Advertisement

Small-scale Forestry

, Volume 18, Issue 4, pp 393–410 | Cite as

Characterizing Small Private Forests and Forest Owners’ Motivations and Attitudes in Trentino (Eastern Alps, Italy)

  • Maria RizzoEmail author
  • Patrizia Gasparini
  • Sergio Tonolli
  • Roberto Zoanetti
  • Dino Buffoni
  • Francesco Dellagiacoma
Original Research
  • 69 Downloads

Abstract

Private forests represent approximately 60% of forest land in the European Union, but the knowledge on the number of private forest holdings and their size, both at the European and sub-national or local level, is significantly lacking and unharmonized. It is commonly known, however, that private forests are characterized by a high and small size of forest holdings. The parcelization of private forests may hinder the active and ecologically sustainable forest management. Characterizing small private forests is an important issue, since small forest holdings represent an important part of the forest sector in Europe. The aims of the present study were to describe the structure of small private forest ownerships of a study area in the Alps (Trentino province, Italy), and to investigate their attitudes and motivations. First, a detailed map of private forest parcels in the study area was produced to assess their extent and number, as well as the number of private owners. The distribution of small private forests in the study area by classes of elevation and slope were also investigated. The results confirmed that private forests are extremely fragmented and that the small or very small forests (0.1–5 ha) represent almost 90% of the total private forest area. Secondly, a questionnaire was developed and an explorative survey conducted on a sample of small forest owners in the study area to analyze their perceptions of the importance of forest production and services and their forest management attitudes.

Keywords

Private forest owners Small-scale forestry Family forestry Parcelization Forest management attitudes Forest owners’ motivations Italian Alps 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors are grateful to Prof. Carlo Buzzi and Prof. Francesca Sartori of the University of Trento for their suggestions on the design of the questionnaire. They are also grateful to the forest wardens of Ala, Capriana and Roncone who conducted the interviews.

