The Knowledge and Value Basis of Private Forest Management in Sweden: Actual Knowledge, Confidence, and Value Priorities

Louise Eriksson1, Clas Fries2
1Department of Geography, Umeå University, SE-901 87, Umeå, Sweden
2Forest Unit, Swedish Forest Agency, Box 284, SE-901 06, Umeå, Sweden

Tóm tắt

AbstractWith growing demands on forests, there is a need to understand the drivers of managing the forest for diverse objectives, such as production, recreation, and climate adaptation. The aim of this study was to examine the knowledge and value basis of forest management behaviors, including different management strategies and management inactivity, among private forest owners in Sweden. Different dimensions of knowledge (declarative and procedural knowledge, assessed in terms of objective and subjective knowledge measures) and value priorities (basic values and forest values), as well as the role of forest owner identity, were examined. The study was conducted by means of a postal questionnaire to a random sample of private forest owners in Sweden (n = 3000, response rate 43%). The distinctions between actual knowledge (objective knowledge), confidence (subjective knowledge), and value priorities, in addition to the hierarchical structure of how these factors are linked to management behaviors, proved to be valuable. Results revealed that different knowledge dimensions and value priorities were jointly important for forest management behaviors. In addition, the role of forest owner identity for management behaviors was confirmed. Insights from the study may be used to develop policy and outreach to private forest owners and thereby facilitate different forest functions in private forestry.

Từ khóa


Tài liệu tham khảo

Aguilar FX, Cai Z, Butler B (2017) Proximal association of and management preferences: evidence from family forest owners. PLoS ONE 12(1):e0169667. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0169667

Ajzen I (2002) Perceived behavioral control, self-efficacy, locus of control, and the theory of planned behavior. J Appl Soc Psychol 32:665–683. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2002.tb00236.x

Andersson E, Keskitalo C (2018) Adaptation to climate change? Why business-as-usual remains the logical choice in Swedish forestry. Glob Environ Change 48:76–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2017.11.004

Bamberg S, Möser G (2007) Twenty years after Hines, Hungerford, and Tomera: a new meta-analysis of psycho-social determinants of pro-environmental behaviour. J Environ Psychol 27:14–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2006.12.002

Bandura A (1977) Social learning theory. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ

Bellassen V, Luyssaert S (2014) Carbon sequestration: managing forests in uncertain times. Nature 506:153–155. https://doi.org/10.1038/506153a

Bergstèn S, Stjernström O, Pettersson Ö (2018) Experiences and emotions among private forest owners versus public interests: Why ownership matters. Land Use Policy 79:801–811. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.08.027

Bissonnette J-F, Dupras J, Doyon F, Chion C, Tardif J (2017) Perceptions of small private forest owner’s vulnerability and adaptive capacity to environmental disturbances and climate change: views from a heterogeneous population in Southern Quebec, Canada. Small-Scale For 16:367–393. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11842-016-9361-y

Blennow K, Persson J, Tomé M, Hanewinkel M (2012) Climate Change: believing and seeing implies adapting. PLoS ONE 7(11):e50182. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0050182

Bliss JC, Martin AJ (1988) Identity and private forest management. Soc Nat Resour 1:365–376

Burke PJ, Stets JE (2009) Identity theory. Oxford University Press, New York, NY

Bush T (2010) Biodiversity and sectoral responsibility in the development of Swedish forestry policy, 1988–1993. Scand J Hist 35:471–498. https://doi.org/10.1080/03468755.2010.528249

Coté 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

Cruz-Alonso V, Ruiz-Benito P, Villar-Salvador P, Rey-Benayas JM (2019) Long-term recovery of multifunctionality in Mediterranean forests depends on restoration strategy and forest type. J Appl Ecol 56:745–757. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.13340

De Groot JIM, Steg L (2008) Value orientations to explain beliefs related to environmental significant behavior. How to measure egoistic, altruistic, and biospheric value orientations. Environ Behav 40:330–354. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916506297831

