Conflicts in conservation: Woodland key habitats, authorities and private forest owners in Sweden

Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research

Volumn 24, Issue 6, 2009, Pages 504-514

  Götmark, Frank ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GOTHENBURG   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Conflict; Forest conservation; NIPF; Private forest owners; Protected area

Indexed keywords

BIODIVERSITY VALUES; FOREST CONSERVATION; FOREST OWNERS; LOGISTIC REGRESSIONS; NIPF OWNER; NONINDUSTRIAL PRIVATE FORESTS; PERSONAL CONTACTS; PREDICTIVE FACTORS; PRIVATE FOREST OWNERS; PROTECTED AREAS; RESPONSE RATE;

BIODIVERSITY; CONSERVATION; ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION;

FORESTRY;

BIODIVERSITY; CONSERVATION; FORESTRY;

EID: 70949093557     PISSN: 02827581     EISSN: 16511891     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/02827580903363545     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Angelstam, P. (2003). Forest biodiversity management*The Swedish model. In D. B. Lindenmayer, & J. F. Franklin (Eds.), Towards Forest Sustainability (pp. 143-166). Collingwood, Victoria, Australia: CSIRO.
2. Barli, O., Baskent, E. Z., Turker, M. F. & Gedik, T. (2006). Analytical approach for analyzing and providing solutions for the conflicts among forest stakeholders across Turkey. Forest Policy and Economics, 9, 219-236.
3. Berggren, U. (2002). Skogsägarnas Syn På Skogsvårdsstyrelsens Arbete Med Biotopskydd [Forest owners' attitudes with respect to the Forest Agencies' work with biotope protection] (Rapp 2002:1). Borås, Västra Götaland: Skogsvårdsstyrelsen. (In Swedish.)
4. Bourke, L. & Luloff, A. E. (1994). Attitudes toward the management of nonindustrial private forest land. Society and Natural Resources, 7, 445-457.
5. Dietz, T. & Stern, P. C. (Eds.) (2002). New Tools for Environmental Protection: Education, Information and Voluntary Measures. Washington DC: National Academy Press.
6. Environmental Objectives Council (EOC) (2007). Sweden's Environmental Objectives*In an Interdependent World. Stockholm: CM-gruppen. pdf at www.miljomal.nu
7. Franc, N., Götmark, F., Økland, B., Nordén, B. & Paltto, H. (2007). Factors and scales potentially important for saproxylic beetles in temperate mixed oak forest. Biological Conservation, 135, 86-98.
8. Gärdenfors, U. (Ed.) (2005). The 2005 Red List of Swedish Species. Uppsala: Artdatabanken, SLU.
9. Götmark, F., Söderlundh, H. & Thorell, M. (2000). Buffer zones for forest reserves: opinions of land owners and conservation value of their forest around nature reserves in southern Sweden. Biodiversity and Conservation, 9, 1377-1390.
10. Götmark, F., Fridman, J. & Kempe, G. (2009). Education and advice contribute to increased density of broadleaved conservation trees, but not saplings, in young forest in Sweden. Journal of Environmental Management, 90, 1081-1088.
11. Groom, M., Meffe, G. & Carroll, R. (2006). Principles of Conservation Biology (3rd ed). Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Press.
12. Gustafsson, L. & Ahlén, I. (1996). Geography of Plants and Animals. National atlas of Sweden. Stockholm: Almqvist and Wiksell.
13. Hedwall, P.-O. (2004). Attitudes Towards Protection of Biodiversity in Forests*A Case Study of Forest Owners in Ska °ne, Sweden (Examensarbete nr 59). Alnarp: SLU. http://exepsilon.slu.se/archive/00000233/01/Attitudes_towards_protection_of_biodiversity_in_forests.pdf
14. Hellström, E. (2001). Conflict cultures*Qualitative comparative analysis of environmental conflicts in forestry. Silva Fennica, Monographs, 2, 1-109.
