Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-qsmjn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-19T20:54:28.149Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

6 - Prevention versus control in invasive species management

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 August 2009

David Finnoff
Affiliation:
Assistant Professor, Department of Economics and Finance University of Wyoming, USA
Jason F. Shogren
Affiliation:
Stroock Distinguished Professor of Natural Resource Conservation & Management Department of Economics and Finance, University of Wyoming, USA
Brian Leung
Affiliation:
Department of Biology & School of Environment McGill University, Montreal, Canada
David Lodge
Affiliation:
Professor in Conservation Biology Department of Biological Sciences, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, USA
Andreas Kontoleon
Affiliation:
University of Cambridge
Unai Pascual
Affiliation:
University of Cambridge
Timothy Swanson
Affiliation:
University College London
Get access

Summary

Introduction

As a leading cause of biodiversity loss and environmental damage, non-indigenous species can pose significant risks to society (see Mack et al. 2000, Lodge 2001). Managing these risks cost-effectively requires a consistent framework for bio-economic risk assessment. The economic theory of endogenous risk – merged with applied population ecology – provides such a framework (Shogren 2000; Leung et al. 2002). Endogenous risk captures the risk-benefit tradeoffs created by jointly determined ecosystem conditions, species characteristics and economic circumstances (Crocker and Tschirhart 1992; Settle et al. 2002). Endogenous risk theory stresses that management priorities depend crucially on both the tastes of the manager – his preferences over time and for risk bearing – and the technology of risk reduction – prevention, control and adaptation matter for optimal reduction strategies. Holding initial biological circumstances constant, managers with different preferences will likely make different choices on the mix of prevention and control. How different tastes affect technology choice, however, remains an open question in invasive species management.

This chapter investigates how manager types differentiated by preferences over time and over risk affect the optimal mix of prevention and control. The chapter advances our understanding on the behavioural underpinnings of risk-reduction strategies to control invasive species. Endogenous risk theory is a flexible tool that allows one to better understand the tradeoffs involved in changing the odds that good events are realised or in decreasing the severity of bad events if they are realised (Ehrlich and Becker 1972).

