Topic: protected areas

Influence of Coastal Economic Valuations in the Caribbean: Enabling Conditions and Lessons Learned

Sarah Parsons — Mon, 10 Dec 2012 13:55:24 -0500

Executive Summary

Across the Caribbean, national economies are heavily dependent on coastal ecosystem services. Coral reefs, mangroves, and other coastal ecosystems provide fish habitat, attract tourists, and protect shorelines from storm damage. However, coastal habitats continue to degrade due to local and global pressures. For example, more than 75 percent of the Caribbean’s coral reefs are currently threatened by human activities. These threats to coastal ecosystems stem from both a lack of awareness of the benefits these ecosystems provide and the costs of insufficient protection, and a lack of political will to protect and sustainably manage these ecosystems. Many of the activities that damage coastal ecosystems arise from shortsighted and poorly informed decisions that fail to take long-term ecosystem values and the full range of benefits from coastal ecosystem services into account.

Economic valuation can contribute to better informed and more holistic decision making about resource use and identify opportunities for effective conservation. Over the past 30 years, the economic valuation literature on the Caribbean’s coastal and ocean resources has increased substantially. More than 200 coastal economic valuation studies of the monetary value of marine ecosystem goods and services in the Caribbean currently exist. However, despite this wealth of valuation studies and estimates, it is not clear whether these efforts have had a meaningful impact on policy or decision making concerning the management and use of these valuable natural resources; to date, there has been no assessment to address this critical question. It is also not immediately clear why some valuations have been more influential than others.

To get a more complete picture of the influence of past coastal valuations in the Caribbean, and to identify the key “enabling conditions” for valuations to influence policy, management, or investment decisions, the World Resources Institute (WRI) and the Marine Ecosystem Services Partnership (MESP) conducted semi-structured interviews with more than thirty marine conservation and valuation experts. Several of these interviews took place in the five countries where WRI had conducted coastal valuations. WRI also reviewed past valuation studies in the Caribbean that informants identified as influential. The findings of this review are based on expert opinion and documented cases of influence. Given the large number of total valuations and the difficulty of tracking influence, this review is not exhaustive. This paper identifies a number of variables that likely influence policy, management, and investment outcomes; however, it does not identify the extent to which each variable contributes to influence. We encourage future research on this topic.

Overall, we found that although valuation studies have helped raise awareness about the economic importance of coastal ecosystems in the Caribbean, few have actually had a positive influence on conservation and management- oriented policy, legislation, or investment in the region. We identified only 13 valuation studies that have influenced policy. For example, valuation helped to convince the government of St. Maarten to establish the country’s first national marine park, and the government of Belize to legally ban bottom trawling. Still, these success stories highlight the potential for economic valuation to have influence. We were able to draw out key contextual, procedural, and methodological conditions that likely led to success.

The elements increasing the likelihood of policy influence included:

a clear policy question;
local demand for valuation;
strong local partnerships and stakeholder engagement;
good governance with high transparency;
opportunities for revenue-raising;
effective communications and access to decision makers and/or media; and
a clear presentation of methods, assumptions, and limitations.

This analysis suggests that getting the methodology right—a principal concern of economists—is only part of the equation. Valuation practitioners who aspire to achieve impact must also consider wider contextual and procedural factors (such as governance and stakeholder engagement) when assessing the likelihood that their valuation will be influential. Furthermore, absolute accuracy is not always essential, as many stakeholders use valuation results as a ballpark figure to guide decision making. For this reason, valuation should be done on a scale appropriate to the policy question, minimizing costs as far as possible. More precise valuation may be necessary for questions relating to fees and taxes. In all cases, clear presentation of methods, assumptions, and limitations is critical in order to address critiques and legitimize results.

In the Caribbean, interest in ecosystem valuation to inform smart choices about coastal resource conservation and management and associated land use continues to grow. However, based on the results of this analysis, it is clear that valuation practitioners need to do much more to ensure that valuation studies have greater influence. In order to achieve more meaningful impacts, greater effort is necessary to strategically choose, design, and execute valuation studies; communicate valuation results to target audiences; and share successes and failures of influence with other practitioners. We conclude with next steps for building on this analysis, including:

Conduct further consultations with experts and decision makers in the Caribbean and beyond to enlarge the catalog of valuation success stories, and explore additional opportunities for qualitative and quantitative analysis of trends and causality.
Develop standardized approaches to monitor and evaluate the influence of coastal valuations.
Research the “return on investment” of economic valuation for coastal conservation and management in relation to other conservation tools.

The results of this review will inform WRI and our partners’ efforts to produce a standardized framework for economic valuation of coastal ecosystems in the Caribbean. A standardized valuation framework would help produce comparable and credible values across the Caribbean, legitimizing their use among decision makers and increasing their uptake. Drawing from this review, the framework will also contain advice on how to make future economic valuations as influential as possible, so they can realize their potential to catalyze positive changes in policy, management, and investment—helping both to restore the productivity and increase the economic contributions of coastal resources, while safeguarding the Caribbean’s valuable coastal and marine resources for future generations.

RELEASE: Indonesian President Yudhoyono Honored with “Valuing Nature Award” in NYC

Michael Oko — Mon, 24 Sep 2012 18:10:14 -0400

Three leading global environmental and conservation organizations are honoring Indonesia’s President H.E. Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono with the first-ever “Valuing Nature Award” for his leadership in recognizing the importance of natural resources and working to conserve them. Indonesia, with an area of nearly 2 million square kilometers (772,204 square miles) and over 2 hundred million people, is one of the most important countries when it comes to sustainability, particularly in relation to its globally important biodiversity, forest and marine resources. The award will be presented by the Nature Conservancy, World Resources Institute and WWF at a dinner in New York City, coinciding with the United Nations General Assembly meetings.

