Landowner behavior can determine the success of conservation strategies for ecosystem migration under sea-level rise

Christopher R. Fielda,b,1, Ashley A. Dayerc, and Chris S. Elphicka,b

aCenter of Biological Risk, and Evolutionary Biology, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT 06269; bCenter for Conservation and , Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT 06269; and cDepartment of Fish and Conservation, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA 24061

Edited by Peter Kareiva, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, and approved July 10, 2017 (received for review December 21, 2016) The human aspects of conservation are often overlooked but will be study area alone (Fig. S1) there are over 30,000 landowners in the critical for identifying strategies for biological conservation in the zone projected to become tidal marsh by 2100 (22, 23). face of climate change. We surveyed the behavioral intentions of Regulatory responses to climate change by local or national coastal landowners with respect to various conservation strategies governments might provide mechanisms that encourage ecosystem aimed at facilitating ecosystem migration for tidal marshes. We migration in coastal areas. Options such as regulatory rolling- found that several popular strategies, including conservation ease- easements (24) or zoning that prohibits shoreline protection are ments and increasing awareness of ecosystem services, may not straightforward to identify, but there are major impediments to interest enough landowners to allow marsh migration at the spatial implementing these approaches. Gradual hazards, such as in- scales needed to mitigate losses from sea-level rise. We identified creased coastal flooding, typically do not receive policy attention, less common conservation strategies that have more support but especially in contentious political environments or when faced thatareunproveninpracticeandmaybemoreexpensive.Our with fiscal constraints (25). These impediments to regulation are results show that failure to incorporate human dimensions into unlikely to change in the near future (25, 26). Existing regulations, ecosystem modeling and conservation planning could lead to the including wetland mitigation programs, such as regulatory in-lieu use of ineffective strategies and an overly optimistic view of the fee or conservation banking, may not apply to upland areas that are potential for ecosystem migration into human dominated areas. projected to become wetlands as sea levels rise, limiting their use in facilitating ecosystem migration. Decision-makers from public in- tidal marsh migration | shoreline protection | coastal resilience | stitutions may respond to sea-level rise more slowly than coastal climate change beliefs | conservation easements communities, as the behavioral responses of individuals typically operate over temporal scales that are better aligned with rates of onserving biodiversity in the face of climate change is one of ecological change (27). In light of these challenges to effective Chumanity’s greatest challenges, but it is uncertain which regulation and the rapid rate of change in coastal systems (19, 20), strategies will be most effective in confronting this challenge (1). better understanding the drivers of individual behavior will likely There is growing consensus that knowledge from the natural and continue to be important for conservation in coastal areas. social sciences must be integrated (2, 3), but progress toward In this paper we report results from a systematic survey of the integration is slow (1). While research on peoples’ responses to behavioral intentions of landowners with respect to building climate change is rapidly growing (4), it remains largely focused shoreline protection or participating in conservation agreements on beliefs, attitudes, and the general actions people support aimed at protecting corridors for marsh migration. We then i rather than on specific actions they might take to achieve bi- ( ) quantify the effects on behavioral intentions of a set of beliefs, ological conservation (5). In addition to the general challenge of understanding human behavior toward conservation, climate Significance change introduces specific challenges, including the invisibility of causes, lack of direct experience with the consequences, and the Key questions remain about the role of social factors, especially distance of impacts in time and space (6, 7). the behavior of private landowners, in determining the outcome Much of the nascent literature on the human dimensions of of strategies for conservation under climate change. We surveyed biodiversity conservation under climate change focuses on the the behavioral intentions of coastal landowners in the northeast beliefs of scientists and protected areas managers (e.g., refs. 8–11). United States, where extreme sea-level rise threatens tidal marsh While this research is key to understanding conservation in pro- persistence unless private landowners allow landward marsh tected areas, such areas constitute only 15.4% of the globe’s land migration. Our results identify (i) conservation strategies currently area and 3.4% of ocean area (12). Additional conservation strat- being implemented that may not have enough support among egies are clearly needed if we are to meet global conservation goals target populations to mitigate losses from sea-level rise, and ii (13). Whether such strategies involve adding to ( ) beliefs and attitudes that may be effective targets for outreach networks or actions elsewhere, the behaviors of people, especially aimed at increasing participation in these strategies. The importance private landowners, will largely determine their success (14, 15). of these social factors as constraints on marsh migration highlights Here we show how the behavioral intentions of landowners the need for wider integration into planning for coastal . could determine the effectiveness of a leading strategy for con- Author contributions: C.R.F., A.A.D., and C.S.E. designed research; C.R.F. performed re- servation under climate change: facilitating species and ecosys- search; C.R.F. and A.A.D. analyzed data; and C.R.F., A.A.D., and C.S.E. wrote the paper. tems movement into new areas (16, 17). We focused on tidal The authors declare no conflict of interest. marshes because they provide a disproportionate share of global This article is a PNAS Direct Submission. ecosystem services (18) and are already experiencing ecosystem Data deposition: Data used in this paper are archived at Harvard Dataverse (doi:10.7910/ shifts in response to sea-level rise (19, 20). The success of miti- DVN/NAKYZD). gation strategies to prevent marsh losses will depend on the be- 1To whom correspondence should be addressed. Email: [email protected]. havior of millions of landowners (21) who might decide to build This article contains supporting information online at www.pnas.org/lookup/suppl/doi:10. shoreline protection that would prevent marsh migration. In our 1073/pnas.1620319114/-/DCSupplemental.

