July 2015 Proposed Final Report: Economic Impact of Public Natural Resource Lands JLARC Staff...
9
July 2015 Proposed Final Report: Economic Impact of Public Natural Resource Lands JLARC Staff Stephanie Hoffman Rebecca Connolly egislative Auditor’s Conclusion: County economies are influenced more by how public lands are used than by the amount of publicly owned lands
-
Upload
matthew-scott -
Category
Documents
-
view
212 -
download
0
Transcript of July 2015 Proposed Final Report: Economic Impact of Public Natural Resource Lands JLARC Staff...
July 2015
Proposed Final Report:Economic Impact of Public Natural Resource Lands
JLARC StaffStephanie Hoffman Rebecca Connolly
Legislative Auditor’s Conclusion:
County economies are influenced more by how public lands are used than by the amount of publicly owned lands
Economic Impact of Public Natural Resource Lands
Is more public natural resource land detrimental to county economic vitality?
Is There a General Answer?
What About
Specific Sites?
Specific sites may have positive or negative economic impacts: Use matters more than ownership
Percent of public natural resource land was not detrimental to county economies
July 2015
No Legislative Auditor recommendationsNo formal responses from agencies
2/9
37% of WA is state and federal natural resource lands
Source: WSU analysis of data provided by the Recreation and Conservation Office.
July 2015Economic Impact of Public Natural Resource Lands 3/9
Economic Impact of Public Natural Resource Lands
Economists estimated the relationship between public land and economic vitality
July 2015
Job Growth
Income Growth
Population Growth
Economic Vitality
$$
They used a statistical tool: regression analysis
Job Growth
Income Growth
Population Growth
Economic Vitality
$$
Controlled for Factors Such As:
Population density
Interstate highway density
Topography
Percent of Public Land
4/9
Economic Impact of Public Natural Resource Lands
In general, public land was not detrimental to county economies between 1990-2010
July 2015
No consistent evidence that counties with high percentages of public land were negatively impacted by lands
Lands managed for habitat, conservation, or passive recreation may have small positive relationship to income and jobs
Consistent with recent academic research
5/9
Economic Impact of Public Natural Resource Lands
Specific sites may have positive or negative net economic impacts
July 2015
Public Cabins & Campsites
vs.Private Vacation Rentals
Net Impact-$0.2 M
Private Homes
Different uses yield different net impacts Public
Cabins & Campsites
Net Impact+$2.8 M vs.
Data and results are site specific and cannot be generalized to other sites
6/9
Economic Impact of Public Natural Resource Lands
Economic impact analyses may not capture broader impacts
May not identify
impacts to other counties
or the state
County ALoses visitors and $$
County BLoses visitors and $$
County CGains visitors and $$
July 2015 7/9
Economic Impact of Public Natural Resource Lands
Land use matters more than ownership
July 2015
Percent of public natural resource land wasnot detrimental to county economies
Estimates of economic impacts depend on land use change, assumptions, and site-specific data
Specific sites may have positive or negative net economic impacts
8/9
Contact Information
Rebecca Connolly, Research [email protected] 360-786-5175
Stephanie Hoffman, Research [email protected] 360-786-5297
John Woolley, Project [email protected] 360-786-5184
http://leg.wa.gov/jlarc/reports/2015/PublicLandsEcon/pf/default.htm
www.jlarc.leg.wa.gov
