Building a stakeholder-led common vision increases the expected cost-effectiveness of biodiversity conservation

PLoS One. 2019 Jun 13;14(6):e0218093. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0218093. eCollection 2019.

Abstract

Uniting diverse stakeholders through communication, education or building a collaborative 'common vision' for biodiversity management is a recommended approach for enabling effective conservation in regions with multiple uses. However, socially focused strategies such as building a collaborative vision can require sharing scarce resources (time and financial resources) with the on-ground management actions needed to achieve conservation outcomes. Here we adapt current prioritisation tools to predict the likely return on the financial investment of building a stakeholder-led vision along with a portfolio of on-ground management strategies. Our approach brings together and analyses expert knowledge to estimate the cost-effectiveness of a common vision strategy and on-ground management strategies, before any investments in these strategies are made. We test our approach in an intensively-used Australian biodiversity hotspot with 179 threatened or at-risk species. Experts predicted that an effective stakeholder vision for the region would have a relatively low cost and would significantly increase the feasibility of on-ground management strategies. As a result, our analysis indicates that a common vision is likely to be a cost-effective investment, increasing the expected persistence of threatened species in the region by 9 to 52%, depending upon the strategies implemented. Our approach can provide the maximum budget that is worth investing in building a common vision or another socially focused strategy for building support for on-ground conservation actions. The approach can assist with decisions about whether and how to allocate scarce resources amongst social and ecological actions for biodiversity conservation in other regions worldwide.

Publication types

  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Animals
  • Australia
  • Biodiversity
  • Budgets / methods
  • Conservation of Natural Resources / economics*
  • Cost-Benefit Analysis / economics*
  • Decision Making
  • Ecology / economics
  • Endangered Species / economics
  • Investments / economics
  • Knowledge

Grants and funding

This project was funded by the Gas Industry Social and Environmental Research Alliance (GISERA) https://gisera.csiro.au/. The funder did not play any role in the study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.