Designing a reserve system with heterogeneous sites: Extending the SLOSS debate from an economic perspective

In reserve design, determining the number, size, and management inputs of reserves under a limited conservation area budget is crucial for effective biodiversity conservation. This is embedded in the classic “single large or several small” (SLOSS) debate; yet, the literature rarely considers management effectiveness and economic costs. We therefore develop a theoretical model to choose the number as well as size and management inputs of each protected area to maximize net benefits, defined as benefits from system-level species richness minus management and opportunity costs. Unlike previous studies, we relax the assumption that all reserve sites should be equally sized. Our objective is to analyze how (i) across-habitat heterogeneity (dissimilarity in species composition between reserves) and (ii) effectiveness of management inputs in generating conservation outcomes affect optimal reserve design. Our analysis reveals that higher across-habitat heterogeneity often favors establishing multiple smaller protected areas (several smalls); however, incorporating management effectiveness can instead support choosing several larger reserves (several larges), even under high heterogeneity. These findings extend the literature on the SLOSS debate and underscore the importance of incorporating management effectiveness into the design of protected areas.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Ecological Economics
Published
2026-02-23
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2026.108964
Primary Topic
Conservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Designing a reserve system with heterogeneous sites: Extending the SLOSS debate from an economic perspective

Zijin Xie, Ayumi Onuma
Ecological Economics
Conservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
article

Designing a reserve system with heterogeneous sites: Extending the SLOSS debate from an economic perspective

Zijin Xie, Ayumi Onuma
article en

Abstract

In reserve design, determining the number, size, and management inputs of reserves under a limited conservation area budget is crucial for effective biodiversity conservation. This is embedded in the classic “single large or several small” (SLOSS) debate; yet, the literature rarely considers management effectiveness and economic costs. We therefore develop a theoretical model to choose the number as well as size and management inputs of each protected area to maximize net benefits, defined as benefits from system-level species richness minus management and opportunity costs. Unlike previous studies, we relax the assumption that all reserve sites should be equally sized. Our objective is to analyze how (i) across-habitat heterogeneity (dissimilarity in species composition between reserves) and (ii) effectiveness of management inputs in generating conservation outcomes affect optimal reserve design. Our analysis reveals that higher across-habitat heterogeneity often favors establishing multiple smaller protected areas (several smalls); however, incorporating management effectiveness can instead support choosing several larger reserves (several larges), even under high heterogeneity. These findings extend the literature on the SLOSS debate and underscore the importance of incorporating management effectiveness into the design of protected areas.

Ecological EconomicsVol. 244
Hokkaido University of Science (JP), Keio University (JP), Hokkaido University (JP), Japan University of Economics (JP)
Life in Land
Openalex Percentile: Top 62%
Conservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.