Figure 2
The image contains three panels of graphs. Panel (a) includes two line graphs showing ecological impact over a ten-year horizon. The left graph shows sensitivity to output elasticity with different beta values, while the right graph shows sensitivity to ecological depreciation with different delta values. Both graphs have time in years on the x-axis and lemur-equivalent units on the y-axis, with a dotted horizontal line marking the conservation target. Panel (b) includes two graphs. The left graph is a stacked area chart decomposing the composite index into biological, habitat, and socioeconomic components under reference weights, with dashed lines indicating contractual floors. The right graph is a line graph showing the composite index under four alternative weighting schemes over time. Panel (c) includes three graphs. The left graph is a line graph showing environmental value versus shadow price, with a shaded region indicating a benefit-cost ratio greater than 1. The centre graph shows environmental value as a function of the conservation fraction α, with a dashed vertical line marking the reference calibration. The right graph is a heatmap of the benefit-cost ratio over the joint shadow-price and conservation-fraction space, with contour lines indicating different benefit-cost ratio levels and a black marker identifying the reference calibration.Ecological production, composite index and environmental valuation. Panel (a) maps how the elasticity and depreciation parameters shape the ten-year conservation trajectory. Panel (b) unpacks the composite index into its biological, habitat and socioeconomic components and demonstrates the sensitivity of the aggregate measure to the choice of weights. Panel (c) quantifies the environmental value created relative to the budgetary cost of the instrument under a range of assumptions about the shadow price and the efficiency of fund deployment and net implementation resources