IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/ceesdp/18887.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Institutional Options for the Protection of Open Space: Evidence from Poland

Author

Listed:
  • Wasilewski, Adam
  • Sikor, Thomas

Abstract

This paper seeks to contribute to the development of institutional options for the management of public goods in Central and Eastern Europe. It assesses the potential of different governance structures, including administrative hierarchies, market approaches, and efforts at local non-market co-ordination. The paper examines the management of public goods in Central and Eastern Europe through a study of open space management and urban sprawl in a semi-urban county near Warsaw, Poland. The protection of open space poses significant challenges to semi-urban land management, as its benefits cannot be captured by individual entities and accrue as much to urban residents as to local people. The concrete institutional options investigated comprehend the use of land registers for monitoring land conversion, establishment of land trusts in part financed by a development gains tax, and technical and organisational support for local environmental organisations. The evaluation of options builds on an analysis of causes underlying rapid land conversion in the past decade. The causal analysis demonstrates that privatization and decentralisation have evoked the radical changes in land use. The demand for housing land motivated farmers to sell semi-urban land, as the state could not enforce its legal oversight over land use. Land conversion was driven by local alliances of farmers eager to "cash in" on their newly acquired rights of alienation, a broader rural society primarily interested in economic development, and local authorities lured by increasing tax revenues.

