Upholstered household furniture in the United States: A survey of current ownership and purchasing plans

This report presents highlights of the results of a telephone survey of U.S. households concerning their ownership, purchasing plans, and preferences regarding upholstered household furniture. The survey was conducted in October and November 1989, by the Survey Research Unit of the Social Science Research Center of the Mississippi Agricultural and Forestry Experiment Station. The SUl\u27Vey also included Canadian households, and subsequent reports will present results for Canada as well as statistical analyses of specific results for both countries. The sUl\u27vey was intended to help identify market potential for various items of upholstered household furniture, and the results are therefore not dependent on short-term economic conditions. The economic recession in the United States since the 1989 survey does not affect the validity of results; market potential becomes sup· pressed demand in an economic downturn

Discount Rates for Nonindustrial Private Forest Landowners in Mississippi: How High a Hurdle?

Mississippi forest landowners were surveyed to determine average discount rates or “hurdle rates”—the lowest rates of return they consider acceptable—for 3 nonforestry investments, and for 5, 15, and 25 yr forestry investments. The survey included 829 individuals who owned at least 20 ac of uncultivated land and had harvested timber during a recent 5 yr period; survey results are therefore oriented toward commercially active forest landowners. On average, the private nonindustrial forest landowners included in the survey expect timberland investments to earn higher rates of compound interest than relatively low-risk bank savings accounts and certificates of deposit. Relatively short-term (5 yr) timberland investments, however, have lower minimum rates of return than stocks, bonds, and mutual funds. With forestry investments, all else equal, Mississippi nonindustrial private forest landowners prefer shorter time periods—average hurdle rates in nominal terms before taxes were 8.0% for forestry investments lasting 5 yr, 11.3% for those lasting 15 yr, and 13.1% for those lasting 25 yr. Household income significantly influenced the lowest rate of return considered acceptable for 5 yr forestry investments—the rate was 9% for landowners with annual incomes above $50,000 and 7.4$50,000. On a hurdle rate basis, higher income private landowners in Mississippi generally find forestry investments lasting 15 yr to be competitive with stocks, bonds, and mutual funds. However, Mississippi landowners’ 13.1% required rate of return for 25 yr forestry investments was higher than the rate considered acceptable for the other investments included in the survey. Reforestation tax incentives, cost-shares, and related public policies that reduce the front-end costs incurred by NIPF landowners tend to increase the projected rate of return for relatively long-term reforestation investments. South. J. Appl. For. 26(1):26–31

Comparison Between Regenerators and Non-Regenerators in Mississippi: A Discriminant Analysis

Nonindustrial private forestland (NIPF) landowners in Mississippi who recently harvested timber were surveyed to examine their regeneration behavior. Differences between regenerators and nonregenerators were investigated by looking at the different factors affecting reforestation decisions. A discriminant analysis was used to identify factors that were useful in differentiating between regenerators and nonregenerators. Ownership size; sociodemographic characteristics such as income, education, place of residence, and age; awareness of existing government incentive/assistance programs; and participation in educational programs were significant variables in differentiating between regenerators and nonregenerators. Landowners who own larger timberlands had a higher propensity to engage in regeneration activities after harvests. This also was true for landowners who had higher income levels and educational attainment, and were younger, city resident, and white. Landowners who were aware of existing government incentive/assistance programs and those who participated in educational programs also were more likely to participate in pine regeneration. Landowners in Mississippi considered both ecological and economic reasons as highly important considerations in their decision to regenerate. The belief that the land would reforest itself to pine naturally, the high cost of reforestation, and lack of information on reforestation options were top reasons cited by landowners for their decision not to regenerate. South. J. Appl. For. 28(4):189 –19