Spatial economic models of land use change and conservation targeting strategies

This dissertation examines conservation targeting strategies to protect environmental benefits from potential land use conversion. An optimal targeting framework is developed to prioritize easements amongst developable parcels based on: (1) valuation of development rights; (2) probability of land use conversion; and (3) an environmental benefits index. The application of this targeting framework investigates the rapid expansion in residential and vineyard uses competing for developable land, currently under extensive uses in Sonoma County, CA. The multiple conservation objectives being considered are priority habitat, rangeland, and greenbelt areas.; Heterogeneity in site characteristics, such as land quality, accessibility to urban centers and zoning restrictions, underlie the spatial variation in land values and future development potential. Hedonic price models are developed to estimate land value from recent transactions as a function of site characteristics within a geographic information system (GIS). These results are utilized to predict the easement value for each developable parcel within the region. Spatial land use change models, based on a multinomial discrete choice, are constructed to explain recent land use transitions as a function of site characteristics. These results make it possible to predict the likelihood of future residential and vineyard conversion for each developable parcel. A spatial approach has been crucial to overlay the surfaces of predicted easement values and conversion probabilities onto the priority conservation areas.; Optimal targeting satisfies the objective to minimize the expected loss in benefits under the constraint of limited conservation funds. Benefit-cost (BC) targeting obtains a suboptimal outcome in comparison, since it ignores the effect of land use change on the site selection problem. The probability of land use conversion is an increasing function in the value of development rights. Due to the positive correlation that exists between conversion probability and costs, low cost sites typically have lower likelihood of future conversion. BC targeting biases the selection toward low cost sites, resulting in targeting inefficiencies. In sum, BC targeting will protect the hinterlands but not necessarily the most threatened areas. Site selection for optimal and BC targeting is compared site selection to determine conditions under which these two methods differ substantially in targeting efficiency.