Farm landowners' objectives in Finland: Two approaches for owner classifications

Society and Natural Resources

Volumn 24, Issue 10, 2011, Pages 1042-1062

  Pouta, Eija ^a   Myyrä, Sami ^a   HäNninen, Harri ^a  

^a FINNISH FOREST RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Finland)

Author keywords

Cluster analysis; Criterion validity; Farmland owner; Landowner objectives; Landowner segments; Latent class analysis

Indexed keywords

AGRICULTURAL LAND; AGRICULTURAL POLICY; CLUSTER ANALYSIS; LANDOWNER; LANDOWNERSHIP; POLICY MAKING;

FINLAND;

EID: 80052616129     PISSN: 08941920     EISSN: 15210723     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/08941920.2010.513698     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Aldrich, G., K. Grimsrud, J. Thacher, and M. Kotchen. 2007. Relating environmental attitudes and contingent values: How robust are methods for identifying preference heterogeneity? Environ. Resource Econ. 374:757-775.
2. Arcidiacono, P., and J. Jones. 2003. Finite mixture distributions, sequential likelihood and the EM algorithm. Econometrica 71:933-946.
3. Babbie, E. 2004. The practice of social research, 10th ed. Belmont, CA: Thomson/Wadsworth.
4. Bailey, K. 1994. Methods of social research, 4th ed. New York: Free Press.
5. Bartholomew, D., and M. Knott. 1999. Latent class models and factor analysis. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
6. Boxall, P. C., and W. L. Adamowicz. 2002. Understanding heterogeneous preferences in random utility models: A latent class approach. Environ. Resource Econ. 23:421-446.
7. Boon, T. E., H. Meilby, B. Thorsen, and O. Jellesmark. 2004. An empirically based typology of private forest owners in Denmark: Improving communication between authorities and owners. Scand. J. For. Res. 19:45-55.
8. Cattaneo A., J. Lankoski, and M. Ollikainen. 2007. Green auctions with joint environmental benefits. Discussion paper 19. Helsinki, Finland: University of Helsinki, Department of Economics and Management.
9. Dillman, D. 1978. Mail and telephone surveys: The total design method. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
10. Fraser, E. 2004. Land tenure and agricultural management: Soil conservation on rented and owned fields in southwest British Columbia. Agric. Hum. Values 21:73-79.
11. Hair, J. F., Jr., W. C. Black, B. J. Babin, R. E. Anderson, and R. L. Tatham. 2006. Multivariate data analysis, 6th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
12. Hiltunen, M. 2004. Second housing in Finland-Perspective of mobility. Paper presented at the 13th Nordic Symposium of Tourism and Hospitality, Aalborg, Denmark, 4-7 November.
13. Horne, P. 2006. Forest owners' acceptance of incentive based policy instruments in forest biodiversity conservation-A choice experiment based approach. Silva Fenn. 40(1):169-178.
14. Karppinen, H. 1998a. Values and objectives of non-industrial private forest owners in Finland. Silva Fenn. 32:43-59.
15. Karppinen, H. 1998b. Objectives of non-industrial private forest owners: Differences and future trends in southern and northern Finland. J. For. Econ. 4:147-173.
16. Kendra, A., and R. B. Hull. 2005. Motivations and behaviors of new forest owners in Virginia. For. Sci. 51:142-154.
17. Klemola, E., J. Karttunen, E. Kaila, K. Laaksonen, and A.-M. Kirkkari. 2002. Lohkon koon ja muodon taloudelliset vaikutukset [Economic effects of parcel size and shape]. TTS (Work Efficiency Institute) publication 386. Helsinki, Finland: TTS (Work Efficiency Institute) Publications.
18. Kline, J. D., R. J. Alig, and R. L. Johnson. 2000a. Forest owner incentives to protect riparian habitat. Ecol. Econ. 33:29-43.
19. Kline, J. D., R. J. Alig, and R. L. Johnson. 2000b. Fostering the production of nontimber services among forest owners with heterogeneous objectives. For. Sci. 46:302-311.
