TY - JOUR
T1 - Determinants of cost-effectiveness in tender and offset programmes for australian biodiversity conservation
AU - Doole, Graeme
AU - Blackmore, Louise
AU - Schilizzi, Steven
PY - 2014
Y1 - 2014
N2 - Tender and offset programmes have been broadly applied for biodiversity conservation throughout Australia. This analysis identifies the relative importance of a range of factors that determine the overall cost-effectiveness of these programmes to guide future management, based on the perceptions of survey respondents with experience in their design and implementation. The novel method of maximum entropy regression for categorical response variables is used to analyse survey results. Key actions for tender programmes, in order of decreasing importance, are the: (a) provision of adequate funding, (b) development of flexible tender designs to aid organisational efficiency, (c) promotion of landholder competition, (d) identification of low-cost means of monitoring, and (e) establishment of strong relationships with landholders. In comparison, key actions for offset programmes, in decreasing order of importance, are the: (a) establishment of efficient organisational processes, (b) promotion of a short time lag between development and the restoration of ecological values, (c) employment of contracts of extended duration, (d) investment in landholder education and support, and (e) development of appropriate biophysical models. © 2013 Elsevier Ltd.
AB - Tender and offset programmes have been broadly applied for biodiversity conservation throughout Australia. This analysis identifies the relative importance of a range of factors that determine the overall cost-effectiveness of these programmes to guide future management, based on the perceptions of survey respondents with experience in their design and implementation. The novel method of maximum entropy regression for categorical response variables is used to analyse survey results. Key actions for tender programmes, in order of decreasing importance, are the: (a) provision of adequate funding, (b) development of flexible tender designs to aid organisational efficiency, (c) promotion of landholder competition, (d) identification of low-cost means of monitoring, and (e) establishment of strong relationships with landholders. In comparison, key actions for offset programmes, in decreasing order of importance, are the: (a) establishment of efficient organisational processes, (b) promotion of a short time lag between development and the restoration of ecological values, (c) employment of contracts of extended duration, (d) investment in landholder education and support, and (e) development of appropriate biophysical models. © 2013 Elsevier Ltd.
U2 - 10.1016/j.landusepol.2013.05.023
DO - 10.1016/j.landusepol.2013.05.023
M3 - Article
SN - 0264-8377
VL - 36
SP - 23
EP - 32
JO - Land Use Policy
JF - Land Use Policy
ER -