IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v105y2019icp72-82.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Forest owner objectives typologies: Instruments for each owner type or instruments for most owner types?

Author

Listed:
  • Danley, Brian

Abstract

The extensive literature on non-industrial private forest owner typologies often assumes that different forest owner types will respond to different policy instruments according to shared forest ownership objectives. Forest owner typologies using principal component analysis and subsequent k-means clustering techniques are now prolific. The surprisingly little empirical work linking forest owner objectives typologies with forest owner opinions or experiences of different policy instruments, however, shows ambiguous support for recommended targeting efforts. This study uses standard tools of analysis to investigate the relationship between private forest owners' ownership objectives and their opinions on forest conservation policy instruments. Results show some statistically significant, but in absolute terms weak relationships between ownership objectives and Sweden's command and control green tree retention measures, participation in voluntary forest stewardship certification, acceptance of a hypothetical financial incentive, and overall interest in taking more environmentally beneficial forest management measures. These results suggest the benefits of targeting different kinds of instruments to different kinds of ownership objectives may be limited.

Suggested Citation

  • Danley, Brian, 2019. "Forest owner objectives typologies: Instruments for each owner type or instruments for most owner types?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 72-82.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:105:y:2019:i:c:p:72-82
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2019.05.018
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934118305914
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2019.05.018?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. Joshi, Sudiksha & Arano, Kathryn G., 2009. "Determinants of private forest management decisions: A study on West Virginia NIPF landowners," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 11(2), pages 132-139, March.
    2. Van Gossum, Peter & Arts, Bas & Verheyen, Kris, 2012. "“Smart regulation”: Can policy instrument design solve forest policy aims of expansion and sustainability in Flanders and the Netherlands?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 23-34.
    3. Janota, Jessica J. & Broussard, Shorna R., 2008. "Examining private forest policy preferences," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 10(3), pages 89-97, January.
    4. Cubbage, Frederick & Harou, Patrice & Sills, Erin, 2007. "Policy instruments to enhance multi-functional forest management," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(7), pages 833-851, April.
    5. Lê, Sébastien & Josse, Julie & Husson, François, 2008. "FactoMineR: An R Package for Multivariate Analysis," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 25(i01).
    6. Kumer, Peter & Štrumbelj, Erik, 2017. "Clustering-based typology and analysis of private small-scale forest owners in Slovenia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 116-124.
    7. Li, Baibing & Martin, Elaine B. & Morris, A. Julian, 2002. "On principal component analysis in L1," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 471-474, September.
    8. Novais, Ana & Canadas, Maria João, 2010. "Understanding the management logic of private forest owners: A new approach," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 173-180, March.
    9. Robert J. Sheeder & Gary D. Lynne, 2011. "Empathy-Conditioned Conservation: “Walking in the Shoes of Others” as a Conservation Farmer," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 87(3), pages 433-452.
    10. Van Herzele, Ann & Van Gossum, Peter, 2009. "Owner-specific factors associated with conversion activity in secondary pine plantations," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 11(4), pages 230-236, July.
    11. 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.
    12. Urquhart, Julie & Courtney, Paul, 2011. "Seeing the owner behind the trees: A typology of small-scale private woodland owners in England," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(7), pages 535-544, September.
    13. Kuuluvainen, Jari & Karppinen, Heimo & Hänninen, Harri & Uusivuori, Jussi, 2014. "Effects of gender and length of land tenure on timber supply in Finland," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(4), pages 363-379.
    14. Lawrence Hubert & Phipps Arabie, 1985. "Comparing partitions," Journal of Classification, Springer;The Classification Society, vol. 2(1), pages 193-218, December.
    15. Laura Villalobos & Jessica Coria & Anna Nordén, 2018. "Has Forest Certification Reduced Forest Degradation in Sweden?," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 94(2), pages 220-238.
    16. Kilgore, Michael A. & Blinn, Charles R., 2004. "Policy tools to encourage the application of sustainable timber harvesting practices in the United States and Canada," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 6(2), pages 111-127, March.
    17. Serbruyns, Inge & Luyssaert, Sebastiaan, 2006. "Acceptance of sticks, carrots and sermons as policy instruments for directing private forest management," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(3), pages 285-296, December.
    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. Danley, Brian & Bjärstig, Therese & Sandström, Camilla, 2021. "At the limit of volunteerism? Swedish family forest owners and two policy strategies to increase forest biodiversity," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 105(C).
    2. Arnould, Maxence & Morel, Laure & Fournier, Meriem, 2022. "Embedding non-industrial private forest owners in forest policy and bioeconomy issues using a Living Lab concept," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).