President Yudhoyono is specifically being recognized for his leadership in establishing the multilateral Coral Triangle Initiative, which will sustain extraordinary marine and coastal resources in six countries: Indonesia, Malaysia, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Solomon Islands and Timor-Leste. This region is one of the most biologically diverse areas, home to more than 75 percent of all known coral species and more than 37 percent of coral reef fish. In total, the coral reefs, mangroves, and associated natural habitats are valued at US $2.3 billion. These resources provide jobs, food, and business opportunities for millions of people in the region. Catalyzed by President Yudhoyono, the Coral Triangle Initiative brings together an unprecedented partnership of governments with public sector, private sector, NGOs and others, and offers a model for connecting marine conservation to the health and security of local communities.

Under President Yudhoyono’s administration, Indonesia pledged to achieve 20 million hectares of marine protected areas across the country by 2020, in which the protection will be strictly enforced and sufficiently financed. To date, Indonesia has achieved 13.4 million hectares of marine protected areas, considerably exceeding the target of 10 million hectares by 2010.

The three organizations recognize President Yudhoyono’s significant contributions to valuing nature and look forward to his continued strong conservation leadership.

Following are statements from representatives of the three organizations:

“Some leaders prioritize economic growth, others social equity, and yet others environmental protection. But Indonesia, under President Yudhoyono, is showing that smart environmental policies, smart growth policies, and smart social policies can be mutually reinforcing,” said Andrew Steer, President, World Resources Institute. “The world is watching and admiring this quest for a triple win.”

“There is an urgent need to scale up the pace and collaboration in marine conservation because the challenge simply cannot be conquered by one nation alone,” said Glenn Prickett, Chief External Affairs Officer for The Nature Conservancy. “President Yudhoyono understands this, and recognizes the extraordinary marine life abundance and diversity in the Coral Triangle region. His personal call for action to address threats in this globally important region led to the start of the Coral Triangle Initiative. Today, CTI has given the world a tremendous opportunity to value nature and realize the tangible benefits of it by managing the marine resources in a way that builds our natural capital.”

“The Coral Triangle Initiative has been a powerful catalyst for positive change in a region rich in biological diversity, but that desperately needs better protection for its precious and fragile marine and coastal resources,” said Catherine Plume, Managing Director of World Wildlife Fund’s Coral Triangle Program. “While important actions are underway, we hope that all stakeholders involved in this important initiative will redouble their sustainability efforts in the region.”

# # # #

The Nature Conservancy (TNC) is a leading conservation organization working around the world to protect ecologically important lands and waters for nature and people. The Conservancy and its more than 1 million members have protected nearly 120 million acres worldwide. Visit The Nature Conservancy on the Web at www.nature.org.

The World Resources Institute (WRI) is a global environmental and development think tank that goes beyond research to put ideas into action. We work with governments, companies, and civil society to build solutions to urgent environmental challenges. WRI’s transformative ideas protect the earth and promote development because sustainability is essential to meeting human needs and fulfilling human aspirations in the future. www.wri.org.

WWF is the world’s leading conservation organization, working in 100 countries for nearly half a century. With the support of almost 5 million members worldwide, WWF is dedicated to delivering science-based solutions to preserve the diversity and abundance of life on Earth, halt the degradation of the environment and combat climate change. Visit www.worldwildlife.org to learn more.

Managing Land for Mining and Conservation in the Democratic Republic of Congo

Peter Veit — Thu, 09 Aug 2012 13:46:41 -0400

This paper originally appeared on the Africa Biodiversity Collaborative Group website. The full text of the paper is available here.

Summary

With significant areas of overlapping high biodiversity resources and mineral wealth, the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) faces increasing pressure from competing uses of land widely considered incompatible. This policy paper reviews the rise of commercial mining and the mining concessions afforded ostensibly at the expense of conservation efforts where protected areas and mining permits overlap. The paper highlights the need for the DRC to review and harmonize multiple and often contradictory laws, strengthen land use laws, and build implemetation and enforcement capacity.

Read the full paper

Insights from the Field: Forests for Water

Kevin Lustig — Wed, 29 Feb 2012 10:56:29 -0500

Summary

In the Neuse River Basin in North Carolina, WRI is working with partners to identify beneficiaries and their water-related dependencies. We learned that clear documentation of the risks that beneficiaries face from water pollution, drought, and watershed degradation will help jump-start their participation in emerging PWS programs.
In the Sebago Lake Watershed in Maine, WRI is finalizing a methodology for “green-gray” analysis that will provide beneficiaries a way to identify cost-effective green infrastructure solutions to water infrastructure demands of the 21st century. Green infrastructure comprises all natural, seminatural and artificial networks of multifunctional ecological systems within, around, and between urban areas at all spatial scales. We learned that, to convince public investment managers to invest in green rather than gray, it is important to make the financial and business case using the same basic methodologies that are used for calculating the costs and benefits of conventional gray approaches.
WRI is also working to develop PWS programs that help the city of Raleigh meet streetscape, conservation development, tree conservation, storm water management, and water quality goals contained in its Unified Development Ordinance in a least cost manner. We learned that market-based solutions like PWS can play a large role in land-use planning processes and that these processes may represent a large untapped demand driver for PWS programs throughout the South.

