Gender in European forest ownership and management: reflections on women as “New forest owners”

References

• Arora-Jonsson S. 2005. Unsettling the order: gendered subjects and grassroots activism in two forest communities [dissertation]. Uppsala: Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences.
   Google Scholar
• Berger P, Luckmann T. 1991[1966]. The social construction of reality: a treatise in the sociology of knowledge. London (UK): Penguin Books.
   Google Scholar
• Bhaskar R. 1989. The possibility of naturalism: a philosophical critique of the contemporary human sciences. 2nd ed. New York, NY: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
   Google Scholar
• Blekesaune A. 2005. Tabellrapport fra en undersøkelse om eiere av skog i Trøndelag [Figures from a survey on owners to forest in Trøndelag]: report 4/05. Trondheim: Norsk senter for bygdeforskning. Norwegian.
   Google Scholar
• Boon TE, Meilby H, Thorsen BJ. 2004. An empirically based typology of private forest owners in Denmark – improving the communication between authorities and owners. Scand J For Res. 19(Suppl. 4):45–55. doi: 10.1080/14004080410034056
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bourdieu P. 1984. Distinctions – a social critique of the judgement of taste. London (UK): Taylor & Francis.
   Google Scholar
• Braidotti R. 1994. Nomadic subjects: embodiment and difference in contemporary feminist theory. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Brandth B. 2001. The gender of agriculture: report 8/01. Trondheim: Centre for Rural Research.
   Google Scholar
• Brandth B, Follo G, Haugen MS. 2015. Paradoxes of a women’s organization in the forestry industry. In: Pini B, Brandth B, Little J, editors. Feminisms and ruralities. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books; p. 57–68.
   Google Scholar
• Brooks A. 1997. Postfeminisms: feminism, cultural theory and cultural forms. London (UK): Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Crenshaw K. 1989. Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex. A black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory and antiracist politics. Univ Chic Leg For. 1989:138–167.
   Google Scholar
• Crenshaw K. 1991. Mapping the margins: intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color. Stan La Rev. 43(6):1241–1299. doi: 10.2307/1229039
   Google Scholar
• D’Andrade RG. 1993[1984]. Cultural meaning systems. In: Shweder RA, LeVine RA, editors. Culture theory. Essays on mind, self, and emotion. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press; p. 89–119.
   Google Scholar
• Didolot F. 2015. Analyse globale des enquêtes de structure 1999 et 2012 [Overall analysis of national surveys about the behavior of French non industrial private forest owners carried on 1999, 2012 and 2015]. France: National Center of Forest Owners. French.
   Google Scholar
• Ellingsæter AL, Solheim J. 2002. Makt – kjønn – arbeidsliv: Teoretiske landskap [Power – gender – working life: theoretical landscapes]. In: Ellingsæter A, Solheim J, editors. Den usynlige hånd? Kjønnsmakt og modern arbeidsliv [The invisible hand? Gender power and modern economic life]. Oslo: Gyldendal; p. 13–76. Norwegian.
   Google Scholar
• Eriksson L. 2012. Exploring underpinnings of forest conflicts: a study of forest values and beliefs in the general public and among private forest owners in Sweden. Soc Nat Resour. 25(11):1102–1117. doi: 10.1080/08941920.2012.657749
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eurostat. 2011. Demography report 2010. Older, more numerous and diverse Europeans. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
   Google Scholar
• Fischer P, Bliss J, Ingemarson F, Lidestav G, Lönnstedt L. 2010. From the small woodland problem to eco-social systems: the evolution of social research on small-scale forestry in Sweden and the USA. Scand J For Res. 25:390–398. doi: 10.1080/02827581.2010.498386
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Follo G. 2001. Kvinner og praktisk skogbruk – holdninger og kjønnstrukturer [Women and practical forestry – attitudes and gender structures]: report 4/01. Trondheim: Norsk senter for bygdeforskning. Norwegian.
   Google Scholar
• Follo G. 2008. Det norske familieskogbruket, dets kvinnelige og mannlige skogeiere, forvaltningsaktivitet — og metaforiske forbindelser [The Norwegian family forestry, its female and male forest owners, the management activities — and metaphorical connections] [dissertation]. Trondheim: Norges teknisk-naturvitenskapelige universitet. Norwegian.
