Federal and state policy influence on woody biomass utilization

A considerable portion of public lands in the United States is at risk of uncharacteristically severe wildfires due to a history of fire suppression. Wildfires already have detrimental impacts on the landscape and on communities in the wildland-urban interface (WUI) due to unnatural and overstocked forests. Strategies to mitigate wildfire risk include mechanical thinning and prescribed burning in areas with high wildfire risk. The material removed is often of little or no economic value. Woody biomass utilization (WBU) could offset the costs of hazardous fuel treatments if removed material could be used for wood products, heat, or electricity production. However, barriers due to transportation costs, removal costs, and physical constraints (such as steep slopes) hinder woody biomass utilization. Various federal and state policies attempt to overcome these barriers. WBU has the potential to aid in wildfire mitigation and meet growing state mandates for renewable energy. This research utilizes interview data from individuals involved with on-the-ground woody biomass removal and utilization to determine how federal and state policies influence woody biomass utilization. Results suggest that there is not one over-arching policy that hinders or promotes woody biomass utilization, but rather woody biomass utilization is hindered by organizational constraints related to time, cost, and quality of land management agencies’ actions. However, the use of stewardship contracting (a hybrid timber sale and service contract) shows promise for increased WBU, especially in states with favorable tax policies and renewable energy mandates. Policy recommendations to promote WBU include renewal of stewardship contracting legislations and a re-evaluation of land cover types suited for WBU. Potential future policies to consider include the indirect role of carbon dioxide emission reduction activities to promote wood energy and future impacts of air quality regulations.

HEALTH AND SAFETY ISSUES IN THE WORKPLACE: THE CASE OF CAMEROON TEA ESTATE (CTE), A RISK COMMUNICATION APPROACH

In 2002, motivated largely by the uncontested belief that the private sector would operate more efficiently than the government, the government of Cameroon initiated a major effort to privatize some of Cameroon’s largest, state-run industries. One of the economic sectors affected by this privatization was tea production. In October 2002, the Cameroon Tea Estate (CTE), a privately owned, tea-cultivating organization, bought the Tole Tea Estate from the Cameroon Development Corporation (CDC), a government-owned entity. This led to an increase in the quantity of tea production; however, the government and CTE management appear not to have fully considered the risks of privatization. Using classical rhetorical theory, Richard Weaver’s conception of “god terms” (or “uncontested terms”), and John Ikerd’s ethical approach to risk communication, this study examines risks to which Tole Tea Estate workers were exposed and explores rhetorical strategies that workers employed in expressing their discontent. Sources for this study include online newspapers, which were selected on the basis of their reputation and popularity in Cameroon. Analysis of the data shows that, as a consequence of privatization, Tole Tea Estate workers were exposed to three basic risks: marginalization, unfulfilled promises, and poor working conditions. Workers’ reactions to these risks tended to grow more emotional as management appeared to ignore their demands. The study recommends that respect for labor law, constructive dialogue among stakeholders, and transparency might serve as guiding principles in responding to the politics of privatization in developing countries.