IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v178y2025ics1389934125001534.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Landowners' willingness to accept for sustainable forest management in the Cross-Timbers region, USA

Author

Listed:
  • Cheng, Haotian
  • Soto, José R.
  • Susaeta, Andres
  • Russell, Aaron
  • Joshi, Omkar

Abstract

The Cross-Timbers (CT) region, spanning southern Kansas through central Oklahoma into Texas, is a vital forested area with millions of residents in urban centers like Tulsa, Oklahoma City, and the Dallas Metroplex. Covering nearly 27 million acres suitable for livestock, this region plays a critical role in agriculture and recreation. However, much of the land remains underutilized in terms of active management for ecosystem services. This study evaluates landowners' preferences for sustainable forest management using a novel survey method, Double-Bounded Best-Worst Choice (DBBWC), which combines Best-Worst Scaling with Double-Bound Contingent Valuation. The results reveal that landowners prioritize compensation of $110 per ha acre per year, compensation of $80 per ha acre per year, and low-intensity thinning as the most preferred forest management practices. In contrast, prescribed burning once a year was ranked least favorable. Additionally, landowners' willingness to accept (WTA) compensation for implementing prescribed burning annually was $96.77 per acre, while for high-intensity thinning, the WTA was $35.86. These findings provide valuable insights into landowners' preferences for forest management and suggest how financial incentives could influence decisions about ecosystem service provision. The study's results are relevant for policy development, particularly for U.S. Forest Service Land Management Plans and broader National Forest Management strategies.

Suggested Citation

  • Cheng, Haotian & Soto, José R. & Susaeta, Andres & Russell, Aaron & Joshi, Omkar, 2025. "Landowners' willingness to accept for sustainable forest management in the Cross-Timbers region, USA," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 178(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:178:y:2025:i:c:s1389934125001534
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2025.103574
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934125001534
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2025.103574?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

    for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • Q23 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Forestry
    • B40 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Economic Methodology - - - General

    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:178:y:2025:i:c:s1389934125001534. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.