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

The need for conservation action to be cost-effective is widely accepted, resulting in increased interest and effort to assess effectiveness. Assessing the financial and economic costs of conservation is equally important for assessing cost-effectiveness, yet their measurement and assessment are repeatedly identified as lacking. The healthcare sector, in contrast, has made substantial progress in identifying and including costs in decision-making. Here, we consider what conservation can learn from this experience. We present a three-step framework for identifying and recording the relevant economic costs and benefits of conservation interventions where the user (1) describes the costing context, (2) determines which types of cost and benefit to include, and (3) obtains values for these costs and benefits alongside metadata necessary for others to interpret the data. This framework is designed to help estimate economic costs but can also be used flexibly to record the direct costs of interventions (i.e., financial costs) and calculate financial and economic benefits. Although recording data on economic costs and benefits is deceptively complex, this framework facilitates improved recording, and indicates how collating this data could enhance the assessment of cost-effectiveness across conservation contexts using a range of decision-making tools. © 2022 The Authors. Conservation Science and Practice published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Society for ConservationWe thank Alec Christie, Ashley Simkins, and Anthony Waldron for helpful discussions and Arcadia, MAVA, and the David and Claudia Harding Foundation for funding. We thank two anonymous reviewers, and Gwen Iacona for detailed comments that helped improve the manuscript. The work was completed by Thomas White as part of a PhD supported by a Balfour studentship at the Department of Zoology, University of Cambridge

A solution scan of societal options to reduce transmission and spread of respiratory viruses: SARS-CoV-2 as a case study

Societal biosecurity – measures built into everyday society to minimize risks from pests and diseases – is an important aspect of managing epidemics and pandemics. We aimed to identify societal options for reducing the transmission and spread of respiratory viruses. We used SARS-CoV-2 (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2) as a case study to meet the immediate need to manage the COVID-19 pandemic and eventually transition to more normal societal conditions, and to catalog options for managing similar pandemics in the future. We used a ‘solution scanning’ approach. We read the literature; consulted psychology, public health, medical, and solution scanning experts; crowd-sourced options using social media; and collated comments on a preprint. Here, we present a list of 519 possible measures to reduce SARS-CoV-2 transmission and spread. We provide a long list of options for policymakers and businesses to consider when designing biosecurity plans to combat SARS-CoV-2 and similar pathogens in the future. We also developed an online application to help with this process. We encourage testing of actions, documentation of outcomes, revisions to the current list, and the addition of further options.</p

A Severe Lack of Evidence Limits Effective Conservation of the World's Primates

Threats to biodiversity are well documented. However, to effectively conserve species and their habitats, we need to know which conservation interventions do (or do not) work. Evidence-based conservation evaluates interventions within a scientific framework. The Conservation Evidence project has summarized thousands of studies testing conservation interventions and compiled these as synopses for various habitats and taxa. In the present article, we analyzed the interventions assessed in the primate synopsis and compared these with other taxa. We found that despite intensive efforts to study primates and the extensive threats they face, less than 1% of primate studies evaluated conservation effectiveness. The studies often lacked quantitative data, failed to undertake postimplementation monitoring of populations or individuals, or implemented several interventions at once. Furthermore, the studies were biased toward specific taxa, geographic regions, and interventions. We describe barriers for testing primate conservation interventions and propose actions to improve the conservation evidence base to protect this endangered and globally important taxon