    3. Ohmura, Tamaki & Creutzburg, Leonard, 2021. "Guarding the For(es)t: Sustainable economy conflicts and stakeholder preference of policy instruments," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    4. Arnould, Maxence & Morel, Laure & Fournier, Meriem, 2021. "Developing the persona method to increase the commitment of non-industrial private forest owners in French forest policy priorities," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    5. Hag Mo Kang & Dae Sung Lee & Soo Im Choi & Sohui Jeon & Chong Kyu Lee & Hyun Kim, 2020. "Problems and Challenges: A Private Forest Purchase Method for National Forest Expansion in South Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-13, October.
    6. Ekström, Hanna & Danley, Brian & Clough, Yann & Droste, Nils, 2024. "Barking up the wrong tree? - A guide to forest owner typology methods," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    7. Triplat, Matevž & Helenius, Satu & Laina, Ruben & Krajnc, Nike & Kronholm, Thomas & Ženko, Zdenka & Hujala, Teppo, 2023. "Private forest owner willingness to mobilise wood from dense, small-diameter tree stands," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 148(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. Ficko, Andrej & Boncina, Andrej, 2013. "Probabilistic typology of management decision making in private forest properties," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(C), pages 34-43.
    2. Ekström, Hanna & Danley, Brian & Clough, Yann & Droste, Nils, 2024. "Barking up the wrong tree? - A guide to forest owner typology methods," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    3. Arnould, Maxence & Morel, Laure & Fournier, Meriem, 2021. "Developing the persona method to increase the commitment of non-industrial private forest owners in French forest policy priorities," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    4. Kumer, Peter & Štrumbelj, Erik, 2017. "Clustering-based typology and analysis of private small-scale forest owners in Slovenia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 116-124.
    5. Ficko, Andrej & Lidestav, Gun & Ní Dhubháin, Áine & Karppinen, Heimo & Zivojinovic, Ivana & Westin, Kerstin, 2019. "European private forest owner typologies: A review of methods and use," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 21-31.
    6. Põllumäe, Priit & Lilleleht, Ando & Korjus, Henn, 2016. "Institutional barriers in forest owners' cooperation: The case of Estonia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 9-16.
    7. Fabra-Crespo, M. & Rojas-Briales, E., 2015. "Comparative analysis on the communication strategies of the forest owners' associations in Europe," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 20-30.
    8. Fischer, A. Paige, 2012. "Identifying policy target groups with qualitative and quantitative methods: The case of wildfire risk on nonindustrial private forest lands," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 62-71.
    9. Bergstén, Sabina & Stjernström, Olof & Pettersson, Örjan, 2018. "Experiences and emotions among private forest owners versus public interests: Why ownership matters," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 801-811.
    10. Sutherland, Lee-Ann & Huttunen, Suvi, 2018. "Linking practices of multifunctional forestry to policy objectives: Case studies in Finland and the UK," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 35-44.
    11. Josset, Clement & Shanafelt, David W. & Abildtrup, Jens & Stenger, Anne, 2023. "Probabilistic typology of private forest owners: A tool to target the development of new market for ecosystem services," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    12. Lawrence, Anna & Deuffic, Philippe & Hujala, Teppo & Nichiforel, Liviu & Feliciano, Diana & Jodlowski, Krzysztof & Lind, Torgny & Marchal, Didier & Talkkari, Ari & Teder, Meelis & Vilkriste, Lelde & W, 2020. "Extension, advice and knowledge systems for private forestry: Understanding diversity and change across Europe," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    13. Katarina Haugen, 2016. "Contested Lands? Dissonance and Common Ground in Stakeholder Views on Forest Values," Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, Royal Dutch Geographical Society KNAG, vol. 107(4), pages 421-434, September.
    14. 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.
    15. Triplat, Matevž & Helenius, Satu & Laina, Ruben & Krajnc, Nike & Kronholm, Thomas & Ženko, Zdenka & Hujala, Teppo, 2023. "Private forest owner willingness to mobilise wood from dense, small-diameter tree stands," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    16. Seoung Bum Kim & Jung Woo Lee & Sin Young Kim & Deok Won Lee, 2013. "Dental Informatics to Characterize Patients with Dentofacial Deformities," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(8), pages 1-8, August.
    17. John E. Hatcher & Thomas J. Straka & John L. Greene, 2013. "The Size of Forest Holding/Parcelization Problem in Forestry: A Literature Review," Resources, MDPI, vol. 2(2), pages 1-19, April.
    18. Ann Herzele & Noelle Aarts, 2013. "“My forest, my kingdom”—Self-referentiality as a strategy in the case of small forest owners coping with government regulations," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 46(1), pages 63-81, March.
    19. Goldstein, Brita & Crandall, Mindy S. & Kelly, Erin Clover, 2023. "“The cost of doing business”: Private rights, public resources, and the resulting diversity of state-level forestry policies in the U.S," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    20. Huff, Emily S. & Floress, Kristin & Snyder, Stephanie A. & Ma, Zhao & Butler, Sarah, 2019. "Where farm and forest meet: Comparing National Woodland Owner Survey respondents with and without farmland," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).

    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:105:y:2019:i:c:p:72-82. 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.