What is the Price of Conservation? A Review of the Status Quo and Recommendations for Improving Cost Reporting

Abstract

Wildlife conservation is severely limited by funding. Therefore, to maximize biodiversity outcomes, assessing financial costs of interventions is as important as assessing effectiveness. We reviewed the reporting of costs in studies testing the effectiveness of conservation interventions: 13.3% of the studies provided numeric costs, and 8.8% reported total costs. Even fewer studies broke down these totals into constituent costs, making it difficult to assess the relevance of costs to different contexts. Cost reporting differed between continents and the taxa or habitats targeted by interventions, with higher cost reporting in parts of the Global South. A further analysis of data focused on mammals identified that interventions related to agriculture, invasive species, transport, and residential development reported costs more frequently. We identify opportunities for conservationists to improve future practice through encouraging systematic reporting and collation of intervention costs, using economic evaluation tools, and increasing understanding and skills in finance and economics.

Determining the economic costs and benefits of conservation actions: A decision support framework

“…Cost‐effective action can optimize the use of conservation resources at project, organizational and national scales, but decision‐making requires accurate data on the economic costs and benefits of an action (Cook et al, 2017; Iacona et al, 2018; White et al, 2022). Using healthcare economic analyses as a model we build a framework for recording the economic costs of conservation actions/programs.…”

“…We encourage conservation researchers and practitioners to report the costs of actions and projects, and to set up to databases to collate the costs of different types of interventions (Iacona et al, 2018; White et al, 2022), building upon the initiatives already occurring in some fields. For example, the InvaCost database collates the damage and management costs of invasive species outbreaks (Diagne et al, 2020), a tool for reporting the inputs and outcomes of restoration projects (including costs) is needed and being developed (Gatt et al, 2022), and a dataset of published literature that reports the cost of interventions is currently being established (ASU, 2022).…”

“…However, the continued decline of biodiversity requires drastic and urgent action across society, and efficient use of limited conservation funds (Leclère et al, 2020; Mace et al, 2018). This efficiency can only be achieved if both effectiveness and cost are suitably measured and reported—including all relevant economic costs and benefits of conservation actions (White et al, 2022). This data will allow decision‐making tools to incorporate cost data—helping individuals, organizations, and governments make evidence‐informed decisions based on effectiveness, values, and cost.…”

“…There are also now large attempts to compile evidence on the effectiveness of conservation interventions (https://environmentalevidence.org/; Sutherland et al, 2019). However, the reporting of costs in conservation remains low, hindering the use of this data to assess cost‐effectiveness and to help target limited resources (Pienkowski et al, 2021; Surrey et al, 2022; White et al, 2022). Possible explanations include a lack of training in the use of economic evaluation tools, a reluctance to incorporate economics into conservation decisions, difficulty in attributing outcomes to specific costs, perceived sensitivity of financial information, and low rates of cost reporting (Ansell et al, 2016; Pienkowski et al, 2021; White et al, 2022).…”

“…However, the reporting of costs in conservation remains low, hindering the use of this data to assess cost‐effectiveness and to help target limited resources (Pienkowski et al, 2021; Surrey et al, 2022; White et al, 2022). Possible explanations include a lack of training in the use of economic evaluation tools, a reluctance to incorporate economics into conservation decisions, difficulty in attributing outcomes to specific costs, perceived sensitivity of financial information, and low rates of cost reporting (Ansell et al, 2016; Pienkowski et al, 2021; White et al, 2022). We thus need an increase in detailed and standardized cost reporting to help assess cost‐effectiveness (Iacona et al, 2018).…”