References

  1. Boon TE, Meilby H, Thorsen BJ (2004) An empirical based typology of private forest owners in Denmark. Improving the communication between authorities and owners. Scand J For Res 19(4):45–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Butler B, Leatherberry EC (2004) America’s family forest owners. J For 102(7):4–14Google Scholar
  3. Canton A, Pettenella D (2010) Motivazioni gestionali dei proprietari forestali privati: un caso di studio nel comune di Recoaro Terme (VI). Forest 7:44–57.  https://doi.org/10.3832/efor0618-007 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. D’Amato AW, Catanzaro PF, Damery DT, Kittredge DB, Ferrare KA (2010) Are family forest owners facing a future in which forest management is not enough? J For 108(1):32–38Google Scholar
  5. De Natale F, Gasparini P, Carriero A (2007) A study on tree colonization of abandoned land in the Italian alps: extent and some characteristics of new forest stands in Trentino. In: Reynolds KM, Thomson AJ, Shannon MA, Köhl M, Ray D, Rennolls K (eds) Sustainable forestry in theory and practice. CAB International, Wallingford, pp 269–284Google Scholar
  6. Finley AO, Kittredge DB (2006) Thoreau, Muir and Jane Doe: different types of forest owners need different kinds of forest management. North J Appl For 23(1):27–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. FOREST EUROPE (2015) State of Europe’s Forests 2015. Ministerial Conference on the Protection of Forests in Europe, 2015. http://foresteurope.org/state-europes-forests-2015-report. Accessed 11 Jan 2018
  8. Gasparini P, Di Cosmo L (2016) National forest inventory reports—Italy. In: Vidal C, Alberdi I, Hernández L, Redmond J (eds) National forest inventories—assessment of wood availability and use. Springer, Berlin, pp 485–506. ISBN 978-3-319-44014-9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gasparini P, Tabacchi G (eds) (2011) L’Inventario Nazionale delle Foreste e dei serbatoi forestali di Carbonio INFC 2005. Secondo inventario forestale nazionale italiano. Metodi e risultati. Ministero delle Politiche Agricole, Alimentari e Forestali. Corpo Forestale dello Stato. Consiglio per la Ricerca e la Sperimentazione in Agricoltura, Unità di ricerca per il Monitoraggio e la Pianificazione Forestale. Edagricole, MilanoGoogle Scholar
  10. Hugosson M, Ingemarson F (2004) Objectives and motivations of small-scale forest owners; theoretical modelling and qualitative assessment. Silva Fenn 38(2):217–231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 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.  https://doi.org/10.1080/02827580600662256 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. ISTAT (2010) 6° Censimento Generale dell’Agricoltura. Caratteristiche strutturali delle aziende agricole. Istituto Nazionale di Statistica, RomaGoogle Scholar
  13. Karppinen H (1998a) Objectives of non-industrial private forest owners: differences and future trends in southern and northern Finland. J For Econ 4(2):147–173Google Scholar
  14. Karppinen H (1998b) Values and objectives of non-industrial private forest owners in Finland. Silva Fenn 32(1):43–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kendra A, Hull RB (2005) Motivations and behaviors of new forest owners in Virginia. For Sci 51(2):142–154Google Scholar
  16. Kurtz WB, Lewis BJ (1981) Decision-making framework for non-industrial private forest owners: an application in the Missouri Ozarks. J For 79:285–288Google Scholar
  17. Lidestav G, Nordfjell T (2005) A conceptual model for understanding social practices in family forestry. Small-scale For 4:391.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11842-005-0024-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. MAF-ISAFA (1988) Inventario forestale nazionale—IFN1985. Sintesi metodologica e risultati. Ministero dell’Agricoltura e delle Foreste, Corpo Forestale dello Stato. Istituto Sperimentale per l’Assestamento Forestale e per l’Alpicoltura, TrentoGoogle Scholar
  19. Majumdar I, Teeter L, Butler B (2008) Characterizing family forest owners: a cluster analysis approach. For Sci 54(2):176–184Google Scholar
  20. Mozzato D (2014) La propensione dei proprietari forestali alla produzione di servizi ecosistemici. Un’analisi dei determinanti nelle aree montane della regione Veneto. Università di Padova, tesi di laurea a.a. 2013/14Google Scholar
  21. Mozzato D, Gatto P (2016) Determinanti, attitudini e disponibilità alla produzione di beni e di servizi da parte dei proprietari forestali privati: una rassegna della letteratura internazionale. Forest 13:18–30. http://www.sisef.it/forest@/contents/?id=efor1751-013 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Nordlund A, Westin K (2011) Forest values and forest management attitudes among private forest owners in Sweden. Forests 2:30–50.  https://doi.org/10.3390/f201 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Paletto A (2011) Proprietà. In: Gasparini P, Tabacchi G (eds) L’Inventario Nazionale delle Foreste e dei serbatoi forestali di Carbonio INFC 2005. Secondo inventario forestale nazionale italiano. Metodi e risultati. Ministero delle Politiche Agricole, Alimentari e Forestali. Corpo Forestale dello Stato. Consiglio per la Ricerca e la Sperimentazione in Agricoltura, Unità di ricerca per il Monitoraggio e la Pianificazione Forestale. Edagricole Milano, pp 114–117Google Scholar
  24. R Core Team (2014) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna. http://www.R-project.org Google Scholar
  25. Rickenbach MG, Kittredge DB, Dennis D, Stevens T (1998) Ecosystem management: capturing the concept for woodland owners. J For 96(4):18–24Google Scholar
  26. Rodrígues-Vicente V, Marey-Pérez M (2009) Land-use and land-base patterns in non-industrial private forests: factors affecting forest management in Northern Spain. For Policy Econ 11(2009):475–490CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Sampson N, De Coster L (2000) Forest fragmentation: implications for sustainable private forests. J For 98(3):4–8Google Scholar
  28. Schmithüsen F, Hirsch F (2010) Private forest ownership in Europe. Geneva timber and forest study paper 26. UNECE/FAO, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  29. Sekot W (2017) Forest accountancy data networks as a means to investigating small-scale forestry: a European perspective. Small-scale For 16:435–449CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Sitzia T (2009) Ecologia e gestione dei boschi di neoformazione nel paesaggio del Trentino. Provincia Autonoma di Trento, Servizio Foreste e Fauna, Trento. ISBN 978-88-7702-233-2Google Scholar
  31. UNECE/FAO, MCPFE and CEPF (2007) Enquiry private forest ownership in Europe. UNECE/FAO, Ministerial Conference on the Protection of Forests in Europe (MCPFE) and Confederation of the European Forest Owners (CEPF), GenevaGoogle Scholar
  32. Young RA, Reichenbach MR (1987) Factors influencing the timber harvest intentions of nonindustrial private forest owners. For Sci 33(2):381–393.  https://doi.org/10.1093/forestscience/33.2.381 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Steve Harrison, John Herbohn 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Consiglio per la ricerca in agricoltura e l’analisi dell’economia agraria Centro di ricerca Foreste e Legno (CREA-FL)TrentoItaly
  2. 2.Dipartimento Territorio, Agricoltura, Ambiente e ForesteProvincia Autonoma di TrentoTrentoItaly
  3. 3.Servizio CatastoProvincia Autonoma di TrentoTrentoItaly

Personalised recommendations