• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Environmental Conservation >Rethinking property rights: comparative analysis of conservation easements for wildlife conservation
【24h】

Rethinking property rights: comparative analysis of conservation easements for wildlife conservation

机译：重新思考产权：野生动植物保护地役权的比较分析

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Conservation easements (or conservation covenants) are commonly conceptualized as acquisitions of sticks in a 'bundle of rights' and are increasingly implemented for wildlife conservation on private lands. This research asks: (1) What are the possibilities and limitations of the conservation easement approach to wildlife conservation in contrasting rural and periurban regions? and (2) How does analysis of conservation easements differ when examining property as a bundle of rights or alternative metaphors? These questions were addressed through document analysis, interviews and GIS mapping in two regions where The Nature Conservancy deployed conservation easements for wildlife habitat: rural Lassen Foothills and periurban Tenaja Corridor, USA. Splitting the bundle allowed for site and region-specific easements with differences in permitted housing densities, land management and hunting. Easements focused on restricted rights rather than affirmative duties. The challenges of habitat connectivity in the fragmented Tenaja Corridor revealed the limits of parcel-based acquisition. Analysts and conservation practitioners should rethink the bundle of rights concept of property, considering a bundle of duties, powers and owners within a broader web of social and ecological interests, to understand the role of conservation acquisitions in contrasting landscape contexts.
机译：保护地役权（或保护盟约）通常被概念化为“权利捆绑”中的棍棒收购，并且越来越多地用于保护私人土地上的野生动植物。这项研究提出了以下问题：（1）与农村和城郊地区形成鲜明对比的自然保护区保护措施的可能性和局限性是什么？ （2）在将财产视为一堆权利或替代隐喻时，对保护地役权的分析有何不同？这些问题通过文件分析，采访和GIS绘图得到解决，这两个地区是美国自然保护协会为野生动植物栖息地部署保护地役权的地区：拉森山麓农村地区和美国特纳雅走廊外围地区。拆分允许的场地和地区特定地役权的捆绑，但允许的房屋密度，土地管理和狩猎有所不同。地役权的重点是限制性权利，而不是平权义务。零散的Tenaja走廊的栖息地连通性挑战揭示了基于包裹的采集的局限性。分析人员和保护从业人员应该重新考虑财产权的概念，在更广泛的社会和生态利益网络中考虑一揽子义务，权力和所有者，以了解保护性收购在景观环境中的作用。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号