Ecologists are also working to illuminate the relationship between economics and nature. Most people do not realize that biodiversity can be a commodity with economic value. For example, nations and industries tend to place a monetary value on goods and products produced, but not on biodiversity or other natural resources from which they are derived. By trying to assess the economic value of biodiversity, ecologists hope to convince industry and government leaders of the significance of conservation goals. This problem leads to another important area of research-setting conservation priorities.
Some ecologists say that the best approach is to try to save the widest variety of species.
For example, they would devote conservation funds to a project to save a species that is very different from others, rather than a project to save a plant or animal that is similar to species found in abundance. According to this reasoning, a platypus, which is highly unique, might receive more attention than one of the many species of beetles. The notion is that efforts to protect tigers, wolves, or grizzly bears will end up protecting the multitudes of other species that occur in the same habitat. More and more scientists are beginning to believe that placing priorities on only certain species cannot solve the worldwide problem of extinction. And limiting scientific efforts to such measures may cause us to overlook more critical issues that can only be addressed by looking at an ecosystem as a whole.