Security and equity of conservation covenants: Contradictions of private protected area policies in Australia

Vanessa Adams, Katie MOON

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

36 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Private land conservation is becoming a popular policy approach, given the constraints of increasing public protected areas, which include reduced availability of land for purchase, insufficient budgets for acquisition, and escalating management costs of small, isolated reserves. Conservation covenants represent a common policy instrument, now prominent in the United States, Canada and Australia, employed to compliment the protected area network. When ‘topsoil’ and subsoil, or ‘mineral’ use rights are decoupled, however, the security of covenants can become threatened if the country’s economic policies take priority over conservation policies and mining is permitted where covenants exist. We discuss this issue on a theoretical level, examining four potential scenarios in which use rights are decoupled or coupled. We demonstrate that decoupled use rights can create an imbalance in the costs and benefits, to landholders and the government, from conservation and mining activities on private properties. We then present a case study in Queensland, Australia, in which the discrepancy of biodiversity and mining policies is directly threatening the ecological outcomes of conservation covenants on private land. We also reflect on our own personal research with landholders in Queensland to highlight the social consequences of such a policy position on the ability of State and Federal Governments to meet their policy commitments. The conflicts we identify can be used to improve the transparency of private land conservation.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)114-119
Number of pages6
JournalLand Use Policy
Volume30
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2013

Fingerprint

private land
policy area
equity
protected area
conservation areas
conservation
private lands
policy approach
economic policy
land management
cost
subsoil
transparency
Queensland
topsoil
biodiversity
federal government
state government
private property
mineral

Cite this

@article{b0014e68393a48dab13289efc424c310,
title = "Security and equity of conservation covenants: Contradictions of private protected area policies in Australia",
abstract = "Private land conservation is becoming a popular policy approach, given the constraints of increasing public protected areas, which include reduced availability of land for purchase, insufficient budgets for acquisition, and escalating management costs of small, isolated reserves. Conservation covenants represent a common policy instrument, now prominent in the United States, Canada and Australia, employed to compliment the protected area network. When ‘topsoil’ and subsoil, or ‘mineral’ use rights are decoupled, however, the security of covenants can become threatened if the country’s economic policies take priority over conservation policies and mining is permitted where covenants exist. We discuss this issue on a theoretical level, examining four potential scenarios in which use rights are decoupled or coupled. We demonstrate that decoupled use rights can create an imbalance in the costs and benefits, to landholders and the government, from conservation and mining activities on private properties. We then present a case study in Queensland, Australia, in which the discrepancy of biodiversity and mining policies is directly threatening the ecological outcomes of conservation covenants on private land. We also reflect on our own personal research with landholders in Queensland to highlight the social consequences of such a policy position on the ability of State and Federal Governments to meet their policy commitments. The conflicts we identify can be used to improve the transparency of private land conservation.",
keywords = "Private land conservation, Covenant, Mining, Property rights, Queensland.",
author = "Vanessa Adams and Katie MOON",
year = "2013",
doi = "10.1016/j.landusepol.2012.03.009",
language = "English",
volume = "30",
pages = "114--119",
journal = "Land Use Policy",
issn = "0264-8377",
publisher = "Elsevier Limited",

}

Security and equity of conservation covenants: Contradictions of private protected area policies in Australia. / Adams, Vanessa; MOON, Katie.

In: Land Use Policy, Vol. 30, 2013, p. 114-119.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Security and equity of conservation covenants: Contradictions of private protected area policies in Australia

AU - Adams, Vanessa

AU - MOON, Katie

PY - 2013

Y1 - 2013

N2 - Private land conservation is becoming a popular policy approach, given the constraints of increasing public protected areas, which include reduced availability of land for purchase, insufficient budgets for acquisition, and escalating management costs of small, isolated reserves. Conservation covenants represent a common policy instrument, now prominent in the United States, Canada and Australia, employed to compliment the protected area network. When ‘topsoil’ and subsoil, or ‘mineral’ use rights are decoupled, however, the security of covenants can become threatened if the country’s economic policies take priority over conservation policies and mining is permitted where covenants exist. We discuss this issue on a theoretical level, examining four potential scenarios in which use rights are decoupled or coupled. We demonstrate that decoupled use rights can create an imbalance in the costs and benefits, to landholders and the government, from conservation and mining activities on private properties. We then present a case study in Queensland, Australia, in which the discrepancy of biodiversity and mining policies is directly threatening the ecological outcomes of conservation covenants on private land. We also reflect on our own personal research with landholders in Queensland to highlight the social consequences of such a policy position on the ability of State and Federal Governments to meet their policy commitments. The conflicts we identify can be used to improve the transparency of private land conservation.

AB - Private land conservation is becoming a popular policy approach, given the constraints of increasing public protected areas, which include reduced availability of land for purchase, insufficient budgets for acquisition, and escalating management costs of small, isolated reserves. Conservation covenants represent a common policy instrument, now prominent in the United States, Canada and Australia, employed to compliment the protected area network. When ‘topsoil’ and subsoil, or ‘mineral’ use rights are decoupled, however, the security of covenants can become threatened if the country’s economic policies take priority over conservation policies and mining is permitted where covenants exist. We discuss this issue on a theoretical level, examining four potential scenarios in which use rights are decoupled or coupled. We demonstrate that decoupled use rights can create an imbalance in the costs and benefits, to landholders and the government, from conservation and mining activities on private properties. We then present a case study in Queensland, Australia, in which the discrepancy of biodiversity and mining policies is directly threatening the ecological outcomes of conservation covenants on private land. We also reflect on our own personal research with landholders in Queensland to highlight the social consequences of such a policy position on the ability of State and Federal Governments to meet their policy commitments. The conflicts we identify can be used to improve the transparency of private land conservation.

KW - Private land conservation

KW - Covenant

KW - Mining

KW - Property rights

KW - Queensland.

U2 - 10.1016/j.landusepol.2012.03.009

DO - 10.1016/j.landusepol.2012.03.009

M3 - Article

VL - 30

SP - 114

EP - 119

JO - Land Use Policy

JF - Land Use Policy

SN - 0264-8377

ER -