Needs of private forest owners in the context of changing political systems: Lithuania as a case study

Pivoriūnas, Aidas; Lazdinis, Marius

doi:10.1007/s11842-004-0014-1

Cited by 15 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In the Baltic countries the private forest ownership has been re-established after regaining their independence in 1991 [40]. Environmental values of forests are emphasized both by national forest programs and private forest owners, but most conservation programs are still determined by state authorities [40,41].…”

Section: Conservation Of Other Small Habitat Patchesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do small protected habitat patches within boreal production forests provide value for biodiversity conservation? A systematic review protocol

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Forest harvesting is the main driver of habitat degradation and biodiversity loss in forests of the boreal zone. To mitigate harmful effects, small-scale habitats with high biodiversity values have been protected within production forests. These include woodland key habitats, and other small-scale habitat patches protected by voluntary conservation action. This article describes a protocol for a systematic review to synthesize the value of small habitat patches left within production landscapes for biodiversity. The topic for this systematic review arose from a discussion with the Finnish forestry sector and was further defined in a stakeholder workshop. Research question: Do small protected habitat patches within production forests provide value for biodiversity conservation in boreal forests? Animal, plant and fungal diversities are addressed as well as the amount of deadwood within the habitat patches as proxy indicators for biodiversity. Methods: The literature, both peer-reviewed and grey, will be searched from bibliographical databases, organizational websites and internet search engines in English, Finnish, Swedish and Russian. Article screening will be done at two stages (title/abstract and full-text). The validity of the studies included will be evaluated against validity criteria and studies will be categorized based on their risk of bias. To describe the findings a narrative synthesis will be conducted. If there is enough quantitative data retrieved from the studies, a meta-analysis will be conducted.

show abstract

Section: Conservation Of Other Small Habitat Patchesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do small protected habitat patches within boreal production forests provide value for biodiversity conservation? A systematic review protocol

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the Baltic countries the private forest ownership has been re-established after regaining their independence in 1991 [25]. Environmental values of forests are emphasized both by national forest programs and private forest owners, but most conservation programs are still determined by state authorities [25,26].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Are small protected habitat patches within boreal production forests effective in conserving species richness, abundance and community composition? A systematic review

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background In boreal zone forest management is changing and degrading forest habitats, which has caused declines in biodiversity. To mitigate these harmful effects in production forests, small-scale habitats with high biodiversity values have been protected within them. These habitats include woodland key habitats, and other small habitat patches protected by voluntary conservation actions. In this systematic review we synthesize the evidence on the value of small protected habitat patches (SPHP) within production forest landscapes for biodiversity. Review question: Are small protected habitat patches within boreal production forests effective in conserving species richness, abundance, and community composition? Methods Both peer-reviewed and grey literature were searched from bibliographical databases, organizational websites and internet search engines in English, Finnish, Swedish and Russian. Articles were screened at two stages (title/abstract and full text) and the validity of the included studies were assessed. Screening and validity assessment were based on predetermined criteria. After data extraction, narrative and quantitative syntheses were conducted. Influences of effect modifiers were tested, and sensitivity analyses were conducted. Review findings During the searches 19,458 articles were found. After duplicate removal and title/abstract screening 336 articles remained. During full text screening 41 articles were included and 35 of them (174 studies) were included in narrative synthesis. 28 articles with 127 studies had suitable data for meta-analysis. SPHPs had significantly higher species richness compared to production forests. When compared to natural forests, there was no significant difference. Forest management in areas surrounding SPHPs did not have impact on species richness of these patches. Individual abundance was significantly higher in SPHPs compared to natural or production forests. There was significantly more dead wood in SPHPs compared to production forests, but when compared to natural forests there was no significant difference. Community composition was different between SPHPs and both production and natural forests. Conclusions The findings of this review show that small protected patches within production forests are important part of biodiversity conservation. They cannot substitute larger protected areas but supplement the protected area network. However, there were gaps both in geographical distribution of the studies as well as in the selection of target species of the studies. Therefore, generalization of the results must be done carefully.

show abstract

“…a comprehensive support system has been established -in the sector and the ownership itself has developed further. Pivoriūnas & Lazdinis (2004) have similarly analysed the situation in Lithuania. Both Toivonen et al (2005) and Pivoriūnas & Lazdinis (2004) conclude that private landowners are multi-objective in their management.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Pivoriūnas & Lazdinis (2004) have similarly analysed the situation in Lithuania. Both Toivonen et al (2005) and Pivoriūnas & Lazdinis (2004) conclude that private landowners are multi-objective in their management. Lately, the idea that forest owners' conceptualization about forest management is linked to the multi-functionality of forests has found further evidence (Feliciano et al, 2017).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This included the idea of taking care of the forest so that it would not be neglected. In addition, Pivoriūnas & Lazdinis (2004) highlight the existence of knowledge gaps about forestry and forest management, but also bureaucracy as an obstacle. Their analysis did not exemplify the nature of bureaucracy; however, the regulation of forestry-related activities was mentioned.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Reflections of active forest owners to the public-private forestry support system in Estonia

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Private forest owners are increasingly responsible for providing an extensive range of goods and services from their forests, as there are around 100,000 forest owners in Estonia. In order to support forest owners in providing these services, the state has continuously backed the forestry sector and established a public-private partnership with forest owners’ associations as well as their umbrella organisations and cooperatives. The aim of this paper is to identify the service and information needs of private forest owners in the context of this established support system. Using a survey sample of 757 respondents, we found that in regard to informational needs more focus should be put on forest management activities, i.e. on available information about service providers’ contacts, prices, options and principles for selling harvesting rights and timber. Furthermore, joint timber sales as a service should be further developed and focused on. While forest owners ranked highly both the information about financial support and the specific measures, they found the system sometimes too complicated. Both in terms of information and service importance-performance, forest owners indicated certification as a low-priority topic. Whilst interest representation in policy processes was indicated as a very important service, its performance was rated quite modestly indicating slight dissatisfaction with the current arrangements. There are also several socio-demographic attributes of forest owners that influence their needs for information and services about forest management. However, a better understanding of these attributes might help develop the system further.

show abstract

Needs of private forest owners in the context of changing political systems: Lithuania as a case study

Cited by 15 publications

References 12 publications

Do small protected habitat patches within boreal production forests provide value for biodiversity conservation? A systematic review protocol

Do small protected habitat patches within boreal production forests provide value for biodiversity conservation? A systematic review protocol

Are small protected habitat patches within boreal production forests effective in conserving species richness, abundance and community composition? A systematic review

Reflections of active forest owners to the public-private forestry support system in Estonia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About