Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Services in Family Forestry pp 51–66Cite as

Societal Expectations from Family Forestry in the USA and Europe

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

  • 265 Accesses

Part of the book series: World Forests ((WFSE,volume 24))

Abstract

Humans rely on forests for a wide variety of tangible goods and less tangible services. Over time, societies have come to expect that forests provide certain things, ranging from timber products to spaces for recreational and spiritual enjoyment. We focus on these societal expectations in this chapter, and specifically consider what is expected from family or small-scale private forests in the USA and Europe. These expectations will shape the services provided by forests either directly via landowner and land manager actions or indirectly via policies that may encourage action . We present this chapter as a conceptual discussion, intended to identify what societal expectations are from family forests and how they may relate to the service-dominant logic framework and the potential this framework provides for better matching expectations with services from this important forest land ownership base.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   99.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  • Acheson, J. M. (2006). Public access to privately owned land in Maine. Maine Policy Review, 15(1), 18–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Amacher, G. S., Conway, M. C., & Sullivan, J. (2003). Econometric analyses of nonindustrial forest landowners: Is there anything left to study? Journal of Forest Economics, 9, 137–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andrejczyk, K., Butler, B. J., Dickinson, B. J., Hewes, J. H., Markowski-Lindsay, M., Kittredge, D. B., et al. (2016a). Family forest owners’ perceptions of landowner assistance programs in the USA: A qualitative exploration of program impacts on behaviour. Small-Scale Forestry, 15(1), 17–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andrejczyk, K., Butler, B. J., Tyrrell, M. L., & Langer, J. (2016b). Hansel and Gretel walk in the forest, landowners walk in the woods: A qualitative examination of the language used by family forest owners. Journal of Forestry, 114(1), 52–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aurenhammer, P. (2017). Forest land-use governance and change through Forest Owner Associations—Actors’ roles and preferences in Bavaria. Forest Policy and Economics, 85, 176–191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bliss, J. C., & Martin, A. J. (1989). Identifying NIPF management motivations with qualitative methods. Forest Science, 35(2), 601–622.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bourdieu, P. (1983). Forms of capital. In J. C. Richards (Ed.), Handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education (pp. 241–258). New York: Greenwood Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burnett, M., & Davis, C. (2002). Getting out the cut: Politics and national forest timber harvests, 1960–1995. Administration & Society, 34(2), 202–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Butler, B. J., & Leatherberry, E. C. (2004). America’s family forest owners. Journal of Forestry, 4–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Butler, B. J., Markowski-Lindsay, M., Snyder, S., Catanzaro, P., Kittredge, D. B., Andrejczyk, K., et al. (2014). Effectiveness of landowner assistance activities: An examination of the USDA forest service’s forest stewardship program. Journal of Forestry, 112(2), 187–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Butler, B. J., Hewes, J. H., Dickinson, B. J., Andrejczyk, K., Butler, S. M., & Markowski-Lindsay, M. (2016). Family forest ownerships of the United States, 2013: Findings from the USDA Forest Service’s National Woodland Owner Survey. Journal of Forestry, 114(6), 638–647.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Butler, S. M., Huff, E. S., Snyder, S. A., Butler, B. J., & Tyrrell, M. (2017). The role of gender in management behaviors on family forest lands in the United States. Journal of Forestry, 116(1), 32–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Canadas, M. J., & Novais, A. (2014). Bringing local socioeconomic context to the analysis of forest owners’ management. Land Use Policy, 41, 397–407.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Canadas, M. J., Novais, A., & Marques, M. (2016). Wildfires, forest management and landowners' collective action: A comparative approach at the local level. Land Use Policy, 56, 179–188.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cialdini, R., & Goldstein, N. J. (2004). Social influence: Compliance and conformity. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 591–621.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Colby, K. T. (1988). Public access to private land—Allemansrätt in Sweden. Landscape and Urban Planning, 15(3–4), 253–264.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Côté, M.-A., Généreux-Tremblay, A., Gilbert, D., & Gélinas, N. (2017). Comparing the profiles, objectives and behaviours of new and longstanding non-industrial private forest owners in Quebec, Canada. Forest Policy and Economics, 78, 116–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drobny, N., & Böhm, J. (2015). Neue Waldbesitzer-Generation – Neue Wege in der Kommunikation. Veränderungen der Waldbesitzstrukturen erfordern neue Informationstechniken. LWF aktuell, 107, 21–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elands, B. H., & Wiersum, K. F. (2001). Forestry and rural development in Europe: an exploration of socio-political discourses. Forest policy and economics, 3(1–2), 5–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elands, B. H., O'Leary, T. N., Boerwinkel, H. W., & Wiersum, K. F. (2004). Forests as a mirror of rural conditions; local views on the role of forests across Europe. Forest policy and economics, 6(5), 469–482.

