東華大學圖書館 |

An Analysis of Financial Incentive Programs for Forest Landowners.

紀錄類型:	書目-電子資源 : Monograph/item
正題名/作者:	An Analysis of Financial Incentive Programs for Forest Landowners./
作者:	Chizmar, Stephanie Jo.
出版者:	Ann Arbor : ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, : 2021,
面頁冊數:	139 p.
附註:	Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 83-05, Section: B.
Contained By:	Dissertations Abstracts International83-05B.
標題:	Reimbursement. -
電子資源:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=28747731
ISBN:	9798494442444

An Analysis of Financial Incentive Programs for Forest Landowners.
Chizmar, Stephanie Jo.

An Analysis of Financial Incentive Programs for Forest Landowners. - Ann Arbor : ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, 2021 - 139 p.

Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 83-05, Section: B.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--North Carolina State University, 2021.

This item must not be sold to any third party vendors.

Forests produce a variety of market as well as non-market goods and services, yet economic activities negate to completely capture the non-market goods and services without market intervention. Accordingly, decisionmakers structure incentive programs for forest landowners, such as preferential tax policies and direct financial payments, to reduce costs and/or increase profits from forest management, and thus correct the market failure preventing socially optimal production of forest-based goods and services. Specifically, these landowner assistance programs incentivize forest management practices, many of which promote complementary production of market and non-market forest-based goods and services.This dissertation, a conglomerate of three papers, reviews and assesses various economic instruments utilized in state-level incentive programs for forest landowners. The first paper (Chapter Two) features a regional examination of cost-share reimbursement programs for forest landowners in the thirteen southern states through a review of relevant literature paired with an extensive online search of state forestry agency websites. We find that while nine state-level programs exist in the U.S. South, only seven have active funding; however, many of the programs identified, including the North Carolina Forest Development Program (FDP), are under increased budgetary constraints.The second paper (Chapter Three) follows with a focused examination of the FDP to pinpoint which factors are associated with the likelihood of funding cost-share project applications that will be completed by forest landowners and include reimbursement payments that fully utilize approved allocations. Results from various estimated models suggest that FDP applications associated with chemical release treatments (site preparation), pine hand-planting activities, and larger applied acreage values are more likely to be completed and implemented as defined in the initial application. Conversely, our findings indicate that the probability of funding completed applications and those that fully utilize allocations is negatively associated with the base fund, non-corporate ownerships, burning practices (site preparation), activities with a 40% cost-share rate, and applications funded 2017 and prior.Finally, in the third paper (Chapter Four), we review state preferential property tax programs (PPTP) in North Carolina, Nebraska, Wisconsin, New York, and Oregon with respect to their treatment of agroforestry practices, land-uses that intentionally integrate trees, crops, and livestock for economic, environmental, and social benefits. We completed this objective through systematically evaluating the suitability of various characteristics of agroforestry practices with each program identified. We conclude that agricultural tax assessments are more likely to favor multi-use agriculture and forestry systems than the preferential tax assessments of forest lands. Results from the analysis indicate forest farming and alley cropping to be the most common agroforestry practices allowed under preferential tax classifications in the study states.Budgetary constraints largely limit the extent of cost-share programs to be able to subsidize forest management on private forestlands. Additional funding for cost-share assistance is necessary to meet current and future demand. Evidence from the studies in this dissertation support that future program modifications and adaptions continue to capitalize on the complementary elements of incentive programs for forest. For example, the incentive programs identified in this report aim to reduce economic pressures on forest landowners while simultaneously encouraging active forest management and foster complementary production of market and non-market forest-based goods and services. Lastly, decisionmakers should consider expanding the emphasis of non-market forest products within incentive programs to reach a more extensive and diverse audience of landowners for sustainable management of forest resources.

ISBN: 9798494442444Subjects--Topical Terms:

3680791
Reimbursement.

An Analysis of Financial Incentive Programs for Forest Landowners.
LDR:05275nmm a2200421 4500 001 2342420
005 20220318093139.5
008 241004s2021 ||||||||||||||||| ||eng d
020 $a 9798494442444
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI28747731
035 $a (MiAaPQ)NCState_Univ18402038950
035 $a AAI28747731
040 $a MiAaPQ $c MiAaPQ
100 1 $a Chizmar, Stephanie Jo. $3 3680790
245 1 3 $a An Analysis of Financial Incentive Programs for Forest Landowners.
260 1 $a Ann Arbor : $b ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, $c 2021
300 $a 139 p.
500 $a Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 83-05, Section: B.
500 $a Advisor: Cubbage, Frederick.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--North Carolina State University, 2021.
506 $a This item must not be sold to any third party vendors.
520 $a Forests produce a variety of market as well as non-market goods and services, yet economic activities negate to completely capture the non-market goods and services without market intervention. Accordingly, decisionmakers structure incentive programs for forest landowners, such as preferential tax policies and direct financial payments, to reduce costs and/or increase profits from forest management, and thus correct the market failure preventing socially optimal production of forest-based goods and services. Specifically, these landowner assistance programs incentivize forest management practices, many of which promote complementary production of market and non-market forest-based goods and services.This dissertation, a conglomerate of three papers, reviews and assesses various economic instruments utilized in state-level incentive programs for forest landowners. The first paper (Chapter Two) features a regional examination of cost-share reimbursement programs for forest landowners in the thirteen southern states through a review of relevant literature paired with an extensive online search of state forestry agency websites. We find that while nine state-level programs exist in the U.S. South, only seven have active funding; however, many of the programs identified, including the North Carolina Forest Development Program (FDP), are under increased budgetary constraints.The second paper (Chapter Three) follows with a focused examination of the FDP to pinpoint which factors are associated with the likelihood of funding cost-share project applications that will be completed by forest landowners and include reimbursement payments that fully utilize approved allocations. Results from various estimated models suggest that FDP applications associated with chemical release treatments (site preparation), pine hand-planting activities, and larger applied acreage values are more likely to be completed and implemented as defined in the initial application. Conversely, our findings indicate that the probability of funding completed applications and those that fully utilize allocations is negatively associated with the base fund, non-corporate ownerships, burning practices (site preparation), activities with a 40% cost-share rate, and applications funded 2017 and prior.Finally, in the third paper (Chapter Four), we review state preferential property tax programs (PPTP) in North Carolina, Nebraska, Wisconsin, New York, and Oregon with respect to their treatment of agroforestry practices, land-uses that intentionally integrate trees, crops, and livestock for economic, environmental, and social benefits. We completed this objective through systematically evaluating the suitability of various characteristics of agroforestry practices with each program identified. We conclude that agricultural tax assessments are more likely to favor multi-use agriculture and forestry systems than the preferential tax assessments of forest lands. Results from the analysis indicate forest farming and alley cropping to be the most common agroforestry practices allowed under preferential tax classifications in the study states.Budgetary constraints largely limit the extent of cost-share programs to be able to subsidize forest management on private forestlands. Additional funding for cost-share assistance is necessary to meet current and future demand. Evidence from the studies in this dissertation support that future program modifications and adaptions continue to capitalize on the complementary elements of incentive programs for forest. For example, the incentive programs identified in this report aim to reduce economic pressures on forest landowners while simultaneously encouraging active forest management and foster complementary production of market and non-market forest-based goods and services. Lastly, decisionmakers should consider expanding the emphasis of non-market forest products within incentive programs to reach a more extensive and diverse audience of landowners for sustainable management of forest resources.
590 $a School code: 0155.
650 4 $a Reimbursement. $3 3680791
650 4 $a Government agencies. $3 3562805
650 4 $a Enrollments. $3 3562827
650 4 $a Conservation easements. $3 3554602
650 4 $a Forestry. $3 895157
650 4 $a Reforestation. $3 612282
650 4 $a Ecosystems. $3 595401
650 4 $a Wildlife conservation. $2 fast $3 542165
650 4 $a Agriculture. $3 518588
650 4 $a Forest management. $3 569176
650 4 $a Ownership. $3 3680792
650 4 $a Carbon. $3 604057
650 4 $a Trees. $3 516384
650 4 $a Environmental protection. $3 527617
650 4 $a Education. $3 516579
650 4 $a Animal sciences. $3 3174829
650 4 $a Environmental health. $3 543032
650 4 $a Medicine. $3 641104
650 4 $a Political science. $3 528916
650 4 $a Wildlife management. $3 571816
650 4 $a Wood sciences. $3 3168288
690 $a 0473
690 $a 0284
690 $a 0478
690 $a 0515
690 $a 0475
690 $a 0470
690 $a 0454
690 $a 0564
690 $a 0615
690 $a 0286
690 $a 0746
710 2 $a North Carolina State University. $3 1018772
773 0 $t Dissertations Abstracts International $g 83-05B.
790 $a 0155
791 $a Ph.D.
792 $a 2021
793 $a English
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=28747731