An Economic Model of Public Timber Sales
The inconsistencies between responsible and objective opinions and facts regarding conflicts over public timber sales are, in part, the the result of grouping all sales into one market category. The meaning of observations can be better inferred by separating the relationships between "effective capacity" and available timber supply into three categories: (1) a balance, (2) excess supply, and (3) excess effective capacity. The expected bidding behavior differs by each category. Sealed bidding probably leads to higher bid-appraisal ratios than does oral auctions, and the difference should be greatest where excess capacity prevails. The limitations for making inferences suggest a need for studies regarding firm and market performance in terms of desired social goals. Some normative observations are offered regarding the residual-value appraisal model, transaction evidence, sealed vs. oral bidding, and collusion.
No Reference information available - sign in for access.
No Citation information available - sign in for access.
No Supplementary Data.
No Article Media
Document Type: Journal Article
Affiliations: Associate Professor of Forestry and Agricultural Economics, The University of Wisconsin, Madison
Publication date: 1969-06-01
More about this publication?
- The Journal of Forestry is the most widely circulated scholarly forestry journal in the world. In print since 1902, the Journal has received several national awards for excellence. The mission of the Journal of Forestry is to advance the profession of forestry by keeping forest management professionals informed about significant developments and ideas in the many facets of forestry: economics, education and communication, entomology and pathology, fire, forest ecology, geospatial technologies, history, international forestry, measurements, policy, recreation, silviculture, social sciences, soils and hydrology, urban and community forestry, utilization and engineering, and wildlife management. The Journal is published bimonthly: January, March, May, July, September, and November.
2016 Impact Factor: 1.675 (Rank 20/64 in forestry)
Average time from submission to first decision: 39.6 days*
June 1, 2016 to Feb. 28, 2017
Also published by SAF:
Other SAF Publications
- Submit a Paper
- Membership Information
- Author Guidelines
- SAF Convention Abstracts
- Ingenta Connect is not responsible for the content or availability of external websites