Land Trusts and Conservation Easements: Who Is Conserving What for Whom?

Land trusts, partnered with government agencies or acting alone, are working to conserve habitat, open space, and working landscapes on private land. Spending both public and private funds, such institutions frequently acquire less than full title by purchasing or accepting donations of conservation...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Conservation biology 2004-02, Vol.18 (1), p.65-76
Hauptverfasser: MERENLENDER, A. M., HUNTSINGER, L., GUTHEY, G., FAIRFAX, S. K.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 76
container_issue 1
container_start_page 65
container_title Conservation biology
container_volume 18
creator MERENLENDER, A. M.
HUNTSINGER, L.
GUTHEY, G.
FAIRFAX, S. K.
description Land trusts, partnered with government agencies or acting alone, are working to conserve habitat, open space, and working landscapes on private land. Spending both public and private funds, such institutions frequently acquire less than full title by purchasing or accepting donations of conservation easements. These title and organizational arrangements are evolving so fast that it is difficult to assess their conservation accomplishments and long-term viability. To understand the contribution of these arrangements to the preservation and restoration of biodiversity, conservation biologists need to identify the biological resources likely to be conserved and those likely to be left unprotected through easements held by land trusts. We describe land trusts and conservation easements and why they are currently an attractive approach to land protection. Our review of the literature showed that little information is available on (1) the resulting pattern of protected lands and resources being conserved, (2) the emerging institutions that hold conservation easements and the landowners they work with, and (3) the distribution of costs and benefits of land trusts and easements to communities and the general public. The prescriptive literature on how to establish land trusts and negotiate easements is extensive. However, easily available information on protected resources is too aggregated to determine what is actually being conserved, and more detailed data is widely scattered and hence difficult to synthesize. The social science literature provides some insight into the motives of landowners who participate but offers little about the variety of institutions or which type of institution works best in particular ecological and political settings. Equally undeveloped is our understanding of the inherent tension between the public and private benefits of this widely used incentive-based conservation strategy. Interdisciplinary research is needed to determine the ecological and social consequences of acquiring partial interest in private land for conservation purposes.
doi_str_mv 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2004.00401.x
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_16171129</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>3589118</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>3589118</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4971-bb26814d09f54303ff14e36fbbbb678ef90c7bb65fa19a6fc944c8106654f4df3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkFFP2zAUhS00JDrgH_CQl-0tmW9sJzbSNK1RgUodCAQqb5ab2iNdmoBvysq_xyGse-VKlo_8nXMtHUIioAmE-bZKQKQshpypJKWUJ-FQSLZ7ZLQDn8iISiljKVV6QD4jriilSgAfkYuZaZbRrd9gh1Evi7ZB659NV7VNNDFo17bp8DSaP7TRFP_hqvkdXkwXudb3aP3jiOw7U6M9fr8Pyd3Z5La4iGdX59Pi5ywuucohXizSTAJfUuUEZ5Q5B9yyzC3CZLm0TtEyD1I4A8pkrlSclxJolgnu-NKxQ_J12Pvo26eNxU6vKyxtXZvGthvUkEEOkKpglIOx9C2it04_-mpt_IsGqvvq9Er3Dem-Id1Xp9-q09sQ_fL-h8HS1M6bpqzwf16InAJNg-_74Ptb1fblw_t1cTWeBhXyJ0N-hV3rd3kmpAKQAccDrrCz2x02_o_OcpYLPb881-Pr-8vrX_Mbrdgr6x2ZgQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>16171129</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Land Trusts and Conservation Easements: Who Is Conserving What for Whom?</title><source>JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing</source><source>Wiley Online Library All Journals</source><creator>MERENLENDER, A. M. ; HUNTSINGER, L. ; GUTHEY, G. ; FAIRFAX, S. K.</creator><creatorcontrib>MERENLENDER, A. M. ; HUNTSINGER, L. ; GUTHEY, G. ; FAIRFAX, S. K.</creatorcontrib><description>Land trusts, partnered with government agencies or acting alone, are working to conserve habitat, open space, and working landscapes on private land. Spending both public and private funds, such institutions frequently acquire less than full title by purchasing or accepting donations of conservation easements. These title and organizational arrangements are evolving so fast that it is difficult to assess their conservation accomplishments and long-term viability. To understand the contribution of these arrangements to the preservation and restoration of biodiversity, conservation biologists need to identify the biological resources likely to be conserved and those likely to be left unprotected through easements held by land trusts. We describe land trusts and conservation easements and why they are currently an attractive approach to land protection. Our review of the literature showed that little information is available on (1) the resulting pattern of protected lands and resources being conserved, (2) the emerging institutions that hold conservation easements and the landowners they work with, and (3) the distribution of costs and benefits of land trusts and easements to communities and the general public. The prescriptive literature on how to establish land trusts and negotiate easements is extensive. However, easily available information on protected resources is too aggregated to determine what is actually being conserved, and more detailed data is widely scattered and hence difficult to synthesize. The social science literature provides some insight into the motives of landowners who participate but offers little about the variety of institutions or which type of institution works best in particular ecological and political settings. Equally undeveloped is our understanding of the inherent tension between the public and private benefits of this widely used incentive-based conservation strategy. Interdisciplinary research is needed to determine the ecological and social consequences of acquiring partial interest in private land for conservation purposes.