IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/foreco/v18y2012i1p3-13.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessing non-industrial private forest owners’ attitudes to risk: Do owner and property characteristics matter?

Author

Listed:
  • Andersson, Mats

Abstract

This study relates owner and property characteristics to non-industrial private forest (NIPF) owners’ attitudes to financial risk-taking in forestry decisions. Using a two-period mean-variance setting, the harvesting decisions of NIPF owners are examined with the aim of measuring their willingness to take risks. Since willingness to pay for reduction of risk is empirically unobservable, I rely on an index of NIPF owners’ attitudes to risk from a hypothetical survey question involving financial risk. According to the index, respondents (owners) are categorized as risk-averse, risk-neutral or risk-seeking. I apply a probit analysis to test how owner and property characteristics influence the NIPF owners’ attitudes to risk. The results show that characteristics influence the formation of risk attitudes. More explicitly, a longer period of ownership increases the probability that the owner is risk-averse, while increased time in the forest conducting silvicultural work increases the likelihood that an owner is risk-seeking. The results also show that female NIPF owners are more risk-seeking than male owners. The study fills a knowledge gap in the literature, relating owner and property characteristics to management decisions. Inclusion of risk attitudes and the judgement of risks into studies of NIPF owners’ management can help to understand why NIPF owners’ harvesting may deviate from net present value maximisation.