MEDIA ADVISORY: 4th Annual Ecosystem Markets Conference - Making Ecosystems Work

Lauren Zelin — Mon, 27 Jun 2011 14:18:28 -0400

Experts and innovators meet to chart the future of ecosystem conservation

The World Resources Institute (WRI) and the American Forest Foundation (AFF) co-host the 4th annual Ecosystem Markets Conference in Madison, Wisconsin, June 29 – July 1, 2011. Hundreds of experts, innovators, land owners, government officials, investors and academics will discuss how to make ecosystem markets work to conserve natural resources; followed by a field trip through Aldo Leopold’s backyard to see ecosystem services in action.

At a time when state and federal budgets for conservation are dwindling, ecosystems are being degraded and threats to natural resources are increasing, more market-driven solutions are necessary to open the next chapter in conservation. Through ecosystem markets, the many benefits that well-managed lands provide, such as clean water and wildlife habitat, are assigned a value that results in payments to landowners for providing these services. This win-win for the public and landowners is necessary to protect the planet’s natural resources.

The 2011 conference theme “Ecosystem Markets: Making Them Work” underscores the need for innovative thinking to bridge the gap between ecosystem market potential and reality. Participants will gather for two days of open-format meetings on topics including payments to landowners, policy and ethics, private investment, water quality, bioenergy, and more.

The conference will open with a video address by Harris Sherman, Under Secretary for Natural Resources and Environment, U.S. Department of Agriculture. Senior representatives from the host organizations along with ecosystem services experts from around the world will participate in the conference and will be available for interviews.

What:
4th Annual Ecosystem Markets Conference. Website: http://ecomarketconference.com/

When:
June 29-30, 2011, conference sessions
July 1, 2011, field trip to working ecosystems and Aldo Leopold’s shack

Where:
The Madison Concourse Hotel and Governor’s Club
1 W. Dayton Street, Madison, WI
(Free parking is provided for our conference group)

Media Highlights:

Wednesday, June 29, 2011
* 8:15 a.m. – Welcome and video address by Harris Sherman, Under Secretary for Natural Resources and Environment, U.S. Department of Agriculture
* 8:35 a.m. – Plenary Session 1: The Current State of Ecosystem Markets
* 10:20 a.m. – Plenary Session 2: Policies to Support Ecosystem Services and Markets
* 12:40 p.m. – Lunch and preview of Green Fire documentary, hosted by the Aldo Leopold Foundation and followed by a Q&A session

Friday, July 1, 2011
* 8:00 a.m. – Field trip; See below for details. * Experts available for interviews during the tour

For the full conference agenda, visit http://ecomarketconference.com/agenda/.

RSVP and Media Requests:

Amanda Cooke | AFF | ACooke@forestfoundation.org | 202-463-2731
Lauren Cole | WRI | LCole@wri.org | 202-729-7736

Follow the Twitter conversation - #ecomarkets2011

Field Trip Information - PHOTO OPPORTUNITY

What:
Tour the Leopold family shack and farm, and see sites conserved for ecosystem services through public/private partnerships, including the Leopold Waterfowl Production Area, Baraboo Oak Street dam removal site, and the Leopold Memorial Reserve constructed wetland. Detailed agenda: http://ecomarketconference.com/field-trip/.

When:
July 1, 2011 from 8:00 a.m.-3:30 p.m.

Where:
Meet at the Madison Concourse Hotel for bus departure.

Who:
Experts from WRI, AFF and other conference attendees will be available for interviews and photo opportunities during the Field Trip. Please contact Amanda Cooke or Lauren Cole to RSVP.

Thanks to the Aldo Leopold Foundation and the Sand County Foundation for their generous assistance in hosting and organizing the field trip.

Property Tax Incentives for Forest Conservation in the U.S. South

John Talberth — Wed, 15 Jun 2011 15:54:24 -0400

Current use valuation programs can encourage landowners to resist development pressures and leave forest as forest.

Development pressure on the outskirts of cities throughout the southern United States drives up land values and makes it more difficult for private landowners to keep their forestland. On average, in the South, short term returns for development can be $36,000 per acre. And for private landowners who want to keep their forest, rising property taxes can also provide a perverse incentive, because as the fair market value of the land increases, property tax bills rise. To help pay these increased taxes many landowners often resort to selling at least a portion of their lands despite their intention to keep their forests intact.

Current use valuation programs, as illustrated in a new WRI issue brief Current Use Valuation Programs: Property Tax Incentives for Preserving Local Benefits of Forests, are a tax benefit that states and counties in the South are using to encourage forestland owners to leave forest as forest and help resist development pressure. Under these programs, enrolled lands are assessed not at their fair market value (for housing development and the like) but at their value for timber production and other forest uses. This lowers the tax bill for landowners, improves the profitability of timber production, and helps reduce development pressure.

Road blocks to implementing effective Current Use Valuation Programs

Current use valuation programs exist throughout the South, but the scale of their implementation and overall effectiveness is limited for a variety of reasons. For example, some programs still provide low financial returns to landowners relative to the opportunity cost of development. Additionally, there are concerns from many local governments about the impact of reduced property taxes.

WRI’s report argues that overcoming these obstacles will require more consistent and accurate analysis of the overall fiscal impacts of current use valuation programs to determine whether protecting forests and other forms of open space result in a net drain or net surplus when the cost of providing community services is taken into account. Cost of community service studies and other forms of fiscal impact analysis demonstrate that by helping counties avoid infrastructure and community service costs (such as roads, electricity, and sewer infrastructure) of new residential developments, such programs can often save money in the long term (Figure 1).

