China’s Local Public Finance in Transition

For immediate release
Contact: Anthony Flint 617-503-2116

            CAMBRIDGE, Mass. (November 9, 2010) – China is quietly developing a system of local public finance to better organize government tax and expenditure policies, including the initiation of a property tax, according to a new study by the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy.
            China’s Local Public Finance in Transition, edited by Joyce Yanyun Man and Yu-Hong Hong, details three major policy options under consideration: instituting new sources of local revenue, such as a property tax; reforming revenue transfers from the central government to local governments, which also addresses cross-provincial disparities; and revisiting the assignment of expenditure responsibilities from local governments to the central government. The end result is likely to be a mix of all three options as part of an incremental reform, according to the volume.
            China’s economy has developed rapidly following the 1978 implementation of economic reforms that facilitated investment, expanded trade, and introduced market mechanisms and practices. But reforms of China’s public finances have proceeded more slowly and with less publicity. The major tax reform, implemented in 1994, shifted a large share of fiscal revenues from local governments to the central government, but did not substantially reassign expenditure responsibilities back to the center. Following the 1994 reform, local governments had 46 percent of revenues but responsibility for 77 percent of public expenditures.
          This revenue shortfall motivated local governments to exploit new sources, and revenue from the conversion of land from rural to urban use has been one of the most important extra-budgetary sources. Conversion involves compensating farmers for their land based on its agricultural use value, and then converting the land to urban use and selling it for development at a much higher value. The difference in land values accrues to local governments.
           The revenue from land sales has been a major source of funding for investment in infrastructure capital, often required to provide services to the newly converted urban land. In areas where urban land is in short supply revenues have been significant, and the incentive to produce more revenue has led to excessive land conversions. This practice has created low-density development in the periphery of some metropolitan areas while leaving large areas of urbanized land undeveloped.
         China’s Local Public Finance in Transition presents the proceedings of a conference co-sponsored by the Lincoln Institute and the Peking University–Lincoln Institute Center for Urban Development and Land Policy in May 2008, plus two additional chapters. It is a valuable resource for government officials, public finance practitioners, academic researchers, university faculty and students, and others concerned with government tax and expenditure policies and practices in China. The volume will be translated into Chinese and published in association with the Peking University–Lincoln Institute Center for Urban Development and Land Policy.
          The Lincoln Institute of Land Policy is a leading resource for key issues concerning the use, regulation, and taxation of land. Providing high quality education and research, the Institute strives to improve public dialogue and decisions about land policy.

Contents

Foreword, Gregory K. Ingram
Introduction
1 Local Public Finance in China: An Overview, Joyce Yanyun Man
Local Expenditures
2 Assessing the Assignment of Expenditure Responsibilities, Jorge Martinez-Vazquez and Baoyun Qiao
3 Fiscal Decentralization, Infrastructure Financing, and Regional Disparity, Weiping Wu
4 Financing Local Public Infrastructure: Guangdong Province, John L. Mikesell, Jun Ma, Alfred Tat-Kei Ho, and Meili Niu
Local Revenue Sources
5 Provincial Tax Revenue, Donald J. S. Brean
6 Tax Structure and Economic Growth, Joyce Yanyun Man and Xinye Zheng
7 Fiscal Reform and Land Public Finance: Zouping County in National Context, Susan H. Whiting
8 The Path to Property Taxation, John E. Anderson
9 Integrating the Proposed Property Tax with the Public Leasehold System, Yu-Hung Hong and Diana Brubaker
Intergovernmental Transfers
10 The Determinants of Intergovernmental Transfer, Li Zhang and Xinye Zheng
11 Central Government Transfers: For Equity or for Growth?, Shuanglin Lin
12 Fiscal Reform and Rural Public Finance, Richard Bird, Loren Brandt, Scott Rozelle, and Linxiu Zhang
Future Reform
13 Intergovernmental Fiscal Relations and Local Public Finance: What Is Next on the Reform Agenda?, Roy W. Bahl

About the Editors

Joyce Yanyun Man is senior fellow and director of the Program on the People’s Republic of China at the Lincoln Institute and director of the Peking University–Lincoln Institute Center for Urban Development and Land Policy in Beijing, and Professor of Economics, College of Urban and Environmental Sciences, Peking University.

Yu-Hung Hong is senior fellow in Interdepartmental Programs at the Lincoln Institute and visiting assistant professor in the Department of Urban Studies and Planning at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

China’s Local Public Finance in Transition
Edited by Joyce Yanyun Man and Yu-Hung Hong
2010 / 300 pages / Paper / $30.00 / ISBN: 978-1-55844-201-6

