Economics and Conservation in the Tropics: Conference Synthesis Note

This note summarizes the results of the meeting, " Economics and Conservation in the Tropics: A Strategic Dialogue, " held in San Francisco, January 31–February 1, 2008, and organized by the Conservation Strategy Fund, Resources for the Future, and the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation. At the meeting, experts (see Annex 1) were asked to discuss the role of economic analysis as a tool to achieve conservation in developing countries. Ideas advanced can be grouped under three broad themes. 1) Conservation economists should do more than valuation. Economic analysis should be used for more than calculating the " total economic value " of conserving ecosystems. Valuation is a means to an end (better decision making), rather than an end in itself, and should be tied clearly to real-world conservation policy and management issues. Further, placing a total monetary value on nature conservation is often methodologically impractical. Meeting participants emphasized the value of other sorts of strategic economic studies to identify:-distributional impacts of conservation actions,-low-cost conservation interventions,-opportunities for ecosystem service payments, and-costs and benefits of high-impact development projects. 2) Deploying conservation economics in the field involves more than payment for ecosystem services (PES) schemes. PES is one kind of policy intervention that has captured the attention of many conservation organizations. Economic analysis may recommend a PES scheme, some other incentive-based instrument (pollution/development tax), or a command-and-control or education-based intervention. Conference presentations suggested that green subsidies, with a single government or private " buyer, " have far better chances for success than true markets (e.g., tradable deforestation permits) for most ecosystem services, with the possible exception of carbon. Participants' level of optimism for PES varied widely. Whatever policy or conservation project is attempted, it needs to be supported by locally generated research, received by local policy makers with a strong grasp of its economic rationale, 2 and administered by professionals also familiar with economic principles. Because economic analysis often seeks to capture very local benefits and costs, it cannot be effectively handled by generic models or far-off experts. The development of local expertise and capabilities is fundamental. Conference participants supported several academic and professional development approaches. Finally, participants noted the need to communicate economic information more clearly, both within conservation organizations and to outside audiences. 3) Conservation economics methods need improvement in a few key areas.-More " scientific evaluation " is needed to determine which interventions actually further environmental and/or sustainable development …