IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wbk/wbrwps/1358.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Patterns of behavior in biodiversity preservation

Author

Listed:
  • Metrick, Andrew
  • Weitzman, Martin L.

Abstract

Conservation budgets are limited, so it is right to ask of biodiversity programs, What should be preserved? How much should be preserved? Where? Recent papers on optimal preservation policy have tried to integrate three considerations: the relative uniqueness of different species or habitats, the degree of risk to their continued survival, and the opportunity cost of the resources needed to enhance their prospects for survival. It is natural to ask, How are we doing? Have biodiversity conservation resources been optimally allocated? What determines government decisions about the preservation of endangered species? The authors submit the first report card, an empirical analysis of U.S. species preservation policy, the best-documented country experience currently available. The authors discuss the most common normative justifications for biodiversity preservation and identify measurable proxies for a subset of those justifications. Proxies include"scientific"species characteristics, such as"degree of endangerment"and"taxonomic uniqueness,"as well as"visceral"characteristics, such as physical size and to what extent a species is considered a"higher form of life."They find that both kindsof characteristics, but especially"visceral"characteristics, influence government decisions on whether to protect a species under the Endangered Species Act. The authors find that"visceral"characteristics- especially physical size and taxonomic class - are also important in explaining how much is spent on endangered species. Perhaps more surprising is their finding that more is spent on animals with lower risk of extinction than on animals with a higher risk of extinction. The author's results are sobering. Many millions have been spent on species preservation, but neither uniqueness nor risk has weighed heavily in resource allocation. Instead there has been a heavy bias toward"charismatic megafauna"- large, well-known birds and mammals ("higher forms of life,"in the human value system). Other classes of fauna - including, say, eels or wild toads - and all flora, have gotten extremely short shrift. Prominent examples of species with high charisma, high attention, and relatively low endangerment are the bald eagle, the Florida scrub jay, and the grizzly bear. Other species may have less charisma but could have more scientific value or species risk.

Suggested Citation

  • Metrick, Andrew & Weitzman, Martin L., 1994. "Patterns of behavior in biodiversity preservation," Policy Research Working Paper Series 1358, The World Bank.
  • Handle: RePEc:wbk:wbrwps:1358
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www-wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/1994/09/01/000009265_3970716141736/Rendered/PDF/multi_page.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Martin L. Weitzman, 1992. "On Diversity," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 107(2), pages 363-405.
    2. Lacy Glenn Thomas, 1988. "Revealed Bureaucratic Preference: Priorities of the Consumer Product Safety Commission," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 19(1), pages 102-113, Spring.
    3. Martin L. Weitzman, 1993. "What to Preserve? An Application of Diversity Theory to Crane Conservation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 108(1), pages 157-183.
    4. Cropper, Maureen L. & William N. Evans & Stephen J. Berard & Maria M. Ducla-Soares & Paul R. Portney, 1992. "The Determinants of Pesticide Regulation: A Statistical Analysis of EPA Decision Making," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 100(1), pages 175-197, February.
    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. 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.
    2. Garrod, G. D. & Willis, K. G., 1997. "The non-use benefits of enhancing forest biodiversity: A contingent ranking study," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 45-61, April.
    3. Jette Jacobsen & John Boiesen & Bo Thorsen & Niels Strange, 2008. "What’s in a name? The use of quantitative measures versus ‘Iconised’ species when valuing biodiversity," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 39(3), pages 247-263, March.

    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. Ando, Amy, 1998. "Delay on the Path to the Endangered Species List: Do Costs and Benefits Matter," RFF Working Paper Series dp-97-43-rev, Resources for the Future.
    2. Perry, Neil, 2010. "The ecological importance of species and the Noah's Ark problem," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(3), pages 478-485, January.
    3. Stavins, Robert, 2004. "Introduction to the Political Economy of Environmental Regulations," RFF Working Paper Series dp-04-12, Resources for the Future.
    4. Swallow, Stephen K., 1996. "Economic Issues in Ecosystem Management: An Introduction and Overview," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 25(2), pages 83-100, October.
    5. Andrew B. Whitford, 2007. "Competing Explanations for Bureaucratic Preferences," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 19(3), pages 219-247, July.
    6. Guilherme S. Bastos & Erik Lichtenberg, 2001. "Priorities in Cost Sharing for Soil and Water Conservation: A Revealed Preference Study," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 77(4), pages 533-547.
    7. Andrew Metrick & Martin L. Weitzman, 1998. "Conflicts and Choices in Biodiversity Preservation," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 12(3), pages 21-34, Summer.
    8. Catherine M. Chambers & Paul E. Chambers & John R. Crooker & John C. Whitehead, 2008. "Stochastic Dominance, Entropy and Biodiversity Management," Working Papers 08-08, Department of Economics, Appalachian State University.
    9. Samuel, Aurelia F. & Drucker, Adam G. & Andersen, Sven B. & Simianer, Henner & van Zonneveld, Maarten, 2013. "Development of a cost-effective diversity-maximising decision-support tool for in situ crop genetic resources conservation: The case of cacao," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 155-164.
    10. 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.
    11. Simpson, R. David & Craft, Amy, 1996. "The Social Value of Using Biodiversity in New Pharmaceutical Product Research," RFF Working Paper Series dp-96-33, Resources for the Future.
    12. H. Spencer Banzhaf & James Boyd, 2012. "The Architecture and Measurement of an Ecosystem Services Index," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 4(4), pages 1-32, March.
    13. Ando, Amy Whritenour, 1999. "Waiting to Be Protected under the Endangered Species Act: The Political Economy of Regulatory Delay," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 42(1), pages 29-60, April.
    14. Simianer, H. & Marti, S. B. & Gibson, J. & Hanotte, O. & Rege, J. E. O., 2003. "An approach to the optimal allocation of conservation funds to minimize loss of genetic diversity between livestock breeds," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 377-392, July.
    15. David Martin, 2014. "An integrated biological and economic individual-based model of tiger protection measures," Working Papers 14-04, Davidson College, Department of Economics, revised Jul 2014.
    16. 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.
    17. Bervoets, Sebastian & Gravel, Nicolas, 2007. "Appraising diversity with an ordinal notion of similarity: An axiomatic approach," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 53(3), pages 259-273, May.
    18. List, John A & Bulte, Erwin H & Shogren, Jason F, 2002. ""Beggar Thy Neighbor": Testing for Free Riding in State-Level Endangered Species Expenditures," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 111(3-4), pages 303-315, June.
    19. Sovacool, Benjamin K. & Mukherjee, Ishani, 2011. "Conceptualizing and measuring energy security: A synthesized approach," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 36(8), pages 5343-5355.
    20. Hein, Lars & Gatzweiler, Franz, 2006. "The economic value of coffee (Coffea arabica) genetic resources," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(1), pages 176-185, November.

    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:wbk:wbrwps:1358. 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: Roula I. Yazigi (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/dvewbus.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.