Forest owner incentives to protect riparian habitat

Ecological Economics

Volumn 33, Issue 1, 2000, Pages 29-43

  Kline, Jeffrey D ^a   Alig, Ralph J ^a   Johnson, Rebecca L ^b  

^a PACIFIC NORTHWEST RESEARCH STATION   (United States)

^b OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Ecosystem management; Endangered species; Nonindustrial private forest owners

Indexed keywords

ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING; FOREST MANAGEMENT; HABITAT MANAGEMENT; RIPARIAN FOREST;

UNITED STATES;

EID: 0034108139     PISSN: 09218009     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0921-8009(99)00116-0     Document Type: Article

References (60)

1. Amoros C., Rostan J., Pautou G., Bravard J. The reversible process concept applied to the environmental management of large river systems. Environ. Manage. 11:1987;607-617.
2. Anderberg M. Cluster Analysis for Applications. 1973;Academic Press, New York. 359 pp.
3. Arora S., Cason T. Why do firms volunteer to exceed environmental regulations? Understanding participation in EPA's 33/50 program. Land Econ. 72:1996;413-432.
4. Arora S., Gangopadhyay S. Toward a theoretical model of voluntary overcompliance. J. Econ. Behav. Org. 28:1995;289-309.
5. Ben-Akiva M., Lerman S. Discrete Choice Analysis: Theory and Application to Travel Demand. 1991;MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. 390 pp.
6. Bettinger P., Alig R. Timber availability on non-federal land in western Washington: implications based on physical characteristics of the timberland base. For. Prod. J. 46:1996;30-38.
7. Binkley, C., 1981. Timber Supply from Private Nonindustrial Forests. Bulletin No. 92. School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, Yale University, 97 pp.
8. Birch, T., 1996. Private Forest-land Owners of the United States, 1994. Resource Bulletin NE134. US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station, Radnor, PA, 183 pp.
9. Bliss J., Martin A. Identity and private forest management. Soc. Nat. Resour. 1:1988;365-376.
10. Bliss J., Martin A. Identifying NIPF management motivations with qualitative methods. For. Sci. 2:1989;601-622.
11. Bowes M., Krutilla J., Sherman P. Forest management for increased timber and water yields. Water Resour. Res. 20:1984;655-663.
12. Boyle K., Bishop R. Welfare measurements using contingent valuation: a comparison of techniques. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 70:1988;20-28.
13. Boyle K., Welsh M., Bishop R. Validation of empirical measures of welfare change: comment. Land Econ. 64:1988;94-98.
14. Cameron T. Interval estimates of non-market resource values from referendum contingent valuation surveys. Land Econ. 67:1991;413-421.
15. Cooper J. A comparison of approaches to calculating confidence intervals for benefit measures from dichotomous choice contingent valuation surveys. Land Econ. 70:1994;111-122.
16. Dennis D. An economic analysis of harvest behavior: integrating forest and ownership characteristics. For. Sci. 35:1989;1088-1104.
17. Dennis D. A probit analysis of the harvest decision using pooled time-series and crosssectional data. J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 18:1990;176-187.
18. Duffield J., Patterson D. Inference and optimal design for a welfare measure in dichotomous choice contingent valuation. Land Econ. 67:1991;225-239.
19. Firey W. Man, Mind, and Land: A Theory of Resource Use. 1960;Free Press, Glencoe, IL. 256 pp.
20. Firey W. Conditions for the realization of values remote in time. Tiryakian E. Sociological Theory, Values, and Sociocultural Change: Essays in Honor of Pitirim A. Sorokin. 1963;Free Press, Glencoe, IL.
21. Franklin J. Scientific basis for new perspectives in forests and streams. Naiman R. Watershed Management: Balancing Sustainability and Environmental Change. 1992;Springer-Verlag, New York.
22. Gottfried R., Wear D., Lee R. Institutional solutions to market failure on the landscape scale. Ecol. Econ. 18:1996;133-140.
23. Greene, W.H., 1995. LIMDEP Version 7.0. Econometric Software Inc., Bellport, NY, 850 pp.
24. Gregory G. Forest Resource Economics. 1972;Ronald Press Company, New York. 548 pp.
25. Hanemann W. Welfare evaluations in contingent valuation experiments with discrete responses. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 66:1984;332-341.
26. Hartman R. The harvesting decision when a standing forest has value. Econ. Inquiry. 14:1976;52-58.
27. Hyberg B., Holthausen D. The behavior of nonindustrial private forest landowners. Can. J. For. Res. 19:1989;1014-1023.
28. Johnson R.L., Brunson M.W., Kimura T. Using image-capture technology to assess scenic value at the urban/forest interface: a cast study. J. Environ. Manage. 40:1994;183-195.
29. Johnson, R., Alig, R., Kline, J., Moulton, R., Rickenbach, M., 1999. Non-industrial Private Forests in Western Oregon and Western Washington: Survey Findings. OSU Forest Research Lab Bulletin, Department of Forest Resources, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR.
