Improving methods for allocating resources among threatened species: the case for a new national approach in New Zealand

Abstract

Selecting the best set of management projects to ensure the persistence of the greatest number of a nation's threatened species is a complex and challenging problem. It is not a simple task to know which set of management actions will provide the best overall conservation outcome when presented with a vast number of species with complex ecologies, extreme management uncertainties and financial constraints. Globally, agencies tasked with the challenge of managing a threatened species strive to achieve the most with their limited budgets. Currently, resources marked for threatened species are allocated in an informal manner (Metrick & Weitzman 1998) or simply to the most threatened species first (Possingham et al. 2002). However, it is clear that systematic and transparent approaches for cost efficient decisions improves the overall benefits to biodiversity (Naidoo et al. 2006; Wilson et al. 2006). Formal methods for the efficient allocation of resources among regions are now commonly practised by conservation agencies (Margules & Pressey 2000). In addition, decision tools are used to guide cost efficient management of single species (Drechsler & Burgman 2004). However, the approaches available for guiding the cost efficient allocation of resources among threatened species are relatively underdeveloped. The main challenge ahead is the development of appropriate objectives and transparent and systematic frameworks to guide the selection of cost efficient management of threatened species.