Family Forest Landowners and the Endangered Species Act: Assessing Potential Incentive Programs

Ward, Lauren; Green, Gary T.; Izlar, Robert L.

doi:10.1093/jofore/fvy048

Cited by 10 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The regulatory framework of the ESA creates a range of financial incentives and disincentives for private conservation investments, including those arising from a desire to avoid regulatory restrictions and associated costs. In addition, many landowners pursue conservation for non-financial reasons, arising from ethical or cultural motivations, environmental values, reputational interests, or to enhance aesthetic or other values from the conserved species or land (Farmer et al 2011;Sorice et al 2011;Ward et al 2018). Our analyses focus primarily on the financial incentives shaped by the ESA that often influence private landowner decision making, though other private benefits can be considered in the framework.…”

Section: Private-sector Conservation Under the Us Endangered Species mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Private‐sector conservation under the US Endangered Species Act: a return‐on‐investment perspective

Epanchin‐Niell

2020

Frontiers in Ecol & Environ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The US Endangered Species Act (ESA) is an important safety net for the protection and recovery of critically imperiled species. One mechanism of the ESA is prohibitions on harming listed species and their habitat, yet the ESA does not require proactive conservation by the private sector, which is necessary for the recovery of many species. A range of ESA programs have been developed – including Candidate Conservation Agreements, Safe Harbor Agreements, and a Voluntary Prelisting Conservation Actions policy – to enhance flexibility and encourage voluntary conservation activities. But why would businesses and other private landowners voluntarily engage in proactive conservation efforts above and beyond what is required for ESA compliance? We applied a return‐on‐investment (ROI) perspective to outline sources of costs and benefits and to explore program participation incentives. This ROI perspective sheds light on the types of financial factors likely to affect private‐sector participation and program effectiveness, and points to better ways to target private‐sector engagement and design more effective programs.

show abstract

Section: Private-sector Conservation Under the Us Endangered Species mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…or habitat, or the satisfaction derived from being a good steward, can affect a landowner's decisions (Farmer et al 2011;Sorice et al 2011;Ward et al 2018) and are a source of returns from participation. These benefits depend on individual preferences and values.…”

Section: Returns From Participationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Private‐sector conservation under the US Endangered Species Act: a return‐on‐investment perspective

Epanchin‐Niell

2020

Frontiers in Ecol & Environ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Profiles focused on either age and involvement, or education and high land tenure were also important. Previous research investigating the importance of age on participation in at-risk species conservation program has resulted in mixed results: it may be related (Kline et al, 2000;Langpap, 2004;Rodriguez et al, 2012) or not (Sorice et al, 2012;Ward et al, 2018). The difference in our approach is the emphasis on the joint explanation offered by age and involvement and decision-making authority.…”

Section: Multiple Pathways To Participationmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…The difference in our approach is the emphasis on the joint explanation offered by age and involvement and decision-making authority. Similarly, while education and land ownership have been investigated as drivers of participation (e.g., Langpap, 2004Langpap, , 2006Ward et al, 2018), hypotheses of joint association with participation have not been tested.…”

Section: Multiple Pathways To Participationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Participation in related incentive programs focusing on wildlife in general or similar habitat goals has also been related to participation in a program for at‐risk species (Sorice & Conner, 2010). Finally, Ward, Green, and Izlar (2018) found past participation was positively related to intention to participate in incentive programs to protect endangered species habitat for members of forestry associations. However, no demographic characteristics were related to intention.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Exploring pathways to participation in an at‐risk species conservation program

Sorice

Donlan

Santo

et al. 2021

Conservat Sci and Prac

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The success of conservation efforts for imperiled and endangered wildlife species relies on private landowners, yet a definitive model of landowner cooperation remains elusive. We use a case study to explore the multiple pathways by which demographics, rootedness, resource dependence, environmental attitudes, social influence, and program structure intersect to jointly explain participation in a federally funded cost-share program to help prevent the Lesser Prairie-Chicken from being listed under the U.S. Endangered Species Act. We conducted structured interviews across three ecoregions with 64 participants and 22 nonparticipants. We analyzed the data using fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis, an approach that identifies the multiple combinations of conditions related to engagement in the program. We found that two concepts, landowner characteristics and social influence, were most commonly associated with participation while profiles representing typical landowner tropes performed poorly. Finally, the positive effect of encouragement by agency representatives suggests that agency staff play a central role in determining participation. It also suggests landowners' decision processes may not be as deliberative as the literature on private lands conservation suggests. The results of our case study suggest new avenues for research that explicitly consider the role of heuristics in decisions to participate. K E Y W O R D Sdecision making, endangered species, incentive program, lesser prairie-chicken, prelisting conservation, private landowners, private lands, qualitative comparative analysis, southern great plains, Tympanuchus pallidicinctus | INTRODUCTIONAn increased number of species are receiving protection under the U.S. Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA) due to increasing human demands on natural resources and their resulting negative impacts to wildlife populations. Nearly two-thirds of these federally listed species occupy private land, and approximately one-third occupy only private lands (Evans et al., 2016). Achieving private landowner cooperation with endangered species recovery efforts has historically been challenging due to concern over land regulation (Norris, 2004).

show abstract

Increasing Safe Harbor Agreement enrollment: a choice experiment approach to investigate preferred contract attributes

Rubino,

Messick,

Serenari

2024

J Wildl Manag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Safe Harbor Agreements (SHAs) are one of the voluntary incentive programs designed to neutralize some of the costs and burdens associated with endangered species protection on private lands under the Endangered Species Act. They have demonstrated mixed success in terms of landowner participation, indicating that merely offering an SHA is not enough to persuade landowners to enter into agreements with government entities to protect endangered species. Yet little research has investigated landowner decision‐making and the programmatic structures that influence participation in SHAs. In this study, we employed hypothetical choice experiment offerings of Houston toad (Bufo houstonensis) SHAs to explore the reasoning behind Texas landowners' (n = 956) willingness to participate in the program, and to reveal programmatic characteristics most appealing to landowners. Respondents were most frequently willing to enroll in an SHA because of beliefs about and a sense of responsibility towards conserving nature, and were unwilling to potentially enroll in an SHA because they did not know enough about SHAs, did not want the government involved in their land management, and did not want to enter a binding agreement regarding endangered species. Additionally, respondents were more likely to enroll in hypothetical SHAs if the agreements included 10‐year contract durations and full future assurances, and less likely to enroll if they included 30‐year contract durations. This study provides program administrators with insights into how to improve the design and delivery of SHAs to increase participation among private landowners.

show abstract

Family Forest Landowners and the Endangered Species Act: Assessing Potential Incentive Programs

Cited by 10 publications

References 23 publications

Private‐sector conservation under the US Endangered Species Act: a return‐on‐investment perspective

Private‐sector conservation under the US Endangered Species Act: a return‐on‐investment perspective

Exploring pathways to participation in an at‐risk species conservation program

Increasing Safe Harbor Agreement enrollment: a choice experiment approach to investigate preferred contract attributes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About