What does it take to get family forest owners to enroll in a forest stewardship-type program?

Forest Policy and Economics

Volumn 10, Issue 7-8, 2008, Pages 507-514

  Kilgore, Michael A ^a   Snyder, Stephanie A ^b   Schertz, Joseph ^a   Taff, Steven J ^c  

^a Agricultural and Natural Resource Sciences   (United States)

^b USDA FOREST SERVICE   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA   (United States)

Author keywords

Contingent valuation; Family forest; Financial incentives; Forest stewardship; Willingness to accept

Indexed keywords

CONTINGENT VALUATION; FAMILY FOREST; FINANCIAL INCENTIVES; FOREST LANDS; FOREST MANAGEMENT PLANNING; FOREST OWNERS; FOREST STEWARDSHIP; MAIL SURVEYS; MINNESOTA; PROGRAM PARTICIPATION; SUSTAINABLE FORESTS; WILLINGNESS TO ACCEPT;

ESTIMATION; PERSONNEL; SURVEYS;

FORESTRY;

ESTIMATION; FOREST MANAGEMENT; FORESTRY; MARKETING; PERSONNEL; PROBABILITY; SURVEYS;

EID: 50849089284     PISSN: 13899341     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2008.05.003     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Arrow K., Solow R., Portney P., Leamer E., Radner R., and Schuman H. Report of the NOAA Panel on Contingent Valuation. Federal Register vol. 58 (1993), U.S. Department of Commerce 4202-4614
2. Baughman M.J. Natural resource characteristics preferred by woodland buyers in northern Minnesota. Northern Journal of Applied Forestry 5 (1988) 69-70
3. Bishop R.C., and Heberlein T.A. Measuring values of extra-market goods: are indirect measures biased?. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 61 (1979) 926-930
4. Bohara A.K., Kerkvliet J., and Berrens R.P. Addressing negative willingness to pay in dichotomous choice contingent valuation. Environmental and Resource Economics 20 3 (2001) 173-195
5. Cameron T.A. A new paradigm for valuing non-market goods using referendum data: maximum likelihood estimation by censored logistic regression. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 15 (1988) 355-379
6. Carson R.T., and Groves T. Incentive and informational properties of preference questions. Environmental and Resource Economics 37 (2007) 181-210
7. Carson R.T., Flores N.E., and Meade N.F. Contingent valuation: controversies and evidence. Environmental and Resource Economics 19 (2001) 173-210
8. Carson R.T., Hanemann W.M., Kopp R.J., Krosnick J.A., Mitchell R.C., Presser S., Ruud P.A., Smith V.K., Conaway M., and Martin K. Referendum design and contingent valuation: the NOAA panel's no-vote recommendation. Review of Economics and Statistics 80 3 (1998) 484-487
9. Caudill S.B., and Groothuis P.A. Modeling hidden alternatives in random utility models: an application to "don't know" responses in contingent valuation. Land Economics 81 3 (2005) 445-454
10. Cervantes, J.C. 2003. Characteristics of Minnesota's nonindustrial private forest landowners. Ph.D. Thesis. St. Paul, MN: Department of Forest Resources, University of Minnesota.
11. Champ P.A., Alberini A., and Correas I. Using contingent valuation to value a noxious weeds control program: the effects of including an unsure response category. Ecological Economics 55 (2005) 47-60
12. Cramer J.S., and Rider G. Pooling states in the multinomial logit model. Journal of Econometrics 47 (1991) 267-272
13. Dillman D.E. Mail and Internet Surveys: the Tailored Design Method. 2d ed. (2000), John Wiley and Sons, New York, NY p. 464
14. Ellefson P.V., Kilgore M.A., and Granskog J.E. State government regulation of forestry practices applied to nonfederal forests: extent and intensity of agency involvement. Journal of Forestry 104 8 (2006) 401-406
15. Forest Stewardship Council. FSC Principles & Criteria of Forest Stewardship. 2003. Forest Stewardship Council. Accessed March 2, 2007. http://www.fsc.org/.
16. Greene J., Daniels S., Jacobson M., Kilgore M., and Straka T. Existing and potential incentives for practicing sustainable forestry on non-industrial private forest lands. Final Report to National Commission on Science for Sustainable Forestry. NSCCF RP: C2 (2005) p. 31
17. Haener M.K., and Adamowicz W. Analysis of don't know responses to the referendum contingent valuation questions. Agricultural and Resource Economics Review 27 2 (1998) 218-230
18. Hanemann W.M. Welfare evaluations in contingent valuation experiments with discrete responses. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 66 (1984) 332-341
19. Kilgore M.A. Minnesota's Sustainable Forest Incentive Act: a landowner's guide. University of Minnesota, Department of Forest Resources. Natural Resource Reports 1 1 (2002) 1-7
20. Kilgore M.A., and MacKay D.G. Trends in Minnesota's forest land real estate market: implications for forest management. Northern Journal of Applied Forestry 24 1 (2007) 37-42
21. Kilgore M., Leahy J., Hibbard C., and Donnay J. Assessing family forest land certification opportunities: a Minnesota case study. Journal of Forestry 105 1 (2007) 27-33
22. Kline J.D., Alig R.J., and Johnson R.L. Forest owner incentives to protect riparian habitat. Ecological Economics 33 (2000) 29-43
23. Kniivilä M. Users and non-users of conservation areas: are there differences in WTP, motives and the validity of responses in CVM surveys?. Ecological Economics 59 (2006) 530-539
24. Leopold A. A Sand County Almanac (1949), Oxford University Press, New York
25. Miles P.D., Chen C.M., and Leatherberry E.C. Minnesota forest statistics, 1990, revised. Resource Bulletin NC-158 (1995), USDA-Forest Service, North Central Forest Experiment Station, St. Paul, MN
26. Minnesota Statutes. Chapter 290C. Sustainable Forest Incentives Act. Office of the Revisor of Statutes. St. Paul, MN (2006)
27. Mortimer M.J., Stull L., and Prisley S. Forest-related ordinances in Virginia: a case study in regulatory de-evolution. Southern Journal of Applied Forestry 30 4 (2006) 196-205
28. Peng J.C., Lee K.L., and Ingersoll G.M. An introduction to logistic regression analysis and reporting. Journal of Educational Research 96 1 (2002) 3-14
29. Pingrey P. Forestry Assistance in Wisconsin (2005), Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Madison, WI p. 12
30. Rathke, D.M. 1993. An evaluation of Minnesota's timberland property tax laws. Masters Thesis. St. Paul, MN: University of Minnesota. p. 304.
31. Richardson R.B., and Loomis J.B. Change climate and recreation benefits in an alpine national park. Journal of Leisure Research 37 3 (2005) 307-320
32. Snyder S.A., Kilgore M.A., Hudson R., and Donnay J. Determinants of forest land prices in northern Minnesota: a hedonic pricing approach. Forest Science 53 1 (2007) 25-36
33. Sullivan J., Amacher G.S., and Chapman S. Forest banking and forest landowners forgoing management rights for guaranteed financial returns. Forest Policy and Economics 7 (2005) 381-392
34. USDA-Forest Service. National Report on Sustainable Forests 2003. FS-766 (2004) United States Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C. p. 139
35. Wang H. Treatment of 'don't know' responses in contingent valuation surveys: a random valuation model. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 32 2 (1997) 219-232
36. Worrell R., and Appleby M.C. Stewardship of natural resources: definition, ethical and practical aspects. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 12 3 (2000) 263-277