@article{parajuli_chizmar_lamica_wiseman_gordon_ochuodho_schons_henderson_mehmood_johnson_2023, title={Economic Contribution Analysis of Urban and Community Forestry in the Southern United States in 2019}, volume={121}, ISSN={["1938-3746"]}, url={https://doi.org/10.1093/jofore/fvad011}, DOI={10.1093/jofore/fvad011}, abstractNote={
 As populations in developing areas continue to increase in recent years, urban and community forestry (U&CF) has received considerable attention due to the ecological, social, and economic significance of trees and green landscapes in urban and semi-urban settings. Based on a regional survey of private, public, and nonprofit businesses and agencies involved in U&CF, we first developed a complete profile of the U&CF sector in the southern United States (SUS) and then estimated the economic contribution of U&CF businesses and activities to the thirteen-state regional economy. We estimated that, in 2019, U&CF in the SUS contributed about $23.2 billion in value added with a total jobs support of over 349,200. Based on the current economic contributions and the number of cities and towns in each state, we also categorized thirteen states into four different tiers. Results not only underscore the economic significance of U&CF businesses and activities in the SUS, but also serve as a baseline to track future trends and performance of U&CF in terms of various business metrics.
 Study Implications: With continuously growing populations in metropolitan cities and developed areas in the southern region, the scope and importance of urban and community forests has continued to increase in recent years as an appropriate strategy to mitigate impacts of urbanization and climate change. Our findings from the regional input-output model suggest that urban and community forestry (U&CF) is a significant economic contributor to the southern regional economy. These regional statistics not only serve as a baseline to track the size and performance of the U&CF sector in the region over the years, but also could be used to enhance existing policies and programs related to U&CF activities in rapidly growing metropolitan areas in the region. Governmental granting agencies could also use these economic metrics for a basis of fund allocation and distribution. Similarly, other sectors, such as public agencies and nonprofit organizations, may also find these results valuable to advocate for additional financial and technical support to sustain and expand U&CF programs in their jurisdictions.}, number={3}, journal={JOURNAL OF FORESTRY}, author={Parajuli, Rajan and Chizmar, Stephanie and Lamica, Austin and Wiseman, Eric and Gordon, Jason and Ochuodho, Thomas and Schons, Stella Zucchetti and Henderson, James E. and Mehmood, Sayeed and Johnson, Lara}, year={2023}, month={May}, pages={217–223} }
 @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{chizmar_parajuli_bruck_frey_sills_2023, title={Forest-Based Employment in the Southern United States amidst the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Causal Inference Analysis}, volume={11}, ISSN={["1938-3738"]}, url={https://doi.org/10.1093/forsci/fxad042}, DOI={10.1093/forsci/fxad042}, abstractNote={
 In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, some governments instituted mandatory stay-at-home policies. As these policies made exceptions for essential industries such as the forest sector, it is not clear a priori whether and how these policies would affect forest-based employment. This study examined the effect of mandatory stay-at-home orders on employment in the forest sector in forest dependent counties in eleven southern states in the United States. We estimated panel event study models in addition to difference-in-difference models to evaluate the policy effects with respect to initial treatment as well as average effects to the treated counties during treatment. We found that employment in wood product manufacturing was lower on average in counties under a lockdown order compared with employment in counties without an active order. We also found that employment in the aggregate forest sector in counties that implemented the policy was significantly lower than employment in counties without the policy up to 9 months following initial enactment compared with the underlying difference between treated and control counties one month prior to treatment. Overall, our findings suggest that lockdown policies had a limited effect on employment in essential industries such as wood-based manufacturing sectors in the southern states.
