Table 3.

Ordered logistic results and marginal effect for having tree on property and community. Funds in U.S. dollars.

Variables	Have tree on property (Y¹)				Have trees in community (Y²)
	Ordered logit	Marginal effect %			Ordered logit	Marginal effect %
		Y¹ = low	Y¹ = median	Y¹ = high		Y² = low	Y² = median	Y² = high
Intercept 1	1.75^{^z} (0.13)				2.01^{^z} (0.15)
Intercept 2	−0.44 (0.93)				−0.37 (0.95)
Benefit of tree	−0.001 (0.01)	0. 03	−0. 01	−0. 02	−0.0004 (0.011)	0. 01	−0. 006	−0. 004
Negative impact	−0.04 (0.03)	1.01	−0. 42	−0. 58	−0.07^{^z} (0.03)	1.78	−1.03	−0. 74
Awareness of tree service	0.004 (0.07)	−0.10	0.04	0.06	−0.03 (0.07)	0.63	−0.37	−0. 27
Family size	0.21 (0.16)	−5.07	2.14	2.93	0.25 (0.16)	−6.06	3.51	2.54
Child < 18 yrs	−0.15 (0.20)	3.72	−1.57	−2.15	−0.20 (0.21)	4.72	−2.74	−1.98
College	0.63^{^y} (0.33)	−15.39	6.49	8.89	0.70^{^z} (0.34)	−17.00	9.86	7.13
Bachelor	0.16 (0.31)	−3.78	1.57	2.18	0.27 (0.32)	−6.55	3.80	2.74
White	0.34 (0.29)	−8.26	3.49	4.77	0.43 (0.29)	−10.27	5.96	4.31
Male	−0.09 (0.21)	2.10	−0. 89	−1.22	−0.21 (0.21)	5.15	−2.99	−2.16
Age	−0.003 (0.008)	−0. 08	0. 03	−0. 04	0.002 (0.008)	−0. 05	0.03	0.02
Income (in thousand $)	0.001 (0.003)	−0. 03	0. 01	0. 02	0.001 (0.003)	−0. 04	0.02	0. 02
Employed	−0.41^{^y} (0.23)	9.92	−4.18	−5.73	−0.32 (0.23)	7.56	−4.38	−3.17
χ²	15.22				15.94
Likelihood ratio	13.00				14.46

↵^zstatistically significant at 5% level
↵^ystatistically significant at 10% level
Note: “Awareness of trees service” is defined as the total number of forestry agency he/she knew at the time of the survey. Values in parenthesis indicate standard error.