The Experts below are selected from a list of 360 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Andrew T Knight - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
locating financial incentives among diverse motivations for long term private Land Conservation
Ecology and Society, 2017Co-Authors: Benjamin Cooke, Matthew J Selinske, Andrew T Knight, Nooshin Torabi, Mathew J Hardy, Sarah A BekessyAbstract: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.
-
understanding the motivations satisfaction and retention of Landowners in private Land Conservation programs
Conservation Letters, 2015Co-Authors: Matthew J Selinske, Jan K Coetzee, Kerry Purnell, Andrew T KnightAbstract:Private Land Conservation is an increasingly popular approach to protect critical biodiversity. In the Western Cape Province of South Africa private Land Conservation is the focal strategy for CapeNature, the provincial Conservation agency. Despite its importance, little is known about the drivers of Landowner participation in the CapeNature program and how these varied motivations influence participant satisfaction and retention. Our psychometric survey of 75 enrolled Landowners found that the highest ranked motivations to participate were Conservation and Place Attachment but Social Learning had a stronger influence on program satisfaction. Landowners participate to fulfill a motivation or set of motivations but their satisfaction and commitment may hinge on other unforeseen motivations or factors. Understanding the relationship between motivations, satisfaction, and commitment is necessary for a successful retention strategy in any Conservation program, especially on private Lands where success depends on Landowner commitment. This research was incorporated into improving CapeNature's program delivery.
Richard Schuster - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
optimizing the Conservation of migratory species over their full annual cycle
Nature Communications, 2019Co-Authors: Richard Schuster, Peter Arcese, Scott G Wilson, Amanda D Rodewald, Daniel Fink, Tom Auer, Joseph R BennettAbstract:Limited knowledge of the distribution, abundance, and habitat associations of migratory species hinders effective Conservation actions. We use Neotropical migratory birds as a model group to compare approaches to prioritize Land Conservation needed to support ≥30% of the global abundances of 117 species. Specifically, we compare scenarios from spatial optimization models to achieve Conservation targets by: 1) area requirements for conserving >30% abundance of each species for each week of the year independently vs. combined; 2) including vs. ignoring spatial clustering of species abundance; and 3) incorporating vs. avoiding human-dominated Landscapes. Solutions integrating information across the year require 56% less area than those integrating weekly abundances, with additional reductions when shared-use Landscapes are included. Although incorporating spatial population structure requires more area, geographical representation among priority sites improves substantially. These findings illustrate that globally-sourced citizen science data can elucidate key trade-offs among opportunity costs and spatiotemporal representation of Conservation efforts.
-
Easement_cost-effectiveness: Effects of disputes and easement violations on the cost-effectiveness of Land Conservation
2018Co-Authors: Richard SchusterAbstract:This repository includes the data and files for the example analysis of the following paper published in PeerJ: Schuster and Arcese (2015) Effects of disputes and easement violations on the cost-effectiveness of Land Conservation. PeerJ x:xxxx
-
effects of disputes and easement violations on the cost effectiveness of Land Conservation
PeerJ, 2015Co-Authors: Richard Schuster, Peter ArceseAbstract:Conservation initiatives to protect and restore valued species communities in human-dominated Landscapes face challenges linked to their potential costs. Conservation easements on private Land may represent a cost-effective alternative to Land purchase, but long-term costs to monitor and enforce easements, or defend legal challenges, remain uncertain. We explored the cost-effectiveness of Conservation easements, defined here as the fraction of the high-biodiversity Landscape potentially protected via investment in easements versus Land purchase. We show that easement violation and dispute rates substantially affect the estimated long-term cost-effectiveness of an easement versus Land purchase strategy. Our results suggest that Conservation easements can outperform Land purchase as a strategy to protect biodiversity as long as the rate of disputes and legal challenges is low, pointing to a critical need for monitoring data to reduce costs and maximize the value of Conservation investments.
Graeme S Cumming - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
positives and pathologies of natural resource management on private Land Conservation areas
Conservation Biology, 2017Co-Authors: Hayley S Clements, Graeme S CummingAbstract:In managed natural resource systems, such as fisheries and rangeLands, there is a recognized trade-off between managing for short-term benefits and managing for longer term resilience. Management actions that stabilize ecological attributes or processes can improve productivity in the supply of ecosystem goods and services in the short term but erode system resilience at longer time scales. For example, fire suppression in rangeLands can increase grass biomass initially but ultimately result in an undesirable, shrub-dominated system. Analyses of this phenomenon have focused largely on how management actions influence slow-changing biophysical system attributes (such as vegetation composition). Data on the frequency of management actions that reduce natural ecological variation on 66 private Land-Conservation areas (PLCAs) in South Africa were used to investigate how management actions are influenced by manager decision-making approaches, a largely ignored part of the problem. The pathology of natural resource management was evident on some PLCAs: increased focus on revenue-generation in decision making resulted in an increased frequency of actions to stabilize short-term variation in large mammal populations, which led to increased revenues from ecotourism or hunting. On many PLCAs, these management actions corresponded with a reduced focus on ecological monitoring and an increase in overstocking of game (i.e., ungulate species) and stocking of extralimitals (i.e., game species outside their historical range). Positives in natural resource management also existed. Some managers monitored slower changing ecological attributes, which resulted in less-intensive management, fewer extralimital species, and lower stocking rates. Our unique, empirical investigation of monitoring-management relationships illustrates that management decisions informed by revenue monitoring versus ecological monitoring can have opposing consequences for natural resource productivity and sustainability. Promoting management actions that maintain resilience in natural resource systems therefore requires cognizance of why managers act the way they do and how these actions can gradually shift managers toward unsustainable strategies.
