•14 FSC-certified community forests sell timber and provide community payments, but depend on external financial support.•Revenues have increased and costs decreased over time, trending towards ...better financial outcomes and independence.•Still, in order to achieve full financial independence, they will need to sell more timber, decrease costs, or add value.•Despite stocks of valuable timber, sales are constrained by low domestic demand and competition with uncertified sources.•Costs are high because of certification and regulations requiring outside experts, and community payments.
Community-based forest management has become increasingly widespread in Africa since the 1990s as an approach to conserving local forests while contributing social and economic benefits to local communities. Community forests (CFs) can sell forest goods and services to generate revenue for community benefit. Increased understanding of whether and how CFs can be economically viable is important for assessing their potential to alleviate rural poverty and deliver benefits to local communities. Questions of viability of commercial timber-producing CFs largely have not been addressed to date in the African context, and have important ramifications for community members, government decision-makers, and external donors. We conducted an economic and financial evaluation of a group of CFs in southeastern Tanzania that sell high-value tropical timber from Forest Stewardship Council–certified community forests. We found that this group of CFs currently is not economically viable, with forest management costs 2.6 times forest revenues over the five-year study period. However, revenues appeared to be increasing and costs decreasing over the period, and in the final two years costs were about 1.5 times revenues. The largest forest management costs were related to CF establishment and maintenance, which may be driven by the cost of relying on external experts; still, these costs decreased over time. Community transfer payments – used to support local development projects or community members – were the second largest cost category, but are unrelated to forest management. Based on current prices and rates of fixed and variable costs, timber sales would have to increase almost tenfold for these communities to be economically viable independent of external donations; however, some combination of increased timber sales, increased training and capacity, capped community payments, and added timber value could be successful in achieving economic viability. Increased sales seem to be the most direct approach, but is constrained by lack of demand at present, so marketing is needed.
Full text
Available for:
GEOZS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, NLZOH, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, UILJ, UL, UM, UPUK, ZAGLJ, ZRSKP
In Africa, forest tenure reform to decentralize forest management from central governments to local communities has been occurring since the 1990s to promote forest conservation, poverty alleviation, ...and sustainable forest-based livelihoods. African governments and donor organizations continue to invest in community forestry, raising the question of what contributes to "success." The present study examines social, economic, and biophysical factors that contribute to success, or lack thereof, in community forestry in southeastern Tanzania. There, community forest enterprises produce commercial timber from natural stands in community forests certified by the Forest Stewardship Council. We compare success across 14 certified community forests using local criteria, emphasizing total revenue earned because half of this revenue is invested in creating community benefits, which incentivize sustainable forest management. Our methods include financial analysis, analysis of potential linkages between success outcomes and attributes of villages and community forests, key informant interviews, and a survey of forest managers. We found that for community forestry with community forest enterprises that produce commercial timber to be most successful, success factors for both community forestry and small-scale, forest-based enterprises must be present and co-occur. In particular, we highlight the importance of having large community forests with a high natural endowment of merchantable timber species for success. A favorable national policy environment, good governance and support at the community and district government levels, secure tenure, tangible benefits, and long-term technical and financial support from a local organization were also important. In addition, we examine the role of forest certification in contributing to success, finding it does so by reinforcing many other success factors. We draw insights from the Tanzanian case that may be relevant for community forestry elsewhere in Africa where community forest enterprises producing commercial timber operate or are desired.
Timber sales from the US National Forest System (NFS) can provide ecological and economic benefits. Unsold ("no-bid") offerings can result in delays, additional costs, and missed targets. We used ...mixed methods, including analysis of administrative data, synthesis of research, and semi-structured interviews to understand situations considered "no-bid" offerings by different stakeholders. We measured prevalence, identified causes, and generated a framework for communicating interlinkages. From 2007 to 2020, the volume not sold at first offering was 11.9% nationally. However, a substantial amount is sold subsequently, leaving 2.7% never sold. Regions with the highest percentage never sold include Alaska, Southwestern, and Pacific Southwest. A new conceptual framework developed from a literature review and interviews with NFS and industry employees identified proximate causes and underlying factors. Proximate causes include road construction, equipment requirements, and timber condition; whereas underlying factors include staffing, communication, and appraisal methods. These insights can aid communication and help develop future strategies.
