Skepticism of state action in forest certification and voluntary set-asides: a Swedish example with two environmental offsetting options

Abstract

Non-industrial private forest owners in Sweden are encouraged to mitigate environmental damages from forestry on their properties under a principle of "freedom with responsibility," although the level of mitigation is generally left to the owners' discretion. One voluntary measure private forest owners are encouraged to take is setting aside a part of their productive forests for conservation. The purpose of this paper is to evaluate how non-industrial private forest owner beliefs concerning both their own and the Swedish state's responsibility for nature protection differ among owners of certified forests, who automatically leave a set-aside, and those who have stayed out of forest certification but have decided to leave a set-aside. Results of a Heckman selection bivariate probit model show that the more a respondent believes the state is responsible for fulfilling environmental goals compared to private forest owners, the less likely it is that an owner of a noncertified forest will leave a set-aside for conservation. Beliefs about responsibility do not, however, differ among owners of certified and non-certified forests. From a policy perspective, Swedish government agencies may have difficulty steering specific measures taken by private forest owners who are interested in conservation but have stayed out of forest certification regimes. ARTICLE HISTORY

Maintenance and enhancement of forest ecosystem services: a non-industrial private forest owner perspective

“…This also indicates that underlying ideals and values are not a su ciently strong motivator for undertaking management treatments to achieve the desired change compared to the act of certifying or becoming member within a forest owner association. Our ndings are corroborated by Danley (2018) who found that forest owners who where members of an FOA were also more frequently certi ed, and therefore also retained more set-asides.…”

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

“…Previous literature suggests that females, resident forest owners, and non-members of forest owners' association are more likely to adopt forest management practices promoting carbon sequestration, climate change adaptation, or biodiversity (Matta et al, 2009;Danley, 2018;Juutinen et al, 2020). Moreover, regarding gender, forests owned by males are more actively managed (Lidestav & Berg Lejon, 2013), females sell timber less frequently (Kuuluvainen et al, 2014), and males are more often compensation oriented in terms of biodiversity conservation in commercial forests (Koskela & Karppinen, 2020).…”

“…The role of forest property size in forest management behavior is ambiguous and varies between forest management practices. Large forestland size is positively associated with leaving unmanaged areas (Danley, 2018) and converting monocultures to mixed broadleaved stands (Van Herzele & Van Gossum, 2009), while the effect on the delayed harvest is ambiguous (Khanal et al, 2017;Mäntymaa et al 2018;Kline et al 2000a). In this study, the effect of property size on adopting the forest management practices studied is generally negative.…”

“…An increase in property size increases the probability of delaying harvest (Khanal et al, 2017;Mäntymaa et al 2018), leave unmanaged areas (Danley, 2018), and convert monocultures to mixed broadleaved stands (Van Herzele & Van Gossum, 2009). Contrary findings regarding delayed harvest and riparian buffer zones are suggested to be due to increasing marginal returns of forestry (Kline et al, 2000a(Kline et al, , 2000b.…”

“…Regarding the effect of occupation on the willingness to adopt forest management practices, agricultural entrepreneurs are likely to allocate forestland under traditional even-aged management and long rotation management (Juutinen et al, 2020). Membership in forest owners' association decreases the probability to leave unmanaged areas in forests (Danley, 2018).…”