Tax Shifting and Incentives for Biodiversity Conservation on Private Lands

Schuster, Richard; Law, Elizabeth A.; Rodewald, Amanda D.; Martin, Tara G.; Wilson, Kerrie A.; Watts, Matthew; Possingham, Hugh P.; Arcese, Peter

doi:10.1111/conl.12377

Cited by 18 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The overarching conclusion is that the Borlaug effect is weak, unreliable, and may not spare the land of most conservation value. Therefore, targeted environmental policies-centred on land-use zoning [117], forest protection [118] and incentives for conservation and restoration [119]-need to be strengthened to ensure that land is spared [109,120].…”

Section: Will Yield Increases Lead To Land Sparing?mentioning

confidence: 99%

What Have We Learned from the Land Sparing-sharing Model?

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The land sparing-sharing model provides a powerful heuristic and analytical framework for understanding the potential of agricultural landscapes to support wild species. However, its conceptual and analytical strengths and limitations remain widely contested or misunderstood. Here, I review what inferences can and cannot be derived from the framework, and discuss eight specific points of contention and confusion. The land sparing-sharing framework is underpinned by an ethic that seeks to minimise harm to non-human species. It is used to quantify how good farmland is for different species, in relation to appropriate reference land uses, and at what opportunity cost. The results of empirical studies that have used the model indicate that most species will have larger populations if food is produced on as small an area as possible, while sparing as large an area of native vegetation as possible. The potential benefits of land sharing or intermediate strategies for wild species are more limited. I review disagreements about the scope of analysis (food production cf. food security), the value of high-yield farmland for wildlife, the (ir)relevance of the Borlaug hypothesis, scale and heterogeneity, fostering human connections to nature, the prospects for land sparing in heavily-modified landscapes, the role of land sparing in improving connectivity, and the political implications of the model. Interpreted alongside insights from social, political and economic studies, the model can help us to understand how decisions about land-use will affect the persistence of wild species populations into the future.

show abstract

Section: Will Yield Increases Lead To Land Sparing?mentioning

confidence: 99%

What Have We Learned from the Land Sparing-sharing Model?

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, a tax-shifting strategy rewards protection of biodiversity features on private lands by off-setting property taxes to lands without protection. Tax shifting could limit ongoing and future threats to species at risk in regions with limited non-private land (Schuster et al 2017).…”

Section: Putting the Pieces Together: Establishing Protected Areas Inmentioning

confidence: 99%

Informing Canada’s commitment to biodiversity conservation: A science-based framework to help guide protected areas designation through Target 1 and beyond

Coristine

Jacob²,

Schuster

et al. 2018

FACETS

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Biodiversity is intrinsically linked to the health of our planet-and its people. Yet, increasingly, human activities are causing the extinction of species, degrading ecosystems, and reducing nature's resilience to climate change and other threats. As a signatory to the Convention on Biological Diversity, Canada has a legal responsibility to protect 17% of land and freshwater by 2020. Currently, Canada has protected ∼10% of its terrestrial lands, requiring a marked increase in the pace and focus of protection over the next three years.Given the distribution, extent, and geography of Canada's current protected areas, systematic conservation planning would provide decision-makers with a ranking of the potential for new protected area sites to stem biodiversity loss and preserve functioning ecosystems. Here, we identify five key principles for identifying lands that are likely to make the greatest contribution to reversing biodiversity declines and ensuring biodiversity persistence into the future. We identify current gaps and integrate principles of protecting (i) species at risk, (ii) representative ecosystems, (iii) intact OPEN ACCESS

show abstract

“…and thus trigger multiple RLE criteria. Such cases may require multiple policy instruments (an “instrument mix,” Ring & Schröter‐Schlaack, ), being applied in different dimensions to ensure ecosystem conservation (Rogge & Reichardt, ; Schuster et al., ). These dimensions correspond to (a) policy fields (land use planning, climate change, science, and industrial), (b) governance scales (country, region, and district), (c) geography, and (d) time.…”

Section: Framework For Incorporating Rle Into Public Policymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…and thus trigger multiple RLE criteria. Such cases may require multiple policy instruments (an "instrument mix," Ring & Schröter-Schlaack, 2011), being applied in different dimensions to ensure ecosystem conservation (Rogge & Reichardt, 2016;Schuster et al, 2017). These dimensions correspond to (a) policy fields (land F I G U R E 2 Suggested framework for the inclusion of RLE in the policy process, based on Dovers and Hezri (2010) and Rogge and Reichardt (2016).…”

Section: Framework For Incorporating Rle Into Public Policymentioning

confidence: 99%

Operationalizing the IUCN Red List of Ecosystems in public policy

Alaniz

Pérez-Quezada

Galleguillos

et al. 2019

CONSERVATION LETTERS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Threats to ecosystems are closely linked to human development, whereas lack, insufficiency, and inefficiency of public policies are important drivers of environmental decline. Previous studies have discussed the contribution of IUCN's Red List of Ecosystems (RLE) in conservation issues; however, its applications in different policy fields and instruments for achieving biodiversity conservation have not been explored in detail. Here, we introduce a framework to operationalize the RLE in public policy, facilitating work of governments, practitioners, and decision makers. Our analysis identified 20 policy instruments that could reduce risks to ecosystems highlighted by different Red List criteria. We discuss how RLE could inform the policy process by analyzing different instruments that could be designed, implemented, and modified to achieve risk reduction. We also present practical examples from around the world showing how ecosystem conservation could be improved by operationalizing the RLE in policy instruments. The RLE criteria can inform the policy process by helping to shape objectives and identifying policy instruments that directly address the causes and severity of risks illuminated in Red List assessments. We conclude that RLE could be expanded into a broader holistic spectrum of policy instruments, which could be a key to achieving the ecosystem conservation.

show abstract

Tax Shifting and Incentives for Biodiversity Conservation on Private Lands

Cited by 18 publications

References 31 publications

What Have We Learned from the Land Sparing-sharing Model?

What Have We Learned from the Land Sparing-sharing Model?

Informing Canada’s commitment to biodiversity conservation: A science-based framework to help guide protected areas designation through Target 1 and beyond

Operationalizing the IUCN Red List of Ecosystems in public policy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About