WHAT IS NATURE’S beauty worth? How can you put a price on a pristine beachfront or a secluded coastal alcove? Are some worth more than others? Are some worth preserving more than others?
Finding answers to these questions is critical, even if it can be difficult and uncomfortable at times. Land, time, money, and political will are all limited resources—and they are all necessary for every environmental campaign.
There’s no one-size-fits-all answer. But as with any economic challenge dealing with limited resources, the best tool for balancing these tradeoffs is the free market backed by secure property rights.
Ignoring property rights is not only a bad deal for property owners. It’s oft en an equally bad deal for the environment.
Respecting people’s right to securely own property allows us to see what a piece of land—whether it’s a beachfront, a house on the coast, or a place in the suburbs—is worth in the real world. If you’re a private citizen wanting to own a piece of land, you need to pay what the market demands. If the government wants a piece of land for a highway, public building, or conservation project, they need to do the same.
Unfortunately, the government doesn’t always agree.
As we’ve discussed in this issue, the California Coastal Commission (CCC) engaged in an “out-and-out plan of extortion” when they attempted to get part of Pat and Mary Nollan’s beachfront land. At least, that was how the late Justice Antonin Scalia described the CCC’s attempt to force the Nollans to “donate” a significant portion of their property to the CCC in exchange for a building permit to complete repairs on their beach house. Thirty years ago— in PLF’s first Supreme Court victory—the court struck down this abusive tactic. On the other coast, David H. Lucas received even worse treatment when he sought to build a home on his coastal property outside of Charleston, South Carolina. The South Carolina Coastal Council declared his property a “critical area” for beach conservation and restricted Lucas’s ability to develop the land and refused to pay him anything for it.
The Supreme Court, in another Scalia opinion, forced the council to pay for the lots it claimed were essential to its conservation goals.
However, when the government was forced to bear the costs of its own regulation—rather than getting land for free—the state decided it wasn’t so critical after all and quickly issued a permit to construct a 5,000-square-foot mansion on the property.
The lesson of the Nollan and Lucas Supreme Court victories is that weakening property rights inevitably leads to government abuse. Secure property rights, on the other hand, encourage governments to apply market-based decision making to environmental policies. Put more simply: The government—or private groups—can conserve valuable coastal areas if they’re willing to pay for it.
For example, the Nature Conservancy, the world’s largest conservation organization, recently proved this simple but important concept in California. They purchased 24,000 acres of unique coastal habitat at Point Conception with the intent of conserving its ecological, cultural, and historical resources forever.
They might allow public access someday, but for now the Conservancy is keeping the land private to protect it. Without secure property rights, they could be forced to open the land up to public use and jeopardize the entire conservation project.
Ignoring property rights is not only a bad deal for property owners. It’s often an equally bad deal for the environment.
The Constitution’s compensation requirement gives regulators (and the taxpayers who fund them) skin in the game. Without this incentive, governments too often acquire land without considering how to manage it for the public’s benefit. The $12 billion backlog in maintenance needs of national parks is clear evidence of this. By championing property rights, we’re championing our right to express our values with our land, whether that’s having a comfortable oasis for our family and friends, or preserving a unique place for prosperity.
What’s nature’s beauty worth? The only way to find out is to ask what we’re willing to pay for it.
