Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Sustainability Strategies in the Forestry–Wood Chain Driven by Market Demands on Books and Other Products

  • Published:
Publishing Research Quarterly Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper focuses on sustainability strategies for the Forestry–Wood chain (FWC) driven by market demands on books and other products. The main objective is to draft and suggest a process for market driven pro-active sustainability strategies for the FWC, based on a SWOT-analysis (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats). Further to highlight the possible strategic implications and critical areas for actors upstream in the FWC, in the context of uncertain external future scenarios. Higher demands on product differentiation were found throughout the FWC, where also collaboration and stakeholder interaction was found important to improve sustainability. The work broadens the “traditional” perspectives on FWC sustainability to encompass also interacting value chains such as book production and publishing, to get a more holistic view.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Arets E, Palosuo T, Moiseev A, Nabuurs G-J, Slimani D, Olsmats C, Laurijssen J, Mason B, McGowan D, Vötter D. Reference futures and Scenarios for the European FWC source Databases, European Forest Institute, EFI Technical Report 85; 2011.

  2. Bonn I, Fischer J. Sustainability: the missing ingredient in strategy. J Bus Strategy. 2011;32(1):5–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Bryman A, Burgess RG. Qualitative research methodology—a review. In: Bryman A, Burgess RG, editors. Qualitative research, vol. I. London: SAGE; 1999.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  4. Catasús B, Ersson S, Gröjer J, Wallentin FY. What gets measured gets … on indicating, mobilizing and acting. Account Audit Account J. 2007;20(4):505–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. CEI-Bois (2011) European confederation of woodworking industries tackle climate change: use wood. http://www.cei-bois.org/files/FINAL_-_BoA_-_EN_-_2011_text_and_cover.pdf.

  6. Confederation European Paper Industries (CEPI). CEPI sustainability report 2013, European paper industry advancing the bioeconomy. http://www.cepi-sustainability.eu/uploads/short_sustainability2013.pdf (2013).

  7. Collis D, Rukstad M. Can you say what your strategy is? Harv Bus Rev. http://hbr.org/2008/04/can-you-say-what-your-strategy-is/ar/1 (2008).

  8. European Commission (EC). Energy 2020:a strategy for competitive, sustainable and secure energy. http://ec.europa.eu/energy/strategies/2010/2020_en.htm (2010).Viewed 19 Mar 2014.

  9. EFORWOOD—EU FP6 Integrated project: sustainability impact assessment of the Forestry Wood-Chain. http://www.innovawood.com/eforwood/ (2014).Viewed 19 Mar 2014.

  10. Eisenhardt K, Sull D. Strategy as simple rules. Harv Bus Rev. 2001;79(1):106–16.

    Google Scholar 

  11. FEP—Federation of European publishers. European book publishing statistics 2012. www.fep-fee.eu (2014). Viewed 13 Nov 2014.

  12. Gamborg C. Final report on stakeholder interaction in EFORWOOD, deliverable D0.1.10., EFORWOOD project report. European forest institute, EFI Technical report 33; 2010.

  13. GRI—Global reporting initiative the sustainability reporting framework online. www.globalreporting.org/reporting/G3andG3-1/guidelines-online/Pages/default.aspx (2014). Viewed 19 Mar 2014.

  14. House E. Challenges facing the UK book industry. Publish Res Q. 2013;29(3):211–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Huang M, Rust R. Sustainability and consumption. J Acad Mark Sci. 2011;39(1):40–54. doi:10.1007/s11747-010-0193-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Kajanus M, Leskinen P, Kurttila M, Kangas J. Making use of MCDS methods in SWOT analysis—Lessons learnt in strategic natural resources management. For Policy Econ. 2012; 20:1–9. doi:10.1016/j.forpol.2012.03.005. ISSN 1389-9341.

  17. Kanter R. Transforming Giants. Harvard Bus Rev. 2008;86(1):43–52.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Kaplan R, Norton D. The balanced scorecard. Cambridge: Harvard business school press; 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Karlöf B. Affärslivets begrepp och modeller, Stockholm: Svenska Dagbladets Förlag AB. 1994. ISBN 91-7738-367-2.

