Incentives for biological conservation: Costa Rica's Private Wildlife Refuge Program

dc.contributor.authorLangholz, J.en
dc.contributor.authorLassoie, Jamesen
dc.contributor.authorSchelhas, J.en
dc.contributor.departmentSustainable Agriculture and Natural Resource Management (SANREM) Knowledgebaseen
dc.coverage.spatialCosta Ricaen
dc.coverage.spatialCentral Americaen
dc.date.accessioned2016-04-19T19:19:53Zen
dc.date.available2016-04-19T19:19:53Zen
dc.date.issued2000en
dc.descriptionMetadata only recorden
dc.description.abstractThe alarming pace of tropical biodiversity loss requires development of innovative approaches for in situ biodiversity conservation. Incentive-based approaches have emerged as one possible option. We interviewed 68 private nature reserve owners to learn more about one of Costa Rica's incentive programs. The interview group included all reserve owners participating in the government's Private Wildlife Refuge Program (n = 22) and a control group of nonparticipating owners (n = 46). Quantitative and qualitative data led to seven main conclusions on the use of incentive programs: (1) a developing country can expand and enhance its formal park system through conservation incentives; (2) insufficient promotion, and resulting information gaps, can prevent an incentive program from realizing its full potential; (3) landowners enter a program not only in response to the intended incentive package, but also for several powerful and hidden incentives such as publicity and marketing purposes; (4) underutilization of official incentives by participants, in part due to sporadic delivery of incentives by the government, can undermine program effectiveness; (5) biodiversity protection goals can be accomplished by means of a wide range of incentives; (6) programs that require only a short-term commitment by landowners can still lead to long-term biodiversity protection; and (7) a program can produce unanticipated negative consequences at the national level, including putting conservation at odds with social justice. These and other lessons on the use of incentives should be of interest wherever biodiversity is threatened, wherever new conservation partners are being sought, and wherever incentive-based approaches are being considered.en
dc.description.notesPES-1 (Payments for Environmental Services Associate Award)en
dc.format.mimetypetext/plainen
dc.identifier2490en
dc.identifier.citationConservation Biology 14(6): 1735-1743en
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.1046/j.1523-1739.2000.99049.xen
dc.identifier.issn0888-8892en
dc.identifier.issn1523-1739en
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10919/66991en
dc.language.isoen_USen
dc.publisherBlackwell Publishingen
dc.relation.urihttp://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0888-8892%28200012%2914%3A6%3C1735%3AIFBCCR%3E2.0.CO%3B2-4en
dc.rightsIn Copyrighten
dc.rights.urihttp://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/en
dc.subjectWildlifeen
dc.subjectBiodiversityen
dc.subjectPayments for environmental servicesen
dc.subjectTropical zonesen
dc.subjectIn situ conservationen
dc.subjectConservationen
dc.subjectConservation incentivesen
dc.subjectRainforesten
dc.subjectBiodiversity conservationen
dc.subjectPESen
dc.subjectIncentive-based approachesen
dc.subjectCosta Ricaen
dc.subjectPrivate nature reserveen
dc.subjectPrivate wildlife refuge program (pwrp)en
dc.subjectIncentive programen
dc.subjectSquatter protectionen
dc.subjectFarm/Enterprise Scale Governanceen
dc.titleIncentives for biological conservation: Costa Rica's Private Wildlife Refuge Programen
dc.typeAbstracten
dc.type.dcmitypeTexten

Files