IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/rensus/v35y2014icp515-526.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Energy wood production from private forests – nonindustrial private forest owners׳ perceptions and attitudes in Croatia and Serbia

Author

Listed:
  • Halder, Pradipta
  • Paladinić, Elvis
  • Stevanov, Mirjana
  • Orlović, Sasa
  • Hokkanen, Timo J.
  • Pelkonen, Paavo

Abstract

Private forests in Croatia and Serbia are highly fragmented in small plots with low productivity and owned by a large number of small-scale nonindustrial private forest owners (NIPFs). The study conducted surveys among 232 NIPFs in these two countries to find out their perceptions and attitudes related to energy wood production from their forests. The secondary objective of the study was to provide policy recommendations to the public authorities and professionals in these countries for improving the preconditions for energy wood mobilization from private forests. The study found that the NIPFs perceived underdeveloped market and low price for energy wood, absence of favorable policies, fragmented forests properties, older NIPFs' lack of interests in energy wood production, and difficulties in getting bank loan for energy wood related business activities as barriers against energy wood production from private forests. However, the NIPFs showed positive attitudes towards producing energy wood from their forests and they considered the possibilities of creating new jobs and commercial opportunities as strengths of energy wood production. The NIPFs׳ socio-demographic background had statistically significant relations with their perceptions and attitudes related to energy wood production. The dimensions of the NIPFs׳ perceptions and attitudes related to energy wood production showed two key dimensions – institutionalists and enthusiasts. The variables to explain the NIPFs׳ attitudes to energy wood production were different between the two countries and they indicated the differences in the country level circumstances for energy wood production. The results appeared to be relevant for understanding the issues that the NIPFs perceived as barriers against developing a viable energy wood market in their countries. When new forestry institutions and policies are emerging in these countries, the existing public and private forestry institutions need to play an important role for improving the preconditions for energy wood production from private forests.

Suggested Citation

  • Halder, Pradipta & Paladinić, Elvis & Stevanov, Mirjana & Orlović, Sasa & Hokkanen, Timo J. & Pelkonen, Paavo, 2014. "Energy wood production from private forests – nonindustrial private forest owners׳ perceptions and attitudes in Croatia and Serbia," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 515-526.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:rensus:v:35:y:2014:i:c:p:515-526
    DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2014.04.038
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364032114002652
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.rser.2014.04.038?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. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. Kenneth W Clements & Simon Mongey & Jiawei Si, 2010. "The Dynamics of New Resource Projects a Progress Report," Economics Discussion / Working Papers 10-05, The University of Western Australia, Department of Economics.
    4. Joshi, Omkar & Grebner, Donald L. & Hussain, Anwar & Grado, Stephen C., 2013. "Landowner knowledge and willingness to supply woody biomass for wood-based bioenergy: Sample selection approach," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(2), pages 97-109.
    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. Balogh, P. & Bai, A. & Popp, J. & Huzsvai, L. & Jobbágy, P., 2015. "Internet-orientated Hungarian car drivers’ knowledge and attitudes towards biofuels," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 17-26.
    2. Ugarte Lucas, Paula & Gamborg, Christian & Lund, Thomas Bøker, 2022. "Sustainability concerns are key to understanding public attitudes toward woody biomass for energy: A survey of Danish citizens," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 194(C), pages 181-194.
    3. 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.
    4. M. Jean Blair & Bruno Gagnon & Andrew Klain & Biljana Kulišić, 2021. "Contribution of Biomass Supply Chains for Bioenergy to Sustainable Development Goals," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-28, February.

    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. 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.
    2. Rode, Rafael & Leite, Helio Garcia & Silva, Márcio Lopes da & Ribeiro, Carlos Antonio Álvares Soares & Binoti, Daniel Henrique Breda, 2014. "The economics and optimal management regimes of eucalyptus plantations: A case study of forestry outgrower schemes in Brazil," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 26-33.
    3. Xian, Hui & Colson, Gregory & Karali, Berna & Wetzstein, Michael, 2017. "Do nonrenewable-energy prices affect renewable-energy volatility? The case of wood pellets," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(C), pages 42-48.
    4. Dulys, Elena & Swinton, Scott & Klammer, Sarah, 2016. "What Drives the Potential Supply of Timber Residues from Private Lands?," 2016 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Boston, Massachusetts 242363, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    5. Kenneth W Clements & Jiawei Si, 2011. "The investment project pipeline: cost escalation, lead time, success, failure and speed," Australian Journal of Management, Australian School of Business, vol. 36(3), pages 317-348, December.
    6. Murat Sirin, Selahattin & Ege, Aylin, 2012. "Overcoming problems in Turkey's renewable energy policy: How can EU contribute?," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 16(7), pages 4917-4926.
    7. 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.
    8. Wolde, Bernabas & Lal, Pankaj & Burli, Pralhad, 2017. "Forestland owners’ willingness to consider multiple ways of supplying biomass simultaneously: Implications for biofuel incentive policies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 183-190.
    9. repec:ags:aaea16:235752 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. 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.
    11. Omoyemeh J. Ile & Hanna McCormick & Sheila Skrabacz & Shamik Bhattacharya & Maricar Aguilos & Henrique D. R. Carvalho & Joshua Idassi & Justin Baker & Joshua L. Heitman & John S. King, 2022. "Integrating Short Rotation Woody Crops into Conventional Agricultural Practices in the Southeastern United States: A Review," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-26, December.
    12. Aguilar, Francisco X. & Daniel, Marissa “Jo” & Cai, Zhen, 2014. "Family-forest Owners’ Willingness to Harvest Sawlogs and Woody Biomass: The Effect of Price on Social Availability," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 43(2), pages 1-21, August.
    13. Keith L. Kline & Virginia H. Dale & Erin Rose & Bruce Tonn, 2021. "Effects of Production of Woody Pellets in the Southeastern United States on the Sustainable Development Goals," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-19, January.
    14. Upadhaya, Suraj & Dwivedi, Puneet, 2019. "The role and potential of blueberry in increasing deforestation in southern Georgia, United States," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 173(C), pages 39-48.
    15. Ugarte Lucas, Paula & Gamborg, Christian & Lund, Thomas Bøker, 2022. "Sustainability concerns are key to understanding public attitudes toward woody biomass for energy: A survey of Danish citizens," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 194(C), pages 181-194.
    16. Lal, Pankaj & Wolde, Bernabas & Alavalapati, Janaki & Burli, Pralhad & Munsell, John, 2016. "Forestland owners' willingness to plant pine on non-forested land for woody bioenergy in Virginia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 52-57.
    17. Scott M. Swinton & Felix Dulys & Sarah S.H. Klammer, 2021. "Why Biomass Residue Is Not as Plentiful as It Looks: Case Study on Economic Supply of Logging Residues," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 43(3), pages 1003-1025, September.
    18. 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.
    19. Joshi, Omkar & Grebner, Donald L. & Hussain, Anwar & Grado, Stephen C., 2013. "Landowner knowledge and willingness to supply woody biomass for wood-based bioenergy: Sample selection approach," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(2), pages 97-109.
    20. Milis, Kevin & Peremans, Herbert & Springael, Johan & Van Passel, Steven, 2019. "Win-win possibilities through capacity tariffs and battery storage in microgrids," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 1-1.
    21. Zhai, Jun & Kuusela, Olli-Pekka, 2022. "Incidence of domestic subsidies vs. export taxes: An equilibrium displacement model of log and lumber markets in Oregon," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).

    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:rensus:v:35:y:2014:i:c:p:515-526. 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/600126/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.