Women entrepreneurship – a shortcut to a more competitive and equal forestry sector?

References

• Ager B. 2014. Skogsarbetets humanisering och rationalisering från 1900 och framåt. [Humanization and rationalization of forest work from 1900 and onwards] [ Doctoral thesis]. Luleå University of Technology. Swedish with English Summary. ISBN 978-91-7439-843-4.
   Google Scholar
• Ahl H. 2006. Why research on women entrepreneurs needs new directions. Entrepren Theor Pract. 30:595–621. 10.1111/j.1540-6520.2006.00138.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alaimo S, Hekman S, editors. 2008. Material feminisms. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Appelstrand M. 2007. Miljömålet i skogsbruket – styrning och frivillighet [The Environmental Goal of Swedish Forest Policy – regulation and voluntariness] [ Doctoral dissertation]. Lund University. Lund: Lund Studies in Sociology of Law. Swedish with English Summary
   Google Scholar
• Appelstrand M. 2009. Bridging entrepreneurial innovation and public environmental values in small-scale forestry with the “New Public Service” model of public administration. In: McGill D, editor. Seeing the forest beyond the trees: New possibilities and expectations for products and services from small-scale forestry. Peer reviewed Proceedings. Morgantown: University of West Virginia. IUFRO 3.08.
   Google Scholar
• Appelstrand M. 2012. Developments in Swedish forest policy and administration – from a ‘policy of restriction’ towards a ‘policy of cooperation’. Scand J For Res. 27:186–199. 10.1080/02827581.2011.635069
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bäckstrand K. 2006. Multi-stakeholder partnership for sustainable development. Rethinking legitimacy, accountability and effectiveness. Eur Environ. 16:290–306.
   Google Scholar
• Barlett PF, Lobao L, Meyer K. 1999. Diversity in attitudes toward farming and patterns of work among farm women: a regional comparison. Agric Human Values. 16:343–354. 10.1023/A:1007658532422
   Google Scholar
• Bernstein S, Cashore B. 2004. Non-state global governance: is forest certification a legitimate alternative to a global forest convention? In: Kirton JJ, Trebilcock MJ, editors. Hard choices, soft law. Voluntary standards in global trade, environment and social governance. Aldershot: Ashgate; p. 33–63.
   Google Scholar
• Brandth B. 2006. Embodying family farm work. In: Bock BB, Shortall S, editors. Rural gender relations issues and case studies. Wallingford (UK): CABI.
   Google Scholar
• Caballé A. 1999. Farm tourism in Spain: a gender perspective. GeoJournal. 48:245–252.
   Google Scholar
• De Martino R, Barbato R. 2003. Differences between women and men MBA entrepreneurs: exploring family flexibility and wealth creation as career motivators. J Bus Venturing. 18:815–832. 10.1016/S0883-9026(03)00003-X
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ds. 2004. Det går långsamt framåt. Jämställdheten inom jord- och skogsbrukssektorn [Moving forward slowly. Equal opportunities in the agricultural and forestry sector]. Stockholm: Ministry of Agriculture; p. 39.
   Google Scholar
• Eckerberg K, Joas M. 2004. Multi-level governance: a concept under stress? Local Environ. 8:405–412. 10.1080/1354983042000255315
   Google Scholar
• Egan M. 1997. Getting down to business and off welfare: rural women entrepreneurs. Affilia. 12:215–228. 10.1177/088610999701200205
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Evans N, Ilbery B. 1996. Exploring the influence of farm-based pluriactivity on gender relations in capitalist agriculture. Soc Ruralis. 36:74–92. 10.1111/j.1467-9523.1996.tb00005.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• FAO. 2006. Time for Action. Changing the gender situation in forestry. Report of the Team of specialist on gender and forestry. Rome: FAO.
   Google Scholar
• Flygare I. 1999. Generations and continuity. Family farming in two Swedish grain-growing districts in the 20th century. Uppsala: Upplands fornminnesförening och hembygdsförbund.
   Google Scholar
• Gunningham N, Kagan RA, Thornton D. 2003. Shades of green. Business, regulation, and environment. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gunningham N, Sinclair D. 2002. Leaders and laggards. Next-generation environmental regulation. Midsomer Norton (UK): Greenleaf.
   Google Scholar
• Götebo Johannesson P. 1996. Mjölk, bär och eterneller: om och tillvarons mångtydighet: lantbrukarkvinnor i Mark under 1900-talet [Milk, berries and immortelles: on gender and life’s ambiguities: farm women in Mark during the 1900s]. Stockholm: Carlssons Bokförlag.
   Google Scholar
• Häggström C, Kawasaki A, Lidestav G. 2013. Profiles of forestry contractors and development of the forestry-contracting sector in Sweden. Scand J For Res. 28:395–404. 10.1080/02827581.2012.738826
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hansen K. 1999. Försäljning, vandrarhem, servering! Om kulturarv och landsbygdsutveckling [Sale, hostel, cafeteria! On cultural heritage and rural development]. In: O´Dell T, editor. Nonstop! Turist i Upplevelseindustrialismen [Tourism in the experiential industry]. Lund: Historiska Media; p. 88–106.
