IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v6y2004i3-4p243-260.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Forest forecasts: does individual heterogeneity matter for market and landscape outcomes?

Author

Listed:
  • Pattanayak, Subhrendu K.
  • Abt, Robert C.
  • Sommer, Allan J.
  • Cubbage, Fred
  • Murray, Brian C.
  • Yang, Jui-Chen
  • Wear, David
  • Ahn, SoEun

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Pattanayak, Subhrendu K. & Abt, Robert C. & Sommer, Allan J. & Cubbage, Fred & Murray, Brian C. & Yang, Jui-Chen & Wear, David & Ahn, SoEun, 2004. "Forest forecasts: does individual heterogeneity matter for market and landscape outcomes?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 6(3-4), pages 243-260, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:6:y:2004:i:3-4:p:243-260
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389-9341(04)00031-0
    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. Williams,Jeffrey C. & Wright,Brian D., 2005. "Storage and Commodity Markets," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521023399.
    2. 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.
    3. Murray, Brian C. & Abt, Robert C., 2001. "Estimating price compensation requirements for eco-certified forestry," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 149-163, January.
    4. 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.
    5. Andrew J. Plantinga & JunJie Wu, 2003. "Co-Benefits from Carbon Sequestration in Forests: Evaluating Reductions in Agricultural Externalities from an Afforestation Policy in Wisconsin," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 79(1), pages 74-85.
    6. Matthews, Stephen & O'Connor, Raymond & Plantinga, Andrew J., 2002. "Quantifying the impacts on biodiversity of policies for carbon sequestration in forests," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 71-87, January.
    7. Ian Hardie & Peter Parks & Peter Gottleib & David Wear, 2000. "Responsiveness of Rural and Urban Land Uses to Land Rent Determinants in the U.S. South," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 76(4), pages 659-673.
    8. James J. Heckman, 2001. "Micro Data, Heterogeneity, and the Evaluation of Public Policy: Nobel Lecture," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 109(4), pages 673-748, August.
    9. Hartman, Richard, 1976. "The Harvesting Decision When a Standing Forest Has Value," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 14(1), pages 52-58, March.
    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. Miguel Riviere & Sylvain Caurla & Philippe Delacote, 2020. "Evolving Integrated Models From Narrower Economic Tools : the Example of Forest Sector Models," Post-Print hal-02512330, HAL.
    2. Pattanayak Subhrendu K. & Ross Martin T. & Depro Brooks M. & Bauch Simone C. & Timmins Christopher & Wendland Kelly J. & Alger Keith, 2009. "Climate Change and Conservation in Brazil: CGE Evaluation of Health and Wealth Impacts," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 9(2), pages 1-44, September.
    3. Miguel RIVIERE & Sylvain CAURLA, 2018. "Integrating non-timber objectives into bio-economic models of the forest sector: a review of recent innovations and current shortcomings," Working Papers of BETA 2018-26, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    4. 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.
    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).

    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. 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.
    2. Caparros, Alejandro & Cerda, Emilio & Ovando, P. & Campos, Pablo, 2007. "Carbon Sequestration with Reforestations and Biodiversity-Scenic Values," Climate Change Modelling and Policy Working Papers 9323, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    3. Khanal, Puskar N. & Grebner, Donald L. & Munn, Ian A. & Grado, Stephen C. & Grala, Robert K. & Henderson, James E., 2017. "Evaluating non-industrial private forest landowner willingness to manage for forest carbon sequestration in the southern United States," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 112-119.
    4. Feng, Hongli & Kling, Catherine L. & Gassman, Philip W., 2004. "Carbon Sequestration, Co-Benefits, and Conservation Programs," Choices: The Magazine of Food, Farm, and Resource Issues, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 19(3), pages 1-6.
    5. van Kooten, G. Cornelis & Sohngen, Brent, 2007. "Economics of Forest Ecosystem Carbon Sinks: A Review," International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, now publishers, vol. 1(3), pages 237-269, September.
    6. 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.
    7. Vokoun, Melinda & Amacher, Gregory S. & Sullivan, Jay & Wear, Dave, 2010. "Examining incentives for adjacent non-industrial private forest landowners to cooperate," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(2), pages 104-110, February.
    8. Caparros, Alejandro & Jacquemont, Frederic, 2003. "Conflicts between biodiversity and carbon sequestration programs: economic and legal implications," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 143-157, August.
    9. Tahvonen, Olli & Salo, Seppo, 1999. "Optimal Forest Rotation within SituPreferences," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 106-128, January.
    10. Dole, D.D., 1994. "The Economics of Private Forest Management," Discussion Papers 232286, University of Western Australia, School of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    11. 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.
    12. 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.
    13. 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.
    14. Gruchy, Steven R. & Grebner, Donald L. & Munn, Ian A. & Joshi, Omkar & Hussain, Anwar, 2012. "An assessment of nonindustrial private forest landowner willingness to harvest woody biomass in support of bioenergy production in Mississippi: A contingent rating approach," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(C), pages 140-145.
    15. 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.
    16. Choi, Suk-Won & Sohngen, Brent & Alig, Ralph, 2011. "An assessment of the influence of bioenergy and marketed land amenity values on land uses in the Midwestern US," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(4), pages 713-720, February.
    17. Elbakidze, Levan & McCarl, Bruce A., 2007. "Sequestration offsets versus direct emission reductions: Consideration of environmental co-effects," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(3), pages 564-571, January.
    18. Mälkönen, Ville, 2006. "Optimal forest conservation: The role of green-image demand and investments," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(1), pages 51-73, March.
    19. 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.
    20. McCarney, Geoffrey R. & Armstrong, Glen W. & Adamowicz, Wiktor L., 2006. "Implications Of A Market For Carbon On Timber And Non-Timber Values In An Uncertain World," Annual Meeting, 2006, May 25-28, Montreal, Quebec 34175, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society.

    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:6:y:2004:i:3-4:p:243-260. 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.