9134–9139 | PNAS | August 22, 2017 | vol. 114 | no. 34 www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.1620319114 Downloaded by guest on October 3, 2021 attitudes, experiences, and group membership attributes that quantified whether such events could influence behavioral in- would be natural targets for intervention aimed at encouraging tentions and the effectiveness of conservation strategies. conservation behavior and (ii) integrate social data and ecosystem Another strategy for encouraging conservation behavior is to projections to quantify the effect that behavioral intentions are make the links between ecosystem functions and their benefits likely to have on the extent of the marsh migration zone that is to humans (ecosystem services) (33) more central to research, available for protection. Finally, we discuss how our results could policy, and communication. This strategy has received consid- help inform future research on the social and ecological dimen- erable attention over the last decade, and proponents have used sions of marsh migration. powerful language to describe its potential to spur a conservation renaissance by changing people’s attitudes and behaviors (34). Specifying Conservation Agreements There has been little empirical research, however, on the atti- We quantified the stated behavioral intentions of coastal land- tudes of the public toward ecosystem services (35), especially owners with respect to four conservation agreements and building compared with more traditional concepts such as nature’s in- shoreline protection. We chose the basic types of agreements to herent benefits (e.g., ref. 36). Empirical evidence is especially represent both well-established strategies and agreements that lacking on whether attitudes about ecosystem services have the are just beginning to be implemented in coastal areas. The well- potential to influence conservation behaviors (37). established strategies were property purchase and conservation Tidal marshes protect coastlines from damaging storm tides, easements. Conservation easements are one of the most com- which are becoming more frequent and extreme as sea levels rise monly used land-protection strategies in the United States because (38). Raising awareness of the services provided by tidal marshes they are flexible and often far cheaper than purchasing land out- is a common strategy of ongoing education efforts in coastal right (28). For example, over 130,000 easements, representing areas (e.g., ref. 39). The capacity for marshes to protect coastal ≈10 million ha of protected land, have been archived by the National areas from storm tides is ideal for testing the potential for eco- Database (www.conservationeasement.us/). system services to influence behavior, as this phenomenon has a The emerging strategies considered were restrictive covenants, direct and easily communicated link to the wealth and well-being binding agreements to forgo shoreline protection that are entered of landowners (40, 41). into mutually by a neighborhood, and future interest agreements, Finally, we considered the potential for increased membership wherein ownership reverts to a conservation organization and the in environmental groups (land trusts, or- landowner receives the fair market value from the time of signing ganizations, and hunting groups) to increase conservation be- should a flood reduce property value by more than 50%. The havior. Environmental group membership represents one of the general terms of the agreements were taken from an overview of most common forms of political group membership (42), but coastal protection options (24) and modified to align with the tax little is known about how this trend affects the prevalence of laws, observed incentives, and ongoing conservation activities of conservation behavior. Environmental groups generally have a our study area to ensure that respondents were faced with realistic direct line to their members via mail, email, or social media. As a scenarios (see Supplementary Information and SI Appendix for result, members presumably are better informed about conser- more information about agreement terms). vation issues than the general population, and it has been shown

The conservation agreements were presented to landowners as that people with strong beliefs about climate science can be more SCIENCES

