Ferraro, Paul J.Simpson, R. David2016-04-192016-04-192001Resources 143: 17-20http://hdl.handle.net/10919/66988Metadata only recordThis article discusses different approaches to biodiversity conservation, advocating for the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of direct payments over indirect payments. It is important to consider not only the theoretical differences but also the lessons revealed from implementation of both direct and indirect approaches. There are multiple options for financing conservation; innovative approaches are not necessarily better than more traditional financing methods. Although conservation schemes that promise more leverage for less money sound appealing, they likely will not deliver the expected outcomes. There is a cost to conserving biodiversity and, with few exceptions, the most cost-effective conservation is through direct payments.text/plainen-USIn CopyrightPayments for environmental servicesConservation strategyBiodiversityBiodiversity conservationPESDirect paymentsConservation outcomesIndirect approachesDirect approachesCost-effectivenessLow-income countriesConservation donorsAbstractCopyright 2001 Resources for the Future (RFF)