The controversy over protected areas and forest-sector employment in Norrbotten, Sweden: Forest stakeholder perceptions and statistics

Society and Natural Resources

Volumn 23, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 146-164

  Keskitalo, E Carina H ^a   Lundmark, Linda ^a  

^a UMEÅ UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Forest sector employment; Norrbotten; People's perceptions; Protected areas; Sweden

Indexed keywords

EMPLOYMENT; ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION; FOREST MANAGEMENT; FORESTRY POLICY; NATURE CONSERVATION; PERCEPTION; PROTECTED AREA; RATIONALIZATION; STAKEHOLDER;

NORRBOTTEN; SWEDEN;

EID: 74349091451     PISSN: 08941920     EISSN: 15210723     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/08941920802688543     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. ASTRID. 2003. Geo-referenced database, generated by Statistics Sweden, containing all individuals in Sweden 1985-2003. Umeä, Sweden: Department of Social and Economic Geography, Umeä University.
2. Bori-Sánz, M., and A. Niskanen. 2002. Nature-based tourism in forests as a tool for rural development-Analysis of three study areas in North Karelia (Finland), Scotland and the Catalán Pyrenees. Internal report No. 7. Joensuu, Finland: European Forest Institute.
3. Bostedt, G., P. J. Parks, and M. Boman. 2001. Integrating forestry and reindeer husbandry in northern Sweden. A discrete time application. Paper presented at the 2001 Annual Conference of the European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists EAERE, 28-30 June, Southampton, UK.
4. Brown, K. 2001. Cut and run? Evolving institutions for global forest governance. J. Int. Dev. 13:893-905.
5. Carroll, M. S., C. W. McKetta, K. A. Blatner, and C. Schallau. 1999. A response to 'Forty years of spotted owls? A longitudinal analysis of logging industry job losses.' Sociol. Perspect. 42(2):325-333.
6. County Administrative Board. 2007. County Administrative Board. http://www.lst.se (accessed 11 May 2007).
7. Freudenburg, W. R., D. J. O'Leary, and L. J. Wilson. 1999. Spotting the myths about spotted owls. Claims of causality, burdens of proof and the "cause" of rain in Seattle. Sociol. Perspect. 42(2):335-354.
8. Freudenburg, W. R., L. J. Wilson, and D. J. O'Leary. 1998. Forty years of spotted owls? A longitudinal analysis of logging industry job losses. Sociol. Perspect. 41(1):1-16.
9. Frost, W. 2004. Tourism, rainforests and worthless lands: The origins of National Parks in Queensland. Tourism Geogr. 6(4):493-507.
10. Garvill, J., E. Lundholm, G. Malmberg, and K. Westin. 2004. Forced or free movers? The motives, voluntariness and selectivity of interregional migration in the Nordic countries. Population Space Place 10(1):59-72.
11. Jurgens, I. 2002. Science-stakeholder dialogue and climate change: Towards a participatory notion of communication. Paper presented at the 2002 Berlin Conference on the Human Dimensions of Global Environmental Change, "Knowledge for sustainability transition: The challenge for social science," Berlin, 6-7 December.
12. Kaltenborn, B., H. Riese, and M. Hundeide. 1999. National park planning and local participation: Some reflections from a mountain region in southern Norway. Mountain Res. Dev. 19(1):51-61.
13. Keskitalo, E. C. H. 2008. Climate change and globalization in the Arctic. An integrated approach to vulnerability assessment. London: Earthscan.
14. Layton, I. 1999. The forest industry in the Barents region in economic and political force fields. BASIS report, accessed 11 March 2008. http://66.102.1.104/scholar?hl=sv&lr=&q=cache:uwu_-0GIIegJ:earth.uni-muenster.de/BASIS/BASISP/files/layton.pdf+globalisation+trends+forestry+boreal
15. Layton, I., and A. Pashkevich. 2003. Forest-sector case studies in the barents region. Comparisons between the Northern Dvina and the Pite river basins. GERUM working report. Umeä, Sweden:Departmentof Socialand EconomicGeography.