being offered by conservation organizations, which we described likely to support immediate action (30). Moreover, members ENVIRONMENTAL in the questionnaire as nonprofit organizations that focus on familiar with the missions and actions of environmental groups land conservation (SI Appendix). Several of the major organi- would be expected to have fewer concerns about being treated zations working on land protection in our study area have a fairly when participating in conservation agreements (e.g., national or global scope, making our phrasing and choice of agree- via compensation). ments broadly applicable to developed coastal regions where such organizations work. Spatial Variation in Behavioral Intentions Despite growing recognition that spatial variation in social data SCIENCE Strategies for Increasing Conservation Behavior is important for effective conservation planning (15), little is SUSTAINABILITY We quantified the effects on behavioral intentions of a range of known about how human behavior affects the interpretation of natural targets for intervention aimed at encouraging conserva- spatial projections of species and ecosystems under climate tion behavior. We identified targets using evidence from across change. The integration of social and ecological data needed to disciplines that beliefs, attitudes, and experiences can influence make such inferences is impeded by the different spatial scales at behaviors (discussed below). We also identified targets for in- which data often exist; typically, social data are difficult or costly tervention that were motivated by ongoing conservation activi- to obtain at the higher spatial resolution of ecological data. Here ties, resulting in a broad range of strategies: strengthening beliefs we overcame this impediment by (i) sampling the population in climate change and its impacts, increasing conservation effort based on the extent of our focal ecosystem (projections of marsh after extreme weather, changing attitudes toward ecosystem distribution in 2100) instead of political boundaries (such as services and wildlife species, and group membership attributes. townships or counties) and (ii) quantifying spatial variation in A prominent strategy for encouraging conservation is to behavioral intentions across a grid used for ecological assess- strengthen people’s beliefs in climate science and the impacts of ments (see ref. 43) and conservation planning (44), making it climate change through public education (29, 30). Strengthening possible to quantify whether spatial variation in the social data beliefs that climate change is happening encourages conservation exists at ecologically meaningful scales. We then overlaid our behaviors (30), but the effect size is often small to moderate (4, analysis of spatial variation in behavioral intentions with pro- 31), and stronger effects are often related to low-stakes activities, jections of marsh distribution (22) to quantify how much of this such as recycling and planting trees (31). Much less is known about zone is currently available for protection (Statistical Methods). the influence of climate-change beliefs on high-stakes behaviors that have the potential to affect personal wealth and well-being. Study Area Recent evidence suggests that climate awareness and educa- Our study population was landowners in coastal Connecticut tion efforts might be most effective immediately after target whose property is within the zone that is projected to be tidal populations experience extreme weather events (7, 32). Because marsh by 2100 (Fig. S1) (22). This zone is situated within the 12% of our respondents’ homes were flooded during Hurricane northeast coast of the United States, a region that will need to Sandy (in 2012, 2 y before our survey was conducted), we adapt to rates of sea-level rise that are unprecedented in modern

Field et al. PNAS | August 22, 2017 | vol. 114 | no. 34 | 9135 Downloaded by guest on October 3, 2021 history if warming exceeds 2 °C (45). This population also likely Belief/Attitude/Experience Behavior defines the approximate upper limit for expected participation rates in conservation behaviors that allow marsh migration, be- I will be offered an incentive Easement cause property owners are generally wealthy and well-educated I am not worried about a fair price Easement (median property value is >$481,000, and 38% of property Flooding will happen Shoreline protection owners hold an advanced degree). Because of these demographic

factors, we had a priori expectations for high levels of environ- Marsh wildlife is important Restrictive covenant mental group membership (42), agreement with basic scientific Flooding will happen Future Interest conclusions about climate change (30), and high participation in House flooded during Sandy environmental behavior (46). The reported rates of beliefs and Purchase group membership from our survey, although potentially subject Local land trust member Restrictive covenant to nonresponse bias, provided strong evidence for these a priori expectations: 86% of our study population believes that sea-level 1 3 5 7 Increase in stated intentions rise is happening, consistent with previous surveys that found (times more likely) that a high percentage of people in the region already believe that climate change is happening (66% in Connecticut vs. a na- Fig. 1. The effect sizes for a selection of the strongest predictors of be- tional average of 63%) (47). Our respondents also reported havioral intentions (n = 1,002). The column on the left shows the belief, higher rates of environmental group membership than the attitude, or experience that is a predictor of the associated behavioral in- overall low rates of membership in the United States (23% in our tention in the column on the right. Bars show the mean increase in stated – intentions between a landowner who reported strongly disagree/strongly survey vs. 3 15% nationwide) (42, 48). unlikely/no vs. strongly agree/strongly likely/yes, as appropriate for the Our study area was also recently affected by a major storm, question. This increase in stated intentions is expressed as how many times Hurricane Sandy, making it possible to quantify the relationship more likely the respondent was to respond with “likely” or “very likely” to between experience with extreme weather and behavioral in- the question (e.g., landowners who were members of local land trusts were tentions. This relationship has become a prominent issue in ∼1.5 times more likely than nonmembers to report that they were likely or coastal areas worldwide as sea-level rise increases the impact of very likely to participate in a restrictive covenant). We estimated this in- major storms on coastal communities (e.g., ref. 49). Additionally, crease using back-transformed values of the parameter estimates from Fig. diverse conservation strategies are being pursued in coastal 2, calculated while holding all other variables constant at their observed sample means. Whiskers show 95% credible intervals. Connecticut to encourage coastal resilience, including both strategies that are common worldwide and those that are largely untested as practitioners develop new ways to address the chal- greater or lesser likelihood of participating in any of the other lenges of coastal conservation and sea-level rise. conservation agreements (Fig. 2), however, demonstrating that Results the strength of this effect is likely to depend on the strategy taken. Landowners who placed greater importance on the value Intentions to Participate in Conservation Agreements. Easements of marshes to wildlife reported being less likely to use shoreline were by far the least-preferred conservation option presented to n = protection and more likely to participate in both conservation coastal landowners ( 1,002). Only 6.9% of landowners easements and restrictive covenants (Figs. 1 and 2). Both con- reported being likely or strongly likely to participate in an cern about receiving a fair price for outright sales and disbelief easement in the next 10 y, and only 3.2% (95% credible interval: about being offered an incentive were negatively correlated with 2.1–4.4%) chose easements as their first choice, compared with landowner intentions to participate in multiple conservation 17% (15–20%) for outright purchase (Fig. S2). Landowners also agreements (Fig. 2). This result, coupled with the low proportion showed greater preferences for restrictive covenants and future of positive beliefs toward incentives (6.8% believe they are likely interest agreements, which respectively were the most likely to be offered an incentive; 65% are worried about receiving a fair option for 8.2% (6.5–10%) and 27% (24–30%) of landowners. Forty-five percent (42–48%) of respondents stated that they price), suggests that landowners have substantial concerns that were unlikely to participate in any of the agreements presented, environmental groups might not act fairly or transparently in and 22% of landowners reported being likely or strongly likely to their efforts to encourage tidal marsh migration. build shoreline protection within 20 y. Variables That Were Not Predictive. Despite its perceived potential, Predictors of Behavioral Intentions. We found that stronger beliefs we found that landowners who placed greater importance on the about the likelihood of coastal flooding were related to stronger protective value of coastal marshes did not report being more stated intentions for both pro- and anti-conservation behavior, likely to participate in conservation agreements, nor did they although the effect sizes were moderate compared with other report being less likely to use shoreline protection (Figs. 1 and factors that influenced intentions. Landowners with stronger 2). This lack of evidence for an effect contrasts with the stronger beliefs about the reality of sea-level rise, increased flooding on effects on behavioral intentions of landowners placing impor- their properties, and/or marsh migration reported being more tance on marsh wildlife (see above). While alleviating concern likely to participate in some conservation agreements but not in about getting a fair price is predicted to have a large effect on others (Figs. 1 and 2). Landowners with stronger beliefs about uptake of agreements (Figs. 1 and 2), members of environmental increased flooding or marsh migration also reported being more groups did not report being more likely than nonmembers to likely to build shoreline protection (Figs. 1 and 2), suggesting believe that they would be offered a monetary incentive to par- that greater awareness about sea-level rise also has the potential ticipate in one of the agreements; only members of local land to hamper conservation efforts, especially with respect to high- trusts were less likely than nonmembers to be worried about stakes decisions that affect the property values of the target receiving a fair price (Fig. S3). Environmental group members population. Landowners whose homes flooded during Hurricane also tended to have stronger beliefs that coastal flooding and Sandy were 1.4 times more likely to report being likely or very sea-level rise are real (Fig. S3), but membership per se did not likely to sell outright, demonstrating a link between experience consistently influence intentions once climate change and flooding with extreme weather and behavioral intentions that could affect beliefs were accounted for (Fig. 2). Members of local or national the implementation of conservation actions immediately after wildlife conservation organizations or hunting groups did not extreme weather events. These landowners did not report a report being more likely than nonmembers to participate in any

