Planning for ecosystem service markets

Journal of the American Planning Association

Volumn 76, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 59-72

  Bendor, Todd K ^a,b   Doyle, Martin W ^b  

^a University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA   (United States)

Author keywords

Compensatory mitigation; Ecosystem service market; Environmental planning; Wetland and stream banking

Indexed keywords

ECOSYSTEM SERVICE; ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING; LAND USE PLANNING; URBAN DEVELOPMENT; URBAN GROWTH; URBAN PLANNING; WETLAND MANAGEMENT;

NORTH CAROLINA; UNITED STATES;

EID: 76749101276     PISSN: 01944363     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/01944360903360100     Document Type: Article

References (80)

1. Act to Promote Private Compensatory Mitigation. (2008). NC SL2008-152. Retrieved September 13, 2009, from http://www.ncleg.net/gascripts/BillLookUp/ BillLookUp.pl?Session=20078&BillID=S1885
2. BenDor, T., & Brozovic, N. (2007). Determinants of spatial and temporal patterns in compensatory wetland mitigation. Environmental Management, 40(3), 349-364.
3. Ben or, T., Brozovic, N., & Pallathucheril, V. G. (2007). Assessing the socioeconomic impacts of wetland mitigation in the Chicago region. Journal of the American Planning Association, 73(3), 263-282. (Pubitemid 47595959)
4. BenDor, T., Brozovic, N., & Pallathucheril, V. G. (2008). Exploring the social impacts of wedand mitigation policies in the United States. Journal of Planning Literature, 22(4), 341-357.
5. BenDor, T., Sholtes, J., & Doyle, M. W. (in press). Landscape characteristics of a stream and wetland mitigation banking program. Ecological Applications.
6. Berke, P., Godschalk, D., Kaiser, E., & Rodriguez, D. A. (2006). Urban land use planning (5th ed.). Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
7. Berke, P., Roenigk, D. J., Kaiser, E. J., & Burby, R. (1996). Enhancing plan quality: Evaluating the role of state planning mandates for natural hazard mitigation. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 39(1), 79-96. (Pubitemid 26411163)
8. Boyd, J., Burtraw, D., Krupnick, A. M. V., Newell, R., Palmer, K., Sanchirico, J., et al. (2003). Trading cases: Five examples of the use of markets in environmental and resource management. In W.E. Oates (Eds.), The RFF reader in environmental and resource policy (pp. 37, 56-65). Washington, DC: Resources for the Future.
9. Bryson, H., & Leslie, A. (2008). The NC ecosystem enhancement program's local watershed planning initiatives: Public involvement in western North Carolina. Retrieved April 27, 2009, from http://www.southeastwaterforum. org/files/3-HBryson, EEP Watershed Initiatives.pdf
10. Carpenedo, S. M., Kramer, E., Lee, J., & Samples, K. (2007). Using GIS to model the effects of potential wedand mitigation sites on water quality in Georgia. Proceedings of the 2007 Georgia Water Resources Conference. Athens: University of Georgia.
11. Cervero, R. (1998). The transit metropolis: A global inquiry. Washington DC: Island Press.
12. Clean Water Act. 13 USC 1344 (1972; amended 1977).
13. Craig, R. (2007). Which way federalism under Section 402? Natural Resources and Environment, 22(1), 20-24.
14. Dye Management Group. (2007). Study of the merger of Ecosystem Enhancement Program & Clean Water Management Trust Fund: Final report of findings and recommendations. Retrieved June 7, 2007, from http://www. nceep.net/pages/DYE-2007-EEP-CWMTF-Study-Final-Report.pdf
15. Endangered Species Act. 16 USC 1531 (1973).
16. Enevoldsen, M. (2005). The theory of environmental agreements and taxes. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
17. Environmental Law Institute. (2002). Banks and fees: The status of offsite wetland mitigation in the United States. Washington, DC: Author.
18. Environmental Law Institute. (2003). Third stakeholder forum on federal wetlands mitigation. Washington, DC: Author.
19. Environmental Law Institute. (2005). State wetland program evaluation: Phase I. Washington, DC: Author.
20. Environmental Law Institute. (2006a). 2005 status report on compensatory mitigation in the United States. Washington, DC: Author.
