Absentee landowners of agricultural land: Influences upon land management decision making and information usage

References

1. 1. Agren

   . 2008. Innovating outreach to Great Lakes basin absentee landowners. Unpublished work.
2. 1. Aldrich G.,
   2. Grimsrud K.,
   3. Thacher J.,
   4. Kotchen M.

   . 2007. Relating environmental attitudes and contingent values: How robust are methods for identifying preference heterogeneity? Environmental Resource Economics 374:757-775.

   OpenUrl
3. 1. Boxall P.C.,
   2. Adamowicz W.L.

   . 2002. Understanding heterogeneous preferences in random utility models: A latent class approach. Environmental Resource Economics 23:421-446.

   OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
4. 1. Ciaian P.,
   2. Swinnen J.F.M.

   . 2006. Land market imperfections and agricultural policy impacts in the new EU member states: A partial equilibrium analysis. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 88:799-815.

   OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
5. 1. Collins L.M.,
   2. Lanza S.T.

   . 2010. Latent class and latent transition analysis. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
6. 1. Constance D.H.,
   2. Rikoon J.S.,
   3. Ma J.C.

   . 1996. Landlord involvement in environmental decision making on rented Missouri cropland: Pesticide use and water quality issues. Rural Sociology 61:577-605.

   OpenUrl
7. 1. Dillman D.

   2000. Mail and internet surveys: The tailored design method, 2nd ed. New York: John Wiley Co.
8. 1. Druschke C.G.,
   2. Secchi S.

   . 2014. The impact of gender on agricultural conservation knowledge and attitudes in an Iowa watershed. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 69(2):95-106, doi:10.2489/jswc.69.2.95.

   OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
9. 1. Duffy M.,
   2. Johanns A.

   . 2012. Farmland ownership and tenure in Iowa 2012. 1983 Revised. Ames: Iowa State University Extension PM.
10. 1. Duffy M.,
    2. Smith D.

    . 2008. Farmland ownership and tenure in Iowa 2007. 1983 Revised. Ames: Iowa State University Extension PM.
11. 1. Finley A.O.,
    2. Kittredge D.B.

    . 2006. Thoreau, Muir, and Jane Doe: Different types of private forest owners need different kinds of forest management. Northern Journal of Applied Forestry 23:27-34.

    OpenUrl
12. 1. Gilbert J.,
    2. Beckley T.M.

    . 1993. Ownership and control of farmland: Landlord-tenant relations in Wisconsin. Rural Sociology 58:569-579.

    OpenUrl
13. 1. Haggerty J.H.,
    2. Travis W.R.

    . 2006. Out of administrative control: Absentee owners, resident elk and the shifting nature of wildlife management in southwestern Montana. Geoforum 37:816-830.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
14. 1. Huntsinger L.,
    2. Johnson M.,
    3. Stafford M.,
    4. Fried J.

    . 2010. Hardwood rangeland landowners in California from 1985-2004: Production, ecosystem services, and permanence. Rangeland Ecology & Management 63:324-334.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
15. 1. Bailey C.,
    2. Jensen L.,
    3. Ransom E.

    1. Jackson-Smith D.,
    2. Petrzelka P.

    . 2014. Land ownership in American agriculture. In Rural America in a Globalizing World: Problems and Prospects for the 2010s, eds. Bailey C., Jensen L., Ransom E.. Morgantown, WV: West Virginia University Press.
16. 1. Karppinen H.,
    2. Hanninen J.

    . 2006. Monitoring Finnish family forestry. Chronicle 82:657-661.

    OpenUrl
17. 1. Kendra A.,
    2. Hull R.B.

    . 2005. Motivations and behaviors of new forest owners in Virginia. Forest Science 51:142-154.

    OpenUrl
18. 1. Maybery D.,
    2. Crase L.,
    3. Gullifer C.

    . 2005. Categorizing farming values as economic, conservation and lifestyle. Journal of Economic Psychology 26:59-72.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
19. 1. Mendham E.,
    2. Curtis A.

    . 2010. Taking over the reins: trends and impacts of changes in rural property ownership. Society and Natural Resources 23:653-668.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
20. 1. Myyrä S.,
    2. Pouta E.

    . 2010. Farmland owners' land sale preferences: Can they be affected by taxation programs? Land Economics 86:245-262.

    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
21. 1. Perry-Hill R.,
    2. Prokopy L.S.

    . 2014. Comparing different types of rural landowners: Implications for conservation practice adoption. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 69(3):266-278, doi:10.2489/jswc.69.3.266.

    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
22. 1. Petrzelka P.

    2012. Absentee landowners in the Great Lakes Basin: Who they are and implications for conservation outreach. Society and Natural Resources 8:821-832.

    OpenUrl
23. 1. Petrzelka P.,
    2. Ma Z.,
    3. Malin S.

    . 2013. The elephant in the room: Absentee landowners and conservation management. Land Use Policy 30:157-166.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
24. 1. Petrzelka P.,
    2. Malin S.,
    3. Gentry B.

    . 2012. Absentee landowners and conservation programs: Mind the gap. Land Use Policy 29:220-223.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
25. 1. Petrzelka P.,
    2. Marquart-Pyatt S.

    . 2011. Land tenure in the US: Power, gender, and consequences for conservation decision making. Agriculture and Human Values 28:549-560.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
26. 1. Pouta E.,
    2. Myyrä S.,
    3. Hanninen H.

    . 2011. Farm landowners' objectives in Finland: Two approaches for owner classifications. Society and Natural Resources 24:1042-1062.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
27. 1. Putten v.I.E.,
    2. Jennings S.M.,
    3. Louviere J.J.,
    4. Burgess L.B.

    . 2011. Tasmanian landowner preferences for conservation incentive programs: A latent class approach. Journal of Environmental Management 92:2647-2656.

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
28. 1. Redmon L.A.,
    2. Clary G.M.,
    3. Cleere J.J.,
    4. Evers G.W.,
    5. Habry V.A.,
    6. Long C.R.,
    7. Nelson L.R.,
    8. Randel R.D.,
    9. Rouquette M. Jr..,
    10. Smith G.R.,
    11. Thrift T.L.

    . 2004. Pasture and livestock management workshop for novices: A new curriculum for a new clientele. Journal of Natural Resource Life Sciences Education 33:7-10.

    OpenUrl
29. 1. Rickenbach M.,
    2. Kittredge D.B.

    . 2009. Time and distance: Comparing motivations among forest landowners in New England, USA. Small-scale Forestry 8:95-108.

    OpenUrl
30. 1. Salmon O.,
    2. Brunson M.,
    3. Kuhns M.

    . 2006. Benefit-based audience segmentation: A tool for identifying nonindustrial (NIPF) owner education needs. Journal of Forestry 104:419-425.

    OpenUrl
31. The Progress Report. 2002. Congress increases handouts to absentee landlords, corporate agribusiness. http://www.progress.org/tpr/congress-increases-handouts-to-absentee-landlords-corporate-agribusiness/.
32. 1. USDA NASS (National Agricultural Statistics Service)

    2007. Census of Agriculture. http://www.agcensus.usda.gov/.
33. 1. Wells B.,
    2. Eells J.

    . 2011. One size does not fit all: Customizing conservation to a changing demographic. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 66(5):136A-139A, doi:10.2489/jswc.66.5.136A.

    OpenUrlFREE Full Text