   Google Scholar
• Follo G, Forbord M, Almås R, Blekesaune A, Rye JF. 2006. Den nye skogeieren. Hvordan øke hogsten i Trøndelag [The new forest owner. How to increase the harvesting in Trøndelag?]: report 1/06. Trondheim: Norsk senter for bygdeforskning. Norwegian.
   Google Scholar
• Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. 2006. Time for action. Changing the gender situation in forestry: report of the UNECE/FAO team of specialists on gender and forestry. Rome: FAO.
   Google Scholar
• Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. 2010. Global forest resources assessment 2010: main report. Rome: FAO.
   Google Scholar
• Fox Keller E. 2002. Making sense of life: explaining biological development with models, metaphors, and machines. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Goverde H, de Haan H, Baylina M, editors. 2004. Power and gender in European rural development. Aldershot (UK): Ashgate.
   Google Scholar
• Häggqvist P, Berg Lejon S, Lidestav G. 2010. Forest days as an educational method in Swedish family forestry. Scand J For Res. 25(Suppl. 9):25–32. doi: 10.1080/02827581.2010.506784
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Häggqvist P, Berg Leon S, Lidestav G. 2014. Look at what they do – a revised approach to communication strategy towards private forest owners. Scand J For Res. 29:697–706. doi: 10.1080/02827581.2014.960894
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hannerz U. 1992. Cultural complexity. Studies in the social organization of meaning. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hänninen H, Karppinen H. 2010. Yksityismetsänomistajat puntarissa [Finnish family forestry under the spotlight]. In: Sevola Y, editor. Metsä, talous, yhteiskunta. Katsauksia metsäekonomiseen tutkimukseen. Metlan työraportteja/Working Papers of the Finnish Forest Research Institute 145. Vantaa: Finnish Forest Research Institute; p. 55–67. Finnish.
   Google Scholar
• Hänninen H, Karppinen H, Leppänen J. 2011. Suomalainen metsänomistaja 2010 [Finnish Forest Owner 2010]. Metlan työraportteja/Working Papers of the Finnish Forest Research Institute 208. Vantaa: Finnish Forest Research Institute. Finnish.
   Google Scholar
• Haugen MS. 1994. Rural women’s status in family property laws: lessons from Norway. In: Whatmore S, Marsden P, Love P, editors. Gender and rurality. Critical perspectives on rural change series VI. London (UK): David Fulton; p. 87–101.
   Google Scholar
• Hogl K, Pregernig M, Weiss G. 2005. What is new about new forest owners? A typology of private forest ownership in Austria. Sm–sc For Ec Man Pol. 3:325–342.
   Google Scholar
• Holst C. 2005. Feminism, epistemology & morality [dissertation]. Bergen: University of Bergen.
   Google Scholar
• Irigaray L. 1985. This sex which is not one. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Karppinen H, Berghäll S. 2015. Forest owners’ stand improvement decisions: applying the theory of planned behavior. For Pol Econ. 50:275–284. doi: 10.1016/j.forpol.2014.09.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Korhonen K, Hujala T, Kurttila M. 2012. Reaching forest owners through their social networks in timber sales. Scand J For Res. 27:88–99. doi: 10.1080/02827581.2011.631935
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kumela H, Hänninen H. 2011. Metsänomistajien näkemykset metsänkäsittelymenetelmien monipuolistamisesta [Forest owners’ views on versatile forest treatment]. Metlan työraportteja/Working Papers of the Finnish Forest Research Institute 203. Vantaa: Finnish Forest Research Institute. Finnish.
   Google Scholar
• Kuuluvainen J, Karppinen H, Hänninen H, Uusivuori J. 2014. Effects of gender and length of land tenure on timber supply in Finland. J For Econ. 20:363–379.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Laat M de, Simons R-J. 2002. Collective learning: theoretical perspectives and ways to support networked learning. Eur J Voc Train. 27:13–24.
