Determinants of private forest management decisions: A study on West Virginia NIPF landowners
The availability of timber in the United States depends largely on forest management and investment decisions of nonindustrial private forest landowners since they hold the largest share of forest land in the nation. Since NIPF landowners are so diverse, there is a need to better understand the determinants of their decisions so that policies could be in place to motivate them. A survey was carried out in 2005 to the nonindustrial private forest landowners of West Virginia to examine the factors affecting their forest management decisions. The study looked at four categories of decisions related to forest management: timber harvest, silvicultural activities (i.e., tree planting, herbicide application, fertilization, thinning, grapevine control, and timber stand improvement), property management activities (i.e., road construction, road maintenance, surveying/boundary maintenance, and access control), and wildlife habitat management and recreation improvement activities. Four models were developed to examine factors affecting each category of forest management activity. The results showed that landowner, ownership, and management characteristics of NIPF landowners are associated with their forest management decisions. Specifically, age, education, profession, income, ownership size, period of forestland acquisition, distance of the forestland to the place of residence, whether the forestland was purchased or acquired through inheritance or as a gift, primary objective of forestland ownership, and presence of a written forest management plan were found to be significant determinants for at least one of the categories of forest management activities. The models explained 25%, 27%, 31%, and 24% of the variation in timber harvesting, silvicultural activities, property management activities, and wildlife habitat management and recreation improvement activities, respectively. Understanding the underlying factors influencing forest management decisions of this diverse group of forest landowners could form the basis for developing, modifying and targeting policy instruments to motivate NIPF landowners in forest management.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Ian W. Hardie & Peter J. Parks, 1996. "Program Enrollment and Acreage Response to Reforestation Cost-Sharing Programs," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 72(2), pages 248-260.
- Daowei Zhang & Warren A. Flick, 2001. "Sticks, Carrots, and Reforestation Investment," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 77(3), pages 443-456.
- 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.
- Nagubadi, Venkatarao & McNamara, Kevin T. & Hoover, William L. & Mills, Walter L., 1996. "Program Participation Behavior of Nonindustrial Forest Landowners: A Probit Analysis," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 28(02), pages 323-336, December.
- Nagubadi, Venkatarao & McNamara, Kevin T. & Hoover, William L. & Mills, Walter L., Jr., 1996. "Program Participation Behvaior Of Nonindustrial Forest Landowners: A Probit Analysis," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 28(02), December.
- Arano, Kathryn G. & Munn, Ian A., 2006. "Evaluating forest management intensity: A comparison among major forest landowner types," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(3), pages 237-248, December.
- 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.
- Bell, Caroline D. & Roberts, Roland K. & English, Burton C. & Park, William M., 1994.
"A Logit Analysis Of Participation In Tennessee'S Forest Stewardship Program,"
Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics,
Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 26(02), December.
- Bell, Caroline D. & Roberts, Roland K. & English, Burton C. & Park, William M., 1994. "A Logit Analysis of Participation in Tennessee's Forest Stewardship Program," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 26(02), pages 463-472, December.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:11:y:2009:i:2:p:132-139. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu)
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.