Figure 1: Dollars Spent on Community Services per Dollar in Tax Revenue Received: Range of Values from Cost of Community Service Studies in the South, 1997-2007, (click to enlarge)

The report also discusses how a variety of modifications to existing programs will increase their popularity among local governments and landowners.

How can Current Use Valuation Programs Promote the Conservation of Forests?

This report outlines four changes to current use valuation programs that could make them more effective, as applied in the South.

Designated state reimbursement fund. States can offer reimbursement funds similar to the one pioneered in Georgia to help alleviate county concerns over short-term fiscal impacts from drops in property tax revenues. Reimbursement funds can be targeted at forestlands specifically rather than open space in general to provide a more direct link between current use valuation and forest protection.
Longer covenant (contract) periods. States and counties can extend covenant terms to match the minimum rotation age for commercial forest management. Extending covenant terms to 20 years or more would ensure that lands protected under current use valuation programs would be of sufficient age to generate income streams from the sale of commercial forest products. Extending covenant terms would also help reduce speculation on lands enrolled for shorter periods.
Management for ecosystem services. States and counties could increase the flexibility of current use valuation programs to allow landowners to enroll lands that provide important ecosystem service benefits but not necessarily cash income from the sale of forest products. Building in this flexibility would make it easier for landowners to enroll and help states and counties meet important objectives related to environmental conservation and improved quality of life for residents. This flexibility would also improve the economics of maintaining land in current use valuation status relative to conversion, by saving landowners the expense of investing in timber or crops when they otherwise would not have chosen to do so.
Extending current use valuation programs to restore forest cover on marginal farmland. On agricultural lands, states and counties could encourage forest restoration on marginal and idle cropland by removing crop income requirements for enrollment. Providing tax incentives to farmers who want to let these lands naturally transition back to forest could help increase the extent of southern forests by millions of acres in the decades ahead.

Implementing these changes to current use valuation programs could help alleviate concerns about the bottom line, and bolster the long-term effectiveness of current use valuation programs throughout the region. In addition, these changes could increase the acreage of southern forest protected from development and instead managed for timber, water, wildlife habitat, recreation, scenery, erosion control, watershed protection, reduction of flooding hazards and other ecosystem services increasingly important to the well-being of southern communities.

This brief is designed to inform state, county, and municipal decisionmakers; land-use planners; and other people working to conserve and sustainably manage forests.

To learn more about southern U.S. forests, visit: www.SeeSouthernForests.org. Developed by WRI with support from Toyota, this interactive site provides a wide range of information about southern forests, including current and historic satellite images that allow users to zoom in on areas of interest, overlay maps showing selected forest features and drivers of change, historic forest photos, and case studies of innovative approaches for sustaining forests in the region. To order hard copies of this issue brief, and other briefs in the Southern Forests for the Future Incentives Series, please contact us.

Current Use Valuation Programs: Property Tax Incentives for Preserving Local Benefits of Forests

Kathy Doucette — Mon, 13 Jun 2011 10:59:07 -0400

Summary

This paper explores current use valuation programs as one tool for conserving and fostering sustainable management of southern U.S. forests under private ownership. The brief identifies key constraints on existing programs and suggests measures that could be implemented to enhance program effectiveness.
As a result of rising property taxes on lands under development pressure, nonindustrial private forestland owners in the South often resort to selling all or a portion of their properties to pay tax bills. Rising property taxes also reduce the profitability of timber production and induce corporate and industry landowners to engage in real estate sales as an alternative activity.
Current use valuation programs are one way that states and counties in the South are encouraging landowners to forgo unwanted development sales. Under these programs, enrolled forest and agricultural lands are assessed not at their fair market value but at their value for current uses. This lowers the tax bill for landowners, improves the profitability of timber production, and helps reduce development pressure.
Though current use valuation programs in one form or another are authorized by statute in all southern states, the programs’ general implementation and programmatic effectiveness is often limited by perceived negative fiscal impacts, minimal economic benefits to landowners relative to conversion, land speculation, and lack of promotion of sustainable forest management.
With respect to fiscal impacts, research shows that while current use valuation programs may cause a short-term loss of revenue, preserving these lands can actually result in positive, long-term fiscal benefits. This is because the cost of providing community services and public infrastructure on lands converted to residential use often exceeds the property tax revenues generated. Making counties more aware of this fact can help overcome reluctance to offer current use valuation.
Changes that can increase the overall implementation and programmatic effectiveness of current use valuation programs include state reimbursement funds for short-term reductions in tax revenues, longer covenant terms, allowances for ecosystem service management, and the inclusion of marginal or idle cropland transitioning into forest.
With these modifications, current use valuation programs can be a tool for not only keeping forest as forest but also stimulating a wide range of beneficial management activities, such as reforestation and management of ecosystem services.
This brief is designed to inform state, county, and municipal decisionmakers; land-use planners; and other stakeholders working to conserve and sustainably manage forests.

Conservation-Related Ballot Measures in the United States (1998–2010)

Maggie Barron — Thu, 19 May 2011 15:34:12 -0400

Source: DuMoulin, Andrew. 2011. Winning Open Space Ballot Measures. The Trust for Public Land LandVote® Database. The Trust for Public Land.

