Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Economics

Conservation in the red

Nature volume 492, pages 193–194 (2012)Cite this article

Subjects

The Convention on Biological Diversity has pledged to reduce species-extinction threats around the globe by 2020. Analysis shows that this goal is achievable but requires a significant increase in the current rate of investment.

International environmental agreements often contain lofty goals, but gathering the necessary resources and commitment to implement such agreements has proven far more difficult than signing them. Over recent decades, numerous target dates have passed with little or no progress made. Writing in Science, McCarthy et al.1 provide a financial assessment of the prospects for meeting the targets of the international Convention on Biological Diversity. The good news is that meeting the convention's goals for 2020 is achievable without breaking the bank — the authors' estimated costs to reduce the extinction risk for all globally threatened species is only about 0.1% of global gross domestic product. The bad news, however, is that this level of spending far outstrips the amount currently spent. If this financing gap continues, then these conservation targets will also remain unmet.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Rent or buy this article

Get just this article for as long as you need it

$39.95

Learn more

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1: Dollars for diversity.

JAMES LOWEN/FLPA

References

  1. McCarthy, D. P. et al. Science 338, 946–949 (2012).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. www.birdlife.org

  3. Butchart, S. H. M. et al. PLoS ONE 7, e32529 (2012).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Naidoo, R. & Iwamura, T. Biol. Conserv. 140, 40–49 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Nickerson, C. et al. Trends in US Farmland Values and Ownership (US Dept Agric., 2012).

    Google Scholar 

  6. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment: Ecosystems and Human Well-Being (Island Press, 2005).

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Stephen Polasky is in the Departments of Applied Economics and of Ecology, Evolution and Behavior, University of Minnesota, St Paul, Minnesota 55108, USA.,

    Stephen Polasky

Authors
  1. Stephen Polasky
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stephen Polasky.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Polasky, S. Conservation in the red. Nature 492, 193–194 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1038/492193a

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/492193a

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing