Landowner responses to financial incentive schemes for recreational access to woodlands in South East England

Using Choice Experiments to Investigate the Policy Relevance of Heterogeneity in Farmer Agri-Environmental Contract Preferences

“…Furthermore, compensation is important due to budget constraints. Church and Ravenscroft (2008) find that finance was the most important incentive to provide recreational access, even though a group of landowners did not respond to it. Wilson (1997) finds a strong relationship between the participation decision and payment, where low payment was a reason for non-participation, but for others financial reasons were the main motivation to participate.…”

“…Farmers are mostly negative towards recreation, which may be due to problems with littering and invasion of privacy/private property. Church and Ravenscroft (2008) find that landowners dislike recreation due to such experiences. The establishment of parking spots could also be the crucial factor.…”

“…The establishment of parking spots could also be the crucial factor. Investigations in England have shown that illegal vehicular access is among the most common reasons for having negative attitudes towards recreation (Church and Ravenscroft 2008). Urquhart et al (2010) find the enjoyment of private ownership, and fear of visitors harming the health of woodland and wildlife, as reasons for negative attitudes towards recreation.…”

Hyper-Production: A New Metric of Multifunctionality

“…Here, the link between the spaces of flows and the spaces of place (Castells, 2004) helps to conceptualise the common ground between areas of action and areas of affinityit is the intersection of these flows and places where the conflict, complementarity, and confusion over multifunctional uses is to be found. However, conflict between competing land uses is not the dominant situation in rural areas by any measure with landowners open, in principle, to nonproductive or post-productive uses (Church & Ravenscroft, 2008). Rural researchers are obviously drawn to conflict 'hotspots' and large-scale land use developments also attract the attention of the general public more than the mundane incremental changes, e.g., proposals for new national parks, exploration of new mineral resources, and the opening of new hydroelectric power facilities are always more prone to conflict (Keskitalo & Lundmark, 2010;Lundmark & Stjernström, 2009;Saeþórsdóttir, 2012).…”

Yes in my backyard : market based mechanisms for forest conservation and climate change mitigation in La Primavera, Mexico

“…Positive participation has also been related to larger property size (Kilgore et al, 2008;Ma et al, 2012, Putten et al, 2011, to properties located closer to the household (Balderas Torres, 2007), and also previous knowledge of the program and positive attitudes towards the environment (Ma et al, 2012;Putten et al, 2011). Landowners may have different reasons for owning their land and they may be positive about pro-conservation incentive programs as long as these do not conflict with their core interests or business objectives (Church and Ravenscroft, 2008;MacMillan and Phillip, 2010). In areas with more pro-development land use regulations, relatively lower participation in incentive-based conservation programs is expected since more profitable activities would be considered by landowners (Markowski-Lindsay et al, 2011).…”