Local Use of Economic Instruments in the Chesapeake Bay Critical Area Programme

Eran Feitelson and Greg Lindsey

Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 2001, vol. 44, issue 2, 187-206

Abstract: As part of the general devolution of authority in many countries and regions to the lowest level of government, local jurisdictions are increasingly encumbered with the responsibility for environmental programmes. The issues that they have to address often pertain to land use. Land use cases also offer the greatest potential for further application of economic instruments. This paper explores the factors that affect the extent to which economic instruments are used at the local level. The Chesapeake Bay Critical Area (CBCA) initiative in Maryland provides a natural experiment to test these factors. Sixteen counties in the CBCA were faced with the same mandate, encouraged to use economic instruments and provided with the same information when developing their local critical area programmes. To assess factors that have affected the use of economic instruments two analyses were conducted. First, the use of all instruments in all countries was analysed. Second, in-depth interviews were conducted in a select subset of counties to gain further insight regarding the reasons for use or non-use of economic instruments. The study finds that both the attributes of the instruments and the local political culture affect the use of such instruments. Specifically, market demand and structure, and the capacity of the jurisdictions and actors in the local development scene, determine the potential for use of the various economic instruments. Actual use is mediated, however, by the extent to which a county has prior experience of the tool, the attitudes of local politicians and citizen groups toward the use of different tools and the way the tools are framed in the local public discourse. Overall, instruments that are seen as simple and providing rewards rather than imposing an additional burden have a greater likelihood of being implemented.

Date: 2001
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09640560120033704 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:taf:jenpmg:v:44:y:2001:i:2:p:187-206

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/CJEP20

DOI: 10.1080/09640560120033704

Access Statistics for this article

Journal of Environmental Planning and Management is currently edited by Dr Neil Powe, Dr Ken Willis and George Bill Page

More articles in Journal of Environmental Planning and Management from Taylor & Francis Journals
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Longhurst ().