Why are Forest Owners Satisfied with Forest Policy Decisions? Legitimacy, Procedural Justice, and Perceived Uncertainty

Vainio, Annukka

doi:10.1007/s11211-011-0136-5

Cited by 17 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 42 publications

(58 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…According to a study by Vainio (2011), forest owner forest policy satisfaction was determined by procedural fairness, perceived social uncertainty, and legitimacy. Firstly, perception of procedural fairness increased perceived legitimacy.…”

Section: Forest Owners and Forest Policymentioning

confidence: 99%

Florence, Quality of Life

Maggino

2014

Encyclopedia of Quality of Life and Well-Being Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

congress of psychology (pp. 130-132). Brussels, Belgium: North-Holland. Guttman, L. (1968). A general non-metric technique for finding the smallest coordinate space for a configuration of points. Psychometrika, 33, 469-506. Guttman, L. (1982). What is not what in theory construction. In R. M. Hauser, D. Mechanic, & A. Haller (Eds.), Social structure and behavior (pp. 331-348). New York: Academic Press. Guttman, L. (1991). The language of science. In In Memoriam: Chapters from an unfinished textbook on facet theory (pp.

show abstract

Section: Forest Owners and Forest Policymentioning

confidence: 99%

Florence, Quality of Life

Maggino

2014

Encyclopedia of Quality of Life and Well-Being Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This was applied in different ways in the investigated tree-selection exercises. What strategies are preferred not only follows individual preference; apparently it conforms to the predominant norms and values of participants' social and professional contexts, which is supposed to increase legitimacy (Osei-Tutu et al, 2014;Vainio, 2011). While the potential long-term development of habitat structures is generally perceived as a valid argument to retain trees with only a few current structures, selected habitat trees differ remarkably amongst the involved groups.…”

Section: A Look Into the Futurementioning

confidence: 99%

Decision Making in Tree Selection – Contemplating Conflicting Goals via Marteloscope Exercises

Joa

Paulus²,

Mikoleit³

et al. 2020

Rural Landscapes: Society, Environment, History

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The implementation of biodiversity conservation measures in forests managed for timber production usually implies trade-offs between ecological and economic objectives. In continuous cover forestry these trade-offs emerge at the scale of selecting individual trees for timber harvesting or habitat retention. Tree selection determines both the economic viability of timber management and the prevalence of treerelated microhabitats, considered a multi-taxon indicator of forest biodiversity. Recent studies find that tree selection is influenced by several factors, such as individual management preferences and goals, professional education and institutional context. To gain a deeper understanding of tree-selection practices in the context of retention forestry, we analyse four tree-selection exercises on silvicultural training sites (Marteloscopes) performed by groups with different professional backgrounds: conservationists, foresters, and students of each. Based on qualitative data from participant observations and group discussions, we explore their decision-making strategies, reasoning, and practices. Our analysis provides novel insights into decision-making processes when implementing conservation measures, especially with regard to dealing with trade-offs and uncertainties. Our findings indicate that tree-selection decisions are not merely the result of cognitive and rational weighing processes. They can be understood as practices requiring experience, professional routine, and intuition. These practices differ across professional cultures. Despite these differences, the participants of the analysed Marteloscope exercises developed an understanding of the other stakeholders' motivations and restrictions. The setting stimulated a change of perspective that built awareness in many of the participants of their own routines and biases. This may facilitate professional cooperation, crossdisciplinary learning, and the implementation of biodiversity conservation.

show abstract

“…Studies on forest owners have a have been intensive in Finland, including studies on the values and objectives of forest owners (Kuuluvainen et al 1996;Karppinen 1998Karppinen , 2000Karppinen , 2005Karppinen & Hänninen 2000, Takala et al 2017a, 2017bKarppinen et al 2020) and on their perceptions of legitimacy (Vainio 2011).…”

Section: Legitimacy and Democracy Studies Related To Forests And Envimentioning

confidence: 99%

Legitimacy of forest policy – concept analysis and empirical applications in Finland

Rantala¹

2020

Diss. For.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study analyzes the political legitimacy of forest and forest-related nature conservation policies in Finland. Legitimacy is defined here that the forest and nature conservation regimes and related political institutions are perceived as rightful among the people. The major contribution of this study is the comprehensive conceptual framework of legitimacy based on several theories, mainly from political science. The framework analyzes the objects of support, patterns of legitimacy, performance evaluations, and how these relate to one another. In this study, the objects of support refer to forest-related political institutions; these include regulations and public incentives, as well as decisionmaking processes, political programs, and administrative procedures. The framework is intended to be especially useful in the empirical analyses of pluralistic public political discussion and uses a methodology developed for this purpose. The study also analyses the social values of organized political actors. The empirical part of this study explores a data set from Finnish print media discourse, based on letters to editors in three newspapers and in one journal, along with comments given during the preparation of Finland's National Forest Programme 2010. Another empirical data set consists of qualitative semi-structured interviews and the writings of the organized interest groups. Many different groups of citizens were found to participate in public discussion on forests. Quite a large number of individuals shared the overall publicity, despite the fact that there were some very active writers. Nature conservation organizations, researchers, and politicians were well represented. However, the participation of governmental officials from both the forest and environmental sectors can be characterized as insufficient, considering their importance in the implementation of policies. The study of letters to editors found that groups of common social values served as patterns of legitimacy in the performance evaluations of forest policies. These include welfare and wellbeing derived from forests; values related to nature conservation; democratic values; distributive justice; good governance; core regime principles; and fair markets. Of all performance evaluations, 52% were negative while 26% were positive and 22 % were mixed. The welfare of citizens and the nation, export incomes and employment were the most common justifications used in the legitimacy evaluations while economic growth was a topic that divided opinions. Principles related to values of nature and sustainable development were almost as common in the data. A common argument related to the wellbeing of future generations combined the ideas of benefits and nature values with the idea of distributive justice. Democratic values, especially the public participation of the involved groups of people and public deliberation were common sources of legitimacy. Most political actors supported the ideal of conciliatory decision-making, while smaller group preferred strictn...

show abstract

Why are Forest Owners Satisfied with Forest Policy Decisions? Legitimacy, Procedural Justice, and Perceived Uncertainty

Cited by 17 publications

References 42 publications

Florence, Quality of Life

Florence, Quality of Life

Decision Making in Tree Selection – Contemplating Conflicting Goals via Marteloscope Exercises

Legitimacy of forest policy – concept analysis and empirical applications in Finland

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About