Suggested Citation

  • Andersson, Mats, 2012. "Assessing non-industrial private forest owners’ attitudes to risk: Do owner and property characteristics matter?," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 3-13.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:foreco:v:18:y:2012:i:1:p:3-13
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jfe.2011.05.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1104689911000432
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jfe.2011.05.001?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Joshi, Sudiksha & Arano, Kathryn G., 2009. "Determinants of private forest management decisions: A study on West Virginia NIPF landowners," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 11(2), pages 132-139, March.
    2. Helga Fehr-Duda & Manuele de Gennaro & Renate Schubert, 2004. "Gender, financial risk, and probability weights," CER-ETH Economics working paper series 04/31, CER-ETH - Center of Economic Research (CER-ETH) at ETH Zurich.
    3. Beach, Robert H. & Pattanayak, Subhrendu K. & Yang, Jui-Chen & Murray, Brian C. & Abt, Robert C., 2005. "Econometric studies of non-industrial private forest management: a review and synthesis," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 7(3), pages 261-281, March.
    4. Gregory, S. Amacher & Christine Conway, M. & Sullivan, Jay & Gregory, S. Amacher, 2003. "Econometric analyses of nonindustrial forest landowners: Is there anything left to study?," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(2), pages 137-164.
    5. Dennis, Donald F., 1990. "A probit analysis of the harvest decision using pooled time-series and cross-sectional data," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 176-187, March.
    6. Jianakoplos, Nancy Ammon & Bernasek, Alexandra, 1998. "Are Women More Risk Averse?," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 36(4), pages 620-630, October.
    7. Charles A. Holt & Susan K. Laury, 2002. "Risk Aversion and Incentive Effects," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(5), pages 1644-1655, December.
    8. Eckel, Catherine C. & Grossman, Philip J., 2008. "Men, Women and Risk Aversion: Experimental Evidence," Handbook of Experimental Economics Results, in: Charles R. Plott & Vernon L. Smith (ed.), Handbook of Experimental Economics Results, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 113, pages 1061-1073, Elsevier.
    9. Conway, M.Christine & Amacher, Gregory S. & Sullivan, Jay & Wear, David, 2003. "Decisions nonindustrial forest landowners make: an empirical examination," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(3), pages 181-203.
    10. Joost M.E. Pennings & Ale Smidts, 2000. "Assessing the Construct Validity of Risk Attitude," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(10), pages 1337-1348, October.
    11. Andersson, Mats & Gong, Peichen, 2010. "Risk preferences, risk perceptions and timber harvest decisions -- An empirical study of nonindustrial private forest owners in northern Sweden," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(5), pages 330-339, June.
    12. Milton Friedman & L. J. Savage, 1948. "The Utility Analysis of Choices Involving Risk," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 56(4), pages 279-279.
    13. Jacobsen, Jette Bredahl & Helles, Finn, 2006. "Adaptive and nonadaptive harvesting in uneven-aged beech forest with stochastic prices," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(3), pages 223-238, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jun-Ya Liu & Qun-Ji Li & Gary Sigley & Hua Quan, 2021. "How Will the Cost Change after Transformation in Public Nature-Based Attractions? A Framework and Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-14, June.
    2. Josset, Clement & Shanafelt, David W. & Abildtrup, Jens & Stenger, Anne, 2023. "Probabilistic typology of private forest owners: A tool to target the development of new market for ecosystem services," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    3. Couture, Stéphane & Cros, Marie-Josée & Sabbadin, Régis, 2016. "Risk aversion and optimal management of an uneven-aged forest under risk of windthrow: A Markov decision process approach," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 94-114.
    4. Cipollaro, Maria & Sacchelli, Sandro, 2018. "Demand and potential subsidy level for forest insurance market in Demand and potential subsidy level for forest insurance market in Italy," 2018 Seventh AIEAA Conference, June 14-15, Conegliano, Italy 275647, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA).
    5. Degnet, Mohammed B. & Hansson, Helena & Hoogstra-Klein, Marjanke A. & Roos, Anders, 2022. "The role of personal values and personality traits in environmental concern of non-industrial private forest owners in Sweden," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 141(C).
    6. Sauter, Philipp A. & Mußhoff, Oliver & Möhring, Bernhard & Wilhelm, Stefan, 2016. "Faustmann vs. real options theory – An experimental investigation of foresters’ harvesting decisions," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 1-20.
    7. Stéphane S. Couture & Marie-Josée Cros & Régis Sabbadin, 2014. "Risk preferences and optimal management of uneven-aged forests in the presence of climate change: a Markov decision process approach," Post-Print hal-02741407, HAL.
    8. Kilham, Philipp & Hartebrodt, Christoph & Schraml, Ulrich, 2019. "A conceptual model for private forest owners' harvest decisions: A qualitative study in southwest Germany," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 1-1.
    9. Sylvain Caurla & Antonello Lobianco, 2020. "Estimating climate service value in forestry : The case of climate information on drought for maritime pine in Southwestern France," Post-Print hal-03639335, HAL.
    10. Howley, Peter & Buckley, Cathal & O Donoghue, Cathal & Ryan, Mary, 2015. "Explaining the economic ‘irrationality’ of farmers' land use behaviour: The role of productivist attitudes and non-pecuniary benefits," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 186-193.
    11. Sylvain Caurla & Antonello Lobianco, 2020. "Estimating climate service value in forestry : The case of climate information on drought for maritime pine in Southwestern France," Post-Print hal-02617889, HAL.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Petucco, Claudio & Abildtrup, Jens & Stenger, Anne, 2015. "Influences of nonindustrial private forest landowners’ management priorities on the timber harvest decision—A case study in France," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(3), pages 152-166.
    2. Eric Nazindigouba KERE & Jérôme FONCEL & Marielle BRUNETTE, 2014. "Attitude towards Risk and Production Decision: An Empirical analysis on French private forest owners," Working Papers 201410, CERDI.
    3. Kilham, Philipp & Hartebrodt, Christoph & Schraml, Ulrich, 2019. "A conceptual model for private forest owners' harvest decisions: A qualitative study in southwest Germany," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 1-1.
    4. Watson, Adam C. & Sullivan, Jay & Amacher, Gregory S. & Asaro, Christopher, 2013. "Cost sharing for pre-commercial thinning in southern pine plantations: Willingness to participate in Virginia's pine bark beetle prevention program," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 65-72.
    5. Marielle Brunette & Jérôme Foncel & Nazindigouba Eric Kéré, 2014. "Attitude towards Risk and Production Decision: An Empirical analysis on French private forest owners," Working Papers halshs-00981350, HAL.
    6. Fellner, Gerlinde & Maciejovsky, Boris, 2007. "Risk attitude and market behavior: Evidence from experimental asset markets," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 338-350, June.
    7. Gutierrez-Castillo, Ana & Penn, Jerrod & Tanger, Shaun & Blazier, Michael A., 2022. "Conservation easement landowners' willingness to accept for forest thinning and the impact of information," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    8. Sauter, Philipp A. & Mußhoff, Oliver & Möhring, Bernhard & Wilhelm, Stefan, 2016. "Faustmann vs. real options theory – An experimental investigation of foresters’ harvesting decisions," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 1-20.
    9. Musshoff, Oliver & Maart-Noelck, Syster Christin, 2014. "An experimental analysis of the behavior of forestry decision-makers — The example of timing in sales decisions," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 31-39.
    10. Mozgeris, Gintautas & Brukas, Vilis & Stanislovaitis, Andrius & Kavaliauskas, Marius & Palicinas, Michailas, 2017. "Owner mapping for forest scenario modelling — A Lithuanian case study," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(P2), pages 235-244.
    11. Fischer, A. Paige, 2012. "Identifying policy target groups with qualitative and quantitative methods: The case of wildfire risk on nonindustrial private forest lands," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 62-71.
    12. G.C., Shivan & Mehmood, Sayeed R., 2012. "Determinants of nonindustrial private forest landowner willingness to accept price offers for woody biomass," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 47-55.
    13. Gutierrez, Ana L. & Penn, Jerrod & Tanger, Shaun & Blazier, Michael, 2020. "Conservation Easement Landowners’ WTA Compensation to Thin their Forest," 2020 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, Kansas City, Missouri 304551, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    14. Ficko, Andrej & Boncina, Andrej, 2013. "Probabilistic typology of management decision making in private forest properties," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(C), pages 34-43.
    15. Lex Borghans & Angela Lee Duckworth & James J. Heckman & Bas ter Weel, 2008. "The Economics and Psychology of Personality Traits," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 43(4).
    16. Alserda, Gosse A.G. & Dellaert, Benedict G.C. & Swinkels, Laurens & van der Lecq, Fieke S.G., 2019. "Individual pension risk preference elicitation and collective asset allocation with heterogeneity," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 206-225.
    17. Stephen Cheung & Stefan Palan, 2012. "Two heads are less bubbly than one: team decision-making in an experimental asset market," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 15(3), pages 373-397, September.
    18. Caliendo, Marco & Cobb-Clark, Deborah A. & Obst, Cosima & Uhlendorff, Arne, 2023. "Risk preferences and training investments," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 205(C), pages 668-686.
    19. Rick Harbaugh, 2005. "Prospect Theory or Skill Signaling?," Working Papers 2005-06, Indiana University, Kelley School of Business, Department of Business Economics and Public Policy.
    20. Georgalos, Konstantinos & Paya, Ivan & Peel, David A., 2021. "On the contribution of the Markowitz model of utility to explain risky choice in experimental research," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 182(C), pages 527-543.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Risk; Attitudes; NIPF; Characteristics; Probit;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q23 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Forestry
    • D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:foreco:v:18:y:2012:i:1:p:3-13. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/701775/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.