Advertisement

Small-scale Forestry

, Volume 15, Issue 1, pp 17–28 | Cite as

Family Forest Owners’ Perceptions of Landowner Assistance Programs in the USA: A Qualitative Exploration of Program Impacts on Behaviour

  • Kyle Andrejczyk
  • Brett J. Butler
  • Brenton J. Dickinson
  • Jaketon H. Hewes
  • Marla Markowski-Lindsay
  • David B. Kittredge
  • Michael A. Kilgore
  • Stephanie A. Snyder
  • Paul F. Catanzaro
Research Paper

Abstract

Using data collected from a series of focus groups, this study examines how landowner assistance programs (which may include management plans, cost-share, technical assistance and advice, and education components) affect family forest owner behaviour in the USA. Not surprisingly, most owners who participated in assistance programs had pre-existing management objectives. Participation in the management plan and cost-share components was found to facilitate the stewardship of private forests by assisting and reinforcing the behaviour of those landowners who already intend to manage their land in some pre-conceived manner. Advice and educational components appeared to do more in terms of introducing owners to new ideas. The mix of components offered as part of a landowner assistance program should consider the goals of the program and which components will be most effective in achieving those goals.

Keywords

Focus groups Landowner assistance programs Forest Stewardship Program Non industrial private forest owners 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to express their sincere gratitude to the family forest owners who participated in this study and provided invaluable insights. This project was funded by a grant from the USDA Forest Service, State and Private Forestry, Cooperative Forestry Staff (Grant Number: 12-CS-11242305-062).

