Genetic prospecting and biodiversity development agreements

Kelly Day-Rubenstein, George B Frisvold

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

7 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Biodiversity loss continues, in part, because local benefits from wildland preservation are limited. Biodiversity development agreements (BDAs) intend, through bioprospecting efforts, to distribute benefits of biodiversity to those who bear preservation costs. Analysis of two case studies suggests that monetary returns from bioprospecting could be substantial, though realization of returns is uncertain and likely to take time. Considerable non-monetary benefits from BDAs have included training and increased infrastructure and institutional capacity. BDAs probably will not finance desired land preservation, nor is it certain they can influence land use. Nonetheless, carefully structured BDAs can be useful components of biodiversity conservation programs. Published by Elsevier Science Ltd.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)205-219
Number of pages15
JournalLand Use Policy
Volume18
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - 2001

Fingerprint

biodiversity
finance
conservation programs
infrastructure
land use
conservation
case studies
costs
cost

Keywords

  • Biodiversity
  • Conservation policy
  • Genetic resource conservation
  • Land use

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Forestry
  • Nature and Landscape Conservation
  • Geography, Planning and Development

Cite this

Genetic prospecting and biodiversity development agreements. / Day-Rubenstein, Kelly; Frisvold, George B.

In: Land Use Policy, Vol. 18, No. 3, 2001, p. 205-219.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Day-Rubenstein, Kelly ; Frisvold, George B. / Genetic prospecting and biodiversity development agreements. In: Land Use Policy. 2001 ; Vol. 18, No. 3. pp. 205-219.
@article{9d9995a12ee84598b7de103529432f80,
title = "Genetic prospecting and biodiversity development agreements",
abstract = "Biodiversity loss continues, in part, because local benefits from wildland preservation are limited. Biodiversity development agreements (BDAs) intend, through bioprospecting efforts, to distribute benefits of biodiversity to those who bear preservation costs. Analysis of two case studies suggests that monetary returns from bioprospecting could be substantial, though realization of returns is uncertain and likely to take time. Considerable non-monetary benefits from BDAs have included training and increased infrastructure and institutional capacity. BDAs probably will not finance desired land preservation, nor is it certain they can influence land use. Nonetheless, carefully structured BDAs can be useful components of biodiversity conservation programs. Published by Elsevier Science Ltd.",
keywords = "Biodiversity, Conservation policy, Genetic resource conservation, Land use",
author = "Kelly Day-Rubenstein and Frisvold, {George B}",
year = "2001",
doi = "10.1016/S0264-8377(01)00016-3",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "18",
pages = "205--219",
journal = "Land Use Policy",
issn = "0264-8377",
publisher = "Elsevier Limited",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Genetic prospecting and biodiversity development agreements

AU - Day-Rubenstein, Kelly

AU - Frisvold, George B

PY - 2001

Y1 - 2001

N2 - Biodiversity loss continues, in part, because local benefits from wildland preservation are limited. Biodiversity development agreements (BDAs) intend, through bioprospecting efforts, to distribute benefits of biodiversity to those who bear preservation costs. Analysis of two case studies suggests that monetary returns from bioprospecting could be substantial, though realization of returns is uncertain and likely to take time. Considerable non-monetary benefits from BDAs have included training and increased infrastructure and institutional capacity. BDAs probably will not finance desired land preservation, nor is it certain they can influence land use. Nonetheless, carefully structured BDAs can be useful components of biodiversity conservation programs. Published by Elsevier Science Ltd.

AB - Biodiversity loss continues, in part, because local benefits from wildland preservation are limited. Biodiversity development agreements (BDAs) intend, through bioprospecting efforts, to distribute benefits of biodiversity to those who bear preservation costs. Analysis of two case studies suggests that monetary returns from bioprospecting could be substantial, though realization of returns is uncertain and likely to take time. Considerable non-monetary benefits from BDAs have included training and increased infrastructure and institutional capacity. BDAs probably will not finance desired land preservation, nor is it certain they can influence land use. Nonetheless, carefully structured BDAs can be useful components of biodiversity conservation programs. Published by Elsevier Science Ltd.

KW - Biodiversity

KW - Conservation policy

KW - Genetic resource conservation

KW - Land use

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0034920783&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0034920783&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/S0264-8377(01)00016-3

DO - 10.1016/S0264-8377(01)00016-3

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:0034920783

VL - 18

SP - 205

EP - 219

JO - Land Use Policy

JF - Land Use Policy

SN - 0264-8377

IS - 3

ER -