4.5 Article

National Valuation of Monarch Butterflies Indicates an Untapped Potential for Incentive-Based Conservation

Journal

CONSERVATION LETTERS
Volume 7, Issue 3, Pages 253-262

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/conl.12065

Keywords

Conservation planning; contingent valuation; ecosystem services; Danaus plexippus; migration; monarch; willingness to pay

Funding

  1. John Wesley Powell Center for Analysis and Synthesis - U.S. Geological Survey
  2. Division Of Environmental Biology
  3. Direct For Biological Sciences [1118975] Funding Source: National Science Foundation
  4. Div Of Biological Infrastructure
  5. Direct For Biological Sciences [1147049] Funding Source: National Science Foundation
  6. Div Of Biological Infrastructure
  7. Direct For Biological Sciences [1052875, 1639145] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The annual migration of monarch butterflies (Danaus plexippus) has high cultural value and recent surveys indicate monarch populations are declining. Protecting migratory species is complex because they cross international borders and depend on multiple regions. Understanding how much, and where, humans place value on migratory species can facilitate market-based conservation approaches. We performed a contingent valuation study of monarchs to understand the potential for such approaches to fund monarch conservation. The survey asked U.S. respondents about the money they would spend, or have spent, growing monarch-friendly plants, and the amount they would donate to monarch conservation organizations. Combining planting payments and donations, the survey indicated U.S. households valued monarchs as a total one-time payment of $4.78-$6.64 billion, levels similar to many endangered vertebrate species. The financial contribution of even a small percentage of households through purchases or donations could generate new funding for monarch conservation through market-based approaches.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available