Comparison of funding and demand for the conservation of the charismatic koala with those for the critically endangered wombat Lasiorhinus krefftii



This study contrasts the actual conservation spending and the Australian public’s demand for conservation funding for two Australian mammal species, the koala and the northern hairy-nosed wombat. It involves a survey of 204 members of the Australian public. Willingness to fund conservation action to protect the northern hairy-nosed wombat was found to be higher than that for the koala despite the koala’s immense popularity. The critically endangered status of the northern-hairy nosed wombat and the more secure conservation status of the koala is a factor likely to have influenced the comparative willingness-to-pay decisions. Actual annual conservation expenditure for both species is lower than the estimated aggregate willingness-to-pay for their conservation. Furthermore, conservation funding for the koala is much more than that for the northern hairy-nosed wombat even though the estimated public willingness-to-pay (demand) for funding koala conservation was less than for this wombat species. Reasons for this are suggested. They may also help to explain misalignment between demand for conservation funding of other species involving differences in charisma and endangerment.


Charismatic fauna Conservation demand Conservation funding Contingent valuation Endangerment Koala Lasiorhinus krefftii Northern hairy-nosed wombat Phascolarctos cinereus 



Willingness to pay


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Archer M. (1965). Rossetti and the Wombat. Apollo, MarchGoogle Scholar
  2. Australian Broadcasting Corporation. 2005. The Muddle-Headed Wombat. Available from: [Accessed 18 February 2005].Google Scholar
  3. Australian Bureau of Statistics. 2002. 2001 Census Basic Community Profile and Snapshot: 305 Brisbane (Statistical Division). Available from:!OpenDocument [Accessed 18 April 2005].Google Scholar
  4. Australian Bureau of Statistics. 2004a. Population by age and sex, Australian states and territories: Table 3. Estimated Resident Population By Single Year Of AgeQueensland (June 2004). Available from: 17ca25688d00098cc0?opendocument [Accessed 18 April 2005].Google Scholar
  5. Australian Bureau of Statistics. 2004b. Population by age and sex, Australian states and territories: Table 9. Estimated Resident Population By Single Year Of AgeAustralia (June 2004). Available from: d00099381?opendocument [Accessed 18 April 2005].Google Scholar
  6. Australian Geographic. 2005. Wombat numbers drop. Australian Geographic 78: 12.Google Scholar
  7. Australian Koala Foundation. Undated. Profile - AKF. Available from: [Accessed 15 February 2005].Google Scholar
  8. Bandara R. and Tisdell C.A. (2005). Changing abundance of elephants and willingness to pay for their conservation. J. Environ. Manage. 76: 47–59PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Banks S.C., Hoyle S.D., Horsup A., Sunnucks P. and Taylor A.C. (2003). Demographic monitoring of an entire species (the northern hairy-nosed wombatLasiorhinus krefftii) by genetic analysis of non-invasively collected material. Anim. Conserv. 6: 101–107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bateman I.J., Carson R., Day B., Hanemann M., Hanley N., Hett T., Jones-Lee M., Loomes G., Mourato S., Özdemiroglu E., Pearce D.W., Sugden R. and Swanson J. (2002). Economic Valuation with Stated Preference Techniques: A Manual. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UKGoogle Scholar
  11. Bateman I.J., Langford I.H., Nishikawa N. and Lake I. (2000). The Axford debate revisited: a case study illustrating different approaches to the aggregation of benefits data. J. Environ. Planning Manage. 43: 291–302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Baumol W.J. and Quandt R.E. (1964). Rules of thumb and optimally imperfect decisions. Am. Econ. Rev. 54: 23–46Google Scholar
  13. Bishop R.C. and Heberlein T.A. (1990). The contingent valuation method. In: Johnson, R.L. and Johnson, G.V. (eds) Economic Valuation of Natural Resources: Issues, Theory and Applications, pp 81–104. Westview, Boulder, ColoradoGoogle Scholar
  14. Buchanan R. 1996. Survival of the Cutest. The Politics of being an Endangered Species. The Age, April 27, Extra 1–2.Google Scholar
