Constraints of philanthropy on determining the distribution of biodiversity conservation funding

被引:31
|
作者
Larson, Eric R. [1 ]
Howell, Stephen [2 ]
Kareiva, Peter [2 ]
Armsworth, Paul R. [3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Illinois, Dept Nat Resources & Environm Sci, Urbana, IL 61801 USA
[2] Nature Conservancy, 4245 Fairfax Dr, Arlington, VA 22203 USA
[3] Univ Tennessee, Dept Ecol & Evolutionary Biol, Knoxville, TN 37996 USA
关键词
land trust; prioritization; protected area; return on investment (ROI); systematic conservation planning; MAXIMIZING RETURN; INVESTMENT; PRIORITIES; PATTERNS; AREAS; BENEFITS; COSTS; SIZE;
D O I
10.1111/cobi.12608
中图分类号
X176 [生物多样性保护];
学科分类号
090705 ;
摘要
Caught between ongoing habitat destruction and funding shortfalls, conservation organizations are using systematic planning approaches to identify places that offer the highest biodiversity return per dollar invested. However, available tools do not account for the landscape of funding for conservation or quantify the constraints this landscape imposes on conservation outcomes. Using state-level data on philanthropic giving to and investments in land conservation by a large nonprofit organization, we applied linear regression to evaluate whether the spatial distribution of conservation philanthropy better explained expenditures on conservation than maps of biodiversity priorities, which were derived from a planning process internal to the organization and return on investment (ROI) analyses based on data on species richness, land costs, and existing protected areas. Philanthropic fund raising accounted for considerably more spatial variation in conservation spending (r(2) = 0.64) than either of the 2 systematic conservation planning approaches (r(2) = 0.08-0.21). We used results of one of the ROI analyses to evaluate whether increases in flexibility to reallocate funding across space provides conservation gains. Small but plausible tax increments of 1-10% on states redistributed to the optimal funding allocation from the ROI analysis could result in gains in endemic species protected of 8.5-80.2%. When such increases in spatial flexibility are not possible, conservation organizations should seek to cultivate increased support for conservation in priority locations. We used lagged correlations of giving to and spending by the organization to evaluate whether investments in habitat protection stimulate future giving to conservation. The most common outcome at the state level was that conservation spending quarters correlated significantly and positively with lagged fund raising quarters. In effect, periods of high fund raising for biodiversity followed (rather than preceded) periods of high expenditure on land conservation projects, identifying one mechanism conservation organizations could explore to seed greater activity in priority locations. Our results demonstrate how limitations on the ability of conservation organizations to reallocate their funding across space can impede organizational effectiveness and elucidate ways conservation planning tools could be more useful if they quantified and incorporated these constraints.
引用
收藏
页码:206 / 215
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Targeting global conservation funding to limit immediate biodiversity declines
    Waldron, Anthony
    Mooers, Arne O.
    Miller, Daniel C.
    Nibbelink, Nate
    Redding, David
    Kuhn, Tyler S.
    Roberts, J. Timmons
    Gittleman, John L.
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 2013, 110 (29) : 12144 - 12148
  • [2] Allocating resources for land protection using continuous optimization: biodiversity conservation in the United States
    Armsworth, Paul R.
    Benefield, Amy E.
    Dilkina, Bistra
    Fovargue, Rachel
    Jackson, Heather B.
    Le Bouille, Diane
    Nolte, Christoph
    ECOLOGICAL APPLICATIONS, 2020, 30 (06)
  • [3] A landscape of conservation philanthropy for US land trusts
    Fovargue, Rachel
    Fisher, Maria
    Harris, Jamal
    Armsworth, Paul R.
    CONSERVATION BIOLOGY, 2019, 33 (01) : 176 - 184
  • [4] Determining High Conservation Values in Production Landscapes: Biodiversity and Assessment Approaches
    Styring, Alison R.
    Unggang, Joanes
    Ragai, Roslina
    Kueffner, Kayleigh
    Froehlich, Daniel
    Megom, Nyegang
    Joseph, Li
    Jukie, Alex
    Tarang, Moses
    Nazrin, Mohamad
    Sulok, Kiding
    Sekina, Kinsy
    Setia, Luisia Duya
    Giannone, Laura
    Aron, Boniface Nilly
    Swartz, Nicholas
    Hyde, Philip
    Tyler, Bow
    James, Diana
    FRONTIERS IN ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE, 2022, 10
  • [5] Effects of budget constraints on conservation network design for biodiversity and ecosystem services
    Remme, Roy P.
    Schroeter, Matthias
    ECOLOGICAL COMPLEXITY, 2016, 26 : 45 - 56
  • [6] Mapping the biodiversity conservation gaps in the East China sea
    Wang, Zihan
    Zeng, Cong
    Cao, Ling
    JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT, 2023, 336
  • [7] The extent and distribution of joint conservation-development funding in the tropics
    Reed, James
    Oldekop, Johan
    Barlow, Jos
    Carmenta, Rachel
    Geldmann, Jonas
    Ickowitz, Amy
    Narulita, Sari
    Rahman, Syed Ajijur
    van Vianen, Josh
    Yanou, Malaika
    Sunderland, Terry
    ONE EARTH, 2020, 3 (06): : 753 - 762
  • [8] Setting conservation targets under budgetary constraints
    Moilanen, Atte
    Arponen, Anni
    BIOLOGICAL CONSERVATION, 2011, 144 (01) : 650 - 653
  • [9] Diversity and distribution of aquatic insects in Southern Brazil wetlands: implications for biodiversity conservation in a Neotropical region
    Maltchik, Leonardo
    Dalzochio, Marina Schmidt
    Stenert, Cristina
    Rolon, Ana Silvia
    REVISTA DE BIOLOGIA TROPICAL, 2012, 60 (01) : 273 - 289
  • [10] Biodiversity conservation gaps in Brazil: A role for systematic conservation planning
    Fonseca, Carlos Roberto
    Venticinque, Eduardo Martins
    PERSPECTIVES IN ECOLOGY AND CONSERVATION, 2018, 16 (02) : 61 - 67