Suggested Citation

  • Wasilewski, Adam & Sikor, Thomas, 2003. "Institutional Options for the Protection of Open Space: Evidence from Poland," Discussion Papers 18887, CEESA: Central and Eastern European Sustainable Agriculture International Research Project.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:ceesdp:18887
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.18887
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/18887/files/dp030018.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.18887?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ray Challen, 2000. "Institutions, Transaction Costs and Environmental Policy," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 1961.
    2. Baland, Jean-Marie & Platteau, Jean-Philippe, 2000. "Halting Degradation of Natural Resources: Is There a Role for Rural Communities?," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198290612.
    3. Bromley, Daniel W & Hodge, Ian, 1990. "Private Property Rights and Presumptive Policy Entitlements: Reconsidering the Premises of Rural Policy," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 17(2), pages 197-214.
    4. Edella Schlager & Elinor Ostrom, 1992. "Property-Rights Regimes and Natural Resources: A Conceptual Analysis," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 68(3), pages 249-262.
    5. Ian Hodge, 2000. "Agri‐environmental Pelationships and the Choice of Policy Mechanism," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(2), pages 257-273, February.
    6. Daniel W. Bromley, 1991. "Pearce, David, Edward Barbier, and Anil Markandya. Sustainable Development: Economics and Environment in the Third World, Brookfield VT: Edward Elgar, 1990, vii + 217 pp., $48.95," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 73(3), pages 975-976.
    7. Daniel Bromley, 1992. "The commons, common property, and environmental policy," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 2(1), pages 1-17, January.
    8. R. Quentin Grafton, 2000. "Governance of the Commons: A Role for the State?," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 76(4), pages 504-517.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sikor, Thomas, 2005. "Agro-Environmental Governance and the State: Lessons from Central and Eastern Europe," Proceedings “Schriften der Gesellschaft für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften des Landbaues e.V.”, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA), vol. 40, March.
    2. Gatzweiler, Franz W. & Hagedorn, Konrad & Zellei, Anett & Lowe, Philip & Sumelius, John & Backman, Stefan & Tanic, Stjepan, 2003. "Volume 4: Synopsis of the Central and Eastern European Sustainable Agriculture Project (CEESA)," CEESA\FAO Series 18901, CEESA: Central and Eastern European Sustainable Agriculture International Research Project.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sikor, Thomas, 2005. "Agro-Environmental Governance and the State: Lessons from Central and Eastern Europe," Proceedings “Schriften der Gesellschaft für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften des Landbaues e.V.”, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA), vol. 40, March.
    2. Sikor, Thomas, 2002. "The Commons in Transition," Discussion Papers 18880, CEESA: Central and Eastern European Sustainable Agriculture International Research Project.
    3. Gani, Azmat & Scrimgeour, Frank, 2014. "Modeling governance and water pollution using the institutional ecological economic framework," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 363-372.
    4. Olegas Beriozovas & Dalia Perkumienė & Mindaugas Škėma & Abdellah Saoualih & Larbi Safaa & Marius Aleinikovas, 2024. "Research Advancement in Forest Property Rights: A Thematic Review over Half a Decade Using Natural Language Processing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(19), pages 1-28, September.
    5. Rout, S., 2008. "Institutional and policy reforms in water sector in India: review of issues, concepts and trends," Conference Papers h042926, International Water Management Institute.
    6. Ghebru, Hosaena, 2015. "Is There a Merit to the Continuum Tenure Approach? A Case of Demand for Land Rights Formulation in Rural Mozambique," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 211683, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    7. Elinor Ostrom, 2014. "A Polycentric Approach For Coping With Climate Change," Annals of Economics and Finance, Society for AEF, vol. 15(1), pages 97-134, May.
    8. Mannetti, Lelani M. & Göttert, Thomas & Zeller, Ulrich & Esler, Karen J., 2017. "Expanding the protected area network in Namibia: An institutional analysis," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 28(PB), pages 207-218.
    9. Coggan, Anthea & Whitten, Stuart M. & Bennett, Jeff, 2010. "Influences of transaction costs in environmental policy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(9), pages 1777-1784, July.
    10. Claron, Charles & Mikou, Mehdi & Levrel, Harold & Tardieu, Léa, 2022. "Mapping urban ecosystem services to design cost-effective purchase of development rights programs: The case of the Greater Paris metropolis," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(C).
    11. van Griethuysen, Pascal, 2012. "Bona diagnosis, bona curatio: How property economics clarifies the degrowth debate," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 262-269.
    12. Gabriel Hoh Teck Ling & Pau Chung Leng & Chin Siong Ho, 2019. "Effects of Diverse Property Rights on Rural Neighbourhood Public Open Space (POS) Governance: Evidence from Sabah, Malaysia," Economies, MDPI, vol. 7(2), pages 1-33, June.
    13. Place, Frank & Swallow, Brent M., 2000. "Assessing the relationships between property rights and technology adoption in smallholder agriculture: a review of issues and empirical methods," CAPRi working papers 2, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    14. Edwards, Geoff & Fraser, Iain, 2001. "Reconsidering agri-environmental policy permitted by the Uruguay round agreement," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 313-326, May.
    15. Gorton, Matthew & Sauer, Johannes & Peshevski, Mile & Bosev, Dane & Shekerinov, Darko & Quarrie, Steve, 2009. "Water Communities in the Republic of Macedonia: An Empirical Analysis of Membership Satisfaction and Payment Behavior," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 37(12), pages 1951-1963, December.
    16. Crase, Lin & Dollery, Brian, 2006. "Water rights: a comparison of the impacts of urban and irrigation reforms in Australia," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 50(3), pages 1-12, September.
    17. Brobbey, Lawrence Kwabena & Hansen, Christian Pilegaard & Kyereh, Boateng, 2021. "The dynamics of property and other mechanisms of access: The case of charcoal production and trade in Ghana," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    18. Quinn, C.H. & Fraser, E.D.G. & Hubacek, K. & Reed, M.S., 2010. "Property rights in UK uplands and the implications for policy and management," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 1355-1363, April.
    19. Paavola, Jouni, 2007. "Institutions and environmental governance: A reconceptualization," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 93-103, June.
    20. Ratinger, Tomas & Krumalova, Veronika & Prazan, Jaroslav, 2004. "Institutional Options for the Conservation of Biodiversity: Evidence from the Czech Republic," Discussion Papers 18888, CEESA: Central and Eastern European Sustainable Agriculture International Research Project.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Land Economics/Use;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:ceesdp:18887. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://cordis.europa.eu/project/rcn/52803_en.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.