The document summarizes a study comparing US consumer perspectives on forest certification from 1995 and 2010. It finds that while general environmental attitudes were slightly more negative in 2010, attitudes and behaviors around certification changed little. Consumers expressed greater willingness to pay premiums for certified wood products in 2010 compared to 1995, especially at higher price points. Levels of trust in different entities to manage certification also saw little change over the period.

1. A Temporal St d of Certification f
T l Study f C tifi ti from
the US Consumer Perspective:
1995 & 2010
RICHARD VLOSKY AND LUCIE K. OZANNE
Forest Products Society 65th International Convention
June 19‐21, 2011
Portland, Oregon

2. A Review of the Literature
Ottman (1998)
 Consumers are concerned about the environmental impacts of their
consumption behaviors.
consumption behaviors
ORC International (2011)
 Confusion about environmental terminology reigns and consumers
may stop purchasing from businesses they feel are deceptive.
 Americans— 97% in 2011 as compared to 90% in 2008— believe they
know what common environmental marketing claims such as green
or environmentally friendly mean.
Fliegelman (2010)
 While manufacturers continue to advertise using traditional
terminology, the focus has shifted to the carbon neutrality or
gy, y
sustainability of products.

3. A Review of the Literature
Ozanne and Vlosky (1997)
 16.5 million Americans who would likely seek out and buy certified
wood products.
 Respondents said they’d pay a price premium: 4.4% ‐ 18.7%.
Ozanne and Smith (1998)
 25 million Americans who may seek out environmentally certified
forest products.
Humphries et al. (2001)
 Wood products merchants in 1998 received premiums between 1%
and 15% and also incurred 1%‐15%+ in incremental costs for certified
wood products.
p
Hrabovsky and Armstrong (2005)
 Success of certification systems is the consumers' willingness to pay
a premium for certified hardwood products.
i f tifi d h d d d t
 61% hardwood lumber exporters stated that their customers will only
pay less than 1 percent.

4. A Review of the Literature
Anderson and Hansen (2004)
 Consumer purchasing behavior and willingness to pay for
certified wood products are contingent on the information
displayed on the eco‐label carried by certified wood products.
Teisl et al. (2002)
Teisl et al (2002)
 Suggested that consumers are unsure whether to trust the
information presented on a forest certification label.
Anderson (2003)
 Experimental Design Results suggest that price is a more
compelling product attribute than the ecolabel.
 Presence of an ecolabel was associated with increased sales, so
long as there was no price premium on the ecolabeled product.
long as there was no price premium on the ecolabeled product

5. Introduction
 In 1995, Ozanne and Vlosky surveyed US consumers to
determine:
d i
 perceptions of environmentally certified wood products
 willingness to incur a premium for certified wood products
 most trusted entity to certify
 In 2000, 2005, and 2010 this study was replicated using the
remaining deliverable respondents from the previous study
 Third Party certification is the focus of these studies
Third‐Party certification is the focus of these studies
 This presentation will compare results from 1995 & 2010

6. Research Methodology
Research Methodology
 Mail survey using the Total Design Method (Dillman 1978,
2000, 2007)
2000 2007)
 Sample frame:
 homeowners
 over 18 years old
 incomes over $30,000
 Used remaining deliverable respondents from previous study
 Started with 2,500 mailed in 2005 and 571 mailed in 2010.
,5 5 57
 Response rates: 1995‐27%; 2000‐33%; 2005‐34%; 2010‐18%

7. Results

8. Respondent Demographics
Sig.
Mean Mean Change 2‐tail
1995 2010 1995 2010
1995‐2010 t test
t‐test
Age 51 64 13 years **
Percent Percent
1995 2010 Χ2
Ethnic Group Caucasian: 94% 93% 0.644
African American: 2% 5%
Native American: 1% 1%
Asian/Pacific Islander: 1% 1%
Hispanic: 1% 0%
Other: 1% 0%

9. Respondent Demographics
Percent Percent
1995 2010 χ2
Gender
G d Female:
F l 48%
8% %
45% 8
0.583
Male: 52% 55%
Marital Married/Living with Partner: 70% 71% 0.631
Status Never Married: 10% 7%
Divorced/Separated: 12% 12%
Widowed: 8% 10%
Political Democrat: 32% 36% 0.770
Party Republican: 44% 41%
Independent:
p 22% 23%
3
Other: 2% 1%

