RMIT University
Browse

Spending to save: What will it cost to halt Australia's extinction crisis?

journal contribution
posted on 2024-11-02, 10:42 authored by Brendan Wintle, Natasha Cadenhead, Rachel Morgain, Sarah Legge, Sarah Bekessy, Matthew Cantele, Hugh Possingham, James Watson, Martine Maron, David Keith, Stephen Garnett, John Woinarski, David Lindenmayer
Conservation Letters published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. As with most governments worldwide, Australian governments list threatened species and proffer commitments to recovering them. Yet most of Australia's imperiled species continue to decline or go extinct and a contributing cause is inadequate investment in conservation management. However, this has been difficult to evaluate because the extent of funding committed to such recovery in Australia, like in many nations, is opaque. Here, by collating disparate published budget figures of Australian governments, we show that annual spending on targeted threatened species recovery is around U.S.$92m (AU$122m) which is around one tenth of that spent by the U.S. endangered species recovery program, and about 15% of what is needed to avoid extinctions and recover threatened species. Our approach to estimating funding needs for species recovery could be applied in any jurisdiction and could be scaled up to calculate what is needed to achieve international goals for ending the species extinction crisis.

Funding

Assimilating development objectives in conservation planning

Australian Research Council

Find out more...

Surrogate ecology: when and where can it work to improve environmental management? New empirical analyses and new ecological theory will be used to discover where, when and how to best apply surrogates

Australian Research Council

Find out more...

Socio-ecological models for environmental decision making

Australian Research Council

Find out more...

Improving the potential of biodiversity offsetting to reconcile development and conservation: will good environmental outcomes counterbalance the bad? Attempts to reduce conflict between development and conservation are increasingly reliant upon environmental offsetting: generating an environmental benefit to compensate for environmental damage elsewhere

Australian Research Council

Find out more...

Resolving human-flying fox conflict in the face of environmental change

Australian Research Council

Find out more...

History

Related Materials

  1. 1.
    DOI - Is published in 10.1111/conl.12682
  2. 2.
    ISSN - Is published in 1755263X

Journal

Conservation Letters

Volume

12

Number

e12682

Issue

6

Start page

7

End page

7

Total pages

1

Publisher

Wiley-Blackwell

Place published

United Kingdom

Language

English

Copyright

© 2019 The Authors. Conservation Letters published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Former Identifier

2006096041

Esploro creation date

2020-06-22

Fedora creation date

2020-04-09

Usage metrics

    Scholarly Works

    Exports

    RefWorks
    BibTeX
    Ref. manager
    Endnote
    DataCite
    NLM
    DC