30. Kaiser H. The varimax criterion for varimax rotation in factor analysis. Psychometrica. 23:1958;187-200.
31. Kennedy E., Costa R., Smathers W. Jr Economic incentives: New directions for red-cockaded woodpecker habitat conservation. J. For. 96:1996;22-26.
32. Kuuluvainen J., Karppinen H., Ovaskainen V. Landowner objectives and nonindustrial private timber supply. For. Sci. 42:1996;300-308.
33. Lee R. Ecologically effective social organization as a requirement for sustaining watershed ecosystems. Naiman R. Watershed Management: Balancing Sustainability and Environmental Change. 1992;Springer-Verlag, New York.
34. MacLean, C., 1990. Changes in Area and Ownership of Timberland in Western Oregon: 1981-86. Resource Bulletin PNW-RB-170. US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Portland, OR, 13 pp.
35. MacLean, C.D., Bassett, P.M., Yeary, G., 1992. Timber resource statistics for western Washington. Resource bulletin PNW-RB-191. US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Portland, OR, 135 pp.
36. Maddala G. Limited Dependent and Qualitative Variables in Econometrics. 1983;Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, MA. 401 pp.
37. Maloney M., McCormick R. A positive theory of environmental quality regulation. J. Law Econ. 15:1982;99-123.
38. Max W., Lehman D. A behavioral model of timber supply. J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 15:1988;71-86.
39. McFadden D. Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior. Zarembka P. Frontiers of Econometrics. 1973;Academic Press, New York.
40. Mulaik S. The Foundations of Factor Analysis. 1972;McGraw-Hill, New York.
41. New, B., Cubbage, F., Moulton, R., 1997. The Stewardship Incentive Program, 1992-1994: An Accomplishment and Program Review. In SCFER Working paper no. 83. Southeastern Center for Forest Economics Research, Research Triangle Park, NC, 32 pp.
42. Newman D., Wear D. Production economics of private forestry: a comparison of industrial and nonindustrial forest owners. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 75:1996;674-684.
43. Natural Resources Conservation Service, 1996. 1996 Farm Bill: Conservation Provisions. US Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC.
44. Oregon Coastal Salmon Restoration Initiative, 1997. The Oregon Plan: Restoring an Oregon Legacy through Cooperative Efforts. Final plan submitted to the National Marine Fisheries Services, Salem, OR.
45. Oregon Department of Forestry, 1997. Forest Practice Administrative Rules. Oregon Department of Forestry, Salem, OR.
46. Park T., Loomis J., Creel M. Confidence intervals for evaluating benefits estimates from dichotomous choice contingent valuation studies. Land Econ. 67:1991;64-73.
47. Reeves G., Benda L., Burnett K., Bisson P., Sedell J. A disturbance-based ecosystem approach to maintaining and restoring freshwater habitats of evolutionary significant units of anadromous salmonids in the Pactfic Northwest. Am. Fish. Soc. Symp. 17:1995;334-349.
48. Reyment R., Joreskog K. Applied Factor Analysis in the Natural Sciences. 1993;Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. 371 pp.
49. Row C. Economies of tract size in timber growing. J. For. 78:1978;576-582.
50. Sample V. Building partnerships for ecosystem management on mixed ownership landscapes. J. For. 92:1994;41-44.
51. Sellar C., Stoll J., Chavas J. Validation of empirical measures of welfare change: a comparison of nonmarket techniques. Land Econ. 61:1985;156-175.
52. Sellar C., Chavas J., Stoll J. Specification of the logit model: the case of valuation of nonmarket goods. J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 13:1986;382-390.
53. Souter R., Bowker J. A note on nonlinearity bias and dichotomous choice CVM: implications for aggregate benefits estimation. Agric. Resour. Econ. Rev. 25:1996;54-59.
54. Strang W. On the optimal forest harvesting decision. Econ. Inquiry. 11:1983;576-583.
55. Swallow S. Economic issues in ecosystem management: an introduction and overview. Agric. Resour. Econ. Rev. 25:1996;83-100.
56. Swallow S., Wear D. Spatial interactions in multiple-use forestry and substitution and wealth effects for the single stand. J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 25:1993;103-120.
57. Swallow S., Parks P., Wear D. Policy-relevant nonconvexities in the production of multiple forest benefits. J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 19:1990;264-280.
58. Swallow S., Weaver T., Opaluch J., Michelman T. Heterogeneous preferences and aggregation in environmental policy analysis: a landfill siting case. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 76:1994;432-443.
59. Swallow S., Talukdar P., Wear D. Spatial and temporal specialization in forest ecosystem management under sole ownership. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 79:1997;311-326.
60. Washington Forest Practices Board, 1993. Washington Forest Practices. Department of Natural Resources, Forest Practices Division, Olympia, WA.