2011
DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2011.03.010
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Regional forest organizations and their innovation impact on forestry and regional development in central Switzerland

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 18 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 18 publications
(20 reference statements)
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Fragmentation and the extremely small size of holdings do not favour profitable forest management. As Seeland et al (2011) mentioned in a Swiss example, there are significant differences between the economic positions of forest owners who join associations of small owners and those who chose not to. Many small forest owners associations in the CZ were established thanks to the existing financial support for an association process.…”
Section: Rdpmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Fragmentation and the extremely small size of holdings do not favour profitable forest management. As Seeland et al (2011) mentioned in a Swiss example, there are significant differences between the economic positions of forest owners who join associations of small owners and those who chose not to. Many small forest owners associations in the CZ were established thanks to the existing financial support for an association process.…”
Section: Rdpmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The development of CSF in Swiss forestry was observed over the last 30 years as a response to climate change and increasing demand for ES (Seeland et al, 2011). Swiss collective forestry regime is open to innovative solutions and promoting cost-effective forest management practices.…”
Section: Collective Forestry Regimes As Social Innovationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Much research deals with cooperation between private forest owners (e.g. Fischer et al 2019, Górriz-Mifsud et al 2019, Pezdevšek Malovrh 2010, Pezdevšek Malovrh et al 2017, Põllumäe et al 2016, Rauch 2007) and mostly analyzes PFOAs with the aim of understanding the influence of various factors on the willingness of private forest owners to cooperate in PFOAs (Pezdevšek Malovrh et al 2010), the reasons for establishing PFOAs (Sarvašová et al 2015, Schraml 2005, factors that influenced the establishment, development, professionalism and efficiency of PFOAs (Černač and Pezdevšek Malovrh 2020, Fabra-Crespo and Rojas-Briales 2015, Glück et al 2010, Kronholm 2016, Leban 2014, Lönnstedt 2014, Pezdevšek Malovrh and Laktić 2017, Sarvašová et al 2015, the motives of private forest owners and their benefits for joining PFOA (Hrib et al 2018, Pezdevšek Malovrh et al 2011, Põllumäe et al 2014, the effects of PFOAs on forest management (Hansmann et al 2016, Seeland et al 2011, and the role of stakeholders (Aurenhammer 2017a, Aurenhammer et al 2017b, Šálka et al 2016. These studies provide important insights into the state of the art of PFOAs, but mainly focus on only one organizational form of cooperation.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%