   Google Scholar
• Lähdesmäki M, Matilainen A. 2014. Born to be a forest owner? An empirical study of the aspects of psychological ownership in the context of inherited forests in Finland. Scand J For Res. 29:101–110. doi: 10.1080/02827581.2013.869348
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Landemore H. 2012. Collective wisdom. Old and new. In: Landemore H, Elster J, editors. Collective wisdom. Principles and mechanisms. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press; p. 1–20.
   Google Scholar
• Leppänen J, Torvelainen J. 2015. Metsämaan omistus 2013 [Ownerhip of forest land 2013] Luonnonvara- ja biotalouden tutkimus 5/2015. Official Statistics of Finland. Luke, Natural Resources Institute Finland; [updated and cited 2015 August 31]. Available from: http://www.luke.fi/wp-content/uploads/5_2015_Metsämaan_omistus_2013.pdf. Finnish.
   Google Scholar
• Lidestav G. 1998. Women as non-industrial private forest landowners in Sweden. Scand J For Res. 13:66–73. doi: 10.1080/02827589809382963
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lidestav G. 2010. In competition with a brother: women’s inheritance positions in contemporary Swedish family forestry. Scand J For Res. 25(Suppl. 9):14–24. doi: 10.1080/02827581.2010.506781
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lidestav G, Andersson E. 2011. Fokusgruppsanalyser av kvinnliga skogliga nätverk [Focus group analysis of female forestry networks]: Working report 344. Umeå: Department of Forest Resource Management, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences. Swedish.
   Google Scholar
• Lidestav G, Berg Lejon S. 2013. Harvesting and silvicultural activities in Swedish family forestry – behavior changes from a gender perspective. Scand J For Res. 28:136–142. doi: 10.1080/02827581.2012.701324
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lidestav G, Engman K, Wästerlund D, editors. 2000. Kvinna och skogsägare [Woman and forest owner]. Stockholm: LRF Skogsägarna. Swedish.
   Google Scholar
• Lidestav G, Nordfjell T. 2005. A conceptual model for understanding the social practices in family forestry. Small-Scale For Econ Manage Policy. 4:391–408.
   Google Scholar
• Lidestav G, Wästerlund D, editors. 1999. Women and forestry: proceedings of the Nordic-Baltic workshop in Balsjö. Copenhagen: Nordic Council of Ministers.
   Google Scholar
• McDowell L. 1992. Doing gender: feminism, feminists and research methods in human geography. Trans Inst Brit Geo. 17(4):399–416. doi: 10.2307/622707
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mizaraite D. 2005. Forest ownership objectives and private forestry problems: gender aspect. Lithuanian Forest Research Institute. Unpublished report.
   Google Scholar
• Moore HL. 1988. Feminism and anthropology. Cambridge (UK): Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Paaja P. 2015. Naismetsänomistajan muotokuva [The portrait of a female forest owner] [master thesis]. Helsinki: Department of Forest Sciences, University of Helsinki. Finnish.
   Google Scholar
• Posch J. 2000. Der Einfluß des Übernahmspreises nach dem Anerbengesetz auf die Existenzfähigkeit von land- und forstwirtschaftlichen Betrieben [The influence of takeover price according to heritage law on the viable capacities of farms and forest holdings] [dissertation]. Vienna: University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences. German.
   Google Scholar
• Ripatti P. 1999. Profile of Finnish female forest owners and their timber sales behaviour. In: Lohmander P, editor. Proceedings of the Biennal Meeting of the Scandinavian Society of Forest Economics; May–June 1998; Umeå, Sweden. Scand For Econ. 37.
   Google Scholar
• Saarinen A. 1992. Feminist research – an intellectual adventure? Publications Series N, 4/1992. Tampere: Centre for Women’s Studies and Gender Relations, Research Institute for Social Sciences, The University of Tampere.
   Google Scholar
• Schmithüsen F, Hirsch F. 2010. Private forest ownership in Europe. Geneva Timber and Forest Study Paper 26. Geneva: United Nations.
   Google Scholar
• Sperber D, Mercier H. 2012. Reasoning as a social competence. In: Landemore H, Elster J, editors. Collective wisdom. Principles and mechanisms. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press; p. 368–392.
