Allow nonuse rights to conserve natural resources

Traditionally, natural resources in the United States have been managed for productive uses, that is, resource extraction. To acquire and retain public resource leases such as oil and gas, timber, and grazing lands, resources must be dedicated to certain "productive uses." Buying rights to natural resources to conserve them, rather than to extract them, is generally not an option.

PERC Vice President of Research Shawn Regan, PERC members Bryan Leonard, Christopher Costello, and Dominic Parker, along with Suzi Kerr, Andrew Plantinga, James Salzman, V. Kerry Smith, and Temple Stoellinger, published an article in Science on the role of nonuse rights in natural resource conservation, titled "Allow 'nonuse rights' to conserve natural resources."

The authors argue that "use-it-or-lose-it" requirements, coupled with narrow definitions of valid "uses," limit the participation of environmental groups in contracts to conserve state-managed natural resources. Such restrictions can skew resource management in favor of extractive uses, even when environmental groups are willing to pay more. By allowing non-use rights, environmentalists can express their values in the marketplace, rather than relying on political, legal or administrative processes.

"If environmental groups are willing to pay more to protect an area than industry groups are to develop it, then clearly the land needs to be protected," says author Shawn Regan about what he calls conservation leasing.

If done thoughtfully, granting non-use rights can improve the status quo of public resource management for the following reasons:

Non-use rights can reveal the economic value of conservation.
Conservationists have shown interest in participating in such markets, and granting them additional access through non-use rights could expand conservation efforts.
Non-use rights, if secure and well-defined, could yield more sustainable conservation outcomes that are not dependent on shifting political winds.
A rights-based approach allows greater flexibility to respond to changing market and environmental conditions-for example, those posed by a changing climate.
A rights-based approach can limit conflicts by compensating existing leaseholders.
This paper is the result of a CPER workshop that brought together experts in resource management, economics, and conservation to think creatively about how to extend market tools such as price signals and property rights to natural resource conservation.