Fairness and endangered species policy: A policy analysis of conservation on private lands

Background/Question/Methods

How can we conserve a public good, like biodiversity, on private lands? In Canada and the US most endangered species habitat overlaps with privately owned and managed land. This makes it essential from a public policy standpoint to engage private landowners in conservation efforts. But exactly what type of policy best encourages private stewardship remains a contentious mystery. This is in large part because the values and norms of non-agricultural landowners in Canada and the US are not well understood. This paper argues that “fairness” is the most important aspect of conservation policy in North America. The concept of fairness is malleable and often ambiguous. Often government is only able to establish its existence by violating it. Nevertheless, fairness remains the central concern for landowners in the two countries Drawing on over 100 interviews with non-agricultural landowners in Ontario, Ohio, Indiana and Utah this paper illustrates that conceptions of fairness mediate landowners’ willingness to conserve endangered species on their own land. Moreover, the paper will argue that this debate over fairness played a key role in the development of Canada’s Species at Risk Act, as the government went to great lengths to avoid the mistakes of the American Endangered Species Act regarding issues of landowner fairness. Today, provinces like Saskatchewan and Alberta have no stand-alone species at risk policy at all because of the “fairness debate” always present in conservation policy

Results/Conclusions

Ultimately, the paper concludes that greater attention to fairness is the keystone to better conservation policy in both countries. Only by creating “fair policy” can we begin to protect a public good on private lands.