Contact Us

For Marketing, Sales and Subscriptions Inquiries
2637 E Atlantic Blvd #43110
Pompano Beach, FL 33062
USA

Conference List

International Journal of Management and Sustainability

August 2014, Volume 3, 8, pp 493-499

Evaluation of Conservation Costs and Benefits of Developing Conservation Strategies

Olanipekun N. O.

Olanipekun N. O. 1

  1. School of Applied Science and Technology, Science Laboratory Technology Department, Federal Polytechnic, Offa, Kwara State, Nigeria 1

on Google Scholar
on PubMed

Abstract:

Due to environmental degradation, depletion and overexploitation of natural resources caused by human activities resulted in development of strategies for conservation of species, habitats and resource. Hence, this paper thus examines the advantages of financial investment and critical elements associated with creating strategies for the conservation of various species. Interdependent to one another are fish, wildlife species, natural habitats as well as natural resources. It rightly observed that the most efficient environmental benefits will be gained through understanding of economic aspects of the costs side of biodiversity which will lead to novel and creative ways. The paper, therefore, concludes that it is better to recognize and incorporate costs at the outset of the planning process, rather than belatedly incur the higher costs of a less efficient plan.
Contribution/ Originality
This study originates new formula for biodiversity conservation through the incorporation of cost implication at the onset of developing conservation strategies. It takes cognizance of various species like fish, natural habitats, natural resources and wildlife species that are interdependent to each other so as to obtain most efficient environmental benefits.

Keywords:


Reference:

  1. Arend, K. and S. Roel, 2005. Biodiversity in SEA: Somerset country council. Case study compiled for drafting of CBD guidelines on biodiversity in SEA. UK: Somerset County Council.
  2. Armsworth, P. R., and J. Roughgarden. 2001. An invitation to ecological economics. [Web].  Available from http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol14/iss1/art10/ [Accessed 8th July 2014].
  3. Council of the European Union, 2010. Council conclusions on biodiversity post-2010—EU and global vision and targets and international access and burden sharing regime. 3002nd Environment Council Meeting,         Brussels, 15 March 2010.
  4. Cullen, R.H., F.D. Kenneth, G. Fairburn and E. Moran, 2005. Economic analyses to aid nature conservation decision making. Academic.Research.Microsoft.com/Paper/5732941.aspx Oryx, 39(3): pp.1–8.
  5. EEA, 2004. High nature value farmland: Characteristics, trends and policy challenges. EEA, Copenhagen.
  6. European Environment Agency (EEA), 2004. High nature value farmland: Characteristics, trends and policy challenges. EEA, Copenhagen.
  7. Leng, R.A., 2009. Peak oil resource depletion, global warming, financial stress and future world food and feed production. In: Preston R, Ogle B (eds) International Conference on Livestock, Climate Change and the Environment. A Giang University, Vietnam, 81.
  8. Mar Van, D., 2005. SEA of sigma plan for flood safety and ecological restoration of scheldt river. Case study compiled for drafting of CBD guidelines on biodiversity in SEA. Resources Analysis, Antwerp, Belgium.
  9. National Ecological Assessment Team Strategic Habitat Conservation, 2006. [Web]. Available from www.fws.gov/nc-es/habreg/NEAT_FinalRpt.pdf? [Accessed 22 July 2013].
  10. Paracchini, M.L., J.E. Petersen, Y. Hoogeveen, C. Bamps, I. Burfield and C.V. Swaay, 2008. High nature value farmland in Europe: An estimate of the distribution patterns on the basis of land cover and biodiversity data. EUR-Scientific and Technical Research Series, JRC Scientific and Technical Reports. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg.
  11. Settele, J., O. Kudrna, A. Harpke, I. Ku¨hn, C. Van Swaay, R. Verovnik, M. Warren, M. Wiemers, J. Hanspach, T. Hickler, E. Ku¨hn, I. Van Halder, K. Veling, A. Vliegenthart, I. Wynhoff and O. Schweiger, 2008. Climatic risk atlas of European butterflies. Pensoft, Sofia. Available from www.pensoftonline.net/biorisk [Accessed 15th August 2013.5].
  12. Tear, T.H., P. Kareiva, P.L. Angermeir, P. Comer, B. Czech, R. Kautz, L. Landon, D. Mehlman, K. Murphy, M.J. Ruckelsaus, M. Scott and G. Wilhere, 2005. How much is enough? The recurrent problem of setting measurable objectives in conservation, [Web]. Available from alyxia.umd.edu/teaching/files/Tear_et_al.pdf [Accessed 22 July 2013].
  13. Thomas, J.A., M.G. Telfer, D.B. Roy, C.D. Preston, J.D. Greenwood, J. Asher, R. Fox, R.T. Clarke and J.H. Lawton, 2004. Comparative losses of British butterflies, birds and plants and the global extinction crisis. Science, 303: 1879–1818 
  14. United States Fish and Wildlife Service, 2013. Strategic habitat conservation, [Web]. Available from http://www.fws.gov/landscape-conservation/shc.html [Accessed 22 July 2013].
  15. Uprety, B., 2005. Integration of biodiversity aspects in strategic environmental assessment of Nepal water plan and environmental impact assessment of operational forestry management plan in Nepal. [Web]. Available from.  www.icem.com.au/documents/biodiversity/bioHPdevt/Volume2 [Accessed 8th July 2014].
  16. Van Swaay, C., A. Cuttelod, S. Collins, D. Maes, M. Lo´pez Munguira, M. Sasic, J. Settele, R. Verovnik, T. Verstrael, M. Warren, M. Wiemers and I. Wynhof, 2010. European red list of butterflies. IUCN and butterfly conservation Europe. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.

Statistics:

Google Scholor ideas Microsoft Academic Search bing Google Scholor

Funding:

Competing Interests:

Acknowledgement:


Related Article