@article{hajjar_mcginley_charnley_frey_hovis_cubbage_schelhas_kornhauser_2024, title={Characterizing Community Forests in the United States}, volume={1}, ISSN={["1938-3746"]}, DOI={10.1093/jofore/fvad054}, abstractNote={
 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.}, journal={JOURNAL OF FORESTRY}, author={Hajjar, Reem and McGinley, Kathleen and Charnley, Susan and Frey, Gregory E. and Hovis, Meredith and Cubbage, Frederick W. and Schelhas, John and Kornhauser, Kailey}, year={2024}, month={Jan} }
 @article{hovis_cubbage_smith_zuniga-teran_varady_shear_chizmar_lupek_baldwin_fox_et al._2023, title={Estimating landowners' willingness to accept payments for nature-based solutions in eastern North Carolina for flood hazard mitigation using the contingent valuation method}, volume={78}, ISSN={["1941-3300"]}, DOI={10.2489/jSWC.2023.00131}, abstractNote={FloodWise is a pilot program that proposes nature-based solutions (NBS) for flood hazard mitigation (risk reduction) in eastern North Carolina to control stormwater runoff for brief periods of time. The program would provide financial incentives and technical assistance to rural landowners to adopt NBS on their properties. In this study, we assessed landowners’ willingness to accept (WTA) payments for adopting NBS on their properties using a payment card contingent valuation method (CVM) via a mail survey. Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES) incentivize landowners to participate in conservation efforts, as well as provide additional opportunities for revenue. Factors such as income, age, contract term length, revenue lost from previous storm events, and size of farm operation influenced one’s willingness to accept payments. The payment levels required for traditional farm conservation practices and NBS flood control practices were not significantly different, indicating that past program methods could help guide new FloodWise or similar NBS efforts. These results can help guide new NBS program development and funding deliberations in North Carolina, and perhaps other rural locations in the US Southeast.}, number={6}, journal={JOURNAL OF SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION}, author={Hovis, M. and Cubbage, F. and Smith, G. and Zuniga-Teran, A. and Varady, R. and Shear, T. and Chizmar, S. and Lupek, M. and Baldwin, M. and Fox, A. and et al.}, year={2023}, pages={500–514} }
 @article{baldwin_fox_klondike_hovis_shear_joca_hester_cubbage_2022, title={Geospatial Analysis and Land Suitability for "FloodWise" Practices: Nature-Based Solutions for Flood Mitigation in Eastern, Rural North Carolina}, volume={11}, ISSN={["2073-445X"]}, url={https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/11/9/1504}, DOI={10.3390/land11091504}, abstractNote={As the global climate continues to change, extreme weather events such as hurricanes and heavy rainfall are becoming more frequent. Subsequently, flooding and standing water disrupt and negatively impact many communities. The use of nature-based solutions (NBS) is an innovative and sustainable approach to flood mitigation. Geospatial research and applications have developed rapidly to identify and map broad regions in the world, as well as specific locations for NBS. We conducted a geospatial analysis in ArcGIS Pro to identify areas where NBS, referred to as “FloodWise” practices in this study, could be sited in the North Carolina Coastal Plain to strategically reduce flooding and provide water quality and habitat improvement. The study provides a spatially explicit application of integrated remote sensing, scientific and professional knowledge, and extant databases to screen diverse variables and identify potential specific NBS opportunities and sites. The practices modeled in this study are wetland restoration, afforestation, agroforestry, “water farming” (which uses a combination of dry dams and berms), and stream restoration. Maps of specific areas and tracts in the county for the NBS practices in Robeson County, North Carolina were developed based on the land ownership size, biophysical characteristics, current land uses, and water management opportunities. Land suitability locations revealed in these maps can be used in future resilience planning initiatives to reduce floodwaters on North Carolina’s rural landscapes. The geospatial analysis methodologies employed in this study can be followed to model NBS locations for flood reduction and water storage opportunities in other counties in Eastern North Carolina or other regions with similar topographies and land-type characteristics.}, number={9}, journal={LAND}, author={Baldwin, Madalyn and Fox, Andrew and Klondike, Travis and Hovis, Meredith and Shear, Theodore and Joca, Lauren and Hester, Megan and Cubbage, Frederick}, year={2022}, month={Sep} }
 @article{hovis_hollinger_cubbage_shear_doll_kurki-fox_line_fox_baldwin_klondike_et al._2021, title={Natural Infrastructure Practices as Potential Flood Storage and Reduction for Farms and Rural Communities in the North Carolina Coastal Plain}, volume={13}, ISSN={["2071-1050"]}, url={https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/16/9309}, DOI={10.3390/su13169309}, abstractNote={Increased global temperatures resulting from anthropogenically induced climate changes have increased the frequency and severity of adverse weather events, including extreme rainfall events, floods, and droughts. In recent years, nature-based solutions (NBS) have been proposed to retain storm runoff temporarily and mitigate flood damages. These practices may help rural farm and forest lands to store runoff and reduce flooding on farms and downstream communities and could be incorporated into a conservation program to provide payments for these efforts, which would supplement traditional farm incomes. Despite their potential, there have been very few methodical assessments and detailed summaries of NBS to date. We identified and summarized potential flood reduction practices for the Coastal Plain of North Carolina. These include agricultural practices of (1) cover cropping/no-till farming; (2) hardpan breakup; (3) pine or (4) hardwood afforestation, and (5) agroforestry; establishing the wetland and stream practices of (6) grass and sedge wetlands and earthen retention structures, (7) forest wetland banks, and (8) stream channel restoration; and establishing new structural solutions of (9) dry dams and berms (water farming) and (10) tile drainage and water retention. These practices offer different water holding and storage capacities and costs. A mixture of practices at the farm and landscape level can be implemented for floodwater retention and attenuation and damage reduction, as well as for providing additional farm and forest ecosystem services.}, number={16}, journal={SUSTAINABILITY}, publisher={MDPI AG}, author={Hovis, Meredith and Hollinger, Joseph Chris and Cubbage, Frederick and Shear, Theodore and Doll, Barbara and Kurki-Fox, J. Jack and Line, Daniel and Fox, Andrew and Baldwin, Madalyn and Klondike, Travis and et al.}, year={2021}, month={Aug} }