For review copies please contact anthony.flint@lincolninst.edu

                                                                                       #  #  #

Nobel Prize winners at Lincoln Institute property rights conference

For immediate release
Contact: Anthony Flint 617-503-2116

   CAMBRIDGE, Mass. (September 16, 2010) – Nobel Prize winners Douglass C. North, Elinor Ostrom, and Thomas C. Schelling will be among the speakers at a two-day conference on property rights and the management of natural resources such as fisheries, forests, mines, and water, sponsored and organized by the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy in conjunction with Elinor Ostrom and Daniel H. Cole.
   The Evolution of Property Rights Related to Land and Natural Resources September 20-21 at the Charles Hotel in Harvard Square, will bring together prominent scholars in economics, political science, history, and law to examine property systems. As concern for dwindling natural resources and environmental regulations increases, the conference discusses lessons and successful property management models ranging from the 19th century California Gold Rush to current air, wildlife, and land approaches relevant to the management of climate change.
    Over the past several years, the academic literature about property rights in land and natural resources has often emphasized the “tragedy of the commons” and failed to account for cases in which stakeholders successfully manage resources such as fisheries, forests, mines, and water. Building on Professor Ostrom’s path breaking work showing that collective action can lead to responsible management of common resources, the conference includes presentations on how various property systems—particularly those that are mainly self-governing—have been applied to and affected the use of natural resources.
   Douglass C. North will speak at the preconference dinner on Sunday, September 19 on issues related to institutions and property rights. In a keynote address, Thráinn Eggertsson will review how the assumptions of costly information and rational politics generate useful tools for exploring the logic of institutions and their changes, using case studies from Iceland.  He will also discuss new directions for the economics of institutions, with an example of the evolution of Iceland’s fisheries regulations.
    Elinor Ostrom and Daniel H. Cole will open session presentations by introducing the idea of moving beyond simplistic models of property systems to theories that better account for the complexities and contingencies of actual resource governance regimes.  More importantly they advocate that the design of these regimes can be informed by comparative analyses of property institutions operating within larger social-ecological systems.
   Other presentations include:

REVISITING THE CALIFORNIA GOLD RUSH

Chair:    Lee Anne Fennell, Chicago Law School

GOLD RUSH LEGACY: AMERICAN MINERALS AND THE KNOWLEDGE ECONOMY 
Speakers: Karen Clay, Carnegie-Mellon University, and Gavin Wright, Stanford University
Discussant:  Peter Z. Grossman, Butler University
        
GOLD RUSHES ARE ALL THE SAME: LABOR RULES THE DIGGING
 Speaker:    Andrea McDowell, Seton Hall Law School
 Discussant:    Mark T. Kanazawa, Carleton College

AIR

Chair:   Thomas C. Schelling, University of Maryland

ACCESS AND USE REGULATIONS AS PROPERTY: THE CASE OF THE U.S. CLEAN AIR ACT
Speaker:   Daniel H. Cole, Indiana University School of Law at Indianapolis
Discussant:    Wallace E. Oates, University of Maryland    

RIGHTS TO POLLUTE: ASSESSMENT OF TRADABLE PERMITS FOR AIR POLLUTION
Speaker:   Nives Dolšak, University of Washington, Bethell
Discussant:  Shi-Ling Hsu, University of British Columbia Law School
   
WILDLIFE

Chair:    James A. Wilson, University of Maine

WHO OWNS ENDANGERED SPECIES?
Speaker: Jason F. Shogren, University of Wyoming
Discussant:    Colin W. Clark, University of British Columbia

ENCLOSING THE FISHERY COMMONS: FROM INDIVIDUALS TO COMMUNITIES
Speaker:   Bonnie J. McCay, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey 
Discussant:   Anthony D. Scott, University of British Columbia

LAND AND WATER 

Chair:   Vicki Been, New York University

THE EVOLUTION OF ZONING SINCE THE 1980S: THE PERSISTENCE OF LOCALISM
Speaker:   William A. Fischel, Dartmouth College
Discussant:   Robert C. Ellickson, Yale Law School  

REFERENCE STATES, VALUATION DISPARITIES AND PSYCHOLOGICAL ENTITLEMENT IN REAL PROPERTY AMONG NATIVE AMERICANS 
Speakers:   C. Leigh Anderson and Richard Zerbe, University of Washington
Discussant:    John A. Baden, Foundation for Research in Economics and The Environment

PLAYING BY DIFFERENT RULES?  PROPERTY RIGHTS IN LAND AND WATER 
Speaker:   Richard A. Epstein, University of Chicago Law School
Discussant:    Henry E. Smith, Harvard Law School

LAND AND WATER (cont’d)

Chair:    David H. Getches, University of Colorado

A POLITICAL ANALYSIS OF PROPERTY RIGHTS
Speaker:   William Blomquist, Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis
Discussant:   Edella Schlager, University of Arizona

WATER RIGHTS AND MARKETS IN U.S. SEMI ARID WEST: EFFICIENCY AND EQUITY ISSUES
Speaker:   Gary D. Libecap, University of California, Santa Barbara.
Discussant:    Lee J. Alston, University of Colorado at Boulder
   
GLOBAL COMMONS ISSUES

Chair:    Scott Barrett, Columbia University

CLIMATE CHANGE: THE ULTIMATE "TRAGEDY OF THE COMMONS"?
Speaker:    Jouni Paavola, Leeds University
Discussant:    V. Kerry Smith, Arizona State University

OCEANS AS A GLOBAL COMMONS
Speaker:   Katrina M. Wyman, New York University
Discussant:    Richard A. Barnes, University of Hull

   Media invited to attend. Contact: Anthony Flint at anthony.flint@lincolninst.edu.
   The Lincoln Institute of Land Policy is a leading resource for key issues concerning the use, regulation, and taxation of land. Providing high-quality education and research, the Institute strives to improve public dialogue and decisions about land policy.