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0888-8892</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1523-1739</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2004.00401.x</identifier><identifier>CODEN: CBIOEF</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>350 Main Street , Malden , MA 02148 , USA , and 9600 Garsington Road , Oxford OX4 2DQ , UK: Blackwell Science Inc</publisher><subject>Animal, plant and microbial ecology ; Applied ecology ; Biodiversity conservation ; Biological and medical sciences ; Conservation biology ; Conservation easements ; Conservation, protection and management of environment and wildlife ; Easements ; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology ; General aspects ; Habitat conservation ; Land conservation ; Land management ; Land trusts ; Landowners ; Parks, reserves, wildlife conservation. Endangered species: population survey and restocking ; Private land ; Reviews</subject><ispartof>Conservation biology, 2004-02, Vol.18 (1), p.65-76</ispartof><rights>Copyright 2004 Society for Conservation Biology</rights><rights>2004 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4971-bb26814d09f54303ff14e36fbbbb678ef90c7bb65fa19a6fc944c8106654f4df3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4971-bb26814d09f54303ff14e36fbbbb678ef90c7bb65fa19a6fc944c8106654f4df3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/3589118$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/3589118$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,803,1417,27923,27924,58016,58249</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&amp;idt=15570102$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>MERENLENDER, A. M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>HUNTSINGER, L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>GUTHEY, G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>FAIRFAX, S. K.</creatorcontrib><title>Land Trusts and Conservation Easements: Who Is Conserving What for Whom?</title><title>Conservation biology</title><description>Land trusts, partnered with government agencies or acting alone, are working to conserve habitat, open space, and working landscapes on private land. Spending both public and private funds, such institutions frequently acquire less than full title by purchasing or accepting donations of conservation easements. These title and organizational arrangements are evolving so fast that it is difficult to assess their conservation accomplishments and long-term viability. To understand the contribution of these arrangements to the preservation and restoration of biodiversity, conservation biologists need to identify the biological resources likely to be conserved and those likely to be left unprotected through easements held by land trusts. We describe land trusts and conservation easements and why they are currently an attractive approach to land protection. Our review of the literature showed that little information is available on (1) the resulting pattern of protected lands and resources being conserved, (2) the emerging institutions that hold conservation easements and the landowners they work with, and (3) the distribution of costs and benefits of land trusts and easements to communities and the general public. The prescriptive literature on how to establish land trusts and negotiate easements is extensive. However, easily available information on protected resources is too aggregated to determine what is actually being conserved, and more detailed data is widely scattered and hence difficult to synthesize. The social science literature provides some insight into the motives of landowners who participate but offers little about the variety of institutions or which type of institution works best in particular ecological and political settings. Equally undeveloped is our understanding of the inherent tension between the public and private benefits of this widely used incentive-based conservation strategy. Interdisciplinary research is needed to determine the ecological and social consequences of acquiring partial interest in private land for conservation purposes.</description><subject>Animal, plant and microbial ecology</subject><subject>Applied ecology</subject><subject>Biodiversity conservation</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Conservation biology</subject><subject>Conservation easements</subject><subject>Conservation, protection and management of environment and wildlife</subject><subject>Easements</subject><subject>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</subject><subject>General aspects</subject><subject>Habitat conservation</subject><subject>Land conservation</subject><subject>Land management</subject><subject>Land trusts</subject><subject>Landowners</subject><subject>Parks, reserves, wildlife conservation. Endangered species: population survey and restocking</subject><subject>Private land</subject><subject>Reviews</subject><issn>0888-8892</issn><issn>1523-1739</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2004</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqNkFFP2zAUhS00JDrgH_CQl-0tmW9sJzbSNK1RgUodCAQqb5ab2iNdmoBvysq_xyGse-VKlo_8nXMtHUIioAmE-bZKQKQshpypJKWUJ-FQSLZ7ZLQDn8iISiljKVV6QD4jriilSgAfkYuZaZbRrd9gh1Evi7ZB659NV7VNNDFo17bp8DSaP7TRFP_hqvkdXkwXudb3aP3jiOw7U6M9fr8Pyd3Z5La4iGdX59Pi5ywuucohXizSTAJfUuUEZ5Q5B9yyzC3CZLm0TtEyD1I4A8pkrlSclxJolgnu-NKxQ_J12Pvo26eNxU6vKyxtXZvGthvUkEEOkKpglIOx9C2it04_-mpt_IsGqvvq9Er3Dem-Id1Xp9-q09sQ_fL-h8HS1M6bpqzwf16InAJNg-_74Ptb1fblw_t1cTWeBhXyJ0N-hV3rd3kmpAKQAccDrrCz2x02_o_OcpYLPb881-Pr-8vrX_Mbrdgr6x2ZgQ</recordid><startdate>200402</startdate><enddate>200402</enddate><creator>MERENLENDER, A. M.</creator><creator>HUNTSINGER, L.</creator><creator>GUTHEY, G.</creator><creator>FAIRFAX, S. K.