Skip to main content

Write a PREreview

Rethinking De-Extinction Criticism: A Multi-Dimensional Model for Prioritizing Revivable Species under Funding Controversies

Posted
Server
bioRxiv
DOI
10.1101/2025.07.16.665200

De-extinction is often criticised for siphoning funds from classical conservation, yet quantitative evidence remains scarce. Here we assemble a disaggregated United States finance dataset covering 2021 to 2024 and find that every dollar invested in de-extinction originated from private sources and coincided with a net rise in public and NGO conservation budgets. Rather than displacing existing capital, de-extinction mobilised new money and produced a crowding-in effect that enlarged the pool available for biodiversity protection.

To channel these additional resources strategically, we develop the Multidimensional De-extinction Effectiveness Model (MDEM), which ranks candidate species by ecological benefit, genetic insight, technical feasibility, and habitat readiness. Applied to sixteen taxa, MDEM consistently places the thylacine ( Thylacinus cynocephalus ) first; Monte Carlo tests (10,000 runs, ± 3 input jitter) yield a median class-level stability of 73.2%, underscoring robustness to uncertainty.

Our results position de-extinction as a complementary branch of conservation finance and offer a transparent framework for steering biotechnology investments toward species with the greatest combined ecological and scientific return.

You can write a PREreview of Rethinking De-Extinction Criticism: A Multi-Dimensional Model for Prioritizing Revivable Species under Funding Controversies. A PREreview is a review of a preprint and can vary from a few sentences to a lengthy report, similar to a journal-organized peer-review report.

Before you start

We will ask you to log in with your ORCID iD. If you don’t have an iD, you can create one.

What is an ORCID iD?

An ORCID iD is a unique identifier that distinguishes you from everyone with the same or similar name.

Start now