  15. Caro T.M. (2003). Umbrella species: critique and lessons from East Africa. Animal Conservation 6: 171–181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. (2003). A Primer on Nonmarket Valuation. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  17. Clark J.A. and May R.M. (2002). Taxonomic bias in conservation research. Science 297: 191–192PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Cork S.J., Clark T.W. and Mazur N. (2000). Introduction: an interdisciplinary effort for koala conservation. Conserv. Biol. 14: 606–609CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. DeKay M.L. and McClelland G.H. (1996). Probability and utility components of endangered species preservation programs. J. Exp. Psychol. Appl. 2: 60–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Finnie T. (1990). The role of zoos in the conservation of koalas. In: Lunney, D., Urquhart, C.A. and Reed, P. (eds) Koala Summit – Managing Koalas in New South Wales, pp 109. New South Wales National Parks and Wildlife Service, Hurstville, SydneyGoogle Scholar
  21. French J. and Whatley B. (2003). Diary of a Wombat. Clarion Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  22. Gould S.J. (1980). A Biological Homage to Mickey Mouse. Penguin Books, Hammondsworth, Middlesex, United KingdomGoogle Scholar
  23. Gunnthorsdottir A. (2001). Physical attractiveness of an animal species as a decision factor for its preservation. Anthrozoös 14: 204–216Google Scholar
  24. Hadker N., Sharma S., David A. and Muraleedharan T.R. (1997). Willingness to pay for Boriuli National Park: evidence form contingent valuation. Ecol. Econ. 21: 105–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hindell M.A. and Lee A.K. (1990). Tree preferences of the koala. In: Lee, A.K., Handasyde, K.A. and Sanson, G.D. (eds) Biology of the Koala, pp 117–121. Surrey Beatty & Sons, SydneyGoogle Scholar
  26. Horsup A. (1999). Recovery Plan for the Northern Hairy-nosed Wombat (Lasiorhinus krefftii) 1998–2002. Queensland Parks and Wildlife Service, Brisbane, QueenslandGoogle Scholar
  27. Hundloe T. and Hamilton C. 1997. Koala and Tourism: An Economic Valuation. Discussion Paper No. 13. The Australia Institute, Lyneham, Australian Capital Territory.Google Scholar
  28. IUCN. 2004. IUCN Red List of Endangered Species. Available from: [Accessed 10 February 2005].Google Scholar
  29. Jackson S.M. (2001). Koalas. In: Bell, C. (eds) Encyclopedia of the World’s Zoo, pp 687–690. Fitzroy Dearborn, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  30. Jackson S. (2003). Wombats. In: Jackson, S. (eds) Australian Mammals: Biology and Captive Management, pp 183–204. CSIRO Publishing, Collingwood, Victoria, AustraliaGoogle Scholar
  31. Jackson S., Reid K., Spittal D. and Romer L. (2003). Koalas. In: Jackson, S. (eds) Australian Mammals: Biology and Captive Management, pp 145–182. CSIRO Publishing, Collingwood, Victoria, AustraliaGoogle Scholar
  32. Kellert S.R. (1980). American attitudes toward and knowledge of animals: an update. Int. J. Study Anim. Problems 1: 87–119Google Scholar
  33. Lee A.K. and Martin R. (1988). The Koala – A Natural History. New South Wales University Press, SydneyGoogle Scholar
  34. Lees C. and Johnson K. (2002). Australasian Species Management Program: Regional Census and Plan. Australasian Regional Association of Zoological Parks and Aquaria, SydneyGoogle Scholar
  35. Lindsay N. (1936). The Magic Pudding: Being the Adventures of Bunyip Bluegum and his Friends Bill Barnacle and Sam Sawnoff. Farrar & Rinehart, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  36. Loomis J.B. and Ekstrand E. (1998). Alternative approaches for incorporating respondent uncertainty when estimating willingness to pay: the case of the Mexican spotted owl. Ecol. Econ. 27: 29–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Loomis J.B., Kent P., Strange L., Fausch K. and Covich A. (2000). Measuring the total economic value of restoring ecosystem service in an impaired river basin from a contingent valuation survey. Ecol. Econ. 33: 103–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Lorenz K. (1970). Studies in Animal and Human BehaviorVol. 2 [translated from German by Robert Martin]. Methuen & Co. Ltd, LondonGoogle Scholar
  39. Martin R. and Handasyde K. (1995). Family Phascolarctidae: koala. In: Strahan, R. (eds) The Mammals of Australia, pp 195–198. Reed Books, Chatswood, New South WalesGoogle Scholar
  40. Martin R. and Handasyde K. (1999). The Koala: Natural History, Conservation and Management. UNSW Press, SydneyGoogle Scholar
  41. Maxwell S., Burbidge A.A. and Morris K. 1996. The 1996 Action Plan for Australian Marsupials and Monotremes. Project 500, for the IUCN/SSC Australasian Marsupial and Monotreme Specialist Group of the World Conservation Union/Species Survival Commission. Endangered Species Program, Environment Australia, Canberra.Google Scholar
  42. May R.M. (2002). The future of biological diversity in a crowded world. Curr. Sci. 82: 1325–1331Google Scholar