Each individual dot on the map above represents a single ballot measure; dots are geographically dispersed according to where the passed or failed (i.e. which locale). Twenty-seven of these ballot measures have funds dedicated solely to the protection of farmland. The rest of the ballot measures were authorized for a variety of open-space protection purposes, including forestland and farmland protection. Over this twelve year period, state measures were initiated in 36 states and passed in 31 states. Successful measures appear to be more prevalent in areas with large population centers.

Public Ballot Measures Unlock Billions of Dollars for Conservation Nationwide

Logan Yonavjak — Thu, 19 May 2011 15:26:57 -0400

A new WRI report explores what makes public ballot measures successful and how they can help conserve forests in the U.S. South.

Public conservation ballot measures are a means to secure citizen approval to raise public funds for conservation. They allow people to vote at the state or local level to approve new public funding—from bonds, taxes, lottery proceeds, or other sources—to dedicate to the conservation of natural landscapes, bodies of water, and/or farmland.

These ballot measures have a strong track record of success in the United States. Between 1988 and 2010, voters secured more than $58 billion for conservation.76 percent of proposed ballot measures were approved. In fact, these measures have received public support even during periods of economic recession, such as 1990-91 and 2008-09.

For example, Maine voters have passed five bonds to fund the “Land for Maine’s Future” program, which invested over $57 million dollars in the protection of more than 504,000 acres of land between 1998 and 2008. This acreage is more than threefold the amount acquired by funds approved by the state legislature.

But how can these measures help fund more conservation in the southern United States? The World Resources Institute’s new issue brief Funding for Forests: The Potential of Public Ballot Measures explores what makes ballot measures successful and how lessons learned can increase support for conservation of forests and other open space in the South.

Conservation-Related Ballot Measures in the United States (1998–2010): Each individual dot on the map above represents a single ballot measure. Successful measures appear to be more prevalent in areas with large population centers.

How have ballot measures fared so far in the U.S. South?

Southern states raised approximately $7.5 billion between 1988-2010 from ballot measures for conservation, with a high average passage rate of 82 percent. The passage of these measures, however, has varied significantly among states. To date, Florida and Texas have each passed more than 80 measures, while Tennessee and Louisiana have only passed 1 measure each, and Mississippi and Kentucky have not passed any measures (Table 1).

Most of the ballot measures passed tend to be local, with the vast majority at the municipal and county, rather than state level. Though local, these measures can be quite successful in raising large amounts of funding for conservation. For instance, Martin County, Florida, passed a ½ percent increase in sales tax in 2006 that approved $60 million for clean water, wildlife habitat, and park improvements.

Several factors may have contributed to the disparities among southern states.

Some states and counties experienced greater rates of population growth, and therefore development pressure, during this time period. For instance, while Florida’s population grew approximately 52 percent between 1988 and 2010, Mississippi’s only grew about 15 percent.
In some states, other uses of publicly raised funds may out-compete land conservation. For example, counties in Tennessee often use up their capacity to fund bonds by focusing on funding for educational purposes, leaving little room for funding conservation.

Table 1. Conservation-Related Ballot Measures in the Southern United States (1988–2010): (Click to enlarge)

Overall, there is significant need for ballot measures in the region to help finance conservation given that 31 million acres of forest – an area the size of North Carolina – is slated to be lost to development by 2040 in the South if current trends continue.

How can the U.S. South increase conservation funding from ballot measures?

The conservation-related ballot measure has a proven track record of use in the South. It has been effective in raising large amounts of funds, and, where applied, appears to enjoy strong public support. So what can be done to ramp up utilization of this promising approach? Several actions could help achieve this objective:

Introduce more conservation-related ballot measures. These measures have been particularly under-utilized in Alabama, Arkansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Oklahoma, South Carolina, and Tennessee (Table 1). The focus should be at the local level. For instance, currently only [4 percent of counties] (node/12165) in the South have passed ballot measures.
Continue to emphasize bonds but consider other funding mechanisms too, where applicable. In the South and in the U.S. overall, bonds are the most popular funding source for conservation. They allow public entities to purchase land more quickly and the payback occurs over a longer time period. In addition, most states already have the authority under existing policies to authorize bonds and give authority to counties and municipalities to do the same. Depending on what enabling authority is allowed, southern states and jurisdictions should also consider more aggressively pursuing other funding mechanisms that raise more money on average per ballot measure than bonds. For example, on a per-measure basis, lottery proceeds raised $626 million, oil and gas revenues raised $400 million, and dedicated portions of sales taxes raised $124 million, while bonds raised $32 million. It is important to assess, however, the local political feasibility of each candidate mechanism.
Leverage existing “best practice” guidance on how to design and successfully pass conservation-related ballot measures. Experience over the past several decades has generated a number of lessons learned and best practices for successfully preparing and passing conservation-related ballot measures. For instance, in polls of seven southern counties, 61 percent of citizens, on average, supported bond measures to raise funds for land conservation in their respective counties, especially when aimed at protecting water quality and drinking water sources. A number of guides are available to help members of state, county, or municipal governments, citizens, conservation organizations, and other stakeholders successfully introduce conservation-related ballot measures. These include the Conservation Campaign Toolkit and the Conservation Finance Handbook: How Communities are Paying for Parks and Land Conservation.

Conservation-related ballot measures have already unlocked billions of dollars for conservation nationwide and have tremendous potential for growth in the South. For more information and discussion on how to increase the use of public ballot measures in the South, please download Funding for Forests: The Potential of Public Ballot Measures.