9136 | www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.1620319114 Field et al. Downloaded by guest on October 3, 2021 Any agreement Restrictive covenant Easement Change in the log-odds Change in the log-odds Change in the log-odds -1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 -0.8 -0.4 0 0.4 0.8 -0.8 -0.4 0 0.4 0.8

National land trust member National wildlife conservatoin organziation member Local land trust member Local wildlife conservation organization member Hunting organization member Property value Primary residence? Gender (male) Age Level of education Republican Democrat Property size Increasing distance from current marsh Flooded during Hurricane Sandy Already has shoreline protection Water levels will rise Marsh will migrate Sea-level rise is happening Flood protection by marshes is important to me Marshes providing a home for wildlife is important to me I will be offered an incentive I am worried about receiving a fair price

Shoreline protection Future interest Purchase Change in the log-odds Change in the log-odds Change in the log-odds -0.8 0 0.8 1.6 -0.8 -0.4 0 0.4 0.8 -0.8 -0.4 0 0.4 0.8

National land trust member National wildlife conservatoin organziation member Local land trust member Local wildlife conservation organization member Hunting organization member Property value Primary residence? Gender Age Level of education Republican Democrat Property size Increasing distance from current marsh Flooded during Hurricane Sandy Already has shoreline protection Water levels will rise Marsh will migrate Sea-level rise is happening Flood protection by marshes is important to me Marshes providing a home for wildlife is important to me I will be offered an incentive I am worried about receiving a fair price

Fig. 2. Parameter estimates for variables that potentially influence behavioral intentions with respect to easements, outright purchase, restrictive covenants, future interest agreements, any agreement vs. no agreement, and the likelihood of constructing shoreline protection. Bars are 95% credible intervals, and white dots are posterior means. Credible intervals that do not overlap zero are shown in black. Positive values for parameter estimates indicate a positive SCIENCES

relationship between a landowner’s stated likelihood of participating in a given agreement or behavior and the variable listed to the left. Parameter esti- ENVIRONMENTAL mates give the change in the ordered log-odds that results from a per-unit increase in the independent variable (e.g., a one-step increase in the Likert scale or a change from no to yes).

of the conservation agreements or less likely to build shoreline implemented. Widespread implementation of conservation protection (Fig. 2). Members of either national or local land easements is a more realistic scenario, both in terms of funding

trusts reported being more likely than nonmembers to partici- and current conservation practice, but just 7.1% (5.4–8.9%) of SCIENCE

pate in restrictive covenants but did not report being more likely the marsh migration zone is owned by landowners who are SUSTAINABILITY to forgo shoreline protection (Fig. 2). currently likely or very likely to participate in easements.