    Google Scholar 

  • Enzenbach, B., Krause, E., & Kirchner, S. (2008). Wald ist nicht nur Männersache. LWF aktuell, 62, 20–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Etzioni, A. (1991). The socio-economics of property. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 6, 465–468.

    Google Scholar 

  • EU. (2009). Directive 2009/28/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources and amending and subsequently repealing Directives 2001/77/EC and 2003/30/EC. Official Journal L, 140, 0016–0062 (05/06/2009).

    Google Scholar 

  • FAO. (2002). Land tenure and rural development. Retrieved January 5, 2018, from http://www.fao.org/docrep/005/y4307e/y4307e00.htm#Contents.

  • Feliciano, D., Bouriaud, L., Brahic, E., Deuffic, P., Dobsinska, Z., Jarsky, V., et al. (2017). Understanding private forest owners’ conceptualisation of forest management: Evidence from a survey in seven European countries. Journal of Rural Studies, 54, 162–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Follo, G., Lidestav, G., Ludvig, A., Vilkriste, L., Hujala, T., Karppinen, H., et al. (2017). Gender in European forest ownership and management: reflections on women as “new forest owners”. Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research, 32(2), 174–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glaeser, E. L., La Porta, R., Lopez-de-Silanes, F., & Shleifer, A. (2004). Do institutions cause growth? Journal of Economic Growth, 9(3), 271–303.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J. (1989). The structural transformation of the public sphere: An inquiry into a category of bourgeois society (T. Burger & F. Lawrence, Trans.). Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hansen, E. N. (2010). The role of innovation in the forest products industry. Journal of Forestry, 108(7), 348–353.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haugen, K., Karlsson, S., & Westin, K. (2016). New forest owners: Change and continuity in the characteristics of Swedish non-industrial private forest owners (NIPF owners) 1990–2010. Small-Scale Forestry, 15, 533–550.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haynes, R. W., Montgomery, C. A., & Alexander, S. J. (2017). Wood-products markets, communities, and regional economies. In D. H. Olson & B. Van Horne (Eds.), People, forests, and change (pp. 47–61). Washington, DC: Island Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Häyrinen, L., Mattila, O., Berghäll, S., & Toppinen, A. (2016). Lifestyle of health and sustainability of forest owners as an indicator of multiple use of forests. Forest Policy and Economics, 67, 10–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heldmann, G. (2013). Family forests on the edge: Implications for public recreation access in Maine. M.S. Thesis, University of Maine, Digital Commons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoogstra-Klein, M. (2016). Exploring the financial rationales of Dutch forest holdings and their relation with financial results. European Journal of Forest Research, 135, 1025–1036.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hull, R. B., Robertson, D. P., & Buhyoff, G. J. (2004). “Boutique” forestry: New forest practices in urbanizing landscapes. Journal of Forestry, 102(1), 14–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ice, G. G., Schilling, E., & Vowell, J. (2010). Trends for forestry best management practices implementation. Journal of Forestry, 108(6), 267–273.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jörgensen, H., & Stjernström, O. (2008). Emotional links to forest ownership. Restitution of land and use of a productive resource in Põlva County, Estonia. Fennia—International Journal of Geography, 186(2), 95–111.

