Easing conservation? Conservation easements, public accountability and neoliberalism

This paper examines the use of conservation easements, with a focus on California. Conservation easements are now the dominant tool used for private land conservation in the United States. Easements are in many ways a paradigmatic neoliberal environmental policy tool. They privatize and re-scale a great deal of land conservation decision-making authority; they are market-based; they provide financial incentives for participation rather than punishment for non-compliance; and they commodify new property rights. However, these neoliberalisms are incorporated in uneven, and sometimes contradictory, ways that emphasize the gulf between neoliberal ideologies and “actually existing neoliberalisms.” Most critically, as a result of extensive public funding and management, conservation easements are not nearly as private (and thus not as neatly neoliberal) as they sometimes seem. Conservation easements are often heralded as a “win-win” land conservation strategy. I argue that the extent to which conservation easements may be construed as win-win solutions depends a great deal on who is included in the calculation of winners and losers. I contend that using and governing easements as if they are private elides complex questions about larger public costs and benefits. This obscures the large number of people and institutions (both state and private) that will likely need to be involved in governing conservation easements in the long term.