  43. (2001). The New Encyclopedia of Mammals. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  44. McGann J.J.(eds.) 2000. The Complete Writings and Pictures of Dante Gabriel Rossetti: A Hypermedia Research Archive. Institute for Advanced Technology in the Humanities, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia. Available from: [Accessed 10 February 2005].Google Scholar
  45. Melzer A., Carrick F., Menkhorst P., Lunney D. and St. John B. (2000). Overview, critical assessmentand conservation implications of koala distribution and abundance. Conserv. Biol. 14: 619–628CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Menkhorst P. and Knight F. (2004). A Field Guide to the Mammals of Australia. Oxford University Press, South Melbourne, AustraliaGoogle Scholar
  47. Metrick A. and Weitzman M.L. (1996). Patterns of behaviour in endangered species preservation. Land Econ. 72: 1–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Metrick A. and Weitzman M.L. (1998). Conflicts and choices in biodiversity preservation. J. Econ. Persp. 12: 21–34Google Scholar
  49. Naidoo R. and Adamowicz W.L. (2001). Effects of economic prosperity on numbers of threatened species. Conserv. Biol. 15: 1021–1029CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Nash O. (1954). Many Long Years Ago. Dent, LondonGoogle Scholar
  51. NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service 2003. Recovery Plan for the Koala (Phascolarctos cinereus) (Draft for Public Comment). NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service, Hurstville, NSW. Available from: [Accessed 11 February 2005].Google Scholar
  52. Park R. (1962). The Muddle-headed Wombat. Educational Press, SydneyGoogle Scholar
  53. Pearce D.W. and Moran D. (1994). Economic Value of Biodiversity. Earthscan Publications Ltd, LondonGoogle Scholar
  54. Phillips B. (1990). Koalas: The Little Australians We’d All Hate to Lose. Australian Government Publishing Service, CanberraGoogle Scholar
  55. Plous S. (1993). Psychological mechanisms in the human use of animals. J. Social Issues 49: 11–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Queensland Environmental Protection Agency. 2003. Public Supports Plan to Save Qld’s Koalas. EQ NewsletterIssue 21. Available from: [Accessed 22 February 2005].Google Scholar
  57. Roberge J. and Angelstam P. (2004). Usefulness of the umbrella species concept as a conservation tool. Conserv. Biol. 18: 76–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Samples K.C., Dixon J.A. and Gowen M.M. (1986). Information disclosure and endangered species valuation. Land Econ. 62: 306–312CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Stein B.A., Master L.L. and Morse L.E. (2002). Taxonomic bias and vulnerable species. Science 297: 1807Google Scholar
  60. The University of Queensland. 2005. UQ News Online: State-of-the-art Koala Venture. Available from: [Accessed 28 February 2005].Google Scholar
  61. Tisdell C.A. (1982). Microeconomics of Markets. John Wiley & Sons, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  62. Tisdell C.A. (1996). Bounded Rationality and Economic Evolution. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UKGoogle Scholar
  63. Tisdell C.A. (2005). Economics of Environmental Conservation. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK and Northampton, MA, USAGoogle Scholar
  64. Tisdell C., Swarna Nantha H. and Wilson C. (in press). Endangerment and likeability of wildlife species: how important are they for proposed payments for conservation. Ecol. Econ.Google Scholar
  65. Tisdell C., Wilson C. and Swarna Nantha H. (2005). Policies for saving a rare Australian glider: economics and ecology. Biol. Conserv. 123: 237–248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Tkac J. (1998). The effects of information on willingness-to-pay values of endangered species. Am. J. Agri. Econ. 80: 1214–1220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Triggs B. (1996). The Wombat: Common Wombats in Australia. University of NSW Press, SydneyGoogle Scholar
  68. Trinca R. and Argent K. (1987). One Woolly Wombat. Kane/Miller Book Publishers, Brooklyn, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  69. Wall D. (1939). Complete Adventures of Blinky Bill: Containing Blinky Bill, Blinky Bill grows up, Blinky Bill and Nutsy. Angus and Robertson, SydneyGoogle Scholar
  70. Woodford J. (2002). The Secret Life of Wombats. Text Publishing, Melbourne, AustraliaGoogle Scholar
  71. Zar J.H. (1999). Biostatistical Analysis. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, New JerseyGoogle Scholar
  72. Zoological Society of San Diego. 2005. Animal Bytes: Koalas. Available from: [Accessed 28 February 2005].Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of EconomicsThe University of QueenslandBrisbaneAustralia

Personalised recommendations