   Google Scholar
• Squires J. 1999. Gender in political theory. Cambridge/Oxford (UK): Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Statistics Norway. 2005. Landbruksundersøkinga 2004 – skogbruk. Endelege tal. Skogeigaren – ein mann på 55 år [The agriculture survey 2004 – forestry. Final figures. The forest owner – a man 55 years old]. [cited 2005 July 1]. Available from: http://www.ssb.no/skogbruk/main.html. Norwegian.
   Google Scholar
• Statistics Norway. 2012. Landbruket i Norge 2011. Jordbruk – Skogbruk – Jakt [Agriculture in Norway 2011. Agriculture – Forestry – Hunting]. Oslo-Kongsvinger: Statistics Norway. Norwegian.
   Google Scholar
• Statistik Austria. 2013. Agrarstrukturerhebung 2010. Vienna: Statistik Austria. German.
   Google Scholar
• Strupstad LM. 1991. Den tause skogeier. En analyse av kvinnelige skogeieres aktivitetsnivå og deltakelse i skogbruket [The silent forest owner. An analysis of female forest owners’ activity and participating in forestry]: report 43. Bø: Telemarksforsking-Bø. Norwegian.
   Google Scholar
• Strupstad LM. 1993. Den tause skogeieren [The silent forest owner]. In: Brandth B, Verstad B, editors. Kvinneliv i landbruket [Female life in agriculture]. Oslo: Landbruksforlaget; p. 171–195.
   Google Scholar
• Swedish Forest Agency. 2014. Swedish statistical yearbook of forestry 2014.
   Google Scholar
• Tomter SM, Dalen LS, editors. 2014. Bærekraftig skogbruk i Norge [Sustainably forestry in Norway]. Ås: Norsk institutt for skog og landskap. Norwegian.
   Google Scholar
• Uliczka H, Angelstam P, Jansson G, Bro A. 2004. Non-industrial private forest owners’ knowledge of and attitudes towards nature conservation. Scand J For Res. 19(3):274–288. doi: 10.1080/02827580410029318
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vainio A, Paloniemi R. 2009. Sukupuoli- ja luontokäsitykset suomalaisen metsänomistajuuden osana. Diskurssianalyyttinen näkökulma [Summary: conceptions of gender and nature in constructing forest ownership: a discourse analytic perspective]. Alue ja ympäristö. 38(2):3–12. Finnish.
   Google Scholar
• Vilkriste L. 2003. Meža īpašnieku aptauja [Opinion poll of forest owners]. Riga: State Forest Service. Latvian.
   Google Scholar
• Vilkriste L. 2008. Privātā meža sektora apsaimniekošanu ietekmējošie faktori [Analyses of factors influencing development of private forest sector]. Jelgava: University of Latvia Agriculture, Forest Faculty. Latvian.
   Google Scholar
• West C, Fenstermaker S. 1995a. Doing difference. Gend Soc. 9:8–37. doi: 10.1177/089124395009001002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• West C, Fenstermaker S. 1995b. Reply (Re) “doing difference”. Gend Soc. 9:506–513. doi: 10.1177/089124395009004012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• West C, Zimmerman D. 2009. Accounting for doing gender. Gend Soc. 23(1):112–122. doi: 10.1177/0891243208326529
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Winkel G, Aggestam F, Sotirov M, Weiss G. 2013. Forest policy in the European Union. In: Pülzl H, Hogl K, Kleinschmit D, Wydra D, Arts B, Mayer P, Palahí M, Winkel G, Wolfslehner B, editors. European forest governance: issues at stake and the way forward; what science can tell us. Joensuu: European Forest Institute; p. 52–63.
   Google Scholar
• Živojinović, I, Weiss G, Lidestav G, Feliciano D, Hujala T, Dobšinská Z, Lawrence A, Nybakk E, Quiroga S, Schraml U. 2015. Forest land ownership change in Europe. COST Action FP1201 FACESMAP Country Reports, Joint Volume. EFICEEC-EFISEE Research Report. Vienna: University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna (BOKU). Online publication [updated and cited 2016 January 8]. Available from: http://www.eficeec.efi.int/portal/news/?bid=2056.
   Google Scholar