IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v11y2009i4p230-236.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Owner-specific factors associated with conversion activity in secondary pine plantations

Author

Listed:
  • Van Herzele, Ann
  • Van Gossum, Peter

Abstract

The conversion of secondary pine plantations into mixed broadleaf stands is considered to be an important mechanism in the process of sustainable forest management. The silvicultural process of forest conversion in ageing pine plantations is associated with active management aimed at inducing, steering or accelerating stand development. The aim of the present study was to investigate owner-specific factors - socio-demographic and forest-related characteristics, and motivation of ownership - influencing NIPF owners' active engagement in silvicultural conversion (henceforth referred to as 'conversion activity'). The study relies on a survey of non-industrial private owners (n = 276) of pine plantations on poor sandy soils in Flanders (northern Belgium). The study revealed that NIPF owners, in general, make only minor contributions to forest conversion. Conversion activity (including thinning, making space for broadleaves, removing invasive species, clear-cut, planting) was rather low, but positively influenced by a number of factors. Private forest owners with clear motivations of ownership were more likely to engage in conversion activity. However, the nature of motivation was not very decisive as most of the items listed (with exception of land investment goals) had a positive influence. Furthermore, the conversion activity of owners called 'economists' did not significantly differ from those of 'recreationists', but 'passive owners' (those with unclear motivations of ownership) were less active. We thus suggest that it is the absence of clear motivations of ownership, rather than a particular ownership goal that would explain low conversion activity. Socio-demographics like age, gender and education, and also forest size had only marginal influence. But frequency of forest visits and proximity to the forest had a significant influence. As an overall conclusion from this study, we emphasize the importance for active forest management, and silvicultural conversion in particular, of forest owners being connected to their forest. In this sense, mental connectedness (motivation of ownership), as well as physical connectedness (living close to the forest and visiting it frequently) do matter.

Suggested Citation

  • Van Herzele, Ann & Van Gossum, Peter, 2009. "Owner-specific factors associated with conversion activity in secondary pine plantations," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 11(4), pages 230-236, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:11:y:2009:i:4:p:230-236
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389-9341(09)00029-X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    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. 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.
    2. Serbruyns, Inge & Luyssaert, Sebastiaan, 2006. "Acceptance of sticks, carrots and sermons as policy instruments for directing private forest management," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(3), pages 285-296, December.
    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. Ann Herzele & Noelle Aarts, 2013. "“My forest, my kingdom”—Self-referentiality as a strategy in the case of small forest owners coping with government regulations," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 46(1), pages 63-81, March.
    2. Tian, Nana & Poudyal, Neelam C. & Lu, Fadian, 2018. "Understanding landowners’ interest and willingness to participate in forest certification program in China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 271-280.
    3. Bastola, Sapana & Penn, Jerrod & Blazier, Michael, 2022. "Assessing Hypothetical Bias in Nudging: Willingness to Pay for Consultation towards Improved Forest Management," 2022 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Anaheim, California 322477, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    4. Nana Tian & Neelam Poudyal & Fadian Lu, 2021. "Assessments of Landowners’ Willingness to Accept Compensation for Participating in Forest Certification in Shandong, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-15, January.
    5. Weiss, Gerhard & Lawrence, Anna & Hujala, Teppo & Lidestav, Gun & Nichiforel, Liviu & Nybakk, Erlend & Quiroga, Sonia & Sarvašová, Zuzana & Suarez, Cristina & Živojinović, Ivana, 2019. "Forest ownership changes in Europe: State of knowledge and conceptual foundations," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 9-20.
    6. 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).
    7. Danley, Brian, 2019. "Forest owner objectives typologies: Instruments for each owner type or instruments for most owner types?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 72-82.

    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. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. Górriz, E. & Mäntymaa, E. & Petucco, C. & Schubert, F. & Vedel, S. E. & Mantau, Udo & Prokofieva, I., 2014. "Explaining participation of private forest owners in," 2014, Number 45, May 22-24, 2014, Uppsala, Sweden, Scandinavian Forest Economics: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Scandinavian Society of Forest Economics, vol. 2014(45), pages 1-10, December.
    4. Sotirov, Metodi & Sallnäs, Ola & Eriksson, Ljusk Ola, 2019. "Forest owner behavioral models, policy changes, and forest management. An agent-based framework for studying the provision of forest ecosystem goods and services at the landscape level," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 79-89.
    5. 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.
    6. Upton, V. & Ryan, M. & Heanue, K. & Ní Dhubháin, Á., 2019. "The role of extension and forest characteristics in understanding the management decisions of new forest owners in Ireland," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 77-82.
    7. Põllumäe, Priit & Lilleleht, Ando & Korjus, Henn, 2016. "Institutional barriers in forest owners' cooperation: The case of Estonia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 9-16.
    8. Ryan, Mary & O’Donoghue, Cathal & Upton, Vincent, 2014. "Land Use Change From Agriculture To Forestry: A Structural Model Of The Income And Leisure Choices Of Farmers," 2014 International Congress, August 26-29, 2014, Ljubljana, Slovenia 182753, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    9. Fabra-Crespo, M. & Rojas-Briales, E., 2015. "Comparative analysis on the communication strategies of the forest owners' associations in Europe," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 20-30.
    10. 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).
    11. Lawrence, Anna & Deuffic, Philippe & Hujala, Teppo & Nichiforel, Liviu & Feliciano, Diana & Jodlowski, Krzysztof & Lind, Torgny & Marchal, Didier & Talkkari, Ari & Teder, Meelis & Vilkriste, Lelde & W, 2020. "Extension, advice and knowledge systems for private forestry: Understanding diversity and change across Europe," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    12. Rabotyagov, Sergey S. & Lin, Sonja, 2013. "Small forest landowner preferences for working forest conservation contract attributes: A case of Washington State, USA," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 307-330.
    13. Nielsen, Anne Sofie Elberg & Jacobsen, Jette Bredahl & Strange, Niels, 2018. "Landowner participation in forest conservation programs: A revealed approach using register, spatial and contract data," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 1-12.
    14. Julia Touza & Charles Perrings & María Chas Amil, 2010. "Harvest Decisions and Spatial Landscape Attributes: The Case of Galician Communal Forests," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 46(1), pages 75-91, May.
    15. Ní Dhubháin, Áine & Maguire, Karl & Farrelly, Niall, 2010. "The harvesting behaviour of Irish private forest owners," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(7), pages 513-517, September.
    16. G.C., Shivan & Mehmood, Sayeed R., 2010. "Factors influencing nonindustrial private forest landowners' policy preference for promoting bioenergy," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(8), pages 581-588, October.
    17. Nana Tian & Neelam Poudyal & Fadian Lu, 2021. "Assessments of Landowners’ Willingness to Accept Compensation for Participating in Forest Certification in Shandong, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-15, January.
    18. Cai, Zhen & Narine, Lana Landra & D'Amato, Anthony & Aguilar, Francisco Xavier, 2016. "Attitudinal and revenue effects on non-industrial private forest owners' willingness-to-harvest timber and woody biomass," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 52-61.
    19. 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.
    20. Favada, Ibrahim M. & Kuuluvainen, Jari & Uusivuori, Jussi, 2007. "Optimal timber stock in Finnish nonindustrial private forests," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(5), pages 527-535, January.

    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:forpol:v:11:y:2009:i:4:p:230-236. 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/locate/forpol .

    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.