Spatial Variation in Behavioral Intentions. We found strong evi- Discussion dence for spatial variation in behavioral intentions across eco- We found a general pattern of weak relationships between be- logically relevant spatial units (see Statistical Methods for spatial havioral intentions and a wide range of beliefs and attitudes that unit definition) and by distance from current marsh. Landowners are common targets for conservation and environmental edu- reported being less likely to build shoreline protection and more cation. Variables that were strong predictors of intentions often likely to participate in an easement with increasing distance from revealed surprising relationships with immediate relevance to current marsh (Fig. 2). The percentage of people in a spatial unit conservation practice. For example: (i) strengthening beliefs in who reported being most likely to participate in one of the climate change could have both negative and positive outcomes; conservation agreements (vs. not participating in any) varied (ii) while environmental group members may ultimately support from 48 to 61%. This range suggests that while we found strong conservation, for example through private donations, there is statistical evidence for spatial variation, the magnitude of this little evidence that they differ from the general population when variation was moderate (an SD of 6.3% in the probability of it comes to higher-stakes decisions about their properties; and intending to participate in an agreement) (Fig. S4). Overlaying (iii) there was little evidence that emphasizing ecosystem services behavioral intentions and projections of marsh migration is likely to lead to greater participation in conservation. This last revealed that 55% (52–59%) of the migration zone is owned by finding highlights the need for additional research on the atti- landowners who reported being most likely to participate in one tudes, beliefs, and behavioral intentions of stakeholders in re- of the conservation agreements presented vs. not participating in lation to ecosystem services to better quantify the power of this any (Fig. 3 and Fig. S5). Achieving this level of land protection concept to meet conservation goals. assumes that behavioral intentions translate into behaviors (see Easements, although popular with conservation practitioners, ref. 50) and might require that landowners be offered an array might not be as effective in the face of sea-level rise as other of options that include practices such as future interest agree- alternatives. More landowners preferred restrictive covenants, ments and restrictive covenants, which have not yet been widely even though covenants do not offer a monetary incentive. One