 Study Implications: This study uses causal inference techniques to assess the effect of lockdown orders on forest-based employment in 11 southern states. Results suggest effects of lockdown orders were limited to the aggregate forest sector and wood product manufacturing, likely due to the rapid designation of the sector as essential and the reduced production of sawmills. The other industries within the sector were not significantly affected, implying that industries designated as essential may be more resilient to short-term shocks. These findings can be used to inform discussions on potential policy responses to future disasters, including how different interventions interact with one another.}, journal={FOREST SCIENCE}, author={Chizmar, Stephanie and Parajuli, Rajan and Bruck, Sonia and Frey, Gregory and Sills, Erin}, year={2023}, month={Nov} }
 @article{chizmar_parajuli_frey_bardon_branan_macfarland_smith_ameyaw_2022, title={Challenges and opportunities for agroforestry practitioners to participate in state preferential property tax programs for agriculture and forestry}, volume={7}, ISSN={["2666-7193"]}, DOI={10.1016/j.tfp.2021.100176}, abstractNote={All 50 states offer preferential property tax programs that lower the taxes paid on enrolled agricultural and/or forest lands. While agroforestry is a land-use that combines elements of both agriculture and forestry, eligibility criteria and other rules and regulations may prevent landowners from enrolling agroforestry practices in one or more of the agricultural and forestry tax programs. This pilot-scale study developed conceptual and methodological frameworks to identify the current barriers to and opportunities in preferential tax policies applicable to agroforestry practices. We conducted an extensive review of state preferential property tax programs relevant for agroforestry practices, following focus group discussions with regional experts in five selected states across the United States: North Carolina, Nebraska, Wisconsin, New York, and Oregon. Based on a systematic review of statutes and their supporting documents, we developed a database of programs, which support or create barriers to enrollment of agroforestry practitioners into the programs. We found that agricultural tax assessments were more likely to favor multi-use agriculture and forestry systems than the preferential tax assessments of forestlands in the five states. Forest farming and silvopasture, followed by alley cropping, windbreaks, and riparian forest buffers, were found to be the most common agroforestry practices allowed under preferential tax classifications in the study states. This study provides a framework for cataloging and analyzing preferential property tax-programs to document barriers and facilitators to agroforestry practices in the United States.}, journal={TREES FORESTS AND PEOPLE}, author={Chizmar, Stephanie and Parajuli, Rajan and Frey, Gregory E. and Bardon, Robert E. and Branan, Robert Andrew and MacFarland, Katherine and Smith, Matthew and Ameyaw, Lord}, year={2022}, month={Mar} }
 @article{parajuli_chizmar_hoy_joshi_gordon_mehmood_henderson_poudel_witthun_buntrock_2022, title={Economic Contribution Analysis of Urban Forestry in the Northeastern and Midwestern States of the United States in 2018}, volume={69}, ISSN={["1610-8167"]}, url={https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2022.127490}, DOI={10.1016/j.ufug.2022.127490}, abstractNote={Urban and community forestry is an increasingly integral component enhancing the well-being of urban places. Along with providing aesthetic benefits and other critical ecosystem services, urban forestry contributes to local and regional economies by supporting jobs and economic activities through various businesses and industries. In this study, we estimated the economic contribution of urban forestry to the regional economy in terms of several economic and business metrics including jobs, labor income, value-added, and tax collections. To this end, we developed an extensive scope of urban forest industries and activities incorporating all private, public, and non-profit businesses and organizations involved in urban forestry in the Northeastern and Midwest states. Results from the input-output modeling suggest that in 2018, urban forestry in the Northeastern and Midwest states directly contributed $17.6 billion in industry output and $13.5 billion in value-added by supporting about 258,550 full- and part-time jobs in various businesses and activities. Including direct, indirect, and induced effects, urban forestry in the region had a total contribution of $34.7 billion in industry output to the regional economy, employing more than 357,200 people with a payroll of about $16 billion. These numbers are crucial to highlight the economic significance of urban forestry businesses and agencies as well as to educate the public, economic development professionals, and legislators about the importance of urban and community forestry in the Northeastern and Midwest states.}, journal={URBAN FORESTRY & URBAN GREENING}, publisher={Elsevier BV}, author={Parajuli, Rajan and Chizmar, Stephanie and Hoy, Morgan and Joshi, Omkar and Gordon, Jason and Mehmood, Sayeed and Henderson, James E. and Poudel, Jagdish and Witthun, Olivia and Buntrock, Laura}, year={2022}, month={Mar} }