    Google Scholar 

  • Juerges, N., & Newig, J. (2015). How interest groups adapt to the changing forest governance landscape in the EU: A case study from Germany. Forest Policy and Economics, 50, 228–235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kendra, A., & Hull, B. (2005). Motivations and behaviors of new forest owners in Virginia. Forest Science, 51(2), 142–154.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kilgore, M. A., & Snyder, S. A. (2016). Lake States natural resource managers’ perspectives on forest land parcelization and its implications for public land management. Land Use Policy, 59, 320–328.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kilgore, M. A., Snyder, S. A., Eryilmaz, D., Markowski-Lindsay, M. A., Butler, B. J., Kittredge, D. B., et al. (2015). Assessing the relationship between different forms of landowner assistance and family forest owner behaviors and intentions. Journal of Forestry, 113(1), 12–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kittredge, D. B. (2005). The cooperation of private forest owners on scales larger than one individual property: International examples and potential application in the United States. Forest Policy and Economics, 7(4), 671–688.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knoot, T. G., & Rickenbach, M. (2011). Best management practices and timber harvesting: The role of social networks in shaping landowner decisions. Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research, 26(2), 171–182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Konijnendijk, C. C. (2003). A decade of urban forestry in Europe. Forest policy and Economics, 5(2), 173–186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Korhonen, K., Hujala, T., & Kurttila, M. (2012). Reaching forest owners through their social networks in timber sales. Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research, 27(1), 88–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krott, M., & Neitzel, C. (2018). Moderner Kleinprivatwald – Eigentümer “first”. AFZ Wald, 73(5), 21–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kueper, A. M., Sagor, E. S., & Becker, D. R. (2013). Learning from landowners: Examining the role of peer exchange in private landowner outreach through landowner networks. Society & Natural Resources, 26(8), 912–930.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kvarda, E. (2004). ‘Non-agricultural forest owners’ in Austria—A new type of forest ownership. Forest Policy and Economics, 6, 459–467.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lidskog, R., & Sjödin, D. (2014). Why do forest owners fail to heed warnings? Conflicting risk evaluations made by the Swedish forest agency and forest owners. Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research, 29(3), 275–282.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lind-Riehl, J., Jeltema, S., Morrison, M., Shirkey, G., Mayer, A. L., Rouleau, M., et al. (2015). Family legacies and community networks shape private forest management in the western Upper Peninsula of Michigan (USA). Land Use Policy, 45, 95–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mallo, M. F. L., & Espinoza, O. (2015). Awareness, perceptions and willingness to adopt cross-laminated timber by the architecture community in the United States. Journal of Cleaner Production, 94, 198–210.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mårald, E., & Westholm, E. (2016). Changing approaches to the future in Swedish forestry, 1850–2010. Nature and Culture, 11(1), 1–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moiseyev, A., Solberg, B., Kallio, A. M. I., & Lindner, M. (2011). An economic analysis of the potential contribution of forest biomass to the EU RES target and its implications for the EU forest industries. Journal of Forest Economics, 17(2), 197–213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • NASF (2019). A Century of Shared Stewardships - State Foresters and the Forest Service. National Association of State Foresters, pp. 16. https://www.stateforesters.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/NASF_SSCD_final-spreads.pdf

