Public Conservation Land And Employment Growth In The Northern Forest Region
As with many environmental issues, debates about increasing public conservation lands in the Northern Forest region frequently center on a perceived tradeoff between jobs and the environment. In particular, opponents of conservation lands often argue that employment will decline significantly when land is diverted from commodity-oriented uses such as wood products production. To evaluate this claim, we estimate a model of simultaneous employment and net migration growth using data on the 92 non-metropolitan counties comprising the region. Growth in employment and net migration are measured over the period 1990 to 1997 and the set of exogenous variables includes the 1990 share of the county land base in public conservation uses. We find that net migration rates were systematically higher in counties with more conservation lands, but the effects are relatively small. Public conservation lands were found to have no systematic effect on employment growth over the 1990 to 1997 period. Two extensions are considered. We examine the separate effects of preservationist and multiple-use lands. We also identify a "natural experiment" involving changes in national forest management that allows us to estimate the effects of diverting private forestland to public conservation uses. Our central conclusions are that existing public conservation lands have a positive, but small, effect on employment and migration in the Northern Forest region and that, over the range of our data, employment and migration are unlikely to be affected by timber harvest reductions resulting from the establishment of new conservation lands.
|Date of creation:||2001|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Phone: (414) 918-3190
Fax: (414) 276-3349
Web page: http://www.aaea.org
More information through EDIRC
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Mueser Peter R. & Graves Philip E., 1995. "Examining the Role of Economic Opportunity and Amenities in Explaining Population Redistribution," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 176-200, March.
- Hausman, Jerry A, 1978.
"Specification Tests in Econometrics,"
Econometric Society, vol. 46(6), pages 1251-71, November.
- Knapp, Thomas A. & Graves, Philip E., 1989. "On the role of amenities in models of migration and regional development," MPRA Paper 19914, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- Roback, Jennifer, 1982. "Wages, Rents, and the Quality of Life," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 90(6), pages 1257-78, December.
- Treyz, George I, et al, 1993. "The Dynamics of U.S. Internal Migration," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 75(2), pages 209-14, May.
- McGranahan, David A., 1999. "Natural Amenities Drive Rural Population Change," Agricultural Economics Reports 33955, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
- Diana M. Burton, 1997. "An Astructural Analysis of National Forest Policy and Employment," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 79(3), pages 964-974.
- Greenwood, Michael J & Hunt, Gary L, 1984. "Migration and Interregional Employment Redistribution in the United States," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 74(5), pages 957-69, December.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:aaea01:20748. See general 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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.