AN ANALYSIS OF SOCIAL ARRANGEMENTS THAT CREATE OPEN SPACE. Lisa Blake Ava Goodale Caroline Krassen Johnathan Licitra Elizabeth Ochoa

Transcription

1 AN ANALYSIS OF SOCIAL ARRANGEMENTS THAT CREATE OPEN SPACE Lisa Blake Ava Goodale Caroline Krassen Johnathan Licitra Elizabeth Ochoa

2 OPEN SPACE REGIMES ARE The institutions of state, market, and community that, independently or collectively, have created different property rights with the goal of protecting and/or use of natural capital.

3 QUESTIONS What institutional open space regime employs the most coherence for social and environmental goals? GOALS: Biodiversity Green space Natural Resources Revenue Dryzek discourse /states/southdakota/

4 DIFFERENT WAYS TO PROTECT OPEN SPACE STATE National Park Service Preservation US Forest Service Conservation MARKET / COMMUNITY The Nature Conservancy Local land trusts

5 NATIONAL PARK SERVICE Designed to preserve the best in America Preserves cultural and natural resources Cultural resources Altered by man Natural resources Unaltered by man

6 LEGISLATION The Antiquities Act of 1906 Gave President power to establish national monuments (parks) Gave rise to the reservation of federal lands The Historic Sites Act of 1935 Allowed for the preservation of cultural resources

7 NPS LAND USES Used in a way compatible to preserve the significance of the resource Recreation for the public Open access without withdrawal rights

8 PROBLEMS WITH NPS Visitor congestion Yosemite Valley South rim of Grand Canyon Park Barrel Creation of new, expensive parks to spur local economy Lack of funding Pork funding Congressional leaders want funds used for purposes that have greatest political return

9 POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS Parks could charge user fees Parks could vary fees depending on the popularity of the park Change in political climate resulting in increased federal funding

10 DISCOURSE ANALYSIS OF THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE BASIC ENTITIES RECOGNIZED OR CONSTRUCTED ASSUMPTIONS ABOUT NATURAL RELATIONSHIPS AGENTS AND THEIR MOTIVES o Global Limits o Nature equal to people o Experts o Preservation o Local, state, and federal government PRESERVATION!

11 NATIONAL FOREST SERVICE Established in 1905 by Congress to ensure quality of water and an ample supply of timber for the Nation s benefit TODAY Under US Department of Agriculture In charge of 191 million acres MISSION Forest and grassland Sustain the health, diversity, and productivity of the Nation s forest and grasslands to meet the needs of the present and future generations

12 NFS IS ABOUT Conservation rather than Preservation Extraction does occur usually by outside corporations Withdrawal rights The rest is used for wildlife habitat and recreational activities (open access)

13 PROBLEMS WITH NFS It must balance the needs of local people, national politics, and forest management Passage of National Environmental Policy Act in 1969 Involvement of the Public Combination of increased priority on wildlife and wilderness People object to how land is used There are a variety of views No logging Logging for prevention of forest fires Logging in just the plantations More logging Status quo

14 POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS ENGAGE IN PRACTICE OF STEWARDSHIP Ex: Forest Service assesses a forest worth half a million dollars Area is logged and half a million goes to timber companies ADDITIONAL MONEY Used to go to Treasury Department Now funneled into restoration projects Implementation of salmon-safe dams

15 DISCOURSE ANALYSIS OF THE NATIONAL FOREST SERVICE Basic Entities Recognized or Constructed Assumptions about Natural Relationships Agents and their Motives oglobal limits onature as brute matter oneed for resources osocial, economic and political structures ohierarchy of humans over everything else ofederal Government omarket/industries oexperts motivated by public opinion and NGOs CONSERVATION!

16 NPS/ NFS HOW EFFECTIVE ARE THEY? The NPS is very effective at preserving space. Its main downfall is expensive upkeep coupled with lack of funding The NFS allows Land to remain as open space Can withdraw resources Provides jobs BUT Internal strife within Forest Service Implementation of certain policies difficult Forest Service opposed no matter what it does

17 OTHER OPTIONS GO TO NATIONAL PARK SERVICE Could be problematic: With enough land in parks and so much public opposition, people start to question the necessity of parks entirely DEVELOPMENT Bad! www4.pbase.com/ pgrupp/image/

18 SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES BETWEEN NPS AND NFS Similarities between NPS and NFS Derived from Epoch 1 type thinking Differences between NPS and NFS NPS Philosophy of preservation Natural resources and cultural resources Open access State main player Main set of rules NFS Philosophy of conservation Natural resources Open access and withdrawal rights of wildlife, fish and forests Govt., NGO s, local, people and public opinion Different rules in different parks