 
     # # #

Inclusionary housing emerges as key affordability policy

For immediate release
Contact: Anthony Flint 617-503-2116

    CAMBRIDGE, Mass. (August 27, 2010) -- Inclusionary housing – the provision of affordable housing by private developers either through requirements or incentives – has emerged as the most significant new public policy direction in the realm of social and affordable housing in recent decades, according to a new book published by the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy.
   The policy can be especially effective when private developers are required to provide affordable housing as a condition of any zoning change, as a method of value capture, say Nico Calavita and Alan Mallach, co-editors of Inclusionary Housing in International Perspective:
Affordable Housing, Social Inclusion, and Land Value Recapture.
    Inclusionary housing, also broadly known in the United States as inclusionary zoning, is a means of using the planning system to create affordable housing and foster social inclusion by capturing resources created through the marketplace. Programs, regulations, and laws prompt private developers to incorporate affordable housing on-site, build it elsewhere, or contribute money or land for the production of social or affordable housing by others.
   Inclusionary Housing in International Perspective examines inclusionary housing programs in-depth in seven countries (Canada, England, France, Ireland, Italy, Spain, and the United States) and reports on experiences in others, including Australia, Colombia, India, Israel, Malaysia, New Zealand, and South Africa,
  Inclusionary housing originated in the U.S in the early 1970s, and gradually spread to Canada, western Europe, and more recently to countries throughout the world. The initial intellectual impetus came from the civil rights movement of the 1960s, and the recognition of the close relationship between the pervasive racial segregation in American society and land use regulations that perpetuated it through what came to be known as exclusionary zoning. Indeed, the term inclusionary zoning was coined as the converse, and was first used to refer more broadly to any strategy designed to foster the production of affordable housing in otherwise exclusive and affluent suburban jurisdictions.
   Calavita and Mallach assess the outcomes of inclusionary housing programs both in theory and practice, describe why and how each country chose to adopt inclusionary policies, and discern what works best under what circumstances. Particular attention is given to the manner and extent to which each country’s inclusionary policies actually create affordable housing, foster social inclusion, and either provide explicitly or result implicitly in the recapture of land value increments for public benefit.
    The authors found that two countries (Canada and the United States) decentralize land use regulation to the state or provincial level; two countries (Ireland and Spain) centrally mandate inclusionary housing; two countries (England and France) centrally enable its use; and one country (Italy) until recently did neither centrally, thus prompting inclusionary housing as a local initiative. Other nations including Colombia, India, Israel, Malaysia, the Netherlands, New Zealand, and South Africa offer their own variations of inclusionary housing.
    Global political shifts and changes in economic and social policy have all contributed to the emergence of inclusionary housing as arguably the most significant new public policy direction in the realm of social and affordable housing in recent decades. The chapter authors explore how variations in political, social, and economic cultures and conditions have led to different forms of inclusionary housing, and how the policies are working on the ground to address the need for better housing and greater social inclusion.

Contents

Foreword, Juli Ponce Sole
1. An International Perspective on Inclusionary Housing, Nico Calavita and Alan Mallach
2. United States: From Radical Innovation to Mainstream Housing Policy, Alan Mallach and Nico Calavita
3. Canada: Social Inclusion in a Market-Driven Polity, Alan Mallach and Nico Calavita
4. England: Affordable Housing Through the Planning System: The Role of Section 106, Sarah Monk
5. Ireland: The Sudden Emergence of Inclusionary Housing, Nico Calavita and Alan Mallach
6. France: Social Inclusion, Fair Share Goals, and Inclusionary Housing, Alan Mallach
7. Spain’s Constitutional Mandates: The Right to Housing, Land Value Recapture, and Inclusionary Housing, Nico Calavita, Joaquim Clusa, Sara Mur, and Robert Weiner
8. Italy: Political Instability and the Struggle for Planning Equity, Nico Calavita and Giovanni Caudo
9. The Global Reach of Inclusionary Housing, Alan Mallach
10. Conclusions, Nico Calavita and Alan Mallach

About the Editors
Nico Calavita is professor emeritus in the Graduate Program in City Planning at San Diego State University.
Alan Mallach is a nonresident senior fellow at the Metropolitan Policy Program of the Brookings Institution in Washington, DC, and visiting scholar at the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia.

Inclusionary Housing in International Perspective:
Affordable Housing, Social Inclusion, and Land Value Recapture
Edited by Nico Calavita and Alan Mallach
2010 / 416 pages / Paper / $30.00
ISBN: 978-1-55844-209-2

Media copies are available by contacting Anthony Flint at anthony.flint@lincolninst.edu.

    The Lincoln Institute of Land Policy is a leading resource for key issues concerning the use, regulation, and taxation of land. Providing high-quality education and research, the Institute strives to improve public dialogue and decisions about land policy. 

       # # #

Lincoln Institute seminar set for assessors conference

For immediate release
Contact: Anthony Flint 617-503-2116

  CAMBRIDGE, Mass. (August 26, 2010) – A team of experts from the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy will conduct a seminar on the latest trends and issues relating to the property tax at the International Association of Assessing Officers in Orlando next week.
   The International Association of Assessing Officers (IAAO) is the internationally recognized leader and preeminent source for innovation, education, and research in property appraisal, assessment administration, and property tax policy. The association’s 76th Annual International Conference on Assessment Administration provides education on property appraisal, assessment administration, and property tax policy. The Lincoln Institute was invited to present a policy seminar to bring assessment professionals information on new public finance research and tax developments.
  The seminar, “Challenging the Conventional Wisdom on the Property Tax,” a reference to a recent publication of the same title, will be introduced by Joan M. Youngman, senior fellow and chair, Department of Valuation and Taxation at the Lincoln Institute, and moderated by Jane H. Malme, fellow at the Lincoln Institute, and will include the following presentations:

Are Property Taxes Forcing the Elderly out of their Homes?
Andrew Reschovsky, visiting fellow, Lincoln Institute, professor of public affairs, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Robert M. La Follette School of Public Affairs
A justification for enacting property tax limitations is the belief that without such limits rising property taxes would force many elderly homeowners to sell their homes. Contrary to popular belief, a study of Wisconsin homeowners finds that for almost all homeowners property tax increases have almost no impact on decisions to move.

