scholarly journals Financial Analysis of Habitat Conservation Banking in California

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (22) ◽  
pp. 12441
Author(s):  
Jagdish Poudel ◽  
Raju Pokharel
Keyword(s):  
Endangered Species ◽  
Financial Analysis ◽  
The United States ◽  
Policy Instrument ◽  
Regulatory Compliance ◽  
Habitat Conservation ◽  
Land Acquisition ◽  
Conservation Banking ◽  
Acquisition Costs ◽  
Positive Return

Habitat conservation banking is a policy instrument for conserving endangered species by providing financial incentives for the landowners in the United States. This policy instrument aims to protect habitat, but little or no thought has been given to its financial performance. A financial analysis of habitat conservation banks (HCB) informs policymakers and conservation biologists of the long-term success of this policy and the future of HCBs. This paper evaluates 26 habitat conservation banks (HCB) in California by calculating their Net Present Values (NPV). We do so by compiling the cost and revenue data for habitat conservation banks. The average annual cost of operating HCBs was $42.78/acre (median: $22.58/acre), and the average credit price or revenue from credit sale was $6014.72/acre (median: $553.65/acre). The average NPV for 26 HCBs was $4205.90/acre at a 4% rate of return, indicating an overall positive return from such an easement instrument. However, only 14 HCBs out of 26 produced a positive return. With the inclusion of land acquisition costs, three of eight HCBs performed financially well. On the brighter side, the number of HCBs has increased with time. But there is not enough evidence to ascertain financial certainty from their revenues. A right selection of space (land acquisition costs can make or break finances for HCB) and species could encourage landowners to establish HCBs. This could build confidence on those who may have been discouraged from lack of knowledge and fear of losing revenue due to regulatory compliance to conserve endangered species habitat in their land. The findings are helpful in identifying lands and prioritizing investments to generate conservation credits.

Habitat conservation banking trends in the United States

2019 ◽  
Vol 28 (6) ◽  
pp. 1629-1646
Author(s):  
Jagdish Poudel ◽  
Daowei Zhang ◽  
Benjamin Simon
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Habitat Conservation ◽  
Conservation Banking

Law Struggles, Lawmaking, and the Politics of Hegemony in Neoliberal India

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kenneth Bo Nielsen ◽  
Alf Gunvald Nilsen
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Land Acquisition ◽  
Ethical Perspective ◽  
Judicial Decisions ◽  
Fair Compensation ◽  
The Right ◽  
Neoliberal India ◽  
Land Question

The chapter examines the fairness claim of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act (LARR), 2013. The author uses the utilitarian fairness standard proposed by one of the most influential American constitutional scholars of the twentieth and twenty-first centuries, Frank Michelman, whose study of judicial decisions from an ethical perspective by introducing the concept of “demoralization costs” has shaped the interpretational debate on takings law in the United States. Michelman’s analysis is particularly relevant for the land question in India today since there is a widespread feeling that millions of people have been unfairly deprived of their land and livelihoods. The chapter looks at the role of the Indian judiciary in interpreting the land acquisition legislation since landmark judgments affect the morale of society. It concludes that using Michelman’s standard would help in bringing about greater “fairness” than what the new legislation has achieved.

scholarly journals Extinction and the U.S. Endangered Species Act

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Noah Greenwald ◽  
Kieran F Suckling ◽  
Brett Hartl ◽  
Loyal Mehrhoff
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Endangered Species ◽  
Endangered Species Act ◽  
The United States ◽  
Species Extinction ◽  
Number Of Species ◽  
The U.S ◽  
Species Extinctions

The United States Endangered Species Act is one of the strongest laws of any nation for preventing species extinction, but quantifying the Act’s effectiveness has proven difficult. To provide one measure of effectiveness, we identified listed species that have gone extinct and used previously developed methods to update an estimate of the number of species extinctions prevented by the Act. To date, only four species have been confirmed extinct with another 22 possibly extinct following protection. Another 71 listed species are extinct or possibly extinct, but were last seen before protections were enacted, meaning the Act’s protections never had the opportunity to save these species. In contrast, a total of 39 species have been fully recovered, including 23 in the last 10 years. We estimate the Endangered Species Act has prevented the extinction of roughly 291 species since passage in 1973, and has to date saved more than 99 percent of species under its protection.

