Abstract
Protecting biodiversity within separate set-aside conservation areas has not been effective enough to halt its loss. Thus, new approaches to conserve biodiversity alongside production are needed. The non-market values of a forest may play an essential role when the forest owner decides the use of their land. However, so far the service offerings other than related to timber production, have been scant. The mismatch between decision support services offered and the service interests of forest owners may result in the objectives of forest owners remaining unfulfilled. The aims of this study were to explore the links between family forest owners’ forest management preferences and their objectives for the forest and secondly their preferences for decision support services. Data were collected in a postal survey in the Northern Karelia region, Finland in spring 2014. Data consist of 298 survey answers that were analysed using multi-variate analyses. Two typologies were combined: clustering of forest ownership objectives and the preferred forest management style. We found that the forest owner’s objectives were demonstrated by their preferred way of managing the forest. Opinions about different decision aid services varied between cluster groups. The groups emphasizing nature values considered biodiversity related information about their forest more necessary than other groups. They were also less satisfied with the usability of the forest management plan. Forest advisory services should better acknowledge the prevalence of multiple objectives also among forest owners who are interested in timber selling. Developing services for forest owners with diverse socio-economic backgrounds, information needs and objectives is important.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Picture modified from Harlio (2017)
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Amacher GS, Koskela E, Ollikainen M, Conway MC (2002) Bequest intentions of forest landowners: theory and empirical evidence. Am J Agric Econ 84:1103–1114. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8276.00371
Auvinen A, Hildén M, Toivonen H et al (2007) Evaluation of the finnish national biodiversity action plan 1997–2005. Monographs of the Boreal Environment Research 29
Bieling C (2004) Non-industrial private-forest owners: possibilities for increasing adoption of close-to-nature forest management. Eur J For Res 123:293–303. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10342-004-0042-6
Blanco V, Brown C, Rounsevell M (2015) Characterising forest owners through their objectives, attributes and management strategies. Eur J For Res. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10342-015-0907-x
Boon TE, Meilby H, Thorsen BJ (2004) An empirically based typology of private forest owners in denmark: improving communication between authorities and owners. Scand J For Res 19:45–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/14004080410034056
Butler SM, Butler BJ, Markowski-Lindsay M (2016) Family forest owner characteristics shaped by life cycle, cohort, and period effects. Small Scale For 16:1–18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11842-016-9333-2
Conway MC, Amacher GS, Sullivan J, Wear D (2003) Decisions nonindustrial forest landowners make: an empirical examination. J For Econ 9:181–203. https://doi.org/10.1078/1104-6899-00034
Côté M-A, Gilbert D, Nadeau S (2015) Characterizing the profiles, motivations and behaviour of Quebec’s forest owners. For Policy Econ 59:83–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2015.06.004
Côté M-A, Gilbert D, Nadeau S (2016) Impact of changes in the sociological characteristics of small-scale forest owners on timber harvesting behavior in Quebec, Canada. Small Scale For 15:375–392. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11842-016-9328-z
Cronbach LJ (1951) Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika 16:297–334. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02310555
Emtage N, Herbohn J, Harrison S (2007) Landholder profiling and typologies for natural resource-management policy and program support: potential and constraints. Environ Manag 40:481–492. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-005-0359-z
Fabrigar LR, Wegener DT (2012) Exploratory factor analysis: understanding statistics. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Favada IM, Karppinen H, Kuuluvainen J et al (2009) Effects of timber prices, ownership objectives, and owner characteristics on timber supply. For Sci 55:512–523
Feliciano D, Bouriaud L, Brahic E et al (2017) Understanding private forest owners’ conceptualisation of forest management: Evidence from a survey in seven European countries. J Rural Stud 54:162–176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2017.06.016
Ficko A, Lidestav G, Ní Dhubháin Á et al (2017) European private forest owner typologies: a review of methods and use. For Policy Econ. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2017.09.010
Finnish Forest Research Institute (2014) Finnish statictical yearbook of forestry 2014. Tammerprint Oy
Follo G, Lidestav G, Ludvig A et al (2016) Gender in European Forest ownership and management—reflections on women as “New Forest Owners”. Scand J For Res. https://doi.org/10.1080/02827581.2016.1195866
