Factors Influencing Land Management Practices on Conservation Easement Protected Landscapes

Stroman, Dianne A.; Kreuter, Urs P.

doi:10.1080/08941920.2015.1024365

Cited by 32 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Of those responding negatively the landholders felt they "had kept up their end of the bargain" but were neglected by the BSP. These results are supported by previous BSP work (Cumming 2007, Pasquini et al 2010, conservation psychology research into motivations (De Young 2000), and factors driving satisfaction (Stroman and Kreuter 2015).…”

Section: Securing Participation and Long-term Collaborationsupporting

confidence: 78%

Locating financial incentives among diverse motivations for long-term private land conservation

Selinske¹,

Cooke²,

Torabi³

et al. 2017

E&S

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. A variety of policy instruments are used to promote the conservation of biodiversity on private land. These instruments are often employed in unison to encourage land stewardship beneficial for biodiversity across a broad range of program types, but questions remain about which instruments are the appropriate tools when seeking long-term change to land-management practice. Drawing on three case studies, two in Australia and one in South Africa, spanning various program types-a biodiverse carbon planting scheme, a covenanting program, and a voluntary stewardship program-we investigate the importance of financial incentives and other mechanisms from the landholder's perspective. From participant interviews we find that landholders have preconceived notions of stewardship ethics. Motivations to enroll into a private land conservation program are not necessarily what drives ongoing participation, and continued delivery of multiple mechanisms will likely ensure long-term landholder engagement. Financial incentives are beneficial in lowering uptake costs to landholders but building landholder capacity, management assistance, linking participants to a network of conservation landholders, and recognition of conservation efforts may be more successful in fostering long-term biodiversity stewardship. Furthermore, we argue that diverse, multiple instrument approaches are needed to provide the flexibility required for dynamic, adaptive policy responses. We raise a number of key considerations for conservation organizations regarding the appropriate mix of financial and nonfinancial components of their programs to address long-term conservation objectives.

show abstract

Section: Securing Participation and Long-term Collaborationsupporting

confidence: 78%

Locating financial incentives among diverse motivations for long-term private land conservation

Selinske¹,

Cooke²,

Torabi³

et al. 2017

E&S

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Despite biochar's demonstrated environmental and agronomic benefits and its potential to increase farm incomes, biochar soil application has not been widely adopted by farmers as a soil preservation or carbon sequestration practice. While farmers must consider many variables when changing land use practices (Burton, Kuczera, & Schwarz, 2008;Stroman & Kreuter, 2015), cost is most likely the largest impediment to biochar. The initial upfront expense of biochar followed by a long-term payoff from improved crop yield, for which there is uncertainty in the precise outcome making the revenue implications also uncertain, is likely a significant reason for pause when considering biochar land amendment as a farming practice (Vochozka, Maroušková, Váchal, & Straková, 2016).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While farmers must consider many variables when changing land use practices (Burton, Kuczera, & Schwarz, 2008;Stroman & Kreuter, 2015), cost is most likely the largest impediment to biochar. While farmers must consider many variables when changing land use practices (Burton, Kuczera, & Schwarz, 2008;Stroman & Kreuter, 2015), cost is most likely the largest impediment to biochar.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Policy support for biochar: Review and recommendations

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Significant evidence has accumulated demonstrating that soil biochar amendment has many environmental benefits; however, adoption has been slow. This raises the question of how to align the environmental benefits with commercial motivations to drive more widespread implementation. Here, we examine the role that government policy can play in accelerating production and use at commercial scale. We identify three types of programs that can support biochar production: commercial financial incentives, nonfinancial policy support, and research and development funding. We also describe how these programs are currently used to support biochar production. For example, financial incentives can motivate immediate changes in business practices while nonfinancial policies can be important mechanisms to educate consumers and expand market demand. Research and development support can provide the necessary funding for early‐stage innovations that may one day become commercially viable options, even without other types of policy support. There are different risk–reward profiles for each policy mechanism, and these must be considered when evaluating a policy direction. Finally, we offer broad recommendations to the development of policy that maximizes the net benefits of biochar adoption. Key recommendations include improving policies that allow for the monetization of environmental benefits and avoided costs, recognizing soil as a resource through national preservation policy, and developing a broadly accepted set of product standards for biochar.

show abstract

“…; Klimek et al . ), as well as transaction costs and costs of conservation management (Moon & Cocklin ; Stroman & Kreuter ). Easement holders, whether trusts or government agencies, incur monitoring and enforcement costs (Cheever & McLaughlin ; Kamal et al .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While easements and other tax-based programs seem to be a natural win-win, the reality is that these agreements can incur costs to participants and government. For example, land owners incur opportunity costs by forgoing land uses that are incompatible with their contracted obligations (Drechsler et al 2007;Klimek et al 2008), as well as transaction costs and costs of conservation management (Moon & Cocklin 2011;Stroman & Kreuter 2015). Easement holders, whether trusts or government agencies, incur monitoring and enforcement costs (Cheever & McLaughlin 2015;Kamal et al 2015).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Tax Shifting and Incentives for Biodiversity Conservation on Private Lands

Schuster

Law

Rodewald

et al. 2017

CONSERVATION LETTERS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Conservation in human-dominated landscapes is challenging partly due to the high costs of land acquisition. We explored a property tax mechanism to finance conservation easements or related contracts as a partial-property acquisition strategy to meet Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) treaty targets to conserve critically imperiled coastal Douglas fir ecosystems in Canada. To maximize cost-efficiency, we used systematic planning tools to prioritize 198,058 parcels for biodiversity values, estimated the cost of eliminating property tax on high-priority parcels to engage land owners in conservation, and then calculated the tax increase on nonpriority parcels necessary to maintain tax revenue. Marginal tax rate increases of 0.13, 0.21, and 0.51% on nonpriority parcels were necessary to offset the elimination of tax revenue on ß21,000 ha of high-priority parcels, and potentially sufficient to increase area protection from 9% to 17% to meet CBD targets given uptake rates of 100, 50, or 25%, respectively. Sensitivity analyses suggest uptake rates of 30% to 40% could allow government to achieve a 17% target with 30% of the planning area prioritized for inclusion in a property tax mechanism. Our results suggest prioritizing parcels for biodiversity value and commensurate "tax shifting" may offer an efficient route to conservation on private land.

show abstract

Factors Influencing Land Management Practices on Conservation Easement Protected Landscapes

Cited by 32 publications

References 40 publications

Locating financial incentives among diverse motivations for long-term private land conservation

Locating financial incentives among diverse motivations for long-term private land conservation

Policy support for biochar: Review and recommendations

Tax Shifting and Incentives for Biodiversity Conservation on Private Lands

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About