From cost-effectiveness to economic-efficiency in conservation planning: the importance of considering the economic benefits of conservation

Simple item page
dc.contributor.advisorTurpie, Janeen_ZA
dc.contributor.authorPalframan, Louise Moiraen_ZA
dc.date.accessioned2014-11-28T09:34:17Z
dc.date.available2014-11-28T09:34:17Z
dc.date.issued2013en_ZA
dc.descriptionIncludes bibliographical references.en_ZA
dc.description.abstractProviding an economic case for establishing new protected areas and demonstrating how conservation enhances human well-being is becoming necessary to reinforce moral arguments for biodiversity protection. Accordingly; this study aimed to assess whether the spatial distribution of priority areas changes in accordance with gains in economic-efficiency when ecosystem service benefits are explicitly considered. Using the site-selection software Marxan, priority areas for South Africa were identified under four scenarios, two of which incorporated a spatial cost benefit analysis of the opportunity costs and ecosystem service benefits associated with conservation. Additional scenarios assessed how reserve design and costs changed when communal-land agriculture and resource use were weighted to account for the social costs of conservation. Opportunity costs were spatially variable and greatest in regions where mixed commercial farming was practiced. Economic benefits exceeded costs in the western interior, northern regions and along the eastern coastline. These areas contracted when ecosystem service benefits were more conservatively estimated by applying the principle of additionality. There was minimal to moderate spatial agreement between the scenarios (0.12 < κ < 0.55).When economic benefits were considered, areas that made more economic sense from a conservation management perspective were prioritized. These changes in spatial distribution were associated with gains in economic efficiency. The cost: benefit ratio was ca. 10 times greater than when no economic variables were considered (scenario 1 = 10.44 vs. scenario 4 = 1.15). When heavy weightings (> 100) were applied, the reserve systems became dispersed (R = 0.91 (for weighting factor of 10), R = 0.52 (for weighting factor of 1000)) in the former homelands and more costly overall (difference of R2.95B between the extremes). Considering the economic benefits of conservation changes the spatial distribution of priority areas and improves their economic efficiency. Disregarding economic benefits may compromise the implementation potential of priority areas, particularly when the economic benefits of competing land-uses are brought to the table. Furthermore, it is important to explicitly consider the social costs of conservation and consider resettlement or compensation costs among the trade-offs.en_ZA
dc.identifier.apacitationPalframan, L. M. (2013). <i>From cost-effectiveness to economic-efficiency in conservation planning: the importance of considering the economic benefits of conservation</i>. (Thesis). University of Cape Town ,Faculty of Science ,Percy FitzPatrick Institute of African Ornithology. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/11427/9793en_ZA
dc.identifier.chicagocitationPalframan, Louise Moira. <i>"From cost-effectiveness to economic-efficiency in conservation planning: the importance of considering the economic benefits of conservation."</i> Thesis., University of Cape Town ,Faculty of Science ,Percy FitzPatrick Institute of African Ornithology, 2013. http://hdl.handle.net/11427/9793en_ZA
dc.identifier.citationPalframan, L. 2013. From cost-effectiveness to economic-efficiency in conservation planning: the importance of considering the economic benefits of conservation. University of Cape Town.en_ZA
dc.identifier.ris TY - Thesis / Dissertation AU - Palframan, Louise Moira AB - Providing an economic case for establishing new protected areas and demonstrating how conservation enhances human well-being is becoming necessary to reinforce moral arguments for biodiversity protection. Accordingly; this study aimed to assess whether the spatial distribution of priority areas changes in accordance with gains in economic-efficiency when ecosystem service benefits are explicitly considered. Using the site-selection software Marxan, priority areas for South Africa were identified under four scenarios, two of which incorporated a spatial cost benefit analysis of the opportunity costs and ecosystem service benefits associated with conservation. Additional scenarios assessed how reserve design and costs changed when communal-land agriculture and resource use were weighted to account for the social costs of conservation. Opportunity costs were spatially variable and greatest in regions where mixed commercial farming was practiced. Economic benefits exceeded costs in the western interior, northern regions and along the eastern coastline. These areas contracted when ecosystem service benefits were more conservatively estimated by applying the principle of additionality. There was minimal to moderate spatial agreement between the scenarios (0.12 < κ < 0.55).When economic benefits were considered, areas that made more economic sense from a conservation management perspective were prioritized. These changes in spatial distribution were associated with gains in economic efficiency. The cost: benefit ratio was ca. 10 times greater than when no economic variables were considered (scenario 1 = 10.44 vs. scenario 4 = 1.15). When heavy weightings (> 100) were applied, the reserve systems became dispersed (R = 0.91 (for weighting factor of 10), R = 0.52 (for weighting factor of 1000)) in the former homelands and more costly overall (difference of R2.95B between the extremes). Considering the economic benefits of conservation changes the spatial distribution of priority areas and improves their economic efficiency. Disregarding economic benefits may compromise the implementation potential of priority areas, particularly when the economic benefits of competing land-uses are brought to the table. Furthermore, it is important to explicitly consider the social costs of conservation and consider resettlement or compensation costs among the trade-offs. DA - 2013 DB - OpenUCT DP - University of Cape Town LK - https://open.uct.ac.za PB - University of Cape Town PY - 2013 T1 - From cost-effectiveness to economic-efficiency in conservation planning: the importance of considering the economic benefits of conservation TI - From cost-effectiveness to economic-efficiency in conservation planning: the importance of considering the economic benefits of conservation UR - http://hdl.handle.net/11427/9793 ER - en_ZA
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11427/9793
dc.identifier.vancouvercitationPalframan LM. From cost-effectiveness to economic-efficiency in conservation planning: the importance of considering the economic benefits of conservation. [Thesis]. University of Cape Town ,Faculty of Science ,Percy FitzPatrick Institute of African Ornithology, 2013 [cited yyyy month dd]. Available from: http://hdl.handle.net/11427/9793en_ZA
dc.language.isoengen_ZA
dc.publisher.departmentPercy FitzPatrick Institute of African Ornithologyen_ZA
dc.publisher.facultyFaculty of Scienceen_ZA
dc.publisher.institutionUniversity of Cape Town
dc.subject.otherConservation Biologyen_ZA
dc.titleFrom cost-effectiveness to economic-efficiency in conservation planning: the importance of considering the economic benefits of conservationen_ZA
dc.typeMaster Thesis
dc.type.qualificationlevelMasters
dc.type.qualificationnameMScen_ZA
uct.type.filetypeText
uct.type.filetypeImage
uct.type.publicationResearchen_ZA
uct.type.resourceThesisen_ZA
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
thesis_sci_2013_palframan_l.pdf
Size:
2.76 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Download
Collections
Masters