Bad Policy or Bad Timing?  Post - Tax Swap Revenue Challenges in South Carolina
Laura Dawson Ullrich, assistant professor of economics, Winthrop University
In 2006 the state of South Carolina signed significant changes to the property tax system into law which, accompanied with the well-observed recession, have led to significant decreases in state and local tax revenues.  Given the current state of revenue collections in South Carolina, the question must be asked, was this bad policy or simply bad timing?

Are Residential Assessments Really Regressive? Estimating the Distribution of Home Prices using Quantile Regressions
Daniel P. McMillen, visiting fellow, Lincoln Institute, professor at the Institute of Government and Public Affairs, Department of Economics, University of Illinois
Traditional analyses of assessment regressivity use summary statistics and regressions to test whether assessment rates fall as sales prices increase.  Quantile regressions are used to determine whether assessment variability also differs by sales price.
 
In Search of the Optimal Revaluation Policy: Benefits and Pitfalls
Alan Dornfest, AAS, Property Tax Policy Supervisor, Idaho State Tax Commission
Current market value is considered by many to be the gold standard as an underlying basis for property tax.  Property markets are dynamic, however, requiring continuous ongoing reappraisal programs to maintain current market value.  Such programs are costly and this presentation attempts to analyze reassessment options according to their costs and benefits, and to consider the consequences of failing to reappraise or reassess regularly.

    The International Association of Assessing Officers is a nonprofit, educational and research association. It is a professional membership organization of government assessment officials and others interested in the administration of the property tax. The IAAO was founded in 1934, and now has a membership of more than 8,000 members worldwide from governmental, business, and academic communities. The mission of the IAAO is to promote innovation and excellence in property appraisal, assessment administration, and property  tax policy through professional development, education, research, and technical assistance.
  In addition to Challenging the Conventional Wisdom on the Property Tax , the Lincoln Institute also recently published The Property Tax and Local Autonomy which was reviewed this month in BookNews.
    The Lincoln Institute of Land Policy is a leading resource for key issues concerning the use, regulation, and taxation of land. Providing high-quality education and research, the Institute strives to improve public dialogue and decisions about land policy. 

        # # #

Dissertation fellowships named in honor of C. Lowell Harriss

For immediate release
Contact: Anthony Flint 617-503-2116  

    CAMBRIDGE, Mass (July 20, 2010) – The Lincoln Institute of Land Policy has named its dissertation fellowship program in honor of C. Lowell Harriss, the Columbia University economist who served for decades on the Lincoln Institute’s board. Harriss passed away last December.
     “I can think of no better way of honoring his commitment to mentoring students and fostering academic excellence than to name our dissertation fellowships in his honor,” said Gregory K. Ingram, president of the Lincoln Institute.
    Kathryn J. Lincoln, chair of the board of directors, said that Harriss “is remembered with great warmth and admiration, and his legacy lives on.”
    Through its longstanding graduate student dissertation fellowships, the Lincoln Institute assists Ph.D students, primarily at U.S. universities, whose research complements the Institute’s interests in land and tax policy. The program is important for both education and research, by supporting scholars early in their careers.
    The C. Lowell Harriss Dissertation Fellowship Program supports students through the Department of Taxation and Valuation and the Department of Planning and Urban Form at the Lincoln Institute. The dissertation fellows for 2010-2011 are: Spencer Brien, Georgia State University, “Three Essays on the Formation and Finance of Local Governments” ; Herman Li, Pennsylvania State University, “Housing Prices and Neighborhood Homeownership and Vacancy”; Joshua Miller, University of Illinois at Chicago, “Who Cares Who Collects? An Economic Analysis of Tax Lien Sales as a Method of Delinquent Property Tax Collection” ‘Michael Gedal, New York University, “Land Values in the City: Essays on Regulation and Redevelopment”; Shawn Johnson, University of Michigan-Ann Arbor, “ Building Knowledge at the Landscape Scale:  The Role of Bridging Organizations”; Rebecca Lewis, University of Maryland-College Park, “Do Smart Growth Instruments in Maryland make a Difference?”; and Nicole Miller, University of British Columbia, “Urban Form and Climate Change: Linking Land Use Planning and Urban Decisions to Greenhouses Gas Mitigation Opportunities.”
   The dissertation fellows from 2009-2010 were Adam Isen, Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, "Return to Local Public Finance"; Sarah Di Vittorio, Department of Environmental Science, Policy, and Management, University of California at Berkeley, "Upstream Forests, Downstream Communities: Emerging Partnerships for Water Security in California"; and Constantine E. Kontokosta, Department of Urban Planning, Columbia University, New York, "The Political Economy of Inclusionary Zoning: Adoption, Implementation, and Neighborhood Effects."
Harriss, who was 97, authored a dozen books and several hundred articles on land and tax policy. A native of Nebraska, he earned a bachelor’s degree in economics from Harvard in 1934, and joined the economics faculty at  Columbia University four years later. He simultaneously worked on his doctorate in the discipline, which he earned from Columbia in 1940.
     In this obituary appearing in The Boston Globe, the economist Ben Stein is quoted on how Harriss was well known for his “total availability to students in his office, at dinner, for a hamburger after class, to explain and comment on the economic events of the day. I never had a better teacher in any school.’’
    He was a visiting professor at Stanford, Yale, Princeton, the University of California at Berkeley, the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania, and Peterhouse College at Cambridge University. He won Fulbright professorships at the Netherlands School of Economics and the University of Strasbourg in France.
   Well regarded by colleagues and fellow board members, Harriss provided a fresh perspective on such topics as land value taxatiion, and was well-known for mailing around clipped New Yorker cartoons on a range of subjects. He was a board member of the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy from 1974 until 2009.
    The Lincoln Institute of Land Policy is a leading resource for key issues concerning the use, regulation, and taxation of land. Providing high-quality education and research, the Institute strives to improve public dialogue and decisions about land policy. 
 