Field et al. PNAS | August 22, 2017 | vol. 114 | no. 34 | 9137 Downloaded by guest on October 3, 2021 properties, suggests a lower participation rate than the stated in- tentions from our survey. If government programs are to play an important role in conserving lands threatened by sea-level rise, more research is needed to determine the underlying cause of this apparent discrepancy, which may be related to attitudes about government vs. nonprofit conservation organizations. Our study used a stated preference survey, which can provide measures of beliefs, attitudes, and behavioral intentions across large spatial scales. Surveys that collect these measures for the populations that will determine program outcomes and efficiency are integral to formative assessments of program effectiveness (51). Obtaining the relevant measures with adequate spatial replication and representativeness is likely to be particularly important for conservation programs, which often operate over large areas. Importantly, our results can guide future research that inte- grates concepts and approaches from additional areas of social science, especially those that can provide information that is beyond the scope of our methods. For example, baseline inten- Fig. 3. Spatial variation in landowner intentions to participate in conser- tions to participate in conservation agreements could inform vation agreements shown for (A) conservation easements and (B) outright additional stated-preference research that seeks to refine agree- purchase. Landowners who reported being very likely to participate in the ment terms and incentives (e.g., contingent valuation) (52). Some given agreement are shown in red; landowners who reported being very of the patterns discovered here, in particular that restrictive con- unlikely to participate are shown in black (n = 1,002 respondents). The vents were preferred over conservation easements, also could be predicted extent of marsh migration by 2100 is shown in blue. further clarified by qualitative approaches that are designed to investigate the role of social norms (e.g., ref. 53) and public deliberation (sensu ref. 54) in decision-making. likely explanation for this seemingly counterintuitive result is the Projections of species and ecosystems under climate change evidence for concern among landowners that conservation or- are ubiquitous in the ecological literature, and many implicitly ganizations will act fairly when entering into binding agreements assume that human land-use decisions will not limit ecosystem such as easements. The potential for this concern to be widely shifts. Our results illustrate how this implicit assumption can held warrants further study, as we have shown it can influence overestimate an ecosystem’s ability to respond to climate change, intentions with respect to several types of agreements. We also highlighting the potential value of better integrating human di- need similar information from other systems to evaluate whether mensions into ecosystem modeling. Ecological models that bet- the attitudes toward easements in our study are widespread. ter reflect human decisions would be especially valuable for Although we anticipate that the wealth and education level of coastal areas in the short term, where the impacts of climate our study population will, if anything, bias attitudes in favor of change are already being directly felt (49) and half of the world’s high adoption rates, this assumption warrants testing. The low population (55) is adapting to climate change alongside threat- participation rates predicted here might be even lower in prac- ened species and ecosystems. tice because intentions do not always translate into actions (50). The community engagement needed to enact agreements, how- ever, might increase participation by providing opportunities to Methods address landowners’ concerns. While it is unlikely that any one We conducted a four-wave mail survey of 3,050 landowners (Fig. S1), fol- factor can fully explain the pattern of low intentions to partici- lowing the Tailored Design Method (56), between February and June 2015. pate in conservation behavior, attitudes about individual prop- We received 1,002 completed surveys (33% response rate). We used five- erty rights may be a strong predictor. Factors that we expected to point Likert scales (57) to measure stated behavioral intentions with respect strongly covary with attitudes about property rights (political to the conservation agreements and constructing shoreline protection party membership and demographic characteristics), however, within the next 20 y. We also used five-point Likert scales (strongly unlikely to strongly likely, or very bad to very good, as appropriate) to quantify were not generally predictive of behavioral intentions (Fig. 2). ’ climate-change beliefs, attitudes about ecosystem services and wildlife, and Addressing landowners concerns about the likelihood and concerns about incentives. We measured which agreement landowners’ fairness of incentives would likely be straightforward and in- were most likely to participate in, including the option of not participating expensive. The strong effects of these concerns (Fig. 2) suggest in any agreement as a choice. Additional details about survey implementa- that reducing them could increase the proportion of landowners tion and analyses are given in Supporting Information. The questionnaire, who are likely to forgo shoreline protection or participate in which contains the full terms of the conservation agreements, is given in SI conservation agreements from the baselines presented here. Appendix. The full list of variables and associated numbers in the ques- While the focus of our study was land protection by the private tionnaire are given in Table S1. Data used in this paper are archived at Harvard Dataverse (doi:10.7910/DVN/ sector, coastal areas in the United States also have the option to “ ” NAKYZD). All work was conducted in accordance with IRB-approved protocol participate in Federal buyout programs, which aim to bolster H14-086 from the University of Connecticut. Participants were informed of the natural defenses in the wake of major storms by acquiring proper- purpose of the survey in a cover letter (SI Appendix) and consented by ties, typically for fair market value. In our study area, such programs returning the questionnaire. have experienced very low participation rates despite being pro- moted by governments at local, state, and federal levels. Well under ACKNOWLEDGMENTS. We thank E. Lewson for help with survey logistics; 100 properties in our study region have participated in acquisition the many landowners who participated in our survey; S. Swallow, J. Barrett, A. Sullivan, H. Miller, and L. Larson for valuable feedback on the question- programs by either the Federal Emergency Management Agency naire; and S. Swallow and two anonymous reviewers for valuable feedback (https://www.fema.gov/)ortheNaturalResources Conservation Ser- on this article. Funding for this work was provided by Connecticut Sea Grant, vice (https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/) since 2010, despite federal fund- University of Connecticut through Award NA14OAR4170086, Project Num- ing being made available in the aftermath of two major hurricanes ber R/SS-5, and the Connecticut Department of Energy and . C.R.F. was funded by a University of Connecticut College of Lib- (Irene in 2011 and Sandy in 2012). The number of properties ac- eral Arts and Sciences Fellowship and a Robert and Patricia Switzer Founda- quired by these programs, compared with the number of eligible tion Environmental Fellowship.

