Consumer preferences and willingness to pay for character-marked cabinets from Alaska birch

Forest Products Journal

Volumn 53, Issue 11-12, 2003, Pages 27-32

  Donovan, Geof ^a   Nicholls, David ^a  

^a USDA FOREST SERVICE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CUSTOMER SATISFACTION; DEFECTS; GRADING; HARDWOODS; LUMBER; SOCIETIES AND INSTITUTIONS;

CABINET DOORS; NATIONAL HARDWOOD LUMBER ASSOCIATION (CO);

WOODWORKING;

BETULA PAPYRIFERA HUMILIS; CONSUMERS; DEFECTS; LUMBER; ORGANIZATIONS; PRICES; WOOD WORKING;

BETULA; BETULA NEOALASKANA; BETULA PAPYRIFERA;

EID: 0346421110     PISSN: 00157473     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. Boyle, K.J., M.P. Welsh, and R.C. Bishop. 1988. Validation of empirical measures of welfare change: Comment. Land Economics 64(1).
2. Buehlmann, U., J.K. Wiedenbeck, and D.E. Kline. 1998. Character-marked furniture: Potential for lumber yield increase in rip-first rough mills. Forest Prod. J. 48(4):43-50.
3. Bumgardner, M.S., R.J. Bush, and C.D. West. 2001a. Knots as an incongruent product feature: A demonstration of the potential for character-marked hardwood furniture. J. of the Inst. of Wood Sci. 15(6):327-336.
4. ____, ____, and ____. 2001b. Product development in large furniture companies: A descriptive model with implications for character-marked products. Wood and Fiber Sci. 33(2):302-313.
5. Cooper, J.C. 1993. Optimal bid selection for dichotomous choice contingent valuation surveys. J. of Environmental Economics and Management (24):25-40
6. Donovan, G.H. and D. Nicholls. 2003. Estimating consumer willingness to pay a price premium for Alaskan secondary wood products. Gen. Tech. Note. PNW-RP-553. USDA Forest Serv., Pacific Northwest Res. Sta., Portland, OR.
7. Gronroos, J.C.M. and J.L. Bowyer. 1999. Assessment of the market potential for environmentally certified wood products in new homes in Minneapolis/St. Paul and Chicago. Forest Prod. J. 49(6):38-34.
8. Hamemann, M. 1984. Welfare evaluations in contingent valuation experiments with discrete responses. Am. J. of Agricultural Econ. 67(3):332-341.
9. ____. 1989. Welfare evaluations in contingent valuation experiments with discrete response data: Reply. Am. J. of Agricultural Econ. 71(4):1057-1061.
10. Jahn, L., M. Bumgardner, C. Forbes, and C. West. 2001. Consumer perceptions of character marks on cabinet doors. Paper AG-617. North Carolina State Univ. Cooperative Extension, Raleigh, NC.
11. Judez, L., R. de Andres, C. Perez Hugalde, E. Urzainqui, and M. Ibanez. 2000. Influence of bid and subsample vectors on the welfare measure estimate in dichotomous choice contingent valuation: Evidence from a case study. J. of Environmental Management 60:253-265.
12. National Hardwood Lumber Association (NHLA). 1998. Rules for the measurement and inspection of hardwood & cypress. NHLA, Memphis, TN.
13. Ozanne, L.K. and R.P. Vlosky. 1997. Willingness to pay for environmentally certified wood products: A consumer perspective. Forest Prod. J. 47(6):39-48.
14. Park, T., J.B. Loomis, and M. Creel. 1991. Confidence intervals for evaluating benefits estimates from dichotomous choice contingent valuation studies. Land Economics 67(1):64-73.
15. Parrent, D. 2000. Alaska Wood Products Manufacturers Directory. Juneau Economic Development Council, Juneau, AK.
16. Wheeler, E.E. 2001. Alaska paper birch. Alaska Div. of Community and Business Development, Dept. of Community and Economic Development. (internet reference) www.dced.state.ak.us/econdev/tree5e.htm. August 10, 2001.
17. Wiedenbeck, J. and U. Buehlmann. 1995. Character-marked furniture: The yield picture. In: Proc. Twenty-third Annual Hardwood Symposium. Advances in hardwood utilization: Following profitability from the woods through rough dimension. Hardwood Research Council, Memphis, TN.