Family forest owners' perception of decision support

Abstract

Family forest ownership today is shaped by multiple values that are entwined with varying lifestyles. The challenge for forestry extension services is to adapt reasonably to these cognitive, social and cultural patterns. Focusing on a decision support perspective, the present study adds to prior knowledge on family forest owners' wishes concerning forest planning. The aim is to identify forest owners' decision-making modes, and the connections between owner backgrounds and decision support anticipation. A psychological survey tool, measuring the degree of sharing of decision-making power and desire to learn, was constructed for data collection. Data were acquired through a postal survey in 2006 from 676 family forest owners in Finland. Multivariate analysis yielded three owner groups as fusions of decision-making modes serving the pre-hypothesis: trusting realizers (53%), active learners (27%) and independent managers (20%). The results suggest differently weighted decision support services (including both written/online information and spoken communication) for these owner groups. Education, occupational status and distance to the holding showed some association with the grouping. The theoretical basis and the methodological approach may be applied in conditions where family forest owners are advised and consulted by public or private endeavours.

Keywords:

• Advice
• extension
• Finland
• forest planning
• forest policy
• multivariate analysis
• NIPF

Acknowledgements

The study was funded by the Academy of Finland (project 210417), Finnish Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry (project 310336) and Finnish Forest Research Institute Metla (project 3458). Niemi Foundation granted additional financial support, and Oulu University of Applied Sciences contributed to the survey arrangements. Kai Blauberg from Forestry Development Center Tapio performed the draw of the respondent sample. Kimmo Kovalainen stored the answers in an electronic form, and Päivi Kova conducted the feedback telephone calls. The authors received valuable hints and comments from Heimo Karppinen, Annika Kangas, Pekka Leskinen, Raili Hokajärvi and one anonymous referee.