10. Respondent Demographics
Percent Percent
1995 2010 χ2
Education
Ed ti Some high school:
S hi h h l 1%
% 1%
% 0.246
6
High school graduate: 13% 21%
Some college: 34% 25%
College graduate: 32% 32%
Graduate/Advanced degree: 19% 21%
Income:
co e U de $ 0,000
Under $20,000 7% 3% 0 043
0.043*
$20,000 ‐ $39,999 19% 14%
$40,000 ‐ $59,999 28% 18%
$60,000 ‐ $79,999 21% 23%
$80,000 ‐ $99,999 10% 17%
$100,000 ‐ $124,999 8% 13%
$125,000 ‐ $149,000 3% 5%
Over $150,000 4% 8%
* Significant at 0.05

11. General Environmental Attitudes
Scale: 1= Strongly Disagree; 3= Neutral; 5= Strongly Agree
gy g ;3 ;5 gy g
Sig.
Mean Mean Change 2‐tail
1995 2010 1995‐2010 t‐test
tt t
Whenever possible, I buy
products which I consider 4.0 3.8
environmentally safe.
I would pay more for
environmentally friendly 3.4 3.3
products.
I believe that
environmental
4.1
41 4.0
40
information on packaging
is important.
I generally believe
g y
environmental 3.6 3.6
information on packaging.

12. General Environmental Attitudes
Scale: 1= Strongly Disagree; 3= Neutral; 5= Strongly Agree
gy g ;3 ;5 gy g
Sig.
Mean Mean Change 2‐tail
1995 2010 1995‐2010
1995 2010 t‐test
t test
I believe there is much
corporations can do to 4.3 4.2
improve the environment.
i th i t
I believe there is much
individuals can do to 4.3 4.2
improve the environment
h

13. Extracting Raw Materials to produce the following
p
products is harmful to the environment
Scale: 1= Strongly Disagree; 3= Neutral; 5= Strongly Agree
Sig.
Mean Mean Change 2‐tail
1995 2010 1995‐2010 t‐test
Steel 3.2
32 3.1
31
Plastic 3.3 3.6 *
Glass 2.7 2.7
Lumber from temperate f
L b f t t forests
t 3.2 2.8
8 **
Lumber from tropical forests 3.9 3.8
*Significant at 0.05
** Significant at 0.01

14. Manufacturing the following products
is harmful to the environment
Scale: 1= Strongly Disagree; 3= Neutral; 5= Strongly Agree
Sig.
Mean M
M Mean Ch
Change t il
2‐tail
1995 2010 1995‐2010 t‐test
Steel 3.6
36 3.3
33
Plastic 3.6 3.6
Glass 2.9 2.9
Lumber from temperate f
b f forests 3.0 3.0
Lumber from tropical forests 3.3 3.5

15. Certification Attitudes
Scale: 1= Strongly Disagree; 3= Neutral; 5= Strongly Agree
gy g ;3 ;5 gy g
Sig.
Mean Mean Change 2‐tail
1995 2010 1995‐2010 t‐test
tt t
I understand the concept of
3.8 3.8
certification.
If available, I would seek out
3.6 3.5
certified wood products.
I have purchased certified wood
I h h d tifi d d
2.9 3.0
products in the past year.
I believe certification can reduce
3.9
39 3.7
37
tropical deforestation.

16. Level of Trust to Manage Forest
Management Certification
Management Certification
Scale: 1= Trust Most; 4= Trust Least

17. Willingness to Pay Premiums
for Certified Wood Products
Product Base Price
2"x4"‐8' Stud
8S d $1
Ready‐to‐Assemble Chair $100
Dining Room Set $1000
Kitchen Remodeling Job $5,000
New Home $100,000
$100 000

18. Average Percent Premium Respondents Say they are
Willing to Pay for Certified Wood Products
g y
(Weighted Average)
**
**
** Significant difference at 0.01

19. Percent of Respondents that are NOT Willing to
Pay a Premium for Certified Wood Products
y

20. Conclusions
 Environmental attitudes, behaviors, and perceptions were
slightly more negative in 2010. No statistically significant
differences were found.
 C tifi ti ttit d b h i
Certification attitudes, behaviors, and perceptions were slightly
d ti li htl
more negative in 2010. No statistically significant differences
were found.
 Levels of trust to certify have very little between 1995 and 2010.
No statistically significant differences were found.
 Stated willingness‐to‐pay premiums for certified wood
products at different price points increased as did percent
premiums.
premiums

21. ? ? ?
? ?
? ?
?
? Questions
Q ti
?
? ?
? ? ? ?
? ? ?
?