 @article{chizmar_parajuli_frey_bardon_sills_2021, title={Allocation versus completion: Explaining the distribution of the Forest Development Program fund in North Carolina}, volume={132}, ISSN={["1872-7050"]}, DOI={10.1016/j.forpol.2021.102594}, abstractNote={The Forest Development Program (FDP) is a nationally renowned state-administered cost-share assistance program for forest landowners in North Carolina, primarily funded through taxation on primary forest products across the state. While the demand for FDP cost-share funds often exceeds available resources, over one-fourth of annual allocations on average go unused, due primarily to application cancellations and the divergence of actual costs and treated acres from the amounts approved originally. This study evaluates various factors related to the utilization of allocated funds based on actual cost-share fund usage data in the last six years. Results suggest that FDP applications associated with the piedmont region, shearing and chemical site preparation, hand-planting activities, and larger applied acres are more likely to be completed as defined in the initial application. The methods and findings of this study provide useful insights to administrators of other similar public incentive programs. The need for similar analyses evaluating the utilization of public funds will likely grow as state and federal governments increasingly rely on incentive programs to meet ambitious goals in conservation and sustainable management of natural resources.}, journal={FOREST POLICY AND ECONOMICS}, author={Chizmar, Stephanie and Parajuli, Rajan and Frey, Gregory E. and Bardon, Robert E. and Sills, Erin}, year={2021}, month={Nov} }
 @misc{chizmar_parajuli_bardon_cubbage_2021, title={State Cost-Share Programs for Forest Landowners in the Southern United States: A Review}, volume={119}, ISSN={["1938-3746"]}, url={https://doi.org/10.1093/jofore/fvaa054}, DOI={10.1093/jofore/fvaa054}, abstractNote={
 
 
 The largest concentration of state-level forest cost-share programs in the United States can be found in the southern states. Since the inception of the first programs in the 1970s, the state-level forest cost-share programs in the US South have acted as models for the rest of the country. Cost-share programs compensate landowners through direct reimbursements to address barriers such as limited owner capital and cash flow in the initial years of investment. Through a review of the literature and progress reports from southern state forestry agencies, we qualitatively assessed state-level cost-share programs and their status in the southern states. We identified the common themes in the literature related to cost-share programs: market, nonmarket, and landowners’ perceptions and knowledge. Many of the programs enacted between the 1970s and 1980s aimed to ensure a sustainable timber supply, a market good, from private forestlands. A few of the programs enacted more recently compensate landowners for nonmarket benefits such as forest health or soil and water conservation. Two of the nine available programs are practically inactive in recent years because of a lack of funding. We discuss current prospects regarding funding, partnerships, and broadening the focus of incentives to cover forest-based ecosystem services.
 
 
 
 Regionally, cost-share programs in the US South differ in eligibility criteria, funding source and status, and resource management objectives. The majority of state-level cost-share programs in the US South were enacted 30 to 50 years ago. The first cost-share programs were designed to support a continued timber supply from private forestlands, but a few recent programs have expanded their objectives to protect forest health and soil and water quality. Forest-based ecosystem service markets, specifically reforestation to capture atmospheric carbon dioxide and provide clean air and water, have become more prevalent in recent years. Funding for forest commodity incentive programs is a continual challenge. New funding sources and new programs are crucial to meet demands for incentives for landowners to provide both timber and ecosystem services outputs.
