Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Cost benefit analysis of conservation efforts to preserve an endangered species: The Griffon Vulture (Gyps fulvus) in Israel

  • Published:
Journal of Bioeconomics Aims and scope

Abstract

The major goal of this study was to determine whether protective measures in the case of the Eurasian Griffon Vulture are in accordance with public priorities. To this end we used the Travel Cost (TCM) and Contingent Valuation Methods (CVM) to estimate its value. We also determined the break even point in the allocation of funds targeted to protection at the regional level and performed a cost-benefit analysis of conservation efforts on a national level in Israel. The value of the marginal vulture was found to be approximately 34,000 NIS at Gamla and 316,000 NIS at Hai-Bar Nature Reserves. The economic efficiency of feeding stations was examined from two aspects: At the regional level, the break-even point for a feeding station to be efficient was 0.24 and 2.20 vultures per year for the Hai-Bar and Gamla NRs respectively. At the national level, in most cases, the national project to save vultures, ‘Porsim Kanaf’ (‘Porsim Kanaf’ is the national birds of prey conservation project in Israel) passes a Cost-Benefit test based on the valuation results.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Arrow K., Solow R., Portney P.R., Leamer E., Radner R., Shuman H. (1993) Report of the NOAA Panel on Contingent Valuation. Federal Register 58: 4601–4614

    Google Scholar 

  • Bahat, O. (1995). Physiological adaptations and foraging ecology of an obligatory carrion eater—the Griffon Vulture (Gyps fulvus). Ph.D. Dissertation, Tel-Aviv University, Tel-Aviv.

  • Bahat, O., Hatzofe, O., Perevolotsky, A. (2002). `Porsim Kanaf’—protecting the vultures and raptors. A report for the first five years, 1996-2001. Israel Nature and Parks Authority, The Society for the protection of Nature in Israel and Israel Electric Company (in Hebrew).

  • Bateman I. J., Carson R. T., Day B., Hanemann M., Hanley N., Hett T., Jones-Lee M., Loomes G., Mourato S., Ozdemiroglu E., Peaece D. W., Sugden R., Swanson J. (2002) Economic valuation in stated preference techniques: A manual. Edward Elgar publishing, Cheltnham

    Google Scholar 

  • Ben-noon, G., Eshed, O., Court, L., Hatzofe, O., & Bahat, O. (2003). Calcium provision to Griffon Vulture chicks as part of a management scheme implemented at Gamla Nature Reserve. In Abstract of Presentations, 6th World Conference on Birds of Prey and Owls, Budapest, Hungary, May 2003.

  • Blaine T. W., Lichtkoppler F. R., Jonesand K. R., Zondag R. H. (2005) An assessment of household willingness to pay for curbside recycling: A comparison of payment card and referendum approaches. Journal of Environmental Management 76(1): 15–22

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown G. Jr. (1993) The viewing value of elephants. In: Barbier E. B. (eds) Economics and ecology. Chapman and Hall publishing, London, pp 146–155

    Google Scholar 

  • Bulte E., Van Kooten G. C. (1999) Marginal valuation of charismatic species: Implications for conservation. Environmental and Resource Economics 14(1): 119–130

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Butchart D. (1988) Give a bird a bone. African Wildlife 42: 316–322

    Google Scholar 

  • Cameron T. A. (1992) Combining contingent valuation and travel cost data for the valuation of non-market good. Land Economics 68(3): 302–317

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cameron T. A., Huppert D. D. (1989) OLS vs. ML estimation of non market resource values with payment card interval data. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 17(3): 230–246

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carson R. T., Flores N. E., Martin K. M., Wright J. L. (1996) Contingent valuation and revealed preference methodologies: Comparing the estimates for quasi-public goods. Land Economics 72: 80–99

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cesario F. J. (1978) Value of time in recreation benefits studies. Land Economics 52(1): 32–41

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cramp, S., Simmons, K. E. L. (eds) (1980) Handbook of the birds of Europe, the Middle East and north Africa: The birds of the Western Palearctic. Vol. 2: Hawks to bustards. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Diamond P. A., Hausman J. A. (1994) Contingent valuation: Is some number better than no number?. Journal of Economic Perspectives 8(1): 45–64

    Google Scholar 

  • Dolev, A., & Perevolotsky, A. (Eds.) (2002). Endangered species in Israel, Red List of Threatened Animals, vertebrates. Israel: Nature and Parks Authority and the Society for the Preservation of Nature (in Hebrew).

  • Gonzalez-Caban, A, Loomis, J. B., Griffin, D., Wu, E., McCulum, D., McKeever, J., & Freeman, D. (2003). Economic value of big game habitat production from natural and prescribed fire. Research Paper PSW-RP-249. USDA Forest Service, Pacific South West Research Station.

  • Halstead J. M., Luloff A. E., Stevens T. H. (1992) Protest bidders in contingent valuation. Agricultural and Resource Economic Review 21(2): 160–169

    Google Scholar 

  • Hammit J. K., Graham J. D. (1999) Willingness to pay for health protection: Inadequate sensitivity to probability?. Journal of risk and uncertainty 8: 33–62

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hatzofe, O. (2003). Financial report. Israel Nature and Parks Authority. Inner document (in Hebrew).

