Journal of Forest and Environmental Science

  • 제31권1호
  • /
  • Pages.38-46
  • /
  • 2015
  • /
  • 2288-9744(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2288-9752(eISSN)
강원대학교 산림과학연구소 (Institute of Forest Science, kangwon National University)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

The Analysis of Pine Stumpage Prices Based on Timber Sale Characteristics of the Southern United States

  • Kim, Hojung (The Forest Center of Climate Change, Korea Forest Research Institute) ;
  • Cieszewski, Chris (Warnell School of Forestry and Natural Resources, The University of Georgia)
  • 투고 : 2014.02.26
  • 심사 : 2014.09.29
  • 발행 : 2015.02.28
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

The stumpage price changes were calculated and analyzed from the data collected by Timber Mart-South from 1998 to 2007. We analyzed the relationship between pine sawtimber stumpage prices and timber sale characteristics using hedonic pricing method. Quadratic transformation was employed for sale size and contract length. Stumpage prices increased with sale size, contract length, bid sales, and the number of bidders. The presence of above average or excellent grade, market conditions, and logging conditions also are positively related to stumpage prices.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Bhahurothu P. 2011. Impact of timber sale characteristics on pine sawtimber prices in non-industrial private forests of southern United States: Implications of forest fragmentation. MS thesis. The University of Gerogia, Athens.
  2. Boardman A, Greenberg DH, Vining AR, Weimer DL. 2011. Cost-benefit analysis: Concepts and practice. 4th ed. New Jersey, Prentice Hall.
  3. Buongiorno J, Young T. 1984. Statistical appraisal of timber with an application to the Chequamegon National Forest. North J Appl For 1: 72-76.
  4. Dunn MA, Dubois MR. 1999. Determining econometric relationships between timber sale notice provisions and high bids received on timber offerings from the Alabama department of conservation/state lands division, Timberlands investments: Improving the odds, Proceedings of the 1999 Southern Forest Economics Workshop. Mississippi State University, Biloxi, Mississippi, pp 83-90.
  5. Fiery M. 2012. Pine Stumpage Price Trends in the US South, Forest2Market. Charlotte, North Carolina. http://www.forest2market.com/blog/Pine-Stumpage-Price-Trends-in-the-US-South.
  6. Haight RG, Holmes TP. 1991. Stochastic price models and optimal tree cutting: results for loblolly pine. Nat Resour Model 5: 423-443. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1939-7445.1991.tb00255.x
  7. Hensyl CH. 2005. Impacts of land and ownership characteristics on the stumpage prices for Virginia's nonindustrial forests. MS thesis. Department of Forestry, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, Virginia.
  8. Hubbard WG, Abt RC. 1989. The effect of timber sale assistance on returns to landowners. Resource Management and Optimization 6: 225-234.
  9. Kilgore M, Brown R, Blinn C, Coggins J, Pfender C. 2010. A national review of state timber sale programs and an analysis of factors influencing Minnesota state stumpage prices. A Report to the Minnesota Forest Resources Council, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, Minnesota.
  10. Ladd GW, Martini MB. 1976. Prices and demand for input characteristics. Am J Agr Econ 58: 21-30. https://doi.org/10.2307/1238573
  11. Leefers LA, Potter-Witter K. 2006. Timber sale characteristics and competition for public lands stumpage: a case study from the Lake States. Forest Sci 52: 460-467.
  12. Mei B, Clutter M, Harris T. 2010. Modeling and forecasting pine sawtimber stumpage prices in the US South by various time series models. Can J Forest Res 40: 1506-1516. https://doi.org/10.1139/X10-087
  13. Munn IA, Palmquist RB. 1997. Estimating hedonic price equations for a timber stumpage market using stochastic frontier estimation procedures. Can J Forest Res 27: 1276-1280. https://doi.org/10.1139/x97-088
  14. Newman DH. 1987. An econometric analysis of the southern softwood stumpage market: 1950-1980. Forest Sci 33: 932-945.
  15. Puttock GD, Meilke KD, Prescott DM. 1990. Stumpage prices in southwestern Ontario: a hedonic function approach. Forest Sci 36: 1119-1132.
  16. Rosen S. 1974. Hedonic prices and implicit markets: Product differentiation in pure competition. J Polit Econ 82: 34-55. https://doi.org/10.1086/260169
  17. Sun C, Kinnucan HW. 2001. Economic Impact of environmental regulations on southern softwood stumpage markets: A reappraisal. South J Appl For 25: 108-115.
  18. Sydor T, Mendell BC. 2008. Transaction evidence analysis: Stumpage prices and risk in central Georgia. Can J Forest Res 38: 239-246. https://doi.org/10.1139/X07-126
  19. Timber Mart-South (TMS). 2009. Stumpage detail report, 1st quarter 2009. Norris Foundation, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia.
  20. Timber Mart-South (TMS). Various years. Norris Foundation, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia. http://www.timbermart-south.com
  21. U.S. Forest Service. 1982. An analysis of the timber situation in the United States, 1952-2030. USDA Forest Service, Washington Office, Washington, DC. Forest Research Report 22. pp 499.
  22. Vasievich JM. 1980. Costs of hazard-reduction burning on southern national forests. South J Appl For 4: 12-15.
  23. Wagner JE, Cubbage FW, Holmes TP. 1994. Estimated economic impacts of environmental regulations on southern softwood stumpage markets. South J Appl For 18: 156-162.