21. Environmental Law Institute. (2006b). The national forum on synergies between water quality trading and wetland mitigation banking. Washington, DC: Author.
22. Finn, D., Lewis D. H., & Wempe, M. (2007). The information system of plans approach: Using and making plans for landscape protection. Landscape and Urban Planning 81(1-2), 132-145. (Pubitemid 46660214)
23. Gilmore, W. (2005). North Carolina's ecosystem-impact innovation. National Wetlands Newsletter, 27(5), 1, 15-16.
24. Government Accountability Office. (2005). Corps of Engineers does not have an effective oversight approach to ensure that compensatory mitigation is occurring: Report to the ranking Democratic member, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, House of Representatives. Washington, DC: Author.
25. Hamstead, Z., & BenDor, T. (in press). Over-compliance in water quality trading programs: Findings from a qualitative case study in North Carolina. Environment and Planning C.
26. Hough, P., & Robertson, M. (2009). Mitigation under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act: where it comes from, what it means. Wetlands Ecology and Management, 17(1), 15-33.
27. Hough, P., & Sudol, M. (2008). New regulations to improve wetland and stream compensatory mitigation. National Wetlands Newsletter, 30(4), 1, 3-4, 21.
28. Jackson, M. O. (2001). A crash course in implementation theory. Social Choice and Welfare, 18(4), 655-708.
29. Mann, R., & Goldman-Carter, J. (2008). Avoidance: Still the best solution to the compensatory mitigation challenge. National Wetlands Newsletter, 30(4), 8-10.
30. Martin, R., & Chowning, J. T. (1999). In-lieu-fee programs belong among mitigation options. National Wetlands Newsletter, 21 (4), 4, 6-9.
31. National Research Council. (2001). Compensating for wetland losses under the Clean Water Act. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
32. National Wetlands Policy Forum. (1988). Protecting America's wetlands: An action agenda. The final report of the National Wetlands Policy Forum. Washington, DC: The Conservation Foundation.
33. North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, North Carolina Department of Transportation, & U.S. Army Corpsof Engineers. (2003). Memorandum of agreement among the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources and the North Carolina Department of Transportation and the United States Army Corps of Engineers Wilmington District. Retrieved December 28, 2008, from http://www.nceep.net/images/ Final%20MOA.pdf
34. North Carolina Department of Transportation. (2008). 2009-2015 state transportation improvement program. Department of Transportation. Retrieved December 28, 2008, from http://www.ncdot.org/PLANNING/development/tip/TIP/
35. North Carolina Division of Water Quality. (2008). Basinwide planning program. Retrieved December 28, 2008, from http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/basinwide/
36. North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program. (2004). Policy, process and procedures manual. Raleigh: Author. Retrieved July 26, 2008, from http://www.nceep.net/abouteep/PPPM2/Text%20Sections%20and%20Front%20Matter/ TOC-2004-10-15.htm
37. North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program. (2007). PeachtreeMartins Creek local watershed plan Phase 3: Watershed management plan. Raleigh: Author. Retrieved April 28, 2009, from http://www.hrwc.net/pmcplan/pmc-plan-complete.pdf
38. North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program. (2008a). EEPILF program schedule of fees. Raleigh: Author. Retrieved December 28, 2008 from http://www.nceep.net/pages/fee.htm
39. North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program. (2008b). EEP local watershed planning. Retrieved December 28, 2008, from http://www.nceep.net/ pages/lwplanning.htm
40. North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program. (2008c). North Carolina mitigation banks. Retrieved December 28, 2008, from http:// h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ ncwedands/documents/mitigation-banks.doc