Endangered Science: The Regulation of Research by the U.S. Marine Mammal Protection and Endangered Species Acts

2012 ◽  
Vol 42 (1) ◽  
pp. 30-61 ◽  
Author(s):  
Etienne Benson
Keyword(s):  
Endangered Species ◽  
Environmental Regulation ◽  
Marine Mammal ◽  
Animal Rights ◽  
Wildlife Conservation ◽  
The United States ◽  
Professional Autonomy ◽  
Federal Agencies ◽  
Biological Research ◽  
The Public

The Marine Mammal Protection Act and the Endangered Species Act have been cornerstones of federal wildlife conservation policy in the United States since their enactment in the early 1970s. These laws prohibited the taking of members of protected populations without a permit, where “taking” was defined so broadly as to include harassment or disturbance, as well as capture or killing. Because most forms of biological research on protected species involved some sort of taking, and because such research was deemed vital to the achievement of conservation goals and the advancement of human knowledge, the laws established procedures under which proposed scientific takes could be permitted after review by federal regulators, scientists, the public, and, in some cases, the courts. Although there was relatively little controversy over the need for or nature of these permit procedures during the debates leading up to the enactment of the laws, they became the source of concern on the part of many zoologists, biologists, and ecologists as soon as federal agencies began to implement them. From these scientists’ perspective, certain forms of environmental regulation undermined their professional autonomy and threatened to hamper the production of the very knowledge necessary for effective environmental protection. Their efforts to block, weaken, or work around such regulation brought them into conflict with environmental and animal rights activists, regulators, and other members of the scientific community and resonated with a broader backlash against environmental regulation.

Beneficence, Street Begging, and Diverted Giving Schemes

2018 ◽  
Vol 71 (4) ◽  
pp. 923-935
Author(s):  
Cristian Pérez-Muñoz
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Main Idea ◽  
The United States ◽  
Policy Instrument ◽  
Potential Solution ◽  
Institutional Response ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Ability To Act ◽  
Normative Evaluation ◽  
Moral Duties

In recent years, some cities and localities in the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, and elsewhere have adopted or intend to adopt one potential solution to the difficulties inherent in addressing the needs of street beggars: diverted giving schemes (DGSs). A DGS is an institutional response designed to motivate people to donate money in charity boxes or donation meters rather than directly to street beggars. Their advocates believe that DGSs are both more efficient and more ethically permissible than direct giving to individual beggars. This article asks whether and how a DGS can be justified. It offers a normative evaluation of the main idea behind this policy, namely, that anonymous and spontaneous donations to charity boxes are in themselves an adequate policy instrument to address the problem of street begging. Ultimately, the paper argues against this idea and develops the case that DGSs can potentially compromise our ability to act on our moral duties toward truly needy beggars. Moreover, it explains why and under which circumstances this kind of program can potentially and seriously interfere with the freedom and opportunities of individuals in the begging population.

1992

1994 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. W. Meinig
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Endangered Species ◽  
Rare Species ◽  
Good Deal ◽  
The United States ◽  
General Situation ◽  
Migration History ◽  
The University ◽  
Local Reproduction ◽  
Eastern Edge

Had the idea of such an invitation ever crossed my mind, I would have thought the chances of being asked to give the Haskins Lecture as a good deal less likely than being struck by lightning. I found it a stunning experience, and I cannot be sure that I have recovered sufficiently to deliver a coherent response. I can only assume that I was selected because I am one of a rare species in the United States—an historical humanistic geographer—and someone must have suggested it might be of interest to have a look at such a creature, see how he might describe himself and hear how he got into such an obscure profession. Geographers are an endangered species in America, as, alas, attested by their status on this very campus [the University of Chicago], where one of the oldest and greatest graduate departments, founded ninety years ago, has been reduced to some sort of committee, and the few remaining geographers live out their lives without hope of local reproduction. I shall have more to say about this general situation, for while I have never personally felt endangered, no American geographer can work unaware of the losses of positions we suffered over many years and of the latent dangers of sudden raids from preying administrators who see us as awkward and vulnerable misfits who can be culled from the expensive herds of academics they try to manage. I have always been a geographer, but it took me a while to learn that one could make a living at it. My career began when I first looked out upon a wider world from a farmhouse on a hill overlooking a small town on the eastern edge of Washington State. My arrival on this earth at that particular place was the result of the convergence (this is a geographer’s explanation of such an event) of two quite common strands of American migration history. My paternal grandparents emigrated from a village in Saxony to Iowa in 1880, following the path of some kin.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document