19 LAND EASEMENTS CONSERVATION EASEMENTS Legal document held between a land owner and a land trust or government agency that limits development and/or subdivision of that land in perpetuity

20 BENEFITS OF EASEMENTS LAND RETAINS USE Flexibility Landowner decides which rights to relinquish Minor changes are permitted House for children Barn for animals PUBLIC BENEFIT Aesthetic value of open space preservation Profit from healthy ecosystems MARKET FOR CONSERVATION Tax break is proportional to conservation value of land

21 PROBLEMS CONSERVED LAND IS STILL PRIVATE LAND Private in perpetuity SYSTEM CATERS TO WEALTHY LANDOWNERS Federal tax benefits Should public have access? Poorer landowners cannot cash in Benefit gained depends on significant source of income (proportionality tax bracket)

22 THE NATURE CONSERVANCY WHAT IS TNC? International, non-profit organization Mission Statement: To preserve the plants, animals, and natural communities that represent the diversity of life on Earth by protecting the lands and water they need to survive HOW DO THEY WORK? Conservation by Design Private lands conservation Ecotourism Partnerships Government, non-profit, local stakeholders, indigenous people and traditional communities, corporations

23 TNC IN TEXAS DEVILS RIVER Crucial contributor of water in west Texas Runs through eight ranches owned by TNC THE RANCHES Working or non-working Sheep ranching Deer leases Pure aesthetic value All under easement Three managed by land/water/sky realty /states/texas/preserves/art10613.html

24 LOCAL LAND TRUSTS What are they? Non-profit organizations that work to protect land through easements Responsible for monitoring and enforcing easements 1,500 land trusts nationally protecting 9.4 million acres (2003) How do they work? Land Trust Alliance National advisory group that provides resources and creates linkages between land trust Standards and Practices

25 GEORGES RIVER LAND TRUST Local land trust in mid-coast Maine Protects 900 acres of Georges River Watershed PARTNERSHIPS Landowners National Park Service The Nature Conservancy Local Non-Governmental Organizations Surrounding land trusts

26 TNC vs. LOCAL LAND TRUST THE NATURE CONSERVANCY Highly staffed (expertise) Political leverage; reputation Scale is larger LOCAL LAND TRUST Volunteers Local leverage TAKE HOME MESSAGE Different approaches provide options for landowners Partnerships

27 DISCOURSE ANALYSIS OF CONSERVATION EASEMENTS BASIC ENTITIES RECOGNIZED OR CONSTRUCTED ASSUMPTIONS ABOUT NATURAL RELATIONSHIPS AGENTS AND THEIR MOTIVES o Markets o Nature is valuable o Landowners o Tax incentives o Controlled land use o Community o Private property o State o Limited development o Whole landscapes

28 COMPARATIVE DISCOURSE ANALYSIS OF OPEN SPACE CONSERVATION REGIMES NPS NFS EASEMENTS Entities recognized Preservation Conservation Preservation and/or conservation Assumptions about Natural relationships Nature equal to people Nature is brute matter Nature is valuable; Controlled land use Agents Government Government Landowners, market Access rights Public recreation Extraction, public recreation No public access (usually) Resources Protected Natural Resources, cultural/historic resources Natural resources, economic resources Natural resources, economic resources Scale Generally larger Generally larger Generally smaller Geography More prevalent in western US More prevalent in western US More prevalent in eastern US Transparency/ accountability Public comment Public comment TNC- partnerships, public reputation Land Trusts: LTA Acquisition Non-voluntary Non-voluntary Voluntary Other Protects areas of national significance Protects areas of national significance Protects areas of local significance M&K Epoch I Epoch 1 II Epoch II

29 Sustainable Development / Epoch III? NPS NFS TNC Local Land Trust Performance based + + Information rich Flexible accountable + + Technology spurring + Regulatory system (synergy)

30 CONCLUSION INSTITUTIONAL PLURALITY AND COMPLEMENTARITY Each open space regime serves a different purpose (conservation, preservation, local, national) Land as a mosaic: need a variety of approaches to match a diversity of needs Fragmentation, Natural Areas

31 Conclusion Public and Private institutions frequently are intermeshed and depend on one another, rather then existing in isolated worlds. - Ostrom 1990 The beauty of having a variety of tools makes the job of land conservation easier -Annette Naegel (GRLT)