Why Australian landholders choose conservation covenants

What motivates landholders and land managers to take on conservation covenants and what kinds of incentives can governments offer to encourage more participation and long-term support?

For over a decade, Deakin University researcher Dr Carla Archibald has been exploring these questions, publishing a series of studies on landholder motivations and private land conservation. Her most recent paper, Can conservation covenants help sustain nature and livelihoods? Factors associated with conservation covenant adopters in Australia, offers fresh insights into the social and economic dimensions of covenant adoption.

In October Dr Archibald presented the research findings - based on a social survey of 475 landholders in New South Wales — to members of Land Covenantors Victoria as part of its 2025 Annual General Meeting.

The paper’s co-authors set out to understand why landholders adopt these agreements, how they differ from those who don’t, and how livelihood considerations come into play.

Carla told the audience in Melbourne that, “the ultimate goal of our research, which was shared with the NSW Biodiversity Conservation Trust and others, is to identify how these agreements can support both biodiversity protection and community resilience, while acknowledging the financial realities landholders face.”

What the study revealed

The survey revealed both expected and surprising insights.

“One of the first things we found is that private land conservation was already widespread in New South Wales,” explained Carla.

“Over 80% of respondents were doing some form of conservation independently, from weed control and revegetation to invasive species management.”

Only about 15% of participants had a formal conservation covenant, while 39% were involved in other programs such as Land for Wildlife.

When it came to factors influencing covenant adoption, four stood out:

1. Existing conservation engagement

Landholders already involved in conservation were eight times more likely to adopt a covenant. “This suggests that people who are already engaged and passionate about conservation are more inclined to take the next step and commit to something more permanent,” said Carla.

2. Time and human capital

Having more available time to manage land and engage in conservation increased the likelihood of covenant adoption by about 1.6 times. Interestingly, whether or not someone was retired didn’t make a significant difference.

3. Available land

Landholders with suitable space to dedicate to conservation were twice as likely to enter into a covenant, though this wasn’t necessarily linked to property size.

“It’s more about knowing which parts of your land are ecologically appropriate,” explained Carla. From a policy perspective, she suggested agencies could target outreach to properties with high conservation potential.

4. Income and incentives

Contrary to expectations, financial incentives were not a major motivator. “Landholders who earned income from their land - such as farmers - were actually more likely to adopt a covenant,” said Carla. “In other words, having a productive enterprise doesn’t preclude conservation. In fact, environmental markets in New South Wales are helping make conservation a better business case. For example, conservation activities on farms can enhance ecosystem services that directly benefit agriculture.”

Aligning biodiversity goals with livelihoods

Overall, the study found that conservation covenants can support sustainable landscapes and livelihoods - if programs account for landholders’ time, income reliance and available assets.

Stronger alignment between ecological outcomes and livelihood support will be key to expanding covenant adoption and achieving Australia’s long-term biodiversity goals.

Earlier research: climate impacts and covenant decisions

At the Land Covenantors Victoria event, Carla also discussed earlier research on how extreme weather events influence landholders’ decisions to enter covenant programs.

That study, also conducted in NSW, compared the perspectives of landholders and practitioners/policymakers. It found that while some landholders turned to covenanting for stability and support during tough times, others withdrew, feeling overstretched or unsupported.

“This shows that covenant programs can serve as a support system - helping strengthen landholders’ capacity to cope with and adapt to climate change,” said Carla.

The role of Land Covenantors Victoria

Looking ahead, Carla hopes to explore the role of sustainable finance in private land conservation, and how to connect her research threads into a broader understanding of how covenants can deliver economic, ecological and social value.

She also highlighted the advocacy role of Land Covenantors Victoria, particularly its success in securing land tax exemptions for covenant landholders.

“After a decade of studying private land conservation, I’m seeing a real and growing interest from policymakers in how to engage and support landholders effectively. Incentives aren’t always financial — they’re often social, and that’s where organisations like Land Covenantors Victoria play an important role.”

Land Covenantors Victoria President Peter Mulherin encouraged Carla to pursue further research with members, noting how this latest research confirms and provides further evidence of the need to recognise private land conservation as generating intergenerational value and the need for proper recognition by policymakers.