Ecology and Society Ecology and Society
E&S Home > Vol. 22, Iss. 2 > Art. 7 > Abstract Open Access Publishing 
Locating financial incentives among diverse motivations for long-term private land conservation

Matthew J. Selinske, Interdisciplinary Conservation Science Research Group, School of Global, Urban and Social Studies, RMIT University, Melbourne, Australia; ARC Centre of Excellence for Environmental Decisions, The University of Queensland, Australia
Benjamin Cooke, Centre for Urban Research, School of Global, Urban and Social Studies, RMIT University, Melbourne Australia
Nooshin Torabi, Interdisciplinary Conservation Science Research Group, School of Global, Urban and Social Studies, RMIT University, Melbourne, Australia
Mathew J. Hardy, Interdisciplinary Conservation Science Research Group, School of Global, Urban and Social Studies, RMIT University, Melbourne, Australia; ARC Centre of Excellence for Environmental Decisions, The University of Queensland, Australia
Andrew T. Knight, Department of Life Sciences, Imperial College London; ARC Centre of Excellence for Environmental Decisions, The University of Queensland, Australia; Department of Botany, Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University; The Silwood Group, London, UK
Sarah A Bekessy, Interdisciplinary Conservation Science Research Group, School of Global, Urban and Social Studies, RMIT University, Melbourne, Australia; ARC Centre of Excellence for Environmental Decisions, The University of Queensland, Australia

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5751/ES-09148-220207

Full Text: HTML   
Download Citation


Abstract

A variety of policy instruments are used to promote the conservation of biodiversity on private land. These instruments are often employed in unison to encourage land stewardship beneficial for biodiversity across a broad range of program types, but questions remain about which instruments are the appropriate tools when seeking long-term change to land-management practice. Drawing on three case studies, two in Australia and one in South Africa, spanning various program types—a biodiverse carbon planting scheme, a covenanting program, and a voluntary stewardship program—we investigate the importance of financial incentives and other mechanisms from the landholder’s perspective. From participant interviews we find that landholders have preconceived notions of stewardship ethics. Motivations to enroll into a private land conservation program are not necessarily what drives ongoing participation, and continued delivery of multiple mechanisms will likely ensure long-term landholder engagement. Financial incentives are beneficial in lowering uptake costs to landholders but building landholder capacity, management assistance, linking participants to a network of conservation landholders, and recognition of conservation efforts may be more successful in fostering long-term biodiversity stewardship. Furthermore, we argue that diverse, multiple instrument approaches are needed to provide the flexibility required for dynamic, adaptive policy responses. We raise a number of key considerations for conservation organizations regarding the appropriate mix of financial and nonfinancial components of their programs to address long-term conservation objectives.

Key words

biodiversity; covenant; easement; farmer engagement; market-based instrument; policy mix; program design; reverse auction; stewardship

Copyright © 2017 by the author(s). Published here under license by The Resilience Alliance. This article  is under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.  You may share and adapt the work for noncommercial purposes provided the original author and source are credited, you indicate whether any changes were made, and you include a link to the license.

Top
Ecology and Society. ISSN: 1708-3087