The ESA was enacted in 1973 with the primary goal of protecting and recovering species that are in danger of extinction or are likely to become endangered in the foreseeable future.

The ESA requires the government to consider the economic impacts of its decisions, but it also recognizes that the protection of endangered species is a priority. The ESA allows for exemptions from its protections in certain cases, and it also provides funding for conservation programs that are designed to benefit both endangered species and the economy.

The ESA requires the government to conduct a cost-benefit analysis before listing a species as endangered or threatened. This analysis is used to determine whether the benefits of listing the species, such as the protection of the species from extinction, outweigh the costs, such as the potential economic impacts of the listing.

Listing a species under the ESA can have a number of economic costs, including increased costs for businesses that operate in the species' habitat, reduced property values for landowners who own land in the species' habitat, and lost jobs in industries that rely on the species.

Listing a species under the ESA can have a number of economic benefits, including increased tourism revenue from visitors who come to see the species, increased sales of products that are made from the species, and increased property values for landowners who own land in the species' habitat.

The ESA requires the government to make a decision on whether to list a species based on a combination of economic and biological factors. The government must consider the economic costs and benefits of listing the species, as well as the biological status of the species and the threats it faces.

There are a number of challenges associated with balancing the economic costs and benefits of listing a species under the ESA. These challenges include the difficulty in quantifying the economic costs and benefits of listing a species, the difficulty in predicting the future economic impacts of listing a species, and the difficulty in weighing the economic costs and benefits against the biological status of the species.

The ESA can be used to promote economic development in a number of ways, including by providing funding for conservation programs that create jobs, by increasing tourism revenue from visitors who come to see endangered species, and by increasing the value of land that is home to endangered species.

The ESA's economic provisions have been criticized for being too restrictive and preventing economic development, for not being restrictive enough and not adequately protecting endangered species, and for being unfair to landowners who own land that is home to endangered species.

The ESA's economic provisions could be improved in a number of ways, including by providing more funding for conservation programs, by providing more flexibility for businesses that operate in the habitat of endangered species, and by providing more compensation for landowners who own land that is home to endangered species.