9138 | www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.1620319114 Field et al. Downloaded by guest on October 3, 2021 1. Cowling RM (2014) Let’s get serious about human behavior and conservation. Conserv 35. Orenstein D (2013) More than language is needed in valuing ecosystem services. Lett 7:147–148. Bioscience 63:913–913. 2. Hagerman S, Dowlatabadi H, Chan KMA, Satterfield T (2010) Integrative propositions 36. Metz W, Weigel L (2010) Key Findings from the Recent National Opinion Research on for adapting conservation policy to the impacts of climate change. Global Environ “Ecosystem Services” (, Arlington, VA). Change 20:351–362. 37. Katz-Gerro T, Orenstein DE (2015) Environmental tastes, opinions and behaviors: 3. Whitehead AL, et al. (2014) Integrating biological and social values when prioritizing Social sciences in the service of cultural ecosystem service assessment. Ecol Soc 20:28. places for biodiversity conservation. Conserv Biol 28:992–1003. 38. Möller I, et al. (2014) Wave attenuation over coastal salt marshes under storm surge 4. Hornsey MJ, Harris EA, Bain PG, Fielding KS (2016) Meta-analyses of the determinants conditions. Nat Geosci 7:727–731. and outcomes of belief in climate change. Nat Clim Change 6:622–626. 39. Schuyt K, Brander L (2004) The Economic Values of the World’s Wetlands (World 5. Tam J, McDaniels TL (2013) Understanding individual risk perceptions and preferences Wildlife Fund, Washington, DC). for climate change in biological conservation. Environ Sci Policy 27: 40. Lane K, et al. (2013) Health effects of coastal storms and flooding in urban areas: A 114–123. review and vulnerability assessment. J Environ Public Health 2013:913064. 6. Weber EU (2010) What shapes perceptions of climate change? Wiley Interdiscip Rev 41. Hinkel J, et al. (2014) Coastal flood damage and adaptation costs under 21st century Clim Change 1:332–342. sea-level rise. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 111:3292–3297. 7. Myers TA, Maibach EW, Roser-Renouf C, Akerlof K, Leiserowitz AA (2012) The re- 42. Dalton RJ (2005) The greening of the globe? Cross-national levels of environmental lationship between personal experience and belief in the reality of global warming. group membership. Environ Polit 14:441–459. Nat Clim Change 3:343–347. 43. Wiest WA, et al. (2016) Population estimates for tidal marsh birds of high conserva- 8. Schliep R, Bertzky M, Hirschnitz M, Stoll-Kleemann S (2008) Changing climate in tion concern in the northeastern USA from a design-based survey. Condor 118: protected areas?: Risk perception of climate change by biosphere reserve managers. 274–288. – GAIA Ecol Perspect Sci Soc 17:116 124. 44. Field CR (2016) A threatened ecosystem in a human-dominated landscape: Tidal 9. Hagerman S, Dowlatabadi H, Satterfield T, McDaniels T (2010) Expert views on bio- marsh conservation in the face of sea-level rise. PhD thesis (University of Connecticut, diversity conservation in an era of climate change. Global Environ Change 20: Storrs, CT). – 192 207. 45. Jevrejeva S, Jackson LP, Riva REM, Grinsted A, Moore JC (2016) Coastal sea level rise ’ 10. Rudd MA (2011) Scientists opinions on the global status and management of bi- with warming above 2 °C. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 113:13342–13347. – ological diversity. Conserv Biol 25:1165 1175. 46. Berger IE (1997) The demographics of recycling and the structure of environmental 11. Lemieux CJ, Scott DJ (2011) Changing climate, challenging choices: Identifying and behavior. Environ Behav 29:515–531. evaluating climate change adaptation options for protected areas management in 47. Leiserowitz A, Smith N, Marlon JR (2010) Americans’ Knowledge of Climate Change – Ontario, Canada. Environ Manage 48:675 690. (Yale Project of Climate Change Communication, Yale University, New Haven, CT). 12. Juffe-Bignoli D, et al. (2014) Protected Planet Report 2014 (United Nations Environ- 48. Straughan B, Pollak T (2008) The Broader Movement: Non-Profit Environmental and mental Programme-World Conservation Monitoring Centre, Cambridge, UK). Conservation Organizations, 1989–2005 (National Center for Charitable Statistics at 13. Rodrigues ASL, et al. (2004) Effectiveness of the global protected area network in the Urban Institute, Washington, DC). representing species diversity. Nature 428:640–643. 49. Strauss BH, Kopp RE, Sweet WV, Bittermann K (2016) Unnatural Coastal Floods: Sea 14. Guerrero AM, Knight AT, Grantham HS, Cowling RM, Wilson KA (2010) Predicting Level Rise and the Human Fingerprint on U.S. Floods Since 1950 (Climate Central willingness-to-sell and its utility for assessing conservation opportunity for expanding Research Report, Princeton). protected area networks. Conserv Lett 3:332–339. 50. Webb TL, Sheeran P (2006) Does changing behavioral intentions engender behavior 15. Knight AT, Cowling RM, Difford M, Campbell BM (2010) Mapping human and social change? A meta-analysis of the experimental evidence. Psychol Bull 132:249–268. dimensions of conservation opportunity for the scheduling of conservation action on 51. Posavac E (2015) Program Evaluation: Methods and Case Studies (Routledge, Abing- private land. Conserv Biol 24:1348–1358. don, UK). 16. Williams P, et al. (2005) Planning for climate change: Identifying minimum-dispersal 52. Provencher B, Lewis DJ, Anderson K (2012) Disentangling preferences and expecta- corridors for the Cape Proteaceae. Conserv Biol 19:1063–1074. tions in stated preference analysis with respondent uncertainty: The case of invasive 17. Hannah L, et al. (2007) Protected area needs in a changing climate. Front Ecol Environ species prevention. J Environ Econ Manage 64:169–182. 5:131–138. 53. Goldstein NJ, Cialdini RB, Griskevicius V (2008) A room with a viewpoint: Using social 18. Costanza R, et al. (2014) Changes in the global value of ecosystem services. Global – norms to motivate environmental conservation in hotels. J Consum Res 35:472 482. SCIENCES Environ Change 26:152–158. 54. Burkhalter S, Gastil J, Kelshaw T (2002) A conceptual definition and theoretical model

