Landowner attitudes and willingness to accept compensation from forest carbon offsets: Application of best–worst choice modeling in Florida USA

Little is known about institutional preferences and barriers for non-industrial private forest landowner participation in carbon (C) offset programs — factors that influence participation in such programs. To address this, we used Florida (U.S.) as a case study, and identified barriers to forest landowner participation in a hypothetical carbon-offset program and landowner willingness-to-accept compensation for enrollment. Preferences were elicited via survey methods and a recent innovation to best–worst scaling (BWS), called best–worst choice (BWC), which retains the analytical features of scaling while enabling measurements in a traditional discrete-choice framework. Results indicate that NIPF landowners are more influenced by revenue than early withdrawal penalty or contract duration, but will exchange revenue for other contract features. We estimate that programs offering $20 or $30 per-acre-per-year have significantly stronger impacts on enrollment than $5 or $10. The least preferred feature was a 100-year commitment. Overall our BWC approach is novel in that it circumvents BWS' limitation by providing an ability to estimate actual willingness-to-pay/accept. The U.S. has a new policy to cut 32% of 2005 power plant carbon emissions by 2030 and allow forest C offsets. Thus, results can also be used to inform state-level policies that compensate landowners for capturing C emissions.

[1]  Paul A Scuffham,et al.  Australian Public Preferences for the Funding of New Health Technologies , 2014, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[2]  J. Louviere,et al.  Determining the Appropriate Response to Evidence of Public Concern: The Case of Food Safety , 1992 .

[3]  P. Dwivedi,et al.  Impact of carbon value on the profitability of slash pine plantations in the southern United States: an integrated life cycle and Faustmann analysis , 2009 .

[4]  Dan Rigby,et al.  Journals, Preferences, and Publishing in Agricultural and Environmental Economics , 2015 .

[5]  T. Stevens,et al.  Estimated participation in U.S. carbon sequestration programs: A study of NIPF landowners in Massachusetts , 2012 .

[6]  D. Hensher,et al.  Stated Choice Methods: Analysis and Applications , 2000 .

[7]  G. Rodŕıguez,et al.  Intra-class Correlation in Random-effects Models for Binary Data , 2003 .

[8]  J Coast,et al.  Preferences for aspects of a dermatology consultation , 2006, The British journal of dermatology.

[9]  B. Butler,et al.  America's Family Forest Owners , 2004, Journal of Forestry.

[10]  Kirsten L.L. Oleson,et al.  Cultural Bequest Values for Ecosystem Service Flows Among Indigenous Fishers: A Discrete Choice Experiment Validated with Mixed Methods , 2014 .

[11]  Allie Goldstein,et al.  State of the Voluntary Carbon Markets 2007 , 2007 .

[12]  J. Louviere,et al.  Some probabilistic models of best, worst, and best–worst choices , 2005 .

[13]  J. Alavalapati,et al.  Economic analysis of slash pine forest carbon sequestration in the southern U. S , 2002 .

[14]  Emily Lancsar,et al.  Several methods to investigate relative attribute impact in stated preference experiments. , 2007, Social science & medicine.

[15]  J. Louviere,et al.  A comparison of importance weights and willingness-to-pay measures derived from choice-based conjoint, constant sum scales and best-worst scaling , 2008 .

[16]  Bruce A. McCarl,et al.  Mitigating greenhouse gases: the importance of land base interactions between forests, agriculture, and residential development in the face of changes in bioenergy and carbon prices , 2010 .

[17]  Jordan J. Louviere,et al.  Quick and easy choice sets: Constructing optimal and nearly optimal stated choice experiments , 2005 .

[18]  Danny Campbell,et al.  Position Bias in Best‐Worst Scaling Surveys: A Case Study on Trust in Institutions , 2015 .

[19]  C. Perry,et al.  Forest Resources of the United States, 2007 , 2009 .

[20]  Jordan J. Louviere,et al.  An Empirical Comparison of Ratings-Based and Choice-Based Conjoint Models , 1992 .

[21]  Jayson L. Lusk,et al.  Consumer Preferences for Amount and Type of Fat in Ground Beef , 2009, Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics.

[22]  Susana Mourato,et al.  Testing for Consistency in Contingent Ranking Experiments , 2002 .

[23]  Kristel Miller,et al.  An assessment of forest landowner interest in selling forest carbon credits in the Lake States, USA , 2012 .

[24]  N. Hanley,et al.  Willingness to pay for unfamiliar public goods: Preserving cold-water coral in Norway , 2015 .

[25]  Joanna Coast,et al.  Estimating preferences for a dermatology consultation using Best-Worst Scaling: Comparison of various methods of analysis , 2008, BMC medical research methodology.

[26]  T. Stevens,et al.  Forest landowners' willingness to sell carbon credits: a pilot study. , 2009 .

[27]  Robert N. Stavins,et al.  Land-Use Change and Carbon Sinks: Econometric Estimation of the Carbon Sequestration Supply Function , 2005 .

[28]  T. Peters,et al.  Best--worst scaling: What it can do for health care research and how to do it. , 2007, Journal of health economics.

[29]  J. Louviere,et al.  Probabilistic models of set-dependent and attribute-level best-worst choice , 2008 .

[30]  T. Stevens,et al.  Barriers to Massachusetts forest landowner participation in carbon markets , 2011 .

[31]  Kathleen R. Brooks,et al.  U.S. consumers attitudes toward farm animal cloning , 2011, Appetite.

[32]  S. Charnley,et al.  Mitigating Climate Change Through Small-Scale Forestry in the USA: Opportunities and Challenges , 2010, Small-scale Forestry.