Making Conservation Public in Mexico: creating a National Public

Making Conservation Public in Mexico: creating a National Public Lands Trust from scratch Paulo Quadri Barba PhD Candidate Environmental Studies Department UC Santa Cruz

Outline What is this about? Brief history and institutional context of land ownership in Mexico. Why create a National Public Lands Trust for Conservation. Using GIS for systematic conservation planning: Data Cartographic models Next Steps

About the project Initiative presented to the Ministry of the Environment (SEMARNAT) and the National Commission of Protected Areas (CONANP) in 2014. Objective Creation of a National Public Lands Trust in Mexico 1 st phase of project completed in 2015: technical and theoretical justifications and viability studies. Part of my doctoral dissertation project Today I will cover some aspects of how are we planning to use GIS for systematic conservation planning.

Land Reform and Distribution in Mexico Data: INEGI historic archives

Land Reform and Distribution in Mexico Data: INEGI historic archives 2 nd Land Reform

Land Reform and Distribution in Mexico Data: INEGI, 2014.

Land Reform and Distribution in Mexico Data: INEGI, 2014.

Why buy land for conservation? Only ~ 18% of Mexico s protected areas (PA) exist under public land ownership. The portfolio of conservation instruments is limited, relying mostly on stewardship agreements with landowners. Every year is more difficult to negotiate PA decrees. The supply of conservation as a public good is almost entirely dominated by private entities and thus is suboptimal. PAs does not seem to be providing poverty reduction benefits. Lack of Access to the majority of Mexican citizens and internationals.

Why create a National Conservation Land Trust? Economic, Demographic, and Forest Transitions

Why create a National Conservation Land Trust? 2 nd Land Reform Can t sell Ejido land 1992 Land Market Ejido Structure

How? Funding Carbon Tax + Private and International Donors Volume Tax per liter (MXN) Revenue (millones de pesos) Annual 45,700 liters 0.1038 4,743.6 Consumption of Gasoline a Annual 22,900 liters 0.1259 2,883.1 Consumption of Diesel b Total 68,600 liters 7,626.7 ~ $450,000,000 USD / yr

How Systematic Conservation Planning What is ecologically important? Biodiversity Approach What is socioeconomically important? Ecosystem Services Approach

Resources optimization approach Land value Willingness to sell Feasible to manage and protect (avoid open access conditions) Low conflict areas High local and national support (high public utility)

Relevant data available in Mexico Biophysical Data Socioeconomic Data Institutional Data Priority Attention Sites (CONABIO) Areas of Biological Priority Conservation status Distance to PA Deforestation Risk Topography and Soils (INEGI) Digital Elevation Models Edaphology Poverty and marginality (CONEVAL) Demographic Data (CONAPO) Land Tenure Data (RAN - PROCEDE) Land Production Value (INEGI) Payment for Environmental Services (CONAFOR) Agricultural Subsidies (PROCAMPO) Ranching Subsidies (PROGAN)

Base Cartographic Model Ecological / Biological Significance Estimated Land Prices Willingness to sell Desirability Feasibility Land Acquisition Priorities

Base Cartographic Model Ecological / Biological Significance Estimated Land Prices Willingness to sell Desirability Feasibility Land Acquisition Priorities

Priority Sites for Conservation in Mexico (CONABIO, 2016)

Basic Cartographic Model Ecological / Biological Significance Estimated Land Prices Willingness to sell Desirability Feasibility Land Acquisition Priorities

Basic Cartographic Model Ecological / Biological Significance Estimated Land Prices Willingness to sell Desirability Feasibility Land Acquisition Priorities

Agricultural Rent Ag (SAGARPA) r a = P a Y a L a K a D a O a r = rent Y = production P = prices L = costs of labor K = capital + Subsidies Poverty (SEDESOL) PES / PA (SEMARNAT) r a = P a Y a + S g L a K a D a O a D = distance to markets / transportation costs O = Operation costs (e.g. fertilizer) Not considering the effect of land use zoning regulations including PAs NPV = n i P a Y a La Ka Da Oa (1 + δ) i

How much is society willing to pay for conservation? PES = Revealed willingness to pay of society for conservation ~ $1,000 MXN / ha / yr Using δ = 0.03 NPV = $33,300 MXN / ha ($1760 USD / ha) Alternative Use Annual Production per hectare Market Value per Unit (MXN) Total Annual Value per hectare (MXN) Net Revenue (total value costs of production) PROCAMPO o PROGAN 14 Net Present Value 12 Corn 1,000 Kg 1,3 1.95 5 1,950.00 975.00 1,000 12,887.00 Extensive Cattle Ranching 43 Kg 2 5.20 6 224.00 112.00 1,000 7,222.00 Chile (jalapeño) 1,500 kg 3 30.00 7 45,000.00 22,500.00 1,000 258,500.00 Soy 4,000 K 3 6.50 8 26,000.00 13,000.00 1,000 154,000.00 Sugar Cane 70,000 kg 3 0.50 9 35,000.00 17,500.00 1,000 203,500.00 Temperate 1 m 3 800.00 10 800.00 400.00 1,000 4,400.00 Forest Explotation 4 Peri-urban housing 13 NA 200.00 m2 2,000,000 hectare NA NA 2,000,000.00

Estimating Land Value: layer weights are in parentheses Municipal Production Value (High) Municipality Level Land Value (Medium) Roads Intersect Road Density Ranks (Low) Intersect Estimated Land Prices by Locality DEM (15m) Slope Slope Reclass Slope Ranks (Medium) Locality Level Land Value (High) EJIDOS / Localities Thiessen polygons Local Polygons Zonal Statistics Regulations or Subsidies (Medium) Urban Localities Make Route Layer Distance to Markets Ranks (High) Substract Urban Land

Ag. Production Value DEM Localities Urban Zoning / PA Roads

Estimated Land Prices for Estado de México Agricultural production value Slope Proximity to markets (cities) Road Density Land use restrictions

Land Value and Biological Priority (CONABIO)

Base Cartographic Model Ecological / Biological Significance Estimated Land Prices Willingness to sell Desirability Feasibility Land Acquisition Priorities

Base Cartographic Model Ecological / Biological Significance Estimated Land Prices Willingness to sell Desirability Feasibility Land Acquisition Priorities

Willingness to sell Knight et al, 2010 and Guerrero et al, 2010 (South Africa): Demographics Human Capital Social Capital Years of ownership Years of farming Primary land use Number of generations property has been owned by family Land owner s cultural group Conservation knowledge (awareness of institutions) Conservation behavior (ecotourism, soil conservation, restoration) Willingness to be involved in conservation agreements Entrepreneurship Burn-out potential Local networks (memberships) Broader networks (municipality involvement)

Next Steps? Final approval of 2 nd phase of the project by the Ministry of the Environment COP, 2016 Identification of areas of high ecosystem services value beyond hydrologic services Pilot projects in the field: Test the model: how much slope and distance reduce municipality level production value? Field surveys to predict willingness to sell (Knight et al, 2010; Guerrero et al, 2010) Create a nationwide land price estimation layer and feed into an heuristic algorithm along with conservation priority data. Build a dynamic - adaptive optimization model.

Thank you and Questions! pquadri@ucsc.edu

Why create a National Conservation Land Trust?

Land Reform and Distribution in Mexico

1 2 3 4 5