       # # #

James Levitt joins Lincoln Institute as fellow

   CAMBRIDGE, Mass. (July 12, 2010) – James N. Levitt, an expert in land conservation, climate change adaptation strategies, and conservation finance, has joined the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy as a fellow. The immediate focus of his work will be large landscape conservation.
   "This is a subject of emerging interest across the land, water and biodiversity conservation communities,” said Levitt, who also serves as director of the Program on Conservation Innovation at The Harvard Forest, and a research fellow at the Ash Center for Democratic Governance and Innovation at the Harvard Kennedy School.
   “Public, private and non-profit practitioners and policymakers in the field are increasingly interested in showing that, by collaborating across parcel, sector, jurisdictional, and even national boundaries, they can achieve lasting, measurable conservation outcomes -- outcomes that protect biodiversity, provide ecosystem services, produce commodities sustainably, promote human health, and enhance treasured amenities.”
   In joining the Department of Planning and Urban Form at the Lincoln Institute, Levitt will be collaborating with several of the institute’s joint venture partners, including colleagues at the University of Montana's Center for Natural Resource and Environmental Policy, the Sonoran Institute, and the Regional Plan Association. This group has already done significant work on the subject, culminating most recently in the Policy Focus Report Large Landscape Conservation: A Strategic Framework for Policy and Action.
   That report, released in June, details grassroots and collaborative strategies for managing large ecosystems, forest lands, watersheds, and wildlife corridors that involve multiple jurisdictions and ownership. The report, which recommends ways to encourage such efforts and foster innovation going forwarded, coincided with the first “listening sessions,” held in Montana, for President Obama’s Great Outdoors initiative – an effort to build on the legacy of national parks and protected lands for the next century.
   “As continental-scale ribbons of development spread across every continent on earth in the 21st century, we collectively aim to make a significant contribution the advancement of complementary regional conservation areas and corridors that will provide essential natural goods, services and wonders for many, many generations to come," Levitt said.
   In addition to leading the Lincoln Institute’s annual Conservation Leadership Dialogue, Levitt is editor of three books on conservation policy and practice: Conservation Capital in the Americas (Lincoln Institute, in collaboration with the Ash Center at the Harvard Kennedy School, the David Rockefeller Center for Latin American Studies at Harvard University and Island Press, 2010); From Walden to Wall Street: Frontiers of Conservation Finance (Island Press and Lincoln Institute, 2005); and Conservation in the Internet Age: Threats and Opportunities (Island Press, 2002).
   A graduate of Yale College and the Yale School of Management, he has served on the National Advisory Board of the Long-Term Ecological Research program sponsored by the National Science Foundation, and is a past vice chair of the Massachusetts Audubon Society. He currently serves as a director or advisor of QLF/Atlantic Center for the Environment, the Center for Business and the Environment at Yale, and Saving Land (the journal of the Land Trust Alliance. In 2008 he was named by the Yale School of Management as a Donaldson Fellow, an honor given to alumni for career achievements that “exemplify the mission of the School.”  He was also awarded the medallion of Chile’s Chamber of Deputies in recognition of his work to advance land conservation in that nation.
   James Levitt is available as an expert source on land conservation and climate change, by contacting anthony.flint@lincolninst.edu.
   The Lincoln Institute of Land Policy is a leading resource for key issues concerning the use, regulation, and taxation of land. Providing high-quality education and research, the Institute strives to improve public dialogue and decisions about land policy. 