Díaz-Siefer P, Neaman A, Salgado E, Celis-Diez JL, Otto S (2015) Human-environment system knowledge: a correlate of pro-environmental behavior. Sustainability 7:15510–15526. https://doi.org/10.3390/su71115510

Dietz T, Stern PC, Guagnano GA (1998) Social structural and social psychological bases of environmental concern. Environ Behav 30:450–471. https://doi.org/10.1177/001391659803000402

Drescher M, Warriner GK, Farmer JR, Larson BMH (2017) Private landowners and environmental conservation: a case study of socialpsychological determinants of conservation program participation in Ontario. Ecol Soc 22(1):44. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-09118-220144

Eggers J, Lämås T, Lind T, Öhman K (2014) Factors influencing the choice of management strategy among small-scale private forest owners in Sweden. Forests 5:1695–1716. https://www.mdpi.com/1999-4907/5/7/1695/pdf

Eriksson L (2017) The importance of threat, strategy, and resource appraisals for long-term proactive risk management among forest owners in Sweden. J Risk Res 20:868–886. https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2015.1121905

Eriksson L (2018a) Effects of policy measures and moderating factors on climate change adaptation among private forest owners in Sweden. Soc Nat Resour 31:409–423. https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920.2017.1382629

Eriksson L (2018b) Explaining gender differences in private forest risk management. Scand J For Res 33:716–723. https://doi.org/10.1080/02827581.2018.1453944

Eriksson L, Nordlund A, Westin K (2013) The general public’s support for forest policy in Sweden: a value belief approach. J Environ Plan Manag 56:850–867. https://doi.org/10.1080/09640568.2012.708324

Eurostat (2017) Agriculture, forestry, and fishery statistics. Statistical books Eurostat, Luxembourg. https://doi.org/10.2785/570022

Fabricius C, Cundill G (2014) Learning in adaptive management: insights from published practice. Ecol Soc 19(1):29. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-06263-190129

Ferraro R, Edson Escalas J, Bettman JR (2011) Our possessions, our selves: Domains of self-worth and the possession-self link. J Consum Psychol 21:169–177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2010.08.007

Ficko A, Lidestav G, Ní Dhubháin A, Karppinen H, Zivojinovic I, Westin K (2017) European private forest owner typologies: a review of methods and use. For Policy Econ 99:21–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2017.09.010

Fischer AP (2019) Adapting and coping with climate change in temperate forests. Glob Environ Change 54:160–171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2018.10.011

Fischer AP, Charnley S (2012) Private forest owners and invasive plants: risk perception and management. Invasive Plant Sci Manag 5:375–389. https://doi.org/10.1614/IPSM-D-12-00005.1

Floress K, Huff ES, Snyder SA, Koshollek A, Butler S, Allred SB (2019) Factors associated with family forest owner actions: a vote-count metaanalysis. Landsc Urban Plan 188:19–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2018.08.024

Feliciano D, Bouriaud L, Brahic E, Deuffic P, Dobsinska Z, Jarsky V, Lawrence A, Nybakk E, Quiroga S, Suarez C, Ficko A (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

Frick J, Kaiser FG, Wilson M (2004) Environmental knowledge and conservation behavior: exploring prevalence and structure in a representative sample. Personal Individ Differ 37:1597–1613. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2004.02.015

Fulton DC, Manfredo MJ, Lipscomb J (1996) Wildlife value orientations: a conceptual and measurement approach. Hum Dimens Wildl 1:24–47

Gan J, Jarrett A, Johnson Gaither C (2015) Landowner response to wildfire risk: Adaptation, mitigation or doing nothing. J Environ Manag 159:186–191. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2015.06.014

Gatersleben B, Murtagh N, Cherry M, Watkins M (2017) Moral, wasteful, frugal, or thrifty? Identifying consumer identities to understand and manage pro-environmental behavior. Environ Behav 51:24–49. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916517733782

Geiger SM, Geiger M, Wilhelm O (2019a) Environment-specific vs. general knowledge and their role in pro-environmental behavior. Front Psychol 10:718. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00718/full

