Soil and water conservation using the socioeconomics, sustainability concerns, and policy preference for residual biomass harvest

B. Wolde, Pankaj Lal, J. Alavalapati, P. Burli, P. Iranah

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

Abstract

While woody bioenergy opens up a new market opportunity for residual biomass, overharvesting of residual biomass can adversely affect soil health, water quality, timber health and stand productivity, among others. As such, it is important to understand the proportion of residual biomass forestland owners are willing to leave unharvested for soil nutrient and other environmental benefit purposes, their sustainability concerns, and policy preferences. Toward this end, we conducted a mail survey on 900 randomly selected forestland owners in Virginia and used ordinal logistic regression, cluster analyses, and Cochran-Armitage trend tests to analyze the data. Our analyses of the 121 most complete responses suggest that factors such as ownership tenure, mode of land acquisition, size of forestland, and forestland ownership objectives, among other factors, affect decisions regarding the proportion of residual biomass forestland owners choose to leave unharvested. Analyses of landowners' sustainability concerns indicate a clustering pattern, where concerns about sufficiency of best management practices and the potential implications of harvest decision on soil and water quality are among the statistical representatives of their respective clusters. Respondents likely to engage in harvest practices that do not leave any residual biomass on the ground have a preference for policies that help cover management cost. Decision makers administering or considering such policy proposals should be aware of the inadvertent effect such cost sharing arrangements can have in encouraging unsustainable practices. These results also hint at the potential need for combining such cost sharing arrangements with extension and outreach programs. By accounting for landowners' concerns and preferences, this study complements previous studies that primarily adopt engineering based approaches and solutions.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)476-483
Number of pages8
JournalJournal of Soil and Water Conservation
Volume71
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - 1 Jan 2016

Fingerprint

water conservation
soil conservation
socioeconomics
sustainability
biomass
landowners
ownership
landowner
soil quality
water quality
cost
extension programs
new markets
outreach
best management practices
best management practice
bioenergy
soil nutrient
ecosystem services
soil nutrients

Keywords

  • Bioenergy
  • Ordered logit
  • Policy preference
  • Residual biomass
  • Sustainability concerns

Cite this

@article{3b8e5ca13d9d4cd4adf47b07971e11e0,
title = "Soil and water conservation using the socioeconomics, sustainability concerns, and policy preference for residual biomass harvest",
abstract = "While woody bioenergy opens up a new market opportunity for residual biomass, overharvesting of residual biomass can adversely affect soil health, water quality, timber health and stand productivity, among others. As such, it is important to understand the proportion of residual biomass forestland owners are willing to leave unharvested for soil nutrient and other environmental benefit purposes, their sustainability concerns, and policy preferences. Toward this end, we conducted a mail survey on 900 randomly selected forestland owners in Virginia and used ordinal logistic regression, cluster analyses, and Cochran-Armitage trend tests to analyze the data. Our analyses of the 121 most complete responses suggest that factors such as ownership tenure, mode of land acquisition, size of forestland, and forestland ownership objectives, among other factors, affect decisions regarding the proportion of residual biomass forestland owners choose to leave unharvested. Analyses of landowners' sustainability concerns indicate a clustering pattern, where concerns about sufficiency of best management practices and the potential implications of harvest decision on soil and water quality are among the statistical representatives of their respective clusters. Respondents likely to engage in harvest practices that do not leave any residual biomass on the ground have a preference for policies that help cover management cost. Decision makers administering or considering such policy proposals should be aware of the inadvertent effect such cost sharing arrangements can have in encouraging unsustainable practices. These results also hint at the potential need for combining such cost sharing arrangements with extension and outreach programs. By accounting for landowners' concerns and preferences, this study complements previous studies that primarily adopt engineering based approaches and solutions.",
keywords = "Bioenergy, Ordered logit, Policy preference, Residual biomass, Sustainability concerns",
author = "B. Wolde and Pankaj Lal and J. Alavalapati and P. Burli and P. Iranah",
year = "2016",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.2489/jswc.71.6.476",
language = "English",
volume = "71",
pages = "476--483",
journal = "Journal of Soil and Water Conservation",
issn = "0022-4561",
publisher = "Soil Conservation Society of America",
number = "6",

}

Soil and water conservation using the socioeconomics, sustainability concerns, and policy preference for residual biomass harvest. / Wolde, B.; Lal, Pankaj; Alavalapati, J.; Burli, P.; Iranah, P.