Gamborg C, Larsen JB (2003) “Back to nature”—a sustainable future for forestry? For Ecol Manag 179:559–571. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-1127(02)00553-4
Government of Finland (2014) Finnish Government Resolution on the Continuation of Forest Biodiversity Programme for Southern Finland 2014–2025. 5 Jun 2014 [in Finnish]
Graham RT, Jain TB (1998) Silviculture’s role in managing boreal forests. Conserv Ecol. https://doi.org/10.5751/es-00053-020208
Gruen TW, Summers JO, Acito F (2000) Relationship marketing activities, commitment, and membership behaviors in professional associations. J Mark 64:34–49. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.64.3.34.18030
Haltia E, Rämö AK (2017) Miksi metsien taloudellisia mahdollisuuksia jätetään käyttämättä?— Metsänomistajakyselyn tuloksia [Why do the economic opportunities of forests remain untapped?—Forest Owner Survey Results]. PTT Reports 256, 180 p. [In Finnish]
Haltia E, Rämö AK, Pynnönen S et al (2017) Miksi metsien taloudellisia mahdollisuuksia jätetään käyttämättä?— Metsänomistejin aktiivisuus ja siihen vaikuttaminen [Why do the economic opportunities of forests remain untapped?—Forest owner activity and means to influence it]. PTT Reports 255 [In Finnish]
Hänninen H, Karppinen H, Leppänen J (2011) Suomalainen metsänomistaja 2010 [Finnish Forest Owner 2010]. Working Papers of the Finnish Forest Research Institute 208
Harlio A (2017) Voluntary biodiversity conservation optimization in agricultural and forest environments. Faculty of Biological and environmental sciences, University of Helsinki, Helsinki
Hartley MJ (2002) Rationale and methods for conserving biodiversity in plantation forests. For Ecol Manag 155:81–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-1127(01)00549-7
Häyrinen L, Mattila O, Berghäll S, Toppinen A (2015) Forest owners’ socio-demographic characteristics as predictors of customer value: evidence from Finland. Small-scale For 14:19–37. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11842-014-9271-9
Hokajärvi R, Hujala T, Leskinen LA, Tikkanen J (2009) Effectiveness of sermon policy instruments: forest management planning practices applying the activity theory approach. Silva Fenn 43:889–906
Hujala T, Pykäläinen J, Tikkanen J (2007) Decision making among Finnish non-industrial private forest owners: the role of professional opinion and desire to learn. Scand J For Res 22:454–463. https://doi.org/10.1080/02827580701395434
Hujala T, Kurttila M, Karppinen H (2013) Customer segments among family forest owners: combining ownership objectives and decision-making styles. Small-scale For 12:335–351. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11842-012-9215-1
Ingemarson F, Lindhagen A, Eriksson L (2006) A typology of small-scale private forest owners in Sweden. Scand J For Res 21:249–259. https://doi.org/10.1080/02827580600662256
Jain AK (2010) Data clustering: 50 years beyond K-means. Pattern Recognit Lett 31:651–666. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patrec.2009.09.011
Jenkins CN, Joppa L (2009) Expansion of the global terrestrial protected area system. Biol Conserv 142:2166–2174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2009.04.016
Karppinen H (2012) New forest owners and owners-to-be: Apples and oranges? Small-scale For 11:15–26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11842-011-9165-z
Kaufman L, Rousseeuw PJ (1990) Finding groups in data: an introduction to cluster analysis. Wiley, New York (NY)
Kline JD, Alig RJ, Johnson RL (2000) Fostering the production of nontimber services among forest owners with heterogeneous objectives. For Sci 46:302–311
Korhonen K, Hujala T, Kurttila M (2012) Reaching forest owners through their social networks in timber sales. Scand J For Res 27:88–99. https://doi.org/10.1080/02827581.2011.631935
Kumela H, Hujala T, Pykäläinen J, Rantala M (2013) Metsänomistajille tarjottavat luontoarvopalvelut : nykytila ja kehitysnäkymiä [Nature value related services offered to forest owners: present state and prospects]. Working Papers of the Finnish Forest Research Institute 253
Kurttila M, Korhonen K, Hänninen H, Hujala T (2010) Yksityismetsien metsäsuunnittelu 2010—nykytilanne ja kehittämistarpeita [Forest mangement planning 2010—present situation and development needs]. Working Papers of the Finnish Forest Research Institute 153
Leppänen J (2010) Finnish family forest owner 2010 survey. Scand For Econ 43:184–195
Leppänen J, Sevola Y (2014) Pien- ja suuromistuksia entistä enemmän [Smallest and greatest forest holdings more common than before]. Forest statistical bulletin 6/2014 [Metsätilastotiedote] Finnish Forest Research Institute Metla
Lidestav G, Ekström M (2000) Introducing gender in studies on management behaviour among non-industrial private forest owners. Scand J For Res 15:378–386. https://doi.org/10.1080/028275800448011
MacCallum RC, Widaman Keith F, Shaobo Zhang, Sehee Hong (1999) Sample size in factor analysis. Psychol Methods 4:84–99
Margules CR, Pressey RL (2000) Systematic conservation planning. Nature 405:243–253. https://doi.org/10.1038/35012251