  • Houston D. C. (1978) The effect of food quality on breeding strategy in Griffon Vultures. Journal of Zoology 186: 175–184

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jakobsson K. M., Dragun A. K. (2001) The worth of a Possum: Valuing species with the contingent valuation method. Environmental and Resource Economics 19: 211–227

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman D., Knetsch J. L. (1992) Valuing public goods: The purchase of moral satisfaction. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 22(1): 57–70

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman D., Knetch J. L., Thaler R. H. (1991) Anomalies: The endownment effect, loss aversion, and status quo bias. Journal of Economic Perspectives 5(1): 193–206

    Google Scholar 

  • Kontoleon A., Swanson T. (2003) The WTP for property rights for the Giant Panda: Can a charismatic species be an instrument for conservation of natural habitat?. Land Economics 79: 483–499

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lehman R. N., Ansel A. R., Garret M. G., Miller A. D., Olendorff R. R. (1999) Suggested practices for Raptor protection on power lines: The American story. In: Ferrer M., Janss G. F. E. (eds) Birds and power lines. Quercus, Madrid, pp 125–144

    Google Scholar 

  • Loomis J. B. (1987) Balancing public trust resources of Mono Lake and Los Angeles’ water right: An economic approach. Water Resource Research 23(4): 1149–1456

    Google Scholar 

  • Mendelssohn H. (1972) The impact of pesticieds on bird life in Israel. ICBP Bulletin 11: 75–104

    Google Scholar 

  • Mendelssohn H., Leshem Y. (1983) The status and conservation of vultures in Israel. In: Wilbur S. R., Jackson J. A. (eds) Vulture biology and management. University of California Press, Berkeley, pp 86–98

    Google Scholar 

  • Mundy P., Butchart D., Ledger J., Piper S. (1992) The vultures of Africa. Accorn books and Russel Friedman books, Randburg, South Africa

    Google Scholar 

  • Navrud S., Mungatana E. D. (1994) Environmental valuation in developing countries: The recreational value of wildlife viewing. Ecological Economics 11(1): 135–151

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richardson P. R. K., Mundy P. J., Plug I. (1986) Bone crushing carnivores and their significance to osteodystrophy in Griffon Vulture chicks. Journal of Zoology, Series A 210(15): 23–43

    Google Scholar 

  • Ryan M., Scott D. A., Donaldson C. (2004) Valuing health care using willingness to pay: A comparison of the payment card and dichotomous choice. Journal of Health Economics 23(2): 237–258

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shechter M., Reiser B., Zaitzev N. (1998) Measuring passive use value. Environmental and Resource Economics 12(3): 457–478

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shlosberg, A. (2001). Toxicological risks of raptors in Israel. In A. Shlosberg & O. Bahat (Eds.), Proceedings on an International Workshop on the Risk of Toxicoses from Pesticides and Pollutants in Raptors and Wildlife in Israel—The Present Situation and Recommendations for the Future (pp. 8–30). Jerusalem Biblical Zoo, Israel, SPNI, Tel-Aviv.

  • Smith V. K., Zhang X., Palmquist R. B. (1999) Marine debris beach quality and non-market values. Environmental and Resource Economics 10(2): 223–247

    Google Scholar 

  • Terrasse J. F. (1985) The effects of artificial feeding on Griffon, Bearded and Egyptian Vultures in the Pyrenees. In: Newton I., Chancellor R. D. (eds) Conservation studies on raptors.. Pastom Press, Norwich, pp 429–430

    Google Scholar 

  • Tristram H. B. (1885) The fauna and flora of Palestine. Palestine Exploration Fund, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Vlachos C. G., Bakaloudis D. E., Holloway G. J. (1999) Population trends of Black Vulture, Aegypius monachus, in Dadia Forest, north eastern Greece following the establishment of a feeding station. Bird Conservation International 9(1): 113–118

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ward F., Beal D. (2000) Valuing nature with travel cost models. E. Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, UK

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilbur U. S., Sanford R., Carrier W. D., Borneman J. C. (1974) Supplemental feeding program for California Condor. Journal of Wildlife Management 38(1): 343–346

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Economics and Management, Tel-Hai College, 12210, Upper Galilee, Israel

    Nir Becker

  2. Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Management, University of Haifa, 31905, Haifa, Israel

    Yael Choresh

  3. Department of Environmental Sciences and Chemistry, University of Indianapolis, Mar Elias Campus, 30012, Ibillin, Israel

    Ofer Bahat

  4. Department of Evolutionary and Environmental Biology, University of Haifa, 31905, Haifa, Israel

    Moshe Inbar

Authors
  1. Nir Becker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yael Choresh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ofer Bahat
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Moshe Inbar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nir Becker.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Becker, N., Choresh, Y., Bahat, O. et al. Cost benefit analysis of conservation efforts to preserve an endangered species: The Griffon Vulture (Gyps fulvus) in Israel. J Bioecon 12, 55–70 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10818-010-9077-6

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10818-010-9077-6

Keywords

JEL Classification

Search

Navigation