Title
When should we save the most endangered species?
Author(s)
Wilson, H. B.;Joseph, L. N.;Moore, A. L.;Possingham, H. P.
Published
2011
Publisher
Ecology Letters
Abstract
Ecology Letters (2011) At the heart of our efforts to protect threatened species, there is a controversial debate about whether to give priority to cost-effective actions or whether focusing solely on the most endangered species will ultimately lead to preservation of the greatest number of species. By framing this debate within a decision-analytic framework, we show that allocating resources solely to the most endangered species will typically not minimise the number of extinctions in the long-term, as this does not account for the risk of less endangered species going extinct in the future. It is only favoured when our planning timeframe is short or we have a long-term view and we are optimistic about future conditions. Conservation funding tends to be short-term in nature, which biases allocations to more endangered species. Our work highlights the need to consider resource allocation for biodiversity over the long-term; 'preventive conservation', rather than just short-term fire-fighting. © 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd/CNRS.
Keywords
Anti-triage;Decision theory;Endangered species;Time-frames
Access Full Text
A full-text copy of this article may be available. Please email the WCS Library to request.
![]()
Back
PUB14955