}, number={2}, journal={JOURNAL OF FORESTRY}, publisher={Oxford University Press (OUP)}, author={Chizmar, Stephanie J. and Parajuli, Rajan and Bardon, Robert and Cubbage, Frederick}, year={2021}, month={Mar}, pages={177–195} }
 @article{parajuli_chizmar_megalos_bardon_2020, title={Educating Landowners on Forest-Based Alternative Income Streams in North Carolina: Program Evaluation and Lessons Learned}, volume={118}, ISSN={["1938-3746"]}, url={https://doi.org/10.1093/jofore/fvaa037}, DOI={10.1093/jofore/fvaa037}, abstractNote={
 
 
 Forest-based payments for ecosystem services markets have grown considerably in recent years. Besides timber products from harvests, forests offer multiple nontimber and intrinsic benefits, which could be important sources of income for landowners. In summer 2019, we organized four region-specific educational workshops all across North Carolina to educate landowners, Extension agents, and natural resource professionals about these alternative forest-based income streams. In this article, we cover the topics included in those workshops, postworkshop evaluation, and lessons learned from those events, which provide useful insights for Extension and outreach professionals in program design and delivery in forest-based payments for ecosystem service markets.
 
 
 
 This article presents the details of a program, postworkshop evaluation, and lessons learned, which serve as useful guidelines for Extension and outreach educators in designing and delivering similar programs in forest-based alternative income streams. Although markets for ecosystem services are improving worldwide along with increasing research and outreach efforts in forest-based intrinsic benefits, results from evaluation surveys suggest that attendees had limited knowledge in forest carbon markets, wetland mitigation banking, and conservation easements in North Carolina. More region-specific Extension and outreach programs highlighting the locally available nontimber market options are recommended all across the country. Similarly, partnerships with other state agencies and institutions in program planning, advertisement, and delivery would improve effectiveness of similar Extension and outreach programs.
}, number={6}, journal={JOURNAL OF FORESTRY}, publisher={Oxford University Press (OUP)}, author={Parajuli, Rajan and Chizmar, Stephanie and Megalos, Mark and Bardon, Robert}, year={2020}, month={Nov}, pages={551–554} }
 @article{cubbage_kanieski_rubilar_bussoni_olmos_balmelli_donagh_lord_hernández_zhang_et al._2020, title={Global timber investments, 2005 to 2017}, volume={112}, ISSN={1389-9341}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2019.102082}, DOI={10.1016/j.forpol.2019.102082}, abstractNote={We estimated timber investment returns for 22 countries and 54 species/management regimes in 2017, for a range of global timber plantation species and countries at the stand level, using capital budgeting criteria, without land costs, at a real discount rate of 8%. Returns were estimated for the principal plantation countries in the Americas—Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay, Chile, Colombia, Venezuela, Paraguay, Mexico, and the United States—as well as New Zealand, Australia, South Africa, China, Vietnam, Laos, Spain, Finland, Poland, Scotland, and France. South American plantation growth rates and their concomitant returns were generally greater, at more than 12% Internal Rates of Return (IRRs), as were those in China, Vietnam, and Laos. These IRRs were followed by those for plantations in southern hemisphere countries of Australia and New Zealand and in Mexico, with IRRs around 8%. Temperate forest plantations in the U.S. and Europe returned less, from 4% to 8%, but those countries have less financial risk, better timber markets, and more infrastructure. Returns to most planted species in all countries except Asia have decreased from 2005 to 2017. If land costs were included in calculating the overall timberland investment returns, the IRRs would decrease from 3 percentage points less for loblolly pine in the U.S. South to 8 percentage points less for eucalypts in Brazil.}, journal={Forest Policy and Economics}, publisher={Elsevier BV}, author={Cubbage, Frederick and Kanieski, Bruno and Rubilar, Rafael and Bussoni, Adriana and Olmos, Virginia Morales and Balmelli, Gustavo and Donagh, Patricio Mac and Lord, Roger and Hernández, Carmelo and Zhang, Pu and et al.}, year={2020}, month={Mar}, pages={102082} }