41. North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancenment Program. (2009a). Awards and recognition. Retrieved April 26, 2009, from http://www.nceep.net/abouteep/ awards2.html
42. North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program. (2009b). EEP's targeted local watersheds. Retrieved April 28, 2009, from http://www.nceep.net/pages/lwp .htm
43. North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program. (2009c). EEP web mapping system. Retrieved September 20, 2009, from http://www.nceep.net/GIS-DATA/ mapping/eep-web-mapping-system.html
44. North Carolina Wetland Functional Assessment Team. (2008). NC. wetland assessment method (NC WAM) user manual Raleigh, NC: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
45. North Carolina Wetlands Restoration Program. (1997). NCGS § 143.214.8-143.214-13. Retrieved December 28, 2008, from http://www.nceep.net/ news/reports/statutes.pdf
46. Penrose, D. (2006). Biological monitoring of stream restoration projects in North Carolina. Raleigh, NC: Ecosystem Enhancement Program.
47. Portney, P. R., & Stavins, R. N. (2000). Public policies for environmental protection. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future.
48. Pressman, J. L., & Wildavsky, A. (1973). Implementation: How great expectations in Washington are dashed in Oakland; or, why it's amazing that federal programs work at all, this being a saga of the Economic Development Administration as told by two sympathetic observers who seek to build morals on a foundation of ruined hopes. Berkeley: University of California Press.
49. Rapanos v. United States, 126 S. Ct. 2208 (2006).
50. Robertson, M. M. (2006a). Emerging ecosystem service markets: Trends in a decade of entrepreneurial wetland banking. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 4(6), 297-302.
51. Robertson, M. M. (2006b). The nature that capital can see: Science, state, and market in the commodification of ecosystem service. Environment and Planning D, 24(3), 367-387.
52. Robertson, M. M., & Hayden, N. (2008). Evaluation of a market in wetland credits: Entrepreneurial wetland banking in Chicago. Conservation Biology, 22(3), 636-646.
53. Robertson, M. M., & Mikota, M. (2007). Water quality trading & wetland mitigation banking: Different problems, different paths? National Wetlands Newsletter, 29(2), 1, 10-14.
54. Rodríguez, D., Godschalk, D., Norton, R. K., & Aytur, S. (2004). The connection between land use and transportation in land use plans. (Report prepared for the North Carolina Department of Transportation, Project # 2003-16.) Chapel Hill, NC: Department of City and Regional Planning.
55. Ruhl, J. B., Glen, A., & Hartman, D. (2005). A practical guide to habitat conservation banking law and policy. Natural Resources & Environment, 20(1), 26-32. (Pubitemid 41371884)
56. Ruhl, J. B., & Gregg, R. J. (2001). Integrating ecosystem services in environmental law: A case study of wetlands mitigation banking. Stanford Environmental Law Journal, 20(2), 365-392.
57. Ruhl, J. B., & Salzman, J. (2006). The effects of wetland mitigation banking on people. National Wetlands Newsletter, 28(2), 1, 9-14.
58. Sabatier, P. (1986). Top-down and bottom-up approaches to implementation research: A critical analysis and suggested synthesis. Journal of Public Policy, 6(1), 21-48.
59. Salzman, J., & Ruhl, J. B. (2000). Currencies and the commodification of environmental law. Stanford Law Review, 53(3), 607-694.
60. Shabman, L. A., & Scodari, P. (2004). Past, present, and future of wetlands credit sales (RFF Discussion Paper 04-48). Washington, DC: Resources for the Future.
61. Stewart, A. (2009). Examining North Carolina's compensatory wetland mitigation program from the perspectives of land use planning and social equity. Unpublished master's thesis. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
62. Templeton, S. R., Dumas, C. F., & Sessions, W. T. (2008). Estimation and analysis of expenses of design-bid-build projects for stream mitigation in North Carolina (Research Report RR 08-01). Clemson, SC: Clemson University Department of Applied Economics and Statistics.
63. Thompson, D. M. (2006). Did the pre-1980 use of in-stream structures improve streams? A reanalysis of historical data. Ecological Applications, 16(2), 784-796.
64. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. (2006). Draft environmental assessment, finding of no significant impact, and regulatory analysis for proposed compensatory mitigation regulation. Washington, DC: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Directorate of Civil Works.
65. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers & U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (1990). Memorandum of agreement between the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of the Army concerning the determination of mitigation under the Clean Water Act Section 404(b)(1) guidelines. Retrieved March 30, 2005, from http://www.epa.gov/owow/wetlands/regs/mi tigate.html
66. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers & U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (1995). Federal guidance for the establishment, use and operation of mitigation banks. 60 Fed. Reg. 228, 58605-58614 (Nov. 28, 1995). Retrieved June 13, 2005, from http://www.epa.gov/owow/wetlands/guidance/mitbankn.html
67. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers & U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (2008). Compensatory mitigation for losses of aquatic resources; Final rule. 73 Fed. Reg. 70 19593-19705 (Apr. 10, 2008). Retrieved December 28, 2008, from http://www.epa.gov/owow/wetlands/pdf/ wetlands-mitigation-final-rule-4-10-08.pdf
68. U.S. Department of Agriculture. (1999). National resources inventory. Washington, DC: Author.
69. U.S. Department of Transportation. (2005). Safe, accountable, flexible,efficient transportation equity act: A legacy for users (SAFETEA-LU). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration. Retrieved December 28, 2008, from http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ safetealu/index.htm
70. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (2002). National wetlands mitigation action plan. Retrieved September 20, 2009, from http://www. mitigationactionplan.gov/
71. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (2009a). Advance identification (ADID). Retrieved April 27, 2009, from http://www.epa.gov/owow/wetlands/facts/ fact28.html
72. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (2009b). Clean air markets. Retrieved April 22, 2009, from http://www.epa.gov/airmarkt/index. html
73. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Sc U.S. Department of Transportation. (2003). Federal guidance on the use of the TEA-21 preference for mitigation banking tojulfill mitigation requirements under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Retrieved December 28, 2008, from http://www.epa.gov/owow/wetlands/pdf/TEA-21 Guidance.pdf
74. Walsh, C. J., Waller, K. A., Gehling, J., & MacNally, R. (2007). Riverine invertebrate assemblages are degraded more by catchment urbanization than by riparian deforestation. Freshwater Biology, 52(3), 574-587. (Pubitemid 46239252)
75. Wang, L., Lyons, J., Kanehl, P., &Gatti, R. (1997). Influences of watershed land use on habitat quality and biotic integrity in Wisconsin streams. Fisheries, 22(6), 6-12.
76. Welty, C., Fraley, L., Hanlon, B., Hanson, R., Kolb, N., McGuire, M. P., et al. (2005). Final report: Usingan "imperviouspermit"allowance system to reduce impervious surface coverage for environmental sustainability (EPA Grant: SU831880). Retrieved April 22, 2009, from http:// cfpub.epa.gov/ncer-abstracts/index.cfm/fuseaction/display. abstractDetail/ abstract/7148/report/F
77. White, D., & Shabman, L. A. (1995). National wetland mitigation banking study watershed-based wetlands planning. A case study report (IWR Report 95-WMB-8). Retrieved April 27, 2009, from http://www. iwr.usace.army.mil/ inside/products/pub/iwrreports/95wmb8.pdf
78. White House Office on Environmental Policy. (1993). Protecting America's wetlands: A fair, flexible, and effective approach. Washington, DC: Author.
79. Wilkinson, J. (2009). In-lieu fee mitigation: Coming into compliance with the new compensatory mitigation rule. Wetlands Ecology and Management, 17(1), 53-70.
80. Yin, R. K. (2008). Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.