19. Warren SR, Niering WA (1993) Vegetation change on a northeast tidal marsh: In- ENVIRONMENTAL of public deliberation in small face-to-face groups. Commun Theory 12:398–422. teraction of sea-level rise and marsh accretion. Ecology 74:96–103. 55. Nganyi J, Akrofi J, Farmer T (2010) UN Atlas of the Oceans (UN-Oceans). Accessed 20. Field CR, Gjerdrum C, Elphick CS (2016) Forest resistance to sea-level rise prevents April 4, 2016. landward migration of tidal marsh. Biol Conserv 201:363–369. 56. Dillman DA, Smyth JD, Christian LM (2008) Internet, Mail, and Mixed-Mode Surveys: 21. Strauss BH (2015) How 2 °C of Warming Could Reshape the U.S. (Climate Central Research Report, Princeton). The Tailored Design Method (Wiley, Hoboken, NJ), 3rd Ed. 22. Hoover MD (2009) Connecticut’s changing salt marshes: A remote sensing approach 57. Colman AM, Norris CE, Preston CC (1997) Comparing rating scales of different to sea level rise and possible salt marsh migration. MS thesis (University of Con- lengths: Equivalence of scores from 5-point and 7-point scales. Psychol Rep 80: 355–362.

necticut, Storrs, CT). SCIENCE 23. Connecticut Environmental Conditions Online (2014) Protected Open Space Mapping. 58. The Trust for Public Land (2016) Conservation Almanac. Available at www. Available at www.cteco.uconn.edu/guides/Protected_Open_Space.htm. Accessed conservationalmanac.org. Accessed November 12, 2014. SUSTAINABILITY ’ March 3, 2016. 59. Leiserowitz A, et al. (2014) Climate Change in the American Mind: America s Global 24. Titus JG (2011) Rolling Easements (Climate Ready Estuaries Program, Environmental Warming Beliefs and Attitudes in November, 2013 (Yale Project of Climate Change Protection Agency, Washington, DC). Communication, Yale University, New Haven, CT). 25. Moser SC (2005) Impact assessments and policy responses to sea-level rise in three US 60. Environmental Systems Research Institute (2014) ArcGIS 10.3 (Environ Syst Res Inst, states: An exploration of human-dimension uncertainties. Global Environ Change 14: Redlands, CA). 353–369. 61. Vaske JJ (2008) Survey Research and Analysis: Applications in Parks, Recreation and 26. Hamilton LC (2011) Education, politics and opinions about climate change evidence Human Dimensions (Venture Publishing, Inc., State College, PA). for interaction effects. Clim Change 104:231–242. 62. Gelman A, et al. (2013) Bayesian Data Analysis (CRC, Boca Raton, FL), 3rd Ed. 27. Wilson RS, et al. (2016) A typology of time-scale mismatches and behavioral inter- 63. Curtis SM, Ghosh SK (2011) A Bayesian approach to multicollinearity and the simul- ventions to diagnose and solve conservation problems. Conserv Biol 30:42–49. taneous selection and clustering of predictors in linear regression. J Stat Theory Pract 28. Gustanski JA, Squires R, Hocker J (2000) Protecting the Land: Conservation Easements 5:715–735. Past, Present, and Future (Island, Washington, DC), 2nd Ed. 64. Gelman A (2008) Scaling regression inputs by dividing by two standard deviations. 29. Maibach EW, Leiserowitz A, Roser-Renouf C, Mertz CK (2011) Identifying like-minded Stat Med 27:2865–2873. audiences for global warming public engagement campaigns: An audience seg- 65. Schofield MR, Barker RJ, MacKenzie DI (2007) Flexible hierarchical mark-recapture mentation analysis and tool development. PLoS One 6:e17571. modeling for open populations using WinBUGS. Environ Ecol Stat 16:369–387. 30. Wendling ZA, et al. (2013) On the importance of strengthening moderate beliefs in 66. Royle JA (2009) Analysis of capture-recapture models with individual covariates using climate science to foster support for immediate action. Sustainability 5:5153–5170. data augmentation. Biometrics 65:267–274. 31. Boyes E, Stanisstreet M (2012) Environmental education for behaviour change: Which 67. Plummer M (2016) JAGS: A program for analysis of Bayesian graphical models using actions should be targeted? Int J Sci Educ 34:1591–1614. Gibbs sampling. Available at mcmc-jags.sourceforge.net. Accessed September 6, 2015. 32. Howe PD, Boudet H, Leiserowitz A, Maibach EW (2014) Mapping the shadow of ex- 68. R Development Core Team (2016) R: A language and environment for statistical perience of extreme weather events. Clim Change 127:381–389. computing. Available at https://www.r-project.org. Accessed September 6, 2015. 33. World Resources Institute (2011) Millennium ecosystem assessment synthesis reports 69. Su Y-S, Yajima M (2015) R2JAGS: Using R to run “JAGS.” Available at https://cran. (Island, Washington, DC). r-project.org/web/packages/R2jags/index.html. Accessed September 6, 2015. 34. Daily GC, Matson PA (2008) Ecosystem services: From theory to implementation. Proc 70. Brooks SP, Gelman A (1998) General methods for monitoring convergence of iterative Natl Acad Sci USA 105:9455–9456. simulations. J Comput Graph Stat 7:434–455.

Field et al. PNAS | August 22, 2017 | vol. 114 | no. 34 | 9139 Downloaded by guest on October 3, 2021