Full text
Available for:
BFBNIB, NUK, PILJ, SAZU, UL, UM, UPUK
Abstract
Abstract
Forest-management burns have been widely acknowledged as a useful land-management tool in the United States. Nevertheless, fire is inherently risky and may lead to severe damages or ...create smoke that affects public health. Past research has not explored the difference in policy and practice between open burns, which meet minimum legal criteria, and certified prescribed burns, which follow a higher standard of care. This study seeks to understand the distinction between legal open burns and certified prescribed burns, and, furthermore, to identify trends by type of burn in the Southeast United States. To that end, we compared statutes, regulations, incentives, and notifications of fire as a forest-management tool among nine states in the US Southeast. We found no steady time trends in number or area of burns among the states for the past decade. A nontrivial proportion of legal open burns, which tend to be smaller burns, are noncertified burns, meaning they meet minimum legal requirements, but not the higher standard required for certified prescribed burns.
Non-timber forest products (NTFPs) are derived from natural populations of plants or fungi, or farmed in forests. Harvesters and producers often benefit from NTFPs by selling them to generate income. ...This article explores research on the producers, production, marketing, and sales of NTFPs in the United States, including the continuum of production from wild-harvesting to forest farming of NTFPs, and their costs and benefits. Specific examples are presented, but the concepts and generalizations are broadly applicable to many NTFPs throughout the U.S. and other parts of the world. Integrating NTFPs into forest management can enhance economic opportunities but also will increase complexity, and will entail balancing multiple and potentially conflicting objectives among a diverse community of stakeholders. We identify information gaps including the need for inventories and yield models of NTFPs, understanding the effect of silvicultural activities on NTFP survival and yield, time series and trends in collection of NTFPs by U.S. households, identification of vulnerable and marginalized communities associated with NTFP harvest, and harvesters’ motivations and drivers.
Full text
Available for:
EMUNI, FIS, FZAB, GEOZS, GIS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, MFDPS, NLZOH, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, SBMB, SBNM, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK, VKSCE, ZAGLJ
Financial effects of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 (TCJA) on private noncorporate timber growers vary due to the difference in timber holdings, level of non-timber income, and intensity of forest ...management. This commentary reports on a financial analysis, which suggests that landowners holding timber as investments as a group are moderately worse off due to the changes in itemized deductions brought by the TCJA. The distinction in the net benefits of timber holdings becomes more significant between forest investors (as a group) and material participants. This may become an incentive for some investors to consider converting to a business and intensifying their forest management to meet the material participation requirement. Some investors, on the other hand, may reduce forest management costs or divest their timberland due to deterioration in profitability. It also suggests that owning and managing timber becomes less beneficial in terms of tax savings for forest landowners with moderate and high non-timber income (except for high income, large holding scenario) under the new law than under the prior law.
•The TCJA has various but limited impacts on the net benefits of timber holdings for material participants.•Owning timber becomes less tax beneficial for most landowners with moderate and high non-timber income under the new law.•Forest investors are adversely affected by the TCJA due to the repeal of miscellaneous itemized deductions.•The distinction in the net benefits of timber holdings between investors and material participants are more significant.
Full text
Available for:
GEOZS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, NLZOH, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, UILJ, UL, UM, UPUK, ZAGLJ, ZRSKP
Community forests (CFs) involve communities in decision-making about, management of and access to forests, and have potential to benefit both communities and forests. However, they lack a single ...definition, clear distinction from related topics, or method for identification. This perspectives article explores historical and current literature on CFs and proposes a conceptual framework for understanding CFs and related concepts in the U.S. context. Through that exploration, we propose a conceptual framework for understanding their meaning and relationship. We propose three potential pathways for identifying CFs in the U.S., each with advantages and disadvantages. CFs can be identified by using a criteria and indicators approach; by participation in programs or networks designated for CFs; or by their own self-identification as a CF. We suggest that using a hybrid of these approaches will produce the most robust process for knowing a community forest when we see one.
