Abstract
Requirements on businesses made by society, public and customers for taking different responsibilities have increased, i.e., balancing economic, environmental and social concerns. Based on literature about corporate responsibility and small scale forest owners this article presents a case study of small scale forest owners’ responsibilities in achieving sustainable forest management and Swedish Forest Agency’s local office holders’ expectations. Interviews have been made with ten small scale forest owners. The results show that no obvious conflict exists between economic and environmental responsibilities. The financial benefits for the owners for taking more environmental and social responsibility are small. The two office holders that were interviewed expect forest owners to take responsibilities. The weight that the interviewed owners give to their wishes is low.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
References
Boon TE, Meilby H, Jellesmark Thorsen B (2004) An empirically based typology of private forest owners in Denmark: improving communication between authorities and owners. Scand J For Res 19(4):45–55
Creighton JH, Baumgartner DM, Blatner KA (2002) Ecosystem management and nonindustrial private forest landowners in Washington State, USA. Small-Scale For Econ Manag Policy 1(1):55–69
Eriksson M (1989) Ägarstrukturens förändring inom privatskogsbruket—i ett historiskt perspektiv (Change of small scale forest owners’ structure—a historical perspective). The Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Forest-Industry-Market Studies, Report No 26
Favada IM, Karppinen H, Kuuluvainen J, Mikkola J, Stavness C (2009) Effects of timber prices, ownership objectives, and owner characteristics on timber supply. For Sci 55(6):512–523
Garriga E, Melé D (2004) Corporate social responsibility theories: Mapping the territory. J Bus Ethic 53(1–2):51–71
Gildea RL (1994) Consumer survey confirms corporate social responsibility affects buying decisions. Pub Relat Q 39(4):20–21
Grayson D, Hodges A (2004) Corporate social opportunity! 7 steps to make corporate social responsibility work for your business. Greenleaf publishing, Sheffield
Henderson D (2001) Misguided virtue: false notions of corporate social responsibility, New Zealand Business Roundtable. Institute of Economic Affairs, London, 171 p
Hugosson M, Ingemarson F (2004) Objectives and motivatoins of small-scale forest owners; theoretical modelling and qualitative assessment. Silva Fennica 38(2):217–231
Ingemarson F, Lindhagen A, Eriksson L (2006) A typology of small-scale private forest owners in Sweden. Scand J For Res 21(3):249–259
Karppinen H, Hänninen H (2006) Monitoring Finnish family forestry. For Chron 82(5):657–661
Kurttila M, Hämäläinen K, Kajanus M, Pesonen M (2001) Non-industrial private forest owners’ attitudes towards the operational environment of forestry—a multinominal logit model analysis. For Policy Econ 2(1):13–28
Kvarda E (2004) Non-agricultural forest owners in Austria—a new type of forest ownership. For Policy Econ 6(5):459–467
Lagerlöf P, Scheibenpflug A (2010) Enskilda skogsägares syn på ansvarstagande—Drivkrafter och hinder. Master thesis, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Faculty of Natural Resources and Agricultural Sciences, Department of Economics
Leppänen J (2010) Finnish family forest owner 2010 survey. Scand For Econ 43:184–195
Lidestav G, Ekström M (2000) Introducing gender in studies on management behaviour among non-industrial private forest owners. Scand J For Res 15(3):378–386
Mark-Herbert C, Rotter J, Pakersht A (2010) Timeless cityland. In: Berg P (ed) A triple bottom line to ensure corporate responsibility
Mikkilä M (2006) The many faces of responsibility: acceptability of the global pulp and paper industry in various societies. The Finnish Society of Forest Science, Unioninkatu 40A, 00170 Helsinki, Finland. http://www.metla.fi/dissertationes. Accessed 24 June 2008
Nystad Ø, Haugland Smith K (2006) Is the motivation for CSR profits or ethics? Presented at the corporate responsibility research conference. Trinity Collage Dublin, Ireland
Porter M, van der Linde C (1995) Green and competitive: ending the stalemate. Harvard Business Review, September–October, pp 120–134
Raditya DA (2009) Case studies of corporate social responsibility (CSR) in forest products companies—and customer’s perspectives. Examensarbeten, SLU Institutionen för skogens produkter nr 42
Ripatti P (1996) Factors affecting partitioning of private forest holdings in Finland. A logit analysis. Acta forestalia fennica, vol 252. Finnish Forest Research Institute, 84 p
van Marrewijk M (2003) Concepts and definitions of CSR and corporate sustainability: between agency and communion. J Bus Ethics 44(2/3):95–105
Zaman M, Yamin M, Wong F (1996) Environmental consumerism and buying preferences for green products. In: Riquier C, Sharp B (eds) Proceedings of the Australian Marketing Educators’ Conference. Theory and Application, vol II. Marketing Science Centre. University of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia, pp 613–626
Ziegenspeck S, Härdter U, Schraml U (2004) The future of european forestry—between urbanization and rural development. Lifestyles of private forest owners as an indication of social change. For Policy Econ 6(5):447–458
Acknowledgments
The interviews were made by Lagerlöf and Scheibenpflug as a part of their master thesis (2010).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Lönnstedt, L. Small Scale Forest Owners’ Responsibilities: Results from a Swedish Case Study. Small-scale Forestry 11, 407–416 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11842-011-9187-6
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11842-011-9187-6