The Purchase of Development Rights: Preserving Agricultural Land and Open Space

Daniels, Tom

doi:10.1080/01944369108975517

Cited by 82 publications

(53 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…They have proven useful for temporarily slowing development until more permanent conservation strategies can be employed, such as conservation easements (Hart 1991b). Property rights include a variety of rights, such as mineral rights, grazing rights, rights to develop, and rights to sell, each of which can be sold or contracted separately (Raymond 1997, Huntsinger and Hopkinson 1996, Daniels 1991. Property owners can sell or donate the right to develop land in perpetuity as part of creating a conservation easement.…”

Section: Rangeland Conservation Optionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

To ranch or not to ranch: Home on the urban range?

Liffmann¹,

Huntsinger²,

Forero³

2000

REM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

California ranchers in urban Alameda and Contra Costa Counties, and in rural Tehama County, were surveyed to examine effects of increasing development, land use change, and attrition of the ranching community on their commitment to ranching, and to assess land conservation program acceptability. Questions were about practices, reasons for ranching, and what influences ranching's future. Ranchers share much in common. Most enjoy ranching, "feeling close to the earth," living in a "good place for family life," and the camaraderie in the ranching community. They regularly carry out range improvements. Most believe that society is becoming "hostile to ranching." A dislike for outsider intervention and land use control prevails. Urban ranchers cared significantly less about the fate of their ranch if sold, and feared local land use planning much more. Rural ranchers overwhelmingly wanted their ranch to remain a productive ranch even if sold. No new ranchers appeared in the urban sample for the last 10 years. As urbanization proceeds, we suggest that a point is reached where ranchers recognize the social, ecological, and economic landscape as urban and see it as no longer suitable for ranching. Expecting to sell for development, and/or expecting zoning to change to allow it, becomes the rational view. Land conservation efforts, including relatively acceptable though as yet not widespread conservation easement programs, should begin before that happens.

show abstract

Section: Rangeland Conservation Optionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

To ranch or not to ranch: Home on the urban range?

Liffmann¹,

Huntsinger²,

Forero³

2000

REM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In contrast, if the program is mandatory all parcels are restricted whether the transfer occurs or not (Danner, 1997). Mandatory programs have a higher likelihood of success in preserving land and open space, even if they are more prone to legal challenges (Daniels, 1991).…”

Section: The Market For Development Rights: Problems and Solutionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Daniels (1991) argues that, when development pressures are intense, zoning may not be sufficient to preserve land, and TDR programs are a less expensive tool to accomplish preservation goals. Furthermore, TDR programs allow local officials to minimize commitment costs because once the development rights are severed from the property to preserve, they are not easily reattached.…”

Section: Distributional Consequences Of Tdr Programsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rural Collective Construction Land Transfer Based on Stakeholder Analysis

Minjun

Wang

Xie

et al. 2015

Journal of Resources and Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper discusses the use of a market-driven technique -transfer of development rights (TDR) -to preserve land from development while guaranteeing the rights of property owners. While the technique is often used in the United States, Europe has a lot more urgency in land preservation but it is still lagging in the use of market based instruments such as the transfer of development rights. This paper explores the economic arguments favoring the use of TDR programs, discusses the difficulties in implementing these programs in Europe, where commandand-control regulation has been preferred in land preservation to market-based solutions, and presents tentative hypotheses to explain the adoption of TDR programs in local communities. Preliminary data collected for TDR programs in Florida supports some of the arguments presented and encourages researchers to extend this empirical analysis to European countries.

show abstract

“…A landowner may voluntarily sell or donate a conservation easement to a government agency or private land trust and a deed of easement is recorded at the county courthouse. The land remains in private ownership, and may be sold or passed on to heirs, but the restrictions apply to all future landowners (Daniels, 1991). As of 2015, 28 states had passed legislation creating programs to purchase conservation easements and had spent nearly US$4 billion to preserve more than 2.5 million acres (American Farmland Trust, 2015).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Farmland preservation is a legal process in which a landowner voluntarily signs a deed of easement to restrict the development of the land to agricultural and open space uses, usually in perpetuity (Daniels, 1991). Once the deed of easement is recorded in the land records at the county courthouse, the restrictions in the deed of easement "run with the land," thus applying to all future landowners.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Preserving Large Farming Landscapes: The Case of Lancaster County, Pennsylvania

Daniels

Payne-Riley

2017

J. Agric. Food Syst. Community Dev.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Preserving large farming landscapes is one of the main goals of farmland preservation programs. Other goals include protecting highly productive soils, maintaining and enhancing the local farming economy, and promoting locally produced fresh food. Farmland preservation programs take time, however, because of the hefty funding requirements and the detailed process of preserving farmland through the acquisition of conservation easements by purchase or donation. The standard measures of dollars spent and farmland acres preserved do not give an accurate picture of the spatial outcomes of preservation and preservation effectiveness. Three other measures better reflect the spatial effectiveness of farmland preservation: acreage and percentage of preserved farm parcels located in agricultural zones, number and acreage of preserved farm parcels in large contiguous blocks, and number and acreage of preserved farm parcels along growth boundaries. Scattered preserved farms and preserved farms not located in agricultural zones are likely to face more nonfarm development nearby as well as problems with nonfarm neighbors. The farmland preservation effort in Lancaster County, Pennsylvania, provides an important case study of the pattern of farmland preservation over time. Other counties and land trusts can employ geographic information systems (GIS) methods in this study to monitor and evaluate the progress of their farmland preservation efforts.

show abstract

The Purchase of Development Rights: Preserving Agricultural Land and Open Space

Cited by 82 publications

References 5 publications

To ranch or not to ranch: Home on the urban range?

To ranch or not to ranch: Home on the urban range?

Rural Collective Construction Land Transfer Based on Stakeholder Analysis

Preserving Large Farming Landscapes: The Case of Lancaster County, Pennsylvania

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About