Increasing the public benefits of agricultural conservation easements: an illustration with the Central Valley Farmland Trust in the San Joaquin Valley
AbstractAgricultural conservation easements (ACEs) involve the significant expenditure of public funds through either tax benefits and/or direct public expenditures. The selection of agricultural parcels for conservation should, therefore, maximise net public benefits to the extent possible within financial constraints and the need for agricultural viability to maintain working landscapes. Some programmes select agricultural parcels for conservation easements based only on agricultural viability and/or land cost, however, without explicit consideration of the many other public benefits often associated with ACEs. This paper illustrates application of a method for increasing the public benefits of agricultural conservation easements through a case study in the northern San Joaquin Valley of California. The method is a strategic planning process that incorporates both a GIS-based quantitative assessment and a more qualitative assessment. Such an approach is a supplement to - rather than a substitute for - the more science-based Landscape Evaluation and Site Evaluation (LESA) approach developed by the US Soil Conservation Service (SCS) and cost-minimisation approaches that emphasise economic considerations. However, we show that public land use planning and regulatory policies are essential for agricultural conservation. Acquisition strategies in isolation will not be successful without complementary public regulatory policies.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by Taylor & Francis Journals in its journal Journal of Environmental Planning and Management.
Volume (Year): 53 (2010)
Issue (Month): 7 ()
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.tandfonline.com/CJEP20
You can help add them by filling out this form.
reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.Access and download statisticsgeneral information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Michael McNulty).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.