References

  1. Andrejczyk K, Butler BJ, Tyrrell ML, Langer J (2015) Hansel and Gretel walk in the forest; landowners walk in the woods: a qualitative examination of the language used by family forest owners. J For. doi: 10.5849/jof.14-151
  2. Baughman MJ, Updegraff K (2002) Landowner survey of Forest Stewardship plan implementation. University of Minnesota, Department of Forest Resources, St. PaulGoogle Scholar
  3. Bliss JC, Martin AJ (1989) Identifying NIPF management motivations with qualitative methods. For Sci 35(2):601–622Google Scholar
  4. Butler BJ (2008) Family forest owners of the United States, 2006. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Research Station, Newtown SquareGoogle Scholar
  5. Butler BJ, Catanzaro PF, Greene JL et al (2012) Taxing family forest owners: effects of federal and state policies in the United States. J For 110(7):371–380Google Scholar
  6. Butler BJ, Markowski-Lindsay M, Snyder S et al (2014) Effectiveness of landowner assistance activities: an examination of the USDA Forest Service’s Forest Stewardship Program. J For 112:187–197Google Scholar
  7. Charmaz K (2006) Constructing grounded theory: a practical guide through qualitative analysis. Sage, Thousand OaksGoogle Scholar
  8. Chopra K, Dasgupta P (2008) Assessing the economic and ecosystem service contributions of forests: issues in modelling, and an illustration. Int For Rev 10:376–386Google Scholar
  9. Cubbage FW, O’Laughlin J, Bullock CS (1993) Forest resource policy. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  10. Domínguez G, Shannon M (2011) A wish, a fear and a complaint: understanding the (dis)engagement of forest owners in forest management. Eur J For Res 130(3):435–450CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Egan A, Gibson D, Whipkey R (2001) Evaluating the effectiveness of the forest stewardship program in West Virginia. J For 99(3):31–36Google Scholar
  12. Eliason SK, Blinn CR, Perry JA (2003) Natural resource professional continuing education needs in Minnesota: focus on forest management guidelines. North J Appl For 20:71–78Google Scholar
  13. Erickson DL, Ryan RL, De Young R (2002) Woodlots in the rural landscape: landowner motivations and management attitudes in a Michigan (USA) case study. Landsc Urban Plan 58:101–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Esseks JD, Moorhouse EA (2005) The second national survey of participants in the Forest Stewardship Program. Center for Great Plains Studies, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, LincolnGoogle Scholar
  15. Esseks DJ, Moulton RJ (2000) Evaluating the Forest Stewardship Program through a national survey of participants in the national Forest Stewardship Program. Center for Governmental Studies, Northern Illinois University Press, DeKalbGoogle Scholar
  16. Jennings BM, McGill DW (2005) Evaluating the effectiveness of the Forest Stewardship Program in West Virginia: ten-year assessment. North J Appl For 22(4):236–242Google Scholar
  17. Kamal S, Grodzińska-Jurczak M, Brown G (2015) Conservation on private land: a review of global strategies with a proposed classification system. J Environ Plan Manag 58(4):576–597CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kilgore MA, Greene JL, Jacobson MG et al (2007) The influence of financial incentive programs in promoting sustainable forestry on the nation’s family forests. J For 105(4):184–191Google Scholar
  19. Kilgore MA, Snyder SA, Eryilmaz D et al (2015) Assessing the relationship between different forms of landowner assistance and family forest owner behaviors and intentions. J For 113(1):12–19Google Scholar
  20. Krueger RA, Casey MA (2009) Focus groups: a practical guide for applied research. Sage, Thousand OaksGoogle Scholar
  21. Kueper AM, Sagor ES, Becker DR (2013a) Learning from landowners: examining the role of peer exchange in private landowner outreach through landowner networks. Soc Nat Resour 26(8):912–930CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kueper AM, Sagor ES, Blinn CR, Becker DR (2013b) Extension forestry in the United States: master volunteer and other peer learning programs. J For 112(1):23–31Google Scholar
  23. Leahy JE, Kilgore MA, Hibbard CM, Donnay JS (2008) Family forest landowners’ interest in and perceptions of forest certification: focus group findings from Minnesota. North J Appl For 25(2):73–81Google Scholar
  24. Lorenzo AB, Beard P (1996) Factors affecting the decisions of NIPF owners to use assistance programs. In: Baughman MJ (ed) Proceedings of symposium on nonindustrial private forests: learning from the past, prospects for the future, Society of American Forestry, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  25. Ma Z, Kittredge DB, Catanzaro P (2012) Challenging the traditional forestry extension model: insights from the Woods Forum Program in Massachusetts. Small-Scale For 11(1):87–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Manuel T, Kendall-Taylor N (2009) From focus groups to peer discourse sessions: the evolution of a method to capture language, meaning, and negotiation. New Dir Youth Dev 2009:61–69CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Mayer AL, Tikka PM (2006) Biodiversity conservation incentive programs for privately owned forests. Environ Sci Policy 9(7–8):614–625CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Melfi FM, Straka TJ, Marsinko AP, Baumann JL (1997) Landowner attitudes toward South Carolina’s Forest Stewardship Program. South J Appl For 21(4):158–163Google Scholar
  29. Palmer M, Larkin M, de Visser R, Fadden G (2010) Developing an interpretative phenomenological approach to focus group data. Qual Res Psychol 7:99–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. QSR International (2012) NVivo 10. QSR International, VictoriaGoogle Scholar
  31. Quartuch MR, Beckley TM (2013) Landowners perceptions of their moral and ethical stewardship responsibilities in New Brunswick, Canada, and Maine, USA. Small-Scale For 12(3):437–460CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Saldaña J (2009) The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Sage, Thousand OaksGoogle Scholar
  33. Siry JP, Cubbage FW, Ahmed MR (2005) Sustainable forest management: global trends and opportunities. For Policy Econ 7:551–561CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. USDA Forest Service (2011) The principal laws relating to USDA Forest Service State and Private Forestry programs. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, State and Private Forestry, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Steve Harrison, John Herbohn (outside the USA) 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kyle Andrejczyk
    • 1
  • Brett J. Butler
    • 2
  • Brenton J. Dickinson
    • 1
  • Jaketon H. Hewes
    • 1
  • Marla Markowski-Lindsay
    • 1
  • David B. Kittredge
    • 3
  • Michael A. Kilgore
    • 4
  • Stephanie A. Snyder
    • 5
  • Paul F. Catanzaro
    • 3
  1. 1.Family Forest Research CenterUniversity of Massachusetts-AmherstAmherstUSA
  2. 2.Northern Research StationUSDA Forest Service, University of Massachusetts-AmherstAmherstUSA
  3. 3.Department of Environmental ConservationUniversity of MassachusettsAmherstUSA
  4. 4.Department of Forest ResourcesUniversity of MinnesotaSt. PaulUSA
  5. 5.Northern Research StationUSDA Forest ServiceSt. PaulUSA

Personalised recommendations