15. Jacobson, S. K., McDuff, M. D. & Monroe, M. C. (2006). Conservation Education and Outreach Techniques. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
16. Kangas, J. & Niemeläinen, P. (1996). Opinion of forest owners and the public on forests and their use in Finland. Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research, 11, 269-280.
17. Kindstrand, C., Norman, J., Boman, M. & Mattson, L. (2008). Attitudes towards various forest functions: A comparison between private forest owners and forest officers. Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research, 23, 133-136.
18. Kuuluvainen, J., Karppinen, H. & Ovaskainen, V. (1996). Land-owner objectives and nonindustrial private timber supply. Forest Science, 42, 300-309.
19. McCleery, R. A., Ditton, R. B., Sell, J. & Lopez, R. R. (2006). Understanding and improving attitudinal research in wildlife sciences. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 34, 537-541.
20. McKeown, C. & Summers, E. (Eds.) (2005). Collins English dictionary (Pocket ed.). Glasgow: HarperCollins.
21. Myers, D. G. (2004). Psychology (7th ed). New York: Worth.
22. Niemelä, J., Young, J., Alard, D., Askasibar, M., Henle, K., Johnson, R., et al. (2005). Identifying, managing and monitoring conflicts between forest biodiversity conservation and other human interests in Europe. Forest Policy and Economics, 7, 877-890.
23. Paltto, H., Nordén, B., Götmark, F. & Franc, N. (2006). At which spatial and temporal scales does landscape context affect local density of red data book and indicator species? Biological Conservation, 133, 442-454.
24. Rodrigues, A. S. L., Andelman, S. J., Bakarr, M. I., Boitani, L., Brooks, T. M., Cowling, R. M., et al. (2004). Effectiveness of the global protected area network in representing species diversity. Nature, 428, 640-643.
25. Resampling Stats (2000). User's Guide. Arlington, VA: Resampling Stats.
26. Schaaf, K. A. & Broussard, S. R. (2006). Private forest policy tools: A national survey exploring the American public's perceptions and support. Forest Policy and Economics, 9, 316-334.
27. Serbruyns, I. & Luyssaert, S. (2006). Acceptance of sticks, carrots and sermons as policy instruments for directing private forest management. Forest Policy and Economics, 9, 285-296.
28. Soanes, C., Stevenson, A. & Hawker, S. (Eds.) (2008) Concise Oxford English dictionary. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
29. SPSS (2002). SPSS Version 11.0.1 for Macintosh. Chicago, IL: SPSS. www.spss.com
30. Statistical Yearbook of Forestry (SYF) (2007). Official Statistics of Sweden. Jönköping: Skogsstyrelsens Förlag. (In Swedish and English; pdf version at www.skogsstyrelsen.se)
31. Swedish Environmental Protection Agency (SEPA) (2003). Lokal Förankring Av Naturvård Genom Deltagande Och Dialog [Local governance in nature conservation, through participation and communication] (Rep. 5264-0). Stockholm: Naturvårdsverket. (In Swedish.)
32. Swedish Environmental Protection Agency (SEPA) (2009). Retrieved February 2009, from http://www.naturvardsverket.se
33. Swedish Forest Agency (SFA) (2009). Homepage, and ''Woodland Key Habitats''. Retrieved February 2009, from http://www.skogsstyrelsen.se/episerver4/templates/SNormalPage.aspx?id 14802
34. Terstad, J. (1999). Swedish experiences of incentives for the protection of nature. Science of the Total Environment, 240, 189-196.
35. Uliczka, H. (2003). Nature conservation efforts by forest owners*Intentions and practice in a Swedish case study. Silva Fennica, 37, 459-475.
36. Uliczka, H., Angelstam, P., Jansson, G. & Bro, A. (2004). Non-industrial private forest owners' knowledge of and attitudes towards nature conservation. Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research, 19, 274-288.