| Community Benefits and Costs of Purchase of Agricultural Conservation Easements |
 |
Community Benefits and Costs of Purchase of Agricultural Conservation Easements
Carl Mailler; Northampton, MA: American Farmland Trust; AFT Publication; page(s) 59; 2005; National/MA/PA; Reports and Studies
|
View Text
|
Abstract:
The National Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) provided funding for American Farmland
Trust (AFT) to estimate the benefits that a farm could provide a local community in the future
when its development rights are purchased. AFT analyzed the financial impacts to communities
and individuals that result from protected farmland. Through the use of existing sources of data to
generate this information, potential benefits are quantified in a way that taxpayers can understand
and appreciate.
AFT compared the costs of purchasing easements on two farms to the benefits those farms could
provide to their communities to field test a methodology developed by J. Dixon Esseks, Richard
C. Owens, Charles A. Francis and Dennis Schroeder in “Estimating the Benefits to Local
Stakeholders from Agricultural Conservation Easements.” Their research identified local
residents or stakeholders who are likely to benefit from purchase of agricultural conservation
easements (PACE) including: 1) owners of the farm, 2) subsequent buyers, 3) owners of adjacent
or neighboring properties, 4) local travelers enjoying the views of the protected parcel, 5) local
residents who find recreational opportunities, 6) consumers who purchase agricultural products
grown on that land, 7) owners and employees of local businesses providing goods and services to
the farm, 8) users of downstream water who avoid flood damage or flood control costs, 9) users
of downstream water who avoid the costs of sediment build-up or water pollution, and 10) local
residents who value farmland preservation for protecting wildlife habitat, rural “history and
heritage,” curbing urban sprawl or achieving other civic purposes.
AFT evaluated and tested methods to determine the value of protected farmland to each category
of stakeholder. A goal of the research was to measure the extent to which the benefits of placing a
conservation easement on farmland equal or come close to the easement cost. Therefore, we
attempted to measure as many types of benefits as possible in dollars so that the estimated values
of the different types could be aggregated or compared.
AFT found that the largest benefit value was from the farm’s economic contribution to the local
community through purchases of local goods and services, employment and product sales.
Essentially, PACE acts as an economic development mechanism. When compared to a $44,000
easement purchase for the farm in Deerfield, Massachusetts, significant benefits included the
following:
-Neighboring properties received $10,790 in lease payments and contributed an
additional $1,045 in property taxes annually.
-Annual purchases of local goods and services amounted to $327,496, while the total
local economic impact of the farm operation was $863,315.
-A one-time cost of $2,139 in soil loss from erosion was prevented by not using the
property for residential development.
-A net annual fiscal benefit of $82 in property tax revenue was generated to pay for
community services.
A PACE cost of $393,330 for the farm in Berks County, Pennsylvania, compared to significant
benefits which included:
-Local businesses received $133,964 from selling goods and services to the farm.
-Recreation benefits valued at $804 per year.
-Local consumers purchased $2,107 in direct sales of farm products.
-The value of local residents desires to have the farmland as part of their community
was $49,466 per year for a five-year period.
| |