Markowski-Lindsay M, Catanzaro P, Milman A, Kittredge D (2016) Understanding family forest land future ownership and use: exploring conservation bequest motivations. Small-scale For 15:241–256. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11842-015-9320-z
Mattila O, Roos A (2014) Service logics of providers in the forestry services sector: evidence from Finland and Sweden. For Policy Econ 43:10–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2014.03.003
Mattila O, Toppinen A, Tervo M, Berghäll S (2013) Non-industrial private forestry service markets in a flux: results from a qualitative analysis on Finland. Small-scale For 12:559–578. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11842-012-9231-1
Metsämuuronen J (2011) Tutkimuksen tekemisen perusteet ihmistieteissä [Foundations of research in social sciences]. International Methelp Oy
Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) Ecosystems and human well-being: Synthesis. Island Press, Washington, DC
Ní Dhubháin Á, Maguire K, Farrelly N (2010) The harvesting behaviour of Irish private forest owners. For Policy Econ 12:513–517. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2010.05.008
Nordlund A, Westin K (2010) Forest values and forest management attitudes among private forest owners in Sweden. Forests 2:30–50. https://doi.org/10.3390/f2010030
Ovaskainen V, Hujala T, Hänninen H, Mikkola J (2017) Cost sharing for timber stand improvements: inducement or crowding out of private investment? For Policy Econ 74:40–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2016.10.014
Päivinen R, Lehtoviita J, Arnkil N (2017) Kestävää kasvua metsistä -tasapainoisesti tulevaisuuteen [Sustainable growth from forests—balanced way to future]. Tapion raportteja 16
Palander T, Ovaskainen H, Tikkanen L (2009) Profiles of private forest owners and the importance of landscape-scale management in the timber trade process of Finnish wood procurement. Forestry 82:227–239. https://doi.org/10.1093/forestry/cpp006
Paloniemi R, Tikka PM (2008) Ecological and social aspects of biodiversity conservation on private lands. Environ Sci Policy 11:336–346. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2007.11.001
Paloniemi R, Vainio A (2011) Legitimacy and empowerment: combining two conceptual approaches for explaining forest owners’ willingness to cooperate in nature conservation. J Integr Environ Sci 8:123–138. https://doi.org/10.1080/1943815X.2011.576682
Paloniemi R, Hujala T, Rantala S et al (2017) Integrating social and ecological knowledge for targeting voluntary biodiversity conservation. Conserv Lett. https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.12340
Primmer E, Paloniemi R, Similä J, Tainio A (2014) Forest owner perceptions of institutions and voluntary contracting for biodiversity conservation: not crowding out but staying out. Ecol Econ 103:1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2014.04.008
Rassi P, Hyvärinen E, Juslén A, Mannerkoski I (2010) Suomen lajien uhanalaisuus—Punainen kirja 2010, The 2010 Red List of Finnish Species
Rudnick D, Ryan SJ, Beier P et al (2012) The role of landscape connectivity in planning and implementing conservation and restoration priorities. Issues in Ecology 16
Silver EJ, Leahy JE, Weiskittel AR et al (2015) An evidence-based review of timber harvesting behavior among private woodland owners. J For 113:490–499. https://doi.org/10.5849/jof.14-089
Staal Wästerlund D, Kronholm T (2016) Family forest owners’ commitment to service providers and the effect of association membership on loyalty. Small-scale For. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11842-016-9359-5
Suomen Metsäkeskus (2016) Pohjois-Karjalan metsäohjelma 2016–2020 [Regional Forest Programme of Northern Karelia 2016–2020]. Suomen Metsäkeskus (Forest Centre)
Takala T, Hujala T, Tanskanen M, Tikkanen J (2017) Forest owners’ discourses of forests: ideological origins of ownership objectives. J Rural Stud 51:1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2017.01.014
Tittensor DP, Walpole M, Hill SLL et al (2014) Biodiversity Targets. Science 346:241–245. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1257484
(2013) Forest Act. 1996. 12.12.1996/1093 Amended 20.12.2013/1085
Acknowledgements
Part of the work has been carried out in the project 311 340/2013, funded by the Finnish Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry. The Finnish Cultural Foundation, South Savo Regional Fund and the Foundation of South-West Finland’s Forest Management Associations have also funded the work. We want to thank Mikko Kurttila, Markus Nissinen, Eeva Primmer, Salla Rantala, Outi Ratamäki and the Finnish Forest Centre, Pohjois-Karjala office, for their input to data collection, and all survey respondents for their participation in the study.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Electronic supplementary material
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Pynnönen, S., Paloniemi, R. & Hujala, T. Recognizing the Interest of Forest Owners to Combine Nature-Oriented and Economic Uses of Forests. Small-scale Forestry 17, 443–470 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11842-018-9397-2
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11842-018-9397-2