Advertisement

Landscape goods and services related to forestry land use

  • Bill Slee
Chapter

Abstract

It has been argued by Mather (1992) that forestry has passed through three distinct historic phases of development: a pre-industrial phase; an industrial phase; and a post-industrial phase. In the pre-industrial phase, forestry was principally but not exclusively a provider of local livelihoods, providing a wide range of timber and non-timber products. In Western Europe this role largely ceased by the late 19th century, although in post-communist countries there has been something of a resurgence of this function in newly privatised forest holdings, which comprise a significant part of the forest estate. Over the 18th and 19th century, the growth of imperial powers and the beginnings of the industrial revolution created a more mono-functional demand for specific types of timber, initially for shipbuilding or charcoal manufacture, but also for building material and paper manufacture. This has been termed the industrial phase. Although this monofunctional industrial style of forestry remains to some extent in some parts of Europe, the most recent post-industrial phase has created more varied styles of forestry with a stronger amenity or post-productivist function (Mather 2001).

Keywords

Forest Owner Green Infrastructure Private Forest Black Grouse Pure Public Good 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Appleton J (1996) The experience of landscape, revised edition, Wiley: London.Google Scholar
  2. Committee of Agricultural Organisations in the European Union & General Committee for Agricultural Cooperation in the European Union 1999, The European model of agriculture: the way ahead, Pr(99)88F1, P(99)89F1 Brussels.Google Scholar
  3. Costanza R, d’Arge R, de Groot R, Farber S, Grasso M, Hannon B, Limburg K, Naeem S, O’Neill RV, Paruelo J, Raskin RG, Sutton P, van den Belt M (1997) The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature 387: 253–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Davidson J, Wibberley G (1977) Planning and the rural environment, Pergamon, Oxford.Google Scholar
  5. Drake L (1992) The Non-Market Value of the Swedish Agricultural Landscape. European Review of Agricultural Economics 19: 351–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Edwards S (2000) The appraisal of rural development forestry in Scotland, unpublished PhD thesis, Dept of Agriculture and forestry, University of Aberdeen.Google Scholar
  7. Elands B, Wiersum F (2003) Forestry and rural development in Europe, Wageningen UR: Wageningen.Google Scholar
  8. Elands B, O’ Leary T (2002) The myth of forests: a reflection on the variety of rural identities in Europe and the role of forests in it. In: Wiersum F, Elands B (eds) The changing role of forestry in Europe: perspectives for rural development, Wageningen: WUR.Google Scholar
  9. Elands BHM, Wiersum KF (2003) Forestry and rural development in Europe: research results and policy implications of a comparative European study, WAU: Wageningen.Google Scholar
  10. Fowler HW, Fowler FG (eds) (1964) Concise Oxford English Dictionary, OUP: Oxford.Google Scholar
  11. Forman RTT, Godron M (1986) Landscape ecology, Wiley: New York.Google Scholar
  12. Glück P, Weber M (eds) (1998) Mountian forestry in Europe: evaluation of silvicultural and policy means, BOKU: Vienna.Google Scholar
  13. Grahame K (1908) The wind in the willows, Methuen: London.Google Scholar
  14. Hirsch F (1976) Social limits to growth, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Hoskins WG (1955) The making of the English landscape, Hodder and Stoughton: London.Google Scholar
  16. Jáger L (ed) (2005) Forest sector entrepreneurship in Europe: country studies, Volumes 1 & 2, Acta Silvatica and Lignaria Hungarica, Special EditionGoogle Scholar
  17. Koch N, Kennedy JJ (2004) Viewing and managing natural resources as human-ecosystem relationships. Forest Policy and Economics 6: 497–504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lawrence A (2004) Social values of forests. In: Burley J et al. (eds) Encyclopaedia of forest sciences, Vol 3, Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp. 1126–1131.Google Scholar
  19. Mantau U et al. (2001) Recreational and environmental markets for forest enterprises, CABI Books: Wallingford.Google Scholar
  20. Mather A (1992) The forest transition. Area 24: 367–379.Google Scholar
  21. Mather A (2001) Forests of Consumption: postproductivism, postmaterialism and the postindustrial forest. Environmental and Planning C: Government and Policy 19: 249–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. O’Brien E (2005) Social and cultural values of trees and woodlands in northwest and south east England. Forest Snow and Landscape Research 79: 169–184.Google Scholar
  23. Pakenham T (2002) Remarkable trees of the world, Weidenfeld and Nicholson: London.Google Scholar
  24. Pakenham T (2003) Meetings with remarkable trees, Weidenfeld and Nicholson: London.Google Scholar
  25. Saastamoinen O (1997) A framework for assessing the total value of forests in Finland. Scandinavian Forest Economics 36: 395–406.Google Scholar
  26. Schama S (1995) Landscape and Memory, Simon and Shuster, London.Google Scholar
  27. Slee B (2005) The economics of access. Quarterly Journal of Forestry 99: 221–231.Google Scholar
  28. Williams R (1973) The Country and the City, Chatto & Windus, London.Google Scholar
  29. Willis K, Garrod G, Scarpa R, Powe N, Lovett A, Bateman I, Hanley N, Macmillan D (2003) The social and economic benefits of forests in Great Britain, Newcastle: CREAM.Google Scholar
  30. Woodland Trust (2004) Space for people: targeting action for woodland access, Woodland Trust: Grantham.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bill Slee
    • 1
  1. 1.Socio-Economics Research Group, Macaulay Institute, Aberdeen and Countryside and Community Research UnitUniversity of GloucestershireUK

Personalised recommendations