Economic incentives to conserve wildlife on private lands: Analysis and policy

被引:4
|
作者
Tisdell C.A. [1 ]
机构
[1] Department of Economics, University of Queensland, Brisbane
来源
Environmentalist | 2004年 / 24卷 / 3期
关键词
Australia; Biodiversity; Conservation on private lands; Economic incentives for conservation; Markets and wildlife; Northern Territory of Australia; Property rights and conservation; South Africa; wildlife conservation;
D O I
10.1007/s10669-005-6049-9
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Some believe that provision of private property rights in wildlife on private land provides a powerful economic incentive for nature conservation because it enables property owners to market such wildlife or its attributes. If such marketing is profitable, private landholders will conserve the wildlife concerned and its required habitat. But land is not always most profitably used for exploitation of wildlife, and many economic values of wildlife (such as non-use economic values) cannot be marketed. The mobility of some wildlife adds to the limitations of the private-property approach. While some species may be conserved by this approach, it is suboptimal as a single policy approach to nature conservation. Nevertheless, it is being experimented with, in the Northern Territory of Australia where landholders had a possibility of harvesting on their properties a quota of eggs and chicks of red-tailed black cockatoos for commercial sale. This scheme was expected to provide an incentive to private landholders to retain hollow trees essential for the nesting of these birds but failed. This case and others are analysed. Despite private-property failures, the long-term survival of some wildlife species depends on their ability to use private lands without severe harassment, either for their migration or to supplement their available resources, for example, the Asian elephant. Nature conservation on private land is often a useful, if not essential, supplement to conservation on public lands. Community and public incentives for such conservation are outlined. © 2005 Springer Science + Business Media, Inc.
引用
收藏
页码:153 / 163
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Can incentives make a difference? Assessing the effects of policy tools for encouraging tree-planting on private lands
    Ruseva, Tatyana B.
    Evans, Tom P.
    Fischer, Burnell C.
    JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT, 2015, 155 : 162 - 170
  • [22] Rent payments as incentives: Making endangered species welcome on private lands
    Bourland, TR
    Stroup, RL
    JOURNAL OF FORESTRY, 1996, 94 (04) : 18 - 21
  • [23] Beyond protected areas: Private lands and public policy anchor intact pathways for multi-species wildlife migration
    Tack, Jason D.
    Jakes, Andrew F.
    Jones, Paul F.
    Smith, Joseph T.
    Newton, Rebecca E.
    Martin, Brian H.
    Hebblewhite, Mark
    Naugle, David E.
    BIOLOGICAL CONSERVATION, 2019, 234 : 18 - 27
  • [24] African wildlife policy: protecting wildlife herbivores on private game ranches
    Kinyua, PID
    van Kooten, GC
    Bulte, EH
    EUROPEAN REVIEW OF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS, 2000, 27 (02) : 227 - 244
  • [25] Protecting habitats of endangered species on private lands: Analysis of the instruments and Canadian policy
    Barla, P
    Doucet, JA
    Green, JDMS
    CANADIAN PUBLIC POLICY-ANALYSE DE POLITIQUES, 2000, 26 (01): : 95 - 110
  • [26] COMPARING THE ECONOMIC VALUE OF FORAGE ON PUBLIC LANDS FOR WILDLIFE AND LIVESTOCK
    LOOMIS, J
    DONNELLY, D
    SORGSWANSON, C
    JOURNAL OF RANGE MANAGEMENT, 1989, 42 (02): : 134 - 138
  • [27] ECONOMIC INCENTIVES IN HEALTH MANPOWER POLICY
    LANGWELL, KM
    WERNER, JL
    MEDICAL CARE, 1980, 18 (11) : 1085 - 1096
  • [28] EQUALITY, INCENTIVES, AND ECONOMIC-POLICY
    PALMER, RW
    AMERICAN ECONOMIC REVIEW, 1980, 70 (02): : 123 - 127
  • [29] Targeted Economic Incentives: An Analysis of State Fiscal Policy and Regulatory Conditions
    Calcagno, Peter T.
    Hefner, Frank L.
    REVIEW OF REGIONAL STUDIES, 2018, 48 (01): : 71 - 91
  • [30] A policy portfolio approach to biodiversity protection on private lands
    Doremus, H
    ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & POLICY, 2003, 6 (03) : 217 - 232