Cost-effective priorities for global mammal conservation.

Global biodiversity priority setting underpins the strategic allocation of conservation funds. In identifying the first comprehensive set of global priority areas for mammals, Ceballos et al. [Ceballos G, Ehrlich PR, Soberón J, Salazar I, Fay JP (2005) Science 309:603-607] found much potential for conflict between conservation and agricultural human activity. This is not surprising because, like other global priority-setting approaches, they set priorities without socioeconomic objectives. Here we present a priority-setting framework that seeks to minimize the conflicts and opportunity costs of meeting conservation goals. We use it to derive a new set of priority areas for investment in mammal conservation based on (i) agricultural opportunity cost and biodiversity importance, (ii) current levels of international funding, and (iii) degree of threat. Our approach achieves the same biodiversity outcomes as Ceballos et al.'s while reducing the opportunity costs and conflicts with agricultural human activity by up to 50%. We uncover shortfalls in the allocation of conservation funds in many threatened priority areas, highlighting a global conservation challenge.

Conservation planning when costs are uncertain.

Spatially explicit information on the financial costs of conservation actions can improve the ability of conservation planning to achieve ecological and economic objectives, but the magnitude of this improvement may depend on the accuracy of the cost estimates. Data on costs of conservation actions are inherently uncertain. For example, the cost of purchasing a property for addition to a protected-area network depends on the individual landholder's preferences, values, and aspirations, all of which vary in space and time, and the effect of this uncertainty on the conservation priority of a site is relatively untested. We investigated the sensitivity of the conservation priority of sites to uncertainty in cost estimates. We explored scenarios for expanding (four-fold) the protected-area network in Queensland, Australia to represent a range of vegetation types, species, and abiotic environments, while minimizing the cost of purchasing new properties. We estimated property costs for 17, 790 10 × 10 km sites with data on unimproved land values. We systematically changed property costs and noted how these changes affected conservation priority of a site. The sensitivity of the priority of a site to changes in cost data was largely dependent on a site's importance for meeting conservation targets. Sites that were essential or unimportant for meeting targets maintained high or low priorities, respectively, regardless of cost estimates. Sites of intermediate conservation priority were sensitive to property costs and represented the best option for efficiency gains, especially if they could be purchased at a lower price than anticipated. Thus, uncertainty in cost estimates did not impede the use of cost data in conservation planning, and information on the sensitivity of the conservation priority of a site to estimates of the price of land can be used to inform strategic conservation planning before the actual price of the land is known.

Supporting multi-stakeholder environmental decisions.

This paper examines how multiple criteria analysis (MCA) can be used to support multi-stakeholder environmental management decisions. It presents a study through which 48 stakeholders from environmental, primary production and community interest groups used MCA to prioritise 30 environmental management problems in the Mackay-Whitsunday region of Queensland, Australia. The MCA model, with procedures for aggregating multi-stakeholder output, was used to inform a final decision on the priority of the region's environmental management problems. The result was used in the region's environmental management plan as required under Australia's Natural Heritage Trust programme. The study shows how relatively simple MCA methods can help stakeholders make group decisions, even when they hold strongly conflicting preferences.

Evaluation of dairy effluent management options using multiple criteria analysis.

This article describes how options for managing dairy effluent on the Lower Murray River in South Australia were evaluated using multiple criteria analysis (MCA). Multiple criteria analysis is a framework for combining multiple environmental, social, and economic objectives in policy decisions. At the time of the study, dairy irrigation in the region was based on flood irrigation which involved returning effluent to the river. The returned water contained nutrients, salts, and microbial contaminants leading to environmental, human health, and tourism impacts. In this study MCA was used to evaluate 11 options against 6 criteria for managing dairy effluent problems. Of the 11 options, the MCA model selected partial rehabilitation of dairy paddocks with the conversion of remaining land to other agriculture. Soon after, the South Australian Government adopted this course of action and is now providing incentives for dairy farmers in the region to upgrade irrigation infrastructure and/or enter alternative industries.