  • Nichiforel, L., Keary, K., Deuffic, P., Weiss, G., Thorsen, B. J., Winkel, G., et al. (2018). How private are Europe’s private forests? A comparative property rights analysis. Land Use Policy, 76, 535–552.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • North, D. C. (1991). Institutions. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 5(1), 97–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pezdevšek Malovrh, S., Nonic, D., Glavonjic, P., Nedeljkovic, J., Avdibegović, M., & Krč, J. (2015). Private forest owner typologies in Slovenia and Serbia: Targeting private forest owner groups for policy implementation. Small-Scale Forestry, 14, 423–440.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pierce, J. L., & Rodgers, L. (2004). The psychology of ownership and worker-owner productivity. Group and Organization Management, 29, 588–613.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Primmer, E., & Karppinen, H. (2010). Professional judgment in non-industrial private forestry: Forester attitudes and social norms influencing biodiversity conservation. Forest Policy and Economics, 12(2), 136–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pröbstl, U., Wirth, V., Elands, B. H., & Bell, S. (Eds.). (2010). Management of recreation and nature based tourism in European forests. Springer Science & Business Media.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pulla, P., Schuck, A., Verkerk, P. J., Lasserre, B., Marchetti, M., & Green, T. (2013). Mapping the distribution of forest ownership in Europe. European Forest Institute, Technical Report 88. pp. 91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pülzl, H., & Hogl, K. (2013). Forest governance in Europe. In H. Pülzl, K. Hogl, D. Kleinschmit, D. Wydra, B. Arts, P. Mayer, M. Palahí, G. Winkel, & B. Wolfslehner (Eds.), European forest governance: Issues at stake and the way forward (pp. 11–17). What Science Can Tell Us 2. European Forest Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sherif, M. (1936). The psychology of social norms. Harper Brothers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Silver, E. J., Leahy, J. E., Weiskittel, A. R., Noblet, C. L., & Kittredge, D. B. (2015). An evidence-based review of timber harvesting behavior among private woodland owners. Journal of Forestry, 113(5), 490–499.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Staal Wästerlund, D. S., & Kronholm, T. (2017). Family forest owners’ commitment to service providers and the effect of association membership on loyalty. Small-Scale Forestry, 16(2), 275–293.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steel, B. S., List, P., & Shindler, B. (1994). Conflicting values about federal forests: A comparison of national and Oregon publics. Society & natural resources, 7(2), 137–153.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vanhanen, H., Jonsson, R., Gerasimov, Y., Krankina, O., & Messieur, C. (Eds.). (2012). Making boreal forests work for people and nature. Vantaa: IUFRO’s Special Project on World Forests, Society and Environment. Retrieved June 29, 2019, from http://jukuri.luke.fi/bitstream/handle/10024/504341/978-951-40-2353-8-wfse-pol-brief-boreal-forests.pdf?sequence=1.

  • Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2004). Evolving to a new dominant logic for marketing. Journal of Marketing, 68(1), 1–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2016). Institutions and axioms: An extension and update of service-dominant logic. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 44(1), 5–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vargo, S. L., Wieland, H., & Akaka, M. A. (2015). Innovation through institutionalization: A service ecosystems perspective. Industrial Marketing Management, 44, 63–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, C. R., & Kerekes, C. B. (2011). Securing private property: formal versus informal institutions. The Journal of Law and Economics, 54(3), 537–572.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ziegenspeck, S., Härdter, U., & Schraml, U. (2004). Lifestyles of private forest owners as an indication of social change. Forest Policy and Economics, 6, 447–458.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, USA

    Emily S. Huff

  2. Georg-August-University Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany

    Nataly Jürges

  3. University of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal

    Maria Canadas

Authors
  1. Emily S. Huff
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Nataly Jürges
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Maria Canadas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Emily S. Huff .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. School of Forest Sciences, University of Eastern Finland, Joensuu, Finland

    Teppo Hujala

  2. Forest Sciences, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland

    Anne Toppinen

  3. United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Amherst, MA, USA

    Brett J. Butler

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Huff, E.S., Jürges, N., Canadas, M. (2019). Societal Expectations from Family Forestry in the USA and Europe. In: Hujala, T., Toppinen, A., J. Butler, B. (eds) Services in Family Forestry. World Forests, vol 24. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-28999-7_3

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation