Family Forest Owners’ Expectations and Perceptions of Service Quality in Timber Transactions in Sweden

In Sweden, 59% of the annual gross felling takes place in forests owned by family forest owners (FFOs). Forest companies conduct thousands of timber transactions with FFOs each year, and, most often, harvesting services are provided to them as part of the deal. Delivering services that meet the FFOs’ expectations of quality is important for any organization that wants FFOs to be loyal suppliers. The objectives of this study are to clarify FFOs’ service quality expectations in timber transactions, show how well forest companies meet these expectations, and identify factors that may influence FFOs’ quality assessments. Data were collected through a survey sent out to 973 FFOs, with a response rate of 43% (n = 418). The results show that, on average, FFOs perceived that the quality of the services delivered in relation to their latest timber transaction met their expectations on 2 out of 14 quality features: modern equipment (e.g., forest machines) and staff’s courtesy towards the FFO. The study concludes that skilled and service-minded employees are highly important for maintaining good relationships with FFOs and that forest companies may have a lot to gain by improving communication and taking the interests of the FFOs into greater consideration.

U.S. Family Forest Owners' Forest Management for Climate Adaptation: Perspectives From Extension and Outreach Specialists

In the United States (US), family forest owners, a group that includes individuals, families, trusts, and estates, are the largest single landowner category, owning approximately one-third of the nation's forests. These landowners' individualized decision-making on forest management has a profound impact on US forest cover and function at both local and regional scales. We sought to understand perceptions among family forest specialists of: climate impacts and adaptation options across different forested US regions; how family forest owners are taking climate adaptation into consideration in their forest management, if at all; and major barriers to more active management for adaptation among family forest owners. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 48 forest experts across the US who work with family forest owners, including extension specialists, state forestry agency employees, and consulting foresters who focus on family forest engagement. Our interviewees shared details on how both climate change impacts and forest management for climate adaptation vary across the US, and they perceived a lack of active forest management by family forest owners. They explained that western forest landowners confronting the imminent threat of catastrophic wildfires are more likely to see a need for active forest management. By contrast, in the east, where most forestland is privately owned, interviewees said that landowners see relatively fewer climate impacts on their forests and less need for forest management to respond to climate change. Perceived barriers to more active family forest management for climate adaptation include the lack of more robust markets for a wide range of forest products, a higher capacity forestry workforce, education and assistance in planning forest management, and addressing the issue of increased parcelization of family forest lands. We situate these perceptions in conversations on the role of boundary organizations in climate adaptation, how individual adaptation occurs, and how governing methods frame adaptation possibilities.

Expanding Family Forest Owner Options to Keep Their Land in Forest Use

Family forest owners (FFOs) own the majority of US forests and 47% of forests in the Northeast. Over 90% of northeastern FFOs want their land to stay wooded. Maintaining forest-based ecosystem services necessitates finding ways to help FFOs achieve goals for keeping their land undeveloped. Conservation easements (CEs) prohibit residential and commercial development, typically in perpetuity, but are currently underused. Understanding what drives CE interest may help maximize their potential as a conservation tool. We explored northeastern FFOs’ likelihood of CE adoption through contingent behavior responses to permanent and temporary CE scenarios. For each commitment length, we tested a range of financial compensation amounts and FFO characteristics. Increased financial compensation did not increase CE adoption likelihood for either commitment length, whereas attitudinal variables strongly influenced intention for both. Respondents did not appear to prefer temporary to permanent easements but were equally likely to consider adoption, suggesting that providing both tools may be in order. Providing FFOs with more options to keep their land in forest use, especially when there is currently high interest in this goal but low participation, has the potential to attract new and different segments of FFOs, thereby sustaining the essential ecosystem services derived from forests. Study Implications Family forest owner interest in land protection in the northeastern US is high; over 90% owning four or more ha have indicated they want their land to stay wooded. Few, however, have taken advantage of conservation easements (CEs) to protect their land. Highly effective at ensuring the continual provision of forest benefits, CEs prohibit land uses such as residential and commercial development. Although research acknowledges CE interest, little is known about what characteristics of the tool are desirable. Gaining greater understanding of these characteristics can help expand the options FFOs have to achieve their goal of keeping their land in forest use.

Forest Farming: Who Wants In?

Forest farming is an agroforestry practice defined as the intentional cultivation of nontimber forest products (NTFPs) underneath a forest canopy. Forest farming perspectives and preferences among family forest owners are generally understudied, particularly in Appalachia, where many marketable native NTFPs species are found. We surveyed Appalachian family forest owners in fourteen Southwest Virginia counties about their interest in forest farming and likelihood of leasing land for this purpose. We also asked about the owner’s residency and historical connection to the region as well as contemporary land uses, and identified the following types of uses: absentee and vacationers, newcomers, longtime farming residents, and longtime nonfarming residents. We mailed 1,040 surveys and 293 were returned (28.9%). Forty-five percent were interested or extremely interested in forest farming and 36% were likely or extremely likely to lease land. Rates of interest in forest farming and leasing were similar across owner types, suggesting broad appeal among family forest owners. Study Implications Forest farming of nontimber forest products (NTFPs) and leasing forestland for this practice is broadly appealing across diverse family forest owners in Appalachia. Opportunities to scale profitable forest farming are on the rise, potentially improving family forest management and spurring regional economic development. Study results indicate there is a critical mass of family forest owners interested in forest farming who could potentially supply cultivated NTFPs. Forest management professionals and stakeholders would benefit from considering how they can assist family forest owners who are interested in forest farming.

Family Forest Owner Management Decisions for Participants Enrolled in a Forest Property Taxation Program in Michigan

Family forest owners affect the ecosystem services that forests provide and, thus, their management decisions are of interest to the forestry sector. There are many programs available to help family forest owners reduce the management costs, some of which involve a reduced tax burden in exchange for active management. Research Highlights: this study is the first to examine the family forest owners enrolled in a statewide forest property taxation program in Michigan in order to understand how parcel characteristics affect management decisions. Background and Objectives: the goal is to understand the relationships between parcel characteristics and family forest owner management decisions for these program enrollees. Materials and Methods: a dataset of enrollment information was compiled and cleaned, which resulted in 20,915 unique forest stands in the state. Key variables analyzed via multinomial regression include stand condition, size, density, forest types, and forest practices. Results: region, forest type, and stand size significantly predicted forest practices. Conclusions: given that stand and parcel characteristics significantly predict forest practice, it may be useful to use these data, rather than self-reported management data from the owners themselves in order to understand future management trajectories of private forests. These data also describe forest practices of enrollees in a tax program, demonstrating that the program is successfully incentivizing management and shedding light on how these programs can promote conservation and stewardship of private forests.

Preferences for Northern Hardwood Silviculture among Family Forest Owners in Michigan’s Upper Peninsula

Managing northern hardwood forests using high-frequency, low-intensity regimes, such as single-tree selection, favors shade-tolerant species and can reduce tree species diversity. Management decisions among family forest owners (FFO) can collectively affect species and structural diversity within northern hardwood forests at regional scales. We surveyed FFOs in the Western Upper Peninsula of Michigan to understand likely future use of three silvicultural treatments—single-tree selection, shelterwood, and clearcut. Our results indicate that FFOs were most likely to implement single-tree selection and least likely to implement clearcut within the next 10 years. According to logistic regression, prior use of a treatment and perceived financial benefits significantly increased the odds for likely use for all three treatments. Having received professional forestry assistance increased likely use of single-tree selection but decreased likely use of shelterwood. We discuss these results within the context of species diversity among northern hardwood forests throughout the region.