2019
DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2019.02.016
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Do forest property characteristics reveal landowners' willingness to accept payments for ecosystem services contracts in southeast Georgia, U.S.?

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
10

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 25 publications
(18 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Some scholars also analyzed the effectiveness of forest ecological service payment programs, including the quantitative analysis of farm rental costs and compensation results, as well as the significant impact on forester enthusiasm, forest harvesting rate and coverage rate [74] . In the studies on the influence of PES on participants, foreign scholars pay more attention to whether the public is willing, the length of the contract, the payment method, the willingness and acceptance of the compensated, whether the compensation standard meets the willingness of forest conservators to receive compensation and the purchase motivation [75][76][77] , etc. One of the key points is the research on ecological compensation intention of private ownership forests and corporate forests [78] .…”
Section: Scientific Design Of Compensation Standardsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Some scholars also analyzed the effectiveness of forest ecological service payment programs, including the quantitative analysis of farm rental costs and compensation results, as well as the significant impact on forester enthusiasm, forest harvesting rate and coverage rate [74] . In the studies on the influence of PES on participants, foreign scholars pay more attention to whether the public is willing, the length of the contract, the payment method, the willingness and acceptance of the compensated, whether the compensation standard meets the willingness of forest conservators to receive compensation and the purchase motivation [75][76][77] , etc. One of the key points is the research on ecological compensation intention of private ownership forests and corporate forests [78] .…”
Section: Scientific Design Of Compensation Standardsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The twenty countries that agreed to participate distributed the survey to forest managers in both the public and private sectors within their professional networks, the most common route was to advertise in the countries forestry professionals representative body, if these did not exist then the research would use their own professional network. The aim was to receive a minimum of four responses from each country with a spread from both private and public managers, unless the country had a different mix of forest manager typologies, such as dominance of family forests (Ma et al, 2012;Wästerlund et al, 2017;Kang et al, 2019).…”
Section: Survey Disseminationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the aspect of research methods, Li et al [25] conduct an empirical analysis on the affecting factors for the residents' WTA with a logit model, and Zhou et al used the right interception (right censored) model to analyze the influencing factors on farmers' WTA in watershed ecological compensation [26]. Furthermore, some scholars also adopted the random parameter logit model [27], the generalized multinomial logit [28], and the ordinal logistic model [29] to empirically analyze the influencing factors of residents' willingness to pay for environmental protection.…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%