Woodland Owners Motivations for Involvement in Landscape Scale Forest Stewardship
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
West Virginia is mainly covered by forest, most of which is in the hands of private forest (PF) owners. The decisions taken about the management of these properties affect the landscape beyond their parcel boundaries. These forests provide ecological services to society, timber products and recreation. Keeping the forest healthy and productive is very important for the common good. Threats related to development parcelization, invasive species and pests are some of the challenges when trying to maintain forest coverage in WV. To be able to face these challenges it is necessary to plan at a wider scale than the individual parcel. Landscape scale forest stewardship has been thought of as a way to manage the forest in a multiple tenure scenario. Cross boundary collaboration and public -private partnerships are necessary to move in the direction of large scale forest management. Understanding the attitudes, actions and motivations of PF owners is critical to success in this task.;In this study we conducted a public opinion survey in five diverse areas of West Virginia located along the primary inter-state transportation corridors. This research was designed using similar methodology to a study by Finley et al. (2006), to identify the attitudes, motivations and barriers to cross-boundary cooperation of private forest owners in the selected areas. We conducted a survey that gave 293 usable responses. Using Principal Component Analysis and Logistic Regression, four significant predictors for willingness to participate in cooperative activities were obtained: 1) education, 2) management activities conducted in woodland properties, 3) sharing property, and 4) the barrier "no cooperation benefits." Also, two dependent variables "market jointly" and "walking tour" to measure the interest of PF owners in engaging with neighbors in education and planning were obtained. Findings suggest that those with a college degree or higher had more than twice the odds of being willing to participate in cooperative activities, those interested in "share" had five times the odds of being interested in cooperative activities than those than were not. Private forest owners doing management activities on their properties were more inclined to participate in cooperative activities. The barrier "no cooperation benefits" produced odds ratio less than one for both cooperative activity variables suggesting those with an unfavorable view of cross-boundary benefits are less willing to collaborate with neighbors.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».