Comparison of harvesting and business activities of non-shareholders and shareholders in a forest common in Västerbotten, Sweden

Holmgren, Eva; Holmgren, Lina; Lidestav, Gun

doi:10.1080/02827580701618769

Cited by 5 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The cited study also found evidence of restrictive forestry practices in FCs in Norrbotten and, particularly, Västerbotten. Furthermore, the shareholders in TSA have been found to undertake fewer forestry activities in their individually managed forests (Holmgren et al 2007). One feature that differs between the FCs is the proportion owned by NIPFs.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Shareholder perceptions of individual and common benefits in Swedish forest commons

Lidestav

Poudyal

Holmgren³

et al. 2013

Int J Commons

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:In the period 1861-1918, thirty-three commons were established in Northern Sweden. This was linked to the finalisation of the Great Redistribution of Forest Holdings in Dalarna and the delimitation process in Västerbotten and Norrbotten. They were intended to serve as an instrument for improved and sustained forest production, the viability of farmers and the liveability of the rural communities in the areas where they were established. The aim of this paper is to describe the results of a study examining how three of these forest commons, one from each region, have benefitted the local shareholders and their community. The perceptions among forest common shareholders were assessed using a questionnaire. The study also assessed economic impact on shareholders in terms of extent and use of the dividend from each of the commons for the period 1958-2007, highlighting the extent of the economic support to individual shareholders and to the local community. Results reveal large differences between the three cases; there was a positive correlation between the extent of the economic support and contentment among the shareholders. Shareholder perceptions of individual and common benefits in Swedish 165Keywords: Community-based resource management, forest policy, resource governance Acknowledgement: We gratefully acknowledge the Brattås Foundation for their financial support for this study.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Shareholder perceptions of individual and common benefits in Swedish forest commons

Lidestav

Poudyal

Holmgren³

et al. 2013

Int J Commons

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Forest researchers entered the arena in the early 2000s. Management of forests with private, commercial and co-owners have been compared, and researchers have also looked at the impact of forest commons on rural development (see also Holmgren et al, 2004;Holmgren et al, 2007;Holmgren, 2009;Holmgren et al, 2010;Lidestav et al, 2013).…”

Section: Objectives Literature Review and Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To secure sustainable management of forest commons, professional foresters are responsible for executing the confirmed management plans. Another cornerstone of the system is that shares in a forest common belong to the original estate and cannot be traded separately from it (Holmgren et al, 2007; see also SFS, 1952/167).…”

Section: Introduction To the History Of Joint Ownership Of Forests In...mentioning

confidence: 99%

History of Joint Ownership of Forests in Finland in the Context of European Forest Commons

Siiskonen¹

2022

AHS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In Europe the history of forest commons dates back to the Middle Ages and some of them are still performing well. The formation of modern states in Europe favoured privatisation of previously communally managed property, including forest commons. Privatisation of state lands proceeded in Finland in the nineteenth century, but at the same time there was a need to establish co-owned forests to settle the landless population. The first part of the study focuses on exploring the development of the system of co-owned forests in Finland since the late nineteenth century until 2020. How has the Finnish system of co-owned forests responded to societal and economic changes during the long time frame of the study? The co-ownership of forests, called jointly owned forests in Finland, has had similarities with European and particularly with Swedish forest commons, but there have also been several differences. The second part of the study aims to approach the present Finnish system in the context of European, particularly Swedish, forest commons. Among the international research community development and special characteristics of the Finnish system of joint ownership of forests are poorly known.

show abstract

“…We separated land owners into three categories: (i) public-including the state Property Board, Swedish Environmental Protection Agency (formally protected areas), Fortification Agency, municipalities and administrative region units; (ii) private incorporates-including private forest industry companies, the state Sveaskog forest company, church and commons (due to their forest-industry behavior in Sweden; cf. Holmgren et al 2007); and (iii) non-industrial private forest owners (NIPF)-encompassing private person ownership polygons < 1000 ha. Here, a polygon is to be understood as one spatial administrative entity, but since ownership can include several polygons, this cannot directly be translated to separate owners.…”

Section: Data and Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Spared, shared and lost—routes for maintaining the Scandinavian Mountain foothill intact forest landscapes

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Intact forest landscapes harbor significant biodiversity values and pools of ecosystem services essential for conservation, land use and rural development. Threatened by fragmentation and loss by transitions to industrial clear-cut forestry, those landscapes are of pivotal interest for protection that secures their intact character. With wall-to-wall land-cover data, we explored opportunities for maintaining intact forest landscapes through comprehensive spatial planning across a 2.5 million hectares boreal to sub-alpine forest region along the eastern slopes of the Scandinavian Mountain range. We analyzed forest and woodland types that are protected, need protection or potentially can be subject to continued forest management. We established that the fraction of already clear-cut forest is very small and that the forest landscape of the Scandinavian Mountain foothills contains a high proportion of protected high conservation value forests, covering almost 2 million ha, and that over 500,000 ha (27%) remains unprotected and may be subject to future protection or continued adapted forest management. We found evident north to south differences with respect to forest landscape configuration, distribution of unprotected forests and land ownership. With a focus on non-industrial private landowners, we conclude that sustainable land-use requires integrative, multi-functional approaches that rely on further protection, forest and forest landscape restoration and a much larger share of continuous cover forestry than presently. Our results provide input into ongoing policy implementation and green infrastructure planning in the context of securing intact forest values and integrative opportunities for rural livelihood and regional development based on multiple value chains.

show abstract

Comparison of harvesting and business activities of non-shareholders and shareholders in a forest common in Västerbotten, Sweden

Cited by 5 publications

References 4 publications

Shareholder perceptions of individual and common benefits in Swedish forest commons

Shareholder perceptions of individual and common benefits in Swedish forest commons

History of Joint Ownership of Forests in Finland in the Context of European Forest Commons

Spared, shared and lost—routes for maintaining the Scandinavian Mountain foothill intact forest landscapes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About