Matthew J Selinske - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
locating financial incentives among diverse motivations for long term private Land Conservation
Ecology and Society, 2017Co-Authors: Benjamin Cooke, Matthew J Selinske, Andrew T Knight, Nooshin Torabi, Mathew J Hardy, Sarah A BekessyAbstract: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.
-
understanding the motivations satisfaction and retention of Landowners in private Land Conservation programs
Conservation Letters, 2015Co-Authors: Matthew J Selinske, Jan K Coetzee, Kerry Purnell, Andrew T KnightAbstract:Private Land Conservation is an increasingly popular approach to protect critical biodiversity. In the Western Cape Province of South Africa private Land Conservation is the focal strategy for CapeNature, the provincial Conservation agency. Despite its importance, little is known about the drivers of Landowner participation in the CapeNature program and how these varied motivations influence participant satisfaction and retention. Our psychometric survey of 75 enrolled Landowners found that the highest ranked motivations to participate were Conservation and Place Attachment but Social Learning had a stronger influence on program satisfaction. Landowners participate to fulfill a motivation or set of motivations but their satisfaction and commitment may hinge on other unforeseen motivations or factors. Understanding the relationship between motivations, satisfaction, and commitment is necessary for a successful retention strategy in any Conservation program, especially on private Lands where success depends on Landowner commitment. This research was incorporated into improving CapeNature's program delivery.
Adena R Rissman - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
private organizations public data Land trust choices about mapping Conservation easements
Land Use Policy, 2019Co-Authors: Adena R Rissman, Amy Wilson Morris, Alexey Kalinin, Patrice A Kohl, Dominic P Parker, Owen SellesAbstract:Abstract Nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) have fewer transparency requirements than governments, yet they increasingly shape Land use and protected areas. Land information disclosure by NGOs can improve coordination and accountability, but create potential privacy concerns. We focus on decisions by Land Conservation NGOs (Land trusts) to share digital maps of Conservation easements on private Lands. We asked which Land trusts were more likely to contribute digital maps to public databases, and what benefits and concerns with disclosure did Land trust staff report? Regressions from a census of 1138 and survey of 241 Land trusts showed that organizations were more likely to share digital maps when they had larger budgets, a statewide sharing norm, regional collaborations, a strategic plan for new acquisitions, higher perceptions of map usefulness, and lower privacy concerns. Key informant interviews provided depth about beneficial map uses and privacy concerns. More Land trusts would likely contribute to protected areas databases if mapping capacity increased, transparency norms were reinforced, map benefits better articulated, and privacy concerns were addressed.
-
trends in private Land Conservation increasing complexity shifting Conservation purposes and allowable private Land uses
Land Use Policy, 2016Co-Authors: Jessica Owley, Adena R RissmanAbstract:The terrain of private-Land Conservation dealmaking is shifting. As the area of private Land protected for Conservation increases, it is time to understand trends in private-Land Conservation agreements. We examined 269 Conservation easements and conducted 73 interviews with Land Conservation organizations to investigate changes in private-Land Conservation in the United States. We hypothesized that since 2000, Conservation easements have become more complex but less restrictive. Our analysis reveals shifts in what it means for private Land to be “conserved.” We found that Conservation easements have indeed become more complex, with more purposes and terms after 2000 compared to Conservation easements recorded before 2000. However, changes in restrictiveness of Conservation easements varied by Land use. Mining and waste dumping were less likely to be allowed after 2000, but new residences and structures were twice as likely to be allowed. We found a shift toward allowing some bounded timber harvest and grazing and a decline in terms that entirely allow or prohibit these working Land uses. Interviews revealed staff perceptions of reasons for these changes. Our analysis suggests that “used” Landscapes are increasingly important for Conservation but that conserving these properties stretches the limits of simple, perpetual policy tools and requires increasingly complex and contingent agreements.
-
trends in private Land Conservation increasing complexity shifting Conservation purposes and allowable private Land uses
Social Science Research Network, 2015Co-Authors: Jessica Owley, Adena R RissmanAbstract:The terrain of private-Land Conservation dealmaking is shifting. As the number of acres of private Land protected for Conservation increases, our understanding of what it means for a property to be "conserved" is shifting. We examined 269 Conservation easements and conducted 73 interviews with Land Conservation organizations to investigate changes in private-Land Conservation in the United States. We hypothesized that since 2000, Conservation easements have become more complex but less restrictive. Our analysis reveals shifts in what it means for private Land to be "conserved." We found that Conservation easements have indeed become more complex, with more purposes and terms after 2000 compared to Conservation easements recorded before 2000. However, changes in restrictiveness of Conservation easements varied by Land use. Mining and waste dumping were less likely to be allowed after 2000, but new residences and structures were twice as likely to be allowed. We found a shift toward allowing some bounded timber harvest and grazing, and a decline in terms that entirely allow or prohibit these working Land uses. Interviews revealed staff perceptions of reasons for these changes. Our analysis suggests that "used" Landscapes are increasingly important for Conservation but that conserving these properties stretches the limits of simple, perpetual policy tools and requires increasingly complex and contingent agreements.
