Opinion of forest owners and the public on forests and their use in Finland

Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research

Volumn 11, Issue 1-4, 1996, Pages 269-280

  Kangas, Jyrki ^a   Niemeläinen, Pasi ^a  

^a FINNISH FOREST RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Finland)

Author keywords

Forest management; Forest policy; Multiple use forestry; Nature conservation; Public preferences

Indexed keywords

EID: 0029785442     PISSN: 02827581     EISSN: 16511891     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/02827589609382936     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Airola, A., 1974. Nynäsin alue ja sen ulkoilukäyttö, Mimeograph 98University of Helsinki. (In Finnish.)
2. Anon. 1990. “ Statistics Finland 1990 Occupation and Socio–Economic Status ”. In Population Census Volume 8, 297Helsinki
3. Bourke, L., and Luloff, A. E., 1994. Attitudes toward the management of nonindustrial private forest land. Soc. Natural Resour., 7:445–457.
4. Dahle, L., Solberg, B., and Södal, D. P., 1987. Haldninger til og betalingsvillighet for björn, jerv og ulv i Norge, Report 5/1987 114Agricultural University of Norway. Department of Forest Economics. (In Norwegian.)
5. Dennis, S., 1988. Incorporating public opinion surveys in national forest land and resource planning. Soc. Natural Resour., 1:309–316.
6. Eskelinen, O., 1979. The natural environment welfare factors of forested outdoor recreation area Pyynikki. Silva Fenn., 13:146–151.
7. Games, A. S., and Winther, G., 1990. Holdninigar til, og betalingsvillighet for, flersidig skogbruk og barskogverm i Norge, 94Agricultural University of Norway. Department of Forestry. M.Sc. thesis (In Norwegian.)
8. Haakenstadt, H., 1972. Forest management in an area of outdoor life. An investigation of public opinion about Oslomarka. Meld. Nor. Landbrukshögsk., 51:1679 (In Norwegian with English summary.)
9. Hallikainen, V., 1993. Erämaan käsite ja kokeminen, suomalaisten erämaa mielikuva, erämaiden virkistys–käyttö ja arvostus, 247University of Joensuu. Faculty of Forestry. Thesis for the licentiate degree(In Finnish.)
10. Hoen, H.F., 1993. Multiple use forestry and preservation of coniferous forests in Norway. Scand. J. For. Res., 8:266–280.
11. Hoen, H. F., and Winther, G., 1993. Multiple use forestry and preservation of coniferous forests in Norway:a study of attitudes and willingness to pay. Scand. J. For. Res., 8:266–280.
12. Jaatinen, E., 1976. Helsingin ulkoilualueiden virkistyskäyttäjien aluekohtaiset mielipiteet, 7Helsingin kaupunkisuunnitteluvirasto, yleiskaavaosasto. Publication YB. (In Finnish.)
13. Järveläinen, V.–P., 1977. Opinions on Finnish private forestry. Folia For., 334:1–47. (In Finnish with English summary.)
14. Kangas, J., 1992a. Choosing the regeneration chain in a forest stand:a decision model based on multi–attribute utility theory. Univ. Joensuu Publ. Sci., 24:1–230. (In Finnish with English summary.)
15. Kangas, J., 1992b. Multiple–use planning of forest resources by using the analytic hierarchy process. Scand. J. For. Res., 7:259–268.
16. Kangas, J., and Pukkala, T., 1992. A decision theoretic approach applied to goal programming of forest management. Silva Fenn., 26:169–176.
17. Kardell, L., 1979. “ Talltorsmon—ett rekreationsområde i Åtvidaberg ”. In Sveriges landbruksuniversitet, avdelning förlandskapsvård, Rapport 17 (In Swedish.)
18. Karhu, I., and Kellomäki, S., 1980. Effects of silvicultural practice on amenity of the forest landscape. Silva Fenn., 14:409–428.
19. Karppinen, H., and Hänninen, H., 1990. Actual and allowable cut in nonindustrial private woodlots in southern Finland. Folia For., 747:1–117.
20. Korhonen, M., 1982. Liperiläisten ja Outokumpulaisten suhtautumisesta metsänhoitoon ja metsämaan käyttöön, Mimeograph 88University of Joensuu. (In Finnish.)
21. Korhonen, M., 1983. Suhtautuminen metsäympäristöön ja metsänhoitoon, Suunnittelumaantieteen julkaisuja No. 12 29University of Joensuu. (In Finnish)
22. Lovén, L., 1973. Landscape preferences of professional foresters. Silva Fenn., 7:8–23.
23. Pukkala, T., and Kangas, J., 1993. A heuristic optimization method for forest planning and decision–making. Scand. J. For. Res., 8:560–570.
24. Saaty, T. L., 1980. “ The Analytic Hierarchy Process ”. In Planning, Priority Setting, Resource Allocation, 283New York:McGraw–Hill.
25. Savolainen, R., and Kellomäki, S., 1981. Scenic value of forest landscape. Acta For. Fenn., 170:1–71.
26. Steel, B. S., List, P., and Shindler, B., 1994. Conflicting values about federal forests:a comparison of national and Oregon publics. Soc. Natural Resour., 7:137–153.
27. Tuomala, S., 1993. Suomalaisten metsäasenteet ja met–sätiedot 1993, 8Helsinki:Finnish Forestry Association.
28. Tomppo, E., and Siitonen, M., 1991. The national forest inventory of Finland. Pap. Timb., 73:90–96.
29. Uusitalo, L., 1986. “ Suomalaiset ja ympäristö ”. In Tutkimus taloudellisen käyttäytymisen rationalisuudesta, Series A:49 170Helsinki:Acta Academiae Oeconomicae Helsingiensis. The Helsinki School of Economics and Business Administration.