20. Koontz, T. M. 2001. Money talks-But to whom? Financial versus non-monetary motivations in land use decisions. Society Nat. Resources 14:51-65.
21. Kurtz, W. B., and B. J. Lewis. 1981. Decision-making framework for nonindustrial private forest owners: An application in the Missouri Ozarks. J. For. 79:285-288.
22. Kuuluvainen, J., H. Karppinen, and V. Ovaskainen. 1996. Landowner objectives and non-industrial private timber supply. For. Sci. 42:300-309.
23. Langpap, C. 2004. Conservation incentives programs for endangered species: An analysis of landowner participation. Land Econ. 80(3):375-388.
24. Lichtenberg, E. 2007. Tenants, landlords and soil conservation. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 89: 294-307.
25. Magidson, J., and J. Vermut. 2002. Latent class model for clustering: A comparison with K-means. Can. J. Market. Res. 20:37-44.
26. Majumdar, I., L. Teeter, and B. Butler. 2008. Characterizing family forest owners: A cluster analysis approach. For. Sci. 54:176-184.
27. Marty T. D., W. B. Kurtz, and J. H. Gramann. 1988. PNIF owner attitudes in the Midwest: A case study in Missouri and Wisconsin. North. J. Applied For. 5:194-197.
28. Maybery, D., L. Crase, and C. Gullifer. 2005. Categorizing farming values as economic, conservation and lifestyle. J. Econ. Psychol. 26:59-72.
29. Meilby, H., and T. E. Boon. 2004. Comparison of forest owner typologies based on latent class analysis and cluster analysis: Scandinavian Forest Economics. In Proceedings of the biennial meeting of the Scandinavian Society of Forest Economics Vantaa, Finland, 12-15 May, ed. H. Pajuoja and H. Karppinen. Scand. For. Econ. 40: 179-188.
30. Milon, W., and D. Scrogin. 2006. Latent preferences and valuation of wetland ecosystem restoration. Ecol. Econ. 56:162-175.
31. Morey, E., J. Thacher, and B. Breffle. 2006. Using angler characteristics and attitudinal data to identify environmental preference classes: A latent class model. Environ. Resource Econ. 34:91-115.
32. Myyrä, S., E. Ketoja, M. Yli-Halla, and K. Pietola. 2005. Farmland owners' land improvements under land tenure insecurity: The case of pH and phosphate in Finland. Land Econ. 81:557-569.
33. Myyrä, S., and E. Pouta. 2010. Farmland owners' land sale preferences: Can they be affected by taxation programs? Land Econ. 86(2):245-262.
34. Myyrä, S., E. Pouta, and H. Hänninen. 2008. Suomalainen pellonomistaja [Finnish farmland owner]. Maaja elintarviketalous 115:182s. http://www.mtt.fi/met/pdf/met115a.pdf (accessed 20 February 2010)
35. Owen, A. L., and J. R. Videras. 2007. Culture and public goods: The case of religion and the voluntary provision of environmental quality. J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 54:162-180.
36. Ovaskainen, V., H. Hänninen, J. Mikkola, and E. Lehtonen. 2006. Cost-sharing and private timber stand improvements: A two-step estimation approach. For. Sci. 52:44-54.
37. Ross-Davis, A. L., and S. R. Broussard. 2007. A typology of family forest owners in north-central Indiana. North. J. Appl. For. 24:282-289.
38. Scarpa, R., and M. Thiene. 2005. Destination choice models for rock climbing in the Northeastern Alps: A latent-class approach based on intensity of preferences. Land Econ. 81:426-444.
39. Selby, A., T. Koskela, and L. Petäjistö. 2007. Evidence of lay and professional forest-based development discourses in three contrasting regions of Finland. For. Policy Econ. 9:633-646.
40. Trochim, W. M. 2006. The research methods knowledge base, 2nd ed. http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb (accessed 20 October 2006).
41. van Herzele, A., and P. van Gossum. 2008. Typology building for owner-specific policies and communications to advance forest conversion in small pine plantations. Landscape Urban Plan. 87:201-209.
42. Wedel, M., and W. Kamakura. 2000. Market segmentation: Conceptual and methodological foundations. Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic.