Tracking the ripple effects of conservation spending
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
0 likes•448 views
Conservation spending on natural resources generates significant employment and economic in the United States. This presentation includes data and analysis for the American West.
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (16)
Viewers also liked
Viewers also liked (7)
Similar to Tracking the ripple effects of conservation spending
Similar to Tracking the ripple effects of conservation spending (20)
More from Sea to Snow Consulting
More from Sea to Snow Consulting (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Tracking the ripple effects of conservation spending
- 1. Economic Value of Conservation Spending in the United States September 2013
- 2. Total Direct Investment in the Conservation Economy, by investment source 9/15/2013 2 4% 60% 25% 11% Federal Government State Governments Private Sector Local Governments Source: Southwick Associates, “Conservation Economy in America”
- 3. 9/15/2013 3 Investment Quintiles Top 10 States Bottom 10 States Total direct economic contributions of conservation spending, by state, without multiplier effects Source: Southwick Associates, “Conservation Economy in America”
- 4. 9/15/2013 4 Total direct economic contributions for conservation spending, in the West (in billions) $4.30 $1.63 $1.32 $0.93 $0.75 $0.97 $0.91 $0.91 $0.70 $0.45 $0.88 (USD, billions) Investment Quintiles Top 10 States Bottom 10 States Source: Southwick Associates, “Conservation Economy in America”
- 5. Aggregate and per capita conservation spending by state, in the West 9/15/2013 5 $0 $200 $400 $600 $800 $1,000 $1,200 $1,400 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 4,500 5,000 Millions Total Spending Per Capita Spending Source: Southwick Associates, “Conservation Economy in America”
- 6. Direct conservation spending by investment source, in the West (in millions) 9/15/2013 6 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 4,500 4,310 1,626 Oregon WashingtonCalifornia 1,323 972 Colorado 884 753 New Mexico 453 Arizona Idaho Wyoming UtahMontana Nevada 934 912 910 704 Federal Government Local GovernmentState Government Private Sector Source: Southwick Associates, “Conservation Economy in America”
- 7. 9/15/2013 7 ROI > 80% 61% - 80% 41% - 60% 21% - 40% 0-20% <0% Return on investment: Direct conservation spending compared to total economic output, by state Source: Southwick Associates, “Conservation Economy in America”
- 8. 9/15/2013 8 ROI > 80% 61% - 80% 41% - 60% 21% - 40% 0-20% <0% 91% 52% 45% 9% -2% 35% 24% 57% 48% 38% 15% Return on investment: Direct conservation spending compared to total economic output, in the West Source: Southwick Associates, “Conservation Economy in America”
- 9. Total economic contributions of conservation spending, including multiplier effects (in millions) 9/15/2013 9 $8,244 $4,310 $2,47 5 $1,626 $1,311 $97 2 $1,043 $7 04 $1,022 $934 $625 $453 $912 $910 $1,323 California Idaho $1,016 $753 Montana Utah New Mexico $1,132 $739 $20,944 Nevada Wyoming Colorado Arizona$1,425 Total Output $884 Total Direct Investment $1,913 Washington $13,779 Oregon Source: Southwick Associates, “Conservation Economy in America”
- 10. Economic contributions of conservation spending, by aggregated industry sector 9/15/2013 10 21% 4% 48% 14% 13%Government & non NAICs (payroll) Construction Professional – scientific and technical services Manufacturing Other Source: Southwick Associates, “Conservation Economy in America”
- 11. Benefit from direct investment in natural resource conservation, by industry 9/15/2013 11 8% 9% 20% 9% 41% 14% Real estate & rental Professional - scientific & technology services Finance & insurance Other sectors Government & non NAICs Manufacturing 52,909 285,532 67,957 62,643 53,259 138,231 Health & social services Other sectors Retail trade Professional- scientific & tech svcs Administrative & waste services Government & non NAICs Jobs supported Economic Output Source: Southwick Associates, “Conservation Economy in America”
- 12. 9/15/2013 12 ecowest.org Download more slides and other resources Contact us by e-mailing mitch@ceaconsulting.com
Editor's Notes
- Narrative: In this presentation, we share findings from the report, “The Conservation Economy in America,” which estimates the economic contributions of conservation spending in the United States.
- Narrative: The federal government is the leading funder for conservation investments in the nation; in 2011, it provided over $23 billion in direct investment and accounted for 60% of spending across all sources. Source: “The Conservation Economy in America: Direct investments and economic contributions” URL: http://www.avcrp.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/NFWF-Conservation-Economy-Rpt-Southwick-3-11-2013.pdfNote: The report classifies private sector investments as contributions to 501(c)3 public charities from private individuals, businesses, and private foundations. The report authors estimated private sector investments by examining annual return (Form 990) data from GuideStar and the National Center for Charitable Statistics. The study excluded U.S.-based nonprofits whose primary mission is to invest in conservation work abroad. An example of a private sector investment could include, for instance, spending from Trout Unlimited to restore eastern brook trout habitat in the Chesapeake Bay. Federal or state grants to nonprofits are classified as public sector investments.
