Abstract
It has been argued by Mather (1992) that forestry has passed through three distinct historic phases of development: a pre-industrial phase; an industrial phase; and a post-industrial phase. In the pre-industrial phase, forestry was principally but not exclusively a provider of local livelihoods, providing a wide range of timber and non-timber products. In Western Europe this role largely ceased by the late 19th century, although in post-communist countries there has been something of a resurgence of this function in newly privatised forest holdings, which comprise a significant part of the forest estate. Over the 18th and 19th century, the growth of imperial powers and the beginnings of the industrial revolution created a more mono-functional demand for specific types of timber, initially for shipbuilding or charcoal manufacture, but also for building material and paper manufacture. This has been termed the industrial phase. Although this monofunctional industrial style of forestry remains to some extent in some parts of Europe, the most recent post-industrial phase has created more varied styles of forestry with a stronger amenity or post-productivist function (Mather 2001).
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Appleton J (1996) The experience of landscape, revised edition, Wiley: London.
Committee of Agricultural Organisations in the European Union & General Committee for Agricultural Cooperation in the European Union 1999, The European model of agriculture: the way ahead, Pr(99)88F1, P(99)89F1 Brussels.
Costanza R, d’Arge R, de Groot R, Farber S, Grasso M, Hannon B, Limburg K, Naeem S, O’Neill RV, Paruelo J, Raskin RG, Sutton P, van den Belt M (1997) The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature 387: 253–260.
Davidson J, Wibberley G (1977) Planning and the rural environment, Pergamon, Oxford.
Drake L (1992) The Non-Market Value of the Swedish Agricultural Landscape. European Review of Agricultural Economics 19: 351–64.
Edwards S (2000) The appraisal of rural development forestry in Scotland, unpublished PhD thesis, Dept of Agriculture and forestry, University of Aberdeen.
Elands B, Wiersum F (2003) Forestry and rural development in Europe, Wageningen UR: Wageningen.
Elands B, O’ Leary T (2002) The myth of forests: a reflection on the variety of rural identities in Europe and the role of forests in it. In: Wiersum F, Elands B (eds) The changing role of forestry in Europe: perspectives for rural development, Wageningen: WUR.
Elands BHM, Wiersum KF (2003) Forestry and rural development in Europe: research results and policy implications of a comparative European study, WAU: Wageningen.
Fowler HW, Fowler FG (eds) (1964) Concise Oxford English Dictionary, OUP: Oxford.
Forman RTT, Godron M (1986) Landscape ecology, Wiley: New York.
Glück P, Weber M (eds) (1998) Mountian forestry in Europe: evaluation of silvicultural and policy means, BOKU: Vienna.
Grahame K (1908) The wind in the willows, Methuen: London.
Hirsch F (1976) Social limits to growth, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Hoskins WG (1955) The making of the English landscape, Hodder and Stoughton: London.
Jáger L (ed) (2005) Forest sector entrepreneurship in Europe: country studies, Volumes 1 & 2, Acta Silvatica and Lignaria Hungarica, Special Edition
Koch N, Kennedy JJ (2004) Viewing and managing natural resources as human-ecosystem relationships. Forest Policy and Economics 6: 497–504.
Lawrence A (2004) Social values of forests. In: Burley J et al. (eds) Encyclopaedia of forest sciences, Vol 3, Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp. 1126–1131.
Mantau U et al. (2001) Recreational and environmental markets for forest enterprises, CABI Books: Wallingford.
Mather A (1992) The forest transition. Area 24: 367–379.
Mather A (2001) Forests of Consumption: postproductivism, postmaterialism and the postindustrial forest. Environmental and Planning C: Government and Policy 19: 249–268.
O’Brien E (2005) Social and cultural values of trees and woodlands in northwest and south east England. Forest Snow and Landscape Research 79: 169–184.
Pakenham T (2002) Remarkable trees of the world, Weidenfeld and Nicholson: London.
Pakenham T (2003) Meetings with remarkable trees, Weidenfeld and Nicholson: London.
Saastamoinen O (1997) A framework for assessing the total value of forests in Finland. Scandinavian Forest Economics 36: 395–406.
Schama S (1995) Landscape and Memory, Simon and Shuster, London.
Slee B (2005) The economics of access. Quarterly Journal of Forestry 99: 221–231.
Williams R (1973) The Country and the City, Chatto & Windus, London.
Willis K, Garrod G, Scarpa R, Powe N, Lovett A, Bateman I, Hanley N, Macmillan D (2003) The social and economic benefits of forests in Great Britain, Newcastle: CREAM.
Woodland Trust (2004) Space for people: targeting action for woodland access, Woodland Trust: Grantham.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2007 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Slee, B. (2007). Landscape goods and services related to forestry land use. In: Mander, Ü., Wiggering, H., Helming, K. (eds) Multifunctional Land Use. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-36763-5_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-36763-5_4
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-36762-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-36763-5
eBook Packages: Earth and Environmental ScienceEarth and Environmental Science (R0)