    # # #

Major report on large landscape conservation released

 For immediate release
Contact: Anthony Flint 617-503-2116

   CAMBRIDGE, Mass. (May 28, 2010) – On this Memorial Day Weekend as many Americans head outdoors to open spaces, the nation is reminded about the importance of land conservation. Today the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy released a report highlighting new grassroots and collaborative strategies for managing large areas for the enjoyment of generations to come.
 Large Landscape Conservation: A Strategic Framework for Policy and Action, the latest Policy Focus Report published by the Lincoln Institute, describes regionally based initiatives currently underway in forest lands, ecosystems, watersheds, and wildlife corridors that involve multiple jurisdictions and ownership. The report recommends ways to encourage such efforts and foster innovation going forward.
   Nearly a century after President Theodore Roosevelt expanded the national parks system, a new approach is needed to balance many different stakeholders in large land areas that cross many boundaries, said Lincoln Institute senior fellow Armando Carbonell. “We are in a new era,” he said.
   The report will be available at the first of several “listening sessions” being scheduled by the Obama administration June 2 in Helena, Bozeman, and Missoula, Montana. At the White House Conference on America’s Great Outdoors in April, President Obama announced his interest in new approaches for modern-day land conservation and the importance of reconnecting Americans to parks, forests, and working landscapes.
   Recognizing that the most important land and water issues facing North America—including land use patterns, water management, biodiversity protection, and climate adaptation—require new approaches, several regional groups have come together to focus on land and water issues at the appropriate geographic scale, which almost always transcend the reach of existing jurisdictions and institutions.
    A leading example is the Crown of the Continent Roundtable, a network to unite the more than 100 government agencies, non-government organizations, tribal groups, and place-based partnerships with a stake in the 10-million acre area spanning western Montana across the Canadian border into Alberta. The Crown of the Continent is known as a cultural and ecological crossroads, where plant and animal communities from the Pacific Northwest, eastern prairies, southern Rockies, and boreal forests mingle.
   The common currency in large landscape conservation is regional collaboration—the ability to work across boundaries with people and organizations that have diverse interests yet share a common place, said Matthew McKinney, director of the Center for Natural Resources and Environmental Policy at the University of Montana, and lead author of the report. The other co-authors are Lynn Scarlett, former deputy secretary at the U.S. Department of the Interior under President George W. Bush, and Daniel Kemmis, former mayor of Missoula, Montana, and former speaker and minority leader of the Montana House of Representatives.
   The report concludes with the following recommendations to improve the practice and performance of large landscape conservation initiatives:

* Gather and share information. Establish a common, coherent scientific database, and develop an annotated atlas of governance efforts.
* Encourage a network of practitioners to build capacity. Catalyze collaboration through a network similar to the Land Trust Alliance to identify best practices and advocate for policy reforms.
* Establish a national competitive grants program to enable and sustain promising efforts. Facilitate homegrown partnerships, improve coordination among ongoing efforts, and recognize the most promising approaches to large landscape conservation.
* Improve the policy toolkit. Strengthen incentive-based tools for landowner conservation and improve coordination and participation by federal and other governmental agencies.
* Facilitate innovative funding opportunities. Maximize and focus the use of existing federal and state programs and authorities that can be implemented quickly and without significant new funding.

   While there is no single model for large landscape conservation, key guiding principles can be applied to create homegrown solutions for particular places. Successful efforts thus far include:

Freedom to Roam: A coalition of business, government and conservation groups ensuring that wildlife can move, migrate, and adapt under the challenges of habitat fragmentation and a changing climate in North America.

America’s Longleaf Pine Initiative: An ad hoc public-private partnership with a multi-state strategy to restore Longleaf pine forests in the southeast U.S.

Platte River Cooperative Agreement and Implementation Program: A negotiated agreement for managing the river basin in Colorado, Nebraska, and Wyoming, to protect endangered species while allowing recreational water uses to continue.

Blackstone River Valley National Heritage Corridor: A grassroots initiative blessed by Congress to protect the natural and cultural heritage of the birthplace of the American Industrial Revolution, along the 46-mile run of the river from Worcester, Mass. to Providence, R.I.

Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan: A $7 billion inter-governmental effort for the nation’s most ambitious ecosystem restoration initiative, encompassing an 18,000-square-mile region of subtropical uplands, wetlands, and coral reefs from south of Orlando to the Florida Keys.

Las Cienegas National Conservation Area: A shared decision-making authority authorized by Congress through the Bureau of Land Management and the Sonoita Valley Planning Partnership to manage public lands and resources across a high-desert basin and wildlife corridor across the Southwest and northern Mexico.

Tahoe Regional Planning Agency: The nation’s first interstate land use authority to maintain environmental quality within the 500-square-mile Lake Tahoe Basin spanning Nevada and California, amid private development, tourism, ranching, and logging.

About the Authors
Matthew McKinney is director of the Center for Natural Resources and Environmental Policy at the University of Montana. Lynn Scarlett is an independent environmental consultant working on climate change, ecosystem services, water, and landscape-scale conservation. From 2005 to 2009 she served as deputy secretary and chief operating officer of the U.S. Department of the Interior. Daniel Kemmis is a private consultant, working primarily in the natural resource and philanthropy arenas. He is a former mayor of Missoula, Montana, and a former speaker and minority leader of the Montana House of Representatives.

About the Lincoln Institute
The Lincoln Institute of Land Policy is a leading resource for key issues concerning the use, regulation, and taxation of land. Providing high-quality education and research, the Institute strives to improve public dialogue and decisions about land policy.  The work on cross-boundary large landscape conservation has been part of the ongoing joint venture of the Lincoln Institute and the Center for Natural Resources and Environmental Policy.

