Serving members and reaching others: The performance and social networks of a landowner cooperative

Forest Policy and Economics

Volumn 11, Issue 8, 2009, Pages 593-599

  Rickenbach, Mark ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN MADISON   (United States)

Author keywords

Cooperatives; Egocentric networks; Importance performance analysis; Landowner associations; Peer to peer learning; Private landowners

Indexed keywords

COOPERATIVES; EGOCENTRIC NETWORKS; IMPORTANCE-PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS; LANDOWNER ASSOCIATIONS; PEER-TO-PEER LEARNING; PRIVATE LANDOWNERS;

EDUCATION; ELECTRIC NETWORK ANALYSIS; PLANNING;

FORESTRY;

EDUCATION; ELECTRIC CIRCUITS; FORESTS; PLANNING; SUSTAINABLE FOREST MANAGEMENT; USA;

EID: 70349832434     PISSN: 13899341     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2009.08.006     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Bacon D.R. A comparison of approaches to Importance-Performance Analysis. International Journal of Market Research 45 (2003) 55-71
2. Barrera D. The impact of negotiated exchange on trust and trustworthiness. Social Networks 29 (2007) 508-526
3. Blinn C.R., Jakes P.J., and Sakai M. Forest landowner cooperatives in the United States: a local focus for engaging landowners. Journal of Forestry 105 (2007) 245-251
4. Boon T.E., Meilby H., and Jellesmark Thorsen B. An empirically based typoilogy of private forest owners in Denmark: improving communication between authorities and owners. Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research 19 (2004) 1-11
5. Butler B.J. Family forest owners of the United States, 2006. USDA Forest Service Northern Research Station General Technical Report NRS-27, Newtown Square, PA (2008)
6. Catanzaro P. What is peer-to-peer learning?. Woodland Owner Networks Blog entry dated 25 June 2008 (2008). http://woodlandownernetworks.wordpress.com/2008/06/25/overview/ http://woodlandownernetworks.wordpress.com/2008/06/25/overview/
7. Crona B., and Bodin O. What you know is who you know? Communication patterns among resource users as a prerequisite for co-management. Ecology and Society 11 2 (2006) 7. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss2/art7/ [online] URL: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss2/art7/
8. Dillman D.A., Smyth J., and Christian L.M. Internet, Mail and Mixed Mode Surveys: the Tailored Design Method (2008), John Wiley Co., Hoboken, NJ
9. Gass R., Rickenbach M., Schulte L., and Zeuli K. Cross-boundary coordination on forested landscapes: investigating alternatives for implementation. Environmental Management 43 (2009) 107-117
10. Granovetter M.S. The strength of weak ties. The American Journal of Sociology 78 (1973) 1360-1380
11. Hahn T., Olsson P., Folke C., and Johansson K. Trust-building, knowledge generation and organizational innovations: the role of a bridging organization for adaptive comanagement of a wetland landscape around Kristianstad, Sweden. Human Ecology 34 (2006) 573-592
12. Hujala T., and Tikkanen J. Boosters of and barriers to smooth communication in family forest owners' decision making. Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research 23 (2008) 466-477
13. Hujala T., Pykäläinen J., and Tikkanen J. Decision making among Finnish non-industrial private forest owners: the role of professional opinion and desire to learn. Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research 22 (2007) 454-463
14. Hull R.B., and Ashton S. Forest cooperatives revisited. Journal of Forestry 106 (2008) 100-105
15. Forestry cooperatives: what today's resource professionals need to know. In: Jakes P. (Ed). Proceedings of a satellite conference, 18 November 2003. USDA Forest Service Northern Research Station General Technical Report NC-266, St. Paul, MN (2006)
16. Kendra A., and Hull R.B. Motivations and behaviors of new forest owners in Virginia. Forest Science 51 (2005) 142-154
17. Kittredge D.B. Private forestland owners in Sweden: large-scale cooperation in action. Journal of Forestry 101 (2003) 41-46
18. Lawler E.J., Thye S.R., and Yoon J. Social exchange and micro social order. American Sociological Review 73 (2008) 519-542
19. Marsden P.V. Recent developments in network measurement. In: Carrington P.J., Scott J., and Wasserman S. (Eds). Models and Methods in Social Network Analysis (2005), Cambridge University Press, New York 8-30
20. Martilla J.A., and James J.C. Importance-performance analysis. Journal of Marketing 41 (1977) 77-79
21. McPherson M., Smith-Lovin L., and Cook J.M. Birds of a feather: homophily in social networks. Annual Review of Sociology 27 (2001) 415-444
22. National Research Council. Forested Landscapes in Perspective (1998), National Academy Press, Washington, DC
23. Newman L., and Dale A. Network structure, diversity, and proactive resilience building: a response to Tompkins and Adger. Ecology and Society 10 1 (2005) r2. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol10/iss1/resp2/ [online]. Available from http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol10/iss1/resp2/
24. Overdevest C., and Rickenbach M.G. Forest certification and institutional governance: an empirical study of forest stewardship council certificate holders in the United States. Forest Policy and Economics 9 (2006) 93-102
25. Patton M.Q. Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods (2002), Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA
26. Portes A. Social capital: its origins and applications in modern sociology. Annual Review of Sociology 24 (1998) 1-24
27. Prell C., Hubacek K., and Reed M. Stakeholder analysis and social network analysis in natural resource management. Society & Natural Resources 22 (2009) 501-518
28. Rickenbach M., Zeuli K., and Sturgess-Cleek E. Despite failure: the emergence of "new" forest owners in private forest policy in Wisconsin, USA. Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research 20 (2005) 503-513
29. Rickenbach M.G., Guries R.P., and Schmoldt D.L. Membership matters: comparing members and non-members of NIPF owner organizations in southwest Wisconsin, USA. Forest Policy and Economics 8 (2006) 93-103
30. Scott J. Social Network Analysis: a Handbook. Second ed. (2000), Sage Publications, London
31. Washburn, M.P. 1998. Forest owner associations in the United States: Linking forest owners to public policy. Dissertation. The Pennsylvania State University School of Forest Resources, University Park, PA.
32. Wasserman S., and Faust K. Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications (1994), Cambridge University Press, New York
33. Wolf S.A., and Hufnagl-Eichiner S. External resources and development of forest landowner collaboratives. Society & Natural Resources 20 (2007) 675-688
34. Zeuli K.A., and Cropp R. Cooperatives: Principles and Practices in the 21st Century (2004), University of Wisconsin-Extension Cooperative Extension Service A1457, Madison, WI