Does Targeting a Designated Area Crowd out the other Preservation Programs’ Efforts?
AbstractMaryland has introduced a number of land preservation programs over the past 40 years to permanently preserve resource lands. Although new programs can increase the number of acres being preserved, they might have unintended impact on land preservation due to interaction with existing land preservation programs. The Maryland Rural Legacy program began in 1997 by designating large contiguous blocks of land and focusing its preservation efforts only in those areas. The program’s could attract existing programs to shift their preservation effort into this designated rural legacy areas if there exist economy of scale or they subsidized existing programs’ effort through matching funds. Alternatively, it could crowd out the others’ preservation efforts in these areas if the RL program raises the cost of preserving there. Using parcel level data and a property score matching method, we find: 1) parcels in designated RL areas are more attractive to preservation programs, 2) the RL program crowds in the preservation effort of the other programs, and 3) RL program preserves more parcels and acres of land in these areas due to increased funding.
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.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by Agricultural and Applied Economics Association in its series 2009 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, 2009, Milwaukee, Wisconsin with number 49339.
Date of creation: 2009
Date of revision:
Contact details of provider:
Postal: 555 East Wells Street, Suite 1100, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53202
Phone: (414) 918-3190
Fax: (414) 276-3349
Web page: http://www.aaea.org
More information through EDIRC
Crowding effects; Designated preservation areas; Land preservation; Agricultural and Food Policy; Environmental Economics and Policy; Land Economics/Use; Resource /Energy Economics and Policy; Q18; Q24; Q28; Q58;
Find related papers by JEL classification:
- Q18 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agricultural Policy; Food Policy
- Q24 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Land
- Q28 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Government Policy
- Q58 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environmental Economics: Government Policy
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
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: (AgEcon Search).
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.