The potential rural development impacts of utilizing non-merchantable forest biomass
Open accessIntegrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Doing so at a community scale, rather than industrial scale and locating a campus in a more urban area, allows local physical and human capital to be revitalized and to generate stronger benefits directly to the local community.
“Doing so at a community-scale (rather than industrial-scale and locating a campus in a more urban area) allows for local physical and human capital that are otherwise ideal to be revitalized and to generate stronger benefits to the local community directly [26].”
From Linking Federal Forest Restoration with Wood Utilization: Modeling Biomass Prices and Analyzing Forest Restoration Costs in the Northern Sierra Nevada (2021) · cites this paper as [26]
Development of community-scale wood utilization campuses represents an opportunity to promote rural economic development in forested communities that are still struggling to recover from the decline of the timber industry.
“Development of community-scale wood utilization campuses also represents an opportunity to promote rural economic development in forested communities that are still struggling to recover from the decline of the timber industry [22,26].”
From Linking Federal Forest Restoration with Wood Utilization: Modeling Biomass Prices and Analyzing Forest Restoration Costs in the Northern Sierra Nevada (2021) · cites this paper as [26]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Swezy, C., Bailey, J., & Chung, W. (2021) · Energies · doi:10.3390/en14092696 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
“Doing so at a community-scale (rather than industrial-scale and locating a campus in a more urban area) allows for local physical and human capital that are otherwise ideal to be revitalized and to generate stronger benefits to the local community directly [26].”
Background
- Authors
- Crandall, M. S., Adams, D. M., Montgomery, C. A., & Smith, D.
- Affiliations
- University of Maine (US)
- Oregon State University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Crandall, Mindy S.
- Venue
- Forest Policy and Economics
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2017-01
- Volume
- 74
- Pages
- 20-29
- ISSN
- 1389-9341 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2550915513
- Cited by
- 17
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 2
- FWCI
- 1.73
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Forest Policy and Economics (acceptedVersion)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Northwest Advanced Renewables Alliance
- Agriculture and Food Research Initiative Competitive
- USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture (2011-68005-30416)
- USDA NIFA (1005416)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Mechanics of Materials › Forest Biomass Utilization and Management
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Forestry › Agricultural and Food Sciences
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Forest Management and Policy
- Keywords
- harvest residues, small-diameter trees, biomass market, rural development, biomass prices, wildfire risk reduction, forest restoration, forest industry, western Oregon, spatially explicit model, biomass subsidies
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