   # #  #

Meeting of the Minds 2010 Convenes in Omaha

For immediate release
Contact: Anthony Flint 617-503-2116

   CAMBRIDGE, Mass. (May 25, 2010)  – The Lincoln Institute of Land Policy is a co-sponsor of the Meeting of the Minds, an annual leadership summit of political, business and nonprofit sector leaders on innovative approaches to sustainability and mobility in cities and regions. 
  “Connecting the Dots: The Innovations We Need for Sustainable Cities”, convenes on June 16-18, 2010, in Omaha, is hosted by Urban Age Institute and the Joslyn Institute for Sustainable Communities. The aim of the gathering is to highlight locally generated innovations poised to be funded by the federal government, on energy independence, zoning reform, smart mobility, and clean transport.
   Peter Pollock, the Boulder-based Ronald Smith Fellow at the Lincoln Institute, will lead the session “The sustainable city in the sustainable region,” exploring the variety of scales at which sustainability can be viewed and the range of policy alternatives that relate to the development of sustainable cities and regions. The panelists include Peter J. Park, manager of Community Planning and Development for Denver, Robert E. Lang, professor of sociology and director of Brookings Mountain West at the University of Nevada – Las Vegas, and Thomas K. Wright, executive director of the Regional Plan Association of New York, New Jersey and Connecticut.
   Other sessions will focus on lessons learned from four cities—two American cities and two cities in the Netherlands—grappling with sustainable urban development. Charles Rutheiser, senior fellow in the Anne E. Casey Foundation’s Civic Sites and Initiatives Unit, and Gabriel Metcalf, executive director of the San Francisco Planning and Urban Research Association, will present on the experiences of Baltimore and San Francisco, respectively. Saskia Ruijsink, specialist in urban and regional management at the Institute for Housing and Urban Development Studies, will introduce a new short film detailing how Rotterdam and Delft are dealing with climate change.
   Zerofootprint Foundation’s CEO Ron Dembo will showcase the Re-Skinning Awards’ winning projects. Each prize winner demonstrates innovative retrofitting technologies and systems ready to be applied in today’s market. Each winner’s work features replicable solutions which are designed to enhance both the efficiency and livability of the world’s existing housing stock.
Sustainability coordinators from the largest cities in the Midwest will also lead sessions on integrating sustainability into comprehensive plans and the imperative of energy efficiency.  A third session will feature the “Living Labs” scattered around the world’s cities, chaired by Neal Peirce of the Washington Post Writers Group will discuss policy experimentation around the world’s cities in conjunction with the launch of the new news service Citiscope, while Barbara Hewson, chief of the Urban Finance Branch of the United Nations Habitat Programme, will lead a debate on smart financing for affordable housing.
    In association with the first Regional Energy Innovation Summit, convening on June 16 in Omaha, guests of the White House Office of Social Innovation and the Kauffman Foundation with participate in an evening program featuring Howard Buffett, policy advisor in the White House Office of Social Innovation and Civic Participation, will share findings from the Energy Innovation Summit.
    Other global partners include Toyota, Siemens AG, Cemex, the Annie E. Casey Foundation, Urban Land Institute, Jones Lang LaSalle, Gallup, UN-Habitat, UN Global Compact Cities Programmes, Regional Plan Association and Metropolis.

Urban Age Institute
The Urban Age Institute is an independent nonprofit ‘think-and-do tank’ working to support innovators based inside the world’s cities. It publishes Urban Age Magazine and delivers programs around the globe.

Joslyn Institute for Sustainable Communities
The Joslyn Institute for Sustainable Communities, based out of Omaha and Lincoln, Nebraska, engages both the local and international community to promote an integrated approach to sustainability through education, public visioning and partnership.

  The Meeting of the Minds seeks to foster innovation in infrastructure, technology, energy, transport, water, and finance for more livable cities. The gathering has been held in Oakland, Portland, and recently in New York, with a focus on sustainable public finance.

# # #

New book details revenue sources for cash-strapped municipalities

For immediate release
Contact: Anthony Flint 617-503-2116

   CAMBRIDGE, Mass. (May 21, 2010) – The nation’s cities and towns are being squeezed as never before – receiving less from federal and state government, facing resistance raising taxes or fees at the local level because of economic hard times, and yet still expected to provide basic services.
   Innovations in public finance for these cash-strapped municipalities – special fees, complex debt structures, value capture, and other financing arrangements – are detailed in a new volume, Municipal Revenues and Land Policies, a record of the proceedings of the Lincoln Institute’s 4th annual Land Policy Conference.
   Although much public discourse about the effects of the 2008 financial crisis on government finances focuses on federal and state budget deficits, most of the actual impacts are at the municipal level where local governments clean streets, repair roads, hire teachers, fight fires, prevent crime, and maintain the water and sewer systems. Gregory K. Ingram, president of the Lincoln Institute and co-editor of the book with Yu-Hung Hong, warns of the peril to come if municipalities are no longer financially able to provide daily public services.
   Even as they become more creative, cities and towns face voter resistance to any tax and user fee increases. Yet, curtailments in local services will adversely affect residents’ welfare and may lead to labor and capital out-migration, Ingram said.
    To explore municipal revenue options in the face of severe economic distress, the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy convened scholars and practitioners in June 2009 to discuss selected fiscal instruments. Public finance experts with backgrounds in economics, law, planning, and political science were invited to exchange their ideas. The chapters in this volume present key themes that emerged from the discussions.
   There is no quick fix in the face of fiscal uncertainty, Ingram said, but it is clear that solutions must not undermine the city’s economic base; tax hikes should be tied to service improvements; cities should encourage private provision of club goods to complement local public services; and a strong city government is needed to work with higher-level governments. These and other solutions for municipal finance policy are now more important than ever.
    Municipal Revenues and Land Policies will be available at the 5th annual Land Policy Conference, “The Environment, Climate Change, and Land Policies,” being held May 23-25 at the Charles Hotel in Cambridge. The annual land policy conference has addressed such topics as property rights, taxation, and decentralization of government.

