IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v124y2021ics1389934120306729.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluating empirical evidence for housing development effects on the management of remaining private-owned forest in the U.S

Author

Listed:
  • Kline, Jeffrey D.
  • Houston, Laurie L.
  • Gray, Andrew N.
  • Monleon, Vicente

Abstract

Forest ecosystems are notably influenced by: 1) the rate and spatial distribution of forest land development, and 2) how remaining undeveloped forest lands are managed. Regarding this second factor, economics and ecology research conducted in different locations in the U.S. suggests that increasing housing development can reduce the profitability of commercial timber production and thus the intensity with which landowners manage their forest lands. Some studies, however, suggest that in some locations these effects are not evident. We sought to consider what contextual factors might influence where and when development effects on forest management might become evident. We began with a critical review and synthesis of existing research addressing the degree to which housing development influences private forest management. We followed that with an empirical (logit) analysis of the likelihood of “active” (e.g., thinning) and extractive (e.g., harvesting) management on nonindustrial private forest lands in Oregon and Washington (U.S.), as a function of stand, site, and other factors, including nearby housing development. From our review and synthesis of previous research literature, we conclude that the varying results of previous studies likely owe to a combination of biophysical and socioeconomic contextual factors that influence both how prevalent development impacts might be in different locations and how easily they can be observed in empirical analyses. The results of our analysis of active and extractive management in Oregon and Washington are largely consistent with this finding, with some regions showing statistically significant negative effects owing to housing development, and other regions remaining largely unaffected. We conclude that policymakers and managers need to consider the biophysical and socioeconomic context of different study areas when evaluating the implications of individual study results.

Suggested Citation

  • Kline, Jeffrey D. & Houston, Laurie L. & Gray, Andrew N. & Monleon, Vicente, 2021. "Evaluating empirical evidence for housing development effects on the management of remaining private-owned forest in the U.S," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 124(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:124:y:2021:i:c:s1389934120306729
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2020.102346
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934120306729
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2020.102346?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. Vickery, Brandon W. & Germain, René H. & Bevilacqua, Eddie, 2009. "Urbanization's impact on sustained yield management as perceived by forestry professionals in central New York," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 11(1), pages 42-49, January.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. Kline, Jeffrey D. & Alig, Ralph J., 2005. "Forestland development and private forestry with examples from Oregon (USA)," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 7(5), pages 709-720, August.
    5. Latta, Gregory S. & Adams, Darius M. & Bell, Kathleen P. & Kline, Jeffrey D., 2016. "Evaluating land-use and private forest management responses to a potential forest carbon offset sales program in western Oregon (USA)," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 1-8.
    6. Zhang, Daowei & Nagubadi, Rao V., 2005. "The influence of urbanization on timberland use by forest type in the Southern United States," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 7(5), pages 721-731, August.
    7. Alan A. Ager & Jeffrey D. Kline & A. Paige Fischer, 2015. "Coupling the Biophysical and Social Dimensions of Wildfire Risk to Improve Wildfire Mitigation Planning," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(8), pages 1393-1406, August.
    8. Kline, Jeffrey D. & Alig, Ralph J. & Johnson, Rebecca L., 2000. "Forest owner incentives to protect riparian habitat," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 29-43, April.
    9. Hashida, Yukiko & Withey, John & Lewis, David & Newman, Tara & Kline, Jeffrey, 2020. "Anticipating changes in wildlife habitat induced by private forest owners’ adaptation to climate change and carbon policy," MPRA Paper 99695, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Mutandwa, Edward & Grala, Robert K. & Petrolia, Daniel R., 2019. "Estimates of willingness to accept compensation to manage pine stands for ecosystem services," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 75-85.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. 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).
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. Lindhjem, Henrik & Mitani, Yohei, 2012. "Forest owners’ willingness to accept compensation for voluntary conservation: A contingent valuation approach," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(4), pages 290-302.
    5. Graves, Rose A. & Nielsen-Pincus, Max & Haugo, Ryan D. & Holz, Andrés, 2022. "Forest carbon incentive programs for non-industrial private forests in Oregon (USA): Impacts of program design on willingness to enroll and landscape-scale program outcomes," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 141(C).
    6. 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.
    7. 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.
    8. 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.
    9. Roy Chowdhury, Pranab K. & Brown, Daniel G., 2023. "Modeling the effects of carbon payments and forest owner cooperatives on carbon storage and revenue in Pacific Northwest forestlands," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    10. 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.
    11. 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.
    12. Qu, Mei & Lin, Ying & Liu, Can & Yao, Shunbo & Cao, Yang, 2016. "Farmers׳ perceptions of developing forest based bioenergy in China," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 581-589.
    13. Kostadinov, Fabian & Holm, Stefan & Steubing, Bernhard & Thees, Oliver & Lemm, Renato, 2014. "Simulation of a Swiss wood fuel and roundwood market: An explorative study in agent-based modeling," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 105-118.
    14. Gregory Amacher & Markku Ollikainen & Mikko Puhakka, 2018. "Renewable Resource Use and Nonseparable Amenity Benefits," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 69(4), pages 637-659, April.
    15. Mohebalian, Phillip M. & Aguilar, Francisco X., 2016. "Additionality and design of forest conservation programs: Insights from Ecuador's Socio Bosque Program," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 103-114.
    16. 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.
    17. 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.
    18. Zhao, Jianheng & Daigneault, Adam & Weiskittel, Aaron, 2020. "Forest landowner harvest decisions in a new era of conservation stewardship and changing markets in Maine, USA," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    19. Koch, Sebastian P. & Schwarzbauer, Peter & Stern, Tobias, 2013. "Monthly wood supply behavior of associated forest owners in Austria—Insights from the analysis of a micro-econometric panel," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 331-346.
    20. Ovaskainen, Ville & Hujala, Teppo & Hänninen, Harri & Mikkola, Jarmo, 2017. "Cost sharing for timber stand improvements: Inducement or crowding out of private investment?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 40-48.

    More about this item

    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:forpol:v:124:y:2021:i:c:s1389934120306729. 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.