The drivers behind nature conservation cost

Lehrer, David; Becker, Nir; Bar, Pua

doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.104222

Cited by 6 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Others have explored those questions before (Frazee et al, 2003; Lessmann et al, 2019; Wilson et al, 2009). We think that those two approaches are complementary and that comparing our results to estimates of ideal budgets would allow better identification of management needs (Lehrer et al, 2019). Fourth, our ecological benefits metrics could be improved by including field‐based or remote‐sensing measurements.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Spatiotemporal variation in costs of managing protected areas

Bouille

Fargione

Armsworth

2022

Conservat Sci and Prac

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Funding for protected areas is limited and recurrent costs associated with managing these sites must be considered in planning their acquisition. However, most conservation planning studies either ignore management costs or use snapshot estimates, even though they vary through time. We surveyed expenditures on management made over 15 years for 37 protected areas in the Appalachians that were established by a large land trust (TNC). These management costs varied greatly through both time and space. We explored what ecological

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Spatiotemporal variation in costs of managing protected areas

Bouille

Fargione

Armsworth

2022

Conservat Sci and Prac

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Attraction type, size, and quality significantly impact the amount of government funding but not the decision of whether to fund or not, whereas attractions’ self-generated revenues significantly influence decisions concerning whether to fund but not the funding amount. Unlike previous studies mainly focusing on a homogenous group of attractions (Lehrer, Becker, and Bar 2019; Rex 2020), this study considers different types of attractions (both natural and cultural attractions) and at various quality levels (1A–5A), drawing a more holistic picture of government funding determinants.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Attraction size. Previous studies use site areas to gage the size of a nature-based attraction or a protected area (Armsworth et al 2011;Lehrer, Becker, and Bar 2019) and the number of employees to measure the size of a cultural attraction (Benckendorff and Pearce 2003;Camarero, Garrido, and Vicente 2011). Since both natural and cultural attractions are included in the sample, neither the site area nor the number of employees is an appropriate measure for the attraction size.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Which Public Attraction Gets (and Gets More) Government Funding? The Effects of Internal and External Factors

Liu

Zou

Chen

2022

Journal of Travel Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Public attractions’ financial viability heavily depends upon sufficient government funding. However, research on government allocations has historically been rare. Drawn on the public administration and finance literature, this study addresses this gap by using a panel dataset of 262 public attractions in China from 2015 to 2018. Double-hurdle models, Heckman two-stage approach, multiple-hurdle approach, and quantile regressions are employed to examine the relationship between government funding, attraction characteristics, and local economic conditions. The findings suggest that attraction characteristics are associated with the amount of government appropriations, but they are less impactful on the attractions’ likelihood of receiving funding. The effects of attraction characteristics on government funding are asymmetric—as attractions’ government funding level increases, attraction type and quality exert stronger impacts while other characteristics influence less. The local economic condition is a significant factor in the amount of government funding. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

show abstract