Type
Chapter
Information
Biodiversity Economics
Principles, Methods and Applications
, pp. 166 - 200
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bellman, R. 1961. Adaptive Control Processes: A Guided Tour. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berndt, E. R., and Hesse, D. M. 1986. Measuring and assessing capacity utilization in the manufacturing sectors of nine OECD countries. European Economic Review. 30. 961–989.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bossenbroek, J. M., Nekola, J. C. and Kraft, C. 2001. Prediction of long-distance dispersal using gravity models: zebra mussel invasion of inland lakes. Ecological Applications. 11. 1778–1788.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Briys, E. and Schlesinger, H. 1990. Risk aversion and the propensities for self insurance and self protection. Southern Economic Journal. 57. 458–467.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, R. S. and Christensen, L. R. 1981. Estimating elasticities of substitution in a model of partial static equilibrium: An application to U.S. agriculture, 1947–74. In Berndt, E. R. and Fields, B. C. (eds.). Modeling Natural Resource Substitution. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 209–229.
Caves, D. W., Christensen, L. R. and Swanson, J. A. 1981. Productivity growth, scale economies, and capacity utilization in U.S. railroads, 1955–74. American Economic Review. 71. 994–1002.Google Scholar
Christensen, L. R. and Green, W. H. 1976. Economies of scale in U.S. electric power generation. Journal of Political Economy. 84. 655–676.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crocker, T. D. and Tschirhart, J. 1992. Ecosystems, externalities and economies. Environmental and Resource Economics. 2. 551–567.Google Scholar
Dionne, G. and Eeckhoudt, L. 1985. Self-insurance, self-protection and increased risk aversion. Economics Letters. 17. 39–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eeckhoudt, L. and Hammitt, J. K. 2004. Does risk aversion increase the value of mortality risk?Journal of Environmental Economics and Management. 47. 13–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ehrlich, I. and Becker, G. 1972. Market insurance, self-insurance, and self-protection. Journal of Political Economy. 80. 623–648.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feder, G. 1979. Pesticides, information, and pest management under uncertainty. American Journal of Agricultural Economics. 61. 97–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finnoff, D., Shogren, J., Leung B. and Lodge, D. 2005. The importance of bioeconomic feedback in invasive species management. Ecological Economics. 52. 367–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holt, C. A., and Laury, S. K. 2002. Risk aversion and incentive effects. American Economic Review. 92. 1644–1655.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, K. 1998. Risk aversion and self-insurance-cum-protection. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty. 17. 139–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leung, B., Lodge, D. M., Finnoff, D., Shogren, J. F., Lewis, M. A. and Lamberti, G. 2002. An ounce of prevention or a pound of cure: bioeconomic risk analysis of invasive species. Proceedings: Biological Sciences. 269. 2407–2413.Google ScholarPubMed
Lichtenberg, E. and Zilberman, D. 1986. The econometrics of damage control: why specification matters. American Journal of Agricultural Economics. 68. 261–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lodge, D. M. 2001. Responses of lake biodiversity to global changes. In Chapin, F. S. , Sala, O. E. and Huber-Sannwald, E. (eds.). Future Scenarios of Global Biodiversity. Heideberg: Springer. 277–312.Google Scholar
Mack, R. N., Simberloff, D., Lonsdale, W. M., Evans, H., Clout, M. and Bazzaz, F. A. 2000. Biotic invasions: causes, epidemiology, global consequences, and control. Ecological Applications. 10. 689–710.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pimentel, D., Lach, L., Zuniga, R. and Morrison, D. 1999. Environmental and economic costs of nonindigenous species in the United States. Bioscience. 50. 53–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ricciardi, A., Neves, R. and Rasmussen, J. 1998. Impending extinctions of North American freshwater mussels (Unionoida) following the zebra mussel (Dreissena polymorpha) invasion. Journal of Animal Ecology. 67. 613–619.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Settle, C., Crocker, T. D. and Shogren, J. F. 2002. On the joint determination of biological and economic systems. Ecological Economics. 42. 301–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shogren, J. F. 2000. Risk reductions strategies against the ‘explosive invade’. In Perrings, C., Williamson, M. and Dalmazzone, S. (eds.). The Economics of Biological Invasions. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sickles, R. C. and Streitwieser, M. L. 1998. An analysis of technology, productivity, and regulatory distortion in the interstate natural gas transmission industry: 1977–1985. Journal of Applied Econometrics. 13. 377–395.3.0.CO;2-G>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, Neumann J. and Morgenstern, O. 1944. Theory of Games and Economic Behavior. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Weitzman, M. 1994. On the ‘environmental’ discount rate. Journal of Environmental. Economics and Management. 26. 200–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williamson, M. 1996. Biological Invasions. London: Chapman and Hall.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

  • Prevention versus control in invasive species management
    • By David Finnoff, Assistant Professor, Department of Economics and Finance University of Wyoming, USA, Jason F. Shogren, Stroock Distinguished Professor of Natural Resource Conservation & Management Department of Economics and Finance, University of Wyoming, USA, Brian Leung, Department of Biology & School of Environment McGill University, Montreal, Canada, David Lodge, Professor in Conservation Biology Department of Biological Sciences, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, USA
  • Edited by Andreas Kontoleon, University of Cambridge, Unai Pascual, University of Cambridge, Timothy Swanson, University College London
  • Book: Biodiversity Economics
  • Online publication: 11 August 2009
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511551079.009
Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

  • Prevention versus control in invasive species management
    • By David Finnoff, Assistant Professor, Department of Economics and Finance University of Wyoming, USA, Jason F. Shogren, Stroock Distinguished Professor of Natural Resource Conservation & Management Department of Economics and Finance, University of Wyoming, USA, Brian Leung, Department of Biology & School of Environment McGill University, Montreal, Canada, David Lodge, Professor in Conservation Biology Department of Biological Sciences, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, USA
  • Edited by Andreas Kontoleon, University of Cambridge, Unai Pascual, University of Cambridge, Timothy Swanson, University College London
  • Book: Biodiversity Economics
  • Online publication: 11 August 2009
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511551079.009
Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

  • Prevention versus control in invasive species management
    • By David Finnoff, Assistant Professor, Department of Economics and Finance University of Wyoming, USA, Jason F. Shogren, Stroock Distinguished Professor of Natural Resource Conservation & Management Department of Economics and Finance, University of Wyoming, USA, Brian Leung, Department of Biology & School of Environment McGill University, Montreal, Canada, David Lodge, Professor in Conservation Biology Department of Biological Sciences, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, USA
  • Edited by Andreas Kontoleon, University of Cambridge, Unai Pascual, University of Cambridge, Timothy Swanson, University College London
  • Book: Biodiversity Economics
  • Online publication: 11 August 2009
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511551079.009
Available formats
×