The influence of urbanization on timberland use by forest type in the Southern United States

Forest Policy and Economics

Volumn 7, Issue 5, 2005, Pages 721-731

  Zhang, Daowei ^a   Nagubadi, Rao V ^a  

^a AUBURN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Housing value; Metropolitan statistical area; Modified multinomial logit; Multiplicative heteroskedastic regression; Road density; Timberland; Urbanization

Indexed keywords

ECONOMIC GROWTH; ESTIMATION MODELS; LAND QUALITY; TIMBERLANDS;

FORESTRY; HARDWOODS; PROJECTION SYSTEMS; SOFTWOODS;

TIMBER;

FORESTRY; HARDWOODS; PROJECTION; SOFTWOODS;

EID: 23144446606     PISSN: 13899341     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2005.03.002     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (20)

1. S. Ahn, A.J. Plantinga, and R.J. Alig Determinants and projections of land use in the South Central United States Southern Journal of Applied Forestry 26 2002 78 84
2. R.J. Alig Econometric analysis of factors influencing forest acreage trends in the Southeast Forest Science 32 1986 119 134
3. Alig, R.J., Plantinga, A.J., Ahn, S., Kline, J.D., 2003. Land use changes involving forestry in the United States: 1952 to 1997, with projections to 2050. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-587. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 92 pp.
4. T. Amemiya, and F. Nold A modified logit model Review of Economics and Statistics 55 1975 255 257
5. Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA), 2004. Regional Economic Information System (REIS). http://www.bea.gov/bea/regional/reis. Accessed in April.
6. W.H. Greene Econometric Analysis 1993 Macmillan New York, NY 791 pp.
7. I.W. Hardie, and P.J. Parks Land use in a region with heterogeneous land quality: an application of an area base model American Journal of Agricultural Economics 73 1997 300 310
8. I.W. Hardie, P.J. Parks, P. Gottlieb, and D.N. Wear Responsiveness of rural and urban land uses to land rent determinants in the U.S. South Land Economics 78 2000 659 673
9. A.C. Harvey Estimating regression models with multiplicative heteroskedasticity Econometrica 44 1976 461 465
10. A.A. Klingebiel, and P.H. Montgomery Land-capability Classification U.S.D.A. Agricultural Handbook No. 210 1961 Washington, D.C
11. Lubowski, R.N., Plantinga, A.J., Stavins, R.N., 2003. Determinants of land_use change in the United States 1982-97. Discussion Paper 03-47. Washington, D.C.: Resources for the Future.
12. Mauldin, T.E., Plantinga, A.J., Alig, R.J., 1999. Land use in the Lake States Region: An analysis of past trends and projections of future changes. Res. Pap. PNW-RP-519. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 24 pp.
13. D.J. Miller, and A.J. Plantinga Modeling land use decisions with aggregate data American Journal of Agricultural Economics 81 1999 180 194
14. R.V. Nagubadi, and D. Zhang Determinants of timberland use by ownership and forest type in Alabama and Georgia Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics 37 1 2005 173 186
15. R.W. Parks On the estimation of multinomial logit models from relative frequency data Journal of Economics 13 1980 293 303
16. Nelson, G., Harris, V., Stone, S., De Pinto, A., 2001. Land use and road improvements: A spatial econometric analysis. Staff Paper AE-4741, Department of Agricultural and Consumer Economics, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, IL.
17. Timber-Mart South (TMS) Timber Mart-south Quarterly Report. Norris foundation, Daniel B. Warnell School of Forest Resources 1992 and 1997 University of Georgia Athens, GA
18. D.N. Wear Land use D.N. Wear J.G. Greis Southern Forest Resource Assessment. Gen. Tech. Rep. SRS-53 2002 U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station Ashville, NC
19. Wear, D.N., Greis, J.G., (Eds.), 2002. Southern Forest Resource Assessment. Gen. Tech. Rep. SRS-53. Ashville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station.
20. J. Wu, and K. Segerson The impact of policies and land characteristics on potential ground water pollution in Wisconsin American Journal of Agricultural Economics 77 1995 1033 1047