Geiger JL, Steg L, van der Werff E, Ünal AB (2019b) A meta-analysis of factors related to recycling. J Environ Psychol 64:78–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2019.05.004

Germain RH, Ellis B, Stehman SV (2014) Does landowner awareness and knowledge lead to sustainable forest management? A Vermont case study. J Ext 52:6RIB3

Hagerman SM, Pilai R (2018) Responding to climate change in forest management: two decades of recommendations. Front Ecol Environ 16:579–587. https://doi.org/10.1002/fee.1974

Hendee JT, Flint CG (2013) Managing private forestlands along the public–private interface of Southern Illinois: Landowner forestry decisions in a multi-jurisdictional landscape. For Policy Econ 34:47–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2013.04.009

Hogl K, Pregernig M, Weiss G (2005) What is new about new forest owners? A typology of private forest ownership in Austria. Small–Scale Econ Manag Policy 4:325–342. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11842-005-0020-y

Huff ES, Leahy JE, Kittredge DB, Noblet CL, Weiskittel AR (2017) Psychological distance of timber harvesting for private woodland owners. For Policy Econ 81:48–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2017.04.007

Hurlbert M et al. (2019) Risk management and decision making in relation to sustainable development. In Shukla PR, et al. (eds) Climate change and land: an IPCC special report on climate change, desertification, land degradation, sustainable land management, food security, and greenhouse gas fluxes in terrestrial ecosystems. In press. https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/sites/4/2019/11/10_Chapter-7.pdf

IBM Corp (2016) IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 24.0. Armonk, NY: IBM Corp

Ingemarson F, Lindhagen A, Eriksson L (2006) A typology of small-scale private forest owners in Sweden. Scand J Res 21:249–259. https://doi.org/10.1080/02827580600662256

IPBES (2013) Decision IPBES-2/4: conceptual framework for the intergovernmental science-policy platform on biodiversity and ecosystem services. https://ipbes.net/sites/default/files/downloads/Decision%20IPBES_2_4.pdf

Jactel H, Bauhus J, Boberg J, Bonal D, Castagneyrol B, Gardiner B, Gonzalez-Olabarria JR, Koricheva J, Meurisse N, Brockerhoff EG (2017) Tree diversity drives forest stand resistance to natural disturbances. Curr Rep 3(3):223–243. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40725-017-0064-1

Johansson J, Keskitalo ECH (2014) Coordinating and implementing multiple systems for forest management: implications of the regulatory framework for sustainable forestry in Sweden. J Nat Resour Policy Res 6:117–133. https://doi.org/10.1080/19390459.2014.913363

Joshi S, Arano KG (2009) Determinants of private forest management decisions: A study on West Virginia NIPF landowners. For Policy Econ 11:118–125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2008.10.005

Kaiser FG, Fuhrer U (2003) Ecological behavior’s dependency on different forms of knowledge. Appl Psychol Int Rev 52:598–613. https://doi.org/10.1111/1464-0597.00153

Karppinen H (2005) Forest owners’ choice of reforestation method: an application of the theory of planned behaviour. For Policy Econ 7:393–409. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2003.06.001

Kelly EC, Gold GJ, Tommaso JD (2017) The willingness of nonindustrial private forest owners to enter California’s carbon offset market. Environ Manag 60:882–895. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-017-0918-0

Keskitalo ECH, Bergh J, Felton A, Björkman C, Berlin M, Axelsson P, Ring E, Ågren A, Roberge J-M, Klapwijk MJ, Boberg J (2016) Adaptation to climate change in Swedish forestry. Forests 7:28. https://doi.org/10.3390/f7020028

Kreye MM, Adams DC, Ober HK (2018) Protecting imperiled wildlife species on private lands: forest owner values and response to government interventions. Ecol Econ 149:254–264. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2018.03.016

Lagergren F, Jönsson AM (2017) Ecosystem model analysis of multi-use forestry in a changing climate. Ecosyst Serv 26:209–224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.06.007

