How public values for threatened species are affected by conservation strategies.

While the imminent extinction of many species is predicted, prevention is expensive, and decision-makers often have to prioritise funding. In democracies, it can be argued that conservation using public funds should be influenced by the values placed on threatened species by the public, and that community views should also affect the conservation management approaches adopted. We conducted on online survey with 2400 respondents from the general Australian public to determine 1) the relative values placed on a diverse set of 12 threatened Australian animal species and 2) whether those values changed with the approach proposed to conserve them. The survey included a contingent valuation and a choice experiment. Three notable findings emerged: 1) respondents were willing to pay $60/year on average for a species (95% confidence interval: $23 to $105) to avoid extinction in the next 20 years based on the contingent valuation, and $29 to $100 based on the choice experiment, 2) respondents were willing to pay to reduce the impact of feral animals on almost all presented threatened species, 3) for few species and respondents, WTP was lower when genetic modification to reduce inbreeding in the remaining population was proposed.

Policy choice and riverine water quality in developing countries: An integrated hydro-economic modelling approach.

Industrialization and urbanization, as a result of rapid economic development, have led to the deterioration of water quality in many rivers in developing countries. The Kelani River in Sri Lanka provides drinking water to Colombo and a range of market and non-market ecosystem services; but these services are threatened by deteriorating water quality. We apply a hydro-economic model that accounts for spatial patterns of water quality and abatement cost variability between firms in the catchment. The hydro-economic model combines a hydrological model of water quality with an economic optimization model to determine a cost-effective policy under alternate policy regimes. These include: the existing policy based on effluent concentration standards, effluent trading and effluent trading with multiple zones and an effluent tax. Tradeable permits with multiple zones are the least cost policy option that accounts for both spatial externalities and abatement costs. However, given current institutional capabilities, an effluent tax would be a more realistic second best policy as a transition from the current policy of effluent concentration standards to a policy based on the quantity of effluents.

Industrial pollution and the management of river water quality: a model of Kelani River, Sri Lanka.

Water quality of the Kelani River has become a critical issue in Sri Lanka due to the high cost of maintaining drinking water standards and the market and non-market costs of deteriorating river ecosystem services. By integrating a catchment model with a river model of water quality, we developed a method to estimate the effect of pollution sources on ambient water quality. Using integrated model simulations, we estimate (1) the relative contribution from point (industrial and domestic) and non-point sources (river catchment) to river water quality and (2) pollutant transfer coefficients for zones along the lower section of the river. Transfer coefficients provide the basis for policy analyses in relation to the location of new industries and the setting of priorities for industrial pollution control. They also offer valuable information to design socially optimal economic policy to manage industrialized river catchments.

Cost to government health-care services of treating acute self-poisonings in a rural district in Sri Lanka.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the direct financial costs to the Sri Lanka Ministry of Health of treating patients after self-poisoning, particularly from pesticides, in a single district. METHODS: Data on staff, drug, laboratory and other inputs for each patient admitted for self-poisoning were prospectively collected over a one-month period from one general hospital (2005) and five peripheral hospitals (2006) in the Anuradhapura district. Data on transfers to secondary- and tertiary-level facilities were obtained for a 6-month period from 30 peripheral hospitals. The cost of the inputs in United States dollars (US$), using 2005 figures, was derived from hospital accounts. FINDINGS: The average total cost of treating a self-poisoned patient at the general hospital was US$ 31.83, with ward staff input and drugs being the highest expenditure category and only US$ 0.19 of this sum related to capital and maintenance costs. The average total cost of treatment was highest for self-poisoning with pesticides (US$ 49.12). The patients placed in the intensive care unit, who comprised 5% of the total, took up 75% of the overall treatment cost for all self-poisoned patients at the general hospital. The average total cost of treating self-poisoned patients at peripheral hospitals was US$ 3.33. The average patient cost per transfer was US$ 14.03. In 2006, the total cost of treating self-poisoned patients in the Anuradhapura district amounted to US$ 76,599, of which US$ 53,834 were comprised of pesticide self-poisonings. Based on the total treatment cost per self-poisoned patient estimated in this study, the cost of treating self-poisoned patients in all of Sri Lanka in 2004 was estimated at US$ 866,304. CONCLUSION: The cost of treating pesticide self-poisonings may be reduced by promoting the use of less toxic pesticides and possibly by improving case management in primary care hospitals. Additional research is needed to assess if increasing infrastructure and staff at peripheral hospitals could reduce the overall cost to the government, optimize case management and reduce pressure on secondary services.