</creator><general>Blackwell Science Inc</general><general>Blackwell Science</general><general>Blackwell</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7T4</scope><scope>7U6</scope><scope>C1K</scope></search><sort><creationdate>200402</creationdate><title>Land Trusts and Conservation Easements: Who Is Conserving What for Whom?</title><author>MERENLENDER, A. M. ; HUNTSINGER, L. ; GUTHEY, G. ; FAIRFAX, S. K.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4971-bb26814d09f54303ff14e36fbbbb678ef90c7bb65fa19a6fc944c8106654f4df3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2004</creationdate><topic>Animal, plant and microbial ecology</topic><topic>Applied ecology</topic><topic>Biodiversity conservation</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Conservation biology</topic><topic>Conservation easements</topic><topic>Conservation, protection and management of environment and wildlife</topic><topic>Easements</topic><topic>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</topic><topic>General aspects</topic><topic>Habitat conservation</topic><topic>Land conservation</topic><topic>Land management</topic><topic>Land trusts</topic><topic>Landowners</topic><topic>Parks, reserves, wildlife conservation. Endangered species: population survey and restocking</topic><topic>Private land</topic><topic>Reviews</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>MERENLENDER, A. M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>HUNTSINGER, L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>GUTHEY, G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>FAIRFAX, S. K.</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Human Population &amp; Natural Resource Management</collection><collection>Sustainability Science Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><jtitle>Conservation biology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>MERENLENDER, A. M.</au><au>HUNTSINGER, L.</au><au>GUTHEY, G.</au><au>FAIRFAX, S. K.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Land Trusts and Conservation Easements: Who Is Conserving What for Whom?</atitle><jtitle>Conservation biology</jtitle><date>2004-02</date><risdate>2004</risdate><volume>18</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>65</spage><epage>76</epage><pages>65-76</pages><issn>0888-8892</issn><eissn>1523-1739</eissn><coden>CBIOEF</coden><abstract>Land trusts, partnered with government agencies or acting alone, are working to conserve habitat, open space, and working landscapes on private land. Spending both public and private funds, such institutions frequently acquire less than full title by purchasing or accepting donations of conservation easements. These title and organizational arrangements are evolving so fast that it is difficult to assess their conservation accomplishments and long-term viability. To understand the contribution of these arrangements to the preservation and restoration of biodiversity, conservation biologists need to identify the biological resources likely to be conserved and those likely to be left unprotected through easements held by land trusts. We describe land trusts and conservation easements and why they are currently an attractive approach to land protection. Our review of the literature showed that little information is available on (1) the resulting pattern of protected lands and resources being conserved, (2) the emerging institutions that hold conservation easements and the landowners they work with, and (3) the distribution of costs and benefits of land trusts and easements to communities and the general public. The prescriptive literature on how to establish land trusts and negotiate easements is extensive. However, easily available information on protected resources is too aggregated to determine what is actually being conserved, and more detailed data is widely scattered and hence difficult to synthesize. The social science literature provides some insight into the motives of landowners who participate but offers little about the variety of institutions or which type of institution works best in particular ecological and political settings. Equally undeveloped is our understanding of the inherent tension between the public and private benefits of this widely used incentive-based conservation strategy. Interdisciplinary research is needed to determine the ecological and social consequences of acquiring partial interest in private land for conservation purposes.</abstract><cop>350 Main Street , Malden , MA 02148 , USA , and 9600 Garsington Road , Oxford OX4 2DQ , UK</cop><pub>Blackwell Science Inc</pub><doi>10.1111/j.1523-1739.2004.00401.x</doi><tpages>12</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0888-8892
ispartof Conservation biology, 2004-02, Vol.18 (1), p.65-76
issn 0888-8892
1523-1739
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_16171129
source JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing; Wiley Online Library All Journals
subjects Animal, plant and microbial ecology
Applied ecology
Biodiversity conservation
Biological and medical sciences
Conservation biology
Conservation easements
Conservation, protection and management of environment and wildlife
Easements
Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology
General aspects
Habitat conservation
Land conservation
Land management
Land trusts
Landowners
Parks, reserves, wildlife conservation. Endangered species: population survey and restocking
Private land
Reviews
title Land Trusts and Conservation Easements: Who Is Conserving What for Whom?
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-08T22%3A21%3A53IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Land%20Trusts%20and%20Conservation%20Easements:%20Who%20Is%20Conserving%20What%20for%20Whom?&rft.jtitle=Conservation%20biology&rft.au=MERENLENDER,%20A.%20M.&rft.date=2004-02&rft.volume=18&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=65&rft.epage=76&rft.pages=65-76&rft.issn=0888-8892&rft.eissn=1523-1739&rft.coden=CBIOEF&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2004.00401.x&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E3589118%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=16171129&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_jstor_id=3589118&rfr_iscdi=true