Non-industrial private forest owners’ willingness to manage for climate change and biodiversity

Abstract

In boreal commercial forests, carbon sequestration, climate change adaptation, and biodiversity conservation can be promoted through various measures. This study examines the factors affecting non-industrial private forest (NIPF) owners' preferences for such forest management practices. A systematic literature review serves as a reference for the empirical analysis of a survey data on the Finnish NIPF owners' stated willingness to adopt thirteen distinct forest management practices. Binary logit models reveal socio-demographic factors, site-specific characteristics, previous forest management, and motivations for forest ownership that are associated with the stated adoption of management practices. Especially, environmental and financial motivations play an important role in decisions concerning forest management practices. Statistically significant factors vary depending on the forest management practice, reflecting the NIPF owner heterogeneity. Younger and highly educated forest owners are more supportive for various management practices that promote biodiversity, while older forest owners are reluctant towards deadwood retention. The results underline the importance of accounting for heterogeneous preferences regarding forest management practices when designing and implementing policies and advisory services aiming at enhancing carbon sequestration, climate change adaptation, or biodiversity in boreal commercial forests.

“Land-sparing benefits biodiversity while land-sharing benefits ecosystem services”: Stakeholders’ perspectives on biodiversity conservation strategies in boreal forests

“…However, non-industrial forest owners are a broad group, and in Sweden only 50% of them are members of forest owners’ associations. Among forest owners in Europe, the willingness to manage for biodiversity conservation varies, with forest owners being females, younger, with higher education, owning small properties and properties with high natural values being more willing to do so (Husa and Kosenius 2021 ; Tiebel et al 2022 ). Thus, the argumentation provided by the owners’ association might not reflect the forest owners’ community as a whole.…”

On the reconfiguring value creation logic and networks of the forest sector in a changing business environment

“…The influence of forest owners' attitudes towards forest values and forest management has been a frequently studied topic (Belin et al 2005;Nordlund and Westin 2011;Degnet et al 2022). Similarly, the impacts of sustainability, climate change and biodiversity loss on forest management and forest owners' decision-making have been studied (Blennow 2012;van Gameren and Zaccai 2015;Bissonnette et al 2017;Husa and Kosenius 2021;Takala et al 2022). Theories of behavioural change, e.g., the theory of planned behaviour, have been utilised in these studies (Thompson and Hansen 2013;Karppinen and Berghäll 2015;Takala et al 2020).…”

Jatkuvapeitteisen metsänkäsittelyn vaikutukset luonnon monimuotoisuuteen, vesistöihin, ilmastoon, virkistyskäyttöön ja metsätuhoriskeihin

“…Suurin osa metsänomistajista on myös halukkaita käsittelemään metsiään jatkuvapeitteisen käsittelyn keinoin niin, että luonnon monimuotoisuus ja ei-aineelliset ekosysteemipalvelut säilyvät, erityisesti jos se on taloudellisesti kannattavaa. Metsänomistajat ovat myös halukkaita tekemään sopimuksia metsien käsittelystä ja suojelusta luonnon monimuotoisuuden ja ei-aineellisten ekosysteemipalvelujen turvaamiseksi, varsinkin jos sopimuksen tekemisestä saa rahallisen korvauksen (Husa & Kosenius 2021;Juutinen ym. 2021).…”