[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v38y2018i5p1009-1035.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluation of Two Approaches to Defining Extinction Risk under the U.S. Endangered Species Act

Author

Listed:
  • Grant G. Thompson
  • Lynn A. Maguire
  • Tracey J. Regan
Abstract
The predominant definition of extinction risk in conservation biology involves evaluating the cumulative distribution function (CDF) of extinction time at a particular point (the “time horizon”). Using the principles of decision theory, this article develops an alternative definition of extinction risk as the expected loss (EL) to society resulting from eventual extinction of a species. Distinct roles are identified for time preference and risk aversion. Ranges of tentative values for the parameters of the two approaches are proposed, and the performances of the two approaches are compared and contrasted for a small set of real‐world species with published extinction time distributions and a large set of hypothetical extinction time distributions. Potential issues with each approach are evaluated, and the EL approach is recommended as the better of the two. The CDF approach suffers from the fact that extinctions that occur at any time before the specified time horizon are weighted equally, while extinctions that occur beyond the specified time horizon receive no weight at all. It also suffers from the fact that the time horizon does not correspond to any natural phenomenon, and so is impossible to specify nonarbitrarily; yet the results can depend critically on the specified value. In contrast, the EL approach has the advantage of weighting extinction time continuously, with no artificial time horizon, and the parameters of the approach (the rates of time preference and risk aversion) do correspond to natural phenomena, and so can be specified nonarbitrarily.

Suggested Citation

  • Grant G. Thompson & Lynn A. Maguire & Tracey J. Regan, 2018. "Evaluation of Two Approaches to Defining Extinction Risk under the U.S. Endangered Species Act," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(5), pages 1009-1035, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:38:y:2018:i:5:p:1009-1035
    DOI: 10.1111/risa.12927
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.12927
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/risa.12927?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Manel Baucells & Rakesh Sarin, 2007. "Evaluating Time Streams of Income: Discounting What?," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 63(2), pages 95-120, September.
    2. Martin L. Weitzman, 2001. "Gamma Discounting," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(1), pages 260-271, March.
    3. Kassar, Ilhem & Lasserre, Pierre, 2004. "Species preservation and biodiversity value: a real options approach," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 857-879, September.
    4. Chad Settle & Jason E Shogren, 2002. "Modeling Native-Exotic Species within Yellowstone Lake," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 84(5), pages 1323-1328.
    5. Harry Markowitz, 1952. "The Utility of Wealth," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 60(2), pages 151-151.
    6. Levhari, David & Mirman, Leonard J, 1977. "Savings and Consumption with an Uncertain Horizon," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 85(2), pages 265-281, April.
    7. Menahem E. Yaari, 1965. "Uncertain Lifetime, Life Insurance, and the Theory of the Consumer," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 32(2), pages 137-150.
    8. Harald Ibrekk & M. Granger Morgan, 1987. "Graphical Communication of Uncertain Quantities to Nontechnical People," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 7(4), pages 519-529, December.
    9. David S. Brookshire & Larry S. Eubanks & Alan Randall, 1983. "Estimating Option Prices and Existence Values for Wildlife Resources," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 59(1), pages 1-15.
    10. Lopes, Paula & Michaelides, Alexander, 2007. "Rare events and annuity market participation," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 4(2), pages 82-91, June.
    11. Robin Gregory & Nathan Dieckmann & Ellen Peters & Lee Failing & Graham Long & Martin Tusler, 2012. "Deliberative Disjunction: Expert and Public Understanding of Outcome Uncertainty," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(12), pages 2071-2083, December.
    12. Nathan F. Dieckmann & Ellen Peters & Robin Gregory, 2015. "At Home on the Range? Lay Interpretations of Numerical Uncertainty Ranges," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(7), pages 1281-1295, July.
    13. Anders Skonhoft, 1999. "On the Optimal Exploitation of Terrestrial Animal Species," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 13(1), pages 45-57, January.
    14. Eiswerth, Mark E. & Haney, J. Christopher, 2001. "Maximizing conserved biodiversity: why ecosystem indicators and thresholds matter," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 259-274, August.
    15. Milton C. Weinstein & Richard J. Zeckhauser, 1975. "The Optimal Consumption of Depletable Natural Resources," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 89(3), pages 371-392.
    16. Erwin Bulte & G. van Kooten, 1999. "Marginal Valuation of Charismatic Species: Implications for Conservation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 14(1), pages 119-130, July.
    17. James E. Smith, 1998. "Evaluating Income Streams: A Decision Analysis Approach," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 44(12-Part-1), pages 1690-1708, December.
    18. Ronald L. Wasserstein & Nicole A. Lazar, 2016. "The ASA's Statement on p -Values: Context, Process, and Purpose," The American Statistician, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 70(2), pages 129-133, May.
    19. Lev R. Ginzburg & Lawrence B. Slobodkin & Keith Johnson & Andrew G. Bindman, 1982. "Quasiextinction Probabilities as a Measure of Impact on Population Growth," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 2(3), pages 171-181, September.
    20. V. Kerry Smith & John V. Krutilla, 1979. "Endangered Species, Irreversibilities, and Uncertainty: A Comment," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 61(2), pages 371-375.
    21. Denise L. Stanley, 2005. "Local Perception of Public Goods: Recent Assessments of Willingness‐to‐pay for Endangered Species," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 23(2), pages 165-179, April.
    22. Paul A. Samuelson, 1937. "A Note on Measurement of Utility," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 4(2), pages 155-161.
    23. Burton A. Weisbrod, 1964. "Collective-Consumption Services of Individual-Consumption Goods," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 78(3), pages 471-477.
    24. Monya Baker, 2012. "On the edge," Nature, Nature, vol. 485(7400), pages 672-672, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Drouhin, Nicolas, 2015. "A rank-dependent utility model of uncertain lifetime," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 208-224.
    2. Lovric, M. & Kaymak, U. & Spronk, J., 2008. "A Conceptual Model of Investor Behavior," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2008-030-F&A, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    3. Joan Costa-Font & Cristina Vilaplana-Prieto, 2022. "Biased survival expectations and behaviours: Does domain specific information matter?," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 65(3), pages 285-317, December.
    4. Hansen, Anders Chr., 2006. "Do declining discount rates lead to time inconsistent economic advice?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(1), pages 138-144, November.
    5. Huang, H. & Milevsky, M.A. & Salisbury, T.S., 2017. "Retirement spending and biological age," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 58-76.
    6. Gahramanov, Emin, 2013. "Survival misperception, time inconsistency, and implications for life-cycle saving and welfare," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 539-550.
    7. Eppink, Florian V. & van den Bergh, Jeroen C.J.M., 2007. "Ecological theories and indicators in economic models of biodiversity loss and conservation: A critical review," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(2-3), pages 284-293, March.
    8. Post, Thomas, 2009. "Individual welfare gains from deferred life-annuities under stochastic Lee-Carter mortality," SFB 649 Discussion Papers 2009-022, Humboldt University Berlin, Collaborative Research Center 649: Economic Risk.
    9. Drouhin, Nicolas, 2020. "Non-stationary additive utility and time consistency," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 1-14.
    10. Antoine Bommier & Daniel Harenberg & François Le Grand & Cormac O'Dea, 2020. "Recursive Preferences, the Value of Life, and Household Finance," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 2231, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    11. Dorian Jullien, 2018. "Under Risk, Over Time, Regarding Other People: Language and Rationality within Three Dimensions," Research in the History of Economic Thought and Methodology, in: Including a Symposium on Latin American Monetary Thought: Two Centuries in Search of Originality, volume 36, pages 119-155, Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
    12. Huang, Huaxiong & Milevsky, Moshe A. & Salisbury, Thomas S., 2012. "Optimal retirement consumption with a stochastic force of mortality," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(2), pages 282-291.
    13. Gonzalo Edwards, 2003. "The effect of a constant or a declining discount rate on optimal investment timing," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(10), pages 657-659.
    14. Costello, Christopher & Ward, Michael, 2006. "Search, bioprospecting and biodiversity conservation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 52(3), pages 615-626, November.
    15. Glenn C. Loury, 1978. "The Optimal Exploitation of an Unknown Reserve," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 45(3), pages 621-636.
    16. de-Paz, Albert & Marín-Solano, Jesús & Navas, Jorge & Roch, Oriol, 2014. "Consumption, investment and life insurance strategies with heterogeneous discounting," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 66-75.
    17. Yoram Halevy, 2004. "Diminishing Impatience: Disentangling Time Preference from Uncertain Lifetime," Levine's Bibliography 122247000000000185, UCLA Department of Economics.
    18. Jacobs Martin, 2016. "Accounting for Changing Tastes: Approaches to Explaining Unstable Individual Preferences," Review of Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 67(2), pages 121-183, August.
    19. HILDEBRAND Vincent, 2001. "Wealth Accumulation of US Households: What do we learn from the SIPP data?," IRISS Working Paper Series 2001-01, IRISS at CEPS/INSTEAD.
    20. repec:cup:judgdm:v:16:y:2021:i:6:p:1324-1369 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Gary Hansen & Selahattin Imrohoroglu, 2008. "Consumption over the Life Cycle: The Role of Annuities," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 11(3), pages 566-583, July.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:38:y:2018:i:5:p:1009-1035. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1539-6924 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.