Failure to Communicate: Inefficiencies in Voluntary Incentive Programs for Private Forest Owners in Michigan

Abstract

Abstract:Coordinating forest management across thousands of nonindustrial private forest (NIPF) owners is a difficult yet necessary task for state land management agencies. Voluntary Incentive Programs (VIPs) can coordinate the decentralized activities of these owners in return for services or financial incentives. However, many VIPs typically have low enrollment. Our study investigates the implementation of VIPs to increase forest management coordination among NIPFs in Michigan. We present findings from 20 semi-structured interviews with leaders of state and local land management organizations, and government officials at state natural resource agencies, and contrast their answers with those recorded from 37 interviews of NIPF owners regarding their knowledge and attitudes toward VIPs. Our interviews highlight a critical disconnect between NIPF owner motivations and VIP incentives, as well as misallocated resources for VIP promotion by state agencies, driving low enrollment. At the core, low enrollment in VIPs is generated by inadequate communication between NIPF owners and program managers, along with distrust of government agency objectives. Viewing managers as "street level bureaucrats", civil servants whose job discretion is impacted heavily by available resources, may increase our understanding of the issues plaguing VIPs and help identify improvements to VIP design and implementation.

Delivery of habitat conservation programs on private land

“…Large‐scale coordination is difficult for state and federal natural resource agencies, particularly in a regulatory environment that favors the land use autonomy of private landowners (Rouleau et al ). This is why many federal land‐management agencies now use voluntary incentive programs (VIPs) and cost‐sharing to encourage the adoption of land management practices on private lands.…”

Northern Hardwood Silviculture: Preferences among Family Forest Owners in the Western Upper Peninsula of Michigan

“…It is well documented that FFOs rate scenic beauty and protection of nature and biodiversity as important reasons for owning forestland (Brush, 1979;Rouleau et al, 2016). Single tree selection is likely the preferred method amongst FFOs in this study (87% were familiar with it and 53% had previously implemented the method, and 62% reported it to be the method they were most likely to implement) possibly because they believe it achieves those objectives, among others.…”

“…Immediately following a harvest, single tree selection leaves the forest in a similar aesthetic state than before cutting, so FFOs who appreciate the dense nature of a typical northern hardwood stand may find single tree selection appealing. Aesthetics are very important when FFOs consider forest management Rouleau, Lind-Riehl, Smith, & Mayer, 2016), and a further understanding of FFOs aesthetic judgements of specific silvicultural prescriptions should help managers better serve this important group of forest owners.…”

“…The second study with strong relevance to my research comes from the same dataset as the previously discussed paper, but focuses mostly on VIPs. Rouleau et al (2016) investigated the implementation of VIPs and their role in forest management in the WUP. Specifically, the study exposes a strong disconnect between FFO management interests and motivations, and the incentives included in VIPs.…”

“…In addition to extreme or uncommon events, clearcuts performed on appropriate sites in northern hardwood forests have been shown to increase diversity in early successional bird species when compared with silvicultural methods that leave higher residual basal area, such as group selection (Costello, Yamasaki, Pekins, Leak, & Neefus, 2000). Landowners and members of the public in the Lake States who hunt are likely familiar with clearcuts in their application to increase habitat for game species such as ruffed grouse (Rouleau et al, 2016). Although these cuts are typically done in aspen stands, they are highly visible and often adjacent to northern hardwood stands.…”