Economics of the endangered species act
Abstract
The Endangered Species Act of 1973 is one of our most far-reaching and controversial environmental laws. While the benefits of protecting endangered species accrue to the entire nation, a significant fraction of the costs are borne by the private landowners who shelter about 90 percent of the nearly 1,000 listed species. The pressure to know whether the social benefits of preservation exceed the private costs has thrust economics into ongoing reauthorization debate. This paper examines how economists can help better the odds that when society imposes and bears costs to protect endangered species, it will be more likely to succeed.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Inadequate funding for recovery actions is an explanation for the low rate of species recovery under the ESA.
“inadequate funding for recovery actions [7]”
From Too few, too late: U.S. Endangered Species Act undermined by inaction and inadequate funding (2022) · cites this paper as [7]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Too few, too late: U.S. Endangered Species Act undermined by inaction and inadequate funding
Eberhard, E. K., Wilcove, D. S., & Dobson, A. P. (2022) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0275322 · Cited by 30 · see citing works
- Authors
- Brown, G. M., & Shogren, J. F.
- Affiliations
- University of Washington (US)
- University of Wyoming (US)
- ORCID
- Shogren, Jason F
- Venue
- Journal of Economic Perspectives
- Publisher
- American Economic Association
- Published
- 1998-08-01
- Volume
- 12
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 3-20
- ISSN
- 0895-3309 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2031679747
- Cited by
- 224
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 5
- FWCI
- 24.20
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- The Journal of Economic Perspectives (publishedVersion)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Socioeconomics of Resources and Conservation
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law › Conservation, Ecology, Wildlife Education
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Conservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
- Keywords
- Endangered Species Act, endangered species conservation, cost-benefit analysis, private landowners
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
