Effectiveness of 20 years of conservation investments in protecting orangutans

Conservation strategies are rarely systematically evaluated, which reduces transparency, hinders the cost-effective deployment of resources, and hides what works best in different contexts. Using data on the iconic and critically endangered orangutan (Pongo spp.), we developed a novel spatiotemporal framework for evaluating conservation investments. We show that around USD 1 billion was invested between 2000 and 2019 into orangutan conservation by governments, nongovernmental organizations, companies, and communities. Broken down by allocation to different conservation strategies, we find that habitat protection, patrolling, and public outreach had the greatest return on investment for maintaining orangutan populations. Given the variability in threats, land-use opportunity costs, and baseline remunerations in different regions, there were differential benefits per dollar invested across conservation activities and regions. We show that although challenging from a data and analysis perspective, it is possible to fully understand the relationships between conservation investments and outcomes and the external factors that influence these outcomes. Such analyses can provide improved guidance toward a more effective biodiversity conservation. Insights into the spatiotemporal interplays between the costs and benefits driving effectiveness can inform decisions about the most suitable orangutan conservation strategies for halting population declines. Although our study focuses on the three extant orangutan species of Sumatra and Borneo, our findings have broad application for evidence-based conservation science and practice worldwide.

Prioritizing debt conversion opportunities for marine conservation

Incentivized debt conversion is a financing mechanism that can assist countries with a heavy debt burden to bolster their long-term domestic investment in nature conservation. The Nature Conservancy, an international conservation-based nongovernmental organization, is adapting debt conversions to support marine conservation efforts by small island developing states and coastal countries. Prioritizing debt conversion opportunities according to their potential return on investment can increase the impact and effectiveness of this finance mechanism. We developed guidance on how to do so with a decision-support approach that relies on a novel threat-based adaptation of cost-effectiveness analysis. We constructed scenarios by varying parameters of the approach, including enabling conditions, expected benefits, and threat classifications. Incorporating both abatable and unabatable threats affected priorities across planning scenarios. Similarly, differences in scenario construction resulted in unique solution sets for top priorities. We show how environmental organizations, private entities, and investment banks can adopt structured prioritization frameworks for making decisions about conservation finance investments, such as debt conversions. Our guidance can accommodate a suite of social, ecological, and economic considerations, making the approach broadly applicable to other conservation finance mechanisms or investment strategies that seek to establish a transparent process for return-on-investment decision-making.

Allocating resources for land protection using continuous optimization: biodiversity conservation in the United States

Spatial optimization approaches that were originally developed to help conservation organizations determine protection decisions over small spatial scales are now used to inform global or continental scale priority setting. However, the different decision contexts involved in large-scale resource allocation need to be considered. We present a continuous optimization approach in which a decision-maker allocates funding to regional offices. Local decision-makers then use these funds to implement habitat protection efforts with varying effectiveness when evaluated in terms of the funder's goals. We illustrate this continuous formulation by examining the relative priority that should be given to different counties in the coterminous United States when acquiring land to establish new protected areas. If weighting all species equally, counties in the southwest United States, where large areas can be bought cheaply, are priorities for protection. If focusing only on species of conservation concern, priorities shift to locations rich in such species, particularly near expanding exurban areas facing high rates of future habitat conversion (e.g., south-central Texas). Priorities for protection are sensitive to what is assumed about local ecological and decision-making processes. For example, decision-makers who doubt the efficacy of local land protection efforts should focus on a few key areas, while optimistic decision-makers should disperse funding more widely. Efforts to inform large-scale conservation priorities should reflect better the types of choice that decision-makers actually face when working over these scales. They also need to report the sensitivity of recommended priorities to what are often unstated assumptions about local processes affecting conservation outcomes.

A landscape of conservation philanthropy for U.S. land trusts

Finding ways to increase financial support is critical to conservation efforts. We used conservation fundraising data, unprecedented in their resolution, to reveal spatial patterns in philanthropic giving to a major land protection organization in the United States. We also quantified the relationship between the amount of effort devoted to fundraising and donations received. Around 40% of the variation in the propensity to give and overall value of gifts was explained by sociodemographic and other predictors. For example, education level had greater predictive capacity than income, political views, and other factors often considered important. Fundraising effort was strongly predictive of the amount donated in an area. Our model estimated a doubling of funds raised with a 5-fold increase of effort. Conservation organizations could use our statistical framework to inform efforts aimed at increasing philanthropic giving by identifying locations with large model residuals. An example application of our framework showed an almost 40% increase (US$200 million) in fundraising revenue for the case-study conservation organization.

