Association for Public Policy Analysis & Management

Land trusts are charitable organizations that work to conserve land in the communities in which they operate. There are nearly 1,700 community-based land trusts in the U.S. with varying degrees of organizational and financial capacity, professional staff, and record of protected areas (LTA, 2011). Among other things, variations in the performance of land trusts reflect differences in the share of private land in a state, landowner conservation attitudes, state and federal policy incentives, as well as land trusts’ organizational resources and capacity (e.g., financial, human, and social capital). The organizational capacity of land trusts is arguably best reflected in their connections to other organizations or network social capital, the latter being a key component in nonprofit governance and collaborative natural resource management (Yonavjak and Gartner 2011, Jaskyte 2012).

Research Approach

The purpose of this paper is to, first, highlight the importance of different types of network capital (bonding, bridging, and linking capital) and associated patterns of organizational networks within, between, and beyond communities; and second, to examine how types of network capital relate to the conservation record and financial achievements of land trusts. Studies have shown the value of connections, known as bonding social capital (connections to other local environmental groups), bridging (connections to local groups with different missions), and linking social capital (relationships, vertically, with state and federal institutions) in the context of economic development and community goal achievements. Bridging social capital, for instance, is important because it allows land trusts to effectively meet and adapt to changing economic and policy realities, particularly by having access to functionally diverse resources. In the private land conservation arena, where public-private collaborations are critical for collective action and ecosystem service provisioning, understanding which types of organizational networks are more or less relevant to successful conservation efforts is vital. The analysis draws on data for 24 land trusts operating across the Blue Ridge region of western North Carolina, southwest Virginia, and east Tennessee (85 counties). Data on the organizational collaborations and conservation achievements of land trusts come from semi-structured interviews with land trust executive directors, survey responses from land trusts’ board members (n=95), and organizational websites and tax records (IRS Form 990). Network measures for bonding, bridging, or linking social capital are derived from analyses of two-mode affiliation networks (land trusts and their partners, and board members and their organizational affiliations, coded according to the National Center for Charitable Statistics NTEE codes). We use network analysis methods to examine relationships between organizational success (acres conserved, dollars raised) and social capital, controlling for organizational resources (number of staff and board members) and other contextual factors.

Implications for Research and Policy

Findings from this study have relevance for resource-dependent conservation and other environmental nonprofits whose functionality and performance are shaped by the multiple-stakeholder networks, within which they are embedded.  Our analytical techniques will also advance network science, as analysis of multi-mode affiliation networks is still in a nascent stage.