To access this brief and other issue briefs in the Southern Forests for the Future Incentives Series, and to learn more about southern U.S. forests, visit: www.SeeSouthernForests.org. Developed by WRI with support from Toyota, this interactive site provides a wide range of information about southern forests, including current and historic satellite images that allow users to zoom in on areas of interest, overlay maps showing selected forest features and drivers of change, historic forest photos, and case studies of innovative approaches for sustaining forests in the region. To order free hard copies of this issue brief, and other briefs in the Southern Forests for the Future Incentives Series, please contact us.

Conservation-Related Ballot Measures in the Southern United States (1988–2010)

Maggie Barron — Thu, 19 May 2011 09:19:03 -0400

From 1988 through 2010, 354 measures were proposed across the 13 states of the U.S. South. As this table summarizes, these measures:

experienced a high passage rate of 82 percent;
raised approximately $7.5 billion for conservation;
tended to be quite local in nature, with the vast majority being at the municipal and county level while only seven state measures were passed by a total of five southern states; and
predominately authorized bonds as the source of funding.

Utilization of conservation-related ballot measures across the South was mixed among states. Florida and Texas led in the passage of these measures, with 80 or more from 1988 through 2010, or nearly four per year on average. Regions around Atlanta (Georgia), Research Triangle (North Carolina), and the Richmond-Arlington corridor (Virginia) had a relatively large number of measures, too (Figure 1). Six states—Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, South Carolina, and Tennessee— had less than one measure pass per year on average. Two states, Kentucky and Mississippi, did not pass a single measure during the time period.

Funding for Forests: The Potential of Public Ballot Measures

Maggie Barron — Wed, 18 May 2011 13:02:01 -0400

SUMMARY

A variety of measures exist to prevent deforestation or forest conversion to other land uses. Some of these measures, such as purchasing land outright for conservation or purchasing conservation easements, are designed to permanently protect forests by precluding future residential or commercial development on the tract of land. But these approaches all require money.
One approach to raising large-scale funding for conservation purposes is the conservation-related ballot measure. Citizens vote for such measures at the state, county, or municipal level to approve new public funding dedicated to conservation for a wide variety of purposes, including protection of natural landscapes, bodies of water, and/or farmland. Ballot measures are a means of securing citizen approval for raising public funds for conservation. The funds are then generated through various mechanisms, such as bonds, taxes, and lottery proceeds.
Conservation-related ballot measures in the United States have a successful track record. Between 1988 and 2010, 76 percent of proposed measures passed, securing more than $58 billion for conservation.
During this same time period, conservation-related ballot measures raised approximately $7.5 billion in the U.S. South. However, support for such measures varied greatly among southern states. For instance, to date, more than 80 measures passed at the municipal, county, and/or state level in Florida as well as in Texas, while no measures passed in either Mississippi or Kentucky.
Conservation organizations, citizens, land-use decision makers, and others can take several steps to increase the utilization of this promising approach and ensure the funds raised are used most effectively, including:
- introduce more conservation-related ballot measures;
- leverage existing “best practice” guidance on how to design and successfully pass conservation-related ballot measures;
- continue to utilize bonds but consider other financing mechanisms, too, where applicable;
- include safeguards to ensure funds remain dedicated to conservation;
- use funds to purchase conservation easements to help maximize cost-effectiveness;
- use funds, where appropriate, to maintain working forests, not just create parks; and
- target areas with high development pressure.

Forests at Work: A New Model for Local Land Protection

Maggie Barron — Thu, 31 Mar 2011 15:04:03 -0400

Summary

To date, traditional public land acquisition programs have played a relatively small role in the conservation and sustainable management of southern U.S. forests. The South trails behind other U.S. regions in both the percent of the land base and the acres per capita conserved in parks, wildlife refuges, wilderness, and other protective categories.
Working forests offer a new model for scaling up the amount of publicly protected forestland in the South. “Working forests” are defined as forests that are actively managed to generate revenue from multiple sources, including sustainably produced timber and other ecosystem services, and thus are not converted to other land uses such as residential development.
A public entity can “acquire” a working forest in two ways. It can purchase all of the property rights associated with a forest through a fee simple, or outright, purchase of the land from willing sellers. Alternatively, a public entity can purchase just the development rights to the forest through a conservation easement, leaving ownership of all the other rights in the hands of private landowners. This brief uses the term “acquire” to cover both fee simple and conservation easement purchases.
Public entities can finance working forests via public bonds, sales taxes, or other means. In return, revenues from working forests can be used to offset acquisition costs over time, cover stewardship expenses, and/or pay taxpayers “dividends” in the form of tax rebates or some other equitable revenue sharing scheme after expenses are covered.
Citizen advisory boards could shoulder much of the administrative and management responsibility for the working forest, thereby keeping management and financing local.
Revenues from timber, recreation, and other ecosystem service payments, increases in tax revenue due to higher surrounding property values, and avoided development costs are among the economic benefits generated by working forests.
Scaling up working forests in the South would necessitate further documentation of the economic benefits of the model relative to traditional acquisition programs, broadening the scale and scope of available financing options, offering favorable tax benefits, and educating woodland owners about the benefits of working forests.
This issue brief is intended as a resource primarily for local public officials in the southern United States who are interested in a more cost-effective approach to acquiring and managing public forestland. It provides readers with several economic scenarios that examine the community benefits of a working forest model and discusses the opportunities for scaling up the model in the region.