Lähdesmäki M, Matilainen A (2014) Born to be a forest owner? An empirical study of the aspects of psychological ownership in the context of inherited forests in Finland. Scand J Res 29:101–110. https://doi.org/10.1080/02827581.2013.869348

Lawrence A, Dandy N (2014) Private landowners’ approaches to planting and managing forests in the UK: what’s the evidence? Land Use Policy 36:351–360. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2013.09.002

Lidestav G, Berg Lejon S (2013) Harvesting and silvicultural activities in Swedish family forestry—behavior changes from a gender perspective. Scand J Res 28:136–142. https://doi.org/10.1080/02827581.2012.701324

Lindner M, Fitzgerald JB, Zimmermann NE, Reyer C, Delzon S, van der Maaten E, Schelhaas M-J, Lasch P, Eggers J, van der Maaten-Theunissen M, Suckow F, Psomas A, Poulter B, Hanewinkel M (2014) Climate change and European forests: what do we know, what are the uncertainties, and what are the implications for forest management? J Environ Manag 146:69–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2014.07.030

Marzano M, Fuller L, Quine CP (2017) Barriers to management of tree diseases: framing perspectives of pinewood managers around Dothistroma Needle Blight. J Environ Manag 188:238–245. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.12.002

McFarlane BL, Boxall PC (2003) The role of social psychological and social structural variables in environmental activism: an example of the forest sector. J Environ Psychol 23:79–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0272-4944(02)00080-4

McFarlane BL, Watson DOT (2008) Perceptions of ecological risk associated with Mountain Pine Beetle (Dendroctonus ponderosae) infestations in Banff and Kootenay National Parks of Canada. Risk Anal 28:203–121. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2008.01013.x

Ní Dhubháin AN, Cobanova R, Karppinen H, Mizaraite D, Ritter E, Slee B, Wall S (2007) The values and objectives of private forest owners and their influence on forestry behavior: the implication for entrepreneurship. Small-Scale For 6:347–357. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11842-007-9030-2

Nichiforel L, Keary K, Deuffic P et al. (2018) How private are Europe’s private forests? A comparative property rights analysis. Land Use Policy 76:535–552. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.02.034

Nguyen TPL, Seddaiu G, Roggero PP (2019) Declarative or procedural knowledge? Knowledge for enhancing farmers’ mitigation and adaptation behaviour to climate change. J Rural Stud 67:46–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2019.02.005

Põllumäe P, Korjus H, Paluots T (2014) Management motives of Estonian private forest owners. For Policy Econ 42:8–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2014.02.007

Roczen N, Kaiser FG, Bogner FX, Wilson M (2014) A competence model for environmental education. Environ Behav 46:972–992. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916513492416

Rohan MJ (2000) A rose by any name? The values construct. Pers Soc Psychol Rev 4:255–277. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327957PSPR0403_4

Ruseva TB, Evans TP, Fischer BC (2014) Variations in the social networks of forest owners: The effect of management activity, resource professionals, and ownership size. Small-Scale For 13:377–395. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11842-014-9260-z

Sagor ES, Becker DR (2014) Personal networks and private forestry in Minnesota. J Environ Manag 132:145–154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2013.11.001

Schwartz SH (1992) Universals in the content and structure of values: theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. Adv Exp Soc Psychol 25:1–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60281-6

Schwartz SH (1994) Are there universal aspects in the structure and contents of human values? J Soc Issues 50:19–45. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.1994.tb01196.x

Shi J, Visschers VHM, Siegrist M, Arvai J (2016) Knowledge as a driver of public perceptions about climate change reassessed. Nat Clim Change 6:759–762. https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2997

Silver EJ, Leahy JE, Weiskittel AR, Noblet CL, Kittredge DB (2015) An evidence-based review of timber harvesting behavior among private woodland owners. J Forestry 113:490–499. https://doi.org/10.5849/jof.14-089

Sousa-Silva R, Verbist B, Lomba Â, Valent P, Suškevičs M, Picard O, Hoogstra-Klein MA, Cosofret C-V, Bouriaud L, Ponette Q, Verheyen K, Muys B (2018) Adapting forest management to climate change in Europe: linking perceptions to adaptive responses. For Policy Econ 90:22–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2018.01.004