Full text
Available for:
BFBNIB, GIS, IJS, KISLJ, NUK, PNG, UL, UM, UPUK
Abstract Research on community forests (CFs), primarily governed and managed by local forest users in the United States, is limited, despite their growth in numbers over the past decade. We conducted ...a survey to inventory CFs in the United States and better understand their ownership and governance structures, management objectives, benefits, and financing. The ninety-eight CFs in our inventory are on private, public, and tribal lands. They had various ways of soliciting input from, or sharing decision-making authority with, local groups, organizations, and citizens. Recreation and environmental services were the most important management goals, but timber production occurred on more than two-thirds of CFs, contributing to income on many CFs, along with a diversity of other income sources to fund operations. We discuss the difficulties in creating a comprehensive CF inventory and typology given the diversity of models that exist, reflecting local social and environmental conditions and the bottom-up nature of community forestry in the United States. Study Implications: Despite their small footprint in the United States, community forests are a rapidly developing model of forest ownership, governance, and management that helps protect forestlands and open space and demonstrates how market and nonmarket forest goods and services can be produced for broad and enduring community benefits. This study inventories and characterizes community forests in the United States to increase understanding of this model, its prevalence, and its potential. It provides a baseline of information that serves as a foundation for further exploration and research on the impacts and contributions of community forests.
Despite statements that it can mitigate financial risk through farm diversification, alley cropping in the United States Southeast has not been comprehensively modeled to estimate potential financial ...returns and risks. We used a Monte Carlo method to model stochastic financial returns to monocropping agriculture, loblolly pine plantation, and loblolly pine alley cropping in North Carolina, USA, plotting the results from 25,000 iterations to understand financial risk. Under certain scenarios and assumptions, alley cropping did have financial returns comparable to, or potentially higher than, monocropping agriculture, but did not lower overall risk, as measured by the spread of the distribution of financial returns. Pine plantations, on the other hand, did have lower risk than both alley cropping and monocropping. Alley cropping with wider 24.4-m alleys performed better than narrow 12.2-m alleys. Allowing the producer to choose a timber rotation length that optimizes financial returns generated the best financial returns for alley cropping, but this assumes perfect knowledge of the manager and is unrealistic. Current policy programs of government payments for commodity crops and cost-share for tree planting, tend to favor monocropping over alley cropping or pine plantation. A hypothetical system of payments for carbon sequestration does increase pine plantation and alley cropping financial returns, but not to the extent that commodity crop programs currently increase monocropping financial returns, and does not reduce risk significantly. Overall, on average agricultural land in North Carolina, alley cropping may be of value to certain producers, but we find those possibilities to be somewhat limited.
Full text
Available for:
EMUNI, FIS, FZAB, GEOZS, GIS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, MFDPS, NLZOH, NUK, OBVAL, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, SBMB, SBNM, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK, VKSCE, ZAGLJ
•Past research explored effectiveness of preferential forest property tax programs.•Moderate evidence of a weak impact on retaining forestland.•Little evidence of any impact on increasing active ...forest management.•Conserving forestland and increasing management may require different policies.•Past research has potential biases.
Over the past several decades, concern about loss of forest-based ecosystem services has caused all fifty states to adopt programs to lower property taxes on enrolled private forestland. Although there has been a moderate amount of research on the effectiveness of these preferential forest property tax programs (PFPTPs), most studies only assess individual states, explore perceptions without an empirical basis, or present seemingly contradictory findings. This manuscript presents a systematic review of literature to determine the strength of evidence supporting PFPTPs’ effectiveness at retaining and also promoting active management of private forests. There is moderate evidence that PFPTPs reduce forest land-use change, parcelization, or sales, although the effect apparently is relatively weak. There is very little evidence that PFPTPs encourage more active forest management. To design a PFPTP that does more to retain forests, studies indicate that a PFPTP may need fewer requirements and rules, whereas to encourage active management a PFPTP may need more. Thus, greater clarity of policy goals will help determine which approach is merited.
Full text
Available for:
GEOZS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, NLZOH, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, UILJ, UL, UM, UPUK, ZAGLJ, ZRSKP
PDF
