Likelihood of Timber Management on Nonindustrial Private Forests: Evidence From Research Studies

Research on timber management tendencies by nonindustrial private forest owners, while sometimes conflicting, provides useful information to support policy analyses of timber supply and investment behavior. Numerous research studies regarding NIPF tree planting, intermediate stand treatments, and timber harvesting are reviewed. Conclusive research findings include that: (1) cost sharing correlates with increased tree planting, (2) cost-shared plantings are typically not liquidated when support payments end, (3) technical assistance with harvesting tends to increase stumpage revenues for owners and results in residual timber stands that are in better condition, and (4) technical assistance is correlated with increased harvesting. The degree to which nonindustrial private forest (NIPF) owners manage their land for timber production is a key question in assessing future timber supplies. Information on management by NIPF owners is also important in analyzing policy options related to issues such asglobal climate change, wildlife habitat, and soil protection. Although much research has been conducted on NIPF timber management and response to government policies, the results sometimes appear to conflict and do not provide a clear understanding of the factors affecting NIPF timber management. These studies contain a great deal of information, however, and we can draw limited conclusions regarding timber supply and investment behavior. The importance of NIPF timber and the identification of significant investment opportunities on NIPF lands (USDA Forest Service 1988, in press) indicate the need for continued and expanded research in this area. This paper reviews previous research on NIPF timber management behavior, including timber harvesting, in the United States. It synthesizes findings on availability of timber from NIPF land and the effects of government programs in augmenting supplies. One aspect of this issuehow NIPF owners respond to timber-related market signalsis particularly significant because recent timber assessments by the USDA Forest Service (in press) project increasing real timber prices. Response to market signals is also important because government programs are often designed in response to perceived market imperfections (Cubbage and Haynes 1988). This synthesis of research results is intended to support analyses of the potential for increasing timber supplies from NIPF land. The review does not include studies on the social efficiency of policy instruments. Instead, it concentrates on studies designed to isolate determinants of timber management behavior by NIPF owners. The paper is organized into six sections. The first discusses NIPF research in general; the next three sections discuss NIPF planting, intermediate treatments, and harvesting; the following section examines other considerations for research into NIPF behavior; and the final section states conclusions and directions for further research. Overview of NIPF Research Previous research into timber management decisions by NIPF landowners ranges from survey-based studies of owners and their forests to sophisticated models for testing hypotheses about landowner behavior. The effects of stumpage prices and government programs on the timber supplied by NIPF owners have been examined by empirical tests of hypotheses as well as through descriptive surveys (Fecso and others 1982; Royer 1987). Landowner and tract characteristics have also been examined to facilitate understanding of the importance of other market and nonmarket goods (recreational value) on timber management decisions (Binkley 1981). Some researchers have used statistical methods to categorize NIPF owners according to the emphasis on timber management, based on owner characteristics and attitudes as well as land characteristics (Greene and Blatner 1986; Kurtz and Lewis 1981; Thompson and Jones 1981; Young and Reichenbach 1987). Tax incentives and technical assistance have often been examined through use of legal research and descriptive surveys (Siegel and Hickman 1988), but several recent empirical tests of hypotheses have been undertaken (Chang 1983; Cubbage and others 1985; Max and Lehman 1988; Skinner and Klemperer 1989). Although numerous approaches have been used in studying NIPF behavior, the following sections concentrate on those that attempted to surface or isolate determinants of timber management applications. Most of the many surveys of landowner behavior conducted since the 1940’s have profiled the characteristics of owners and their tracts of land (Fecso and others 1982). They usually have not tried to simultaneously explore the effects of markets, policies, and owner characteristics. Surveys of NIPF owners have described characteristics, activities, attitudes, perceptions, and intentions of owners, as well as characteristics of their forest holdings. Differences in sampling basis and/or geographic coverage complicate comparisons of results, but several general findings have surfaced:’ 1. NIPF owners and forest holdings are diverse, both within and across regions. 2. Landowner intentions vary widely within and across regions. 3. NIPF owners are numerous, and many are absentee owners. 4. NIPF owners are older, on average, than the