   Google Scholar
• Hekman SJ. 2010. The material of knowledge: feminist disclosures. Bloomington (IN): Indiana University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Högvall Nordin M. 2006. “Dom brukar jämföra det med en stridspilot”: föreställningar om arbetsmiljö och risker i skogsmaskinarbete: en studie i organisationskommunikation [“They usually compare it to a combat pilot”. Conceptions about work environment and risk in forest machine work] [Doctoral thesis]. Swedish with English Summary. Umeå universitet, Institutionen för kultur och medier, Belastningsskadecentrum.
   Google Scholar
• Hougaz L, Betta M. 2010. Women in family businesses: perception and understanding of entrepreneurship. Regional Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research. Queensland: Australian Graduate School of Entrepreneurship, Swinburne University of Technology.
   Google Scholar
• Johansson E. 1994. Skogarnas fria söner. Maskulinitet och modernitet i norrländskt skogsarbete [Free sons of the forest: a study of masculinity and modernity among loggers in northern Sweden 1860-1940] (Nordiska museets Handlingar 118) [ Doctoral dissertation]. Stockholm: Nordiska museet.
   Google Scholar
• Johansson E. 2000. Modernisation and masculinity in everyday life of 19th century Swedish logging. In: Proceedings of the XXI IUFRO World Congress. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Reports, No. 47. Umeå: Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences.
   Google Scholar
• Karlsson SE, Lönnbring G. 2005. Vi skall slå dem med häpnad varje dag – om framgångsrika kvinnoföretagare på landsbygden [We will amaze them every day – on successful rural women entrepreneurs]. LRF/NUTEK/Svenska Riksförbundet Nationellt Resurscentrum för kvinnor/EU. Karlstad: Department for Social Sciences, Karlstad University.
   Google Scholar
• Kjær AM. 2004. Governance. Cambridge: Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kleinschmit D. 2010. Confronting the demands of a deliberative public sphere with media constraints. For Policy Econ. 16:71–80. 10.1016/j.forpol.2010.02.013
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Länsstyrelsen i Västerbotten. 2012. JÄMLYS – en jämställdhetsanalys av skogssektorn i Västerbotten [JÄMLYS – an analysis of gender equality in the forestry sector in Västerbotten]. Umeå: Länsstyrelsen i Västerbotten.
   Google Scholar
• Lidestav G. 2010. In competition with a brother: women’s inheritance positions in contemporary Swedish family forestry’. Scand J For Res. 25:14–24. 10.1080/02827581.2010.506781
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lidestav G, Andersson E. 2011. Fokusgruppsanalyser av kvinnliga skogliga nätverk [Focus group analysis of women’s forest networks]. Umeå: Institutionen för skoglig resurshushållning, Sveriges lantbruksuniversitet. Swedish.
   Google Scholar
• Lidestav G, Andersson E, Lejon SB, Johansson K. 2011. Jämställt arbetsliv i skogssektorn – underlag för åtgärder [Gender equality in working life of the forest sector – basis for action]. Umeå: Institutionen för skoglig resurshushållning, Sveriges lantbruksuniversitet. Swedish.
   Google Scholar
• Lidestav G, Nordfjell T. 2005. A conceptual model for understanding social practices in family forestry. Small Scale For Econ Manag Policy. 4:391–408.
   Google Scholar
• Lidestav G, Sjölander AE. 2007. Gender and forestry: a critical discourse analysis of forestry professions in Sweden. Scand J For Res. 22:351–362. 10.1080/02827580701504928
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• LRF (Lantbrukarnas Riksförbund). 2009. Den osynliga entreprenören [The invisible entrepreneur]. Stockholm: LRF, Jämställdhetsakademi.
   Google Scholar
• McGehee NG, Kim K, Jennings GR. 2007. Gender and motivation for agri-tourism entrepreneurship. Tourist Manag. 28:280–289. 10.1016/j.tourman.2005.12.022
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ministry for Rural Affairs. 2011a. Konkurrenskraft kräver jämställdhet – Jämställdhetsstrategi för skogsbrukssektorn [Competitiveness requires gender equality – A brief presentation of the gender equality strategy for the forestry sector]. Stockholm: Ministry for Rural Affairs.
   Google Scholar
• Ministry for Rural Affairs. 2011b. The forest kingdom – with values for the world. Action plan. Stockholm: Ministry for Rural Affairs.
   Google Scholar
• Mörth U, Sahlin-Andersson K, editors. 2006. Privatoffentliga partnerskap. Styrning utan hierakier och tvång? [Public-private Partnership. Steering without hierarchical structures and coercion]. Stockholm: SNS Förlag.