  20. Kemmis S, Wilkinson M. Participatory action research and the study of practice. In: Atwel B, Kemmis S, Weeks P, editors. Action research in practice. London: Routledge; 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Kitzinger J. The methodology of Focus groups: the importance of interaction between research participants. In: Bryman A, Burgess RG, editors. Qualitative research, vol. II. London: SAGE Publications; 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Kotler P. Marketing Management—The Millenium Edition. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall; 2000. ISBN 0-13-0156684-1.

  23. Kurttila M, Pesonen M, Kangas J, Kajanus M. Utilizing the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) in SWOT analysis—a hybrid method and its application to a forest-certification case, Forest Policy and Economics. 2000;1(1):41–52. doi:10.1016/S1389-9341(99)00004-0. ISSN 1389-9341.

  24. Lekwall P, Wahlbin C. Information för marknadsföringsbeslut. 3rd ed. Göteborg: IHM Förlag AB; 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Lindner M, Suominen T, Palosuo T, Garcia-Gonzalo J, Verweij P, Zudin S, Päivinen R. ToSIA—A tool for sustainability impact assessment of forest-wood-chains, Ecol Model. 2010; 221(18):2197–2205. doi:10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2009.08.006. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304380009005651. ISSN 0304-3800.

  26. Mintzberg H. The rise and fall of strategic planning. UK: Prentice Hall International; 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Morgan D. Focus groups as qualitative research. London: SAGE; 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Mysen T. Sustainability as corporate mission and strategy. Eur Bus Rev. 2012;24(6):496–509.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Nikolova B. The rise and promise of participatory foresight. Eur J Futures Res. 2013;15:33. doi:10.1007/s40309-013-0033-2.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Nørreklit H. The balanced scorecard: what is the score? a rhetorical analysis of the balanced scorecard. Acc Organ Soc. 2003;28(6):591–619.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Porter M. What is strategy? Harv Bus Rev. 1996. 74(6):61–78. ISSN 0017-8012

  32. Rametsteiner E. SFM indicators as tools in political and economic context: actual and potential roles. In: Raison RJ, Brown AG, Flinn DW, editors. Criteria and indicators for sustainable forest management, IUFRO research Series 7. Wallingford: CABI Publishing; 2001. p. 107–30.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Rimm A-M. conditions and survival: views on the concentration of ownership and vertical integration in German and Swedish publishing. Publ Res Q. 2014;30(1):77–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Rosén K, Lindner M, Nabuurs G-J, Paschalis-Jakubowicz P. Challenges in implementing sustainability impact assessment of forest wood chains. Eur J For Res. 2012;131(1):1–5. doi:10.1007/s10342-011-0571-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Sharma S, Henriques I. Stakeholder Influences on Sustainability Practices in the Canadian forest products industry. Strateg Manag J 2005; 26(2):159–180. http://www.jstor.org/stable/20142213.

  36. Vertinsky I, Zhou D. Product and process certification—systems, regulations and international marketing strategies. Int Mark Rev. 2000;17(3):231–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Verweij PJFM, Knapen MJR, de Winter WP, Wien JJF, te Roller JA, Sieber S, Jansen JML. An IT perspective on integrated environmental modelling: the SIAT case. Ecol Model. 2010. 221(18):2167–2176. ISSN 0304-3800.

  38. WCED—World Commission on Environment and Development. Our common future, UN World Commission on Environment and Development (Chaired by Gro Brundtland). London: Oxford University Press; 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Wikström K. Project and project management as living theory—some considerations of how to create relevant and novel knowledge for the project-based industry. Åbo: PBI; 2002.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors want to thank EU, Skogsindustrins forskningsstiftelse and Innventia for funding of this research effort, and also the EFORWOOD coordinator Kaj Rosén and all EFORWOOD partners and colleagues for good collaboration and a creative, friendly project atmosphere.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Technology and Business Studies, Dalarna University, 791 88, Falun, Sweden

    Carl Olsmats

  2. Independent Sustainability Consultant, Nacka, Sweden

    Dorotea Slimani

Authors
  1. Carl Olsmats
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Dorotea Slimani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Carl Olsmats.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Olsmats, C., Slimani, D. Sustainability Strategies in the Forestry–Wood Chain Driven by Market Demands on Books and Other Products. Pub Res Q 31, 21–35 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12109-014-9389-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12109-014-9389-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation