1
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Prioritizing species conservation programs based on IUCN Green Status and estimates of cost‐sharing potential

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Over 1 million species around the world are at risk of extinction, and conservation organizations have to decide where to invest their limited resources. Cost‐effectiveness can be increased by leveraging funding opportunities and increasing collaborative partnerships to achieve shared conservation goals. We devised a structured decision‐making framework to prioritize species’ conservation programs based on a cost–benefit analysis that takes collaborative opportunities into account in an examination of national and global conservation return on investment. Conservation benefit is determined by modifying the novel International Union for the Conservation of Nature Green Status for Species to provide an efficient, high‐level measure that is comparable among species, even with limited information and time constraints. We applied this prioritization approach to the Wilder Institute/Calgary Zoo, Canada, a nonprofit organization seeking to increase the number of species it assists with conservation translocations. We sought to identify and prioritize additional species’ programs for which conservation translocation expertise and actions could make the most impact. Estimating the likelihood of cost‐sharing potential enabled total program cost to be distinguished from costs specific to the organization. Comparing a benefit‐to‐cost ratio on different geographic scales allowed decision makers to weigh alternative options for investing in new species’ programs in a transparent and effective manner. Our innovative analysis aligns with general conservation planning frameworks and can be adapted for any organization.

          Abstract

          Priorización de los programas de conservación de especies con base en el Estatus Verde de la UICN y las estimaciones del potencial del reparto de costos

          Resumen

          Hoy en día, las organizaciones de conservación tienen que decidir en dónde invertir sus limitados recursos a la vez que más de un millón de especies están en peligro de extinción a nivel mundial. La rentabilidad de las inversiones puede incrementarse aprovechando las oportunidades de financiación y aumentando las asociaciones de colaboración para alcanzar los objetivos de conservación compartidos. Diseñamos un marco de toma de decisiones para priorizar los programas de conservación de especies con base en un análisis de costo‐beneficio que considera las oportunidades de colaboración de un estudio del rendimiento de la inversión en la conservación a escala nacional y mundial. El beneficio de la conservación se determina al modificar el novedoso Estatus Verde de las Especies de la Unión Internacional para la Conservación de la Naturaleza para proporcionar una medida eficiente y de alto nivel que pueda compararse entre especies, incluso con limitaciones de información y tiempo. Aplicamos esta estrategia de priorización al Instituto Wilder/Zoológico de Calgary (Canadá), una organización sin fines de lucro que pretende aumentar el número de especies a las que ayuda con reubicaciones de conservación. Intentamos identificar y priorizar programas de especies adicionales en los que la experiencia y las acciones de reubicación para la conservación pudieran tener un mayor impacto. La estimación de la probabilidad del potencial de reparto de costos permitió distinguir el costo total del programa de los costos específicos de la organización. La comparación de la relación costo‐beneficio a diferentes escalas geográficas permitió a los responsables de la toma de decisiones sopesar las opciones para invertir en nuevos programas de especies de forma transparente y eficaz. Nuestro análisis innovador se ajusta a los marcos generales de planificación de la conservación y puede adaptarse a cualquier organización.

          【摘要】

          世界上有超过100万种物种面临灭绝风险, 而保护组织必须决定应如何分配有限的资源。通过利用筹资机会和增加合作关系来实现共同的保护目标, 可以提高成本效益。我们设计了一个结构化决策框架, 在分析国家和全球保护投资回报时考虑合作机会, 并基于该成本效益分析来确定物种保护项目的优先排序。我们通过修改新的《IUCN物种生成状况绿色标准》确定了保护效益, 以提供一个有效的、高水平的衡量标准, 从而可以在有限的信息和时间限制下, 在不同的物种之间进行比较。我们将该方法用于加拿大Wilder研究所/卡尔加里动物园, 这是一个非营利组织, 旨在增加其协助迁地保护的物种数量。我们试图确定并优先考虑更多迁地保护的专业知识和行动可以产生最大影响的物种保护项目。估计成本分担潜力的可能性可以区分项目总成本与组织具体承担的成本。在不同的地理范围内比较效益成本比, 有助于决策者以透明和有效的方式权衡投资于新的物种保护计划的备选方案。我们的创新性分析与一般的保护规划框架相匹配, 可以适用于任何组织。 【翻译:胡怡思;审校:聂永刚】

          Related collections

          Most cited references48

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Eliciting expert knowledge in conservation science.

          Expert knowledge is used widely in the science and practice of conservation because of the complexity of problems, relative lack of data, and the imminent nature of many conservation decisions. Expert knowledge is substantive information on a particular topic that is not widely known by others. An expert is someone who holds this knowledge and who is often deferred to in its interpretation. We refer to predictions by experts of what may happen in a particular context as expert judgments. In general, an expert-elicitation approach consists of five steps: deciding how information will be used, determining what to elicit, designing the elicitation process, performing the elicitation, and translating the elicited information into quantitative statements that can be used in a model or directly to make decisions. This last step is known as encoding. Some of the considerations in eliciting expert knowledge include determining how to work with multiple experts and how to combine multiple judgments, minimizing bias in the elicited information, and verifying the accuracy of expert information. We highlight structured elicitation techniques that, if adopted, will improve the accuracy and information content of expert judgment and ensure uncertainty is captured accurately. We suggest four aspects of an expert elicitation exercise be examined to determine its comprehensiveness and effectiveness: study design and context, elicitation design, elicitation method, and elicitation output. Just as the reliability of empirical data depends on the rigor with which it was acquired so too does that of expert knowledge. ©2011 Australian Governmemt Conservation Biology©2011 Society for Conservation Biology.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Is conservation triage just smart decision making?

            Conservation efforts and emergency medicine face comparable problems: how to use scarce resources wisely to conserve valuable assets. In both fields, the process of prioritising actions is known as triage. Although often used implicitly by conservation managers, scientists and policymakers, triage has been misinterpreted as the process of simply deciding which assets (e.g. species, habitats) will not receive investment. As a consequence, triage is sometimes associated with a defeatist conservation ethic. However, triage is no more than the efficient allocation of conservation resources and we risk wasting scarce resources if we do not follow its basic principles.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Global biodiversity conservation priorities.

              The location of and threats to biodiversity are distributed unevenly, so prioritization is essential to minimize biodiversity loss. To address this need, biodiversity conservation organizations have proposed nine templates of global priorities over the past decade. Here, we review the concepts, methods, results, impacts, and challenges of these prioritizations of conservation practice within the theoretical irreplaceability/vulnerability framework of systematic conservation planning. Most of the templates prioritize highly irreplaceable regions; some are reactive (prioritizing high vulnerability), and others are proactive (prioritizing low vulnerability). We hope this synthesis improves understanding of these prioritization approaches and that it results in more efficient allocation of geographically flexible conservation funding.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                Journal
                Conservation Biology
                Conservation Biology
                Wiley
                0888-8892
                1523-1739
                June 2023
                March 09 2023
                June 2023
                : 37
                : 3
                Affiliations
                [1 ] Wilder Institute/Calgary Zoo Calgary Alberta Canada
                [2 ] IUCN Species Survival Commission Conservation Translocation Specialist Group Calgary Alberta Canada
                [3 ] Department of Ecology and Evolution Stony Brook University Stony Brook New York USA
                [4 ] IUCN Species Survival Commission Caracas Venezuela
                Article
                10.1111/cobi.14051
                36661059
                146940f8-fe9f-4154-aa72-8b473fb82914
                © 2023

                http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article