   Google Scholar
• Niskanen A, Pettenella D, Slee B. 2007. Barriers and opportunities for the development of small-scale forest enterprises in Europe. Small Scale For. 6:331–345. 10.1007/s11842-007-9035-x
   Google Scholar
• Pettersson K. 2002. Företagande män och osynliggjorda kvinnor – Diskursen om Gnosjö ur ett könsperspektiv [Male entrepreneurs and women made invisible – The discourse on Gnosjö from a gender perspective]. Geografiska regionstudier, nr. 49: Kulturgeografiska institutionen, Uppsala universitet.
   Google Scholar
• Pierre J. 2000. Introduction: understanding governance. In: Pierre J, editor. Debating governance authority, steering and democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press; p. 1–12.
   Google Scholar
• Sattler Weber S. 2007. Saving St James: A case study of farm women entrepreneurs. Agric Human Values. 24:425–434. 10.1007/s10460-007-9091-z
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schlyter P, Stjernquist I, Bäckstrand K. 2009. Not seeing the forest for the trees? The environmental effectiveness of forest certification in Sweden. For Policy Econ. 11:375–382. 10.1016/j.forpol.2008.11.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scott JW, Butler J, Scott JW, editors. 1992. Experience in Feminists theorize the political. New York: Routledge; p. 22–40.
   Google Scholar
• Skogsstyrelsen. 2011. Förslag på åtgärder för att skapa förutsättningar för ökad jämställdhet bland skogsägare [Proposed measures in order to create preconditions for increased gender equality among forest owners]. Rapport Dnr. 2001/2017. Jönköping: Skogsstyrelsens förlag.
   Google Scholar
• Sollander E, Eriksson H, Karlsson S. 2005. Skogliga sektorsmål – förutsättningar och bakgrundsmaterial [Sectorial goals for the forestry sector – preconditions and background material]. Rapport 11/2005. Jönköping: Skogsstyrelsens förlag.
   Google Scholar
• Sundin E, Holmquist C. 1989. Kvinnor som företagare – osynlighet, anpassning och mångfald [Women as entrepreneurs – invisibility, adaption and diversity]. Malmö: Liber.
   Google Scholar
• Sundström G. 2005. Målstyrningen drar åt skogen. Om government och governance i svensk skogspolitik [When management by objectives diverts into the woods. On government and governance in Swedish forest policy]. Score Rapportserie 6. Stockholm.
   Google Scholar
• Svensson E-M. 2001. Genusforskning inom juridiken [Gender research in the fields of Law]. Kalmar: Högskoleverket.
   Google Scholar
• Swedish Forest Agency. 2013. Statistical yearbook of forestry. Jönköping: Skogsstyrelsens förlag.
   Google Scholar
• Trauger A, Sachs C, Berbercheck M, Keirnan NE, Braiser K, Findeis J. 2008. Agricultural education: gender identity and knowledge exchange. J Rural Stud. 24:432–439. 10.1016/j.jrurstud.2008.03.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Umearus P, Lidestav G, Eriksson LO, Högvall Nordin M. 2013. Gendered business activities in family farm forestry: from round wood delivery to health service. Scand J For Res. 28:596–607.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Umaerus P, Lidestav G, Högvall Nordin M. 2011. Business activities in family farm forestry in a rural development context. Working papers 330. Umeå: Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences.
   Google Scholar
• van Kersbergen K, van Waarden F. 2004. Governance as a bridge between disciplines: cross-disciplinary inspiration regarding shifts in governance and problems of governability, accountability and legitimacy. Eur J Pol Res. 43:143–172. 10.1111/j.1475-6765.2004.00149.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vedung E. 1998. Utvärdering i politik och förvaltning [Evaluation in politics and administration]. Lund: Studentlitteratur.
   Google Scholar
• Vedung E, Danielsson M. 1997. Riksdagens skogspolitiska intentioner. Om mål som uppdrag till en myndighet [The Parliament’s political intentions regarding forestry. On objectives as an administrative commission]. Skogsstyrelsen meddelande 13:1997.
   Google Scholar
• Vedung E, van der Doelen FCJ. 2006. The Sermon: information programs in the public policy process – choice, effects, and evaluation. In: Bemelmans-Videc M-L, Rist RC, Vedung E., editors. Carrots, sticks & sermons. Policy instruments and their evaluation. New Brunswick, (NJ): Transaction.
   Google Scholar
• Warren Smith I, Jackson C. 2004. Women creating wealth through rural enterprise. Int J Entrepren Behav Res. 10:369–383. 10.1108/13552550410564707
   Google Scholar
• Wästerlund D, Lidestav G. 1999. Working conditions of female forest professionals in Sweden. In: Lidestav G, Wästerlund D, editors. Women and Forestry, Proceedings of the Nordic-Baltic Workshop in Balsjö, Sweden; 1998 December 7–9; Tema Nord 1999: 571, p 55–63. Nordic Council of Ministers, Copenhagen.
   Google Scholar
• Watson J. 2002. Comparing the performance of male and female-controlled businesses: relating outputs to inputs. Entrepren Theor Prac. 26:91–100.
   Google Scholar