Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Family Forest Owner Characteristics Shaped by Life Cycle, Cohort, and Period Effects

  • Research Paper
  • Published:
Small-scale Forestry Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Understanding differences and similarities among family forest owners is important in the context of forest land conservation. This study assesses similarities and differences in landowners by analyzing life cycle effects, cohort differences, and period-specific events that shape people’s attitudes and behaviors towards their forestland over time. Using data collected by the U.S. Forest Service’s 2013 National Woodland Owner Survey, bivariate, random forest and classification tree analyses were used to examine landowners in terms of demographic cohorts. Some attitudes and behaviors of family forest owners were identified as being a result of life cycle (e.g., recreating on their wooded land, plans to transfer land in the next 5 years), cohort (e.g., education level, help with programs or policies), and period (e.g., wars, economic depressions changing attitudes or behaviors) effects. While many of the attitudes and behaviors are common across cohorts. Understanding the reasons for similarities and differences among landowners could help program and policy developers target the appropriate group of people and achieve the highest success rates for policies and programs.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Arano KG, Munn I, Gunter JE et al (2004) Modeling landowner participation in proposed reforestation loan program. Small Scale For 3:177–190

    Google Scholar 

  • Bechtold WA, Patterson PL (2005) The enhanced forest inventory and analysis program—national sampling design and estimation procedures. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station, Asheville

    Google Scholar 

  • Bell CD, Roberts RK, English BC, Park WM (1994) A logit analysis of participation in tennessee’s forest stewardship program. J Agric Appl Econ 26:463–472

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boon TE, Meilby H, Thorsen BJ (2004) An empirically based typology of private forest owners in Denmark: improving communication between authorities and owners. Scand J For Res 19:45–55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Butler BJ, Tyrrell M, Feinberg G et al (2007) Understanding and reaching family forest owners: lessons from social marketing research. J For 105:348–357

    Google Scholar 

  • Butler BJ, Dickinson B, Hewes J (2016a) U.S. forest service national woodland owner survey: national, regional, and state statistics for family forest and woodland ownerships with 10+ acres, 2011–2013. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Research Station, Newtown Square

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Butler BJ, Hewes JH, Dickinson BJ et al (2016b) Family forest ownerships of the United States, 2013: Findings from the U.S. Forest Service’s National Woodland Owner Survey

  • Butler BJ, Hewes JH, Dickinson BJ et al (2016c) USDA forest service, national woodland owner survey 2011–2013: documentation of design, implementation, and analysis methods. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Research Station, Newtown Square

    Google Scholar 

  • Conway MC, Amacher GS, Sullivan J, Wear D (2003) Decisions nonindustrial forest landowners make: an empirical examination. J For Econ 9:181–203

    Google Scholar 

  • Core Team R (2014) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna

    Google Scholar 

  • Dickinson BJ, Butler BJ (2013) Methods for estimating private forest ownership statistics: revised methods for the USDA forest service’s national woodland owner survey. J For 111:319–325. doi:10.5849/Jof.12-088

    Google Scholar 

  • Elwood NE, Hansen EN, Oester P (2003) Management plans and oregon’s NIPF owners: a survey of attitudes and practices. West J Appl For 18:127–132

    Google Scholar 

  • Erickson TJ (2011) Generations and geography. Understanding the diversity of generations around the globe. Tammy Erickson Associates, Carlisle

    Google Scholar 

  • Favada IM, Karppinen H, Kuuluvainen J et al (2009) Effects of timber prices, ownership objectives, and owner characteristics on timber supply. For Sci 55:512–523

    Google Scholar 

  • Fortney J, Arano KG, Jacobson M (2011) An evaluation of West Virginia’s managed timberland tax incentive program. For Policy Econ 13:69–78

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fox J (2010) Polycor: polychoric and polyserial correlations. R package version 0.7-8. http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=polycor

  • Gan J, Kebede E (2005) Multivariate probit modeling of decisions on timber harvesting and request for assistance by African–American forestland owners. South J Appl For 29:135–142

    Google Scholar 

  • Holford TR (2014) Age-period-cohort analysis. Wiley StatsRef: Statistics Reference Online

  • Hothorn T, Buehlmann P, Dudoit S et al (2006) Survival ensembles. Biostatistics 7:355–373

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hothorn T, Hornik K, Strobl C, Zeileis A (2015) Party: a laboratory for recursive partytioning. R package version 1.0-25. https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/party/index.html

  • Janota JJ, Broussard SR (2008) Examining private forest policy preferences. For Policy Econ 10:89–97

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Joshi S, Arano KG (2009) Determinants of private forest management decisions: a study on West Virginia NIPF landowners. For Policy Econ 11:132–139

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Joshi O, Mehmood SR (2011) Corrigendum to “Factors affecting nonindustrial private forest landowners’ willingness to supply woody biomass for bioenergy” [Biomass Bioenerg 35(2011) 186–192]. Biomass Bioenergy 35:1612

  • Joshi O, Grebner DL, Munn IA, Grala RK (2015) Issues concerning landowner management plan adoption decisions: a recursive bivariate probit approach. Int J For Res 2015:e926303. doi:10.1155/2015/926303

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaetzel BR, Hodges DG, Fly JM (2011) Landowner motivations for owning woodland on the Tennessee Northern Cumberland Plateau. South J Appl For 35:39–43

    Google Scholar 

  • Karppinen H (2012) New forest owners and owners-to-be: apples and oranges? Small-Scale For 11:15–26

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuuluvainen J, Tahvonen O (1999) Testing the forest rotation model: evidence from panel data. For Sci 45:539–551

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuuluvainen J, Karppinen H, Ovaskainen V (1996) Landowner objectives and nonindustrial private timber supply. For Sci 42:300–309

    Google Scholar 

  • Leitch ZJ, Lhotka JM, Stainback GA, Stringer JW (2013) Private landowner intent to supply woody feedstock for bioenergy production. Biomass Bioenergy 56:127–136. doi:10.1016/j.biombioe.2013.04.017

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loeyland K, Ringstad V, Oey H (1995) Determinants of forest activities: a study of private nonindustrial forestry in Norway. J For Econ 1:219–237

    Google Scholar 

  • Majumdar I, Teeter LD, Butler BJ (2007) A typology of family forest owners in the South. In: Laband DN (ed) Emerging issues along urban–rural interfaces II: linking land-use and science in society. Auburn University, Auburn, pp 68–71

    Google Scholar 

  • Majumdar I, Teeter L, Butler B (2008) Characterizing family forest owners: a cluster analysis approach. For Sci 54:176–184

    Google Scholar 

  • Majumdar I, Laband D, Teeter L, Butler B (2009) Motivations and land-use intentions of nonindustrial private forest landowners: comparing inheritors to noninheritors. For Sci 55:423–432

    Google Scholar 

  • Mundell J, Taff SJ, Kilgore MA, Snyder SA (2010) Using real estate records to assess forest land parcelization and development: a Minnesota case study. Landsc Urban Plan 94:71–76. doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2009.08.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nagubadi V, McNamara K, Hoover WL, Mills WL (1996) Program participation behavior of nonindustrial forest landowners: a probit analysis. J Agric Appl Econ 28:323–336

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nord M, Luloff AE, Bridger JC (1998) The association of forest recreation with environmentalism. Environ Behav 30:235–246. doi:10.1177/0013916598302006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pew Research Center (2010) Millenials: a portrait of generation next. Confident, connected, open to change. Pew Research Center, Washington DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Radeloff VC, Hammer RB, Stewart SI (2005) Rural and suburban sprawl in the U.S. Midwest from 1940 to 2000 and its relation to forest fragmentation. Conserv Biol 19:793–805

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruseva TB, Evans TP, Fischer BC (2015) Can incentives make a difference? Assessing the effects of policy tools for encouraging tree-planting on private lands. J Environ Manage. doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2015.03.026

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sanborn-Stone R, Tyrrell ML (2012) A study of forestland parcelization in the Catskill/Delaware watersheds of New York. J For 110:267–274

    Google Scholar 

  • Shivan GC, Mehmood SR (2010) Factors influencing nonindustrial private forest landowners’ policy preference for promoting bioenergy. For Policy Econ 12:581–588

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith HL (2008) Advances in age–period–cohort analysis. Sociol Methods Res 36:287–296. doi:10.1177/0049124107310636

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Torgler B, Garcia-Valiñas MA, Macintyre A (2008) Differences in preferences towards the environment: the impact of a gender, age and parental effect. Social Science Research Network, Rochester

    Google Scholar 

  • Young T, Wang Y, Guess F et al (2015) Understanding the characteristics of non-industrial private forest landowners who harvest trees. Small-Scale For. doi:10.1007/s11842-015-9287-9

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang D, Flick WA (2001) Sticks, carrots, and reforestation investment. Land Econ 77:443–456

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Funding for this project was provided, in part, by the Research and Development and State and Private Forestry deputy areas of the U.S. Forest Service. Useful reviews were provided by Emily Silver, Kristin Floress, and John Stanovick.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. USDA Forest Service – University of Massachusetts Amherst Family Forest Research Center, 160 Holdsworth Way, Amherst, MA, 01003, USA

    Sarah M. Butler & Marla Markowski-Lindsay

  2. USDA Forest Service, Northeastern Research Station, 160 Holdsworth Way, Amherst, MA, 01003, USA

    Brett J. Butler

Authors
  1. Sarah M. Butler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Brett J. Butler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Marla Markowski-Lindsay
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sarah M. Butler.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 16 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Butler, S.M., Butler, B.J. & Markowski-Lindsay, M. Family Forest Owner Characteristics Shaped by Life Cycle, Cohort, and Period Effects. Small-scale Forestry 16, 1–18 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11842-016-9333-2

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11842-016-9333-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation