Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Optimizing allocation of management resources for wildlife.

Helene Marsh1, Andrew Dennis, Harry Hines

  • 1School of Tropical Environment Studies and Geography, James Cook University, Townsville, QLD 4811, Australia. helen.marsh@jcu.edu.au

Conservation Biology : the Journal of the Society for Conservation Biology
|March 30, 2007
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Cost-per-responder analysis of TAR-200 versus other Food and Drug Administration-approved novel and generic treatments among patients with Bacillus Calmette-Guérin-unresponsive, high-risk, non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer with carcinoma in situ in the United States.

Journal of medical economics·2026
Same author

Outcomes after transoral robotic surgery for laryngeal cancer: a database study.

Journal of robotic surgery·2025
Same author

Violence survivors' quality of life assessment: An observational cohort study.

Injury·2025
Same author

Vulnerability of marine megafauna to global at-sea anthropogenic threats.

Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology·2025
Same author

Performance of shock index, lactate and physician's gestalt in predicting adverse events among critically ill adult patients at an Emergency Department in Tanzania.

African journal of emergency medicine : Revue africaine de la medecine d'urgence·2025
Same author

A randomised controlled trial of short-term Intermittent Energy Restriction [IER] versus Continuous Energy Restriction [CER] on body fat stores and measures of insulin resistance in women with obesity at increased risk of breast cancer.

BMC nutrition·2025
Same journal

Insights from three decades of IUCN Red List assessments catalyzing shark, ray, and chimaera conservation.

Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology·2026
Same journal

Extreme site fidelity in long-distance migratory shorebirds in Australia and potential implications for conservation.

Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology·2026
Same journal

Debate, pluralism, and power in epistemological violence: Reply to Simpson et al. (2026).

Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology·2026
Same journal

When everything is violence, nothing is violence: Response to Koot et al. (2020).

Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology·2026
Same journal

Key agroecosystems for the conservation of amphibians and reptiles in Europe.

Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology·2026
Same journal

What climate adaptation can learn from evolutionary adaptation.

Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology·2026
See all related articles

Prioritizing species for conservation using only threat listings is inefficient. A new decision-support process incorporating ecological and social factors improves cost-effective wildlife management and extinction rate reduction.

Area of Science:

  • Conservation Biology
  • Wildlife Management
  • Ecology

Background:

  • Current species conservation funding often relies on threatened species listings, which may not be the most cost-effective approach.
  • Effective resource allocation for native wildlife management requires a more comprehensive strategy than solely relying on threat categories.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To develop and test a decision-support process for prioritizing species conservation funding.
  • To integrate ecological and social factors alongside threat categories for more strategic resource allocation.
  • To separate societal values from technical scientific input in conservation decision-making.

Main Methods:

  • A scoring system was designed using three criteria: threat category, extinction consequences, and recovery potential.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Policy makers and stakeholders weighted criteria importance, while scientists scored species.
  • The process was applied to Australian frog and mammal populations at different spatial scales.

    • Main Results:

    • The process identified 7 frog and 10 mammal species as conservation priorities across two case studies.
    • Priority species included those across various threat classifications, from endangered to least concern.
    • The methodology proved robust when comparing different taxonomic groups.

    Conclusions:

    • The developed process enables transparent, cost-effective, and strategic management decisions across diverse taxonomic groups.
    • This approach is recommended for short-listing species for conservation discussions, rather than direct resource allocation.