PRESS RELEASE: WRI Expands Capacity in International Forest and Ecosystems Work

Michael Oko — Wed, 16 Mar 2011 14:29:37 -0400

Two new leaders, Nigel Sizer and Robert Winterbottom, added to roster

Two international forest experts, with more than 45 years combined experience, have joined the World Resources Institute’s (WRI) People and Ecosystems Program. Dr. Nigel Sizer, who worked at WRI earlier in his career, returns to lead the Global Forest Initiative, overseeing efforts to increase the ability of governments, businesses and civil society to protect intact forest landscapes, sustainably manage working forests, and restore deforested lands. Robert Winterbottom, who also previously spent time at WRI, is now directing the Ecosystem Services Initiative, managing activities to reduce the degradation of ecosystems, and to invest in ecosystem services to secure economic growth and enhance people’s well being.

“We are thrilled to bring Nigel and Bob back to WRI— two extremely qualified experts with hands-on experience,” said Craig Hanson, director of WRI’s People and Ecosystem Program. “I look forward to working with them, as WRI expands its impact through our global forest and ecosystem services initiatives.”

Sizer comes to WRI from Rare, an international conservation organization, where he served as vice president for Asia. While at Rare, he expanded operations into China, and conceived and developed Community Carbon, a grassroots effort to link impoverished communities in Indonesia to global carbon markets. In 2008, he served as lead advisor on climate change and energy issues in Asia to former President Bill Clinton and the Clinton Global Initiative. Sizer has also worked with UNEP in Nairobi, and established The Nature Conservancy’s Asia-Pacific Forest Program.

“I am delighted to be back at WRI, which has built an extraordinary reputation over the years,” said Sizer. “I really look forward to working with new colleagues and helping expand both our influence and impact in the world.”

Winterbottom comes to WRI with more than 25 years of experience on environment and sustainable development issues in dozens of countries in Africa, Latin America and Asia. In Bangladesh, he worked to scale up the collaborative management of wetlands and protected forests by building capacity at the grassroots level and among responsible government agencies. In eastern Senegal, he increased rural incomes by expanding community-based enterprises, together with improved land use planning and natural resource management. Winterbottom also supported efforts by Niger to strengthen property rights and policies to promote widespread adoption of sustainable agricultural practices and “regreening” of rural landscapes. Most recently, he led a team of experts in assessing needs and opportunities in Vietnam for climate change adaptation and restoration of ecosystem services in targeted watersheds.

“For many years, WRI has been at the forefront of helping governments and businesses understand the value of ecosystem services,” said Winterbottom. “I’m excited to be back at WRI to advance this groundbreaking work.”

Forests for Water: Exploring Payments for Watershed Services in the U.S. South

Maggie Barron — Mon, 28 Feb 2011 12:35:36 -0500

Summary

The forested watersheds of the southern United States provide a number of benefits—including water flow regulation, flood control, water purification, erosion control, and freshwater supply—to the region’s citizens, communities, and businesses.
The loss and degradation of forests can reduce their ability to provide these watershed-related ecosystem services.
Payments for watershed services provide landowners financial incentives to conserve, sustainably manage, and/or restore forests specifically to provide one or more watershed-related ecosystem services. Such payments typically involve downstream beneficiaries paying upstream forest owners or forest managers.
There are three general types of payments for watershed services: (1) voluntary payments by downstream entities to upstream landowners to reduce the costs of doing business, (2) payments made to minimize an entity’s cost of meeting a regulation, and (3) payments made to generate public benefits. A number of instances of each type of payment have been piloted in the United States, Latin America, and elsewhere.
Many payments for watershed services share a common trait: they are investments in “green infrastructure” instead of “gray infrastructure.” In other words, they are investments in forests and natural, open space instead of in human-engineered solutions to address water quantity or quality problems. In many instances, investments in green infrastructure can be more cost effective than investments in gray infrastructure.
Entities that may have a business case for making a payment for watershed services include beverage companies, power companies with hydroelectric facilities, manufacturers that rely on clean freshwater supplies for processing, housing developers, public and private wastewater treatment plants, city and county governments, drinking water utilities, and public departments of transportation, among others.
These entities can pursue a number of steps to capture the potential benefits of payments for watershed services, including identifying those forests most responsible for their clean water supplies, conducting economic analyses of green versus gray infrastructure, and exploring public/private financing partnerships.
Upstream landowners can pursue a number of steps to advance— and ultimately benefit from—payments for watershed services, including developing an understanding of the watershed-related ecosystem services their forests provide, actively looking for emerging payment opportunities, and collaborating with other landowners to achieve economies of scale when engaging beneficiaries of the services their forests provide.
This issue brief is intended as an introductory resource primarily for entities that depend upon stable supplies of clean freshwater in the southern United States and are looking for cost-effective approaches to sustain this supply. This brief also provides information to southern landowners interested in potential revenue streams generated by conservation and sustainable management of forests.

PRESS RELEASE: 75% of World’s Coral Reefs Currently Under Threat, New Analysis Finds

Michael Oko — Wed, 23 Feb 2011 21:55:53 -0500

“Reefs at Risk Revisited” report presents comprehensive analysis of threats to coral reefs

A new comprehensive analysis finds that 75 percent of the world’s coral reefs are currently threatened by local and global pressures. For the first time, the analysis includes threats from climate change, including warming seas and rising ocean acidification. The report shows that local pressures— such as overfishing, coastal development, and pollution— pose the most immediate and direct risks, threatening more than 60 percent of coral reefs today.

“Reefs at Risk Revisited,” the most detailed assessment of threats to coral reefs ever undertaken, is being released by the World Resources Institute with the Nature Conservancy, the WorldFish Center, the International Coral Reef Action Network, Global Coral Reef Monitoring Network, and the UNEP-World Conservation Monitoring Center, along with a network of more than 25 organizations. Launch activities are taking place in Washington, D.C., London, Malaysia, Indonesia, the Caribbean, Australia, and other locations around the world.