Steele J, Chandran RS, Grafton WN, Huebner CD, McGill DW (2006) Awareness and management of invasive plants among West Virginia Woodland owners. J For 104:248–253. https://doi.org/10.1093/jof/104.5.248

Steg L, Bolderdijk JW, Keizer K, Perlaviciute G (2014) An integrated framework for encouraging pro-environmental behaviour: The role of values, situational factors and goals. J Environ Psychol 38:104–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2014.01.002

Stern PC (2000) Toward a coherent theory of environmentally significant behavior. J Soc Issues 56:407–424. https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-4537.00175

Swedish Forest Agency (SFA) (2014) Skogsstatistisk årsbok 2014 [Swedish Statistical Yearbook of Forestry]. The Swedish Forest Agency, Jönköping

Swedish Gov Bill (2007) En skogspolitik i takt med tiden [A Forest Policy in Line with the Times]. Ministry of Agriculture, Stockholm. https://www.regeringen.se/49bba7/contentassets/80c43f4e251b43939c8bf4d3a54ebd01/en-skogspolitik-i-takt-med-tiden-prop.-200708108

Swedish University of Agricultural Science (SLU) (2018) Forest statistics 2018. SLU, Uppsala. https://www.slu.se/globalassets/ew/org/centrb/rt/dokument/skogsdata/skogsdata_2018_webb.pdf

Thompson DW, Hansen EN (2013) Carbon storage on non-industrial private forestland: an application of the theory of planned behavior. Small-Scale For 12:631–657. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11842-013-9235-5

Thompson JR, Canham CD, Morreale L, Kittredge DB, Butler B (2017) Social and biophysical variation in regional timber harvest regimes. Ecol Appl 27:942–955. https://doi.org/10.1002/eap.1497

Thorn C, Bogner FX (2018) How environmental values predict acquisition of different cognitive knowledge types with regard to forest conservation. Sustainability 10:2188. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10072188

Thorn S, Leverkus AB, Thorn CJ, Beudert B (2019) Education and knowledge determine preference for bark beetle control measures in El Salvador. J Environ Manag 232:138–144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.11.032

Trivino M, Pohjanmies T, Mazziotta A, Juutinen A, Podkopaev D, Le Tortorec E, Mönkkönen M (2017) Optimizing management to enhance multifunctionality in a boreal forest landscape. J Appl Ecol 54:61–70. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.12790

Ünal AB, Steg L, Gorsira M (2017) Values versus environmental knowledge as triggers of a process of activation of personal norms for eco-driving. Environ Behav 50:1092–1118. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916517728991

United Nations (2015) Transforming our world: the 2030 agenda for sustainable development. A/RES/70/1. United Nations, New York, NY

Vicente-Molina AA, Fernández-Sáinz A, Izagirre-Olaizola J (2013) Environmental knowledge and other variables affecting pro-environmental behaviour: comparison of university students from emerging and advanced countries. J Clean Prod 61:130–138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.05.015

Vulturius G, André K, Geiger Swartling Å, Brown C, Rounsevell MDA, Blanco V (2018) The relative importance of subjective and structural factors for individual adaptation to climate change by forest owners in Sweden. Reg Environ Change 18:511. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-017-1218-1

Walton TN, Emmet Jones R (2018) Ecological identity: the development and assessment of a measurement scale. Environ Behav 50:657–689. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916517710310

Weiss G, Lawrence A, Lidestav G, Feliciano D, Hujala T, Sarvašová Z, Dobšinská Z, Živojinović I (2019) Research trends: Forest ownership in multiple perspectives. For Policy Econ 99:1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2018.10.006

White AM, Long JW (2019) Understanding ecological contexts for active reforestation following wildfires. New Forest 50:41–56. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11056-018-9675-z

Williams NG, Powers MD (2019) Carbon storage implications of active management in mature Pseudotsuga menziesii forests of western Oregon. For Ecol Manage 432:761–775. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2018.10.002