In: Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, Vol. 71, No. 6, 01.01.2016, p. 476-483.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Soil and water conservation using the socioeconomics, sustainability concerns, and policy preference for residual biomass harvest

AU - Wolde, B.

AU - Lal, Pankaj

AU - Alavalapati, J.

AU - Burli, P.

AU - Iranah, P.

PY - 2016/1/1

Y1 - 2016/1/1

N2 - While woody bioenergy opens up a new market opportunity for residual biomass, overharvesting of residual biomass can adversely affect soil health, water quality, timber health and stand productivity, among others. As such, it is important to understand the proportion of residual biomass forestland owners are willing to leave unharvested for soil nutrient and other environmental benefit purposes, their sustainability concerns, and policy preferences. Toward this end, we conducted a mail survey on 900 randomly selected forestland owners in Virginia and used ordinal logistic regression, cluster analyses, and Cochran-Armitage trend tests to analyze the data. Our analyses of the 121 most complete responses suggest that factors such as ownership tenure, mode of land acquisition, size of forestland, and forestland ownership objectives, among other factors, affect decisions regarding the proportion of residual biomass forestland owners choose to leave unharvested. Analyses of landowners' sustainability concerns indicate a clustering pattern, where concerns about sufficiency of best management practices and the potential implications of harvest decision on soil and water quality are among the statistical representatives of their respective clusters. Respondents likely to engage in harvest practices that do not leave any residual biomass on the ground have a preference for policies that help cover management cost. Decision makers administering or considering such policy proposals should be aware of the inadvertent effect such cost sharing arrangements can have in encouraging unsustainable practices. These results also hint at the potential need for combining such cost sharing arrangements with extension and outreach programs. By accounting for landowners' concerns and preferences, this study complements previous studies that primarily adopt engineering based approaches and solutions.

AB - While woody bioenergy opens up a new market opportunity for residual biomass, overharvesting of residual biomass can adversely affect soil health, water quality, timber health and stand productivity, among others. As such, it is important to understand the proportion of residual biomass forestland owners are willing to leave unharvested for soil nutrient and other environmental benefit purposes, their sustainability concerns, and policy preferences. Toward this end, we conducted a mail survey on 900 randomly selected forestland owners in Virginia and used ordinal logistic regression, cluster analyses, and Cochran-Armitage trend tests to analyze the data. Our analyses of the 121 most complete responses suggest that factors such as ownership tenure, mode of land acquisition, size of forestland, and forestland ownership objectives, among other factors, affect decisions regarding the proportion of residual biomass forestland owners choose to leave unharvested. Analyses of landowners' sustainability concerns indicate a clustering pattern, where concerns about sufficiency of best management practices and the potential implications of harvest decision on soil and water quality are among the statistical representatives of their respective clusters. Respondents likely to engage in harvest practices that do not leave any residual biomass on the ground have a preference for policies that help cover management cost. Decision makers administering or considering such policy proposals should be aware of the inadvertent effect such cost sharing arrangements can have in encouraging unsustainable practices. These results also hint at the potential need for combining such cost sharing arrangements with extension and outreach programs. By accounting for landowners' concerns and preferences, this study complements previous studies that primarily adopt engineering based approaches and solutions.

KW - Bioenergy

KW - Ordered logit

KW - Policy preference

KW - Residual biomass

KW - Sustainability concerns

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85048342326&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.2489/jswc.71.6.476

DO - 10.2489/jswc.71.6.476

M3 - Article

VL - 71

SP - 476

EP - 483

JO - Journal of Soil and Water Conservation

JF - Journal of Soil and Water Conservation

SN - 0022-4561

IS - 6

ER -