- Narrative:Economic contributions of conservation spending are highest in California, Florida, Texas, Oregon, and Pennsylvania. State-level investments range from $4.3 billion in California to $108 million in Rhode Island. Source: “The Conservation Economy in America: Direct investments and economic contributions” URL: http://www.avcrp.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/NFWF-Conservation-Economy-Rpt-Southwick-3-11-2013.pdfNote: The study did not examine the causative factors that might explain state-to-state differences in conservation spending. It is plausible that certain factors, such as lobbying efforts or the amount of federal lands, may have influenced the level of federal funding allocated to states through different agencies and programs. In this report, the term ‘multiplier effect’ refers to economic activity (such as jobs, income for businesses, and impacts on the broader supply chain) that results from the original conservation investment.
- Narrative: On an aggregate basis, California, Oregon, and Washington State have the highest economic contributions for conservation spending within the West. On the upper end, these investments support nearly 29,000 jobs and contribute $3 billion to the state GDP in California, as compared to only 3,200 jobs and $300 million for the state GDP in Nevada. Source: “The Conservation Economy in America: Direct investments and economic contributions” URL: http://www.avcrp.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/NFWF-Conservation-Economy-Rpt-Southwick-3-11-2013.pdf
- Narrative: While California leads the pack in conservation spending in absolute terms, it is also important to examine state-by-state differences using per capita spending levels. Through this lens, California, with its population of 38 million people, actually drops to the lowest level with $113 in per capita spending. In contrast, Wyoming has the highest amount, with $1,306 in per capita spending for its population of 576,000. Source: “The Conservation Economy in America: Direct investments and economic contributions”; U.S. Census Bureau for population figures. URL: http://www.avcrp.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/NFWF-Conservation-Economy-Rpt-Southwick-3-11-2013.pdfhttp://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/index.html
- Narrative: The federal government contributes an average of 63% of conservation spending by state within the West, slightly higher than the national average of 60%. Federal government contributions for conservation investments are as high as 72% in New Mexico and as low as 48% in Wyoming. Source: “The Conservation Economy in America: Direct investments and economic contributions” URL: http://www.avcrp.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/NFWF-Conservation-Economy-Rpt-Southwick-3-11-2013.pdf
- Narrative: Nationwide, the $38.8 billion in conservation spending leads to $93.2 billion of total economic output. Comparing direct expenditures on conservation to the total economic output of this spending shows that the return on investment (ROI) is greatest in California and Illinois. Direct conservation spending results in economic returns, which are higher than the original investment in all but three states (Texas, Wyoming, and South Dakota). Source: “The Conservation Economy in America: Direct investments and economic contributions” URL: http://www.avcrp.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/NFWF-Conservation-Economy-Rpt-Southwick-3-11-2013.pdfNote: To estimate the total economic contributions associated with conservation spending, the authors use the IMPLAN input-output model to estimate the number of jobs, amount of income, and tax revenue supported directly by conservation investments. The IMPLAN economic model tracks purchasing rounds to show how spending on conservation itself impacts sales and economic activity in other industries. For instance, if the Yosemite Conservancy restores trails impacted by recent wildfires, the organization may purchase trail-building supplies from manufacturers, who purchase their own inputs from wholesalers. The original business must also pay operating costs, including salaries and wages, which stimulate additional economic activity by entering the household spending stream. The IMPLAN model thus measures direct, indirect, and induced effects of conservation expenditures.
- Narrative: In California, direct conservation spending of $4.3 billion generated $8.2 billion in total economic output, yielding an ROI of 91 percent. Wyoming is one of only three states with a negative ROI: its original investment of $753 million produced an economic output of only $738 million. Source: “The Conservation Economy in America: Direct investments and economic contributions” URL: http://www.avcrp.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/NFWF-Conservation-Economy-Rpt-Southwick-3-11-2013.pdf
- Narrative: At the national level, $38.8 billion of conservation spending led to $93.2 billion of economic output in 2011 (a ratio of 42 percent). Within the West alone, $13.7 billion in direct conservation investments generated $20.9 billion of total economic activity in 2011 (a ratio of 66 percent). Source: “The Conservation Economy in America: Direct investments and economic contributions” URL: http://www.avcrp.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/NFWF-Conservation-Economy-Rpt-Southwick-3-11-2013.pdf
- Narrative: Direct conservation spending impacts nearly every sector of the economy, with the greatest impacts observed in the government sector. Roughly $41.6 million of income and 138,000 jobs in the public sector are supported by conservation expenditures. Source: “The Conservation Economy in America: Direct investments and economic contributions” URL: http://www.avcrp.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/NFWF-Conservation-Economy-Rpt-Southwick-3-11-2013.pdf
- Narrative: The upper chart in this slide shows how economic contributions of conservation spending reach across various sectors. The total economic contribution of conservation spending is $18.7 million for the government sector and $12.6 million for the manufacturing sector.The lower chart demonstrates that conservation spending supports 138,000 jobs in the public sector and 68,000 in retail trade. Other sectors that experience high employment impacts include accommodations and food services, health and social services, and scientific and technical professional services. Source: “The Conservation Economy in America: Direct investments and economic contributions” URL: http://www.avcrp.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/NFWF-Conservation-Economy-Rpt-Southwick-3-11-2013.pdf