Crowdfunding biodiversity conservation

Raising funds is critical for conserving biodiversity and hence so is scrutinizing emerging financial mechanisms that may help achieve this goal. Anecdotal evidence indicates crowdfunding is being used to support activities needed for biodiversity conservation, yet its magnitude and allocation remain largely unknown. To help address this knowledge gap, we conducted a global analysis based on conservation-focused projects extracted from crowdfunding platforms. For each project, we determined the funds raised, date, country of implementation, proponent characteristics, activity type, biodiversity realm, and target taxa. We identified 72 relevant platforms and 577 conservation-focused projects that raised $4,790,634 since 2009. Although proponents were based in 38 countries, projects were delivered across 80 countries, indicating a potential mechanism of resource mobilization. Proponents were affiliated with nongovernmental organizations (35%) or universities (30%) or were freelancers (26%). Most projects were for research (40%), persuasion (31%), and on-the-ground actions (21%). Projects were more focused on species (57.7%) and terrestrial ecosystems (20.3%), and less focused on marine (8.8%) and freshwater ecosystems (3.6%). Projects focused on 208 species, including a disproportionate number of threatened birds and mammals. Crowdfunding for biodiversity conservation is a global phenomenon and there is potential for expansion, despite possible pitfalls (e.g., uncertainty about effectiveness). Opportunities to advance conservation through crowdfunding arise from its capacity to mobilize funds spatially and increase steadily over time, inclusion of overlooked species, adoption by multiple actors, and funding of activities beyond research. Our findings pave the way for further research on key questions, such as campaign success rates, effectiveness of conservation actions, and drivers of crowdfunding adoption. Even though crowdfunding capital raised has been modest relative to other conservation-finance mechanisms, its contribution goes beyond funding research and providing capital. Embraced with due care, crowdfunding could become an important financial mechanism for biodiversity conservation.

Waiting can be an optimal conservation strategy, even in a crisis discipline

Biodiversity conservation projects confront immediate and escalating threats with limited funding. Conservation theory suggests that the best response to the species extinction crisis is to spend money as soon as it becomes available, and this is often an explicit constraint placed on funding. We use a general dynamic model of a conservation landscape to show that this decision to "front-load" project spending can be suboptimal if a delay allows managers to use resources more strategically. Our model demonstrates the existence of temporal efficiencies in conservation management, which parallel the spatial efficiencies identified by systematic conservation planning. The optimal timing of decisions balances the rate of biodiversity decline (e.g., the relaxation of extinction debts, or the progress of climate change) against the rate at which spending appreciates in value (e.g., through interest, learning, or capacity building). We contrast the benefits of acting and waiting in two ecosystems where restoration can mitigate forest bird extinction debts: South Australia's Mount Lofty Ranges and Paraguay's Atlantic Forest. In both cases, conservation outcomes cannot be maximized by front-loading spending, and the optimal solution recommends substantial delays before managers undertake conservation actions. Surprisingly, these delays allow superior conservation benefits to be achieved, in less time than front-loading. Our analyses provide an intuitive and mechanistic rationale for strategic delay, which contrasts with the orthodoxy of front-loaded spending for conservation actions. Our results illustrate the conservation efficiencies that could be achieved if decision makers choose when to spend their limited resources, as opposed to just where to spend them.

The value of flexibility in conservation financing

Land-acquisition strategies employed by conservation organizations vary in their flexibility. Conservation-planning theory largely fails to reflect this by presenting models that are either extremely inflexible-parcel acquisitions are irreversible and budgets are fixed-or extremely flexible-previously acquired parcels can readily be sold. This latter approach, the selling of protected areas, is infeasible or problematic in many situations. We considered the value to conservation organizations of increasing the flexibility of their land-acquisition strategies through their approach to financing deals. Specifically, we modeled 2 acquisition-financing methods commonly used by conservation organizations: borrowing and budget carry-over. Using simulated data, we compared results from these models with those from an inflexible fixed-budget model and an extremely flexible selling model in which previous acquisitions could be sold to fund new acquisitions. We then examined 3 case studies of how conservation organizations use borrowing and budget carry-over in practice. Model comparisons showed that borrowing and budget carry-over always returned considerably higher rewards than the fixed-budget model. How they performed relative to the selling model depended on the relative conservation value of past acquisitions. Both the models and case studies showed that incorporating flexibility through borrowing or budget carry-over gives conservation organizations the ability to purchase parcels of higher conservation value than when budgets are fixed without the problems associated with the selling of protected areas.

Limitations of outsourcing on-the-ground biodiversity conservation

To counteract global species decline, modern biodiversity conservation engages in large projects, spends billions of dollars, and includes many organizations working simultaneously within regions. To add to this complexity, the conservation sector has hierarchical structure, where conservation actions are often outsourced by funders (foundations, government, etc.) to local organizations that work on-the-ground. In contrast, conservation science usually assumes that a single organization makes resource allocation decisions. This discrepancy calls for theory to understand how the expected biodiversity outcomes change when interactions between organizations are accounted for. Here, we used a game theoretic model to explore how biodiversity outcomes are affected by vertical and horizontal interactions between 3 conservation organizations: a funder that outsourced its actions and 2 local conservation organizations that work on-the-ground. Interactions between the organizations changed the spending decisions made by individual organizations, and thereby the magnitude and direction of the conservation benefits. We showed that funders would struggle to incentivize recipient organizations with set priorities to perform desired actions, even when they control substantial amounts of the funding and employ common contracting approaches to enhance outcomes. Instead, biodiversity outcomes depended on priority alignment across the organizations. Conservation outcomes for the funder were improved by strategic interactions when organizational priorities were well aligned, but decreased when priorities were misaligned. Meanwhile, local organizations had improved outcomes regardless of alignment due to additional funding in the system. Given that conservation often involves the aggregate actions of multiple organizations with different objectives, strategic interactions between organizations need to be considered if we are to predict possible outcomes of conservation programs or costs of achieving conservation targets.