Integrating quantitative and qualitative data in assessing the cost-effectiveness of biodiversity conservation programmes

被引:12
|
作者
Austin, Zoe [1 ]
McVittie, Alistair [2 ]
McCracken, Davy [3 ]
Moxey, Andrew [4 ]
Moran, Dominic [2 ]
White, Piran C. L. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ York, Dept Environm, York YO10 5DD, N Yorkshire, England
[2] Scotlands Rural Coll SRUC, Land Econ Environm & Soc, Edinburgh EH9 3JG, Midlothian, Scotland
[3] Scotlands Rural Coll SRUC, Future Farming Syst, Auchincruive KA6 5HW, Ayr, Scotland
[4] Pareto Consulting, Edinburgh EH13 0BX, Midlothian, Scotland
基金
英国自然环境研究理事会;
关键词
Agri-environment schemes; Conservation monitoring; Conservation objectives; Conservation planning; Expert knowledge; Scotland Rural Development Programme; Stakeholder engagement; AGRI-ENVIRONMENT SCHEMES; MANAGEMENT; POLICY; PRIORITIZATION; EFFICIENCY; PROJECTS; INDEX;
D O I
10.1007/s10531-015-0861-4
中图分类号
X176 [生物多样性保护];
学科分类号
090705 ;
摘要
Globally, most biodiversity conservation programmes are not currently evaluated in terms of their costs and benefits, or their rate of return on the original investment. Assessing the cost-effectiveness of such schemes is challenging as the relationship between spending and the effectiveness of conservation is dependent on many biological and socio-economic factors. Here, we evaluate the cost-effectiveness of a selection of species and habitat conservation schemes undertaken through the Scotland Rural Development Programme. We use a combination of quantitative and qualitative data, based on expert knowledge, to estimate effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of different schemes and understand variations in the results. Our findings highlight a lack of geographical targeting in terms of where the funding might achieve the most conservation benefit, which may be contributing to high costs per unit of effectiveness. Recommendations include the need for improved advice on appropriate management and monitoring programmes that are linked closely to objectives. Conservation schemes within Scotland were used as the focus of the study, but the approaches used, interpretations drawn and improvements identified could be applied to any regional, national or international biodiversity conservation programmes. Cost and effectiveness data can be subject to a high degree of uncertainty and hence any cost-effectiveness estimate is subject to a number of caveats. There is therefore a need to focus not only on improving the cost-effectiveness of biodiversity conservation programmes, but also to improve the robustness of cost-effectiveness assessments, in terms of data availability and accuracy and improved monitoring of the outcomes of interventions.
引用
收藏
页码:1359 / 1375
页数:17
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Practical feasibility of outcomes research in oncology: Lessons learned in assessing drug use and cost-effectiveness in The Netherlands
    Franken, Margreet G.
    van Gils, Chantal W. M.
    Gaultney, Jennifer G.
    Delwel, Gepke O.
    Goettsch, Wim
    Huijgens, Peter C.
    Steenhoek, Adri
    Punt, Cornelis J. A.
    Koopman, Miriam
    Redekop, William K.
    Uyl-de Groot, Carin A.
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CANCER, 2013, 49 (01) : 8 - 16
  • [32] Assessing the cost-effectiveness of mepolizumab as add-on therapy to standard of care for severe eosinophilic asthma in Singapore
    Tan, Ling Eng
    Tan, Wan Hui Gloria
    Aziz, Mohamed Ismail Abdul
    Koh, Mariko Siyue
    Tay, Tunn Ren
    Pearce, Fiona
    Ng, Kwong
    JOURNAL OF ASTHMA, 2022, 59 (01) : 189 - 199
  • [33] Assessing cost-effectiveness when environmental benefits are bundled: agricultural water management in Great Barrier Reef catchments
    Rolfe, John
    Windle, Jill
    McCosker, Kevin
    Northey, Adam
    AUSTRALIAN JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL AND RESOURCE ECONOMICS, 2018, 62 (03) : 373 - 393
  • [34] Assessing costs and cost-effectiveness across the mitigation hierarchy: An example considering the reduction of bird mortality at power lines
    White, T. B.
    Serratosa, J.
    Allinson, T.
    Jones, V. R.
    Petrovan, S. O.
    Jobson, B. R.
    Jones, K. R.
    Sutherland, W. J.
    BIOLOGICAL CONSERVATION, 2024, 296
  • [35] Sensor cost-effectiveness analysis for data-driven fault detection and diagnostics in commercial buildings*
    Zhang, Liang
    Leach, Matt
    Chen, Jianli
    Hu, Yuqing
    ENERGY, 2023, 263
  • [36] Costs and Cost-Effectiveness of a Mobile Phone Text-Message Reminder Programmes to Improve Health Workers' Adherence to Malaria Guidelines in Kenya
    Zurovac, Dejan
    Larson, Bruce A.
    Sudoi, Raymond K.
    Snow, Robert W.
    PLOS ONE, 2012, 7 (12):
  • [37] Holistic view of safety culture in aircraft ground handling: Integrating qualitative and quantitative methods with data triangulation
    Musa, Muhafiza
    Isha, Ahmad Shahrul Nizam
    JOURNAL OF AIR TRANSPORT MANAGEMENT, 2021, 92
  • [38] Integrating biodiversity, ecosystem services and socio-economic data to identify priority areas and landowners for conservation actions at the national scale
    Di Minin, Enrico
    Soutullo, Alvaro
    Bartesaghi, Lucia
    Rios, Mariana
    Szephegyi, Maria Nube
    Moilanen, Atte
    BIOLOGICAL CONSERVATION, 2017, 206 : 56 - 64
  • [39] Abatacept: from a budget impact model to cost-effectiveness analysis - data from RCT and real life
    Benucci, Maurizio
    Damiani, Arianna
    Manfredi, Mariangela
    Infantino, Maria
    Grossi, Valentina
    Li Gobbi, Francesca
    CLINICOECONOMICS AND OUTCOMES RESEARCH, 2019, 11 : 405 - 409
  • [40] A Scoping Review of Item-Level Missing Data in Within-Trial Cost-Effectiveness Analysis
    Ling, Xiaoxiao
    Gabrio, Andrea
    Mason, Alexina
    Baio, Gianluca
    VALUE IN HEALTH, 2022, 25 (09) : 1654 - 1662