The effectiveness of state preferential property tax programs in conserving forests: Comparisons, measurements, and challenges

Ma, Zhao; Butler, Brett J.; Catanzaro, Paul; Greene, John L.; Hewes, Jaketon H.; Kilgore, Michael A.; Kittredge, David B.; Tyrrell, Mary L.

doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2013.09.016

Cited by 18 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This time frame was regarded as sufficient because EU funds will be available in the first 15 years of the project, additional outflows will not be incurred in years [16][17][18][19], and maintenance expenditures will appear in year 20. Beginning in year 13, when maintenance expenditures will be incurred (late brushing), NCFs will be identical for each scenario.…”

Section: Case Study-detailed Assumptions and Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Most studies analyze the effectiveness of government programs supporting the afforestation of farmland. They are often based on the results of surveys addressing farmers, who are asked to describe the key drivers and the main obstacles in the afforestation process [16,20,21,30], or institutions supporting afforestation schemes [19]. Regression models are developed, and marginal effects of forestry subsidies are calculated [18].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the United States, forest policy involves tools, such as technical support, education, financial incentives and legal regulations. Tax incentives play the most important role [19]. A study of the Spanish forest market covering 1993-2003 revealed that farmers who participated in afforestation schemes co-funded by subsidies earned 3% more than agricultural producers who chose not to convert their land to forests [16].…”

Section: Decision Making Process On Afforestationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Financial Dilemmas Associated with the Afforestation of Low-Productivity Farmland in Poland

Źróbek-Różańska

Nowak

et al. 2014

Forests

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:In Poland, 82% of forests are State-owned, and only 17% of forests constitute private property. Each year, forests are converted to other land-use types, mainly for road construction. The afforestation rate on privately-owned low-productivity land is decreasing steadily. The owners and perpetual usufructuaries of this kind of land are eligible to government subsidies to cover establishment expenditures in whole or in part, provided that the afforestation scheme complies with the local zoning plan or an outline planning permission. The above creates a dilemma for farmers-is this a profitable option of managing low-productivity land? Owners of small farms particularly often face such dilemmas. Owners of small farms, which consist of low-yield agricultural land, can be regarded as investors operating on the real estate market, but those investors have features characteristic of agricultural producers. This study relied on the net present value (NPV) criterion, which is popularly used to assess the effectiveness of investments on the real estate market. A financial feasibility assessment performed with the use of such method in view of afforestation statistics and the 5% discount rate on the Polish forest market OPEN ACCESSForests 2014, 5 2847 revealed the highest increase in net cumulative cash flows in the first five years, followed by a gradual decrease in successive years. The first negative cash flow was reported in year 20. NPV would remain negative because farmers would be charged with periodic maintenance expenditures until the stand reaches harvestable age at approximately 40 years. The longer the investment period, the lower the profits, even if discount rate is excluded. Investments of the type are difficult to terminate because forests younger than 20 years are difficult to sell at a price that covers growing outflows. Afforestation projects are also influenced by other economic and non-economic factors. The paper validates the research hypothesis that afforestation is a long-term investment that delivers benefits for future generations.

show abstract

Section: Case Study-detailed Assumptions and Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Decision Making Process On Afforestationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Financial Dilemmas Associated with the Afforestation of Low-Productivity Farmland in Poland

Źróbek-Różańska

Nowak

et al. 2014

Forests

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We selected four case studies to showcase prominent examples of private-land conservation policy instruments: conservation easements, contract payments, property-tax incentives, and regulatory mitigation ( (Ma et al 2014). The four cases include diverse conservation organizations, including two federal agencies, one state agency, and one multiorganization database with both nonprofit and government organizations.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Wisconsin's MFL and preceding Forest Crop Law (FCL) are considered among the most effective state programs in protecting forests highly susceptible to development (Ma et al 2014). Both MFL and FCL tax incentive programs are administered by the WDNR primarily to encourage timber production and sound forestry practices on private lands (Rickenbach et al 2005), with a growing recognition of nontimber public benefits (Locke and Rissman 2012) …”

Section: Property-tax Incentive: Wisconsin Department Of Natural Resomentioning

confidence: 99%

Public access to spatial data on private-land conservation

Rissman¹,

Owley²,

L’Roe³

et al. 2017

E&S

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. Information is critical for environmental governance. The rise of digital mapping has the potential to advance privateland conservation by assisting with conservation planning, monitoring, evaluation, and accountability. However, privacy concerns from private landowners and the capacity of conservation entities can influence efforts to track spatial data. We examine public access to geospatial data on conserved private lands and the reasons data are available or unavailable. We conduct a qualitative comparative case study based on analysis of maps, documents, and interviews. We compare four conservation programs involving different conservation tools: conservation easements (the growing but incomplete National Conservation Easement Database), regulatory mitigation (gaps in tracking U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's endangered species habitat mitigation), contract payments (lack of spatial data on U.S. Department of Agriculture's Conservation Reserve Program due to Farm Bill restrictions), and property-tax incentives (online mapping of Wisconsin's managed forest tax program). These cases illuminate the capacity and privacy reasons for current incomplete or inaccessible spatial data and the politics of mapping private land. If geospatial data are to contribute fully to planning, evaluation, and accountability, we recommend improving information system capacity, enhancing learning networks, and reducing legal and administrative barriers to information access, while balancing the right to information and the right to privacy.

show abstract

Private forest owners and property tax incentive programs in the United States: A national review and analysis of ecosystem services promoted, landowner participation, forestland area enrolled, and magnitude of tax benefits provided

Kilgore

Ellefson

Funk

et al. 2018

Forest Policy and Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The effectiveness of state preferential property tax programs in conserving forests: Comparisons, measurements, and challenges

Cited by 18 publications

References 22 publications

Financial Dilemmas Associated with the Afforestation of Low-Productivity Farmland in Poland

Financial Dilemmas Associated with the Afforestation of Low-Productivity Farmland in Poland

Public access to spatial data on private-land conservation

Private forest owners and property tax incentive programs in the United States: A national review and analysis of ecosystem services promoted, landowner participation, forestland area enrolled, and magnitude of tax benefits provided

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About