TY - JOUR
T1 - Public access to spatial data on private-land conservation
AU - Rissman, Adena R.
AU - Owley, Jessica
AU - L'roe, Andrew W.
AU - Morris, Amy Wilson
AU - Wardropper, Chloe B.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2017 by the author(s).
PY - 2017/6
Y1 - 2017/6
N2 - Information is critical for environmental governance. The rise of digital mapping has the potential to advance privateland conservation by assisting with conservation planning, monitoring, evaluation, and accountability. However, privacy concerns from private landowners and the capacity of conservation entities can influence efforts to track spatial data. We examine public access to geospatial data on conserved private lands and the reasons data are available or unavailable. We conduct a qualitative comparative case study based on analysis of maps, documents, and interviews. We compare four conservation programs involving different conservation tools: conservation easements (the growing but incomplete National Conservation Easement Database), regulatory mitigation (gaps in tracking U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s endangered species habitat mitigation), contract payments (lack of spatial data on U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Conservation Reserve Program due to Farm Bill restrictions), and property-tax incentives (online mapping of Wisconsin’s managed forest tax program). These cases illuminate the capacity and privacy reasons for current incomplete or inaccessible spatial data and the politics of mapping private land. If geospatial data are to contribute fully to planning, evaluation, and accountability, we recommend improving information system capacity, enhancing learning networks, and reducing legal and administrative barriers to information access, while balancing the right to information and the right to privacy.
AB - Information is critical for environmental governance. The rise of digital mapping has the potential to advance privateland conservation by assisting with conservation planning, monitoring, evaluation, and accountability. However, privacy concerns from private landowners and the capacity of conservation entities can influence efforts to track spatial data. We examine public access to geospatial data on conserved private lands and the reasons data are available or unavailable. We conduct a qualitative comparative case study based on analysis of maps, documents, and interviews. We compare four conservation programs involving different conservation tools: conservation easements (the growing but incomplete National Conservation Easement Database), regulatory mitigation (gaps in tracking U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s endangered species habitat mitigation), contract payments (lack of spatial data on U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Conservation Reserve Program due to Farm Bill restrictions), and property-tax incentives (online mapping of Wisconsin’s managed forest tax program). These cases illuminate the capacity and privacy reasons for current incomplete or inaccessible spatial data and the politics of mapping private land. If geospatial data are to contribute fully to planning, evaluation, and accountability, we recommend improving information system capacity, enhancing learning networks, and reducing legal and administrative barriers to information access, while balancing the right to information and the right to privacy.
KW - Conservation easements
KW - Cost share
KW - Environmental governance
KW - Geographic information systems
KW - Land trusts
KW - Privacy
KW - Privateland conservation
KW - Tax incentive
KW - Transparency
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85021827954&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85021827954&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.5751/ES-09330-220224
DO - 10.5751/ES-09330-220224
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85021827954
SN - 1708-3087
VL - 22
JO - Ecology and Society
JF - Ecology and Society
IS - 2
M1 - 24
ER -