The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Benefits of Investing in Ecosystem Restoration
Open accessAbstract
Measures aimed at conservation or restoration of ecosystems are often seen as net‐cost projects by governments and businesses because they are based on incomplete and often faulty cost‐benefit analyses. After screening over 200 studies, we examined the costs (94 studies) and benefits (225 studies) of ecosystem restoration projects that had sufficient reliable data in 9 different biomes ranging from coral reefs to tropical forests. Costs included capital investment and maintenance of the restoration project, and benefits were based on the monetary value of the total bundle of ecosystem services provided by the restored ecosystem. Assuming restoration is always imperfect and benefits attain only 75% of the maximum value of the reference systems over 20 years, we calculated the net present value at the social discount rates of 2% and 8%. We also conducted 2 threshold cum sensitivity analyses. Benefit‐cost ratios ranged from about 0.05:1 (coral reefs and coastal systems, worst‐case scenario) to as much as 35:1 (grasslands, best‐case scenario). Our results provide only partial estimates of benefits at one point in time and reflect the lower limit of the welfare benefits of ecosystem restoration because both scarcity of and demand for ecosystem services is increasing and new benefits of natural ecosystems and biological diversity are being discovered. Nonetheless, when accounting for even the incomplete range of known benefits through the use of static estimates that fail to capture rising values, the majority of the restoration projects we analyzed provided net benefits and should be considered not only as profitable but also as high‐yielding investments. Beneficios de Invertir en la Restauración de Ecosistemas
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Clewell, A. F., & Aronson, J. (2013) · doi:10.5822/978-1-59726-323-8 · Cited by 180
Self-citationImpacts of incentives to reduce emissions from deforestation on global species extinctions
Strassburg, B. B. N., Rodrigues, A. S. L., Gusti, M., Balmford, A., Fritz, S., Obersteiner, M., Kerry Turner, R., & Brooks, T. M. (2012) · Nature Climate Change · doi:10.1038/nclimate1375 · Cited by 121
Research works printed but not linked: 48
- 10.1111/j.1526-100X.2011.00822.x · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1111/rec.12011 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1111/j.1526-100X.2009.00638.x · DOI · Paper page
- Aronson J., 2007, Restoring natural capital: the science, business, and practice
- 10.1126/science.1073947 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.jaridenv.2009.02.004 · doi:10.1016/j.jaridenv.2009.02.004
- 10.1111/j.1755-263X.2008.00006.x · doi:10.1111/j.1755-263x.2008.00006.x
- 10.1016/j.cosust.2012.12.003 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2010.01.007 · doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2010.01.007
- Blignaut J. N., 2007, Determining a charge for the clearing of invasive alien plant species to augment water supply in South Africa, Water SA, 33, 23
- 10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2012.01.004 · DOI
- Brancalion P. H. S., 2012, Finding the money for tropical forest restoration, Unasylva, 63, 25
- 10.1016/j.tree.2011.06.011 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1111/j.1526-100X.2011.00772.x · DOI · Paper page
- CBD (Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity), 2012, CBD COP11 decision XI/16: ecosystem restoration
- 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2006.00340.x · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2004.09.014 · doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2004.09.014
- 10.1016/j.ecoser.2012.07.005 · DOI · Paper page
- De Groot R. S., 2010, The economics of ecosystems and biodiversity: ecological and economic foundations, 9
- 10.1016/j.marpol.2012.05.020 · doi:10.1016/j.marpol.2012.05.020
- Elmqvist T., 2010, The economics of ecosystems and biodiversity: ecological and economic foundations, 41
- 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2008.01090.x · DOI
- 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2010.02.016 · DOI
- Farley J., 2007, An ecological economic assessment of restoration, 17
- 10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.35.021103.105711 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1257/jel.40.2.351 · doi:10.1257/jel.40.2.351 · Paper page
- 10.1111/j.1755-263X.2008.00031.x · DOI
- 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2007.02.010 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2003.10.019 · DOI
- Janzen D. H., 2002, Handbook of Ecological Restoration
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199588992.001.0001 · DOI · Paper page
- Maes J., 2013, Mapping and assessment of ecosystems and their services: an analytical framework for ecosystem assessments under Action 5 of the EU Biodiversity Strategy to 2020
- 10.1007/s13157-011-0145-z · doi:10.1007/s13157-011-0145-z
- Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, 2005, Ecosystems and human well‐being: biodiversity synthesis
- 10.1371/journal.pbio.1001247 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.5751/ES-02688-140123 · DOI
- 10.1007/s10531-007-9215-1 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.agee.2004.01.016 · doi:10.1016/j.agee.2004.01.016
- Rees W., 2007, Valuing natural capital and the costs and benefits of restoration
- 10.1126/science.1172460 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-102710-145115 · DOI · Paper page
- TEEB (The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity), 2010, The economics of ecosystems and biodiversity—ecological and economic foundations
- TEEB (The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity), 2011, The economics of ecosystems and biodiversity in national and international policy making
- 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2007.12.024 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1111/j.1755-263X.2012.00237.x · DOI
- 10.1126/science.1180289 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1162/wopj.2006.23.2.31 · doi:10.1162/wopj.2006.23.2.31
- 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2007.11.004 · DOI
Cited by
Global priority areas for ecosystem restoration
Strassburg, B. B. N., Iribarrem, A., Beyer, H. L., Cordeiro, C. L., Crouzeilles, R., Jakovac, C. C., Braga Junqueira, A., Lacerda, E., Latawiec, A. E., Balmford, A., et al. (2020) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-020-2784-9 · Cited by 1,175
Benefits of restoring ecosystem services in urban areas
Elmqvist, T., Setälä, H., Handel, S., van der Ploeg, S., Aronson, J., Blignaut, J., Gómez-Baggethun, E., Nowak, D., Kronenberg, J., & de Groot, R. (2015) · Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability · doi:10.1016/j.cosust.2015.05.001 · Cited by 895
Self-citationMeli, P., Rey Benayas, J. M., Balvanera, P., & Martínez Ramos, M. (2014) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0093507 · Cited by 289
Optimal Conservation Outcomes Require Both Restoration and Protection
Possingham, H. P., Bode, M., & Klein, C. J. (2015) · PLOS Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.1002052 · Cited by 274
Enhancing protection for vulnerable waters
Creed, I. F., Lane, C. R., Serran, J. N., Alexander, L. C., Basu, N. B., Calhoun, A. J. K., Christensen, J. R., Cohen, M. J., Craft, C., D'Amico, E., et al. (2017) · Nature Geoscience · doi:10.1038/ngeo3041 · Cited by 223
Metadata
- Authors
- DE GROOT, R. S., BLIGNAUT, J., VAN DER PLOEG, S., ARONSON, J., ELMQVIST, T., & FARLEY, J.
- Venue
- Conservation Biology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2013-09-20
- Volume
- 27
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 1286-1293
- ISSN
- 0888-8892 (ISSN-L)
- 1523-1739
- OpenAlex
- W2137774346
- Cited by
- 364
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 15.36
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- Funders
- TEEB study and sponsors
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Benefits of Investing in Ecosystem Restoration. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/cobi.12158
- The paper
- DE GROOT, R. S., BLIGNAUT, J., VAN DER PLOEG, S., ARONSON, J., ELMQVIST, T., & FARLEY, J. (2013). Benefits of Investing in Ecosystem Restoration. Conservation Biology. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.12158
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.