Università degli Studi di Salerno.
    9. Spring, Daniel A. & Kennedy, John O.S., 2005. "Existence value and optimal timber-wildlife management in a flammable multistand forest," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(3), pages 365-379, November.
    10. Lyssenko, Nikita & Martinez-Espineira, Roberto, 2009. "`Been there done that': Disentangling option value effects from user heterogeneity when valuing natural resources with a use component," MPRA Paper 21976, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 08 Apr 2010.
    11. Sabah Abdullah & Randall S. Rosenberger, 2012. "Controlling for Biases in Primary Valuation Studies: A Meta-analysis of International Coral Reef Values," Working Papers 2012.72, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    12. Outeiro, Luis & Häussermann, Vreni & Viddi, Francisco & Hucke-Gaete, Rodrigo & Försterra, Günter & Oyarzo, Hugo & Kosiel, Klaus & Villasante, Sebastian, 2015. "Using ecosystem services mapping for marine spatial planning in southern Chile under scenario assessment," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 341-353.
    13. Jose M. Martínez-Paz & Angel Perni & Federico Martínez-Carrasco, 2013. "Assessment of the Programme of Measures for Coastal Lagoon Environmental Restoration Using Cost--Benefit Analysis," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(2), pages 131-148, February.
    14. Giles Atkinson & Sian Morse-Jones & Susana Mourato & Allan Provins, 2012. "‘When to Take “No” for an Answer’? Using Entreaties to Reduce Protests in Contingent Valuation Studies," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 51(4), pages 497-523, April.
    15. Magdalena Joanna Hędrzak & Elżbieta Badach & Sławomir Adam Kornaś, 2021. "Preliminary Assumptions for Identification of the Common Hamster ( Cricetus cricetus ) as a Service Provider in the Agricultural Ecosystem," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-22, June.
    16. Karine Nyborg & Inger Spangen, 2000. "Cost-Benefit Analysis and the Democratic Ideal," Nordic Journal of Political Economy, Nordic Journal of Political Economy, vol. 26, pages 83-93.
    17. Mogaka, Violet Moraa & Mbatia, O.L.E. & Nzuma, Jonathan M., 2012. "Feasibility of Biofuel Production in Kenya: The Case of Jatropha," 2012 Conference, August 18-24, 2012, Foz do Iguacu, Brazil 126427, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    18. Kerstin K Zander & Gillian B Ainsworth & Jürgen Meyerhoff & Stephen T Garnett, 2014. "Threatened Bird Valuation in Australia," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(6), pages 1-9, June.
    19. Burnett, Kimberly & Kaiser, Brooks & Pitafi, Basharat A. & Roumasset, James, 2006. "Prevention, Eradication, and Containment of Invasive Species: Illustrations from Hawaii," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 35(1), pages 63-77, April.
    20. Denise L. Stanley, 2005. "Local Perception of Public Goods: Recent Assessments of Willingness‐to‐pay for Endangered Species," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 23(2), pages 165-179, April.

    More about this item


    wildlife management; environmental values; economics; ethics;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • H41 - Public Economics - - Publicly Provided Goods - - - Public Goods
    • B4 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Economic Methodology
    • Q51 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Valuation of Environmental Effects
    • Q2 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation
    • Q57 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Ecological Economics


    Access and download statistics


    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:pra:mprapa:21132. 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: . General contact details of provider: .

    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: Joachim Winter (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.