Contents:

The Importance of Municipal Finance
1. Municipal Revenue Options in the Time of Financial Crisis, Gregory K. Ingram and Yu-Hung Hong
2. Financing Cities, Robert P. Inman

Intergovernmental Transfers and Municipal Fiscal Structures
3. Intergovernmental Transfers to Local Governments, David E. Wildasin
Commentary, Michael Smart
4. Trends in Local Government Revenues: The Old, the New, and the Future, J. Edwin Benton
Commentary, Jocelyn M. Johnston
5. Creative Designs of the Patchwork Quilt of Municipal Finance, Michael A. Pagano
Commentary, Carol O’Cleireacain

Broad-Based Local Taxes and Development Impact Fees
6. The Contribution of Local Sales and Income Taxes to Fiscal Autonomy, John L. Mikesell
Commentary, Cynthia L. Rogers
7. The Effects of Development Impact Fees on Local Fiscal Conditions, Gregory S. Burge
Commentary, Albert Saiz
8. A New Financial Instrument of Value Capture in São Paulo, Paulo Sandroni
Commentary, Margaret Walls

Financing Submunicipal Services
9. Governance Structures and Financial Authority in Submunicipal Districts, Robert J. Eger III and Richard C. Feiock; Commentary, Richard Briffault
10. Illustrating the Effects of Business Improvement Districts on Municipal Coffers, Leah Brooks and Rachel Meltzer; Commentary, Lynne B. Sagalyn
11. Does TIF Make It More Difficult to Manage Municipal Budgets?, David F. Merriman
Commentary, Mark Skidmore
12. Homeowners Associations and Their Impact on the Local Public Budget, Ron Cheung
Commentary, John E. Anderson

Capital Financing of Infrastructure
13. Complex Debt for Financing Infrastructure, Jeffrey I. Chapman; Commentary, Mark D. Robbins and William Simonsen
14. Prospects for Private Infrastructure in the United States: The Case of Toll Roads, José A. Gómez-Ibáñez; Commentary, José C. Carbajo

Comparisons of the Property Tax with Other Revenue Instruments
15. An Analysis of Alternative Revenue Sources for Local Governments, David L. Sjoquist and Andrew V. Stephenson; Commentary, William F. Fox
16. How Alternative Revenue Structures Are Changing Local Government, Tracy M. Gordon and Kim Rueben; Commentary, Michael J. Wasylenko

About the Editors
Gregory K. Ingram is president and CEO of the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy and cochair of the Department of International Studies.

Yu-Hung Hong is a fellow at the Lincoln Institute and a visiting assistant professor at Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Municipal Revenues and Land Policies Edited by Gregory K. Ingram and Yu-Hung Hong 2010 / 560 pages / Paper / $30.00 ISBN: 978-1-55844-208-5

   For review copies contact anthony.flint@lincolninst.edu

   The Lincoln Institute of Land Policy is a leading resource for key issues about the use, regulation and taxation of land. Providing high-quality education and research, the institute strives to improve public dialogue and decisions about land policy.

# # #

Setting a framework for high-speed inter-city rail in the U.S.

For immediate release
Contact: Anthony Flint 617-503-2116

   CAMBRIDGE, Mass. (May 6, 2010) – Armando Carbonell, senior fellow at the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, will moderate Forging a National Rail Plan for America May 11, 2010 at 8:30 a.m. at Union Station’s Capitol Club in Washington D.C., a panel discussion on how the U.S. might proceed with a long-range national plan for passenger and freight rail.
   The panel will include Karen Rae, Deputy Administrator, Federal Railroad Administration, Stephen Gardner, Vice President of Policy and Development, Amtrak, Frank Busalacchi, Secretary, Wisconsin Department of Transportation, Darrell Wilson, Assistant Vice President of Government Relations, Norfolk Southern, and Petra Todorovich, Director, America 2050. Also featured is Julie Mills, director of Greengauge 21 to talk about the U.K.'s HS2 plan.
   Since President Obama has proposed investing up to $8 billion in inter-city, high-speed rail, America 2050, a partnership of the Regional Plan Association and the Lincoln Institute, with support from the Rockefeller Foundation, has provided a framework for routes primarily through megaregions such as the Boston-Washington corridor or in Florida.
Rail is emerging as the mode of choice in these areas, similar to connections in Europe or Asia, that are too large to navigate by automobile and too small to navigate by air.
   “Planning is critical for a truly integrated national passenger and freight rail system,” said Carbonell, chairman of the Department of Planning and Urban Form at the Lincoln Institute.  Among the factors to be considered, he said, are the major cities that have transit and commuter rail for riders getting to and from high-speed inter-city rail.
   The nation's rail authorizing legislation, the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, directed the Federal Railroad Administration to develop a long-range national plan for passenger and freight rail that comports with state rail plans and "the needs of the Nation." A preliminary national rail plan released by FRA in 2009 provides a starting point for this effort.
   Key questions include:
   n    Should the federal government establish criteria or incentivize investment in certain corridors for high-speed rail investment that have the adequate population and employment density, transit connections, and proven intercity air or rail markets to generate sufficient ridership demand for high-speed services?
   n    What are the best models for planning, financing, and operating multi-state and/or interagency rail corridors?
   n      How will a national rail plan balance passenger and freight needs?
     America 2050’s report Where High-Speed Rail Works Best evaluated potential corridors across the country against criteria contributing to ridership demand and called on the FRA to invest first in corridors with the greatest demand for ridership and strongest chance of success.
   Following the panel discussion, at a separate event, a coalition of transportation groups plan a press conference to address funding for high-speed rail and Amtrak’s proposed budget. Those represented will include Fourbillion.com, Transportation for America, U.S. Public Interest Research Group, U.S. High-Speed Rail Association, Midwest High-Speed Rail Association, Southeast High Speed Rail Association, Business Alliance for Northeast Mobility, American High Speed Rail Alliance, American Association of State Highway Officials (AASHTO), OneRail Coalition.

# # #