IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/nbaece/404860.html

Managing Undesirable Vegetation Transitions on the Landscape: A Study of Perceptions of Conservation Professionals in Nebraska and Montana

Author

Listed:
  • Deka, Anubrata
  • Banerjee, Simanti
  • Floyd, Theresa

Abstract

In this bulletin, we have provided a descriptive analysis of the perceptions of conservation professionals in Nebraska and Montana, two states where the rangeland ecosystem is facing a large-scale transition from native grasses to invasive trees and grasses. This analysis provides an initial understanding of the different factors that can influence adoption of policy initiatives by conservation professionals. When considered alongside insights into the management behaviors of ranchers—whose productivity and profitability are adversely affected by these transitions—this information helps form a more comprehensive picture of the ecological and economic impacts of UVTs, as well as strategies for their mitigation. In the next step, our goal is to analyze data from questions about respondents’ social networks to evaluate how the structure and composition of their networks influence policy priorities and barriers, and how those are related to their perceptions of trust. This analysis will be conducted for both states while controlling for respondent-level characteristics and other variables in the data set, thereby deepening our understanding of how personal, environmental, and social factors influence professionals’ approaches to UVT management on the landscape.

Suggested Citation

  • Deka, Anubrata & Banerjee, Simanti & Floyd, Theresa, 2025. "Managing Undesirable Vegetation Transitions on the Landscape: A Study of Perceptions of Conservation Professionals in Nebraska and Montana," Cornhusker Economics 404860, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Department of Agricultural Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:nbaece:404860
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.404860
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/404860/files/fulltext-908.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.404860?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. McCann, Laura, 2013. "Transaction costs and environmental policy design," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 253-262.
    2. Grand, Linda & Messer, Kent D. & Allen, William, 2017. "Understanding and Overcoming the Barriers for Cost-effective Conservation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 139-144.
    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. Aritta Suwarno & Meine van Noordwijk & Hans-Peter Weikard & Desi Suyamto, 2018. "Indonesia’s forest conversion moratorium assessed with an agent-based model of Land-Use Change and Ecosystem Services (LUCES)," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 211-229, February.
    2. Baudry, Marc & Faure, Anouk & Quemin, Simon, 2021. "Emissions trading with transaction costs," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    3. Miranda, Bruno Varella & de Oliveira, Gustavo Magalhães, 2023. "Assessing the performance of voluntary environmental agreements under high monitoring costs: Evidence from the Brazilian Amazon," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 214(C).
    4. Han, Qifeng & Li, Chunhui & Jin, Yulu, 2025. "The impact of intellectual property protection on the development of artificial intelligence in enterprises," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 105(C).
    5. Coria, Jessica & Jaraite, Jurate, 2015. "Carbon Pricing: Transaction Costs of Emissions Trading vs. Carbon Taxes," CERE Working Papers 2015:2, CERE - the Center for Environmental and Resource Economics.
    6. Lapeyre, Renaud & Froger, Géraldine & Hrabanski, Marie, 2015. "Biodiversity offsets as market-based instruments for ecosystem services? From discourses to practices," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 15(C), pages 125-133.
    7. Besma Bouchoucha & Ismahene Yahyaoui & Najeh Bouchoucha, 2026. "The Relationship Between Trade Openness and Environmental Degradation in Arab Maghreb Union : The Role of Institutional Quality," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 17(2), pages 4823-4842, April.
    8. Phan, Thu-Ha Dang & Brouwer, Roy & Davidson, Marc David, 2017. "A Global Survey and Review of the Determinants of Transaction Costs of Forestry Carbon Projects," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 1-10.
    9. Ndebele, Tom & Johnston, Robert J. & Newburn, David, 2020. "Transaction Costs and Household Adoption of Stormwater Best Management Practices," 2020 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, Kansas City, Missouri 304338, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    10. Tiberio Daddi & Niccolò Maria Todaro & Maria Rosa De Giacomo & Marco Frey, 2018. "A Systematic Review of the Use of Organization and Management Theories in Climate Change Studies," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(4), pages 456-474, May.
    11. Bellanger, Manuel & Fonner, Robert & Holland, Daniel S. & Libecap, Gary D. & Lipton, Douglas W. & Scemama, Pierre & Speir, Cameron & Thébaud, Olivier, 2021. "Cross-sectoral externalities related to natural resources and ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    12. Valentová, Michaela & Horák, Martin & Dvořáček, Lukáš, 2020. "Why transaction costs do not decrease over time? A case study of energy efficiency programmes in Czechia," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    13. Michael Finus & Francesco Furini, 2024. "Global Public Good Agreements with Fixed Costs," Graz Economics Papers 2024-18, University of Graz, Department of Economics.
    14. Coggan, Anthea & Buitelaar, Edwin & Whitten, Stuart & Bennett, Jeff, 2013. "Factors that influence transaction costs in development offsets: Who bears what and why?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 222-231.
    15. Yiying Chen & Taolu Luo & Guiliang Tian & Qiuya Zhao, 2023. "Can a Water Bank Improve Groundwater Rights Market Efficiency?—A Study Based on Monte Carlo Simulations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(1), pages 1-19, December.
    16. Valentová, Michaela & Lízal, Lubomír & Knápek, Jaroslav, 2018. "Designing energy efficiency subsidy programmes: The factors of transaction costs," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 382-391.
    17. Pérez-Blanco, C.D. & Gutiérrez-Martín, C., 2017. "Buy me a river: Use of multi-attribute non-linear utility functions to address overcompensation in agricultural water buyback," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 190(C), pages 6-20.
    18. Marjaneh Jahangiri Lahkani & Shouyang Wang & Mariusz Urbański & Mariya Egorova, 2020. "Sustainable B2B E-Commerce and Blockchain-Based Supply Chain Finance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-14, May.
    19. Thomas Bolognesi, 2014. "The paradox of the modernisation of urban water systems in Europe: Intrinsic institutional limits for sustainability," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 38(4), pages 270-281, November.
    20. Jacob R. Fooks & Kent D. Messer & Maik Kecinski, 2018. "A Cautionary Note on the Use of Benefit Metrics for Cost-Effective Conservation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 71(4), pages 985-999, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ags:nbaece:404860. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/daunlus.html .

    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.