Perspectives and challenges of logging enterprises in the Italian Alps

Public participation has become an important driver in increasing public acceptance of policy decisions, especially in the forestry sector, where conflicting interests among the actors are frequent. Stakeholder Analysis, complemented by Social Network Analysis techniques, was used to support the participatory process and to understand the complex relationships and the strong interactions among actors. This study identifies the forestry training sector stakeholders in the Western Italian Alps and describes their characteristics and priorities, in relation to training activities on entrepreneurial topics for forestry loggers. The hierarchy among actors has been identified, highlighting their respective roles and influence in decision-making processes. A lack of mutual communication among different and well-separated categories of actors has been identified, while good connections between stakeholders, operating in different territories, despite the presence of administrative and logistical barriers, have been observed. Training is a topic involving actors with different roles and interests. Nevertheless, all actors consider training about how to improve yields of forest operations and how to assess investments, particularly in innovative machinery, to be crucially important and conducive to a better comprehension of the wood supply chain and the enhancement of the raw material.

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Implementing Participatory Processes in Forestry Training Using Social Network Analysis Techniques

Blanc

Lingua

Bioglio

et al. 2018

“…Obtaining detailed, long-term records from small-scale private contractors is rather difficult, because many contractors keep partial records only, and they are often unwilling to share data that may be considered sensitive. Therefore, the small sample size is a justified limitation, and its negative effect has been contained by selecting representative cases based on a detailed knowledge of the sector, which was obtained from three previous surveys of Italian contractors [14][15][16]. These surveys produced a detailed picture of the contracting sector in Italy, as well as a list of contractors that was used for extracting representative samples.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is true that Italian forestry presents peculiar conditions in terms of extreme ownership fragmentation, conservative silviculture, low product value, and poor integration between forest management and wood industry-all of which affect the progress of mechanized harvesting, when they do not limit it [16]. That is the main reason why the Italian harvester and processor fleet is still much smaller than in the neighboring alpine countries, such as Austria [30] France [31] or Germany [32].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…On the other hand, some logging contractors still have some doubts about acquiring a harvester or a processor, mainly due to the high purchase cost of the equipment and the limited investment capacity of their firms [16]. Before they buy, operators would like to obtain reliable information about productivity, actual use potential and fuel consumption, for costing purposes.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Use, Utilization, Productivity and Fuel Consumption of Purpose-Built and Excavator-Based Harvesters and Processors in Italy

Magagnotti

Pari²,

Spinelli

2017

Self Cite

Annual use, utilization, productivity and fuel consumption of three purpose-built and three excavator-based harvesters and processors were monitored for one work year. All machines were owned and operated by private contractors and were representative of the Italian machine fleet. Despite challenging mountain terrain, annual use ranged from 675 to 1525 h per year, and production from 3200 to 27,400 m 3 per year. Productivity was lower for excavator-based units, and for machines working under a yarder, due to limited yarder capacity. Purpose-built machines offered higher utilization, productivity and fuel efficiency compared with excavator-based machines. Fuel consumption per m 3 was 2.4 times greater for excavator-based units, compared with purpose-built machines. Excavator-based units offered financial and technical advantages, but their long-term market success will likely depend on future improvements in fuel efficiency, in the face of increasing fuel prices.

“…Even so, the question remains unanswered for the other half of the cases, where a tractor is permanently coupled with the chipper. Further research may address the decision factors leading to specific technology choices, which could improve our understanding of this business and help prospective users with their plans [28].…”

Section: Chipper Type Is Indifferentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Value Retention, Service Life, Use Intensity and Long-Term Productivity of Wood Chippers as Obtained from Contractor Records

Spinelli

Eliasson

Magagnotti

2017

Self Cite

Acknowledging the absence of up-to-date empirical data on the value retention, service life and annual use of chipping machinery, in 2017 the authors surveyed the records kept by 50 contractors offering biomass chipping services. The machine fleet and operations in this survey could be taken as representative for most of Europe, where the biomass sector is well established and is facing further expansion. Data collection included the whole chipping unit, comprised of chipper, carrier and loader. Manually-fed units were excluded from the survey. The data pointed at a service life up to and exceeding 10,000 h and 10 years, which relieved any concerns about poor durability. Value retention was good, and may exceed that of other mainstream forestry equipment. Engine power was the main explanatory variable in any models to predict purchase price and productivity. The effect of this variable could explain most of the variability (>80%) in the purchase price and productivity data. Results also pointed at the essential equivalence in price and productivity between PTO-driven (i.e., tractor powered) and independent-engine chippers, once differences in engine power are accounted for. However, the distribution of purchase price between different components of the chipping unit was different between the two unit types, with the chipper accounting for a larger proportion of the total investment in independent-engine units. Machine power was also different, with most PTO-driven units being significantly smaller than independent-engine units, due to the limitations of existing tractors. Furthermore, half of the carriers assigned to a PTO-driven unit were subject to flexible use, i.e., they were not solely used for chipping work.