16. Lehtinen, A. A. 2001. Nordic forest communities, vulnerability and the question of environmental justice-A view from geography. In Social sustainability of forestry in northern Europe: Research and education. TemaNord Publication No. 2001:575. ed. M. Hytönen, 315-331. Copenhagen, Denmark: Nordic Council of Ministers.
17. Lindgren, U., Ö. Pettersson, B. Jansson, and H. Nilsagärd. 2000. Skogsbruket i den lokala ekonomin. Report 4, 2000. Jönköping, Sweden: Swedish Forest Agency.
18. Luckert, M. K., and F. J. Salkie. 1998. Forestry in Canada: Transitions and emerging policy issues. Can. Public Policy 24:1-10.
19. Lundholm, E. 2007. Are movers still the same? Characteristics of interregional migrants in Sweden 1970-2001. Tijdschr. Econ. Sociale Geogr. 98(3):336-348.
20. Lundmark, L. 2005. Forest-related employment in the European North: Current trends and future development. Fennia 183(2):81-95.
21. Lundmark, L. 2006a. Mobility, migration and seasonal tourism employment. Scand. J. Hospital. Tourism 6(3):3-17.
22. Lundmark, L. 2006b. Restructuring and employment change in sparsely populated areas. Examples from northern Sweden and Finland. GERUM report series 2006:2, Dissertation. Umeä, Sweden: Kulturgeografiska institutionen, Umeä Universitet.
23. Lundmark, L., P. Fredman, and K. Sandell. 2006. The Role of national parks and protected areas for labour market restructuring: From forest sector employment to tourism? In Restructuring and employment change in sparsely populated areas. Examples from northern Sweden and Finland, 121-145. GERUM report series 2006:2, Dissertation. Umeä,Sweden: Kulturgeografiska institutionen, Umeä Universitet.
24. Marris, C., I. H. Langford, and T. O'Riordan. 1998. A quantitative test of the cultural theory of risk perceptions: Comparison with the psychometric paradigm. Risk Anal. 18(5):635-647.
25. Nordic Council of Ministers. 2002. Have a 'good participation': Recommendations on public participation in forestry based on literature review and Nordic experiences. TemaNord no. 515. Copenhagen: Nordic Council of Ministers.
26. Norrbotten County Administrative Board. 2005. Inga fler avsättningar av produktiv skogsmark. Press release 9 February 2005. www.bd.lst (accessed 6 May 2007).
27. Pettersson, Ö. 2002. Socio-economic dynamics in sparse regional Structures. Introduction. PhD dissertation. GERUM Kulturgeografi 2002:2. Kulturgeografiska institutionen/SMC. Umeä, Sweden: Umeä Universitet.
28. Piteä-Tidningen. 2004a. Unreasonable environmental protection ambitions threaten industry and employment. Piteä-Tidningen, Piteä, 15May 2004.
29. Piteä-Tidningen. 2004b. More reserves threaten industry in Norrland. Piteä-Tidningen, 19 April 2004.
30. Regeringens skrivelse. 2002. En samlad naturvärdspolitik 2001/02:173. Stockholm, Sweden: Regeringskansliet.
31. Sandell, K. 2005. Access, tourism and democracy: A conceptual framework and the non-establishment of a proposed national park in Sweden. Scand. J. Hospital. Tourism 5(1):63-75.
32. Slovic, P. 1987. Perception of risk. Science 236:280-285.
33. Slovic, P., B. Fishhoff, and S. Lichtenstein. 1980. Behavioral decision theory perspectives on risk and safety. Acta Psychol. 56:183-203.
34. Statistics Sweden. 2007. Statistics Sweden. www.scb.se (accessed 11 May 2007).
35. Stjernström, O. 2007. Hällbar utveckling och restriktiv markanvändning i Västerbotten. CERUM report 18:2007. Umeä, Sweden: Umeä Universitet.
36. Swedish Environmental Protection Agency. 2007. Swedish Environmental Protection Agency. www.naturvardsverket.se (accessed 12 May 2007).
37. Swedish National Forest Inventory. 2004. Swedish National Forest Inventory. http://www-riksskogstaxeringen.slu.se (accessed 16 May 2007).
38. Sweden Statistics (SCB). 2002. Svenskt skogsbruk. www.scb.se/statistik/nr0103/nr0103tab8.asp (accessed 18 October 2002).
39. Swedish Statistical Yearbook of Forestry. 2004. Sveriges officiella statistik, Skogsstyrelsen, Jönköping.
40. Tykkyläinen, M., P. Hyttinen, and A. Mononen. 1997. Theories of regional development and their relevance to the forest sector. Silva Fennica 31(4):447-459.
41. Weber, E. U. 2006. Experience-based and description-based perceptions of long-term risk: Why global warming does not scare us (yet). Climatic Change 2006(77):103-120.