“This report serves as a wake-up call for policy-makers, business leaders, ocean managers, and others about the urgent need for greater protection for coral reefs,” said Dr. Jane Lubchenco, under secretary of commerce for oceans and atmosphere and NOAA administrator. “As the report makes clear, local and global threats, including climate change, are already having significant impacts on coral reefs, putting the future of these beautiful and valuable ecosystems at risk.”

Local pressures – especially overfishing and destructive fishing – are causing many reefs to be degraded. Global pressures are leading to coral bleaching from rising sea temperatures and increasing ocean acidification from carbon dioxide pollution. According to the new analysis, if left unchecked, more than 90 percent of reefs will be threatened by 2030 and nearly all reefs will be at risk by 2050.

“Coral reefs are valuable resources for millions of people worldwide. Despite the dire situation for many reefs, there is reason for hope,” said Lauretta Burke, senior associate at WRI and a lead author of the report. “Reefs are resilient, and by reducing the local pressures we can buy time as we find global solutions to preserve reefs for future generations.”

The report includes multiple recommendations to better protect and manage reefs, including through marine protected areas. The analysis shows that more than one-quarter of reefs are already encompassed in a range of parks and reserves, more than any other marine habitat. However, only six percent of reefs are in protected areas that are effectively managed.

“Well managed marine protected areas are one of the best tools to safeguard reefs,” said Mark Spalding, senior marine scientist at the Nature Conservancy and a lead author of the report. “At their core, reefs are about people as well as nature: ensuring stable food supplies, promoting recovery from coral bleaching, and acting as a magnet for tourist dollars. We need apply the knowledge we have to shore up existing protected areas, as well as to designate new sites where threats are highest, such as the populous hearts of the Caribbean, Southeast Asia, East Africa and the Middle East.”

Reefs offer multiple benefits to people and the economy – providing food, sustaining livelihoods, supporting tourism, protecting coasts, and even helping to prevent disease. According the report, more than 275 million people live in the direct vicinity (30 km/18 miles) of coral reefs. In more than 100 countries and territories, coral reefs protect 150,000 km (over 93,000 miles) of shorelines, helping defend coastal communities and infrastructure against storms and erosion.

For the first time, the report identifies the 27 nations most socially and economically vulnerable to coral reef degradation and loss. Among these, the nine most vulnerable countries are: Haiti, Grenada, Philippines, Comoros, Vanuatu, Tanzania, Kiribati, Fiji, and Indonesia.

“The people at greatest risk are those who depend heavily on threatened reefs, and who have limited capacity to adapt to the loss of the valuable resources and services reefs provide,” said Allison Perry, project scientist at the WorldFish Center and a lead author. “For highly vulnerable nations – including many island nations – there is a pressing need for development efforts to reduce dependence on reefs and build adaptive capacity, in addition to protecting reefs from threats.”

The report is an update of “Reefs at Risk,” released by WRI in 1998, which served as an important resource for policymakers to understand and address the threats of reefs. The new report uses the latest data and satellite information to map coral reefs— including a reef map with a resolution 64 times higher than the original report.

“Through new technology and improved data, this study provides valuable tools and information for decision makers from national leaders to local marine managers,” said Katie Reytar, research associate at WRI and a lead author. “In order to maximize the benefits of these tools, we need policymakers to commit to greater action to address the growing threats to coral reefs.”

Find out more at: www.wri.org/reefs

# # # #

The World Resources Institute (WRI) is a global environmental think tank that goes beyond research to put ideas into action. We work with governments, companies, and civil society to build solutions to urgent environmental challenges. (www.wri.org)

The Nature Conservancy(TNC) is a leading conservation organization working around the world to protect ecologically important lands and waters for nature and people. The Conservancy and its more than one million members have protected more than 480,000 sq km of land and engage in more than100 marine conservation projects. The Conservancy is actively working on coral reef conservation in 24 countries, including the Caribbean and the Coral Triangle. (www.nature.org)

WorldFish Center is an international, nonprofit, nongovernmental organization dedicated to reducing poverty and hunger by improving fisheries and aquaculture. Working in partnership with a wide range of agencies and research institutions, WorldFish carries out research to improve small-scale fisheries and aquaculture. Its work on coral reefs includes ReefBase, the global information system on coral reefs. (www.worldfishcenter.org)

International Coral Reef Action Network (ICRAN) is a global network of coral reef science and conservation organizations working together and with local stakeholders to improve the management of coral reef ecosystems. ICRAN facilitates the exchange and replication of good practices in coral reef management throughout the world’s major coral reef regions. (www.icran.org)

United Nations Environment Programme-World Conservation Monitoring Centre (UNEP-WCMC) is an internationally recognized center for the synthesis, analysis, and dissemination of global biodiversity knowledge. UNEP-WCMC provides authoritative, strategic, and timely information on critical marine and coastal habitats for conventions, countries, organizations, and companies to use in the development and implementation of their policies and decisions. (www.unep-wcmc.org)

Global Coral Reef Monitoring Network (GCRMN) is an operational unit of the International Coral Reef Initiative (ICRI) charged with coordinating research and monitoring of coral reefs. The network, with many partners, reports on ecological and socioeconomic monitoring and produces Status of Coral Reefs of the World reports covering more than 80 countries and states. (www.gcrmn.org)