| Sumario: | The writers offer a framework for evaluating alternative designs of conservation programs and their implications for the allocation of conservation funds. Based on an analysis of the allocation of funds to conservation programs in the U.S., they demonstrate that the efficient allocation of funds must consider two important “pooling” effects: cumulative effects and interrelationships among alternative environmental benefits. They point out that failure to take into account the cumulative effects of environmental benefits may cause conservation funds to be overly dispersed geographically, which might result in minimum environmental benefits in cases where the budget is small. They further note that ignoring the interrelationships among alternative environmental benefits may lead not only to the misallocation of conservation funds among geographical areas, but to the targeting of incorrect resources for conservation programs.
|
|---|