Identifying appropriate communication means for reaching nonindustrial private forest landowners

Journal of Forestry

Volumn 111, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 34-41

  Kuipers, Brett T ^a   Shivan, G C ^a   Potter Witter, Karen ^a  

^a MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Communication strategy; K means clustering; Nonindustrial private forest landowners

Indexed keywords

COMMUNICATION MATERIALS; COMMUNICATION STRATEGY; K-MEANS CLUSTERING; MARKET SEGMENTATION; MICHIGAN; NIPF LANDOWNERS; NIPF OWNER; NON-INDUSTRIAL PRIVATE FOREST LANDOWNERS; NONINDUSTRIAL PRIVATE FORESTLANDS; NONINDUSTRIAL PRIVATE FORESTS; TARGET AUDIENCE;

COMMUNICATION;

FORESTRY;

CLUSTER ANALYSIS; FOREST DYNAMICS; FOREST MANAGEMENT; FORESTRY PRODUCTION; LANDOWNER; STRATEGIC APPROACH;

COMMUNICATION; FORESTS; PRIVATE OWNERSHIP;

MICHIGAN; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84872778841     PISSN: 00221201     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.5849/jof.12-006     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. armstrong, J.S., and T.S. Overton. 1977. Estimating nonresponse bias in mail surveys. J. Mark. Res. 14:396-402.
2. Bardon, R., D. Hazel, and K. Miller. 2007. Preferred information delivery methods of North Carolina forest landowners. J. Ext. 45.5.Available online at www.joe.org/joe/2007oc-tober/a3.php; last accessed Nov. 30, 2011.
3. Best, C. 2002. America's private forests: challenges for conservation.J. For. 100(3):14-17.
4. Butler, B.J., M. Tyrrell, G. Feinberg, S. Van-Manen, L. Wiseman, and S. Wallinger. 2007. Understanding and reaching family forest owners: lessons from social marketing research.J. For. 105(7):348-358.
5. Chiu, T., D. Fang, J. Chen, Y. Wang, and C. Jeris. 2001. A robust and scalable clustering algorithm for mixed type attributes in large database environment. P. 263-268 in Proc. of Int. Conf. on knowledge discovery and data mining. San Francisco, CA. Available online at dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=502549; last accessed Dec. 15, 2011.
6. Conway, M.C., G.S. Amacher., J. Sullivan, and D. Wear. 2003. Decisions nonindustrial forest landowners make: An empirical examination. J. For. Eco. 9(3):181-203.
7. Davis, M., and M. Fly. 2010. Do you hear what I hear: Better understanding how forest management is conceptualized and practiced by private forest landowners.J. For. 108(7): 321-328.
8. Dillman, DA. 2000. Mail and Internet surveys: The tailored design method. 2nd ed., Wiley, New York. 464 p.
9. English, B.C., CD. Bell., G.R. Wells, and R.K. Roberts. 1997. Stewardship incentives in forestry: Participation factors in Tennessee. South. J. Appl. For. 21(1):5-10.
10. Finley, A., and D. Kittredge. 2006. Thoreau, muir, and jane doe: Different types of private forest owners need different kinds of forest management. North. J. Appl. For. 23(1):27-34.
11. Hair, J.F., B. Black, B. Babin, R.E. Anderson, and R.L. Tatham. 2006. Multivariate data analysis, 6th ed., Prentice Hall, Inc., New Jersey. 899 p.
12. Hair, J.F., R.E. Anderson., R.L. Tatham, and W.C Black. 1998. Multivariate data analysis with readings, 5th ed., Prentice Hall, Inc., New Jersey. 730 p.
13. Joshi, O., and S.R. Mehmood. 2011. Segmenting southern nonindustrial private forest landowners on the basis of their management objectives and motivations for wood-based bioenergy. South. J. Appl. For. 35(2):87-92.
14. Kennedy, N.S. 2001. Reservation prices and willingness to accept price offers for nonindustrial forest landowners in western Virginia. M.Sc. thesis, Virginia Polytechnic Institute, BlacksburgVA. 73 p.
15. Kittredge, D.B. 2004. Extension/outreach implications for America's family forest owners. J. For. 102(7):15-18.
16. Macqueen, J.B. 1967. Some methods for classification and analysis of multivariate observations. P. 281-287 in Proc. of the 5th Berkeley Symposium on mathematical statistics and probability. University of California, Berkeley, CA.
17. Majumdar, I., L. Teeter, and B. Butler. 2008. Characterizing family forest owners: A cluster analysis approach. For. Sci. 54(2):176-185.
18. Mueller, L. 2011. Nonindustrial private forest owners in Michigan: Examination at a finer scale. M.Sc. thesis, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI. 70 p.
19. Mueller, L.S., Shivan, G.C., and K. PotterWitter. 2012. Michigan woody biomass supply snapshot. Available online at www.michiganforestbiofuels.org/sites/default/files/michiganwoody-biomass-supply-snapshot.pdf; last accessed July 11, 2012.
20. Petersen, C. 2006. Report to NEFA on landowner education initiatives: how to effectively deliver forest stewardship information and knowledge to private forest landowners in the NEFA region. Available online at www.nefainfo.org/publications/Report%20to%20NEFA%20on%20Landowner%20Education%20Initiatives%20FINAL.pdf; last accessed Dec. 15, 2011.
21. Peterson, G., and K. Potter-Witter. 2006. Stalking the elusive family forest owner in Michigan. Proceedings of the Society of American Foresters National Convention, Society of American Foresters, Bethesda, MD.
22. Radhakrishna, R., L. Nelson, R. Franklin, and G. Kessler. 2003. Information sources and extension delivery methods used by private longleaf pine landowners. J. Ext. 41.4. Available online at www.joe.org/joe/2003august/rb3.shtml; last accessed Dec. 14, 2011.
23. Salmon, O., M. Brunson, and M. Kuhns. 2006. Benefit-based audience segmentation: A tool for identifying nonindustrial private forest (NIPF) owner education needs. J. For. 104(8): 419-426.
24. Smith, W.B., P.D. Miles, C.H. Perry, and S.A. Pugh. 2009. Forest resources of the United States, 2007. USDA For. Serv., Gen. Tech. Rep. No. WO-78. 336 p.
25. Surendra, G.C., S. Mehmood, and J. Schelhas. 2009. Segmenting landowners based on their information-seeking behavior: A look at landowner education on the red oak borer. J. For. 107(6):313-319.